Atari 5200 vs. CelecoVision

[VectorGamer]

No winners.

 

The winners are those who own both systems and many games for them.

 

Amen, brother...I am a classic arcade freak who needs to get my hands on all the classic arcade ports no matter what system (except of the Intellivision, of course)

[mcjakeqcool]

@wood_jl

 

I agree, the SNES was inferior to the Mega Drive, just compare Hard Drivin on the MD with Race Drivin on the SNES, and the MD wins by a long shot.

[DracIsBack]

@wood_jl

 

I agree, the SNES was inferior to the Mega Drive, just compare Hard Drivin on the MD with Race Drivin on the SNES, and the MD wins by a long shot.

 

That's a blanket statement on the basis of one specific type of game.

 

Each has their strengths and weaknesses.

 

Which could put more colors on screen at once?

 

Which was faster?

 

Which had hardware scaling and rotation?

 

etc. etc. etc.

 

For that matter, was the company that did those games on the SNES a renowned SNES developer? How big was their budget? How long was their development cycle?

 

I loved the Genesis/Megadrive and wasn't an SNES fan, but a it's not as simple "X game sucked on Y system and therefore Y system is inferior to Z system".

[Murph74]

@wood_jl

 

I agree, the SNES was inferior to the Mega Drive, just compare Hard Drivin on the MD with Race Drivin on the SNES, and the MD wins by a long shot.

 

That's a blanket statement on the basis of one specific type of game.

 

I think one of the bigger factors being overlooked in this thread has nothing to do with tech specs, game play, capability, or library. I think a lot of the success of these systems goes back to marketing. It doesn't mean better or worse, but in history-- the story is usually written by the winners. And in commerce, the consumer and the marketplace dictate the winners. Even today, look at the 'sold out' span of the Wii (over a year in my area, now finally a readily available product this spring). Far inferior overall technology to the PS3 or even the Xbox 360, but still much more in demand. Thanks in general to marketing. I mean, it's hard to compare almost any game available across platforms and put Wii at the top of the list of versions, but the wii could easily be the best selling version simply because fo the number of installed units who might buy it.

 

And I do seem to recall (or at least it seemed like it to me) Atari's marketing efforts were split between the 2600, the 5200, and Alan Alda's home computers. Coleco was able to focus their video gaming efforts on the ColecoVision. Not to say Coleco didn't have other pies baking, but I don't recall them leveraging the CV against the Cabbage Patch Kid. If anything they complimented each other (buy a CV, get a CPK promotion, anyone!?). Not to mention, I do seem to recall seeing MANY more ColecoVision specific commercials than 5200 specific commercials. And I'd think Coleco's hold in the general toy market also helped strengthen their distribution chain.

 

Just observations. In the long run, Atari is the name the guy on the street usually thinks of when he thinks classic or pre-N gaming, but it's not the 5200 that typically comes to mind IMO. For those around at the time, I still feel the ColecoVision was almost a sign of prestige. As a kid, I was never envious of a 5200. Of course, my memory could be faulty at this now advanced age!

[else]

I'd say the Wii is a success because of it's revolutionary motion-controllers, rather than it's marketing. If it were just dependent on marketing, why wasn't the GameCube more of a success? I mean the Wii is essentially a GameCube with a new control scheme, right?

[CV Gus]

I do know for a fact that the CV sold 6 millions units

 

You personally counted them?

 

 

(By your logic, how can you believe any figure you didn't count, like the number of people killed in WW1? The number of people on the Titanic? Or any other historical figure?)

 

Evil laugh...

 

3-6 million was the number usually reported in the mid-1980s.

Edited May 22, 2009 by CV Gus

[Murph74]

I'd say the Wii is a success because of it's revolutionary motion-controllers, rather than it's marketing. If it were just dependent on marketing, why wasn't the GameCube more of a success? I mean the Wii is essentially a GameCube with a new control scheme, right?

 

To a point, you are correct. And to a point you are validating my point I think.

 

Gamecube has a handful of factors going against it as a standalone system. PS2 was backwards compatible with PS1 which had a huge installed base already. So that hurt GC's chances since users would have to start a new library. Also the introduction of the Xbox, a system with a hard drive which was somewhat of revolutionary inclusion, hurt things for GC, IMO. Other things like the non standard disc size, an overly generic look, and a lack of must-have titles out of the gate all contributed to the GC's market position I think.

 

As for the controllers for the wii, I agree they are 'revolutionary', but I'm not convinced that A) they couldn't have just been launched as an upgrade to the GC (IE Coleco's Super Action Controllers), or B) that they were actually revolutionary. Correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am!), but didn't Sony have some limited motion functionality for the late ps2 controllers? I thought I'd read that somewhere, or at least that the wii wasn't 'first', just used it 'best' so far.

 

So by even the logic of the Wii being a motion-charged GC, I'd suggest marketing plays as much of a part as anything. Again, just one opinion. I still think system failures are typically related more to lacking marketing than inept hardware, but hardware can and does cause problems. In the case of the 5200 v Colecovision, I think Coleco was able to focus on their platform much better than atari did with their 5200, and that made the difference at the marketplace.

 

And we still don't have a logical, definitive answer as to which one was/is better over all. And probably never will...

[DracIsBack]

(By your logic, how can you believe any figure you didn't count, like the number of people killed in WW1? The number of people on the Titanic? Or any other historical figure?)

 

That's the point. When someone says, "I know for a fact", I'd like to see how it's derived.

 

3-6 million was the number usually reported in the mid-1980s.

 

6 million is twice as many as 3 million. And again, what's the source? Coleco's annual reports? NPD data tracking retail sell-through? Or "I heard from someone who heard from someone who heard from someone who heard from someone". It's kind of like how you can get numbers for 2600 sales on the web that say 10 million, 20 million, 26 million and 40 million. How many units did the thing actually sell?

 

For the record (because I don't think I've said this), I *loved* the Colecovision as a system. I thought it had great games and I used to love playing on my friend's unit.

 

But when it comes to numbers, there's a lot of crap on the net. :-) Like that figure I once saw of the Jaguar claiming "2 million sold". Pretty astounding when less than 250,000 were built.

 

So by even the logic of the Wii being a motion-charged GC, I'd suggest marketing plays as much of a part as anything. Again, just one opinion. I still think system failures are typically related more to lacking marketing than inept hardware, but hardware can and does cause problems.

 

All good points, though I really struggle with the concept of the GameCube being a "failure." Disappointment relative to other Nintendo systems I can buy, but failure or "bomb" as it's often remembered is pushing it. The thing sold almost 22 million consoles, had over 600 games lived way longer than Colecovision or 5200 and made billions in profits.

Edited May 22, 2009 by DracIsBack

[CV Gus]

I don't understand - I do not see anything in CV Gus' post that you quoted that is derogatory to anyone preferring the 5200 over the Colecovision.

 

He does get under my skin a bit with these constant "Coleco vs" threads that he starts up in both the 5200 and 7800 forums. This is only one of many.

 

 

In topics such as these, it should be elementary that it will be opinionated and members will attempt to back up their opinions with what they believe are the facts.

 

To me, it's ridiculous that something as subjective as personal preference in gaming should ever be pitched as a "fact". ie. "x system is better than y system". At the end of the day, all it reflects is personal taste and preference.

 

 

TRANSLATION: I posted something he didn't like.

 

If you don't like the threads, here's an idea- don't read them. And maybe you didn't notice who started this one?

 

Apparently, you did not comprehend the "7800" one- it was a HYPOTHETICAL situation, sort of like "what if Hitler had won the war?" Having BOUGHT (as in "I owned") a 7800 in 1988, and being on the S.S. Atari as it slowly, painfully, sank in those days, I've often wondered if an older system- the CV being the more established and therefore a more logical choice, although (in case you never read it) I've done the same with the 5200- could've done better against the NES.

 

If you look at it objectively, the Atari 2600 was the only gaming system Atari did well with. Their decision to abandon the 5200 after maybe 18 months doomed that one (if it had been doing well against the CV, why would they have done that?), the 7800 (see above) was a disaster, and the Jaguar was even worse.

 

 

As for the "3-6 million:" At the time, the video game magazines based the figures on company figures, and sales figures from stores. This is why you had such a wide range. Since they couldn't zero in on an exact figure, they simply gave the range they came up with. Keep in mind that back then there were something like 200,000,000 people in America, so even 6 million is only a fraction.

Edited May 22, 2009 by CV Gus

[DracIsBack]

TRANSLATION: I posted something he didn't like.

 

You post a lot of things I don't like! It all comes from the fact that you try to rewrite history, change facts and ignore facts when they are put in front of you.

Edited May 22, 2009 by DracIsBack

[Murph74]

All good points, though I really struggle with the concept of the GameCube being a "failure." Disappointment relative to other Nintendo systems I can buy, but failure or "bomb" as it's often remembered is pushing it. The thing sold almost 22 million consoles, had over 600 games lived way longer than Colecovision or 5200 and made billions in profits.

 

I understand your point as well. I'm not under-minding the successes of the GameCube intentionally, and maybe could have chosen better wording. But in a competitive market, the GameCube definitely wasn't the 'winner' of the video game wars in most people's eyes. Not to minimize it's impact on the whole. I actually think the level of success it DID have helped catapult the Wii with it's backwards compatibility.

[VectorGamer]

One thing that Coleco failed to produce was a his/hers expansion module so you could make love to it...

 

At times, I feel the need to express myself to my Colecovision...

[Ransom]

One thing that Coleco failed to produce was a his/hers expansion module so you could make love to it...

 

At times, I feel the need to express myself to my Colecovision...

 

[CARTRIDGE STEALER]

One thing that Coleco failed to produce was a his/hers expansion module so you could make love to it...

 

At times, I feel the need to express myself to my Colecovision...

 

 

wasnt the expansion module slot built for that?

[the.golden.ax]

One thing that Coleco failed to produce was a his/hers expansion module so you could make love to it...

 

At times, I feel the need to express myself to my Colecovision...

 

Yeah.... F* Colecovision... (isn't that what you are saying?)

 

AX

[+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 ...

 

 

someone wants to see a brawl, does'nt he....

 

Well, it wouldn't be worth the time.

 

Reminds me of my (elderly) uncle. Like lots of "older" people, he's a "Buick man." Another relative was and "Oldsmobile man." But the Buick man uncle has bought only Buicks since before we were all born. Came time to get a new car last year, and he briefly looked at a couple other brands. Could have got a better deal on a nicer car - a Cadillac. But he wanted a Buick; thinks they're the best. If it came down to a Rolls Royce or a Buick, he's taking the Buick. Jag owners are the same way; it would be a pointless waste of time to argue directly with either.

[VectorGamer]

One thing that Coleco failed to produce was a his/hers expansion module so you could make love to it...

 

At times, I feel the need to express myself to my Colecovision...

 

Yeah.... F* Colecovision... (isn't that what you are saying?)

 

AX

 

LOL! Good one!

[mcjakeqcool]

No one knows how many Atari 5200 or 7800 consoles were sold, but I would say that the Jaguar (along with the Lynx) was more sucsessful then those 2 consoles, at least the Jaguar had some 3rd party devolpers apart from Activision and Parker Brothers, at the end of the day, there was more reason to buy a Jaguar then a 5200 or 7800, just watch a Jaguar commercial, or read one of the flyers Atari gave out free with the system, the Jaguar had more potential then the 5200 and 7800, however that was not enough to stop it being a faliure, the Lynx was in the same boat, anyway in '93 Cybermorph was a impressive game, and the Lynx was far superior over the gameboy, I don't see the 5200 with any impressive games and the 7800 was most certinaly not superior over the NES or Master System. It's a hard choice between the ST, Lynx and Jaguar, but I would say the Jaguar was the post 2600 console Atari made just for how utterly groundbreaking it was.

Edited May 26, 2009 by mcjakeqcool

[Crazyace]

According to this topic:

 

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=144552

 

There seem to be 3,772,751 7800's sold in the USA - maybe Curt has info for worldwide squirrelled away somewhere as well. That's way more than the Jaguar.

I wonder how many 5200's were sold?

[+wood_jl]

No one knows how many Atari 5200 or 7800 consoles were sold, but I would say that the Jaguar (along with the Lynx) was more sucsessful then those 2 consoles,

 

Successful how? In sales? In terms of standing up to its peer competition?

 

at least the Jaguar had some 3rd party devolpers apart from Activision and Parker Brothers, at the end of the day, there was more reason to buy a Jaguar then a 5200 or 7800, just watch a Jaguar commercial, or read one of the flyers Atari gave out free with the system, the Jaguar had more potential then the 5200 and 7800,

 

The 5200 stood up to its competition - the Colecovision - much better than the Jag compared to it's competition - the Playstation, Saturn, and Nintendo 64. Those systems wiped the floor with the Jag, undisputedly. Whether or not you feel the Colecovision was superior to the 5200, the systems are at least comparable. (Leaving the 5200 controllers out of the equation, for the moment)

 

however that was not enough to stop it being a faliure, the Lynx was in the same boat, anyway in '93 Cybermorph was a impressive game, and the Lynx was far superior over the gameboy,

 

The Lynx had a cool display for the time, for sure. However, it ate through AA batteries like nobody's business. There were not enough hit software titles. Evidence for this? Gameboy graphics sucked, but the battery life was excellent and there were TONS of fun games. The Lynx was "Atari in name" only, like all the later Atari stuff. Considering the "64-bit" hardware, Cybermorph should have been leaps ahead of Starfox, and it was barely so.

 

I don't see the 5200 with any impressive games and the 7800 was most certinaly not superior over the NES or Master System. It's a hard choice between the ST, Lynx and Jaguar, but I would say the Jaguar was the post 2600 console Atari made just for how utterly groundbreaking it was.

 

Why do you keep calling the ST a game system? Why not throw the Amiga in this equation, or a Mac II, then? If it was so groundbreaking, it should have whipped the 32-bit systems and we should have seen Super Mario 64 stuff on the Jag.

[VectorGamer]

No one knows how many Atari 5200 or 7800 consoles were sold, but I would say that the Jaguar (along with the Lynx) was more sucsessful then those 2 consoles, at least the Jaguar had some 3rd party devolpers apart from Activision and Parker Brothers, at the end of the day, there was more reason to buy a Jaguar then a 5200 or 7800, just watch a Jaguar commercial, or read one of the flyers Atari gave out free with the system, the Jaguar had more potential then the 5200 and 7800, however that was not enough to stop it being a faliure, the Lynx was in the same boat, anyway in '93 Cybermorph was a impressive game, and the Lynx was far superior over the gameboy, I don't see the 5200 with any impressive games and the 7800 was most certinaly not superior over the NES or Master System. It's a hard choice between the ST, Lynx and Jaguar, but I would say the Jaguar was the post 2600 console Atari made just for how utterly groundbreaking it was.

 

In what regard was the Jaguar successful? Sales? Technology-wise?

 

As a classic gamer, I look at the titles available for the Jaguar and do not find it appetizing. The 2600, 5200, Colecovision and to a lesser degree the 7800 and NES are the consoles I want to fulfill my hunger for classic arcade games.

[DracIsBack]

No one knows how many Atari 5200 or 7800 consoles were sold

 

Curt just posted Atari's USA internal sales figures for the 7800 consoles and games in the United States. Still waiting for the 5200, but hope it shows up someday.

 

, but I would say that the Jaguar (along with the Lynx) was more sucsessful then those 2 consoles,

 

Well, you think it was more successful (in your subjective opinion) on the basis of whatever criteria you chose to define "success".

 

From a market perspective, it's pretty likely that both the 5200 and 7800 massively outsold the Jaguar. Atari's SEC filings when they folded the Jaguar showed than less than 250,000 were built and that 100,000 were sitting unsold in inventory.

 

Likewise, Curt's figures for the 7800 showed it moving almost 4 million consoles between 1986 and 1990, along with several million game cartridges.

 

While 5200 figures have not been released, 4 million between 1982 and 1984 has been suggested.

 

the Jaguar had more potential then the 5200 and 7800,

 

Given how badly it actually sold, I'd argue the reverse. And I love the Jaguar.

 

 

I don't see the 5200 with any impressive games and the 7800 was most certinaly not superior over the NES or Master System.

 

You really like expressing your opinions as though they are facts and making blanket statements, don't you? Please feel free to tell me why all of the 80 or so 5200 games "suck". How many have you actually played?

 

As for the 7800, please feel free to explain to me how something like Ball Blazer or Rescue On Fraculus might be superior on an NES or SMS?

[DracIsBack]

I wonder how many 5200's were sold?

 

Not sure if Curt has them, but I feel pretty confident that there were a lot more than the 250,000 Jaguars ever manufactured.

[oky2000]

What's so interesting to me though is that other than Donkey Kong and Zaxxon, the CV didn't have ports of any popular arcade games. Atari had tons of popular arcade games. Yet the CV became the hot system to own. There's a business/marketing lesson in there somewhere I think.

 

On a personal level, though, I'd loved both Venture and Lady Bug at the arcade, so I was just blown away when I saw that I could play them at home with the CV. That was when it became a "must have" for me. I was terrible at DK and didn't waste quarters on it (I'm still terrible at jumping games to this day), and Zaxxon never interested me. So having those less popular but still strong games was what brought me to the CV. I wonder how many other kids felt the same way at the time?

 

DK Jr, Space Pilot, Space Panic, Fury, Gorf, Galaxians, Popeye, Frogger....the list is endless really.

 

I've never used a 5200 for real, but the Coleco controllers were a pain IMO. Both have great games, assuming 5200 Rescue on Fractalus plays the same as the A8 version I would say the 5200 is the more powerful machine.

 

Anyway it's always biased to what you owned or played as a child and that's where the nostalgia comes in

[DracIsBack]

I would say the 5200 is the more powerful machine.

 

One 8-bit machine is "more powerful" than another 8-bit machine?

 

 

They have strengths and weaknesses in their graphics architecture but I just don't get while people claim x system is "more powerful" than Y system when they both have limited 8-bit processors.