Atari v Commodore

[atariksi]

Agreed there will be some more overhead because anything that is made from PMGs on the A8 has more "resolution" lets call it for checking what it's collided with where the C64 just gets some bits to say "something" happened but it's not much more.

 

In the case of Gyruss, it's a hybrid; hardware collision is used for player to nasties and nasty bullets and software for the more involved job of checking all the player bullets against the nasties. i didn't bother disassembling the code, merely used the Atari 800Win cheat options to turn off the hardware collisions to see what kept going and with just player to playfield disabled, the player's ship becomes totally invulnerable.

 

Actually... has anyone else noticed the "random nasty death" issues around stage four or is that just the crack in the Homesoft collection?

 

Yup, that's what I was trying to point out. There is no "simple" way to check collisions using hardware against a load of software sprite bad guys (short of saving a PF or a PMG, shoving it where each sprite is, checking the hardware registers, etc). ergo it can't be only hardware collisions..

 

 

 

Pete

 

Well missiles also have a lot of combinations so I'm sure it's doable.

 

I'm sure it is as well, but there would still need to be some form of software intervention. You could put the missiles in the positions of the sprites when they're settled in their waveform, but there are still too many pixels/ships there for the number of missiles, you could maybe check every scanline what the collisions hold (if there are no more then #Missiles per available per scanline) but that's still software intervention. You really may as well just do a constant check for bullets x/y if they're within range of the internal formation check all of those, if not check only the moving waveforms. It's something you'll have to do in the end anyway because they're all software sprites on A8 so it's really only alien/alien bullet to player ship that's possible fully in hardware and even then you wouldn't be able to tell WHAT hit it. Result, not much different to the C64.

 

 

 

Pete

 

If the player sprite shoots missiles then playfield detection for player and missiles is all hardware.

[atarian63]

World Soccer, yeah nothing to rave on about on Commodore, couple of screens thrown together, bad AI, the ATARI 800 has clearer screens, that's all.

Well, I see you haven't bought a pair of new glasses yet. The sooner the better.

more trolling

Yes we know, you have already said that. It seems we have an extreme case of "troll-phobia".

nice of you to finally admit you are trolling. Now be on your way. You are changing no minds here.

[PeteD]

Agreed there will be some more overhead because anything that is made from PMGs on the A8 has more "resolution" lets call it for checking what it's collided with where the C64 just gets some bits to say "something" happened but it's not much more.

 

In the case of Gyruss, it's a hybrid; hardware collision is used for player to nasties and nasty bullets and software for the more involved job of checking all the player bullets against the nasties. i didn't bother disassembling the code, merely used the Atari 800Win cheat options to turn off the hardware collisions to see what kept going and with just player to playfield disabled, the player's ship becomes totally invulnerable.

 

Actually... has anyone else noticed the "random nasty death" issues around stage four or is that just the crack in the Homesoft collection?

 

Yup, that's what I was trying to point out. There is no "simple" way to check collisions using hardware against a load of software sprite bad guys (short of saving a PF or a PMG, shoving it where each sprite is, checking the hardware registers, etc). ergo it can't be only hardware collisions..

 

 

 

Pete

 

Well missiles also have a lot of combinations so I'm sure it's doable.

 

I'm sure it is as well, but there would still need to be some form of software intervention. You could put the missiles in the positions of the sprites when they're settled in their waveform, but there are still too many pixels/ships there for the number of missiles, you could maybe check every scanline what the collisions hold (if there are no more then #Missiles per available per scanline) but that's still software intervention. You really may as well just do a constant check for bullets x/y if they're within range of the internal formation check all of those, if not check only the moving waveforms. It's something you'll have to do in the end anyway because they're all software sprites on A8 so it's really only alien/alien bullet to player ship that's possible fully in hardware and even then you wouldn't be able to tell WHAT hit it. Result, not much different to the C64.

 

 

 

Pete

 

If the player sprite shoots missiles then playfield detection for player and missiles is all hardware.

 

And what did they hit? If all the enemies are made from PF and they're multicolour so must be using all the PFs how does the hardware detect that those 4 pixels near the middle of the screen in a little + shape aren't the ones in a little + shape next to them?

 

 

Pete

[atarian63]

Imagine that there are football manager games and this one is one of them.

 

Now that DID make me laugh No offence to anyone, it just tickled me.

 

 

Rockford won't be laughing after wood-jl recovers from this little faux-pas and begins his next troll fly-by

(yawn) I'm not trolling....I have have Ataris piled all over this room and where are we??? Oh yeah, this is ATARIAGE. So I'm not here to troll. What the f*ck are all these Commodore users doing here, EXCEPT to troll?

 

I own more than 1 car, I own many 8bit computers, I have my favourites when it comes to both...doesn't make me personally a troll for not being a fanboy of any manufacturer....I have an open mind personally.

Fine for you however many here are loyal Atari fans. Brand loyalty works. Chevy guys,Dodge guys, Sports teams. It makes the world go round.

Open mind or lack of making a choice. Either is fine.

[TMR]

The c64 at introduction was nothing more than a very cheaply made toy.

 

If that were true (it isn't, of course) then the A8 series was thrashed rather severely on both the hardware and software sales fronts by a "cheaply made toy" and that's a bit like having a console on the market now and realising that you're being beaten in popularity by something like the V.Smile TV Learning System.

it is poorly made and V-smile is better built.

 

Oh dear... what exactly is poorly made? i was talking about a fictional console being beaten by the V.Smile so you're calling an unspecified machine "poorly made". If you're going to shout about other people being a troll, perhaps you should try exhibiting less of the signs yourself, reading posts before rushing to reply to make cheap little shots for example.

[potatohead]

... but it's wrong to attack the competing system or it's users! Saying things that the A8 is clearly the superior machine, or the C64 sold so much more it's not even worth talking about - this kind of talk is ridiculous.

 

Yawn... just another C64 freak with polite words.

 

The whole tread meanwhile is about "vice versa"...

 

C64 guys come along to an Atari forum, telling everyone that the C64 is the deus ex machina, thus not accepting that the A8 has its superiorities. So, please go back to lemon, thanks.

 

I really have nothing to say that will make you look worse for posting this.

 

Everyone else - thank you for your welcomes! This thread has gotten me really interested in the Atari 8-bits. Sadly I'm only re-building my Commodore system at the moment and I have very little space for that, so an Atari machine is not a likely purchase in the near future.

 

Ah well, there are emulators...

 

They are great machines, with an interesting texture. Of course, this is why most of us here like them as much as we do!

[atarian63]

Who'd want a C16? Ewwwwwww.....

 

The bigger 264 series machines are pretty capable (and all of the following applies to the C16 as well); they don't have hardware sprites (probably their biggest downfall, along with TED-generated sound) but with the colour RAM it was possible to get eighty colours on a scanline at 320x200 with no extra CPU intervention after what the hardware is already taking with the DMA, there's half colour clock horizontal scrolling like the C64 has and it has probably the coolest way of handling vertical overscan i've ever seen... just lie to the raster register and it'll start the screen wherever you tell it to!

 

If they'd have "fixed" it it would have rendered earlier machines incompatible.

 

But Atari added features to the GTIA that meant that, if games used them, the 400 and 800 couldn't run the game. The question is more why they stopped where they did, rather than offering 80x192 and 80x96 pixel character modes for example, or wedging a colour RAM system in at the same time since the VIC 20 had already shown how useful it could potentially be at that point.

You are aware that here in the US many bought the Vic 20 and never used it. Many of them ended up as doorstops. Can't tell you how many people tried to trade those in. They were often never or barely used. It's a moot point what it could do as people here in the US nought it to say they had a computer. Few actually used it and you couldnt do much with it. Software was very hard to find anywhere.

[atarian63]

But Atari added features to the GTIA that meant that, if games used them, the 400 and 800 couldn't run the game.

 

No... GTIA came very early on. CTIA is so rare that virtually nobody here has one.

Yep, never really saw but a couple ever.

[atarian63]

Who'd want a C16? Ewwwwwww.....

 

Well whatever the numbnutz who were appointed as managers at Commodore did with the Commodore 16 TED project AFTER Jack Tramiel left has nothing to do with the designers who made it in the first place....even they knew it was crazy what Commodore were trying to do with that system.

 

The Commodore 16 was designed to be a $70 'my first' home computer in the spirit of the VIC-20 but much cheaper with chiclet keys like the Jupiter Ace and ZX Spectrum, so cheap in fact that the Japanese or Atari would have lost money trying to compete at this level and the VCS/Coleco market would be wiped out when $10 tape games replace $40 cartridges.

 

Sadly the incompetent replacements of JT grew the project to such a ludicrous level we ended up with the Commodore Plus/4 with 64K, no sprites, no hardware scrolling, worse sound, and some pretty shit software built in......and they expected it to sell alongside the C64 for a similar price

 

Had the original 16k model with chiclet keys launched for $70 in 1984-5 then they would have had another massive hit on their hands, but they didn't and the C64 went on to record breaking sales spanning 2 decades.

not here in the US. C64 was nearly dead by late 87.that is 5 years.

[atariksi]

 

An analogue synthesizer (well technically an analogue phase accumulator) with full ring modulation/synchronisation/filtering and FULL ADSR enveloping on ALL channels PLUS a fourth sample channel effectively...compared to what? A limited VCS sounding chip which hasn't got a hope in hell of making either a decent piano sound or electric guitar sound let alone both let alone in more than two channel mode...hmmmm?

 

I hope you are exaggerating here when you claim the A8 sounds like the VCS. No way, man.

...

Once every few weeks, you get the SAME arguments from oky2000 and some others as if the fanboy reset button was pressed. Then you get the same arguments as answered many many times: Atari can only do 2 colors in 320 mode, 4 colors in 160 mode, electric guitar on SID, etc. etc. Just one-sided views. And comparing with C16 as if thread is C64+C16 vs. A8. I would recommend comparing A8+A7800 vs. C16+C64. C16 colors are still less and it's incompatible. C16 came too late but at least Commodore realized palette isn't subjective. POKEY DACs running at high frequency or combined to form higher sound bit depth is much easier than what SID can do. And it fits in well with the superior hardware design of A8 since you can have SIO or joystick ports doing streaming audio/imagery without having to worry about all the timing issues involved with synchronized audio/video events.

[emkay]

Atari ST would also have been much better if they maintained backward compatibility.

 

Well, If they put compatibility in, what would it be?

A8 is too much different

C64? Even more possible. As we know the ST is a "Plus 4" successor. Which is a C64 without Sprites and SID, and some colours added.

[atarian63]

The c64 at introduction was nothing more than a very cheaply made toy.

 

If that were true (it isn't, of course) then the A8 series was thrashed rather severely on both the hardware and software sales fronts by a "cheaply made toy" and that's a bit like having a console on the market now and realising that you're being beaten in popularity by something like the V.Smile TV Learning System.

it is poorly made and V-smile is better built.

 

Oh dear... what exactly is poorly made? i was talking about a fictional console being beaten by the V.Smile so you're calling an unspecified machine "poorly made". If you're going to shout about other people being a troll, perhaps you should try exhibiting less of the signs yourself, reading posts before rushing to reply to make cheap little shots for example.

This is one of the main reasons I skip your little forum of c64'ers.

As a DEALER as in owned, bought,sold,serviced many brands of PC's. Making financial decisions based on profit etc. I am telling you that at electronics shows,dealer symposiums etc, it being c64 was view a cheaply made toy. That is not just my opinion but the opinion of many at the time. You can discount my experience and call it trolling if you like but I am probably one of the most qualified here to speak about conditions at the time.

What you seem to accuse me of is the very thing you yourself do in a small snyde way often here.

You may not like the facts but they are the facts. that doesnt discount your love of your selected machine however don't expect others to adopt it.

Also, poorly made refers to the chronic level of returns, bad keyboads,bad video, dead power brick, dead sound. Tin foil RF sheild,thin as hell cheap MB, crappy kb. Best of all a return rate worse than Xbox 360. You spent alot of your spare time sending them back for RMA! Let's not even get started with disk drives. The original VIC drive was AWFUL, many many defects.

Remember.. this is how I made my living. C64 was not very helpful with that.

Edited October 24, 2009 by atarian63

[TMR]

But Atari added features to the GTIA that meant that, if games used them, the 400 and 800 couldn't run the game. The question is more why they stopped where they did, rather than offering 80x192 and 80x96 pixel character modes for example, or wedging a colour RAM system in at the same time since the VIC 20 had already shown how useful it could potentially be at that point.

You are aware that here in the US many bought the Vic 20 and never used it. Many of them ended up as doorstops. Can't tell you how many people tried to trade those in. They were often never or barely used. It's a moot point what it could do as people here in the US nought it to say they had a computer. Few actually used it and you couldnt do much with it. Software was very hard to find anywhere.

 

wood_jl said of the lack of colour control that if Atari had '"fixed" it it would have rendered earlier machines incompatible' and my point was and still is that they already did change the design to add optional modes that were incompatible with the introduction of the GTIA so that wasn't an issue as far as Atari were concerned. Trolling about the VIC makes no difference to that point, you'd have been better off keeping it to yourself.

[atarian63]

But Atari added features to the GTIA that meant that, if games used them, the 400 and 800 couldn't run the game. The question is more why they stopped where they did, rather than offering 80x192 and 80x96 pixel character modes for example, or wedging a colour RAM system in at the same time since the VIC 20 had already shown how useful it could potentially be at that point.

You are aware that here in the US many bought the Vic 20 and never used it. Many of them ended up as doorstops. Can't tell you how many people tried to trade those in. They were often never or barely used. It's a moot point what it could do as people here in the US nought it to say they had a computer. Few actually used it and you couldnt do much with it. Software was very hard to find anywhere.

 

wood_jl said of the lack of colour control that if Atari had '"fixed" it it would have rendered earlier machines incompatible' and my point was and still is that they already did change the design to add optional modes that were incompatible with the introduction of the GTIA so that wasn't an issue as far as Atari were concerned. Trolling about the VIC makes no difference to that point, you'd have been better off keeping it to yourself.

using the VIC as an example was a moot point, therefore my statement. You may return to your own trolling now or lemon or whatever.

[TMR]

This is one of the main reasons I skip your little forum of c64'ers.

 

What, the one with more Atarians than C64 users, you mean (nine users out of sixteen in total)? And there was us thinking it was just because you couldn't hide behind the "this is an Atari site" argument...

 

As a DEALER as in owned, bought,sold,serviced many brands of PC's. Making financial decisions based on profit etc. I am telling you that at electronics shows,dealer symposiums etc, it being c64 was view a cheaply made toy. That is not just my opinion but the opinion of many at the time.

 

Yeah, okay, so you and the people you dealt with weren't impressed with the C64 we bloody get that. But when you repeatedly use phrases like "cheaply made toy" you're doing so to get a response, it's trolling plain and simple.

 

You can discount my experience and call it trolling if you like but I am probably one of the most qualified here to speak about conditions at the time.

 

i know that at thirty seven i'm too young to have been in the trade when the A8 was actually selling (we had an XEGS, but i can't remember ever seeing it fired up) but i spent nearly a decade selling more Commodore 64s than Atari STs and having less of the Commodore kit back in returns - of course that was after the five year window you saw, but it doesn't make my experiences any less valid than yours, probably more so because i've no doubt i saw more C64s go through.

[TMR]

But Atari added features to the GTIA that meant that, if games used them, the 400 and 800 couldn't run the game. The question is more why they stopped where they did, rather than offering 80x192 and 80x96 pixel character modes for example, or wedging a colour RAM system in at the same time since the VIC 20 had already shown how useful it could potentially be at that point.

You are aware that here in the US many bought the Vic 20 and never used it. Many of them ended up as doorstops. Can't tell you how many people tried to trade those in. They were often never or barely used. It's a moot point what it could do as people here in the US nought it to say they had a computer. Few actually used it and you couldnt do much with it. Software was very hard to find anywhere.

 

wood_jl said of the lack of colour control that if Atari had '"fixed" it it would have rendered earlier machines incompatible' and my point was and still is that they already did change the design to add optional modes that were incompatible with the introduction of the GTIA so that wasn't an issue as far as Atari were concerned. Trolling about the VIC makes no difference to that point, you'd have been better off keeping it to yourself.

using the VIC as an example was a moot point, therefore my statement.

 

No it wasn't, it was a valid point; the VIC demonstrated the concept of colour RAM, that's all it was mentioned for. Your statement is invalid and trolling.

 

You may return to your own trolling now or lemon or whatever.

 

And you're doing it again, trolling and then accusing others. i don't post to Lemon by the way.

[ANTIQ]

But Atari added features to the GTIA that meant that, if games used them, the 400 and 800 couldn't run the game. The question is more why they stopped where they did, rather than offering 80x192 and 80x96 pixel character modes for example, or wedging a colour RAM system in at the same time since the VIC 20 had already shown how useful it could potentially be at that point.

 

Try

GRAPHICS 0:POKE 623,64

and

GRAPHICS 2:POKE 623,64:PRINT #6;"caveat emptor"

 

They probably didn't add a colour RAM system to GTIA because ANTIC does the character generation.

[vcsdream]

I had to register on these forums just to reply to this thread - the link to which I've seen on the Lemon 64 forums. This has to be the thread with some of the silliest posts on the entire Internet!

 

 

 

You're telling us....silliest posts....and those are just the ones from the Commodore users.

[vcsdream]

Today another "random" game. LOL

 

52 - WORLD SOCCER

 

C64

C64

C64

 

The C64 version has better hi-res graphics and more colours. The Atari version has worse graphics with limited colours. C64 wins again.

 

ATARI

ATARI

ATARI

more waste of time selective comparisons. And the troll comment at the end.

The troll comment at the end ??? Where do you see anything like that ??? Serious problems with reality...again ??? At the end there are only ATARI pics. Can't you distinguish "the beginning" from "the end" ??? Oh, I forgot that you are the "smartest" bloke on this forum (if we don't count frenchman).BTW, You love provoking people and then playing offended virgin, don't you ? If it's too complicated for you, scroll up and read your previous posts.

"c64 wins again" not only usually a false statement but one designed to elicit a negative response. In otherwords for the slow (rockford) Trolling!

It would seem to be your only reason for being here.

 

The phrase "c64 wins again" isn't at the end of my post either. You confuse "the end" with "the middle". So, it's even worse than I thought. LOL

 

 

Yes, atarian63 is right, it is at the end...at the end of the sentence....surely that's not difficult to understand?

[Azhrei]

Okay, there's a lot of hostility in here. I don't see why I should be called a "freak" because I like a computer that someone else doesn't. I don't see why I should be told to be unbiased because I said there are some silly posts in here when there are also intelligent posts. I never said there weren't. It was an allusion to an extreme view of the debate that I had never expressed. I don't see why this site should be closed to people who have no experience of the Atari computers but are interested in them, because I followed a link on a forum that is focussed on a different computer.

 

It seems the schoolyard mentality of, "My parents/I bought this computer, therefore it's automatically better!" is still around, and in force. There were no Atari 8-bit computers where I grew up. I would have loved to seen them, used them, find out what I would like about them over my own C64. I grew up excited about computers and eager to learn as much about as many I could find. I didn't really experience the "my machine is better than yours!" stuff until I continued to use my Commodore computers while everyone else in my school had moved onto the Amiga, SNES or Mega Drive (and then I really got it).

 

So experiencing the hostility here because I dare to admit to liking the C64 is just beyond me. It is beneath contempt, and everyone here, 8-bit enthusiasts all, should be above it. But many aren't, and it is so childish that I'm just not going to post from here on. It's not worth the aggravation.

 

So, thank you very much again to everyone who welcomed me, and had an interest in introducing me to the Atari computers. To all those engaged in the petty bickering, you should know better. Say what you will of me, I won't be here to see it.

 

Peace.

[Rockford]

 

 

He starts making false accusations and calling people names when he can't deal with the argument or doesn't understand it (like in this case). Looks like he misread my example: "if you argue with Rockford, you just have to do random searches..." He did in fact try to establish Atari was cheaper system earlier using random searches for prices on the internet and then he goes and blames people what does some price quotes establish. It doesn't establish any price-- you can have various prices all over the world.

YOU CAN HAVE VARIOUS PRICES ALL OVER THE WORLD NO S..T What a spectacular discovery you have made ! But wait a second, I did quote prices from different countries like US, UK, France, Germany... and you quoted what... ? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. That's right, all you can do is blabbing. LOL

[Rockford]

World Soccer, yeah nothing to rave on about on Commodore, couple of screens thrown together, bad AI, the ATARI 800 has clearer screens, that's all.

 

He probably has 10 soccer games on C64 that have hires miscolored graphics and that hardly anyone has heard of or uses.

How do you know that ? Oh well, apart from blabbing, you also excel at reading people's mind.

[Rockford]

 

 

As usual your comments make no point or no sense.

 

But your comments always make "sense", like comparing C64 games to A2600 games or posting fart videos. ROTFL

 

 

no my problem if you dont have the $$ for the real deal.

What an incredibly moving Rockefeller-like speech. LOL

Fart videos were especially for you. It was to illustrate your level of mentality in your posts which you continue to do.

As for Rockefeller.. Hey one has to aspire. You should try it.

So, YOU posted farting videos and that illustrated MY mentality. Your logic is as comical as your comments. ROTFL

[Rockford]

 

The C64 version has better hi-res graphics and more colours. The Atari version has worse graphics with limited colours. C64 wins again.

 

 

Let's see the f*cking GAMEPLAY screens. Who gives a sh*t about the menu screens.

Yeah, who gives...it's not me for sure, since these are exact "f*cking GAMEPLAY screens". Imagine that there are football manager games and this one is one of them.

still shots in some of you examples are not gameplay. Think McFly!

You didn't understand what was written. Maybe you should try again ?

Nonsense as usual

There is nothing nonsensical in reading with understanding, but how could you possibly know that ? Besides, If you don't understand something it doesn't mean that there is no logical explanation.

[Rockford]

53 - ACE OF ACES

 

C64

C64

C64

 

The C64 version has better hi-res graphics, sound & music, handling, more colours and works smoothly. On Atari everything is worse: low-res graphics, limited colours and unresponsive handling that makes it a chore to play. What's more, it's a flight simulation and works slower on ATARI. Yeah...what a shocker ! C64 wins again.

 

ATARI

ATARI

ATARI