Atari 5200 and Atari 7800 Game comparison

[Jess Ragan]

Yeah, all this Atari vs. Nintendo talk is ridiculous. My tastes are entirely too subjective to love every system from a single company. I do like most Nintendo consoles, but I was unimpressed with the Nintendo 64... and left completely cold by that stopgap piece of crap known as the Game Boy Color.

[+Psionic]

It would be gay for me to say all the 5200 games are better playing then the 7800.

Indeed...in a recent poll by The Advocate, gays preferred the 5200 over the 7800 by a 2-to-1 margin.

[Lord Thag]

What it always comes down to is what you personally like. I personally like more games on the 5200 than the 7800, but you'll never catch me saying 'the 7800 sucks'. It doesn't. I like a bunch of games on it. The problem is that a lot of people do not seem to be able to step out of their own shoes and admit that many of their views are not 'right' in a truly objective sense, but really only a matter of personal taste.

 

For example, I pretty much loathe most of the newer mario games. I hate the cutsey, vomit inducing 'Im-a-Mario' psychadelic idocy of them, and I don't like the gameplay either. Yet I don't go around screaming that they suck. They don't. Half the planet thinks they are some of the best games ever. I just don't care for them.

 

The thing to remember is that we all have our view, and they are just that, *our* views, and not the objective truth. I generally try to phrase my opinions as such, unless I'm just trying to be funny. I find it very strange that folks get so upset when someone else doesn't agree with their pet notions about a subject. I guess I'm just not wired that way most of the time.

[phonedork]

 

 

 

Yea the NES fans hate other systems. But not there own! You hate other Atari systems! Thats lame! A nintendo fan does not put down the Super NES. Thats what I mean. I did not stir up nothing. Everything is ok until I say a 7800 game plays better and here we go. If thats all it takes to stir you up you got problems. I think my reviews are pretty much fair although they are my opinion. I am not on no bandwagon. And why are we even talking about this? This is a game comparison. Why dont you play some of the 7800 ports and compare it to the 5200 ports and give me your review? The same with you 7800 players. You might actually like playing the other ports. Then maybe you guys will get along! AS for me I will always be the odd ball! Which basically means unbiased.

 

 

 

Choplifter 5200>7800

 

I take that back about Choplifter being better on the 7800. I actually like playing it more on the 5200. It appears that although the 5200 lacks the color of the 7800, it has better animation on the 5200. The chopper also controls better. I have noticed that the jets dont crash into you like the 7800 version. I think thats so cheesy!

"Yea the NES fans hate other systems. But not there own!" first off, people like me dont hate other atari systems. doesn't make sense. i've had every system atari put out when each had come out. i've even got a flashback I and II. as far as the nes forums, you havent read some of the "nes" vs n64 generations battle out. final fantasy and which mario game was the best are pretty big deals on other nintendo forums.

 

"Why dont you play some of the 7800 ports and compare it to the 5200 ports..." what's the point? you complain that atari fans fight against each other and yet you want me to compare the games? so i can fuel the fire you're creating? give me abreak.

 

i will say this, winter games, alien brigade, food fight, and xevious on the 7800 are my favorite ports. i even kinda like the cheesey ninja golf. the 7800 is a neat console but not 1 of my favorite among atari systems.

 

on a comparison in terms of all games and software (quality and quantity) on each atari system, the 8bit as a computer gaming systems hands down pound for pound takes all the atari systems. many atari fans will also agree that the 2600 will also win the nostalgia award almost every time (unless you were younger). but that doesn't mean that each atari fan doesnt have their own favorite console. to each their own....

 

Dude I am not directing anything at you. I mean Atari fans in general. Getting people to try the other systems and giving it at least the benefit of a doubt could put out fires in theory. Do you really think I am trying to aggrivate people? Your right about the Atar 8bit computer as the pound for pound better system. But again that is not the subject. Your changing this to a system comparison not me!

[phonedork]

Yea the NES fans hate other systems. But not there own!" first off, people like me dont hate other atari systems. doesn't make sense. i've had every system atari put out when each had come out. i've even got a flashback I and II. as far as the nes forums, you havent read some of the "nes" vs n64 generations battle out. final fantasy and which mario game was the best are pretty big deals on other nintendo forums.

 

 

That is a game comparison not a system comparison. Its really a matter of who likes 3d over 2d in that aspect. There are a few people that posted on this forum with just straight attacks on a system. I was not doing that. But I do get in the debate because I think there both equal. So I may join the 5200 side on one debate and the next I am on the 7800 side. I cannot be biased to either system because my pet system is the Sega Saturn. Which I personally think is the best 2d sytem ever IMO. But there are forums that say how terrible it is against the PSX and the N64. I really dont get involved, because its what I think that matters. I ignore it. I am not going to say PSX sucks or N64 sucks because somebody tells me that the saturn port is worst then the PSX port. You actually seem like a nice guy. I am not saying its you who attacks the 7800 system. But your pet system is definately the 5200!

[ApolloBoy]

How the hell could you hate either the 5200 or the 7800 when you own both? It doesn't make any sense. I never understood the whole 5200 vs. 7800 thing, and as I've said several times, it's a load of crap not worth arguing about. Seriously, who cares if the 5200 or the 7800 are better over another?

[DracIsBack]

It would be gay for me to say all the 5200 games are better playing then the 7800.

Indeed...in a recent poll by The Advocate, gays preferred the 5200 over the 7800 by a 2-to-1 margin.

 

That made me laugh out loud.

[CV Gus]

I'd have to say...the Atari 5200.

 

This is probably because I was around in those days.

 

It has to do with "current."

 

The Atari 5200 came out in later 1982. What games did it offer at first and over the next year or so? Games like Pac-Man, Ms. Pac-Man, Pengo, Joust, Robotron: 2084, Gyruss, Blueprint, Frogger, Qix, Berzerk, Space Dungeon, etc.

 

The Atari 7800, even in the more prosperous and populated area I used to live in, did not really make any sort of an appearance until 1988. In Kay-Bee Toys, no less. But even if we say 1987, what games did it offer? Why, Ms. Pac-Man, Centipede, Joust, Asteroids, Robotron: 2084, etc.

 

See the problem?

 

The games for the 5200 were recent and relative in its time. The games for the 7800 were by then dated, by which I mean that they were older and usually already done. What was one of the most exciting things about having a home system? When a cool-new-great arcade game was coming home. The 5200 had plenty of that; the 7800, very, very little.

 

And when you see the 5200 that nearly was- Millipede, Tempest, Super Pac-Man, etc.- it would have been an even more uneven fight. Especially since games like Robotron: 2084, Ms. Pac-Man, and Centipede just weren't much better on the 7800- in fact, I liked the 5200 Centipede better, as it was more like the arcade in appearance, and had the Trak-Ball.

 

Hell, if the CV versions of Joust, Dig-Dug, and Pac-Man had only been completed 100%, then the first two would've easily equaled the 7800 versions!

[Gregory DG]

The Atari 7800, even in the more prosperous and populated area I used to live in, did not really make any sort of an appearance until 1988. In Kay-Bee Toys, no less. But even if we say 1987, what games did it offer? Why, Ms. Pac-Man, Centipede, Joust, Asteroids, Robotron: 2084, etc.

 

See the problem?

You should read this article. Follows with exactly what you're saying.

[DracIsBack]

The Atari 7800, even in the more prosperous and populated area I used to live in, did not really make any sort of an appearance until 1988. In Kay-Bee Toys, no less. But even if we say 1987, what games did it offer? Why, Ms. Pac-Man, Centipede, Joust, Asteroids, Robotron: 2084, etc.

 

See the problem?

You should read this article. Follows with exactly what you're saying.

 

 

 

Yeah - that is something that has always bugged me. When Atari made the 7800, they were essentially grumbling about three pain points in their life.

 

1. The Colecovision

2. Parents who complained that the 5200 couldn't play 2600 games

3. The dropping prices of home computers.

 

The initial lineup of games and licenses to product games reflects this.

 

Then the NES comes out of nowhere in 1985 and totally redefines the kinds of video games the public wants to play.

 

Jack dusts off the 7800 and throws it to market with the old games repacked in cheap labels in 1986.

 

In 1987-8, with the fiercest competitor imaginable eating up the market, what does he do? Spends nothing on advertising. Tosses licenses to market, often hastily developed with cheap developers. Worst of all - he divides his limited resources by having the XEGS and 2600jr at the same time.

 

Finally, in 1989, he realizes he can't continue this way. He pares back the XEGS. He starts releasing bigger games and getting better licenses.

 

By 1989 though, the 16-bit consoles (Genesis and TG-16 are on market) and forcing the 7800 off shelves.

 

Nice.

[Atari2008]

It's interesting that Atari kept rehashing many of the same titles that were available on the 2600 and 5200 for the 7800, instead of pushing it in different directions. Plus, many of those same games and more innovative titles were available on the NES. Atari did have a great library of classic games but they over-relied on it. It's true the Colecovision had more inventive titles that pushed the limits (like Smurfs which can be considered a primitive Super Mario Bros), while the 7800 had the same tired games. I mean how many different versions of Joust, Mario Bros., and Ms. Pacman can you play? The 7800 could've been much more competitive had Atari pushed it to the max. Most of the library leaves one feeling that the system still has a lot of untapped potential. I mean only one side-scrolling platformer? The NES made that one of the most popular genres of the time. Just from the perspective of variety, rehashing the same titles would make people who already owned a 2600 and/or 5200 less inclined to pick up a 7800 to play enhanced versions of the same games. Still with the 7800 homebrew scene picking up, maybe we'll see what the 7800 is really capable of.

 

It would also be interesting to see what other types of games the 5200 is capable of as well.

 

The Atari 7800, even in the more prosperous and populated area I used to live in, did not really make any sort of an appearance until 1988. In Kay-Bee Toys, no less. But even if we say 1987, what games did it offer? Why, Ms. Pac-Man, Centipede, Joust, Asteroids, Robotron: 2084, etc.

 

See the problem?

You should read this article. Follows with exactly what you're saying.

 

 

 

Yeah - that is something that has always bugged me. When Atari made the 7800, they were essentially grumbling about three pain points in their life.

 

1. The Colecovision

2. Parents who complained that the 5200 couldn't play 2600 games

3. The dropping prices of home computers.

 

The initial lineup of games and licenses to product games reflects this.

 

Then the NES comes out of nowhere in 1985 and totally redefines the kinds of video games the public wants to play.

 

Jack dusts off the 7800 and throws it to market with the old games repacked in cheap labels in 1986.

 

In 1987-8, with the fiercest competitor imaginable eating up the market, what does he do? Spends nothing on advertising. Tosses licenses to market, often hastily developed with cheap developers. Worst of all - he divides his limited resources by having the XEGS and 2600jr at the same time.

 

Finally, in 1989, he realizes he can't continue this way. He pares back the XEGS. He starts releasing bigger games and getting better licenses.

 

By 1989 though, the 16-bit consoles (Genesis and TG-16 are on market) and forcing the 7800 off shelves.

 

Nice.

[DracIsBack]

The 7800 could've been much more competitive had Atari pushed it to the max. Most of the library leaves one feeling that the system still has a lot of untapped potential.

 

One gets that feeling with the Lynx and Jaguar as well. Tramiel just wasn't into paying money. He didn't typically hire the best developers, he didn't allow for long dev cycles, he wouldn't pay for the carts to store and he grumbled over licenses.

 

I'm a huge fan of all Atari systems but there's a lot of hints that the Tramiel era systems could do particular things but it seldom came together into a "showcase".

 

 

How many times have Jaguar fans (of which I'm one) pointed to select examples of things that showed off what the system could do, in parts. The reality was that most of the library didn't even come close to showing what it could do. Most of the library looked like games that were quickly ported from the SNES by developers who had neither the time or resources to invest in making a good game.

 

On the 2600, it's popularity meant that people were pushing the hell out of the system. By the time it died, stuff like California Games, Solaris, Double Dragon and Space Shuttle were way beyond what developers thought in 1977.

 

The 5200 had the advantage of being almost identical to computers that had been programmed heavily for four years prior to its release.

 

The 7800, Lynx and Jaguar all kind of died before developers went into making their "later generation" titles. I always wonder what the better developers could have done with those systems, given Nintendo style budgets, timelines etc.

[Gregory DG]

One gets that feeling with the Lynx and Jaguar as well. Tramiel just wasn't into paying money. He didn't typically hire the best developers, he didn't allow for long dev cycles, he wouldn't pay for the carts to store and he grumbled over licenses

In their defense, they didn't have a lot of money to spend either. Not like the deep pockets of Sony, Nintendo, MS or even Sega.

[DracIsBack]

In their defense, they didn't have a lot of money to spend either. Not like the deep pockets of Sony, Nintendo, MS or even Sega.

 

True although I think they could have spent more than they actually did. There certainly was a lot of profit taking from the 7800 ...

[Atari2008]

Also, I think Atari could've made the 7800 their centerpiece system. I understand that the 2600 was their top selling system, but reintroducing it as the 2600jr and then continuing to support it at the same time as the 7800 were mistakes. Also releasing the XEGS was another terrible drain of resources and attention, and I would imagine it confused the public....I mean 3 Atari systems? It's as if Atari was ambivalent about the 7800 and went back and forth between the 2600 and XEGS, they should've had faith in the 7800 and pushed it as their main and only platform. Also, the more NES-style games like Midnight Mutants and Scrapyard Dog should've came out much sooner. I mean Scrapyard Dog came out in 1990, all 3 of the Super Mario Bros. series had already been released by then! Too little too late.

 

In their defense, they didn't have a lot of money to spend either. Not like the deep pockets of Sony, Nintendo, MS or even Sega.

 

True although I think they could have spent more than they actually did. There certainly was a lot of profit taking from the 7800 ...

[DracIsBack]

Also, I think Atari could've made the 7800 their centerpiece system.

 

They did, but only after their plans to make the XEGS a primary system didn't work. By the time the XE died off though, the 7800 itself was on its last legs

 

Also, the more NES-style games like Midnight Mutants and Scrapyard Dog should've came out much sooner. I mean Scrapyard Dog came out in 1990, all 3 of the Super Mario Bros. series had already been released by then! Too little too late.

 

Agree, but Jack didn't want to spend the money for that in 1986 or 1987. I mean, 7800 games didn't even reach 128K until the end of 1988. XE games had that kind of memory useage at launch. <grumble>

[CV Gus]

Again, I had the advantage of actually being there.

 

You have to keep in mind how arcade games evolved. When the 2600 came out, we were practically still in the Pong-era, with simple driving games and such. Sure, there were more advanced games, but, overall...

 

But arcade games evolved. Soon, no home system could really do enough to bring them home.

 

This is why the ColecoVision caused such a stir. When we saw photos of Ladybug, Cosmic Avenger, Smurf, etc...well, we couldn't believe it!

 

Naturally, Atari had to come out with something.

 

One problem is the fact that many games had already appeared on the 2600. The Cv had no such problem; what could you compare CV Cosmic Avenger, Ladybug, or the like to, except for the arcade versions?

 

But in the case of the 5200, you could compare them to the 2600 versions. And, in a few cases, THE 2600 WON!!!

 

Look at Super Breakout. The 2600 version used paddles. The 5200, those ridiculous joysticks. The gameplay and even sound was better on the 2600 were so much better, and the 5200 graphics weren't THAT much better.

 

And by the way, making Super Breakout the pack-in game was an example of intelligent stupidity. Atari knew that it's the cartridges, not the consoles, that make the money. Yet they failed to realize that you must include a popular pack-in game in order to SELL the console. Coleco did this with Donkey Kong.

 

But Super Breakout? Anybody who liked this game, already had the 2600 version. If Atari thought that this would make people buy an extra cartridge in addition to the 5200, well, they were wrong. People just went with the CV.

 

Space Invaders? Again, the 2600 version was so much better. Especially with the numerous simultaneous two-player options.

 

So the initial line of games lacked the excitement of the CV. Especially since the graphics in them were not so great; look at the single-colored ghosts of Pac-Man. Sure, it's a fine game, but even the CV version was better.

 

By the time the marketer/expert-inspired "crash" occurred (it was NOT a "glut"), the 5200 had a good collection of games, but with the head start the CV had, and the crummy 5200 controllers, it was too late. Perhaps, if Atari had gotten its act together in 1984, and stuck with the 5200, it would have made it, especially with Millipede, Tempest, and Super Pac-Man. What's more, the CV game Lord of the Dungeon proved that home video gamers could enjoy good RPGs.

 

But, when Atari abandoned the 5200, people were furious- the thing had an effective lifespan of less than 1 1/2 years, and Atari would've dumped it even if that disasterous summer of 1984 had not occurred that way.

 

 

Then came the (grrrrrr!) Tramiels.

 

First, they abandoned the 5200 AND 7800. Then, they tried to bring it out when the NES was already firmly established. With old games, no less. Then, every single time it looked like they were about to do something right, sure enough, they'd screw it up. Not to mention trying to support too many systems at once. The 7800 effort seemed quarter-hearted at best. And those racist Atarian comics did not help.

They couldn't even get the kinds of games right. What was a popular genre? Side-scrolling level/boss games. Did the 7800 have any R-Type style games? No. RPGs? Not until the very end (Midnight Mutants). Even the CV and 5200 had something here!

 

Knuckleheads, they were.