Atari 5200, why do you like it?

[robertski]

I like My Atari 5200. I am a big game programmer, mainly for myself... Currently working on

a PC version of the great game JINX, I think from my A7800 Collection. The thing is Atari always

makes some crucial mistake on virtually every gaming platform they launch. I would want to

convert a Flashback20 into a real atari. But the voltages in the joy=ports is only 3.3v which

wont support the trackball. If only I could find a way to provide alternate voltage.... well, A

project for the future maybe. I Think a flashback5200 would sell like hotcakes. I wish Atari

would make that/ Then they could build a really great direct replacement for the controller.. One

that never wears out and works great/ and make it so the pins on the mainboard are all in a line

so we can add a cartridge port real easy like... Then I will like the Atari5200 twice

as much as I like it now.....

 

Later... Rob.

[akator]

I Think a flashback5200 would sell like hotcakes. I wish Atari

would make that/ Then they could build a really great direct replacement for the controller.. One

that never wears out and works great/ and make it so the pins on the mainboard are all in a line

so we can add a cartridge port real easy like... Then I will like the Atari5200 twice

as much as I like it now.....

 

I second that. A "flashback" 5200 with improved controllers... well, that would be just plain simply stunningly awesomely perfectly mindblowingly -- yeah, I would buy that.

[+wood_jl]

I Think a flashback5200 would sell like hotcakes. I wish Atari

would make that/ Then they could build a really great direct replacement for the controller.. One

that never wears out and works great/ and make it so the pins on the mainboard are all in a line

so we can add a cartridge port real easy like... Then I will like the Atari5200 twice

as much as I like it now.....

 

I second that. A "flashback" 5200 with improved controllers... well, that would be just plain simply stunningly awesomely perfectly mindblowingly -- yeah, I would buy that.

 

Even the improved controllers - sans "flashback" 5200 - would be cool.

[atariksi]

I Think a flashback5200 would sell like hotcakes. I wish Atari

would make that/ Then they could build a really great direct replacement for the controller.. One

that never wears out and works great/ and make it so the pins on the mainboard are all in a line

so we can add a cartridge port real easy like... Then I will like the Atari5200 twice

as much as I like it now.....

 

I second that. A "flashback" 5200 with improved controllers... well, that would be just plain simply stunningly awesomely perfectly mindblowingly -- yeah, I would buy that.

 

It would be REAL flashback if they actually flashed back to a system that existed and was compatible with it. Currently, they just seem like Atari 2600 emulators running in hardware. Even the joysticks on Flashback2 system (although looks the same as Atari 2600 joystick) is not as good as the original Atari 2600 joystick.

[kool kitty89]

The thing is Atari always

makes some crucial mistake on virtually every gaming platform they launch. I would want to

convert a Flashback20 into a real atari. But the voltages in the joy=ports is only 3.3v which

wont support the trackball. If only I could find a way to provide alternate voltage.... well, A

project for the future maybe.

Couldn't you simply add another voltage regulator (7805) and tap the main power input, using the 5V signal for the joy ports? Unless the power input is less than 7V (the minimum for a 7805 to effectively supply 5V) or the power adapter is too weak to supply a 7805 in addition to the main regulator and components.

 

I Think a flashback5200 would sell like hotcakes. I wish Atari

would make that/ Then they could build a really great direct replacement for the controller.. One

that never wears out and works great/ and make it so the pins on the mainboard are all in a line

so we can add a cartridge port real easy like... Then I will like the Atari5200 twice

as much as I like it now.....

Really? You think it would sell well with the stigma which continues in the gaming community (especially among the ignorant)? The FB and FB2 appealed to some enthusiasts, but also to a wide range of average people interested for nostalgia reasons as well as some general (and casual) retro gamers. The 5200 has a much more limited group of former users and much more limited intrest in general --I'd be among the exceptions to that, granted. It doesn't have enough commercial business appeal. (I think it would be difficult to push a 7800 flashback too, but I suppose that might happen -they could roll it in with the VCS a bit more given the hardware is compatible and they've already got a VCS ASIC)

I mean it might make more sense to come out with a C64 flashback (including Europe), or plug and play given its popularity and greater difficulty of use/scarcity compared to a lot of old game consoles. (many of which have clones available) I'm talking in general, of course, the C64 has no personal nostalgia for me (I think it's neat, but so are a ton of other old consoles and computers).

 

It would be REAL flashback if they actually flashed back to a system that existed and was compatible with it. Currently, they just seem like Atari 2600 emulators running in hardware. Even the joysticks on Flashback2 system (although looks the same as Atari 2600 joystick) is not as good as the original Atari 2600 joystick.

Huh? None of the flashbacks are emulators (in the sence of an embedded processor running emulation software, not "emulation" in the sense of emulating the original chip design with a new one).

Both use hardware ASICs: the FB1 is simply a NES on a chip derivative (NES clone ASIC) running ports of Atari games. The Flashback 2 uses a custom ASIC implementation of the original chipset-- rather like a lot of other clone consoles. (the majority, in fact, with the exception of a couple recent systems running embedded ARM SOCs, like that crappy @Games MegaDrive/Firecore)

Yobo's clones for instance, are all ASIC based -- somes there are inaccuracies and incompatibilities due to inexact reverse engineering, or sometimes due to poor external hardware. (as with the audio and video quality of a lot of Genesis clones -and indeed several official Sega models with sub-par audio amps -noisy, muffled, distorted sound, sometimes with wrong volume levels on some channels)

 

 

As for the sticks: inferior to the CX-10, or the CX-40 too?

Edited April 13, 2010 by kool kitty89

[+wood_jl]

I Think a flashback5200 would sell like hotcakes. I wish Atari

would make that/ Then they could build a really great direct replacement for the controller.. One

that never wears out and works great/ and make it so the pins on the mainboard are all in a line

so we can add a cartridge port real easy like... Then I will like the Atari5200 twice

as much as I like it now.....

Really? You think it would sell well with the stigma which continues in the gaming community (especially among the ignorant)? The FB and FB2 appealed to some enthusiasts, but also to a wide range of average people interested for nostalgia reasons as well as some general (and casual) retro gamers. The 5200 has a much more limited group of former users and much more limited intrest in general --I'd be among the exceptions to that, granted. It doesn't have enough commercial business appeal. (I think it would be difficult to push a 7800 flashback too, but I suppose that might happen -they could roll it in with the VCS a bit more given the hardware is compatible and they've already got a VCS ASIC)

 

Agreed. One of the biggest failures in our consideration here is that we are not your average consumer. We are gamers. We are not average gamers. We are RETRO-GAMERS. We are not mainstream. A product like the Flashback stuff (or most things on retail shelves) has a broad appeal, not just to retro-gamers. Not just to gamers. It appeals to non-gamers. Casual consumers who haven't played a video game system in 20 years might spring for a Flashback. Only if it's cheap, though. A 5200 is out of the question because the controllers are just too expensive. To try to make them cheap would be to repeat the mistake they made with them in the first place. They'd be pieces of shit, and nobody would buy **ANYTHING** labeled Atari again. As well, the kind of joe-blow non-gamer average-consumer isn't too likely to differentiate 2600 from 5200 or 7800. They just know "let's play Atari" and you know which system that usually means. Lots of us retro-gamers seem to lack a certain self-awareness. Just because I like it (or love it) doesn't mean it's going to sell like hotcakes. It just means "I want it" and nothing more.

[mimo]

There was a CX-40 two joystick holder made by Atari and included with the original run of A8 Robotron. I do not own one but I've heard it works fairly well.

 

Mitch

Do you know what it was called? I see articles and pictures mentioning the 5200 joystick coupler, but that's it...

 

There's one on ebay right now. Here's a pic:

Now I'm thinking about bidding on it.

 

Mitch

 

b+c computers sell them NIB www.myatari.com for $19.95+shipping so don't bid too high

[Hatta]

Haha, that's a nice piece of gear. Personally, I have more atari joysticks than I know what to do with. So my plan is to just bolt a couple of them to a piece of wood. Ghetto, but should be functional.

[atariksi]

The thing is Atari always

makes some crucial mistake on virtually every gaming platform they launch. I would want to

convert a Flashback20 into a real atari. But the voltages in the joy=ports is only 3.3v which

wont support the trackball. If only I could find a way to provide alternate voltage.... well, A

project for the future maybe.

Couldn't you simply add another voltage regulator (7805) and tap the main power input, using the 5V signal for the joy ports? Unless the power input is less than 7V (the minimum for a 7805 to effectively supply 5V) or the power adapter is too weak to supply a 7805 in addition to the main regulator and components.

 

I Think a flashback5200 would sell like hotcakes. I wish Atari

would make that/ Then they could build a really great direct replacement for the controller.. One

that never wears out and works great/ and make it so the pins on the mainboard are all in a line

so we can add a cartridge port real easy like... Then I will like the Atari5200 twice

as much as I like it now.....

Really? You think it would sell well with the stigma which continues in the gaming community (especially among the ignorant)? The FB and FB2 appealed to some enthusiasts, but also to a wide range of average people interested for nostalgia reasons as well as some general (and casual) retro gamers. The 5200 has a much more limited group of former users and much more limited intrest in general --I'd be among the exceptions to that, granted. It doesn't have enough commercial business appeal. (I think it would be difficult to push a 7800 flashback too, but I suppose that might happen -they could roll it in with the VCS a bit more given the hardware is compatible and they've already got a VCS ASIC)

I mean it might make more sense to come out with a C64 flashback (including Europe), or plug and play given its popularity and greater difficulty of use/scarcity compared to a lot of old game consoles. (many of which have clones available) I'm talking in general, of course, the C64 has no personal nostalgia for me (I think it's neat, but so are a ton of other old consoles and computers).

...

I don't think they should be flashbacking systems because of popularity in earlier times. Anything can sell if the marketing is right; it's better to promote something that has better hardware or I guess unique hardware in the computer industry.

 

It would be REAL flashback if they actually flashed back to a system that existed and was compatible with it. Currently, they just seem like Atari 2600 emulators running in hardware. Even the joysticks on Flashback2 system (although looks the same as Atari 2600 joystick) is not as good as the original Atari 2600 joystick.

Huh? None of the flashbacks are emulators (in the sence of an embedded processor running emulation software, not "emulation" in the sense of emulating the original chip design with a new one).

Both use hardware ASICs: the FB1 is simply a NES on a chip derivative (NES clone ASIC) running ports of Atari games. The Flashback 2 uses a custom ASIC implementation of the original chipset-- rather like a lot of other clone consoles. (the majority, in fact, with the exception of a couple recent systems running embedded ARM SOCs, like that crappy @Games MegaDrive/Firecore)

...

I doubt they rewrote all those games in the flashback systems so I think for the most part they are emulating the code of existing games. Regardless, it's not the same chipset not register compatible for true flashback.

 

As for the sticks: inferior to the CX-10, or the CX-40 too?

 

Don't know what the difference is but I'm referring to the REAL joystick as those with the hard PCBs and metal strips that allow fast pressing of buttons and changing directions.

[kool kitty89]

I don't think they should be flashbacking systems because of popularity in earlier times. Anything can sell if the marketing is right; it's better to promote something that has better hardware or I guess unique hardware in the computer industry.

The average consumer isn't going to prefer a A8/5200 derivative over a generic embedded plug and play though... Popular old systems have a broad apeal, not just to a narrow/niche market.

 

 

I doubt they rewrote all those games in the flashback systems so I think for the most part they are emulating the code of existing games. Regardless, it's not the same chipset not register compatible for true flashback.

They only ported games to the FB1, the FB2 runds games natively as it's hardware compatible --they even added provisions for a cartridge slot. (which many homebrew hackers have added) You'll have to check out curt vendel's details on it to confirm the level of compatibility (he's got a thread on it somewhere), but it's essentially a VCS on a chip using newer manufacturing processes iirc. (so, a bit like the ASIC used in some 2600 Jrs, but not NMOS)

 

 

Don't know what the difference is but I'm referring to the REAL joystick as those with the hard PCBs and metal strips that allow fast pressing of buttons and changing directions.

I'll have to open it to see if metal contact switches or rubber dome (or membrane) switches are used inside the CX40 (assuming I've got a CX40 and not just a worn out CX-10 --I know I've got 2 CX-10s too).

[atariksi]

I don't think they should be flashbacking systems because of popularity in earlier times. Anything can sell if the marketing is right; it's better to promote something that has better hardware or I guess unique hardware in the computer industry.

The average consumer isn't going to prefer a A8/5200 derivative over a generic embedded plug and play though... Popular old systems have a broad apeal, not just to a narrow/niche market.

...

I said "popularity in earlier times". It's hard to say what will have popularity now since modern hardware (audio cards, video cards, processors, etc.) gives people satiation and they look for something else. So the unique hardware has to be a different way of programming which A8 offers. A8's display lists aren't there on any other machine, the WSYNC is unique, etc. I think A8/5200 system would be just as popular if not more than a A2600 clone.

 

I doubt they rewrote all those games in the flashback systems so I think for the most part they are emulating the code of existing games. Regardless, it's not the same chipset not register compatible for true flashback.

They only ported games to the FB1, the FB2 runds games natively as it's hardware compatible --they even added provisions for a cartridge slot. (which many homebrew hackers have added) You'll have to check out curt vendel's details on it to confirm the level of compatibility (he's got a thread on it somewhere), but it's essentially a VCS on a chip using newer manufacturing processes iirc. (so, a bit like the ASIC used in some 2600 Jrs, but not NMOS)

...

I am not familiar with what they intended to do with those flashback systems but just playing around with them I noticed the games weren't exactly same as original A2600. Obviously the flashback I joysticks are different and not as good as CX40/CX10 joysticks.

 

Don't know what the difference is but I'm referring to the REAL joystick as those with the hard PCBs and metal strips that allow fast pressing of buttons and changing directions.

I'll have to open it to see if metal contact switches or rubber dome (or membrane) switches are used inside the CX40 (assuming I've got a CX40 and not just a worn out CX-10 --I know I've got 2 CX-10s too).

 

Well, I did open up a flashback II joystick and it's using the rubber contacts like A5200 and the button has to slowly click into "on" and click "off" rather than instant with the real Atari joystick.

[ApolloBoy]

I think A8/5200 system would be just as popular if not more than a A2600 clone.

I don't know about that, especially since there's a lot more people who remember the 2600 than either the 5200 or the 8-bits. Heck I'm pretty sure there's a lot of people who weren't even aware that Atari made computers, let alone anything other than the 2600.

 

I am not familiar with what they intended to do with those flashback systems but just playing around with them I noticed the games weren't exactly same as original A2600. Obviously the flashback I joysticks are different and not as good as CX40/CX10 joysticks.

That's because the Flashback 1 is actually an NES clone, and so the games are quite different from the originals. The Flashback 2 and 2+ on the other hand, use an ASIC that has the 6507, TIA and RIOT integrated, so the games should play exactly the same as they do on a real 2600. I have a Flashback 2 and I didn't notice any differences.

 

Well, I did open up a flashback II joystick and it's using the rubber contacts like A5200 and the button has to slowly click into "on" and click "off" rather than instant with the real Atari joystick.

It's still much more reliable (and better) than the 5200 controller, that's for sure.

[kool kitty89]

I am not familiar with what they intended to do with those flashback systems but just playing around with them I noticed the games weren't exactly same as original A2600. Obviously the flashback I joysticks are different and not as good as CX40/CX10 joysticks.

That's because the Flashback 1 is actually an NES clone, and so the games are quite different from the originals. The Flashback 2 and 2+ on the other hand, use an ASIC that has the 6507, TIA and RIOT integrated, so the games should play exactly the same as they do on a real 2600. I have a Flashback 2 and I didn't notice any differences.

Yes, and it can play real VCS games with the added cart slot modification. (only problem is 3.3V instead of 5V mentioned above -causing problem with the trackball and maybe the paddles/driving controllers)

[Dastari Creel]

I don't know about that, especially since there's a lot more people who remember the 2600 than either the 5200 or the 8-bits. Heck I'm pretty sure there's a lot of people who weren't even aware that Atari made computers, let alone anything other than the 2600.

 

*Raises hand*

 

I was away of the 5200 but I never saw one, just the cartridges sitting in stores. Everyone that I knew that had an Atari had a 2600. One time I did see a 7800, but that's about it. I never had a clue that Atari had anything other than those three systems and the XE which I thought was a console but they tried to market it so hard against the NES that it was hard to ignore that one.

 

I think I had some sort of very low-level awareness of the Jaguar but by that point I had totally given up on Atari. I don't believe I ever even heard of the Lynx.

 

Why am I getting back into Atari? For the nostalgia. Am I interested in the 5200 and the 8-bit computers? Yes. Am I normal? No.

 

Its probably true that most people would just go with the 2600 for the nostalgia. From my own experiences during the era when the 2600/5200 were the most recent systems I just don't think enough people had the 5200 for there to be nostalgia for it and those who aren't after nostalgia go for new games.

[atariksi]

I think A8/5200 system would be just as popular if not more than a A2600 clone.

I don't know about that, especially since there's a lot more people who remember the 2600 than either the 5200 or the 8-bits. Heck I'm pretty sure there's a lot of people who weren't even aware that Atari made computers, let alone anything other than the 2600.

...

It's also true the other way. I never heard of the 2600 until recently. I was more into computers along with a bunch of others I know who were just into computers. Perhaps 5200 is less heard of but Atari 400/800/XL/XE/XEGS was well known. Anyways, I was saying there's no way to claim that same popularity holds true today. In fact, there's many people who had 2600 did upgrade to Atari 8-bit computers so they wouldn't mind if the flashback was A5200/A800 compatible. My brother bought one of those joystck games expecting Atari 800 type graphics but was disappointed and I bought a flashback (I and II) expecting Atari 7800 or Atari 8-bit type of graphics but nope.

 

I am not familiar with what they intended to do with those flashback systems but just playing around with them I noticed the games weren't exactly same as original A2600. Obviously the flashback I joysticks are different and not as good as CX40/CX10 joysticks.

That's because the Flashback 1 is actually an NES clone, and so the games are quite different from the originals. The Flashback 2 and 2+ on the other hand, use an ASIC that has the 6507, TIA and RIOT integrated, so the games should play exactly the same as they do on a real 2600. I have a Flashback 2 and I didn't notice any differences.

...

But flashback I was intended to do games for Atari 2600/7800 or some Atari system.

[atariksi]

I don't know about that, especially since there's a lot more people who remember the 2600 than either the 5200 or the 8-bits. Heck I'm pretty sure there's a lot of people who weren't even aware that Atari made computers, let alone anything other than the 2600.

 

*Raises hand*

 

I was away of the 5200 but I never saw one, just the cartridges sitting in stores. Everyone that I knew that had an Atari had a 2600. One time I did see a 7800, but that's about it. I never had a clue that Atari had anything other than those three systems and the XE which I thought was a console but they tried to market it so hard against the NES that it was hard to ignore that one.

 

I think I had some sort of very low-level awareness of the Jaguar but by that point I had totally given up on Atari. I don't believe I ever even heard of the Lynx.

 

Why am I getting back into Atari? For the nostalgia. Am I interested in the 5200 and the 8-bit computers? Yes. Am I normal? No.

 

Its probably true that most people would just go with the 2600 for the nostalgia. From my own experiences during the era when the 2600/5200 were the most recent systems I just don't think enough people had the 5200 for there to be nostalgia for it and those who aren't after nostalgia go for new games.

 

We're combining 5200 and 8-bit into one flashback (not just 5200) so that's one I would say would be just as popular as 2600 compatible one. In fact, you can have two POKEYs in the flashback one at $E800 and one at $D200 so software can use either location. And you can mirror the GTIA at $C000 and $D000 so then you can easily run A5200 or A800 stuff or program new ones without much difference between the two systems.

 

I don't see any solid statistics showing majority prefers Atari 2600 compatible flashback over Atari 5200/Atari 800 type flashback.

[atariksi]

I am not familiar with what they intended to do with those flashback systems but just playing around with them I noticed the games weren't exactly same as original A2600. Obviously the flashback I joysticks are different and not as good as CX40/CX10 joysticks.

That's because the Flashback 1 is actually an NES clone, and so the games are quite different from the originals. The Flashback 2 and 2+ on the other hand, use an ASIC that has the 6507, TIA and RIOT integrated, so the games should play exactly the same as they do on a real 2600. I have a Flashback 2 and I didn't notice any differences.

Yes, and it can play real VCS games with the added cart slot modification. (only problem is 3.3V instead of 5V mentioned above -causing problem with the trackball and maybe the paddles/driving controllers)

 

But soldering stuff isn't your average user's activity. That is one reason for the incompatbility. I didn't see the EXACTness of Flashback II with Atari 2600 either and Flashback I is obviously not.

[ApolloBoy]

I don't see any solid statistics showing majority prefers Atari 2600 compatible flashback over Atari 5200/Atari 800 type flashback.

I don't think you need statistics to prove that. When most people talk about "the Atari", they almost always mean the 2600, not the 5200 or the 8-bit line. Just because you never heard of the 2600 until recently doesn't mean it's the same case for most people. Also, the size of the 2600 forum I think shows just how popular the 2600 is.

Edited April 14, 2010 by ApolloBoy

[atariksi]

I don't see any solid statistics showing majority prefers Atari 2600 compatible flashback over Atari 5200/Atari 800 type flashback.

I don't think you need statistics to prove that. When most people talk about "the Atari", they almost always mean the 2600, not the 5200 or the 8-bit line. Just because you never heard of the 2600 until recently doesn't mean it's the same case for most people. Also, the size of the 2600 forum I think shows just how popular the 2600 is.

 

The same argument to you-- just because you and your limited experience shows that when people currently refer to "atari" it means 2600 my experience (and others I know) is people mean the computer or some other Atari. And I am not trying to prove that Atari 8-bit/5200 is more popular-- you are. I'm just claiming that *YOU* have no provided any solid statistics to show Atari 2600 is more popular. I would say there's overlap of the users of both systems and some people would favor buying anything "Atari". Going by just the size of some forum on one website also doesn't allow you to draw that conclusion.

[+wood_jl]

Also, the fact that people have been used to getting "arcade perfect" (well, almost) versions of the games in the plug N play joysticks (Jakks, etc) means that they would see A800/5200 versions as little more than "compromised" games.

 

Most of the BEST ORIGINAL games for the A800/5200 would likely never been heard of before by the Joe Blow average consumer. Many would never have the right secured for them to be in such a device....so no Archon, etc. All probably why we'll never see such a device. The Flashback stuff already has the best name recognition and broadest appeal, and even it got a rather limited (and even more so with the 2+) selection of games leaving out many of the best.

[ApolloBoy]

The same argument to you-- just because you and your limited experience shows that when people currently refer to "atari" it means 2600 my experience (and others I know) is people mean the computer or some other Atari.

Prove it. You're the only person so far who's said that the 5200 and 8-bit are more popular than the 2600, and I've seen no evidence of that whatsoever.

Edited April 14, 2010 by ApolloBoy

[kool kitty89]

It's also true the other way. I never heard of the 2600 until recently. I was more into computers along with a bunch of others I know who were just into computers. Perhaps 5200 is less heard of but Atari 400/800/XL/XE/XEGS was well known. Anyways, I was saying there's no way to claim that same popularity holds true today. In fact, there's many people who had 2600 did upgrade to Atari 8-bit computers so they wouldn't mind if the flashback was A5200/A800 compatible. My brother bought one of those joystck games expecting Atari 800 type graphics but was disappointed and I bought a flashback (I and II) expecting Atari 7800 or Atari 8-bit type of graphics but nope.

Define recently... I could maybe understand not knowing about the VCS, or especially not knowing the VCS had been renamed 2600, back in the 80s if you really didn't watch much TV or know the many kind of people who'd by plaign a VCS, but surely by the late 80s you should have been aware of it... (unless I'm wrong in my assumption that you were involved with the A800 when it was new/on the market)

 

Even then it's pretty hard to swallow... A machine that sold some 30 million units and is interntnationally recognized as one of the most important game consoles ever created and a huge influence on the industry...

 

But flashback I was intended to do games for Atari 2600/7800 or some Atari system.

FB 2/2+ is a 2600 in hardware, or at least a very close approximation. (say compared to soem home computers and contemporary clones, if not closer)

 

But soldering stuff isn't your average user's activity. That is one reason for the incompatbility. I didn't see the EXACTness of Flashback II with Atari 2600 either and Flashback I is obviously not.

Yes, they didn't bother adding the cartridge slot, though added some provisions for such. I think Atari Inc. (yes, Infogrames took that name...) considered it wasn't worth it to include the cartridge slot given the lower popularity of VCS carts compared to several other classic systems which have often modern clones. (NES, SNES, Genesis all still have carts in circulation and some used/classic game store chains selling them, for VCS stuff that's far less common even in thrift stores from what I've seen for the last few years -garage sales, flea markets, local listings, and online sales seem to be the biggest)

 

The same argument to you-- just because you and your limited experience shows that when people currently refer to "atari" it means 2600 my experience (and others I know) is people mean the computer or some other Atari.

Prove it. You're the only person so far who's said that the 5200 and 8-bit are more popular than the 2600, and I've seen no evidence of that whatsoever.

While I can agree that in the context of retro gaming/computing fans, "atari" should refer to a wide vairety of things... for the general public who were around at the time or perhaps have some limited knowledge from family or the media:

Atari refers mainly to the classic arcade games and the VCS/2600, in North America. In Europe, the ST should also be a biggie (A8-bits never made it big among the EU 8-bit market sadly), perhaps the Lynx in some cases too. (apparently more popular than the GameGear in a couple regions like the UK)

 

By sheer proliferation the VCS/2600 is easy to see as the most popular of any Atari Branded hardware products (A8 line is probably 3rd or 4th -solid sales figures aren't forthcoming, but it might even be 2nd -the 7800 and ST being contestants)

[atariksi]

The same argument to you-- just because you and your limited experience shows that when people currently refer to "atari" it means 2600 my experience (and others I know) is people mean the computer or some other Atari.

Prove it. You're the only person so far who's said that the 5200 and 8-bit are more popular than the 2600, and I've seen no evidence of that whatsoever.

 

Find the quote where I said that. You claimed A2600 is more popular without a shred of evidence. I have no idea what you're reading.

[atariksi]

It's also true the other way. I never heard of the 2600 until recently. I was more into computers along with a bunch of others I know who were just into computers. Perhaps 5200 is less heard of but Atari 400/800/XL/XE/XEGS was well known. Anyways, I was saying there's no way to claim that same popularity holds true today. In fact, there's many people who had 2600 did upgrade to Atari 8-bit computers so they wouldn't mind if the flashback was A5200/A800 compatible. My brother bought one of those joystck games expecting Atari 800 type graphics but was disappointed and I bought a flashback (I and II) expecting Atari 7800 or Atari 8-bit type of graphics but nope.

Define recently... I could maybe understand not knowing about the VCS, or especially not knowing the VCS had been renamed 2600, back in the 80s if you really didn't watch much TV or know the many kind of people who'd by plaign a VCS, but surely by the late 80s you should have been aware of it... (unless I'm wrong in my assumption that you were involved with the A800 when it was new/on the market)

 

Even then it's pretty hard to swallow... A machine that sold some 30 million units and is interntnationally recognized as one of the most important game consoles ever created and a huge influence on the industry...

...

Recently as in when I was developing MPDOS (around 2001) to support as many platforms as possible then I found out there was an Atari VCS and some other machines as well that used the same joysticks as Atari 800 and Amiga and Atari ST. I was into computers so I never bothered with game consoles or paid much attention to them. I never saw any advert on TV either. And I'm not the only person-- I know others with similar interests who never owned nor knew about VCS. In fact, even when I heard about 2600 I thought VCS was separate. Regardless, the point I was making is that Atari 800/5200 type flashback can be delcared to be just as popular as 2600 given there's no solid evidence to prove that either enjoys a big edge.

 

The same argument to you-- just because you and your limited experience shows that when people currently refer to "atari" it means 2600 my experience (and others I know) is people mean the computer or some other Atari.

Prove it. You're the only person so far who's said that the 5200 and 8-bit are more popular than the 2600, and I've seen no evidence of that whatsoever.

While I can agree that in the context of retro gaming/computing fans, "atari" should refer to a wide vairety of things... for the general public who were around at the time or perhaps have some limited knowledge from family or the media:

Atari refers mainly to the classic arcade games and the VCS/2600, in North America. In Europe, the ST should also be a biggie (A8-bits never made it big among the EU 8-bit market sadly), perhaps the Lynx in some cases too. (apparently more popular than the GameGear in a couple regions like the UK)

...

He twisted my words around-- I never said A800/A5200 was more popular presently nor back then-- I just said that a flashback of A800/A5200 would be just as popular given people generally would by the "Atari" tag and overlap of interest, general retro interest, etc. And just because more people heard of it more back then doesn't apply today.

 

By sheer proliferation the VCS/2600 is easy to see as the most popular of any Atari Branded hardware products (A8 line is probably 3rd or 4th -solid sales figures aren't forthcoming, but it might even be 2nd -the 7800 and ST being contestants)

 

Yeah, but you're missing the point. I'm not arguing what was popular back then (sales figures). I'm arguing there's no solid evidence to say that NOWADAYS Flashback compatible with 2600 would be more popular than Flashback compatible with 800/5200.

[+wood_jl]

By sheer proliferation the VCS/2600 is easy to see as the most popular of any Atari Branded hardware products (A8 line is probably 3rd or 4th -solid sales figures aren't forthcoming, but it might even be 2nd -the 7800 and ST being contestants)

 

Indeed. This is merely my limited anecdotal experience, but when I had A8 in high school (mid-80s) other Atari users were a really scarce commodity. When I got ST (mid-late 1980s) there were several people (high school again) who had ST and I did much more trading/borrowing games. I knew a few people who crossed brand lines and went from C64 and Apple II to ST - and this is in America where the ST really wasn't what I'd consider truly "popular" like it was in Europe. I did run into more people that had ST though, by a significant margin. However, it still stands that most average/non-retro-enthusiast people are not aware (anymore) of ST, or A8 either. Commodore 64 will always have more name recognition; this is represented by the C64 DTV games joystick which rode the coattails of actual C64 popularity. I think it would be "news" to most casual consumers today that Atari even made computers. Sad, really.