Atari: Diminishing Efforts?

[atariksi]

It's strange that people cannot accept the idea that the CV outsold the 5200. Nobody seems to have a problem with the NES having outsold the 7800, after all.

 

There were a number of reasons why the 5200 lost out- although, unlike the poor 7800, it was NOT a massacre:

...

You are speaking of sales so terms like "poor 7800", "5200 lost out", etc. don't fit. I would take a better system despite its sales.

[+thegoldenband]

I would take a better system despite its sales.

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "better", and what time period you're talking about. Bigger-selling systems generally get more titles, more developers, and a bigger pool of talent and options. Systems that don't sell well generally get pulled before long, which means no more titles, no more support, and no brick-and-mortar availability outside of clearance sales and the like.

 

Sometimes sales and marketing trump everything, including a system's capabilities. With emulation, the Internet, and system collecting it's different nowadays, but if you're a young kid in the boonies in the '80s, you're not going to be mail-ordering 5200 titles when the stores stop carrying them. I liked my 5200, even despite my initial disappointment at the horrendous build quality of the controllers (which were basically unplayable out of the box -- the fire buttons were absurdly stiff). But even once I got the Wico adapter, my 5200 sat idle not long after we bought it, and one of the main reasons was that we just couldn't find any new games for it.

 

If I'd had some decent RPGs for the 5200 it might've been different -- something like AD&D for the Intellivision, or Gateway to Apshai for the CV, might've kept my interest longer than yet another game of Zaxxon or Mr. Do's Castle. Both of those systems had, IMHO, more compelling game libraries than the 5200, even if the 5200 was ostensibly a more powerful machine. As it was, the 2600 and CoCo were my main gaming systems until I got an NES in 1988-89.

Edited July 31, 2009 by thegoldenband

[kool kitty89]

It's strange that people cannot accept the idea that the CV outsold the 5200. Nobody seems to have a problem with the NES having outsold the 7800, after all.

 

There were a number of reasons why the 5200 lost out- although, unlike the poor 7800, it was NOT a massacre:

...

You are speaking of sales so terms like "poor 7800", "5200 lost out", etc. don't fit. I would take a better system despite its sales.

 

 

I think he meant "poor" in the sense that that poor, unfortuante 7800 got Slaughtered by Nintendo (which it was, along with the Master System), not that the hardware was poor. (personification of the 7800) Although, from resent quotes on 5200 and CV sales, it looks like the 7800 may have outsold both of these. (as I mentioned, Curt's figures give over 3.77 million 7800's sold from '86-90)

Edited July 31, 2009 by kool kitty89

[+Allan]

It's strange that people cannot accept the idea that the CV outsold the 5200. Nobody seems to have a problem with the NES having outsold the 7800, after all.

 

There were a number of reasons why the 5200 lost out- although, unlike the poor 7800, it was NOT a massacre:

...

You are speaking of sales so terms like "poor 7800", "5200 lost out", etc. don't fit. I would take a better system despite its sales.

 

 

I think he meant "poor" in the sense that that poor, unfortuante 7800 got Slaughtered by Nintendo (which it was, along with the Master System), not that the hardware was poor. (personification of the 7800) Although, from resent quotes on 5200 and CV sales, it looks like the 7800 may have outsold both of these. (as I mentioned, Curt's figures give over 3.77 million 7800's sold from '86-90)

 

Atari 5200 and Colecovision sales numbers are still unconfirmed.

 

Allan

[Gorf]

Jaguar- What major system DIDN'T outdo it? How wasn't it a bad joke?

 

You're really looking for a brawl now are'nt you? ColecoVision was a nice system

but it's not an Atari....nough said.

[kool kitty89]

Gorf, I got the impression he meant sales wise, which I believe is pretty accurate. (the Jag sold around 230,000 units right?)

 

And the the way Atari management handled it seems a lot like "a bad joke". (I think you've refered to the dev tools by those exact words)

[jetset]

Jaguar- What major system DIDN'T outdo it? How wasn't it a bad joke?

 

You're really looking for a brawl now are'nt you? ColecoVision was a nice system

but it's not an Atari....nough said.

 

 

Shhhhh! He loves Atari. He said so that means it must be true.

[atariksi]

Jaguar- What major system DIDN'T outdo it? How wasn't it a bad joke?

 

You're really looking for a brawl now are'nt you? ColecoVision was a nice system

but it's not an Atari....nough said.

 

 

Shhhhh! He loves Atari. He said so that means it must be true.

 

He "loves" Atari except when it sells.

[kool kitty89]

He "loves" Atari except when it sells.

 

Oh, come on, has he ever denied the 2600?

 

 

 

Also, has it been established that the 6 million sales figure for the CV is definitely bogus? (with actual sales closer to 2 million)

Edited August 2, 2009 by kool kitty89

[atariksi]

He "loves" Atari except when it sells.

 

Oh, come on, has he ever denied the 2600?

 

 

 

Also, has it been established that the 6 million sales figure for the CV is definitely bogus? (with actual sales closer to 2 million)

 

We're talking Atari 5200 sales so without any factual basis of sales numbers why argue against 5200 sales?

[kool kitty89]

I agree that the main point going on was the 5200's sales relative to the CV, but, either way, it appears the CV's sales have been exaggerated greatly with the 6 million figure floating around. (and changes some other sales comparisons, like with the Intelivision, if the ~3 million figure for that is even accurate, or compared to the 7800's sales -at least there's some fairly definitive numbrs on that one, at least for US sales) Another one I haven't seen breakdowns for is the Master System (particularly US/North American sales), but that's a differen't issue. (my main interest for that is whether the 7800 sold better in that region than the SMS)

[CV Gus]

It is highly unlikely that the 7800 outsold the CV. In fact, I'd bet my next paycheck that it outsold neither the CV NOR the 5200.

 

You have to remember that when speaking of CV and 5200 sales, the figures usually given pertained to American (USA) sales. But there was a comment one video game magazine from the 7800 era mentioned: that the 7800 was selling best in Europe (according to Atari). So if the 7800 did sell as many as the figure given above, it was likely the COMBINED sales of here and abroad. It was similar to the Jaguar being a 64-bit system- it was, if you based it on the data bus (which only Atari did). It was all hocus-pocus. The 7800 did not even outsell the SMS.

 

What happened to the 5200 I already mentioned above. But, for the 7800, it was even worse, although similar: The NES had a head start on it- as did the CV over the 5200.

But while the 5200 had the advantage of Atari still being one company- and this included its arcade division, which was vital (Tempest, etc.), the 7800 did not- Atari was now split into two. Atari was hurt by the way it had abandoned the 5200 (few trusted them not to do the same for the 7800), almost all of the strong third party companies had put their best into the NES and maybe the SMS, you could not count on "Atari" arcade games being made into 7800 versions (unlike the 2600 and 5200), and, worst of all...the Tramiels, who couldn't sell ice water in the Sahara.

 

While exact sales figures do not exist, all publications agreed that the CV outsold the 5200. The fact that some mentioned that 5200 sales eventually equalled the CV did not matter- this was by 1984; in order to OVERTAKE (i.e. outsell) anything that has a head start (as did the CV) AND better sales figures for some time means that you must not only start to outsell, but you must continue to do so for quite some time. It is no different than a race- if I have a headstart on you, and I am going faster, then it is not nearly enough for you to move faster as I am slowing down- you must keep it up.

 

And even if this would have been the case, it was moot- Atari had dropped the 5200. There is simply no way any rational person can say the 5200 did better overall. All of the evidence indicates otherwise.

 

There are also other things:

 

1) Garage sales- I have found over 2 dozen CVs over the years at them, but only ONE 5200, and it wasn't even working. It took me quite some time to get it running, and I still need to find some 15-pin sockets for it to play Space Dungeon, Robotron: 2084, and any two-player games (simultaneous).

By the way- I ask if they have any "5200 stuff." With only one or two exceptions, I find out they menat the 2600. When I expalin what a 5200 was, they have no idea what I am talking about. This is NOT the case with the CV; at least 80% of the time, they know of it.

 

2) If the 5200 was doing so well, even I cannot believe Atari was insanely stupid enough to have dropped the 5200 in favor of the 7800, which, quite frankly, was not such a huge step from the 5200, and was introduced with games which the 5200 had already done, or (as with Desert Falcon and Galaga) could've done. Did they think Atari owners would forgive them? Or did they think to attract the larger CV crowd with games that did not work the first time? No matter how you add it up, it just doesn't work.

 

3) Again- this is worth mentioning again- the 5200 was hurt by the continued support the 2600 was receiving. No doubt, the CV was hurt in a similar way by that stupid ADAM computer, but it was worse for the 5200.

 

 

I've also often wondered why the second console- the 5200 (1982) was not 2600 compatable, while the third console- the 7800 (1984)- was. Why would a next generation console not be, while the one after that would? It does seem as if the 7800 was originally to have been Atari's next system, but they had to rush something out to meet the CV. It's only a guess, but at times it does seem that way, esp. as they dropped the 5200 after no more than 18 months.

 

Once again, after playing the 5200 and 7800 last night...I prefer the 5200. There's just something about it that, well, is "brighter."

 

As for the 3-6 million sold figure for the CV- it is likely that the actual number was about 4 1/2 million. Part of the problem is that the CV continued to be sold after mid-1984, so figures at that point would be blurry.

 

 

For you 5200 programmers- how much better could the 5200 Joust, Pac-Man, and Dig Dug have been? How good could Galaga and Desert Falcon have been? Alien Brigade? Dark Chambers?

Edited August 3, 2009 by CV Gus

[atarian63]

Back in '82 when the CV & 5200 were side by side on the shelves at a local department store, I constantly saw customers looking at the 2 systems. You'd hear: "Hey Dad, this one has DONKEY KONG!". No system comparison, no price checking. Now be honest, which GAME would want to play, DONKEY KONG or SUPER BREAKOUT? Had Atari tied in a hot ARCADE game at the time that was unavailable on the 2600, how do you think it would have done? Atari got too BIG headed and thought that whatever we slap the name ATARI to will sell! And for fun, what game do you think Atari should have put in to make it sell?

yes, I do remember some of that, however when people played the cv with that crappy controller disc, they weren't so enthused. Ms. Pac would have been nice or a version of Gyruss. Never got the attraction to DK. It was very hard and not very rewarding.

 

Just having the 5200 version of Pac Man would have been nice as it's awesome compated to the half assed 2600 version. (iirc they did end up switching to Pac Man eventually, but it should have been the game from the start) Of course, it's double sided as Pac man is one of the wors games to shocase the 5200 controller. (could the keypad be used instead of the stick, like frogger)

 

And the Coleco controller didn't have the crappy disc, that was the Intellivision, the CV had the short stalk, knobby, joystick, which worked well as a thumbstick. (except that one's hand tended to cover the buttons, similar problem with using the 5200 stick as a thumbstick)

There is a crappy disk under the stalk.(yes INTV had disk only) I have a CV and the controller is the main reason it is frustrationg. I really want to like it but it creaks and snaps.

Just my opinion, I am sure if I had a new one it would be much better. I just prefer the 5200 stick.

Edited August 3, 2009 by atarian63

[atarian63]

I would take a better system despite its sales.

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "better", and what time period you're talking about. Bigger-selling systems generally get more titles, more developers, and a bigger pool of talent and options. Systems that don't sell well generally get pulled before long, which means no more titles, no more support, and no brick-and-mortar availability outside of clearance sales and the like.

 

Sometimes sales and marketing trump everything, including a system's capabilities. With emulation, the Internet, and system collecting it's different nowadays, but if you're a young kid in the boonies in the '80s, you're not going to be mail-ordering 5200 titles when the stores stop carrying them. I liked my 5200, even despite my initial disappointment at the horrendous build quality of the controllers (which were basically unplayable out of the box -- the fire buttons were absurdly stiff). But even once I got the Wico adapter, my 5200 sat idle not long after we bought it, and one of the main reasons was that we just couldn't find any new games for it.

 

If I'd had some decent RPGs for the 5200 it might've been different -- something like AD&D for the Intellivision, or Gateway to Apshai for the CV, might've kept my interest longer than yet another game of Zaxxon or Mr. Do's Castle. Both of those systems had, IMHO, more compelling game libraries than the 5200, even if the 5200 was ostensibly a more powerful machine. As it was, the 2600 and CoCo were my main gaming systems until I got an NES in 1988-89.

At the time Arcade games were what sold home systems.Colecovision made a business out of it! RPG were for pc's and in the early stages had a very limited market. If you were Atari,CV or INTV you wanted arcade hits. BTW I do like Gateway to apshai,used to play it alot on the 800xl. PC's were were RPG was going in it's infancy.

[+thegoldenband]

Right, I'm just speaking of my own preferences, and my experience gaming in (roughly speaking) 1982-1987 or so. As the '80s wore on, like many gamers, I pulled away from pure arcade titles and toward RPG-style titles, or at least games with a bit more depth. Had I owned a 5200 version of Gateway to Apshai, or one of the Intellivision AD&D games, I think my 5200 would've spent less time collecting dust. Raiders of the Lost Ark, and even Swordquest:Earthworld, certainly got more playtime than any of my 5200 games. (Oddly enough, I never had a copy of Adventure.)

[kool kitty89]

What happened to the 5200 I already mentioned above. But, for the 7800, it was even worse, although similar: The NES had a head start on it- as did the CV over the 5200.

But while the 5200 had the advantage of Atari still being one company- and this included its arcade division, which was vital (Tempest, etc.), the 7800 did not- Atari was now split into two. Atari was hurt by the way it had abandoned the 5200 (few trusted them not to do the same for the 7800), almost all of the strong third party companies had put their best into the NES and maybe the SMS, you could not count on "Atari" arcade games being made into 7800 versions (unlike the 2600 and 5200), and, worst of all...the Tramiels, who couldn't sell ice water in the Sahara.

 

Not entirely true, the NES barely had a headstart over the 7800 (or Master System) in the US market (in mid 1986) and didn't get really big, and tie up developers until a while later. The advantages were, it already had a lot of support in Japan, so lots of software to bring over and developers already working on it, while the 7800 had been dormant after Atari Inc. ceased to exist. (and the Master System was brand new tech, and Sega was already losing in Japan, without much developer support to carry over from their SG-1000) Nintendo had very savvy and expensive marketing campaigns, particularly the team-up with worlds of wonder.

 

Warner (owning Atari Games) still held a sizeable chunk of Atari Corp stock, so cooperating over Atari Arcade titles would benefit them.

The biggerst problems were the lack of advertizing and delay in release of the 7800. (as well as the poor job courting developers, but this goes along with the late release as well) Also note that the 7800 was not "finally" released in response to Nintendo, Tramiel had already started marketing the new 2600 Jr. in mid 1985, prior to Nintendo's test market.

 

 

Again- this is worth mentioning again- the 5200 was hurt by the continued support the 2600 was receiving. No doubt, the CV was hurt in a similar way by that stupid ADAM computer, but it was worse for the 5200.

 

Yeah, they kind of rushed with the Adam, it might have been better if handeled a bit differently. (and simpler/cheaper, more compact, especially no onboard tape-drives) It could have been a good gaming computer to switch over to durring the crash as well, compatible with the CV being a big point.

 

I've also often wondered why the second console- the 5200 (1982) was not 2600 compatable, while the third console- the 7800 (1984)- was. Why would a next generation console not be, while the one after that would? It does seem as if the 7800 was originally to have been Atari's next system, but they had to rush something out to meet the CV. It's only a guess, but at times it does seem that way, esp. as they dropped the 5200 after no more than 18 months.

 

Because the 7800 was a 3rd party (or 2nd party depending on how you look at GCC) development, started independantly by GCC who saw the numerous problems with the 5200 (specifically lack of 2600 compatibility and cost), though there were other reasons to go with an A8-bit derived 5200-like design (but a quick and clean conversion, easy to diretly port 8-bit games to, but not cartridge compatible not mangled like the 5200), especially the stockpiles of 8-bit components, the important thing was to not split the market (so either have 2600 compatibility or an adaptor at launch) with 2 strong systems, rather have an aging system being phased out (but still supported, possibly with a cost-reduced form aimed at the budget market), and a newer, more capable system. (the typical generational transition) The other important thing is to provide lockout, so as to not run into the same problems as the 2600. (no controll over 3rd parties, either in a quality sense, or licencing fees/royaltees, same problem with the 8-bitters, the 5200 didn't really resolve this problem either, though the 7800 did)

[atarian63]

Right, I'm just speaking of my own preferences, and my experience gaming in (roughly speaking) 1982-1987 or so. As the '80s wore on, like many gamers, I pulled away from pure arcade titles and toward RPG-style titles, or at least games with a bit more depth. Had I owned a 5200 version of Gateway to Apshai, or one of the Intellivision AD&D games, I think my 5200 would've spent less time collecting dust. Raiders of the Lost Ark, and even Swordquest:Earthworld, certainly got more playtime than any of my 5200 games. (Oddly enough, I never had a copy of Adventure.)

Yeah, just kind of crept in, 82-83 or so were arcade then suddenly new typs of games came along and took off like crazy!

[+Mitch]

It is highly unlikely that the 7800 outsold the CV. In fact, I'd bet my next paycheck that it outsold neither the CV NOR the 5200.

 

You have to remember that when speaking of CV and 5200 sales, the figures usually given pertained to American (USA) sales. But there was a comment one video game magazine from the 7800 era mentioned: that the 7800 was selling best in Europe (according to Atari). So if the 7800 did sell as many as the figure given above, it was likely the COMBINED sales of here and abroad. It was similar to the Jaguar being a 64-bit system- it was, if you based it on the data bus (which only Atari did). It was all hocus-pocus. The 7800 did not even outsell the SMS.

 

Do you even check facts before you post this stuff? No, how silly of me, of course you didn't. Maybe you should look at the 7800 sales figures before you make any more assumptions.

 

Mitch

[atariksi]

It is highly unlikely that the 7800 outsold the CV. In fact, I'd bet my next paycheck that it outsold neither the CV NOR the 5200.

...

Mail your next paycheck to:

 

AtariKSI

19 Ventnor Drive

Edison, NJ 08820

 

>What happened to the 5200 I already mentioned above. But, for the 7800, it was even worse, although similar: The NES had a head start on it- as did the CV over the 5200.

 

You stated your mental speculations before and now more mental speculations with some variations. Head start doesn't mean anything when you are looking at total sales in the 8-bit era.

 

>...It is no different than a race- if I have a headstart on you, and I am going faster, then it is not nearly enough for you to move faster as I am slowing down- you must keep it up.

 

Yeah, but no one has established here CV was going faster than 5200.

 

>1) Garage sales- I have found over 2 dozen CVs over the years at them, but only ONE 5200, and it wasn't even working.

 

Your limited experience doesn't reflect sampling of entire planet. What is a fact is that Colecovision stole some of Atari's audience by making that compatibility module for 2600 games and making people buy an inferior system over the 5200 (superior system). As many people know, good marketing can make inferior systems sell more than superior systems.

 

>2) If the 5200 was doing so well, even I cannot believe Atari was insanely stupid enough to have dropped the 5200 in favor of the 7800, which, quite frankly, was not such a huge step from the 5200, ...

 

They had a computer already with similar hardware; Colecovision was stealing their 2600 audience so they had to make a compatible system. Otherwise, if you study modern day gaming systems-- they try to make money by making them incompatible.

 

>3) Again- this is worth mentioning again- the 5200 was hurt by the continued support the 2600 was receiving. No doubt, the CV was hurt in a similar way by that stupid ADAM computer, but it was worse for the 5200.

 

Are modern gaming platforms hurt by making them incompatible with older ones? Only if SOMEONE ELSE makes another system that's compatible with the old one.

 

>I've also often wondered why the second console- the 5200 (1982) was not 2600 compatable, while the third console- the 7800 (1984)- was. Why would a next generation console not be, while the one after that would?

 

Already answered. Just see the modern consoles as examples.

[kool kitty89]

OK, the ~3.7 million 7800 figure is just for the US/NA and only for sales between 1986-1990 http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?s...144552&st=0

 

 

As to backwards compatibility, it really depends on the case, with the 2699=> successor this was new territory, and it wasn't unreasonable for consumers to assume a new Atari machine will be able to play their old games. (Atari themselves seem to have been planning this on the 3200, but that died and the 5200 was slapped together instead) There are some circumstances where compatibility is supplied out of the box, like 7800, Sega Mark III/Master System (JP), PS2, and Wii, and others that have the necessary hardware onboard, but require a (semi) passive adaptor to provide this function, like the Genesis/MegaDrive did for the Master System. (via the power base converter)

 

Another important point for compatibility in the 2600's case, is that Atari split the market, with the 2600 being too strong to give up despite the problems (aging hardware, no control over 3rd party software content), a compatible successor would allow the older unit to be discontinued more quickly with customers buying the new system already having a large library of old games as well. (plus, no need to port over games already on the 2600, except for ones done poorly like Pac Man, or ones done well, but that will still be significantly better on the new system, showing off its capabilities)

 

Making a new system incompatible isn't necessariy advantageous either, the only times it really is, is when both the old and new systems have significant software support and the same games being ported to both, even then things can get tricky. (support an old system too well and it can detract from the new one as was with the 2600)

 

If your old system is still getting support, but not a significant number of common games to the new system, there's really no downside, in fact it could be beneficial, as some new customers (who never owned the previous system) will purchase those games for the old system to play on the new one. (especially if therer were a bunch of games on the older system the already knew they wanted, but decided to pass up getting the older system as they were interested in the new games as well)

 

Sony probably would have contiued compatibility had it not been so problematic on the PS3. (though dropping PS2 software emulation support was rather odd) Too bad as the PS2 is still getting some nice exclusive titles. (or maybe not exclusive, but not featured on the PS3)

 

Selling more hardware wouldn't be the reason as game companies thend to make practically no profit off the hardware (often taking a loss to cut prices), making money from 1st party software sales, and 3rd party licencing/royaltees.

Edited August 4, 2009 by kool kitty89

[GaryH917]

...

[VectorGamer]

Cool - it's like another "CV vs. 5200" thread destined to be locked! : ]

 

I suppose the point of the thread was asking for opinions regarding an Atari downward spiral since the release of the 2600. So....

 

I think the 5200 and 7800 consoles were underachievers. Maybe not from a machine (e.g. CPU) standpoint but otherwise the 5200 design could have been better (simply put that the gamer's experience is what is on the screen, the controls, the carts and the shell of the console). Some will argue that the majority of us that complain about the stock controllers are simply "no good at video games." When in reality the developers at Atari petitioned against it. The carts were larger than they needed to be (and have no end labels), the switch box and power supply were not well received and it was the largest console at the time of its release.

 

My opinion - the 5200 does not do much for me. Most of the titles released for the 5200 are better on the ColecoVision and even the 2600 (BerZerk, Space Invaders and Galaxian).

 

I really like the 7800 - the problem is the meager library and it suffers from schizophrenia. Most of the arcade ports "rock" and then you pop in a game like Hat Trick and you're like "what the heck is this garbage?"

 

It seems like Atari always screwed up golden opportunities. Pac-Man, Defender and ET on the 2600...then the controllers for the 5200...then shelving the 7800 and then releasing it when no one cared...they had a golden opportunity to port Galaga to the 7800 and what they released was desecration.

 

So yeah, I think they went downhill but in the same sense they had their peaks and valleys on the way down...

[kool kitty89]

One problem with the 5200 is most of its games are ports from the 400/800, designed to work with a standard 1 button atari joystick or paddles. (and possibly some keys)

Additionally, the 5200 hardware was altered in ways that made porting games somewhat frustrating, and still didn't add a real security/lockout feature. (they should have kept the hardware the same as the 8-bitters and just added a security check/authentication mechanism and used a cartridge connector incompatible with the 8-bitters, and either supply a minimal keypad attachment, or modify games to work w/out keys or with the 2600 keyboard controller in one of the controller ports)

 

A related discussion's going on here: http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?s...47811&st=25

 

Some games did (or at least should have) benefit from the analog controll, like missile command (as long as the controller was in good working order and not worn and jittery with coresponding fire button issues), but many were trac-ball games, so benefitting even more from a real trac-ball controller (the 2600 tracball should be compatible), except for a couple games like Star Wars that were designed for 2-axis joystick/yolk controls.

 

Thinking of missile command in particular, one change, probably at least as significant as analog/trac-ball control, is 3 fire buttons with 3 seperate missile launch sites, like in the arcade, that would have been cool. (in fact, you should be abole to have this even with a digital joystick using the 2600/400/800 etc joystick port, configuring the 2 pot lines as additional buttons, something that shouldn't be technically lminited to the new console either, but should be possible as an accessory for the 2600/8-bit computers as well -with supported games -of course, using the 2 pots for the joustick you could have up to 5 buttons as well, but that would create a joystick that wouldn't work properly with games meant for the digital ones)

 

Also I think the problems started around 1982, not right after the 2600's launch (didn't really get a killer app until Space Invaders), and th ecomment on defender is debatable. (that one seems more of a technical limitation, and single fire button than th eproblems with games like ET, or Pac Man in particular, both of which had the possibly bigger problem of overproduction, costing Atari money, as well as an above average licencing fee for the ET rights)

Edited August 4, 2009 by kool kitty89

[Rik]

Wierd.I never saw or knew anyone who owned a 5200 back in the day.Still havent seen one at the flea markets,thrift,pawn,etc.Everyone owned a 2600,INTV,CV,O2.Never even heard anyone talking about the 5200.

[phuzaxeman]

Cool - it's like another "CV vs. 5200" thread destined to be locked! : ]

 

....My opinion - the 5200 does not do much for me. Most of the titles released for the 5200 are better on the ColecoVision and even the 2600 (BerZerk, Space Invaders and Galaxian).

 

there are a lot of titles on the 5200 that the coleco doesnt have and vice versa.....that's why there's been a debate. in terms of the 2600, and just for the sake of debate, berzerk and galaxian on the 5200 completely owns the 2600. berzerk is almost, sound and graphics, a flawless translation of the arcade. i will say that 2600 space invaders was better gameplay wise. while the 2600 is king of all atari's, the 5200 shines in their games like space dungeon, star raiders, countermeasure, real sports baseball, etc. there's just a lot of great games on this system.