Intellivision - Help me stop hating it so much!

[+thegoldenband]

Yeah, I think everyone owes it to themselves to play a few good sessions of AD&D Cloudy Mountain, on real hardware, before giving up on the Intellivision. It's quite a terrific game, and may well be the system's most "perfect" title.

 

BTW, I can't imagine that Atari used external DB-9 connectors on the VCS to facilitate third-party controller replacements. I'm guessing that it was probably just an artifact of their decision to go with a multi-controller lineup and thus, as a bonus, the controllers were easy to change out if one broke. Remember, too, that the Fairchild Channel F, Odyssey^2, and Emerson Arcadia 2001 all had hardwired controllers when they were first released -- and then there was the Studio II with its built-in controllers!

Edited September 7, 2010 by thegoldenband

[+save2600]

I love the INTV. The sounds of most games are worth the price of admission right off the bat. I literally grew up playing it, so the controllers don't seem all that funky to me - but I can see where some would be like WTF! lol

 

There's major charm to be observed in most of the common to rare games made for it. The gameplay isn't exactly about speed or stellar hand-eye coordination like you'd expect from a joy-twitch type game, but it does have its own feel that you have to either get used to or not. Mattel were pretty damn bold releasing such a system with those controllers - but for the most part, people back then just dealt and didn't complain (as much). You learned how to deal back then. The system wasn't cheap, nor were its games. Value systems were different back then too. People stuck to something longer - didn't give up as quickly on things as they do today. I dunno. I can't help but think a lot of hatred for INTV often times is generational. Like/love it for what it is or not. It's NOT Atari - that's for sure. And that's a great thing - in its own right. There's certainly enough redundancy with Atari stuff to go around, so to me - INTV is a nice, warm change that I welcome for a different type of gaming experience. No other way to put it than that I guess.

 

INTV also was the very first console to introduce more than just a twitch type gaming experience. I mean, a "real-time" thought provoking, type game with Utopia and Sea Battle to name a couple. Utopia especially. Wow. What a great concept to introduce to people so early on. Especially young people. Sure, some of the classic board games arguably might compare - such as Chess, but really... contextually, Utopia put you in "god like" charge of almost all that encompasses us today. Bravo to Mattel for having the guts to release and market some of these more computer like gems.

Edited September 7, 2010 by save2600

[jaybird3rd]

Atari got a ton of 3rd party support for the VCS which came out in 1977. So Mattel could not see it coming in 1978?

No, they couldn't. The whole idea of third-party support, both in hardware and in software, didn't evolve until after both the 2600 and the Intellivision were already on the market. Remember that, in the early years of video game consoles, most controllers were either built in to the console control panel (like the early Pong units) or were hardwired into the console (like the Channel F), so at the time, the use of hardwired controllers in the Intellivision wasn't unusual at all.

 

The 2600 was given removable cartridges mainly so it could play both Tank and Pong, and since both of those games required different controllers, the controllers were made removable as well. Neither decision was made to "attract third-party support," because at the time, there wasn't any such thing; there weren't even any third-party software publishers until 1980 (Activision). The 2600's ability to be expanded with cartridges and controllers from all kinds of different companies was an accident. The Intellivision took an all-in-one approach with the hand controllers, so making them removable probably wasn't deemed necessary.

 

It's perfectly true that the Intellivision could have had third-party controllers if Mattel had made them removable, but it's ahistorical to say that Mattel was wrong not to have known that at the time. I'm simply trying to look at these decisions in the proper context, the way a historian would, instead of imposing a more modern point of view.

[accousticguitar]

Two words: Shark! Shark!

[SRGilbert]

At the moment, I have 17 different systems spanning from the 2600 up to the Xbox, all set up and ready to play. Out of those 17 systems, the INTV did NOT make the cut, and that's considering the Odyssey2, TG16, and a Jaguar did. And I do own an Intellivision and a number of games, but it's the only one that sits in a box.

 

Honestly, I think it's personal. Even back in the day, when we had a 2600, my cousins got an INTV and I felt downright sorry for them. It didn't help that the whole family were sports and card game fans, so all of the games they had were of those types. If I saw some of the shooters or adventure games, maybe it would have made a difference. As it was, I had no interest in playing it at all when we went over there.

 

I do have honest pet peeves about the system though. Like many, I'm not crazy about the controllers, but then again, I'm not a fan of that "vertical" style with side fire buttons that was all the rage at the time, couple that with the requisite short and coiled cords. I also hate that the cart port is on the side of the console, making it require much more horizonal space that necessary, and I imagine that voice module would be ridiculous.

 

Don't like the carts either: tiny, only an easy to lose end label and just ugly.

 

Things they did get right? I like that it doesn't require a power supply, and the RF connector isn't a hard wired cord like Atari.

[jaybird3rd]

As far as the Intellivision software is concerned, it's inevitable that Intellivision games and Atari games are very different, because both consoles are different and were designed to appeal to different audiences.

 

The 2600 was intended primarily for home conversions of popular arcade games, and the initial games that were made for it reflected that. On the other hand, the Intellivision seems to have been aimed at more of an upscale market: it was much more expensive, it was advertised in mature outlets like Playboy Magazine, its woodgrain and brown plastic case didn't look like something that belonged on a spaceship, its pitchman was the urbane and erudite George Plimpton, and its games were seen as more sophisticated and more realistic ("the closest thing to the real thing"). Its initial library of games were aimed at a wider audience than kids who hung out at video arcades, so you had very detailed implementations of classic games (card games, board games, Horse Racing, etc), sports games, simulations, and other types of games that the general public was familiar with. So, in the beginning, the Atari was the "kid's console," while the Intellivision was the "thinking man's console" (hence its full name, "Intelligent Television").

 

As the video game market grew more competitive, and as it became clear that space shooters and arcade games were driving more sales, the game ideas for both consoles became more intermingled: the Intellivision gradually got more arcade-style games, while the 2600 got more detailed and sophisticated games. But in both cases, the game designs were closely tied to the capabilities of the hardware, and games that were designed for one couldn't easily be ported to the other. So, out of necessity, the two consoles maintained very different personalities, and Intellivision games certainly have a different "feel" than Atari games as a result. You'll either like them or you won't, but it's a mistake to dismiss them merely because they aren't just like what you might have played when you were a kid. I think the 2600 turned out to be the more versatile of the two platforms because its minimalist design was more flexible (again, a happy accident on Atari's part), but the Intellivision still has a lot to offer, and if you're willing to expand your horizons a bit and give it an honest chance, you may find that you'll like it.

[BydoEmpire]

Here's my best attempt: First, try Burgertime - great port. Looks great, controls great, and only uses one button. Then play Night Stalker - if it feels too slow in the beginning, just start on the hard level (press the disc). I love the Inty. I can understand people not liking the controllers, but they're not nearly as hand-cramping as, say the CV's or the 7800's. Maybe because I grew up with it, but I never had a problem with the discs. Regardless, there are some real gems on the platform.

 

If you don't like the system, though, no big deal. Not everyone has to like everything. If you've already tried a bunch of games and don't like them I don't see how anyone here is going to convince you otherwise.

 

I also hate that the cart port is on the side of the console, making it require much more horizonal space that necessary, and I imagine that voice module would be ridiculous.

Yeah, that bugs me, too. I have mine sideways in my entertainment center so the cartridge slot points outwards, which looks a little weird. Edited September 7, 2010 by BydoEmpire

[Rik]

Like what was already said, but true, there's not much that can be said or done to convince otherwise if you hate the INTV, either you like it or you don't.We are all different and can't be expected to like all consoles.Myself, i believe all systems have something to offer.I however love my INTV, great system, IMO.

Edited September 7, 2010 by Rik

[tz101]

About the sports games: Why did Mattel not put AI into them, allowing for a one-player option. If you live by yourself, or no one wants to play NFL or baseball, then you cannot play. Makes no sense, especially when Atari and Coleco were putting AI into sports games at the time.

[JayWI]

About the sports games: Why did Mattel not put AI into them, allowing for a one-player option. If you live by yourself, or no one wants to play NFL or baseball, then you cannot play. Makes no sense, especially when Atari and Coleco were putting AI into sports games at the time.

 

They did later with the Super Pro versions of Football and Basketball and World Championship Baseball. The AI in them was excellent for the time and Mattel did upgrade a few things both graphically and gameplay-wise.

 

Granted it sucked to spend $30 on a game like NFL Football and have no one to play it with most of the time and then having to spend another $20-30 for the Super Pro version where you could play by yourself.

[tz101]

The title of this thread is so laughable, it should be pinned for that alone.

[jaybird3rd]

About the sports games: Why did Mattel not put AI into them, allowing for a one-player option. If you live by yourself, or no one wants to play NFL or baseball, then you cannot play. Makes no sense, especially when Atari and Coleco were putting AI into sports games at the time.

It was probably an issue of ROM size. I could be wrong about this, but I believe most of the original Mattel sports titles were 8K. When they were revamped and expanded by INTV Corp. a few years later, larger ROMs had become more affordable, and the games could be up to 32K. That gave them the extra space they needed to implement AI, improved graphics, and all the other "goodies" that may not have been affordable in the original versions.

[Gregory DG]

Never been a big fan of the system. I've tried to like it, but there's just no truly stand out games for it. I even find Burgertime severely lacking.

 

It's cool in theory (and nostalgia/retro/whatever) but in actual practice: It's a dud.

[NBC]

The clickers or buttons in the wrong spot. that my only complaint.

[Austin]

I actually just recently picked up an Intellivision. It stayed hooked up for a few weeks while I got used to it, but then had to pack it up to make room for other systems (I don't have a whole lot of room to work with). In the short time I spent with it I found there are prerequisites that should be followed prior to playing most of its games:

 

First, read the manuals. Period. Some of these games are damn-difficult to figure out on your own without reading the booklet. This is especially true for its exclusives and its strategy games. Having overlays helps greatly, too.

 

Second, to reiterate what's been said before, try not to use the disc like a standard d-pad. Learn to rotate your finger around it smoothly and you will find it's much easier to control. In Burgertime, for instance, if you are walking left and plan to go UP a ladder, as you're walking, slightly rotate the pad to the up/left position--Your character will keep walking, but will then climb up the ladder when he gets near it. When you want to get off a ladder, do the same thing. You don't have to be nearly as exact as you do in other versions and that's a nice change, IMO.

 

While I do enjoy the system in small bursts, I admit I don't like the controllers very much. I can deal with the disc pad and having overlays and keypad buttons is nice, but I find the buttons to be some of the the worst out there. I still can't find a comfortable way to press them without getting cramped after just a short play session, and if I tilt the controller too much to get a more "comfortable" position, everything becomes disorienting.

[Almost Rice]

Head to Head games were the best games on the INTV.

 

Try Sea Battle and Shark! Shark! It is a great party game system.

[Dr Manhattan]

I've enjoyed a number of games on the Intellivision. Shark! Shark!, Astrosmash, Micro Surgeon, AD&D Cloudy Mountain & ToT, B-17 Bomber, Horse Racing, and a number of multi console games. (Some of them were superior on the Intellivision.)

 

I'll admit the controller is a mess. And sometimes George Plimpton came off as a bit of a jerk. He's the original video game troll.

[fiddlepaddle]

I like playing Happy Trails (Activision) and Loco Motion on the Intellivision; worth having just for that.

[Rik]

Most complain about the controllers.Yeah, they could be better, but they're not completely useless, for me anyway.My INTV 2 controller buttons hardly move in at all when pressed, but they do work quite well for buttons that hardly move in.The disk, well not too bad if you press precisely on direction.I don't have a controller that works %100 well in maze games yet, still looking.

[Lendorien]

I started this thread because I really do have an irrational dislike for the system, and because I was hoping to inspire some good discussion on the merits of the system. It was intended sort of as a tongue in cheek sort of post, so those who are personally offended, lighten up!

 

I agree that some of people's like for certain systems comes from nostalgia. In my case, I never owned any systems growing up. I did play some 5200 when I was young, but it was brief and though memorable, could have been the intellivision for all I knew. So my dislike for the systems comes mainly from the Intellivision Lives PS2 game and my experiments with the actual system once I bought it a couple months ago.

 

To the guy who said that if I didn't like it, I should sell it, well, it IS on a marketplace thread if you want it, though someone has asked to buy it already.

 

In any case, I'm enjoying the discussion. I'll admit that I think that when I have regular net access again, I'm going to find an emulator and test out a couple of the games mentioned here. Just to make sure my hatred isn't just based on a bunch of lousy games.

[Lord Thag]

Lendorian, most of the games you mentioned are not really the ones that have aged all that well.

 

The Intellivision is a great system. It's got some excellent, deep games that you cannot play anywhere else.

 

If you want to really check out what it's capable of, check out the follwing:

 

Thunder Castle: Awesome maze game with great music, power ups, intermission screens and all kinds of candy. It's gorgeous.

 

Hover Force: Top down 3d helicopter game with animated cutscenes

 

All the AD&D Games (Cloudy Mountain, Treasure of Tarmin and Tower of Doom). Like RPGs? All these games are amazingly good. Tower of Doom is staggeringly deep for an early console game. Think Rogue or Nethack with an action component. It's that good.

 

Imagic: Imagic has all kinds of awesome exclusives for this system. White Water is a blast, and so is Ice Trek. Lots of people love dracula, beauty and the beast and microsurgeon.

 

Dreadnaught Factor: The best shooter from the entire era. Take on screen filling Star Destroyer sized ships and whittle them down, piece by piece, trying to keep them away from your homeworld. Amazing game. Nothing else like it since.

 

That should get you started.

[JayWI]

Lendorian, most of the games you mentioned are not really the ones that have aged all that well.

 

The Intellivision is a great system. It's got some excellent, deep games that you cannot play anywhere else.

 

If you want to really check out what it's capable of, check out the follwing:

 

Thunder Castle: Awesome maze game with great music, power ups, intermission screens and all kinds of candy. It's gorgeous.

 

Hover Force: Top down 3d helicopter game with animated cutscenes

 

All the AD&D Games (Cloudy Mountain, Treasure of Tarmin and Tower of Doom). Like RPGs? All these games are amazingly good. Tower of Doom is staggeringly deep for an early console game. Think Rogue or Nethack with an action component. It's that good.

 

Imagic: Imagic has all kinds of awesome exclusives for this system. White Water is a blast, and so is Ice Trek. Lots of people love dracula, beauty and the beast and microsurgeon.

 

Dreadnaught Factor: The best shooter from the entire era. Take on screen filling Star Destroyer sized ships and whittle them down, piece by piece, trying to keep them away from your homeworld. Amazing game. Nothing else like it since.

 

That should get you started.

 

All of those are great games! You can't go wrong with an Imagic title. However most of those games will be a bit pricey to get cib. For many games it's a must to get the overlays and instructions and usually it's an all or nothing type deal.

 

I enjoy the maze games like lock 'n' chase and mousetrap. Make sure you have a first gen console for mousetrap (or any coleco game) since it won't play on a newer system. Mattel put a lockout chip in the later consoles to stop 'em from working.

 

Try a bunch of games and you may stop hating it. I always saw the intellivision as a love it or hate it type thing and with my wifes reactions to the controllers the other night ("could these suck less please?") I'm more convinced of it.

[BrianC]

I enjoy the maze games like lock 'n' chase and mousetrap. Make sure you have a first gen console for mousetrap (or any coleco game) since it won't play on a newer system. Mattel put a lockout chip in the later consoles to stop 'em from working.

 

It's only the Intellivision IIs that won't play early Coleco games. Other later models like the Intv III were designed after the first model and lack the Intellivision II's "tweaks" (I have an Intv III and I can confirm that it plays both DK and Mouse Trap). I like the Intellivision Mouse Trap, but I prefer the CV version since it lets you use the joystick and the keypad at the same time. Other Intellivision games have a work around by letting you use the second controller's keypad along with the first controller's disc, but Mouse Trap doesn't.

Edited September 10, 2010 by BrianC

[Chuck D. Head]

v

 

It's only the Intellivision IIs that won't play early Coleco games. v

 

Well, that's how my life works. I am getting an INTV lot that has a INTY 1 and an INTY 2 that only has one controller. I say to myself, I will give thae INTY 2 to my daughter for her room so she will stop hogging my 2600. Only problem is she spends 98% of her Atari time playing...wait for it....Mousetrap!!! There has to be a resistor I can pull or a trace I can cut to bypass that nonsense, right? Morgan

[GroovyBee]

There has to be a resistor I can pull or a trace I can cut to bypass that nonsense, right?

 

Nope! Its not that easy on the Inty.