Why is the importance of ColecoVision almost never brought up historically?

[zzip]

Most histories I've read mention the ColecoVision; that it was a powerful system that blew its contemporaries out of the water; that its life was cut short by the crash. I'm not sure what else you could say about it.

 

I suppose the OP meant "Why doesn't the ColecoVision get the attention of the 2600 and the NES?"

I said before, but so many videogame histories tend to skim over everything pre-NES, except maybe to mention how "ET destroyed the industry". The whole era doesn't get enough credit.

[Bill Loguidice]

My own personal experience regarding the importance of the Adam historically, is that it had almost no impact at all. It got almost no magazine and 3rd parties support compared to its contemporaries for example. And no one tried to compete with it, at least not to the extent of the Apple II/C64/Atari feud. It was also, for me, an ill conceived machine with its dependency on its printer for power and tape drive that could be erased by turning the machine off with a tape in it.

 

It was just another z80 based computer lost in the sea of 6502 based home computers in its market. It may have had a better chance if it had launched and concentrated on the european/asian home market where the z80 was popular and many were developing on it.

 

It was literally on the market for just a little over a year. Considering how vanishingly short that was, it got quite a bit of support and coverage.

 

Besides the low end elephant in the room, the C-64, which sucked the life out of all comers in that space, Coleco obviously botched the Adam's launch both with fluctuating prices and their lack of quality control. They really bit off more than they could handle. With that said, it's really a pretty nice machine all things considered, particularly once you deprecate the tapes in favor of disks and you utilize some of the bug-fixed ROM chips.

[Bill Loguidice]

I said before, but so many videogame histories tend to skim over everything pre-NES, except maybe to mention how "ET destroyed the industry". The whole era doesn't get enough credit.

 

Maybe, maybe not. Since 2009, at least four of my books don't gloss over it, and there are several that I can think of from some colleagues that do a good job of not leaving anything out either. I've also noticed an increase in the number of books dedicated to something that's either from or originated in the pre-Crash era, be it computer- or videogame-related. So I'd say the collective we are doing a very good job these days of giving that era its just due. Of course, it will never be quite as high profile or popular as some of the stuff in the post-Crash era, but that's to be expected for a variety of reasons.

[pacman000]

Most of the histories I've read were written 15-20 years ago. At the time Atari and the early 80's were the big nostalgia magnets, so they do a decent job there. They also blame the crash equally on bad video games and the rise of home computers. ET, if mentioned at all, is only an example of a bad game, not the only game blamed.

 

http://thedoteaters.com/?page_id=6

 

http://www.videogames.org

 

Of course, I'm biased towards Atari, so I also tend to choose Atari-centric sites.

[zzip]

Maybe, maybe not. Since 2009, at least four of my books don't gloss over it, and there are several that I can think of from some colleagues that do a good job of not leaving anything out either. I've also noticed an increase in the number of books dedicated to something that's either from or originated in the pre-Crash era, be it computer- or videogame-related. So I'd say the collective we are doing a very good job these days of giving that era its just due. Of course, it will never be quite as high profile or popular as some of the stuff in the post-Crash era, but that's to be expected for a variety of reasons.

That's good. I see the problem mostly in articles on mainstream gaming sites or youtube videos. Obviously not as well researched as a book, but still it would be nice if they didn't pretend Videogames started with NES.

[Duke75]

That's good. I see the problem mostly in articles on mainstream gaming sites or youtube videos. Obviously not as well researched as a book, but still it would be nice if they didn't pretend Videogames started with NES.

 

Yeah, I've noticed this as well. Even fairly good historians tend to start everything with the NES, often dismissing what came before as too primitive to generate substantial discussion, especially since a lot of the younger guys are really into the "games as storytelling medium" stuff and not as much into, say, analyzing gameplay algorithms.

[Schizophretard]

 

If we reset with a clear query, I'll certainly be happy to defend for/against a position, but honestly, at this point, I don't even know what we're discussing/arguing anymore.

 

"It's more about whether optional add-ons should be counted the same as in-cartridge helper chips."

[Jinks]

 

"It's more about whether optional add-ons should be counted the same as in-cartridge helper chips."

Same. Both plug in and give the underpowered system more power.

[TheTIGuy]

Because Sega's 32X and CD went soooooo well and had soooo many great titles...

EDIT: Also; fanboi alert!

Edited December 10, 2017 by TheTIGuy

[+lawdawg710]

Donkey Kong was released on cartridge by Coleco for sale once the Adam was released, several can be found cib (albeit costly) but the version that was packed in with the Colecovision was released for retail!

[dreamcups]

First: the Colecovision was and IS a milestone of a system. I hate to break it to the kids that weren't around at the time, but simply put, you actually did have to be there. You can look at it retrospectively all you want, but if all you're basing things on is wikipedia or forum posts from people who largely weren't there, you are missing the point of how huge the CV was. The fact that arcade games were it's forte is the main reason, and that's enough. Why? Because EVERYBODY was trying to replicate the arcade back then. That was the whole damn reason of owning a CV, so you didn't have to go to the sketchy arcades (I loved sketchy arcades, but that's another thread). The fact it didn't have many of its own games outside of ports (which is also kinda misleading, when you look at the entire library of games) does nothing to detract from this.

 

;

;

It was commonplace at the time to try to replicate the arcade, but i don't think everybody had the same focus. The 2600 was a machine with many original titles that didn't resemble typical arcade games, created by Atari and its third parties with the home experience in mind (something its rival consoles usually missed). By that time the arcade game scene was huge, so it was great to be able to play them at home, but the 2600 proved successful and remarkable with its original games and in the end helped to establish game consoles as something of its own, not just something meant to try to recreate the arcade.

 

​And answering the thread's title question, i think that's why the Colecovision doesn't got more historic recognition. It's library didn't offer something new or different, essentially made of arcade ports that, though competent, weren't as good as the originals.

Edited December 24, 2017 by dreamcups

[VectorGamer]

​ It's library didn't offer something new or different, essentially made of arcade ports that, though competent, weren't as good as the originals.[/font]

I don't know about that. Most of the commercials hyped the ColecoVision as a console where you can play the arcade at home and many of the translations were very good (Looping, Mouse Trap, Pepper II and LadyBug were probably better than the arcade game). We can look back now and pick out the imperfections with Donkey Kong, but BITD it was the ColecoVision's "killer app."

 

As far as "new and different" - I agree that it's outnumbered when you put it side-by-side with the Atari 2600. But there was a sufficient number of original games for the ColecoVision released.

[+nurmix]

By this logic, the Collecovision owes everything to the Intellivision, which it "basically completely cloned" outside of 2 steps forward 2 steps backward "graphical prowess".

As in... "Hey look how much sharper and colorful our sprites are! ...oh wait, they are disappearing and canceling each other out when 4 or more are on the same horizontal line... hmm, let's not add that to the marketing campaign, mmm k?"

 

 

 

Sent from my Keyboard Component using Jack's Conversational Intelli-talk cassette

[Nebulon]

I don't know about that. Most of the commercials hyped the ColecoVision as a console where you can play the arcade at home and many of the translations were very good (Looping, Mouse Trap, Pepper II and LadyBug were probably better than the arcade game). We can look back now and pick out the imperfections with Donkey Kong, but BITD it was the ColecoVision's "killer app."

 

As far as "new and different" - I agree that it's outnumbered when you put it side-by-side with the Atari 2600. But there was a sufficient number of original games for the ColecoVision released.

 

Agreed.

 

Decent arcade ports is why I got a ColecoVision in the first place. That was its major selling point.

[MrBeefy]

Until I got older I didnt know what a ColecoVision or Intellivision was. I havent ever seen a Coleco in person at a local gaming store, thrift store, or pawn shop.

 

First Intellivision i saw was when i was working at a comic shop and a druggie came in wanting to sell it and 15 games. I only offered $10 for it didn't like my offer but later came back when none of the pawn shops etc would buy it from him.

 

My guess is that they are ignored for just not being as popular. Other than nightstalker and maybe the dungeons and dragons games are there any ITV or CV games that are exclusives that are awesome?

[Flojomojo]

Other than nightstalker and maybe the dungeons and dragons games are there any ITV or CV games that are exclusives that are awesome?

 

Intellivision was pretty awesome at the time, the George Plimpton TV spots were impressive once. The games had a computer-like depth that we just didn't see on the Atari home console. Colecovision was similarly impressive with its high resolution graphics and arcade-like visuals.

 

The thing is, you really had to be there to appreciate it, because NES and afterwards completely smoked them both in terms of complexity, diversity, and quantity.

 

I have no problem with lumping the pre-NES "second generation" hardware together: Atari VCS, Intellivision, Atari 5200, ColecoVision, Atari 5200, Vectrex, Bally. Their concepts (arcade at home), development (tiny teams, often one person), style of play (self-contained episodes, no game saving) and distribution methods (anyone can make any cartridge they want for any system, no effective lock-outs) are more alike than different.

 

If nothing else, the strong-arm publishing tactics of Nintendo makes the "third generation" (and everything that comes afterwards) a different species altogether.

[VectorGamer]

The thing is, you really had to be there to appreciate it, because NES and afterwards completely smoked them both in terms of complexity, diversity, and quantity.

Unfortunately the NES is lacking in golden age arcade ports. The games that were released were done really well. It's a shame really, but perhaps Nintendo was looking to the future versus dredging up the past.

[Bill Loguidice]

Unfortunately the NES is lacking in golden age arcade ports. The games that were released were done really well. It's a shame really, but perhaps Nintendo was looking to the future versus dredging up the past.

 

Hmm, what is it really missing? (genuinely curious of your thoughts) A vast number of arcade ports made it over, and even many computer ports.

[Flojomojo]

Unfortunately the NES is lacking in golden age arcade ports. The games that were released were done really well. It's a shame really, but perhaps Nintendo was looking to the future versus dredging up the past.

 

True. They were more into contemporary (at the time) arcade games. I thought Tengen was awesome back then, and of course Nintendo's own stuff was fun. They're not the best games on the system, but arcade ports are one reason I still dig the NES library. Top of head:

 

Elevator Action

Mario Bros

Popeye

Donkey Kong

DK Jr

Donkey Kong 3

Defender

Joust

Gyruss (NES-ized)

Spy Hunter (still my favorite console port of this game, because they nailed the controls IMHO)

Xenophobe

Paperboy

Marble Madness

Karnov

Kung Fu Master

Track and Field

Hogan's Alley

Klax

720º

Gauntlet

 

I'm sure there are others I've forgotten.

 

I see that the OP has not logged in for more than 30 days, we're just talking amongst ourselves now, but what else is new.

[Flojomojo]

Hmm, what is it really missing? (genuinely curious of your thoughts) A vast number of arcade ports made it over, and even many computer ports.

Early Atari type stuff

 

Space Invaders

Asteroids

Jungle King

Moon Patrol

 

etc etc. Stuff that made it to the Atari 7800 instead.

 

Oh I forgot to put Pac-Man on my list!

[Bill Loguidice]

Early Atari type stuff

 

Space Invaders

Asteroids

Jungle King

Moon Patrol

 

etc etc. Stuff that made it to the Atari 7800 instead.

 

Oh I forgot to put Pac-Man on my list!

 

Space Invaders never made it over to the West, but the Famicom got it: http://www.mobygames.com/game/nes/space-invaders________

 

The others I'm not aware of making it over. That's kind of surprising actually, because they would be good candidates (at least in Japan), excepting the Atari arcade ones.

[VectorGamer]

Early Atari type stuff

 

Space Invaders

Asteroids

Jungle King

Moon Patrol

 

etc etc. Stuff that made it to the Atari 7800 instead.

 

Oh I forgot to put Pac-Man on my list!

 

And Ms. Pac-Man and Exerion.

 

Was Space Invaders released for Famicom? My memory is blurry since I haven't fired up my NES with Everdrive in a long time.

 

Zaxxon, Space Fury, Space Firebird (a Nintendo arcade game), Mr. Do! series - you could rattle off a whole bunch of arcade games that weren't ported to the NES. Just use the MAME UI and sort by year and look at all the titles released up to 1983 for reference.

[Bill Loguidice]

A lot of those didn't make it over to the 7800 either, unless we count the 2600 versions, which we really shouldn't. It was probably more a sign of the times than any particular omission.

[+GoldLeader]

I like a lot of what the OP said in the beginning, but a lot of that is with the benefit of hindsight, or takes place behind the scenes.. I just read it (and a few comments) and I haven't read this whole thing, so any comment I make is probably a retread haha... (but here goes).

 

To me maybe the one point missing would be this: The ColecoVision was the first time me, and many of my friends UPGRADED our consoles. (I. e. Bought another console, besides our Atari). In my neck of the woods, nobody knew anybody with an Intellivision (shocking, I know) and those commercials with them ripping on our Beloved Ataris generally outraged people like me. Don't get me wrong, there were Intellivisions in the stores and Someone had to be buying them, but I am talking, within my circle of friends. We all knew 1 guy with a 5200 and beyond that Coleco Ruled! It was the one system we all had to have and the one we had to talk our parents into, Because parents back then used to say things like, "You've already got an Atari"...So that's where the compatibility with Atari games came into play. I believe I said "I'll give my aunt my Atari and just buy that adapter so I can play both!" (God I wished I hadn't done that, but that's another story).

 

Also we'd all saved our paper route money, etc., and were ready to buy Colecos long before they were in stores. The pages of our magazines were dog-eared, and covered in drool stains by the time they actually made it to stores.

 

Also I'd say Intellivision seemed along the same lines as Atari but with better graphics, Whereas ColecoVision's Mission Statement was "To bring the Arcade home", which is what everybody wanted. And they were releasing a lot of "obscure favorites", too, not just the same old thing!

[+GoldLeader]

Unfortunately the NES is lacking in golden age arcade ports. The games that were released were done really well. It's a shame really, but perhaps Nintendo was looking to the future versus dredging up the past.

 

I agree wholeheartedly. I think it's safe to say that in 1982-1983 (give or take) you had Coleco (doing the arcade ports of the time), In 1987-1991 (give or take) you had Nintendo NES (doing arcade ports of the time)...

 

One could argue the Coleco was the NES of its time...