Atari 5200 vs. CelecoVision

[CV Gus]

I just got Defender for the 5200 today. Wow - what the heck was Atari thinkin'? This version sux, but not as bad as the 2600 garbage they released. In fact, Stargate for the 2600 is better than the 5200 version of Defender.

 

Colecovision's Defender is the best of the bunch.

 

I'm shocked that I seem to be the only one who really enjoys 5200 Defender and thinks the CV version is dumbed down.

 

I'm curious what it is about the 5200 version that turns you off?

 

 

You're not the only one. The CV version was not good. The 5200 version was.

 

 

 

Those of you who weren't around or paying attention in the early 80's, don't think that Atari was really banking on Super Breakout. It didn't take too long before Pac-man was the free pack-in and that's when I got my 5200.

 

 

True- but it was too late. The first few months back then were crucial; the CV had a head start on the 5200. Right from the start the 5200 should have included something that would sell the system. But they didn't, and that slowed the 5200 down even more.

[Tempest]

Speaking of Frogger, for those of you who have the means I strongly suggest you check out the Timex 1000 port. Obviously it's not very good graphics-wise (the Timex 1000 didn't actually have real graphics, just character sets), but it's amazing what they could do on such a limited system. I was actually pretty impressed with it.

 

Tempest

[frogstar_robot]

The worst version? No, not the 2600. It's the Super Nintendo. They also made a Game Boy Color with the same "look and feel" (not my cliche but works) as each other, and **NOT** the arcade look at all. They totally lick balls, and I'm sad to say I own both of them because I didn't know; I assumed the SNES version would be comparable to (if not better than) than Genesis...WRONG!!! GB Color version was equally disappointing and very similar. I'd rather play Parker Bros. 2600 version than either, because it was at least *trying* to be the arcade game.

 

JW

 

Ah Nintendization. Take a perfectly good and beloved title and louse it up with overbright colors, anime characters, and gameplay that is only loosely inspired by the original at best. Apart from the the flicker and pastel pallete of the NES, Nintendization did more than anything else to turn me off Nintendo products for a long time. Though I do have a softmodded Wii these days that I'm pretty happy with. I don't mind the cutesy in small does as long as it isn't applied to something it shouldn't be applied to.

Edited April 18, 2009 by frogstar_robot

[mcjakeqcool]

The 5200 and ColecoVision both have simalar controlers, but the ColecoVision has a better liabary of games, but then, I do have a soft spot for atari...decionions, decionions!

[Poopopyo]

They're almost equally as fat so i guess they're equally as good.

[mcjakeqcool]

Agreed, poopopyo, agreed.

[CV Gus]

Overall, if you consider everything in 2009, the CV wins out.

 

For Homebrewing, the CV has the most games, and a good variety. Pac-Man Collection is one of the best. Likewise, the rediscovered games, like Lord of the Dungeon and Steamroller.

 

Since the CV uses the standard 9-pin plug, controllers are easy to find. And with a simple y-plug, you can use the keypad, too. Or just use the second controller to select a game.

 

There are more of them "out in the wild."

 

It has many more games.

 

And a better control scheme.

 

 

But still, the 5200 has winners, too. There's just something about it that seems "brighter" than the 7800 or Jaguar. And games like Pengo, Robotron: 2084, Blueprint, Space Dungeon, Berzerd, Defender, Qix, and Super Breakout (if you have a paddle controller!) are just so good. So it's not by that much.

[DracIsBack]

Overall, if you consider everything in 2009, the CV wins out.

 

You like Colecovision, as evidenced by your name and endless discussions about it. That's cool. Doesn't mean everyone prefers it or that people are full of shit for liking 5200 better than Colecovision just because you personally don't.

 

Quit expressing your opinions as though they are "facts"

Edited May 15, 2009 by DracIsBack

[CV Gus]

Unlike you recently?

 

Comment: I think that if the Jaguar was marketed better it would have been a sucsess, it had a lot more potential then say the 5200 and Atari XEGS.

 

 

Your Reply: "The Jaguar was the most marketed of any of the Tramiel era systems. To give them some credit, they actually listened to customers and the market and fixed a lot of the issues that had plagued the 7800, XEGS and Lynx. They

 

- Spent far more money on advertising

- They aggressively recruited third party developers

- They tried to get big name licenses (ie. Alien vs. Predator, NBA Jam, Myst etc)

- They sent review copies of games to the press

- They pushed additional customer support items like the toll-free number, the Jaguar help line, the Jaguar tips book etc.

 

The Jaguar was really sunk by a few key things

 

- The system was really hard to develop for

- Games that pushed the system (see above) were few and far between

- Due to above, they didn't make the most of the window they had before the Saturn and Playstation arrived. (Most Jaguar games arrived after they were in the marketplace)

- Atari had a historically tarnished reputation"

 

 

And of course, someone who makes 5200 paddle and digital controllers, 2600-5200 console converter/adapter modules, and asks where to get 15-pin plugs to fully repair his own 5200- that he spent hours getting working- AND posts the plans and text explanations for these sort of things, hates 5200s and thinks 5200 owners are full of it, right?

 

 

 

Fact is, the CV did do better than the 5200. Even if one assumes the 5200 was superior (which isn't likely), then so what? The SMS was superior to the NES, but which held 80-90% of the market?

Edited May 15, 2009 by CV Gus

[Tempest]

Break it up you two. There's no need to argue.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Because we all know the 5200 was the better system....

 

 

Tempest

[DracIsBack]

- Spent far more money on advertising FACT. Check Atari's annual reports on advertising spend for Jaguar compared to Lynx. Cross reference with Don Thomas's report on spend for 7800

- They aggressively recruited third party developers Fact. Compare the number of third party companies that were Jaguar licenses compared to Jaguar, Lynx or XEGS (the console and its cartridges, not the 8-bit line)

- They tried to get big name licenses (ie. Alien vs. Predator, NBA Jam, Myst etc) Fact. and I gave examples

- They sent review copies of games to the press. Fact. Compare the number of reviews of Jaguar games in magazines compared to 7800, XE, 2600jr or Lynx.

- They pushed additional customer support items like the toll-free number, the Jaguar help line, the Jaguar tips book etc. Fact. I've called all of them and I have the book. Looked for those things when I had the other systems and they weren't available.

 

The Jaguar was really sunk by a few key things

 

- The system was really hard to develop for. Fact. And there's loads of documented evidence of this. Atari even called out the "surprise delay" of software in several annual reports as impacting their business.

- Games that pushed the system (see above) were few and far between. Fact. They marketed it as a "64-bit system" Go back and read reviews for the Jaguar and see how many criticized the machine because most games didn't look of the caliber that Atari promised. Please feel free to explain to me how - say - the Soccer Games on the Jaguar demonstrate it's power?

- Due to above, they didn't make the most of the window they had before the Saturn and Playstation arrived. (Most Jaguar games arrived after they were in the marketplace) Fact: Check the release dates of Jaguar games. Count how many were released in 1993. How many were released in 1994? How many were released in 1995 pre-Saturn? How many were released post Saturn? Then compare with Atari's documented financial performance in 1993, 1994 and 1995. Annual reports are available in all cases.

- Atari had a historically tarnished reputation" Fact: Read articles from the Jaguar's launch to get a sense of Atari's reputation in the press, how they viewed Atari and what they thought of the Jaguar's chances for survival.

 

Notice what I didn't say in any of this: Jaguar is better or worse than _____ system. I only spoke of docmented facts on why it didn't work in the marketplace. I didn't try to tell anyone that it was better or worse than another machine ... only why it didn't succeed.

 

Fact is, the CV did do better than the 5200.

 

Once again, PROVE IT. You've been asked a half dozen times to provide documented sales figures for both. Unless you've got NPD data documenting the run-rates for both machines, you're speculating.

 

And regardless of whether it sold better or not, it doesn't make it a "better system". It makes it a system, that you personally prefer better.

 

The SMS was superior to the NES, but which held 80-90% of the market?

 

Again, a blanket statement and in what way?

 

The NES had slightly higher resolution and a more sophisticated sound chip. the SMS had more colors and could put more on screen. The library quality of both comes down to personal taste.

[jetset]

Break it up you two. There's no need to argue.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Because we all know the 5200 was the better system....

 

 

Tempest

 

Amen brother!

 

Tempest wins the thread!

[mcjakeqcool]

DracIsBack is right, the Jaguar had far more money spent on advertising, Atari aggressively recruited third party developers for it, Atari tried to get big name licenses, Atari sent review copies of games to the press for it and finally additional customer support items like the toll-free number, the Jaguar help line and Jaguar tips book were included with Atari Jaguar home consoles, DracIsBack is right. Also I may add, the Jaguar had a lot more going for it then 2600 jr, 7800, Atari XEGS or Lynx, and therefore is a better console then the likes of those consoles. (Ok, fair enough the 2600 Atari's biggest selling console, but the 2600 jr was'ent, it was viewed as a Kids toy in the late 80s.) For those reasons I've stated combined, the Jaguar is the best Atari console since the 2600.

[DracIsBack]

For those reasons I've stated combined, the Jaguar is the best Atari console since the 2600.

 

It's the console you think is the best. Many in the 5200 forum may not agree with you on that.

[+wood_jl]

DracIsBack is right, the Jaguar had far more money spent on advertising, Atari aggressively recruited third party developers for it, Atari tried to get big name licenses, Atari sent review copies of games to the press for it and finally additional customer support items like the toll-free number, the Jaguar help line and Jaguar tips book were included with Atari Jaguar home consoles, DracIsBack is right. Also I may add, the Jaguar had a lot more going for it then 2600 jr, 7800, Atari XEGS or Lynx, and therefore is a better console then the likes of those consoles. (Ok, fair enough the 2600 Atari's biggest selling console, but the 2600 jr was'ent, it was viewed as a Kids toy in the late 80s.) For those reasons I've stated combined, the Jaguar is the best Atari console since the 2600.

 

I strongly disagree.

 

What is the "best" console - for its time - is obviously going to be judged relative to its peers. The 2600, of course, was a revolutionary device. The games on the 5200 were leaps and yards better than the Intellivision, but about on par with the Colecovision.

 

The Jaguar games were dull and boring. I bought into the 64-bit hype, and paid $250 for one, in 1993 or maybe 1994. I found that I played more Super Nintendo than Jaguar. At the time, Donkey Kong Country on the SNES managed to throw beautiful graphics up on the screen that were unmatched on the supposedly superior Jaguar.....with 1/4 "the bits" on the SNES. Likewise, Kasumi Ninja was no improvement on Mortal Kombat 2. I don't hate the Jag, but I realize it for what it was - overhyped mediocrity. The 2600 and the 5200 actually delivered the goods, and I must admit, so did the Colecovision. The Jag was long on expectations and short on delivery, which is not surprising, because the Tramiels sucked at video games; these are the folks responsible for the 7800 mismanagement, of course. I do not see how anybody could rank the Jag above and beyond the 2600 and 5200, both of which were impressive in their day.

 

Additionally, the "relative to its peers" business - vis a vis the Jaguar - would have to include not only the SNES (and Genesis), but the Playstation and Saturn. In THESE terms, the Jag was pathetic and laughable. Despite the fact that the PSX had "half the bits", do you mean to seriously suggest there is ANYTHING on the Jag on par with Tekken 3 and Gran Turismo? I rest my case. The 2600 and 5200 lived in simpler times, and were both relatively capable for those times.

Edited May 16, 2009 by wood_jl

[DracIsBack]

The Jaguar games were dull and boring.

 

You personally found Jaguar games dull and boring. Doesn't mean that everyone else did. Wander into the Jaguar forum and make a statement like that ...

[+wood_jl]

The Jaguar games were dull and boring.

 

You personally found Jaguar games dull and boring. Doesn't mean that everyone else did. Wander into the Jaguar forum and make a statement like that ...

 

Why don't you play another game of "Club Drive" and I'll play "Gran Turismo" and you take another hit of whatever you're on. Side effects of whatever you're on are that you like to trash Atari's earlier efforts - which were UNDENIABLE successes - as you laud the Jaguar as a success (which it obviously was not) while you dump on previous systems that WERE successes. That's what I disagree with. I do not object to liking the Jag at all, and when my collection is comple (ever??) I kind of want one back. I'm just a little sore at Jag because I spend a lot on one and it was the first time an Atari product disappointed me. I am quite serious about that. I was never disappointed with an Atari product until the Jag. That is all. I don't see that being a revisionist historian, and that denegration of earlier Atari consoles is a successful method of defending the Jag. You are freely permitted to live in a fantasy world, where the Jag was demonstrably successful as were earlier Atari consoles. Operative word there is "fantasy." Get over it man, I assure you - from the heart - that I love Atari. The reason we are not in the Jaguar forum should be so obvious it's not worth mentioning. No insult intended to you, by the way. We each have our opinions!!!

[Murph74]

Fact is, the CV did do better than the 5200.

 

Once again, PROVE IT. You've been asked a half dozen times to provide documented sales figures for both. Unless you've got NPD data documenting the run-rates for both machines, you're speculating.

 

And regardless of whether it sold better or not, it doesn't make it a "better system". It makes it a system, that you personally prefer better.

 

 

 

Well, for what it's worth, I own both, and PREFER the simplicity, size, look, and library of the ColecoVision to the 5200.

 

And I realize this isn't the "documented proof" you ask for, a qui8ck google search seems to indicate the Colecovision sold 6 Million units in it's life span to the 5200's 400,000 units. I'm not all into the 'new math' and stuff, but if those numbers hold up, people in the marketplace preferred the Colecovision 15 to one over the 5200. You could compare the 2600 and it's reported 40 Million units to the Coleco's 6 million, but I find that to be an unfair comparison based on the time frames involved and technology of the said systems.

[DracIsBack]

Why don't you play another game of "Club Drive" and I'll play "Gran Turismo" and you take another hit of whatever you're on.

 

LOL - I hate Club Drive as well. However, that's different than a generic "express my opinions as though they're facts" statement like "All Jaguar games are dull and boring". While I recognize that you personally didn't like the Jaguar or its games, that doesn't mean that everyone feels the same.

 

Side effects of whatever you're on are that you like to trash Atari's earlier efforts - which were UNDENIABLE successes - as you laud the Jaguar as a success (which it obviously was not) while you dump on previous systems that WERE successes.

 

Not only do you express your opinions as though they are "facts", you also make strange assumptions.

 

 

revisionist historian, and that denegration of earlier Atari consoles is a successful method of defending the Jag. You are freely permitted to live in a fantasy world, where the Jag was demonstrably successful as were earlier Atari consoles

 

Please feel free to point out where I said the Jaguar was as successful as earlier consoles or - frankly - where I was defending its merits as a console?

 

You very obviously have built up something in your mind as to what I think or don't and you've seemed to have filled in the pieces with additional parts that aren't actually there. Perhaps you should do a search on my posts regarding the Jaguar to get my feelings on it?

 

 

We each have our opinions!!!

 

Yep, and last time you expressed your opinions as though they were "facts". And that's what ticked me off. Number one cause of flame wars in these forums. Just because you don't like the Jaguar or its games doesn't mean everyone feels the same.

[Mazerati]

Fact is, the CV did do better than the 5200.

 

Once again, PROVE IT. You've been asked a half dozen times to provide documented sales figures for both. Unless you've got NPD data documenting the run-rates for both machines, you're speculating.

 

And regardless of whether it sold better or not, it doesn't make it a "better system". It makes it a system, that you personally prefer better.

 

 

 

Well, for what it's worth, I own both, and PREFER the simplicity, size, look, and library of the ColecoVision to the 5200.

 

And I realize this isn't the "documented proof" you ask for, a qui8ck google search seems to indicate the Colecovision sold 6 Million units in it's life span to the 5200's 400,000 units. I'm not all into the 'new math' and stuff, but if those numbers hold up, people in the marketplace preferred the Colecovision 15 to one over the 5200. You could compare the 2600 and it's reported 40 Million units to the Coleco's 6 million, but I find that to be an unfair comparison based on the time frames involved and technology of the said systems.

 

there's no way the 5200 only sold 400,000 units

[the.golden.ax]

Good answer Atarian63. Indeed, There are plenty of "comparison threads" on here if you use the 'Search' button.

I've had problems with the joysticks/controllers.

I am also happy to see kids discovering classic systems again as well as those who originally had them reacquainting themselves. It does indeed keep the hobby alive.

 

Because I can't resist... Did someone say CalicoVision?

Although our model has 4 colors - black, tortoise, orange, and white.

 

We could turn this into a Cats vs Dogs thread:

 

Bubsy Vs. Wonderdog

VS

 

OR

 

Atari Jaguar Vs. Neo Geo Dog

VS

 

OR

 

James Bond Girl: Pussy Galore Vs. Snoop Doggy Dog

VS

 

 

AX

[DracIsBack]

And I realize this isn't the "documented proof" you ask for, a qui8ck google search seems to indicate the Colecovision sold 6 Million units in it's life span to the 5200's 400,000 units. I'm not all into the 'new math' and stuff, but if those numbers hold up, people in the marketplace preferred the Colecovision 15 to one over the 5200. You could compare the 2600 and it's reported 40 Million units to the Coleco's 6 million, but I find that to be an unfair comparison based on the time frames involved and technology of the said systems.

 

That's one of the inherent challenges with "numbers" on the internet. People quote them, but don't say where they got them from ... and those numbers change depending on where you go. Even when they do, the sources cited are often suspect.

 

For example, on the Jaguar Wikipedia page, I've seen its sales figures listed as "2 million units". In Atari's financial report, they actually said than fewer than 135,000 were sold, with 100,000 sitting in inventory. But the person who quoted "2 million" got it from one of the game sites.

 

Even the 2600 numbers, I find strange because I've seen different sales figures between 10 million, 26 million, 30 million and forty million. I remember (Tramiel) Atari making an announcement in the late 1980s pointing towards the 26-30 million consoles sold number (can't remember) but it included 2600, 7800, 5200 etc. If that announcement was made in the 1980s, where did 40 million 2600's come from?

 

You've quoted 400,000. I've also heard 4,000,000 but I've not actually seen it anywhere but these forums. I've also seen people claim that the 5200 was gaining on the Coleco and outselling it by the time they were killed off.

 

Which numbers are right? Which are wrong? On the internet, I'm not sure we always know.

[Gorf]

You seem to have a negative opinion on every single possible topic, so this doesn't surprise me a bit anyway.

 

More like everything I do is negative because I dare have a differing opinion of the 5200 controllers, no?

Come now.

 

If you like them then fine. I think they were a disaster.

 

I made my point clear, though you didn't understand it. (Hint: what you're implying I said is not what I said at all). But, whatever.

 

 

Yeah you did....you can't take criticism of your pwecious wittew 5200 controwers....I add PLENTY

of pssitive as well as negative.....I can do both.

[Gorf]

The Jaguar games were dull and boring. I bought into the 64-bit hype, and paid $250 for one, in 1993 or maybe 1994. I found that I played more Super Nintendo than Jaguar. At the time, Donkey Kong Country on the SNES managed to throw beautiful graphics up on the screen that were unmatched on the supposedly superior Jaguar.....with 1/4 "the bits" on the SNES.

 

.....yawn! DKC was a great achivement needing SFX chips to pull off what it did. Trevor McFur

as a game sucks but it so totally destroys anything you wil EVER see graphically on a SNES.

EVER.

[Murph74]

Which numbers are right? Which are wrong? On the internet, I'm not sure we always know.

 

 

I'm in agreement, as my original post even gave in that these were not what I would consider fast, hard sales data from verifiable and accurate sources. But after about 20 minutes of googling, it was the only site with ANY sales figures for the 5200. I'm sure the 5200 defenders will throw their arms up at the site that had the numbers posted, while the rest of the world will get a smile. It's obviously NOT meant as any form of commentary from my end, but I kind of see it as ironic considering the topic of this thread.

 

Link

 

I'd love to see other source's numbers, but not even Sean Kelly's 5200 FAQ seems to address the number of 5200's that made it to market, or were sold. But I also have to say, even growing as a child of the 80's, at least here in St. Louis, almost everyone i knew had a 2600, and those who upgraded typically went Colecovision. In hindsight, I can only think of 2 or 3 people I knew with a 5200. Heck I didn't even get one til 1998.

 

So, the 400k number does sound low even in my estimation, it's not totally beyond belief to me. Another link...

 

Even after a slow start, 1983 sales for the 5200 plummeted. Warner Communications (Atari's former parent company) reported second quarter losses of $283.4 million. By the end of the year, Atari had posted losses of $536 million. They ended production of the 5200 in 1984.

 

 

For what it's worth, I do believe there are some great games for the 5200, and it's a system worth checking out-- but for me and preferences, the system spends more time in the box than on the TV. It's actually been about 5 years since it's been powered up here.

Edited May 17, 2009 by Murph74