Jump to content
IGNORED

How come a lot getting into retro games skip Atari?


totallyterrificpants

Recommended Posts

If they knew the insides of the 2600, that it all relies on 128 bytes of RAM, counting bits rather than bytes, etc... some of them would have changed their minds. But most of the newcomers do not know that and they simply judge by the graphics and gameplay. What I have always likes about Atari 2600 was the minimalism and simplicity. And when I later discovered what the hardware is about I started to like it even more. I do not say it has no bugs, but compared to more advanced systems its design is more or less clean and it serves well and gives good programmers simple but rather flexible platform to develop interesting assembly language based games that always sync to display... You know, you have systems like Sega Genesis that are far less balanced and far more bugged than 2600... in case of Genesis you get 2 scrolling planes but only 320 pixels of sprites on a scanline. That is totally unbalanced. Not to mention all those bugs in VDP concerning colors, scroll registers etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NES games are generally more accessible than Atari games. Many of them are like stories, with beginnings, middles, and ends. Some of the better ones have a sense of progression, in which you get stronger and stronger while you explore the world over many play sessions. The Legend of Zelda could have been done on an expanded Atari cartridge, but since it wasn't, NES games seem deeper, more cartoonlike. Atari games are mostly single-screen, high score-chasing mini games in comparison.

 

I grew up with Atari style games (both at home and in the arcade), and it's easy to understand how that style of play isn't for everyone.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't wait till we start building chips that use other particles such as Orbitons, Spinons, Leptons, Quarks, Holons, Bosons.. And many many others. Not forgetting more exotic ones like the Tau Antineutrino. Such technology would make make the fastest computers look like gassy out-of-repair steam engines and buggy prototype mechanical difference engines.

 

All this reminds me of a short story I wrote about a fictional Spingrav computational engine. Where cryptography and radio communications built around such technology are essential navigational equipment for flying in Sidespace.

 

I have no doubt such things will eventually happen Maybe they already have, just not here on Earth. Who's to say for certain?

Get me a gam cart made from pure Higgs Bosons, then we can talk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yeah, I can't do anything too well with the 2600 stick. I have an alternate one that I use that is basically the same size, but easier to move. D-pads just rule for me haha. Love 'em.

 

I love the 2600, I can look past most of its technical shortcomings and know how amazing it still must have been at the time. I just can see exactly why a lot of people would have no interest in a screen with a few colors, on it that features stickmen like pixels and often poor sound 40 years later with thousands of other games that could be played instead. In the ultimate sign of fairness to even the fanboys, no one wants to play the original Mario Bros. on NES either.

No, the guys in the know play this version:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the input in this topic. Very informative and I'm glad I'm talking mostly to people who grew up in that generation. By the time I was born, Sonic The Hedgehog was about 8 months away from launching on Genesis :P

 

Whereas when I was born Pong consoles were still a half decade away. :)

 

Here's a compare and contrast for you. I am the exact reverse of the people you are talking about...a guy frozen in console amber.

 

I went straight from the VCS to computers and never got into any other console. In the early 90s when all the guys around me were playing NES and whatever else in the college dorms I brought in my dinosaur of an Atari. Genesis I had no significant exposure to. I just watched Sonic on Youtube (I was that unfamiliar with it) to get an appreciation for what was done on Zippy. I don't think I quite get it :). Maybe it's because these interminable platformers where you run around and collect stuff don't appeal to me. I suppose I feel toward them the way some younger folks feel toward space shooters.

 

Controllers are definitely an issue in my case. I don't really want to play on a d-pad. I've played many games on computer keyboards but to me the optimum controller was, is, and ever will be a joystick. I kept using those well after we made the transition to the C64. And that was of course what we had at the arcades--which was the gold standard of gaming in those days.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mario Bros, an Atari 2600 console original, well there you go, without Atari no Mario, or even Mario startet on Atari

Except Mario Bros was released as a second wave famicom launch title in the fall of 1983. The same year the VCS version came out. So, no. you are still wrong.

 

 

Anyway. Personally, I don't think anybody really dumps on the VCS from the Nintendo side, considering it was on the Coleco and Atari consoles that many Nintendo properties became breakout hits. Hell Nintendolife did a few articles a couple years back that were dedicated to the history of the 2600 and the colecovision. What Nintendo fans do look down upon the earlier pre-crash companies for, is specifially the industries role in the causes for console crash of 1983. Everything from failure to lockdown consoles from unlicensed devs to the sue happy nature of the corporate side of things as way to do business. As well as the fact that the later Warner execs didn't care about putting out quality products. Thinking that people would buy shit in a cart simply because it had the Atari logo on it.

 

That, I think is what really causes the kids my generation, the kids who cut thier teeth on the NES in the 1987-1992 era, to really dismiss companies like Atari, like Mattel. etc. Atari to us, represented the old guard. The old timers who simply could not forsee that that the public would want something new to sink thier teeth into.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think, It all comes down to--> What you grew up with, and grew to love!!!

My very first game console was the ATARI 2600, then after that the COLECOVISION. Even though, i will never forget my 1st console and that is what really started my love affair, COLECOVISION really kept me hooked. hahaha But i love them both and have both and will never forget them and look back and reminisce all the great memories i shared with my sister playing both for hours on end.

 

Anthony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you feel about this video where he is flat out saying the VCS is horrible? I know Conan is just goofing around making others laugh but I feel this videos comedy was coming more from look at how bad this late 70's console is rather than legitimately finding funny stuff

 

Ha ha. Golf really did suck!

 

It surprised me a lot that Conan actually liked Space Invaders. What they should let him do next is to let him play Tombraider I for the Playstation I. I bet your life he'll be just as pissed, ha ha. You could barely see that those few polygons and cubes are supposed to be a 3D world. Bashing granddaddies it always easy.

 

And then you should let Conan O' Brien play Mario World for the NES. That one is also from after he lost his virginity (his words, not mine). Coanan'll say: "Why the f*** is he running from left to right for? Screen after screen as nothing is happening. And that cheesy repeating stupid tune in the background irritates the hell out of me.".

 

After that they should let him play an FPS on the Playstation 4, 5 or 6. He'll say: "Why are the controls beyond what anybody will ever understand or master? What are all these buttons supposed to do, damned? I just wanna kill the baddies. Give me that Atari controller back! That one at least had a fire button! I wanna fire! I wanna shoot. What's all this sh** all about?". And then let Conan play an on-line FPS, he'll say: "Did you start the game yet? I'm lying still on my back", "Yes Conan, you got killed by a 14 y.o. within 4 seconds. Now you've lost all your collected weapons and power ups and they are making fun of you on the internet.", "Wooooot? I barely saw anything coming. I'm not dead yet, look: I warped to another part of the level. Who are those creatures jumping around like fleas, moving faster than a speeding bullet? Super manfly? Do they have itching powder in their pants or something? WTF?", "No, Conan. Those are the 14 year-olds you're supposed to kill for points.", "But I can barely see then coming and I'm dead already, this sucks, man!".

 

You can bash any game. Any. Which is a lot of fun. But it takes a real man to not judge a book by it's cover.

Edited by MeneerJansen
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mario Bros, an Atari 2600 console original, well there you go, without Atari no Mario, or even Mario startet on Atari

Bull. Nintendo only licensed their arcade IP Mario bros and Donkey Kong and DK Jr and Popeye to Atari and other consoles because they were not in the console market at the time, least in the US. Sans some obscure educational PC titles like Mario teaches typing or the crappy and forgettable Phillips CDi titles, and potential future "mobile apps," name one instance where Nintendo licensed their IP on another gaming platform? Yes, I did just list several exceptions, but my point is Nintendo as a general rule doesn't license their IP to third party game platforms... :roll:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you feel about this video where he is flat out saying the VCS is horrible? I know Conan is just goofing around making others laugh but I feel this videos comedy was coming more from look at how bad this late 70's console is rather than legitimately finding funny stuff

 

Dude, it's Conan. He also had Mike Tyson try to defeat his own likeness in the original Punch-out and failing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My first console was the NES, followed by the Mega Drive. I bought a VCS when it was heavily discounted sometime in the early 90's. So the VCS nostalgia is limited for me, but I do appreciate a few games. There are a lot of YouTubers who do have a soft spot for the 2600, much more than the later Atari consoles. What I don't like however is reviewers not putting any effort in actually doing some basic research.

 

Even tough I owned a few Nintendo consoles, I don't understand why some people glorify this company. This is a company which never listened to its fans other than requests for the next Mario or Zelda game. Region lock in 3DS? Thanks!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most retro gamers I know also dismiss Sega and love anything Nintendo released in the past.

I've never met a "retro gamer" who said anything like this, or felt this way. Then again, I'm 42 so I - and most of the people I know - grew up with Atari.

 

 

 

Lastly is the Game Design Shift- pre NES games are usually arcade style affairs. One or two screens, no ending, the point is to get a high score. NES marked a clear shift towards games with specific goals and endings when that goal was achieved (even if it just told you 'good job! Now play again!') There's been a mental shift towards an expectation of that kind of gameplay... 'I do a thing, I get a reward'. The idea of 'I do a thing to see how good I am, and that's it' is utterly unappealing to those who put no value into a score total.
I think this is a big part of it. Personally, I like arcade-style games. It's 90% of what i play. However, I totally get that that style of games has almost completely vanished, and newer gamers didn't grow up with the mindset of it being fun to play a game over and over to try to beat your score. Edited by BydoEmpire
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and later Atari Games - was in the arcades too.

 

This statement pretty much sums up the issue better than most realize. (I'm focusing on the word "arcade")

 

Look at it this way. If you were born in 1990, your chances of being exposed to arcades is very low. Almost non-existent. Most arcades were gone by the late 1990's. For those of us who grew up with arcades (you were most likely born before 1983 and some may say even soon than that) you most likely walked or road your bike to the local arcades. That would mean (I'm guessing) you were at least 10 years old before you were doing this (in my case I was 11 which would be about 1984). Before the NES (if your only exposure was arcades and consoles) you would have only known "arcade style video games", but we didn't call them that. They were just "video games".

 

The NES for the most part is non arcade like games and younger gamers don't get the concept of an arcade style video game. That's what the majority of titles in the pre-crash game systems were. There for, they see them as not having a point to the game. Why play a game with no end? Younger gamers expect some kind of reward (like the ending of a game). Playing for points doesn't get you anything. If you then add on all the misinformation about the crash, you get the attitude that Atari sucks by many (not all) younger gamers.

 

It really is a generational gap because, the industry did change greatly after the crash in the way games were meant to be played.

 

Yes, I know this is a generalization (and there are always exceptions) but, for the most part I believe this to be true.

 

Think of it like classic cars. Many of us would like a muscle car (GTO, Road Runner, Cuda, Mustang), but how many of us would really like a "model T", or a "model A". Younger gamers see the NES as a classic muscle car and see Atari (INTV, Coleco, OD2) as model T's. Just old and crusty.

Edited by pboland
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This statement pretty much sums up the issue better than most realize. (I'm focusing on the word "arcade")

 

Look at it this way. If you were born in 1990, your chances of being exposed to arcades is very low. Almost non-existent. Most arcades were gone by the late 1990's. For those of us who grew up with arcades (you were most likely born before 1983 and some may say even soon than that) you most likely walked or road your bike to the local arcades. That would mean (I'm guessing) you were at least 10 years old before you were doing this (in my case I was 11 which would be about 1984). Before the NES (if your only exposure was arcades and consoles) you would have only known "arcade style video games", but we didn't call them that. They were just "video games".

 

The NES for the most part is non arcade like games and younger gamers don't get the concept of an arcade style video game. That's what the majority of titles in the pre-crash game systems were. There for, they see them as not having a point to the game. Why play a game with no end? Younger gamers expect some kind of reward (like the ending of a game). Playing for points doesn't get you anything. If you then add on all the misinformation about the crash, you get the attitude that Atari sucks by many (not all) younger gamers.

 

It really is a generational gap because, the industry did change greatly after the crash in the way games were meant to be played.

 

Yes, I know this is a generalization (and there are always exceptions) but, for the most part I believe this to be true.

 

Think of it like classic cars. Many of us would like a muscle car (GTO, Road Runner, Cuda, Mustang), but how many of us would really like a "model T", or a "model A". Younger gamers see the NES as a classic muscle car and see Atari (INTV, Coleco, OD2) as model T's. Just old and crusty.

I think this was a gross exaggeration considering that arcade style games were still very popular, even going into the SNES days. Take a look at how popular shooters like Gradius, TwinBee, Parodius Da, and Axelay were. Even take a look at arcade style on rails games like Star Fox and fighting games like Street Fighter and Final Fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm 25 so obviously I didn't grow up with Atari....

Most retro gamers I know also dismiss Sega and love anything Nintendo released in the past. Why is this? I would say personal preference but I'd say a good 85% of retro gamers my age adore Nintendo and dismiss Sega and especially dismiss Atari.

Most retro gamers who take a side in the (ugh, barf) "Console Wars" of Sega vs. Nintendo were born after 1980. They missed Atari, and they were at an age when they probably could only have one system, because they depended on parents and grandparents to buy them stuff.

 

Old people like me never had that kind of limitation, we like everything. The (retch, gag) "Video Game Crash" helped us with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This statement pretty much sums up the issue better than most realize. (I'm focusing on the word "arcade")

 

Look at it this way. If you were born in 1990, your chances of being exposed to arcades is very low. Almost non-existent. Most arcades were gone by the late 1990's. For those of us who grew up with arcades (you were most likely born before 1983 and some may say even soon than that) you most likely walked or road your bike to the local arcades. That would mean (I'm guessing) you were at least 10 years old before you were doing this (in my case I was 11 which would be about 1984). Before the NES (if your only exposure was arcades and consoles) you would have only known "arcade style video games", but we didn't call them that. They were just "video games".

 

Arcades were still around in the late 90s/early 2000s but they had changed to mostly these bulky sit down racing cabinets, or dancing rhythm games in an effort to offer an experience you couldn't get at home. Also, there was the fighting game craze of the mid 90s that gave arcades a huge boost. They were still readily available in just about every major shopping mall.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had quite a few local retro gaming friends over the years, but the NES was as far back as any of them ever went in terms of systems they were interested in. Every time I asked any of them why they weren't interested in the Atari 2600, the result was always the same: "The graphics are too primitive." While any seasoned gamer knows that graphics aren't everything, I think there's just this general consensus among a large portion of retro gamers that anything produced earlier than the NES doesn't have enough graphical power to make recognizable characters and interesting games. People around this forum definitely know that not to be true, but it does seem to be the popular opinion among most retro gaming enthusiasts these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...