Different system, same code?

[Gregory DG]

There were a bunch of games that appeared in both 2600 and 7800 versions... Desert Falcon, Crossbow, Sentinel, Xenophobe, F14-Tomcat, Title Match Pro Wrestling, etc.

 

Some, like Desert Falcon, share the same sound effects between the versions. And others, like Title Match, play almost identically. Which makes me wonder...

 

Do any of these games share the same code? Was Atari or Absolute able to shave costs by doing this? If so, would it be possible to spruce up 2600 games to look better?

[EricBall]

Since the 2600 and the 7800 both use the TIA for sound, sharing that is easy. (Especially if it sounds halfway good.)

 

I was going to say that because the 2600 and 7800 are so different from a graphics point of view that nothing else could be shared. However, re-thinking this, there may be a chunk of game logic which could be common. How the sprites move & interact, player controls & enemy AI.

 

It wouldn't be easy, nor always possible, but it reminds me of a story about Lode Runner (I think) being ported to two other 6502 systems. One port started with a clean slate, the other took the existing code and reworked it for the new system. Guess which finished first and had fewer bugs?

[Brad2600]

I noticed this.

 

I often ask myself, WHY would they release both 2600 and 7800 versions when they could have saved money by releasing only a 2600 version or possibly only a 7800 version, since the 7800 can play 2600 games. It doesn't make sense to me..the whole Tramiel-era Atari.

 

It's possible that they used the same code. I wouldn't know unless I had both versions of a certain game.

[DeV0]

Yeah, for some reason Kung Fu Master comes to mind.

[Voch]

Dig Dug is another one that sounds exactly the same for both the 2600 and the 7800 (and, admittedly, the 2600 did have some nice music and sounds so it's not a big deal...just a little bit of a shock when I played the 7800 version for the first time).

 

Voch

[Nukey Shay]

EricBall--

Actually, that story was regarding the Pitfall2 conversions to the 8-bit Atari and Commodore computers...and it worked rather well.

The Pitfall II translations were an interesting story. Conversions of the game to Atari 800 and C64 [from the Atari 2600 originals, Eloquence's note] were begun at the same time by two different programmers (Atari 800 by Mike Lorenzen, and C64 by Tim Shotter) using my 2600 code. All three machines used the same microprocessor and therefore the same machine language.

  Mike chose to use my code directly and adapt the machine dependent routines to the new target machine. Tim used the original 2600 game as if it were a "design specification" and wrote all the code from scratch. Remarkably, both games reached the beta test point at about the same time. However, because Mike started with debugged code, he had no game play bugs while Tim had a full month of debugging left to do. In the extra time Mike designed an entire new level that begins when you reach the end of my game.

 This information has helped us make the code porting decision for all the years since.

[DracIsBack]

I always thought one of the Tramiel's biggest mistakes was allowing their cheapness to confuse the consumer.

 

Imagine if you were a kid and you put Desert Falcon on your Christmas list. Your grandmother, wanting to be hip, wanders into a store looking to buy this game for you, knowing that you have an "Atari". She sees one Nintendo system, one Sega system and three (!) Atari systems. First she's scared. Then she thinks, "maybe the game he wants is only on the system he has". Well, she looks for Desert Falcon and finds ...

 

1. Desert Falcon for the Atari 2600 and 7800 in a red box

2. Desert Falcon for the Atari 7800 in a grey box

3. Desert Falcon for the Atari XE in a blue box

 

Wonder how many times Atari owning kids got the wrong game for their system?

 

The Tramiels were really foolish that way. They took the approach of "getting the most of their license" (read: Cheap) and programmed the same games for multiple systems. It confused the consumer, did little to differentiate the systems and just sucked up their already limited shelf space with repitition.

 

I remember thinking (as a 13 year old kid) that the Atari 2600 version of Winter Games (advertised as "for the 2600 and 7800") would suddenly begin displaying advanced graphics like the Winter Games on the back of the 7800 box when I plugged it in to my first 7800. Surprise! :wink:

[ZylonBane]

They took the approach of "getting the most of their license" (read: Cheap) and programmed the same games for multiple systems. It confused the consumer, did little to differentiate the systems and just sucked up their already limited shelf space with repitition.

"Grandma, I want Mario for my Nintendo!"

 

Yeah, no chance for confusion there.

[DracIsBack]

"Yeah, no chance for confusion there"

 

Easy dude ... look at it in context. In 1987, Nintendo had ONE single system on the market.

 

If a kid said, "Grandma, I want Super Mario Brothers 2 for my Nintendo", Grandma would have a much easier time getting it than if the same kid said,

 

"Grandma - I want Desert Falcon for my Atari!"

 

Grandma would have gone into the store and said, "Does we want the one in the red box, the blue box or the grey box? Two of those boxes even say the game is for "the Atari 7800""

 

Bad, bad, bad marketing.

 

To make it even funkier, a kid who owned an XE had to tell Grandma that games marked "XE Game System", "Atari 400/800" and "Atari XL/XE Computers" all worked on the same thing!

[JB]

I remember thinking (as a 13 year old kid) that the Atari 2600 version of Winter Games (advertised as "for the 2600 and 7800") would suddenly begin displaying advanced graphics like the Winter Games on the back of the 7800 box when I plugged it in to my first 7800. Surprise! :wink:

That woudl've been a slick trick, and similar to what Nintendo would do years later later with the Super GameBoy, then later still in select GameBoy Color games that worked with the GBO.

 

Shame Atari didn't think of it.

[bcprs1]

Funny you bring up the "grandma I want this game" becaue that really happened to me. I wanted 7800 Title Match Pro Wrestling, Pete Rose Baseball and Rampage for xmas. My grandmother ended up getting all three for the 2600. Luckily, my parents got me the 7800 Rampage and 2600 Pete Rose was pretty good. 2600 and 7800 TMPW both are a disappointed. I remember being so excited that Atari now had a wrestling game. As you can imagine, I was not too happy when I finally played it.

[TwiliteZoner]

Speaking of sound! The first time I fired up Donkey Kong on the 7800 I think my window cracked from the horrific sound coming out of the TV.

[Brad2600]

I'm sure many of you will agree with me on the fact that Atari released too many versions of a single game on both the 2600 and 7800. This possibly oversaturated the market in some way.

 

I'm surprised that it isn't totally the case with the 5200. 5200 versions of certain games seem to be decent and in the case of 5200 Frogger, a lot nicer looking than the 2600 version.

 

Basically, Atari screwed up big time.

[Voch]

Speaking of sound! The first time I fired up Donkey Kong on the 7800 I think my window cracked from the horrific sound coming out of the TV.

 

Agreed. But it's quickly becoming my favorite Donkey Kong port despite the sound once I figured out how to get past the jacks in the elevator level.

 

Voch

[ZylonBane]

Easy dude ... look at it in context.

Why? You said nothing about historical context in the post I responded to. You presented your objections as if they were of a timeless, universal quality. How is confusion about dozens of Mario games on different platforms now any different from confusion about redundant Atari games back then?

[DracIsBack]

Why? You said nothing about historical context in the post I responded to. You presented your objections as if they were of a timeless, universal quality. How is confusion about dozens of Mario games on different platforms now any different from confusion about redundant Atari games back then?

 

Is Nintendo currently selling the SNES, N64 and Game Cube on the shelves with versions of "Super Mario Brothers 3" available for all systems? No. but that's not really the point.

 

The market has evolved significantly since 1987. However, IN 1987, Atari was competing as much with themselves as they were with competitors which hurt them in 1987! That was foolish.

 

Remember something. In 1984-5, video games were considered to be dead. Nintendo revised the industry by focusing. They focused all resources, advertising, game development for one single, solitary console. They revised the entire industry on that one single, solitary console. When they got competition from Sega, who answered Nintendo with ONE SINGLE, SOLITARY console.

 

What did Atari do? They threw THREE consoles on the market. Three that fought for Atari's limited game development, advertising dollars and retail space.

 

That was my point. When their competition was stronger, Atari made the stupid mistake of diversifying their limited resources among three consoles instead of focusing on one and they confused the hell out of the customer by having the same games on all systems and not doing a good job distinguishing them.

 

They confused consumers and the result was that they diluted the Atari brand and spread themselves too thin in the market.

 

Ironically, the same thing would happen later to Sega.

 

Remember when Sega had the Sega Master System II, Genesis, Sega CD, Pico, Game Gear and 32X, Nomad and Saturn on the market at the same time? THey spread themselves too thin and eventually died off as well as a console maker.

[JB]

Ironically, the same thing would happen later to Sega.

 

Remember when Sega had the Sega Master System II, Genesis, Sega CD, Pico, Game Gear and 32X, Nomad and Saturn  on the market at the same time? THey spread themselves too thin and eventually died off as well as a console maker.

The SegaCD and 32x were jokes that never had any real support.

32x especially. The Saturn was already coming when it was launched, and most of the software development efforts were focused on that. A child could've told the 32x was going to be all but stillborn.

That's really what hurt Sega most. They lost a lot of reputation on those expansions. People plunked 200$ down for a system that was basically dead in a year.

 

The SegaCD was dead before the Saturn ever made it out. The 32x was dead shortly thereafter.

 

 

Though they got more support than the Pico, which wasn't even in the same market. It was targeting the same one that bought Speak & Spells back in the day.

 

 

Game Gear and Nomad didn't overlap. The Nomad was a replacement for the deceased Game Gear.

It also came out after the Saturn. And they made it very clear it was just a Genesis you could take with you. Which may have hurt them a little, except it hit shelves after the Saturn died in America.

 

...

 

Did the Master System 2 even come out in America?

[DracIsBack]

The SegaCD and 32x were jokes that never had any real support.  

32x especially.

 

Actually, they received more support than the XEGS and 7800 did from Tramiel Atari.

 

The Saturn was already coming when it was launched, and most of the software development efforts were focused on that. A child could've told the 32x was going to be all but stillborn.

 

Totally agree. And that was my point in comparing Atari and Sega. They both spread themselves too thin, trying to support many platforms instead of focusing on one "killer" system. Had Atari focused specifically on the 7800 and Sega on the Saturn instead of distracting themselves with the 32X and XEGS, things might have turned out differently for both.

 

 

 

Game Gear and Nomad didn't overlap. The Nomad was a replacement for the deceased Game Gear.

 

I remember seeing both on the shelves at the same time, but my memory could be hazy....

 

Did the Master System 2 even come out in America?

 

It did, but Sega was a global company and they were supporting the SMS heavily in Europe - even in 1993.

[JB]

The SegaCD and 32x were jokes that never had any real support.  

32x especially.

 

Actually, they received more support than the XEGS and 7800 did from Tramiel Atari.

Ouch.

 

 

The Saturn was already coming when it was launched, and most of the software development efforts were focused on that. A child could've told the 32x was going to be all but stillborn.

 

Totally agree. And that was my point in comparing Atari and Sega. They both spread themselves too thin, trying to support many platforms instead of focusing on one "killer" system. Had Atari focused specifically on the 7800 and Sega on the Saturn instead of distracting themselves with the 32X and XEGS, things might have turned out differently for both.

Persoanlly, I always thought the bad PR from the 32x's sudden demise hurt them pretty badly.

 

Had they not launched it, it woldn't be an issue. But once they did they were stuck with the unappealing choices of continuing to support blatantly inferior hardware or axing support for a brand new product that the loyal followers had just sank 200$ into.

Of course, the fans were already irked that new hardware was hitting hte streets so soon after their 32x purchse, but not as much as they were when the 32x died.

 

It was really a situation with no good outcome, and whoever concieved the 32x should be shot.

 

Game Gear and Nomad didn't overlap. The Nomad was a replacement for the deceased Game Gear.

 

I remember seeing both on the shelves at the same time, but my memory could be hazy....

Maybe I'mmistaken. I was pretty sure the Nomad was a lot later than that.

 

Did the Master System 2 even come out in America?

 

It did, but Sega was a global company and they were supporting the SMS heavily in Europe - even in 1993.

Ah.

I know the SMS is STILL a big seller in parts of South America.

[MegaManFan]

Brazil, at least. They just released a new model of SMS there.

[DracIsBack]

Had they not launched it, it woldn't be an issue. But once they did they were stuck with the unappealing choices of continuing to support blatantly inferior hardware or axing support for a brand new product that the loyal followers had just sank 200$ into.  

Of course, the fans were already irked that new hardware was hitting hte streets so soon after their 32x purchse, but not as much as they were when the 32x died.  

 

Sorta like the XEGS and 2600jr ...

[rockman_x_2002]

Game Gear and Nomad didn't overlap. The Nomad was a replacement for the deceased Game Gear.

 

I remember seeing both on the shelves at the same time, but my memory could be hazy....

 

It's kinda like how Nintendo continued to still sell the Game Boy Color systems a little while after the Game Boy Advance was released. Although the newer system was out, they still slightly supported their older hardware for a minimal amount of time until they felt everyone had a chance to upgrade to the newer system.

 

Of course, the Nomad was little more than a glorified, handheld Genesis (and you didn't need to buy new carts). On the other hand... the GBA is little more than a (more powerful) glorified, handheld SNES.

 

The same could be said for how they did the transition from NES to SNES, SNES to N64, and N64 to GCN. Likewise, Sony's transition from PS1 to PS2.

 

But in Atari's case, they supported all their consoles at the same time. A bad move on their part.