5200 or Colecovision?

[King Atari]

Okay, I know this is the 5200 forum, perhaps this is more of a Classic Gaming Section question. Anyways, I know the 5200 was released to compete more with the Intellivision, but then Colecovision came out , and they became competitors. My question is: which is the better system? I've got a 5200 and love it, but I've tried some Colecovision games, and was very impressed. Since these two guys were battling it out in '82, let's see who won!

[Voltman3]

Although I have both systems, again, I like the 5200 better.

I'm not gonna go into processors etc... surely that has been debated.

 

Controllers for both are a sensitive subject !!

I really hated the Coleco Conts' and still do.

To this day I prefer the CX52 Cont.

Even tho the 5200 is bigger (who woulda thought Black and Pink would work) the Coleco's styling doesn't do anything for me either.

 

IMO-

Colecovision- has a more diverse library of games.

5200- seems to have smoother graphics & is more fun to play.

 

I always wished that Atari had released

Donkey Kong and Lady Bug for 5200 !

 

I played those 2 for hours & hours on my Colecovision back in the day.

Of Course Defender & Pacman occupied the rest of my time on the 5200.

 

I wouldn't give up either one, but to me- the 5200 has the overall edge.

 

Later-

[oesii]

I like the 5200 for its game library, although it is missing DK and DKjr which are nice on the CV. The tracball with Centipede, Missle command, and Millipede make it an easy winner for me.

 

Big Mo has a great comparison article at AtariHQ:

 

http://www.atarihq.com/5200/cv52/

[Lemmi]

Its very simple

 

5200 SUCKS!!!!!

 

Colecovision RULES!!!!!!!

[oesii]

Oh, and no Ballblazer on the CV. What's up with that

 

 

[tillenterprises]

I remember drooling over both of them in the store when I was a teenager in '82, and wishing I could have them both, but I think I was leaning towards CV because of Donkey Kong. But it was a hopeless cause to ask for either of them, since I couldn't ask my parents to dish out an extra couple hundred dollars, after I just got an Atari 2600 that summer. Now, I finally own both (actually 2 of each, and 2 Adam computers) and every game released for each of them, and play them both equally. I think the colors are more vibrant on the 5200, and look more "washed- out" on the CV, but the CV has a lot of the more obscure, yet fun, arcade ports that are great translations of the arcade versions. I think it's a wash between the two. By the way- the person who said "black and pink," do you still have the pink trim protector stickers on your 5200? If so, if you pull them off, you'll find the silver chrome underneath

[NoahsMyBro]

I never really liked the CV. It's graphics looked impressive at first, but aside from that the system offered me nothing. It seemed to have lousy controllers (I actually like the 5200 sticks), unremarkable sound (although I didn't think about that at the time), and a slew of second-tier arcade licenses.

 

I loved the 5200, and still do.

[oesii]

This discussion got me playing some 5200 Zaxxon this afternoon on the Atari800 emulator. Man, what a great arcade port, I hadn't played it in awhile. I remember Zaxxon was one of the CV's big draws over the 2600 but the 5200 version is much better. Another point for the 5200

 

But there will never be a clear cut winner here because both stock controllers suck for the most part (the 5200 tracball is the best though) and if you want to play Ballblazer or Rescue on Frac. you need a 5200 and if you want Lady Bug or DKong you need a CV.

[voiddweller]

if you want to play Ballblazer or Rescue on Frac. you need a 5200 and if you want Lady Bug or DKong you need a CV.

 

Agreed!

 

I recently played the 5200 Zaxxon and I remembered the sound effects on the CV being much better. However, it's been a long time, so I may be mistaken...

[+Cafeman]

5200 Zaxxon. Looks great on 5200, but after a while, you notice the utter lack of MISSILES coming up at you, and your thumb and forefinger fall off because of no auto-fire. It's good and all, but I like aspect of the choppy CV version too. Mind you, 5200 Zaxxon is only 16K and that is the only reason it didn't end up near perfect. The Atari 8bit 32K version is much more faithful.

[NE146]

It's an old question from an old war. I used to want the 5200 to win but of course I wanted a Colecovision as well (secretly). Anyway, it's fun to look back and remember the big battle. But in the end.. hmmm.. It was more of a draw, but reluctantly I'd have to give Colecovision the edge. I still love my 5200 more though for sentimental reasons.

 

Incidentally if this interests you I have a couple of old magazines where they talk about "5200 vs. Colecovision" like this one (from Phaze's page) that I could scan:

 

[Big Player]

Big Mo has a great comparison article at AtariHQ:

http://www.atarihq.com/5200/cv52/

 

This is a great article. It explains all the techincal aspects of the hardware in simple terms. I love reading articles like this.

[oesii]

I know it's a great article because I haven't read it in a year or two and I knew where to find it

 

I was suprised to see the author was Big Mo who posts here, I guess I found that site a long time before I found this one.

[sku_u]

Colecovision had better controllers available (if you were rich) but the 5200 definitely has a much better library of games.

[Tempest]

My only complaint about the 5200 is that it was an Atari 400 in a different case! Only five unique (non-Atari 400/800) games were released for it (Space Dungeon, Countermeasure, Kangaroo, Berzerk, and Meteorites), and three of those exist as prototypes or on disk for the 400 (Kangaroo, Berzerk, and Space Dungeon). So why would you buy an Atari 5200 when you could get the same games for the Atari 400 AND get a great computer thrown in? Several unique games were made (Xari Arena, Black Belt, Frisky Tom, Meebzork, etc.), but they never got past the prototype stage.

 

I love my 5200 to death, but the Colecovision had the superior library. If only it weren't for those damn painful joysticks... The 5200 was nothing more than a quick emergancy backup plan for the failed Atari 3600, yet I seem to love it anyway... Maybe it's the mystique of the system or the cool splash screen, but I'll take my 5200 over the Colecovision anyday.

 

Tempest

[NE146]

My only complaint about the 5200 is that it was an Atari 400 in a different case!

 

Yeah and you know what's maddening about that too is you can see a lot of "what could have beens"... Colecovision had Donkey Kong and DK Jr., but just by playing the 400/800 version it just makes you drool that THOSE probably could have been the 5200 versions!

[Goochman]

The 5200 sticks ruin the system otherwise it would kill the CV - With the sticks and library the CV wins.

 

Those 5200 sticks caused some games never to be released due to their quirkyness - ala Asteroids

 

CV is fun if you give it a chance!

[GrizzLee]

I love both systems.

 

I have fond memories of my CV though. Both had sucky controllers. I rectified the CV problem sometime back http://home.earthlink.net/~resqsoft/coleco.htm.

 

I think Atari really missed the mark with the 5200 by failing to leverage the vast 8 bit library against it and forcing consumers to use those whacky sticks. I am looking fwd to Clay Cowgil's 5200 PSx/controller interface.

 

BTW: In the day, I was considering buying one of 3 systems, CV, 5200 and the Vectrex. The CV won me over because of the Donkey Kong pack-in cart. I think the pack-in cart sold the CV more than anything else. The 5200 came with Breakout initially - a big mistake IMHO. By that time, I think people were getting tired of re-hashed game titles and were looking for new games. Coleco came along with a great pack-in and gave us many obscure or overlooked coin-ops, all of which were new to the home gaming scene. Many which are very good, such as Lady Bug, Looping, Venture, etc... Perhaps a discussion for another thread, but I personally miss the pack-in games. Aside from DK on the CV, I think Super Mario World (NES) was the greatest pack-in of all time for any system.

 

-Lee

[joeybastard]

Thankfully I have both systems but I have to say I like the CV better. The original sticks are horrid but if you use the Super Action Sticks or the roller controller trakball, it's a joy to behold. I think the CV is better for a few reasons:

1. The add on expansions (Turbo, Roller, Super action sticks)

2. The 2nd tier arcade ports are fun games and really well done on CV. As well as good versions of main arcade games (DK, DKJR, Atarisoft's Defender, Centipede, etc)

3. Squish 'em Sam

[+Cafeman]

This subject has been discussed a lot. I like both systems -- who wouldn't? I have always preferred the 5200.

 

The CV's knob controller is much worse than the 5200's, to me. It feels so light & junky, and cramps my hand. I have few problems at all with the 5200 stick. A rebuilt and good-quality 5200 stick is a world of difference from a broken original model one though.

 

Compared to a newer gamepad, 5200's sticks suck. But compared to what was typically available in the day, 5200's sticks are certainly palatable. For you young 'uns, image a system where you could never pause a game -- that was the 2600. Having pause built into the 5200 seemed so awesome.

 

The games themselves often boast great sprite animation and fluidity of movement, and hardly any flicker. Even CV had flickering issues. Look at those near-transparent fireballs in DK for example. Even though most 5200 titles were available on other systems, they weren't nearly as impressive as the 5200 version -- such as Pac-Man, Ms Pac, Q*bert, Defender, RS Baseball, ETC. They were hardly 'the same games' we played on 2600. Still, it woulda been great to have some of those unique and fresh CV titles too, such as Venture, Smurf, Donkey Kong, Ladybug, and Mr. Do.

 

You know, in the year 2002, its easy to look at screenshots of CV's best games and 5200's best games and choose the CV as the best system. But actually playing the games, with those controllers, would IMO make the 5200 seem the better of the two. You just gotta play it to see.

[Tempest]

You know I forgot that RS Baseball and RS Soccer were 5200 exclusives as well (well exclusive in the sense that there was no 400/800 version). The 5200 version of Qix and Centipede were also unique (they never released updated versions for the 400/800 like they did with Dig Dug).

 

Tempest

[Charlie_]

Coleco ................... LOL

 

5200 is my favorite system of all time.

 

It does not bother me that the 5200 is an Atari computer in a different case. Atari figured it out before MS did. Computers make the best game machines.

 

Ive been saying for years that some one should pack up a little PC in a box so everyone had the same hardware and call it a console.

 

I'm glad Atari did it back in the day with the 5200, and I'm glad MS is doing it right now with the Xbox.

 

What might be called "ATARI Classics" like missle command, berzerk, centipede, and the likes are better than anything put out on Coleco, IMO.

 

Charlie

[Goochman]

Chaz,

 

I would agree with you 100% except the 5200 sticks........Atari did everything right with the 5200 (you dont want cart slot compatibilty to take away from the 'computers' but making easy translations to the new console) by improving upon the 2600 was right on.

 

But those controllers.............

 

The best thing about the 5200 IMHO was I could play better versions of Dig Dug, Centipede and got a few other new titles the 800 would've never seen

[atariz28]

I had a coleco in the day. I remember coleco having a lot fresher catalog of games. Most of the games on the 5200 were rehashes of the 2600 catalog. Also the coleco allowed the use of a 2600 controller for a lot of games. I have both now. I like them both a lot. My 7800 is my system of choice though.

[KAZ]

Big Mo has a great comparison article at AtariHQ:

http://www.atarihq.com/5200/cv52/

 

This is a great article. It explains all the techincal aspects of the hardware in simple terms. I love reading articles like this.

 

The conclusion I drew from this article was that the 5200 was a more "powerful" machine. It seemed to imply that 5200 was better, except where games are concerned.

 

Myself, I sometimes think that the graphics on the CV are somehow more crisp. Like if you compare the 7800 to Nintendo (uh oh), it seems to me that Nintendo has crisper graphics. Like something to do with resolution or something. But the 7800 might kill the Nintendo in sheer machine strength. I think this same phenomenon is at work between the 5200 and CV.

 

I love these debates too, they are really interesting. I am biased towards Atari, but it doesn't mean that the CV or Intellivision is not cool. They will end up in my collection very soon.

 

Super Nintendo, to me, was the peak of cartridge based consoles...

I know I'm intentionally leaving out N64, but sometimes I think they do the job TOO WELL. The graphics are simply TOO good I sometimes like the simplicity of SNES, yet it has enough power to get the job done-and the games are mega fun.

 

Then I'd still rather play Mike Tyson's Punchout than Super Punchout on the SNES...so some games are just like that. I even own both too.