Lost Dragon Posted October 1, 2014 Share Posted October 1, 2014 Getting back on topic :-) Articles from the era concerning the UK Press and their reaction to the XE system are (i find) very intersting as you can see how the media are viewing decisions Atari made and coming across as 'Are they mad?...you cannot move for people off-loading 8 Bit Atari's (800XL's in particular) in the Free Ads as there simply are'nt the games avaiable for the systems, unlike the C64/Speccy and CPC, what are Atari UK thinking? etc etc) and you get a (brief) quote/insight from a big UK software house (Ocean) into how they viewed Atari etc. Factor that in with comments raised in community interviews (RVG interviews Andrew Hewson) and personal interviews (certain person i've interviewed for ST Gamer Vol.2) and you stteadily build a snapshot on how the UK publishers viewed the A8 micro range, be it in console or pure computer form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Dragon Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 The 'message' i always took away from the UK press coverage of the XE system (such as it was) during it's era was this:Basically you were paying for 'history'.Fantastic little system if you were after a simple solution to play a wide range of A8 classics, just don't expect to see it supported anywhere like the NES or MS, let alone the C64 as unless it sold in huge numbers, UK publishers simply were'nt going to support it (and with out the support, it was unlikely to sell well...so Catch-22 again) and also that you simply did'nt need to buy a new console to play said games as there were simply so many 2nd hand 800XL's etc up for grabs in the Free Ads/Classified sections etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Westphal Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 Atari should have offered a 64k solution early on, and told developers to exploit the system resources, to compete with the c64. They should have positioned key developers like sculptured software to be main producers. A socketed 130k xegs with an expansion port and longer keyboard cable would have been nice, and maybe change the color of the " masculene challenged " buttons. ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Dragon Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 I would have loved to have read the thoughts of a few more coders/publishers from the 'Big Names' regarding their thoughts on the Atari hardware and how Atari UK 'handled it' in terms of pricing, marketing and support, from the UK press at the time (a few more mag scans to go up yet), just been very lucky to be able to put questions to likes of Andrew Hewson etc thanks to RVG Community interviews, plus various coders i've interviewed for ST Gamer etc, but i still have a very incomplete picture. Anything i find will of course be shared with the community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Dragon Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 Ok, forwarded some very early ZZap 64 scans to High Voltage to put up here, you get a brief look at the C64 Vs A8 debate from likes of:David Tomkins (CBM Retail Project Manager), Tim Chaney (US Gold), Ian Stewart (Gremlin Graphics), Tony Crowther and Andy walker (Tasket).It's far from the idea look into what folks thought at the time, but crumbs are better than nothing i guess and we can add it to the comments from various interviews and we might just start to get a clearer view of the standing of the Atari 8 Bit range in the UK from that era. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Westphal Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 I would be really interested in reading some of these articles/interviews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Dragon Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 :-) The Zzap 64 ones were forwarded to High Voltage today, so should be up soon.Talking of interviews, i think i've secured my best yet tonight!!! and that's whilst Pete Baron's finds a new home and sits with another 2 interviews put together this week alone. If you like interviews...look out for a few posts from myself/High Voltage..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwilove Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 (edited) Hindsight... It seems like the XEGS was released trying to copy Nintendo's success with it's NES games console system - but simply re-releasing top hits as carts - was never going to be enough to guarantee sales success of the the XEGS. There was not the money/drive put into recruiting new titles/games for the XEGS. Had I known Atari UK was interested in new breathtaking titles for it's games system - I would have sent them a demo version of Hawkquest - that was nearing it's completion in 1989 ... and I'm forever sorry that I didn't even consider them, as a likely publisher. Of course, the hardware was seriously outdated (at the time of the XEGS release) - though it's really of late - when GTIABlast! was starting it's development (which is now into it's 2nd year) was the Atari 1978/1979 hardware being pushed to it's very limits? You have to spend money to make money - and not rely upon past achievements to make it for you miraculously. You'd think Jack Tramiel should have known better - after all, when the C-64 was released - it was designed to be rather ruthless in it's quest for world domination - without decent specs it could not be a contender - but it was it's cheaper price - that made it outsell BBC, Spectrum, etc and quickly sped past the Atari 400/800/etc line... The 7800 was simply not the technical upgrade over the 5200 - that it was hoped it would be. It was simply not good enough - and should have been better... Harvey. Edited October 2, 2014 by kiwilove 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Dragon Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 @Paul Westphal :Ok, as well as the ZZap 64 pages (people talking of A8 Vs C64) i've just forwarded some pages from another mag to High Voltage you might find of interest.Support for (or lack of..) the XE discussed within them, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynxpro Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 Hindsight... It seems like the XEGS was released trying to copy Nintendo's success with it's NES games console system - but simply re-releasing top hits as carts - was never going to be enough to guarantee sales success of the the XEGS. There was not the money/drive put into recruiting new titles/games for the XEGS. Had I known Atari UK was interested in new breathtaking titles for it's games system - I would have sent them a demo version of Hawkquest - that was nearing it's completion in 1989 ... and I'm forever sorry that I didn't even consider them, as a likely publisher. Of course, the hardware was seriously outdated (at the time of the XEGS release) - though it's really of late - when GTIABlast! was starting it's development (which is now into it's 2nd year) was the Atari 1978/1979 hardware being pushed to it's very limits? You have to spend money to make money - and not rely upon past achievements to make it for you miraculously. You'd think Jack Tramiel should have known better - after all, when the C-64 was released - it was designed to be rather ruthless in it's quest for world domination - without decent specs it could not be a contender - but it was it's cheaper price - that made it outsell BBC, Spectrum, etc and quickly sped past the Atari 400/800/etc line... The 7800 was simply not the technical upgrade over the 5200 - that it was hoped it would be. It was simply not good enough - and should have been better... Harvey. The 7800 was graphically more powerful than the 5200/A8 and was backwards compatible with the 2600 which was its major reason for being and especially in 1984 when it should've been released nationally/internationally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwilove Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 (edited) The 7800 was graphically more powerful than the 5200/A8 and was backwards compatible with the 2600 which was its major reason for being and especially in 1984 when it should've been released nationally/internationally. It does seem like the 7800 was only more powerful in terms of sprite hardware only - over the A8 hardware. Not so in terms of background/playfield graphics - as seen in the various 7800 games. Maybe it'll take some homebrew developers who can really show what the 7800 can do and understand it's limits ... Not that there is anyone who wants to take on that challenge - just yet. Even if the 7800 was released in 1984 - I would be very doubtful if it would have been all that successful -it's top titles - say - Xevious, Galaga, Joust and Pole Position would not have been enough to keep it alive for some years... Harvey Edited October 3, 2014 by kiwilove Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Dragon Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 Paul Westphal pretty much nails how i feel on in his post above, Atari really should have pushed the 64K solution a lot earlier and a lot harder.From my limited understanding things like 'turbo loading' were technically impossible on the A8, compared to the C64 and the A8 lacks the same number of 'sprites' (or PMG's in A8 case) to compete with C64 on a level playing field, but IF Atari had worked closer with key software houses, sorted out the A8 pricing and marketing, i do feel the A8 range could of been a real contender. When the 2-page adverts in mags like ACE appeared advertising Old Classics like Fight Night, Blue Max, Rescue On Fract.etc i knew the game was up for Atari with the A8.Hell, i'd moved on years before to the C64 as that was simply where the games were and Atari falling back on the same titles i'd played years ago, to sell the XE range now, simply smacked of desperation. As a gamer i knew it was old tech, repackaged, just as i did when CBM tried to flog the C64GS and C64 games on cart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kogden Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 Ummm.... turbo loading? Atari floppy drives were faster than C64 floppy drives, especially with a Happy board added. Atari's OS was also much more advanced. The system is also easier to code for and more flexible. Compared to the C64, the Atari was faster, easier to code for and had a more advanced and flexible architecture. SIO and PBI were also better expansion buses than offered on the C64. The A8 WAS a real contender. The XEGS was an abortion, the ST had already been out for a couple years or so. The only thing the C64 had going for it was the fact that it was cheap and had better sprites. And arguably could display more colors at once in hi-rez modes without resorting to software-defined video modes. SID didn't suck either. As a gamer, if you liked games that made heavy use of sprites, the C64 was a good game machine. As a COMPUTER USER, the A8 was clearly a better machine. What killed the Atari 8-bit as a platform was the race to the bottom with Tramiel and Commodore. I actually know absolutely no one that bought a 7800 or XEGS. We moved to the ST by then. I knew a couple kids with 5200s. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashjazzcat Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 I remember my friend's mother ordered him an XEGS from the catalogue for Christmas around 1987 or so. First one turned up and didn't work. Returned that, and the replacement died. His dad eventually bought him a 65XE at Curry's. Now I have two of the things: they both work, but aside from the acres of space inside the case, I struggle to see the advantages. No PBI/ECI, huge footprint with the keyboard attached (quite as large as my vastly superior 1200XL), horrendous keyboard which cannot be easily replaced with a decent sprung Mitsumi mechanism because of the way the Help key is attached, no Y/C video output by default (video quality may be OK, but so what if you have to actually add a chroma jack to get the best signal). It seems to me to be the same 1979 hardware, only with bits missing and a worse keyboard (also found in some 65/130/800XE machines). Yeah - it's nostalgic having a couple and the light gun's cool, but back in 1987 I'd have gone for the 65/130XE (and did). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kogden Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 Yeah - it's nostalgic having a couple and the light gun's cool, but back in 1987 I'd have gone for the 65/130XE (and did). I actually wanted an XEGS but my dad got me a 130XE instead. I was pleasantly surprised. As for the crappy keyboard on the XEGS, I think the XETouch kit from Best works with those too. My current 130XE doesn't have the nice Mitsumi keyboard so I bought one of those kits. It is like night and day. Completely changes the feel of the keyboard. Feels better than an XL keyboard now. Hell, feels better than my full-travel new Lenovo PC keyboard. Not kidding. Swapping out the mushy rubber cups for the ones in the kit makes that much of a difference. The replacement cups are stiffer and past a certain amount of pressure collapse quickly to give a natural keypress feel with no "mushiness". Best $15 I ever spent on the 130XE. Went from the most awful keyboard on the planet (next to ZX81 anyway) to one of the best I own. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Stephen Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 I actually wanted an XEGS but my dad got me a 130XE instead. I was pleasantly surprised. As for the crappy keyboard on the XEGS, I think the XETouch kit from Best works with those too. My current 130XE doesn't have the nice Mitsumi keyboard so I bought one of those kits. It is like night and day. Completely changes the feel of the keyboard. Feels better than an XL keyboard now. Hell, feels better than my full-travel new Lenovo PC keyboard. Not kidding. Swapping out the mushy rubber cups for the ones in the kit makes that much of a difference. The replacement cups are stiffer and past a certain amount of pressure collapse quickly to give a natural keypress feel with no "mushiness". Best $15 I ever spent on the 130XE. Went from the most awful keyboard on the planet (next to ZX81 anyway) to one of the best I own. Can't agree more about those keycap upgrades. I enjoy typing on my 130XEs more than my 1200XL or 800 now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro Rogue Posted October 4, 2014 Share Posted October 4, 2014 Even if the 7800 was released in 1984 - I would be very doubtful if it would have been all that successful -it's top titles - say - Xevious, Galaga, Joust and Pole Position would not have been enough to keep it alive for some years... Harvey Why would you think those launch titles (which is all they were) would have been the sole games for some years? That doesn't make a lot of sense. It would have gone through the normal library expansion, including original titles and Atari Inc.'s own continuing arcade games (which would be all the games during the mid through late 80s released instead under Atari Games). Just like any console. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Dragon Posted October 4, 2014 Share Posted October 4, 2014 @kogden: Talking from a UK perspective.Disk Drives were way out of our price range, so we had A8 Tape games and the horrendous loading times that came with them.15-20 mins+ in some cases and to get Boot error near the end was a bloody nightmare. C64 tape loading thanks to Turbo-Loading was by comparison, a lot less bother and yet another 'plus point' put forward by C64 fanboys in our school yards at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Loguidice Posted October 4, 2014 Share Posted October 4, 2014 @kogden: Talking from a UK perspective.Disk Drives were way out of our price range, so we had A8 Tape games and the horrendous loading times that came with them.15-20 mins+ in some cases and to get Boot error near the end was a bloody nightmare. C64 tape loading thanks to Turbo-Loading was by comparison, a lot less bother and yet another 'plus point' put forward by C64 fanboys in our school yards at the time. That's something that's difficult for us in the US to appreciate, simply because we were well off tapes by the mid-80s. That's near the top of the list of differences between the two territories besides the occasional difference in popular computers of the time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+CharlieChaplin Posted October 4, 2014 Share Posted October 4, 2014 Well, but in Europe we had tape speeders too. Some worked via software and reached up to 2x speed, but most worked via hardware and reached up to 10x original tape speed (e.g. Turbo 6000 in GDR / german democratic republic). Even the UK had one or more tape-speeders for the A8, the Rambit turbo-tape comes to mind. In eastern europe tape and tape-speeders were the de-facto standard in the late 80s and early 90s for the A8... The XEGS simply came too late and with lots of old titles on cart. (its nice nowadays having those titles on cart. as a collector, but it wasn`t so nice in 1987/1988 when Atari competed with Nintendo and Sega)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Dragon Posted October 4, 2014 Share Posted October 4, 2014 Lot of the commercial releases i had on A8 had horrendously long loading times:Red Max, Ace Of Aces, Gauntlet etc etc.Going the C64 with Turbo Loaders, min-games like Inva-load, Delta with it's music mixer whilst game loaded, Dragon's Lair etc which loaded in next level as you played, none of which i ever saw on any A8 game in UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kogden Posted October 5, 2014 Share Posted October 5, 2014 (edited) @kogden: Talking from a UK perspective.Disk Drives were way out of our price range, so we had A8 Tape games and the horrendous loading times that came with them.15-20 mins+ in some cases and to get Boot error near the end was a bloody nightmare. C64 tape loading thanks to Turbo-Loading was by comparison, a lot less bother and yet another 'plus point' put forward by C64 fanboys in our school yards at the time. I ended up getting my own machine in pretty late in the game when my dad got tired of me playing with his ST all the time so he bought me a 130XE and a 1010 around 88/89. The 1010 ended up being a bit flaky and even finding casette titles anymore at that point was pretty laughable. He dug up a Happy 1050 somewhere and an Amdek Color I in really nice shape a couple months or so later and I used that machine to death for years. My brief experience with cassettes was pretty infuriating. I was very spoiled apparently. Edited October 5, 2014 by kogden 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zetastrike Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 (edited) Why were disks and carts so out of reach for Europeans in the 80s? Did they retail for twice what they did here? I'm certain a floppy drive didn't go for nothing in the US. From what I've read, the disks themselves didn't cost much more than a tape ($5 vs $10-15?). I've never been able to wrap my head around why no one wanted to pay for better formats. Between the ~$500 you spent on a C64, joysticks, monitor, what difference does it make to fork over the cash for a disk drive? Edited October 7, 2014 by zetastrike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Between the ~$500 you spent on a C64, joysticks, monitor, what difference does it make to fork over the cash for a disk drive? Monitors weren't the norm either at least in the UK (it was more common to have disk-based machines in most of Europe) in part because we were in recession and buying just the computer and a tape deck was pretty much redlining what the average family could afford. Cartridges cost over double what the full priced tape-based games did and anything up to fourteen or fifteen times what budget houses like Mastertronic or Firebird were charging per game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+MrFish Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Monitors weren't the norm either at least in the UK... I don't think they were the norm in the U.S. either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.