Sell me on a 5200

[GroovyBee]

Obviously, you have better graphics on A5200 on games that use large r/w buffers.

 

But you can have graphics like this on the 7800 with 1/4 the amount of RAM :-

 

 

GTIA is a graphics chip and it contains collision detection circuitry, graphics modes and color palette amongst other things. Its also obvious that collision detection relates to visuals (graphics).

 

Hardware collision detection isn't an advantage if the game diosn't use it.

[Kjmann]

Obviously, you have better graphics on A5200 on games that use large r/w buffers.

 

But you can have graphics like this on the 7800 with 1/4 the amount of RAM :-

 

 

GTIA is a graphics chip and it contains collision detection circuitry, graphics modes and color palette amongst other things. Its also obvious that collision detection relates to visuals (graphics).

 

Hardware collision detection isn't an advantage if the game diosn't use it.

 

 

I think the 7800 Would have been a wonderful machine if they has at least put a Pokey chip in it for sound. I Can't Stand to play a game with sound so atrocious as that. Graphics mean Very little in respect to overall Playability of a Game. Some of the best playing game I've every seen had terrible graphics.

 

Take Pitfall II for Example. The Graphics weren't anything to write home about. The 8bit version was just a slight upgrade from the 2600 version (Although that extra cavern was awesome). but the good control and Fun little adventure soundtrack was what sold me and it's what keeps me playing it.

 

Also, Is it just me or does the 7800's Color Palette always look Dull. The Colors were just never quite as bright and resilient as the 8-bit.

 

The hardware collision detection in the 8-bit/5200 was a big advantage for about 50% of the games out there. it was great for games that needed that fast detailed detection. But you had the choice to use PMG's, Bounding boxes, Or Both if you knew what you were doing and you had a Sound chip that to this day people love hearing. That alone is enough to make the 8-bit/5200 chipset out shine the 7800. =)

 

BTW: just because a game Doesn't use the Hardware collision detection doesn't mean that it's not an advantage of the chipset. It's like having 4 wheel drive in a car, just because I have never used the 4 wheel drive in my car doesn't mean it's not an advantage that I might want to use someday.

[DracIsBack]

People like you make me wish there were a - reputation point button on posts.

 

Feel free to write Albert and ask him to add one.

[GroovyBee]

4 - Not To Mention the Ram Differences (8-bit,48k vs 5200,16k) and cart Size limitations (8-bit,128k vs 5200,32k). The Numbers Speak for themselves in that category. (These Cart size and RAM issues are the Main Reasons that we never did Tempest Xtreem for the 5200. It just couldn't handle it.)

 

Interesting! The 7800 version of Tempest uses 15K for its video buffer (160B) in the cart's RAM and just less than 1K internal RAM for the game. Maybe I should do a 5200 cross port?

[Kjmann]

4 - Not To Mention the Ram Differences (8-bit,48k vs 5200,16k) and cart Size limitations (8-bit,128k vs 5200,32k). The Numbers Speak for themselves in that category. (These Cart size and RAM issues are the Main Reasons that we never did Tempest Xtreem for the 5200. It just couldn't handle it.)

 

Interesting! The 7800 version of Tempest uses 15K for its video buffer (160B) in the cart's RAM and just less than 1K internal RAM for the game. Maybe I should do a 5200 cross port?

 

The 7800 Version of tempest Doesn't have 7 Music Tracks, 5 Digital sounds and 64 levels.

[DracIsBack]

Some of the best playing game I've every seen had terrible graphics.

 

Agree. In truth, I think almost everyone in Atariage must feel the same way as we're still playing old machines in the era of the PS3.

 

Also, Is it just me or does the 7800's Color Palette always look Dull. The Colors were just never quite as bright and resilient as the 8-bit.

 

Hard to say. One thing that bugged me on both machines was that a lot of games made REALLY awful use of all the colors that they both had. I was just playing "Zorro" on A8 the other day and marvelling at the awful art direction. Sadly, there are a pile of 7800 games that just make awful use of the color palette as well.

 

A8 does seem a bit brighter, for sure.

 

The hardware collision detection in the 8-bit/5200 was a big advantage for about 50% of the games out there. it was great for games that needed that fast detailed detection.

 

Agree with that as well. But when I think about 'graphics', I think visuals. Resolution. Number of colors. Number of moving objects. Scrolling. Effects.

[DracIsBack]

The 7800 Version of tempest Doesn't have 7 Music Tracks, 5 Digital sounds and 64 levels.

 

It's also not finished! Best not to call GroovyBee out like that when he's working on something ...

 

[Kjmann]

The 7800 Version of tempest Doesn't have 7 Music Tracks, 5 Digital sounds and 64 levels.

 

It's also not finished! Best not to call GroovyBee out like that when he's working on something ...

 

 

I didn't call him out. He made a comment concerning our game and I responded.

 

We are very proud of "Tempest Xtreem" and I will always come to the Defense of it when someone takes pot shots at it.

 

We Worked very hard for 2 years on that game and Crammed That 128k Cart to the absolute Limit.

[GroovyBee]

The 7800 Version of tempest Doesn't have 7 Music Tracks, 5 Digital sounds and 64 levels.

 

Correct! But those features don't require all that much RAM and their code and most of the read only data could be stored in ROM.

[GroovyBee]

We are very proud of "Tempest Xtreem" and I will always come to the Defense of it when someone takes pot shots at it.

 

I wasn't taking pot shots at the game at all. You said that it couldn't fit into the constraints of the 5200 system. I compared it against 7800 Tempest (which is the same style of game) and which might fit into those constraints given the resources it uses at the moment.

[Kjmann]

We are very proud of "Tempest Xtreem" and I will always come to the Defense of it when someone takes pot shots at it.

 

I wasn't taking pot shots at the game at all. You said that it couldn't fit into the constraints of the 5200 system. I compared it against 7800 Tempest (which is the same style of game) and which might fit into those constraints given the resources it uses at the moment.

 

Well, I would agree that the 7800 version that you are working on would probably be capable of being done on the 5200. Tempest Xtreem is Very Big though. 16k alone is taken up by the digital sounds that have to be stored in RAM Because they get used on the fly during gameplay. Not To mention the custom line drawing routines, Multiplexing routines, and combination of PMG's and Software Sprites. There is a lot of Game Going on there. Consequently the DLI's are Overloaded as it is. =)

 

 

If I took your Statement the wrong way, I apologize. =)

[DracIsBack]

 

We are very proud of "Tempest Xtreem"

 

You should be! It rules!

[atariksi]

 

I stated clearly that it depends on implementation and gave the example of Qix (see post #29). Obviously, you have better graphics on A5200 on games that use large r/w buffers. I don't have the entire library of Atari 7800 and 5200 games to compare with but I'm sure there are other games like Defender, Gyruss, etc. that benefit from GTIA and ANTIC's ability to do line replication, pixel replication, and allow quick screen updates. And various text modes as well. And my point involving collision detection was the following (post #39): "Looks don't make a game nor everything about graphics. Graphics include smooth motion, collision detection, etc. " I was addressing just looks like screen-shots address. GTIA is a graphics chip and it contains collision detection circuitry, graphics modes and color palette amongst other things. Its also obvious that collision detection relates to visuals (graphics).

 

Clearly, you're one of those people that would argue whether or not shit is brown. Welcome to my IGNORE list.

 

No, clearly you can't follow simple logic. You can have a bad game even on a superior system-- it depends on implementation. You're just getting emotional and irrational.

[atariksi]

...

The hardware collision detection in the 8-bit/5200 was a big advantage for about 50% of the games out there. it was great for games that needed that fast detailed detection.

 

Agree with that as well. But when I think about 'graphics', I think visuals. Resolution. Number of colors. Number of moving objects. Scrolling. Effects.

Now it's "I think". Wake up to reality. As I stated before, you actually see collision detection or lack thereof; i.e., it's a visual. And smooth motion relates to frame rate or jerkiness like tearing-- it's a visual but you wouldn't see it in a screen-shot.

[DracIsBack]

As I stated before, you actually see collision detection or lack thereof;

 

Yes, but no one says, "The graphics in this game are sooo amazing. That collision detection is just beautiful!!!"

 

Have you every seen a review of any game where they have a section on "graphics" and then gets into a discussion on "collision detection"? I certainly haven't!

 

I have seen reviews where collision detection sucks and they ding it under playability!

 

You can have a bad game even on a superior system

 

No kidding! Every system ever released has games that suck despite its technology and games that don't take advantage. The 7800 has tons of them. KARATEKA anyone?

 

it's a visual but you wouldn't see it in a screen-shot.

 

Where did I say anything about screen shots? There are plenty of examples of the 7800 producing more colors @ higher resolution while moving around more objects and animating the background than I've seen on the 5200. And why shouldn't it? It's a newer machine.

 

Now it's "I think". Wake up to reality. As I stated before, you actually see collision detection or lack thereof; i.e., it's a visual. And smooth motion relates to frame rate or jerkiness like tearing-- it's a visual but you wouldn't see it in a screen-shot.

 

Let's separate "smooth motion" from "playability" for a minute.

 

To me, collision detection is "play mechanics" not "visuals". No one (except maybe you) goes, "oh wow - look at that beautiful collision detection" when reviewing the graphics of a game. Any game review will consider that playability. Essential? Sure. But tied to the visual capabilities of a system? Not to most people.

 

 

I said "I think", because clearly you and I have different definitions of 'graphics'. When I think graphics, I think visuals only.

 

Smooth motion, I agree with. Animation, number of colors, number of objects on screen, frame rate, smoothness of scrolling all count as 'visual" in my eyes. Collision detection is not "graphics" to most people.

Edited July 12, 2010 by DracIsBack

[atariksi]

As I stated before, you actually see collision detection or lack thereof;

 

Yes, but no one says, "The graphics in this game are sooo amazing. That collision detection is just beautiful!!!"

 

Have you every seen a review of any game where they have a section on "graphics" and then gets into a discussion on "collision detection"? I certainly haven't!

 

I have seen reviews where collision detection sucks and they ding it under playability!

...

Collision detection gets mentioned when it's bad especially in comparison to another version on another platform. I can SEE collision detection is bad watching some videos of the game what to speak of playing them. Playability is a catagory that overlaps other catagories like graphics, audio, etc. It's not mutually exclusive from graphics.

 

You can have a bad game even on a superior system

 

No kidding! Every system ever released has games that suck despite its technology and games that don't take advantage. The 7800 has tons of them. KARATEKA anyone?

 

it's a visual but you wouldn't see it in a screen-shot.

 

Where did I say anything about screen shots? There are plenty of examples of the 7800 producing more colors @ higher resolution while moving around more objects and animating the background than I've seen on the 5200. And why shouldn't it? It's a newer machine.

Faulty logic again: newer machine does NOT equal better at everything. Sometimes people try to cut corners due to price wars/time/etc. and compromise hardware. Obviously, using less RAM and no POKEY is a compromise with the hardware. And RAM relates to graphics in this case-- how much modifiable scroll area you have or drawing space. Most implementations use what's in the system not adding hardware via cartridges. If you allow adding of hardware, you can obviously do more than what a system is capable of (for any system).

 

Now it's "I think". Wake up to reality. As I stated before, you actually see collision detection or lack thereof; i.e., it's a visual. And smooth motion relates to frame rate or jerkiness like tearing-- it's a visual but you wouldn't see it in a screen-shot.

 

Let's separate "smooth motion" from "playability" for a minute.

 

To me, collision detection is "play mechanics" not "visuals". No one (except maybe you) goes, "oh wow - look at that beautiful collision detection" when reviewing the graphics of a game. Any game review will consider that playability. Essential? Sure. But tied to the visual capabilities of a system? Not to most people.

...

I already answered that above. You are assuming playability is mutually exclusive from graphics.

 

Smooth motion, I agree with. Animation, number of colors, number of objects on screen, frame rate, smoothness of scrolling all count as 'visual" in my eyes. Collision detection is not "graphics" to most people.

 

Don't speak for other people. Regarding smooth motion, so I guess you agree that Gyruss and Donkey Kong are better off graphically with smooth motion than a flickering screen at higher resolution.

[atariksi]

Obviously, you have better graphics on A5200 on games that use large r/w buffers.

 

But you can have graphics like this on the 7800 with 1/4 the amount of RAM :-

 

 

GTIA is a graphics chip and it contains collision detection circuitry, graphics modes and color palette amongst other things. Its also obvious that collision detection relates to visuals (graphics).

 

Hardware collision detection isn't an advantage if the game diosn't use it.

 

Regarding your screen-shots, I would have to play the games to find out how good they are or at least see a video clip to get a better perspective. You can do the collision detection in software if CPU time isn't that critical. And using 4bpp modes would eat up a lot more CPU time on A7800 (DMA cycles).

[DracIsBack]

Collision detection gets mentioned when it's bad especially in comparison to another version on another platform. I can SEE collision detection is bad watching some videos of the game what to speak of playing them. Playability is a catagory that overlaps other catagories like graphics, audio, etc. It's not mutually exclusive from graphics.

 

Well, until I met you, I've never seen a review or a single person say,

 

"the graphics in this game are so beautiful! Look at that collision detection!"

 

 

Faulty logic again: newer machine does NOT equal better at everything.

 

where exactly did I say that? You're making assumptions!

 

The 2600 has a larger palette than the NES. But as a rule, which produces better graphics overall?

 

 

I already answered that above. You are assuming playability is mutually exclusive from graphics.

 

Obviously we have different definitions of graphics, which I've already said.

 

 

 

so I guess you agree that Gyruss and Donkey Kong are better off graphically with smooth motion than a flickering screen at higher resolution.

 

Bad example for the 7800, which is what you were saying the 5200 has better graphics than.

 

Regarding your screen-shots, I would have to play the games to find out how good they are or at least see a video clip to get a better perspective.

 

I would have thought you'd do that first before arguing about how the 5200 has better graphics than the 7800 ... and perhaps come up with a report on how the 5200 would deliver a superior version that not only replicates the game 100% and improves upon it in a number of ways!

 

 

But this thread goes on and on. We aren't going to agree on what constitutes "graphics", so therefore I'll concede to quiet you down ... the Atari 5200 has better graphics than the Atari 7800.

Edited July 12, 2010 by DracIsBack

[+Allan]

You guys seem pretty knowledgable about Atari game systems/computers. Instead of spending THOUSANDS of hours arguing over what system is better, why don't you try applying that knowledge. Why not try creating something, whether it's programming a game, working with a programmer to create graphics/music for game, or maybe doing something with a modern language that is classic computer/game system related. There are so many projects that could be done that are classic computer/game system related. For those with electronics skills you could be creating different types of hardware. Even creating new types of webpages geared towards classic computer/games systems would be great or just contributing towards pre-existing ones like Atarimania.com or atariarchives.org. It seems such a waste of time and knowledge when people just argue over things when they could be spending that time creating something.

 

Just a thought.

 

Allan

[GroovyBee]

Instead of spending THOUSANDS of hours arguing over what system is better, why don't you try applying that knowledge.

 

I already am .

[GroovyBee]

Regarding your screen-shots, I would have to play the games to find out how good they are or at least see a video clip to get a better perspective. You can do the collision detection in software if CPU time isn't that critical. And using 4bpp modes would eat up a lot more CPU time on A7800 (DMA cycles).

 

Feel free to try the games in emulation or on a CC2. Binaries for most of my games are available.

[+Allan]

Instead of spending THOUSANDS of hours arguing over what system is better, why don't you try applying that knowledge.

 

I already am .

That was OBVIOUSLY not directed at you!

 

Allan

[DracIsBack]

It seems such a waste of time and knowledge when people just argue over things when they could be spending that time creating something.

 

You know, you are completely right!

[Cebus Capucinis]

Instead of spending THOUSANDS of hours arguing over what system is better, why don't you try applying that knowledge.

 

I already am .

 

Apply it faster. We want more games!

[GroovyBee]

Apply it faster. We want more games!

Soon.... .