Which console is better? Atari or NES?

[+Random Terrain]

Newsflash, just because you prefer one thing does not mean you automatically dislike the other. I like the NES, but guess what, brace yourselves here, I can also like the Atari despite having a preference for the NES.

Thanks for enlightening us.

 

I like some things and hate other things about games on every console I've owned. There are a lot of games that I don't like on the Atari 2600.

 

One thing I hated about some games on the NES was text, text, text, text, text, text, text and more text that you had to click through to get back to playing the actual game. It's similar to annoying cutscenes in modern games that you can't skip. I also wasn't fond of NES games that had repetitive tunes that burned a hole in your brain. I also wasn't a fan of playing through the same 10 levels over and over just to get to the part where you're having difficulty. NES games needed a continue feature.

[atarilovesyou]

I have a bit on an internal struggle regarding the lack of proper continues with some Nintendo games. Battletoads has to be my all-time fave game to love and hate at the same time. Young gamers today don't know that feeling of having limited continues, or NO continues...adjusting difficulty? What was THAT? Back in the day, we had to take what we got and like it or leave it. Most of us liked it.

 

I can't tell you how frustrating it is to get to say, say, the jet level in Battletoads. That's where I have difficulty, remembering the sequence. At least with the Turbo bikes, it's the 3rd level. But the jets is like the 8th or something. So a nice way to practice is to use save states on emulators...

 

...but then I feel like I'm cheating. Part of going through the slog to get to the part you're having difficulty with means you get very, very good at the levels that came before it. Cobra Triangle also comes to mind. Anyway, I really don't have the time like I used to get better at those levels, so unless I go emulation, I'm screwed at getting much better at that one level. And there were limited continues...that was a wrong decision. The game is tough enough as it is...give us unlimited continues, like Ninja Gaiden (another hard one, but doable). Yes, you can use a Game Genie for that, but again...the purist in me considers it cheating.

 

So, I guess we all have to decide for ourselves. I can see both sides, but it's not like I won't have free time forever...and the best part is, after about ten years I forget how to beat my games anyways, so they're all new again ...either that or I'm in early stages of Alzheimer's ...I shouldn't joke about that, but there you have it

[Andromeda Stardust]

Whoa, Atari is gaining a lead. NES was winning for quite a while. Somebody been stuffing the ballot box?

 

As far as NES games go, even some games with an "easy" mode were hard, or lacked an "easy" mode entirely. Megaman comes to mind. There were two difficulty settings, "Normal" and "Hard". "Normal" setting is a retarded level of difficult. Never tried "Hard" mode as I eventually got fed up and sold MM 1, 2, and 3 back to the store for peanuts. Even with Game Genie codes for infinite health/lives, the game was frustrating as hell due to the fact that in the later stages, "spikes of instant death" were everywhere, and the weapons, many of which were absolutely required to pass the Wiley stages, did not replenish even after you died, wtf?

 

That said, there are still tons of enjoyable NES games out there, many of which do not get truly difficult until the latter stages.

 

Then there's also an awesome variety of puzzlers, which anyone from novice to expert can play, and you keep slogging it out as the game progresses in difficulty until you inevitably can't keep up and the game ends. It's very similar in concept to the arcadey style gameplay of many Atari ports, where you simply play the same stages again and again while the difficulty ramps up, until you run out of lives or get bored. Sure you've seen everything there is to see once you finish the first loop, but the enemies get smarter/faster with each loop until things get real frantic. So it never really ends...

[+wood_jl]

The results are going to be skewed as these are after all Atari centric forums.

 

The results are more skewed by the apples-to-oranges comparison, than the fact that this is an Atari-centric forum. Which is "better" - Model T Ford, or 2014 Ford Mustang? The comparison is equally irrelevant on a Model-T forum as it is a Mustang Forum. Better how?

 

The appropriate question should have been "IN A HYPOTHETICAL UNIVERSE WHERE YOU WERE **FORCED** TO CHOOSE ONE, WHICH WOULD YOU CHOOSE: ATARI 2600 OR NES?"

That does not beg a definition of "better," a highly-subjective term that can not be universally-applied, but can be argued to eternity without resolution. "Which is better?" questions attempt to apply the subjective term universally, while "Which would you choose?" questions do not.

[BydoEmpire]

On forums, "better" always means "favorite." Just automatically do the translation in your head and save yourself some grief.

 

We're not only talking about a leap in console generations but a completely different paradigm in games. Each 2600 game was meant to be played for a lifetime like non-video game forms of entertainment (chess, baseball, etc..).

Yeah that's my reasoning for choosing Atari as well. The style of most of the games was different, and it shows in that 30 years later I'm playing a lot more Atari than NES (or other modern games). I loved the NES back in the day, and I still have one and play it occasionally, but I have no desire to ever revisit a platformer I've already completed. Not that there weren't great arcade-style games on the NES as well, of course, but for me the mindset of the creators of 2600 games was just different. Edited May 22, 2014 by BydoEmpire

[Nebulon]

It was just a joke bloke.

 

I don't think this thread is remotely serious. No system is better than another. The whole thing is subjective... Just a bit of fun.

Totally. Hence my link to the video about the Shover Robot and the Pusher Robot. Both do the same thing and are arguing over it.

 

One thing's for sure, the two machines are unique and have a distinctly different 'feel' from one-another. So there's no way one could ever replace the other.

 

The only real solution is to have them sitting side-by-side.

[Andromeda Stardust]

Maybe a push robot and a pull robot would be a fairer comparison? Both accomplish the same task using vastly different methods. I would consider the Atari and NES vastly different. It's not just two sides to the same horse. Also peeps don't argue over semantics. I tend to be wordy sometimes.

 

Here's a better option. You are on a deserted island. There is a life boat full of NES and a life boat full of Atari. You have to choose to sink one life boat. The contents of the other will keep you entertained for years until help arrives. Should you choose niether within the alotted time, both boats will sink and you're forced to sit and do nothing forever.

[Rhomaios]

Maybe a push robot and a pull robot would be a fairer comparison? Both accomplish the same task using vastly different methods. I would consider the Atari and NES vastly different. It's not just two sides to the same horse. Also peeps don't argue over semantics. I tend to be wordy sometimes.

 

Here's a better option. You are on a deserted island. There is a life boat full of NES and a life boat full of Atari. You have to choose to sink one life boat. The contents of the other will keep you entertained for years until help arrives. Should you choose niether within the alotted time, both boats will sink and you're forced to sit and do nothing forever.

 

Are we talking about complete libraries here? Then NES, hands down, no contest. Not only are there lengthy games, narrative games, games you can beat, but there are also so many awesome endless arcade games, too. Best of both worlds. Add the Famicom library and there's barely a reason to leave that island.

[Nebulon]

Donkey Kong Jr. on the NES is pretty much arcade-perfect.

 

Actually, a deserted island, a NES, a dev-kit, and an unlimited supply of electricity would be a workable scenario for me.

[atarilovesyou]

Yeah, if we're talking libraries, NES comes out on top. But you can't play Kaboom! on an NES

[Nebulon]

Yeah, if we're talking libraries, NES comes out on top. But you can't play Kaboom! on an NES

Well said.

 

I went back and played a number of Atari 2600 greats, and was reminded of how unique an experience it is playing games on that machine.

 

The two consoles really do have a very different feel to them.

[high voltage]

Maybe a push robot and a pull robot would be a fairer comparison? Both accomplish the same task using vastly different methods. I would consider the Atari and NES vastly different. It's not just two sides to the same horse. Also peeps don't argue over semantics. I tend to be wordy sometimes.

 

Here's a better option. You are on a deserted island. There is a life boat full of NES and a life boat full of Atari. You have to choose to sink one life boat. The contents of the other will keep you entertained for years until help arrives. Should you choose niether within the alotted time, both boats will sink and you're forced to sit and do nothing forever.

 

No question, Atari has Survival Island

[malducci]

3rd Generation. 4th is SNES territory. See the Wikipedia article.

 

Add this minor list of corrections:

 

Coleco, Vectrex, and 5200 are not 3rd, they're 2.5

 

Just like TurboGrafx is 3.5 being hybrid 8-bit.

 

And NeoGeo, 3DO, CDi, Jag, are 4.5

 

Throw Sega's 32X add-on in the 4.5 bin as well.

 

DreamCast is 5.5

 

While we're at it, go ahead and declare the Wii 6.5 instead of 7, and Wii-U 7.5 instead of 8.

 

Nintendo still rocks though.

 

Ah, forget the numbers already. NES is still 3rd gen. VCS is 2nd. Almighty PONG is 1st.

 

FYI, higher number doesn't necessarily mean better. Those who believe so wouldn't have signed up at a site called AtariAge!

That's the most retarted division of generations I've ever seen. Why even have generations, if you're gonna go that far???

Might as well go with: NES is 3.5, the master system is 3.75 and the TG16 is 3.91. The Genesis is 4, but the SNES is 4.3-ish. NeoGeo is 4.5, but the 3DO, Jag, 32x are 4.63. The CDi isn't even 4th gen. It's not even a gaming console; it's an interactive multimedia device.

 

I voted for NES. The VCS has its charm, but the games are just too simplistic for my tastes. I played it BITD, but I had more fun going outside and getting into trouble. The NES was the first real gaming console that could keep my indoors, all day long. That thing was addictive.

[Andromeda Stardust]

Yes, break down the generational barriers! Create a decimal system...

[Nebulon]

Yes, break down the generational barriers! Create a decimal system...

I think maybe a really detailed timeline of consoles and computers would help things a lot. Something down to the year and month of first release of each system (for the NES, I guess that'd be both 1983 and 1985). The generation thing just isn't working.

 

If someone's really into making timelines, perhaps one for consoles and one for computers. I've seen quite a few out there, but none are complete that I know of (and not many mention months).

[DaytonaUSA]

Grew up with the NES, so in a way I'll always love it, but my vote goes to the Sega Master System. From console design, to the games themselves, I just think it's superior. Granted, not nearly as many titles to choose from, but games like Choplifter alone are worth the price of admission.

[Andromeda Stardust]

@Nebulon Another problem with the timeline idea is that the game systems often were launched at different months and even years in different regions. Famicom was released in Japan in 1983. NES was introduced to test markets in the United States in late 1995, and was gradually introduced across various regions of the country throughout 1986. Even Nintendo themselves aren't quite positive what the exact release date of Super Mario Brothers/NES. It's important for celebrating the plumber's birthday, although he existed in various forms beforehand in the Arcades. Very few retro systems had global launches like they do today. Preorders and Imports were unheard of; you just searched around or waited until a store had it instock.

[high voltage]

Most important is the original timeline as verified in magazines from that era.

1st gen Pong

2nd gen O2, Intellivision, VCS, Fairchild

3rd gen gen Coleco, 5200, Vectrex

 

After that, the Famicom 1983 NES 1986 fiasco, not important, put it in any gen you want, who cares

[AtariLeaf]

I also wasn't a fan of playing through the same 10 levels over and over just to get to the part where you're having difficulty. NES games needed a continue feature.

 

Goddamn right! Nail, meet head.

[Andromeda Stardust]

NES was introduced to test markets in the United States in late 1995 1985, and was gradually introduced across various regions of the country throughout 1986.

Stupid typos.

[+Ransom]

Parkay.

[high voltage]

Nice to know that the NES guys think a system from the mid 70s can compete with a system from the mid 80s. Just goes to show the power of ATARI.

[high voltage]

[CatPix]

@Nebulon Another problem with the timeline idea is that the game systems often were launched at different months and even years in different regions. Famicom was released in Japan in 1983. NES was introduced to test markets in the United States in late 1985, and was gradually introduced across various regions of the country throughout 1986.

And you can add that for Europe, dates varies even more wildly, with some countries not receiving an offcial NES release before 1990.

Also, there is still that "perception" thing. Best sales years for the NES in Europe spawn between 1990 and 1992!

[pablum]

NES for me.

 

While my first console was an Atari 2600 with the fake wood front and I do love the system, I prefer the richer gaming experiences the NES provides.

 

They're really so different that I don't compare them. Just in this thread.

 

Most of what I liked on the 2600 were arcade ports. These days I have classic compilations or MAME to give me near-arcade equivalent experiences. The same goes for much of my NES collection, but there are more unique games that I enjoyed on my NES than the 2600.