NES vs 7800

[phonedork]

I dug out my NES Ikari Warriors tonight from my storage pile. I'm not sure you want to be calling it proof of the NES's capabilities at moving around objects ... four guys on the screen and it flickers. I've seen much better from than on the NES and the 7800, with and without backgrounds.

 

Also - I must be used to the 7800 version, but I find the NES control scheme isn't as tight as it is in other NES games. It feels like you're steering with soap, IMO.

 

 

Well Ikari warriors is a lousy game on both the NES and the 7800 to me. Control wise I will say the 7800 has this, because you can hold the fire button to keep shooting in the direction you want. The NES version shoots only where you are moving to. Which sucks when somebody is behind you and you want to shoot him while walking away. But the NES looks better. It does flicker a quite a bit on the NES, but it has more animation then the 7800. The characters look more terrible on the 7800. Not saying either one looks extremely good. Explosions are better on the NES. The animation is choppy on both systems, but slightly better on the NES. Sometimes there are Helicopters, Tanks, couple of men, and explosions all on one screen. This is what I mean by it being busy. The game is not always that busy, but there are times when it does.

 

yeah my pile of $hit is better than your pile of $hit. galaga on both systems are pretty darn good with nes edging the 7800.

 

 

Galaga is NOT EVEN CLOSE on these two systems.

 

While I love every version of Galaga, the 7800 version sucks in comparison to the NES version.

 

The NES version looks and plays like "real" Galaga and is surprisingly close to the arcade.

7800 version is not even close.

 

 

I personally like the turbographx version of Galaga 90. I know thats kind of off the subject, but I felt I had to say that.

[gdement]

I think the NES version of Galaga is overrated.

1) It has an annoying delay when you start the game. It plays the music while you wait, then eventually decides to start scrolling the game along after the song is about over.

2) It feels too crowded to me. Maybe that's just me.

3) The bulk of enemy sprites don't move smoothly - they jump around choppily on a tile map because the NES can't handle that many true sprites.

4) Shockingly, the Atari's TIA chip makes a more accurate explosion than the NES does. The NES makes this wimpy "fizz" sound. It's supposed to be a deep, loud, embarrasing explosion that tells everybody in the room you just died.

 

It's a fine version, but I don't find it particularly great.

 

The 7800 version has some disappointing graphics and probably should have been done in high resolution, but it's more fun to play IMO.

Long ago somebody posted a hires 7800 demo using arcade Galaga sprites, and they looked perfect. I don't know whether the system would be able to keep up with it or not, worst case is you'd have to delete the stars. I prefer to think that with some optimization it would work.

[jboypacman]

I wonder how well the Sega Master System could translate some of these game titles(Ikari warriors,Galaga,ect).

[Atarifever]

I wonder how well the Sega Master System could translate some of these game titles(Ikari warriors,Galaga,ect).

The Master System was too busy doing good versions of 16 bit games to be much concerned with it's 8-bit performance. If it's performance should be compared to anything, it should be the Turbo Grafx, not the wimpy NES or the 7800 (which was really designed with another generation in mind).

Edited February 22, 2008 by Atarifever

[DracIsBack]

The Master System was too busy doing good versions of 16 bit games to be much concerned with it's 8-bit performance. If it's performance should be compared to anything, it should be the Turbo Grafx,

 

That's pushing it ...

 

I love the SMS, having owned four of them. Phantasy Star, Golden Axe Warrior and many others rank among my favorites. However, I've always wondered what the technical "superiority" actually is. The colors are definitely an advantage. They seem as bright as on the NES and as numerous as on the 7800. However, the sound is, IMO, better on the NES. And it seems to flicker and slowdown a lot more than the 7800.

 

 

I think Sega themselves did great development but some of the other companies could have done a better job.

[Atarifever]

The Master System was too busy doing good versions of 16 bit games to be much concerned with it's 8-bit performance. If it's performance should be compared to anything, it should be the Turbo Grafx,

 

That's pushing it ...

 

I love the SMS, having owned four of them. Phantasy Star, Golden Axe Warrior and many others rank among my favorites. However, I've always wondered what the technical "superiority" actually is. The colors are definitely an advantage. They seem as bright as on the NES and as numerous as on the 7800. However, the sound is, IMO, better on the NES. And it seems to flicker and slowdown a lot more than the 7800.

 

 

I think Sega themselves did great development but some of the other companies could have done a better job.

I think the sound is awesome on the SMS. Maybe some companies didn't take advantage of it, but just load up the sound test code on Space Harrier, and try telling me it doesn't have incredible sound. Pretty much everything looked better on the SMS, and I haven't noticed a lot of flicker in anything other than 16 bit conversions that pushed the limits well beyond what Atari or Nintendo were doing at the time anyway. . I think Rampage is a good case in point graphically.

Here's the 7800

Here's the NES

Here's the SMS

 

 

And we all know what Double Dragon compares like:

Atari 7800

NES

SMS

 

Like I said, the flickering is explainable when you're comparing

This

To this.

Edited February 22, 2008 by Atarifever

[DracIsBack]

I think the sound is awesome on the SMS.

 

I didn't think it was bad at all. Just didn't get the "technical superiority" over the NES that a number of folks claim.

 

I haven't noticed a lot of flicker in anything

 

I have but that's because it bugs me. You are correct though in that the 16-bit translations (ie. Ghouls and Ghosts, Moonwalker etc) had it more.

 

Like you, I felt that Rampage was awesome on the SMS. At the same time, I didn't feel that Rampage was done well on the NES or 7800 and think it could have been done significantly better on both. Especially when I played the Tandy Co Co version.

 

In the case of Double Dragon, I actually don't consider it to be one of the SMS's showcases. I find the control sluggish, the people small, the colors badly chosen etc. It was closer to the arcade than the NES version, but I actually found the NES version to be more polished as a game. I expected more from the SMS version (ala Rampage) than was received.

 

Also, I've long felt that (like Rampage), the 7800 DD was kind of half-assed. It was fun (IMO), but looks rushed. Definitely not a polished job like Commando was on the 7800 ... or Xenophobe or Klax. I had issue with most of Imagineering/Absolute's titles though. The same guys also did Fight Night, Touchdown Football and other crappy conversions. Ikari Warriors was the only one I really liked, and even that paled compared to COMMANDO in my eyes.

 

I actually do agree that the SMS has the best graphics of the 8-bit consoles, though I do think the "technical superiority" is sometimes overstated. I definitely don't compare it to the TG-16.

 

As an aside, what are your favorite SMS games? I had a round of Golden Axe Warrior last weekend and am re-acquainting myself with other SMS games. Still trying to decide if I should pick up Spellcaster again. That game was DAMN hard!

Edited February 22, 2008 by DracIsBack

[Atarifever]

As an aside, what are your favorite SMS games? I had a round of Golden Axe Warrior last weekend and am re-acquainting myself with other SMS games. Still trying to decide if I should pick up Spellcaster again. That game was DAMN hard!

No particular order

1: Space Harrier. I know it isn't the best looking version, but I find the music and the way it plays are great.

2: Shinobi. I like it almost as much as Revenge of Shinobi, which is possibly my favorite game of all time.

3: Zillion.

4: Blackbelt.

[Atarifever]

Like you, I felt that Rampage was awesome on the SMS. At the same time, I didn't feel that Rampage was done well on the NES or 7800 and think it could have been done significantly better on both. Especially when I played the Tandy Co Co version.

I think pretty much everything could have been done better on the 7800. The NES and SMS might have been, overall, a little superior, but had the 7800 had more support, that difference would seem a lot smaller. Also, I may think the SMS is technically superior to the 7800, but I still like the 7800 more.

[DracIsBack]

I think pretty much everything could have been done better on the 7800.

 

Rampage, in particular, BUGGED me. I mean, it's not exactly a "complicated" game. It's done on static screens for crying out loud. But those graphics were so poorly drawn and didn't need to be. There was hardly any detail in the buildings. The news screens look silly. The sprites look like "Muppet Baby" versions of the monsters. And it's loaded with stupid little hiccups like the sound cutting in and out or fists that appear before a monster ends the water and after it leaves. The other little characters were also poorly done.

 

I liked the title screen but that was about it.

[Gorf]

I guess if you like annoying flicker the NES version of Galaga is better.

 

7800 rules! Get over it.

 

I take that back! Jaguar rules!

 

Roar!

 

 

(relax kids....just kidding..NES has it stong points too...but I still find the 7800

a more flexible and capable machine.....and it's an Atari 1st and foremost.)

Edited February 25, 2008 by Gorf

[+pboland]

I know some will think this isn't a valid point, but I think the 7800 might be a bit more versatile system then the NES just for the fact that it can play most 2600 games. Why do I think this is a big deal? I do because, it was very forward thinking of Atari to have true backwards compatibility. It was the first system to have backwards compatibility without some kind of adapter. This would not be seen again until the PS2. This is part of the reason I always hated the "under 50 bucks!" 2600 console (don't get me wrong the 2600 jr. is a nice system, but wasn't needed). If there was that much demand back in the day for a 2600, Atari should have push the fact that the 7800 could play most of 2600 games. If they would have just dropped the price of the 7800 a bit (I know it was more than $50 but still) and push the fact that the 7800 could play most of the 2600 games, They would have had a much bigger user base. With a larger user base, there most likely would have been better support for the system and thus more time spent making better quality games. Then the gap between the 7800 and NES would be much smaller.

 

Just a thought.

[DracIsBack]

I Atari should have push the fact that the 7800 could play most of 2600 games.

 

I think they did push that fact in and of itself. I think the problem was twofold.

 

1. They didn't push the 7800 in general. Not compared to the NES and SMS. Not even compared to the XEGS for a time.

 

2. They caused major market confusion. We Atari geeks know the difference between the machines, but I think Joe-Q-Public often has trouble with anything beyond "Atari". Atari sat on the market with three consoles at the same time. Then, they released the same games on all the Atari systems. Worst of all ... you had 2600 titles advertised as being "For the 2600 and 7800" alongside 7800 titles advertised as "for the 7800!"

 

Egad! What's the consumer to think? Do I have the right one? How is the 2600 different fromt he 7800? Will this game (2600) look better when played on a 7800? Heck, when I brought the 7800 home as a kid, I was convinced that my 2600 "Winter Games" would look like the one on the back of the 7800 box when I played it on the 7800. Surprise!

 

They would have had a much bigger user base. With a larger user base, there most likely would have been better support for the system and thus more time spent making better quality games

.

 

The 7800 had a couple of additional strikes against it.

 

1. The retailers didn't want to touch Atari with a ten foot pole after what Warner Atari did to them, leaving them with millions of unsold cartridges.

 

2. Jack was the cheapest damn sonovabitch around. No ads, no development, no games, no distribution money. No prototypes sent to the press for review. Even the color labels from Warner were replaced with black and white labels. The manuals didn't even have screen shots in most cases. I don't think problem was emphasizing it's 2600 compatibility as much as it was he didn't put jack-shit into a launch at all. We wanted to ride the Atari name and rake in the profits on no investment.

 

3. Nintendo had locked up the good licenses with their contracts. Unless Atari released the 7800 in 1984 (before the NES), they would have had a hard time getting developers to write 7800 games due to the NES having exclusivity.

 

I do firmly believe that technical differences with the NES were not even close to the 7800's biggest issue. The problems listed above did far, far more damage than how well the 7800 could do tile based graphics etc.

Edited February 25, 2008 by DracIsBack

[SoundGammon]

I Atari should have push the fact that the 7800 could play most of 2600 games.

 

I think they did push that fact in and of itself. I think the problem was twofold.

 

1. They didn't push the 7800 in general. Not compared to the NES and SMS. Not even compared to the XEGS for a time.

 

2. They caused major market confusion. We Atari geeks know the difference between the machines, but I think Joe-Q-Public often has trouble with anything beyond "Atari". Atari sat on the market with three consoles at the same time. Then, they released the same games on all the Atari systems. Worst of all ... you had 2600 titles advertised as being "For the 2600 and 7800" alongside 7800 titles advertised as for the 7800! Egad! What's the consumer to think? Do I have the right one? How is the 2600 different fromt he 7800? Will this game (2600) look better when played on a 7800?

 

They would have had a much bigger user base. With a larger user base, there most likely would have been better support for the system and thus more time spent making better quality games

.

 

The 7800 had a couple of additional strikes against it.

 

1. The retailers didn't trust Atari with a ten foot pole after what Warner Atari did to them, leaving them with millions of unsold cartridges.

 

2. Jack was the cheapest damn sonovabitch around. No ads, no development, no games, no distribution money. No prototypes sent to the press for review. Even the color labels from Warner were replaced with black and white labels. The manuals didn't even have screen shots in most cases. I don't think problem was emphasizing it's 2600 compatibility as much as it was he didn't put jack-shit into a launch at all. We wanted to ride the Atari name and rake in the profits on no investment.

Can you imagine if Jack was working for FOX studios when George Lucas came in with a script for a movie called STAR WARS? He probably would have said: "Hey, we don't need your movie, we'll just colorize some old b&w Flash Gordon serials!"

[Gregory DG]

Can you imagine if Jack was working for FOX studios when George Lucas came in with a script for a movie called STAR WARS? He probably would have said: "Hey, we don't need your movie, we'll just colorize some old b&w Flash Gordon serials!"

That's basically what a bunch of studios did. He shopped Star Wars around to numerous studios and they all declined. Until George met Alan Ladd Jr. at 20th Century Fox.

[Gorf]

Can you imagine if Jack was working for FOX studios when George Lucas came in with a script for a movie called STAR WARS? He probably would have said: "Hey, we don't need your movie, we'll just colorize some old b&w Flash Gordon serials!"

That's basically what a bunch of studios did. He shopped Star Wars around to numerous studios and they all declined. Until George met Alan Ladd Jr. at 20th Century Fox.

 

 

It's amazing some of the morons that get to run companies they have NO business running.

 

I have to give the Tramiel's a big fat red FU for the most

idiotic decisions a company exec could possibly make.

 

How do you buy a game company and abandon the games?

 

Horses toots! All of them!

[Vic George 2K3]

Probably because no one at the time thought that Nintendo was going to revive the dead American video game market (and interest in video games) back around the mid-1980s until they saw NESes and games really selling in the late 1980s?

 

Frankly, I'm not sure how well the Atari 7800 would have sold if it had been released back in 1984, given the state of both Atari and the video game market at that point. It could have wound up as another Vectrex, leaving Nintendo and Sega as the only real contenders for the "king of the market" throne with the following generation.

[carmel_andrews]

I'd be interested to know if Nintendo ever considered resurrecting the previous atari/nintendo tie up negotiations after tramiel had gotten into atari

 

Mind you going by how 'piss poor' tramiel did in marketing his products in the US (thinking mostly of the ST series) and how 'piss poor' the ST did compared to competitors products...Perhaps Tramiel would havwe been better of selling the ST (or what became the ST) to commodore (seeming as though the ST was largely based on commodore technology)...And Atari could have done great things with the 7800 as well as the 68000 high end games system that Atari/Amiga corp were developing using the 'lorraine' chip set

[Foxsolo2000]

Probably because no one at the time thought that Nintendo was going to revive the dead American video game market (and interest in video games) back around the mid-1980s until they saw NESes and games really selling in the late 1980s?

 

Frankly, I'm not sure how well the Atari 7800 would have sold if it had been released back in 1984, given the state of both Atari and the video game market at that point. It could have wound up as another Vectrex, leaving Nintendo and Sega as the only real contenders for the "king of the market" throne with the following generation.

 

I have to agree with you on this for the crash knocked out three of the four gaming systems of the time and shops in the Uk couldn't offload the stuff fast enough. Had the 7800 been released in 84 I doubt many places would have stocked it and aside from die hard Atari fans I question whether anyone else would have bought it?

[vdub_bobby]

Just a quick note: the NES sound capabilities are really pretty cool, and much more advanced than the POKEY (let alone the TIA), though in some ways not as flexible (sound familiar? ).

 

Five channels. Two are dedicated square wave channels with 11 bits of frequency resolution (compared to 8 for each of the four channels in the POKEY). One is a dedicated noise channel. One is a dedicated triangle-wave channel. The last is dedicated to playing digitized samples. There are a lot of other cool options built into the hardware also; you can change the duty cycle of each square wave, you can "sweep" the square wave channels automatically, there are hardware volume envelopes with automatic looping for the square wave channels, etc. etc. The digitized-sample channel takes 7-bit samples (versus 4-bit when you use POKEY, I think) that you feed manually or it can automatically stream samples in a different (more limited) format.

 

You can't get 4-part harmonies like with POKEY but that's pretty much POKEY's only advantage.

[SoundGammon]

Just a quick note: the NES sound capabilities are really pretty cool, and much more advanced than the POKEY (let alone the TIA), though in some ways not as flexible (sound familiar? ).

 

Five channels. Two are dedicated square wave channels with 11 bits of frequency resolution (compared to 8 for each of the four channels in the POKEY). One is a dedicated noise channel. One is a dedicated triangle-wave channel. The last is dedicated to playing digitized samples. There are a lot of other cool options built into the hardware also; you can change the duty cycle of each square wave, you can "sweep" the square wave channels automatically, there are hardware volume envelopes with automatic looping for the square wave channels, etc. etc. The digitized-sample channel takes 7-bit samples (versus 4-bit when you use POKEY, I think) that you feed manually or it can automatically stream samples in a different (more limited) format.

 

You can't get 4-part harmonies like with POKEY but that's pretty much POKEY's only advantage.

The 7800 had an advantage on sound...ANY sound chip could have been put into a cartridge, even 2 POKEYs if they wanted to. TEMPEST, arcade version, had 2. The AMY chip was still being developed at the time. Also, how about the expansion interface, didn't it have audio input?

[supercat]

You can't get 4-part harmonies like with POKEY but that's pretty much POKEY's only advantage.

 

The TIA manages 4-part harmonies just fine in Stella's Stocking. I'd think having a 7-bit DAC would allow the Nintendo to do even better, at least if the DAC has any queueing or buffering logic.

[vdub_bobby]

The 7800 had an advantage on sound...ANY sound chip could have been put into a cartridge, even 2 POKEYs if they wanted to. TEMPEST, arcade version, had 2. The AMY chip was still being developed at the time. Also, how about the expansion interface, didn't it have audio input?

You could put all kinds of extra hardware on NES carts too, and they did. They DID put POKEY's on 7800 carts, so that's the point of comparison. Talking about what coulda been is fun but a poor way to make comparisons.

You can't get 4-part harmonies like with POKEY but that's pretty much POKEY's only advantage.

 

The TIA manages 4-part harmonies just fine in Stella's Stocking. I'd think having a 7-bit DAC would allow the Nintendo to do even better, at least if the DAC has any queueing or buffering logic.

Well, you can get just about anything if you use sampled sounds, but it limits the other stuff you can do since, no, the DAC doesn't have any queueing or buffering logic unless you use the "delta" mode. I'm kind of curious to know what you could do with the delta mode but I doubt it let you play speech, for example.

[CV Gus]

In all honesty, I don't think anyone will ever truly know which was better, by how much.

 

You have to remember that the 7800's abilities were never fully utilized. It never really got the tremendous benefits from research and Development the NES received. The NES was so well supported, it almost seemed to become a 16-Bit system at times.

 

But the 7800 had a terminal case of Tramielitis. I never felt as though they were serious about the 7800. Even after the terrific Tower Toppler, nothing. Where were the popular genres of games at the time (such as Lifeforce or R-Type?). Nothing.

 

They should have either just forgotten about it altogether, or at least tried to make it a solid second to the NES.

[NightSprinter]

In terms of extra hardware for the NES, audio hardware only got added to the FamiCom carts. The NES, unfortunately, had the extra audio wires located in the expansion port on the box-shaped unit and disabled altogether on the top-loader. So in comparison to the audio capabilities of the American and European systems, the 7800 COULD have a technical advantage since you could use virtually any external audio chip.