What Atari 2600 arcade ports are superior compared to the actual arcade cabinet?

[Keatah]

In the final analysis it comes down to difficulty. Arcade games were mostly too difficult for this kid. And costly. And I don't quite understand, to this day, why I spent hundreds on top of hundreds going there. Because I enjoyed at-home play just as much. And if I skipped the arcade for a couple of weekends I could get a cartridge or two, or something for the Apple II.

 

[BIGHMW]

I may be a 5200 guy but except for the Q*bert port I say that there are a TON of great, yet simple games you can play on a 2600. That is why I also have the VCS adapter as well as a Flashback 9, I just wish there would've been a better port of Q*bert as opposed to the one 2600 players have had to put up with compared to the brilliant A8/5200 version.

 

As for A8/5200 Asteroids compared to the 2600 version I HAVE TO admit that even though I DID make a conversion request to get a proper 5200 port of the A8 version of Asteroids as opposed to the unfinished prototype we had to put up with for 40 years since it was aborted, 2600 Asteroids is way more colorful.

 

....and nowadays the 2600 sure seems like a great value more than ever, with John Champeau @johnnywc and Champ Games and others churning out incredible games we never thought were possible 40 years ago, like Gorf Arcade, Qyx, Galagon, and Scramble, for instance. All are brilliant, and all are highly recommended, the only thing is is that you can't play them (except Scramble) on a Flashback 9. 

 

SO MUCH you can do NOW with just 128 bytes of RAM as opposed to 40 years ago.

Edited December 25, 2022 by BIGHMW

[Keatah]

For sure the 2600 is more appealing than 90% of all cellaphone gamez. And even AAA titles on PC. Certainly much longer lived with more replay value, despite the vastly simpler hardware and smaller "game programs".

[+johnnywc]

22 hours ago, BIGHMW said:

SO MUCH you can do NOW with just 128 bytes of RAM as opposed to 40 years ago.

Thanks for the kind words!  Of course most of the Champ Games these days use the 70Mhz ARM processor, 32K of ROM and 8K of RAM (vs. 128 bytes 😮 ) but it's still challenging and certainly a lot of fun trying to get arcade games as close as possible on the 2600 with 2 player sprites, 2 missiles, a ball and the low resolution playfield.   

[BIGHMW]

3 hours ago, johnnywc said:

Thanks for the kind words!  Of course most of the Champ Games these days use the 70Mhz ARM processor, 32K of ROM and 8K of RAM (vs. 128 bytes 😮 ) but it's still challenging and certainly a lot of fun trying to get arcade games as close as possible on the 2600 with 2 player sprites, 2 missiles, a ball and the low resolution playfield.   

Don't kid yourself John @johnnywc. You and your company are doing one hell of a job by doing do, and that's what counts!!!  

 

....and maybe someday you can team up with our (both here on AA and here in the PNW as I live in nearby Port Townsend, WA) very own @Ryan Witmer in maybe concocting up a new 2600 version of his 5200 adaptation of Lock 'N' Chase, Rob 'N' Banks!!!

 

You guys would be able to bless us with the most incredible version of Lock 'N' Chase ever put out for a 2600 provided you guys join forces on it.

 

Now if we could have a better Q*bert port than the one Parker Bros. gave us in 1983, your work has proven how much more can be done given the right R & D, let's see a (renamed, like Galagon and Qyx) Champ Games version of Q*bert (maybe perhaps "Cue-bert"... renamed for copyright reasons, also because IT IS Champ Games' work)

[Shaggy the Atarian]

On 11/29/2022 at 11:02 AM, zzip said:

Space Invaders  I'm not sure if the 2600 versions is actually better, but I think it is more iconic.   I'll go with it for that reason.

 

Pitfall II - One of those odd games that started on console and got ported to arcade.   The 2600 is the original, the way it was meant to be, so I like it best for that reason.

 

Battlezone - Maybe the gameplay isn't better, but damn it looks really good for a 2600 game!

 

Interesting to see Pitfall II get a mention since so few people know of the console-to-arcade port. I got super lucky years ago when I found a PII Arcade for super cheap and it's been in my arcade ever since. It does look and sound much better and playing Pitfall with a giant balltop arcade stick is something else but the difficulty is a bit off-the-rails with the game. Personally I prefer the 2600 version (the 800 version is the best IMO) but the arcade has it's own charm. I agree with pretty much everyone else on Space Invaders; BattleZone, I dunno. I always had a soft spot for the arcade version and owned one for a few years. Nothing gets you immersed into the action like the periscope in the arcade, but the 2600 did a commendable job. It definitely looks awesome like you say; Maybe gameplay-wise I'd give Robot Tank the edge.

 

Warlords is one  that I think holds up really well against the arcade version  - in some ways I like the 2600's wonky physics more and they both control the same. I think there are a surprising number of "just as good" entries for the 2600 (Frogger, Amidar, BattleZone, Space Invaders, etc.)

 

On other games, it might be the nostalgia speaking but I enjoy Front Line more on the 2600 than I do the arcade. Granted, finding an OG arcade for this one is nigh impossible anymore and playing it emulated sucks but there's something rather charming about how the 2600 version was handled. Those sounds will forever be scorched into my brain...the game sounds weird to me when I play it in arcades. Same effect happens to me with a lot of other arcade ports - I played them so much at home that often I find the arcade ones to lack that "charm" if you want to call it that. 

 

I think Combat is worth a mention since it's basically two arcade games packed into one (Tank and Jet Fighter). While it's not as high-rez and you don't get the twin stick control, the game's in color and the variations ultimately make it more enjoyable. 

[Keatah]

On 11/29/2022 at 10:04 AM, jgkspsx said:

Asteroids 2600 has ATROCIOUS collision detection and is full of bugs. I really can't stand to play it. But I'm glad other people enjoy it.

I liked it because it was in color. And again it was easier for my infantile game skilz at the time. Never really noticed issues with collision detection. Or if we did we just didn't care.

 

On 11/29/2022 at 10:04 AM, jgkspsx said:

My vote goes to Gravitar. The arcade version is super cool (and maybe not as hard as Game 1 of the 2600 port) but the 2600 version is the one I come back to time and time again.

Gravitar was annoying (on any platform) to me. Always having to fight against gravity while maneuvering was the bane of my existence! Felt the whole universe was sagging. Sagging like my gramma's tits you know..!

 

On 11/29/2022 at 10:04 AM, jgkspsx said:

My second vote goes to Galaxian. The arcade version just feels awkward to me - the ship is too big and slow. Playing the 2600 port for HSC I really got to appreciate all the game modes and how much more fun it is. Granted, it's almost a different game entirely, but still.

I liked the Astrocade version along with the umpteen thousands of clones on Apple II - the format seemed to lend itself well to "The Arcade Machine", an early game making tool from Br0derbund. Always thought of it as an upgrade take on Space Invaders.

 

On 11/29/2022 at 10:04 AM, jgkspsx said:

I second Space Invaders and Defender (though the amazing sounds of both are missed). Missile Command I'm 50-50 on. I like them equally.

Space Invaders on 2600 is akin to killer-app status. I never cared much for 2600 Defender. Always seemed to project the aura of cheapness back then. Today I see it differently, as a style, and it's more appreciated once I digested and comprehended the limits of the hardware. And of the state of programming knowledge back then too.

 

Atari 400/800 Defender was very very good and I wouldn't even give a magazine article (let alone a strategy guide) the time of day if it was about Arcade Defender.

 

I mean why would I bother spending $0.25 on a game I could play for 30 seconds then be dead? Other games I could play for like 15 or 20 minutes. A kid's first exposure to ROI I guess!

 

On 11/29/2022 at 10:35 AM, Flyindrew said:

Maybe thats true, but 2600 Asteroids is one of those very rare examples of it being 1000 times better than the 8 bit computer version of the game.

Have to agree there. The 8-bit version seemed slow and sluggish, cheap even. And I disliked how when 2 asteroids crossed over each other, they'd XOR themselves out of existence.

 

On 11/29/2022 at 12:02 PM, zzip said:

Space Invaders  I'm not sure if the 2600 versions is actually better, but I think it is more iconic.   I'll go with it for that reason.

Ohh its better. At the absolute minimum it's less fatiguing. The colors softer. The player shots don't feel as regimented, they don't have to be as precise to still hit their targets. Comes with game variations and a double-shot trick too. And of course it was something special back in the day.

 

In fact the first time I played SpaceInvaders was on 2600, and when subsequently trying the Arcade cab version I was like ughh!! Spent exactly 1 quarter on it and no more! 2 years difference

 

On 11/29/2022 at 12:02 PM, zzip said:

Pitfall II - One of those odd games that started on console and got ported to arcade.   The 2600 is the original, the way it was meant to be, so I like it best for that reason.

I disliked anything "Pitfall". It didn't engage my psyche - which was highly geared toward space and racing games at the time. Aside from a little bitty sense of adventure and exploration, it was tedium working through it over and over again. It was one of those games I had in my cartridge collection just because.

 

I would never seek it out in the arcade because I essentially didn't know it was converted from home-to-arcade anyways. Games that went in that direction just weren't covered much in magazines. Same think with Choplifter. By the time I heard of the arcade version I had long played hundreds of games on the Apple II, and thus wouldn't waste time with a version 10x more difficult just because.

 

On 11/29/2022 at 12:02 PM, zzip said:

Battlezone - Maybe the gameplay isn't better, but damn it looks really good for a 2600 game!

Pretty sure the first time I played Battlezone was on Microsoft Arcade. I may have plopped a quarter into an arcade machine once or twice, but I sure as hell didn't understand anything because it was so complex-looking.

 

I did enjoy Stellar-7 first on the Apple II and then later on the PC. Very much Battlezone-like in so many respects. Better I'd say because the enemies were more varied and you had to progress through several planets/levels.
 

On 12/4/2022 at 7:21 AM, schuwalker said:

Seems some choices on here are based because of the control scheme from the arcade to more of a simplified version on the 2600.

Controls were king at least to me. The Defender and Asteroids panels were just ridiculous and not intuitive at all. I s'pose that may have been a way of increasing the difficulty while simplifying the cost. Just not for me. If I'm playing space games I want space-a-ship joystick controls, not an array of buttons.

 

On 12/4/2022 at 7:21 AM, schuwalker said:

I still prefer the arcade on the majority of these...

 

Space Invaders while a good port, something about the added deep bass from the arcade makes it more enjoyable for me

Interestingly the sound qualities (like bass) of arcade cabinets didn't draw me in much. Cool, sure, but not a main attractant. Gyruss was an exception with its 5 AY-3-8910 chips working in concert. Nopunintended.

 

On 12/4/2022 at 7:21 AM, schuwalker said:

Asteroids...nothing will ever trump vector monitors, more points for the deep bass from the arcade version.

 

My choices are some the earlier black and white arcade games. Sears Target Fun/Air Sea Battle with the added different target choices over Atari Antiaircraft; Combat over the earlier Kee Tank games which also includes Atari Jetfighter and Biplane crammed into one cart.

Canyon Bomber, Air-Sea Battle, Tank/JetFighter in Combat, and similar games, just always made sense to me on the 2600. Like a natural. ASB was even a favorite of mine. Whereas in the arcades they were curiosities and bygones from the B&W era.

 

On 12/8/2022 at 1:16 PM, Flyindrew said:

Also Night Driver is far superior on the VCS compared to the arcade version especially playing with the original paddle controllers.

Yes. And as a bit of trivia, Nurburgring was the forerunner to Night Driver. Nurburgring had like 25 tablet-sized PCBs in a long-ass cardcage. All discrete TTL with no CPU.

[Keatah]

3 hours ago, Shaggy the Atarian said:

BattleZone, I dunno. I always had a soft spot for the arcade version and owned one for a few years. Nothing gets you immersed into the action like the periscope in the arcade, but the 2600 did a commendable job. It definitely looks awesome like you say; Maybe gameplay-wise I'd give Robot Tank the edge.

I've always maintained that BZ was intimidating. I didn't want to spend my tokens on it because I felt like I'd be going through a learning curve. I'd look at two tokens and figure 3 minutes here on BZ or maybe a half-hour on something else. Easy choice. Perhaps t'was my first exposure to a game too advanced and too much ahead of its time. At least I felt that way. But I didn't feel that way about I, Robot. Now that was truly advanced to the point where not everyone knew what has happening. I found it a visual treat.

 

3 hours ago, Shaggy the Atarian said:

I think Combat is worth a mention since it's basically two arcade games packed into one (Tank and Jet Fighter). While it's not as high-rez and you don't get the twin stick control, the game's in color and the variations ultimately make it more enjoyable.

There are many times I think that the number of variations on 2600 games is a form of customization, making one game try to fit all. The children's variations being a good idea. I never consciously valued the idea back then. But of course did use it. See the importance in retrospect.

 

Thing with arcade games was the controls were often clumsy and the difficulty set too high. Both suitable for savants and not low-end players like myself. I mean there were times I'd leave the arcade and feel all sad and inadequate that I couldn't even get on the hi-score board in the first place - so many players were better than me. Maybe chalk that up to inexperience with a game, but I never really progressed to achieving it often enough to find it satisfying.

 

Maybe that's why I like M.A.M.E. so much today and actively dislike arcadegoing. I can pause a game in the middle of a triple-hour session for a break. Or get the controls set-up just like I want. Or even set the dip-switches to something more reasonable, something less than "suck my wallet dry". I do expect to play for more than 3-4 minutes at a time on ONE 25-cent credit.

 

I really don't care how authentic two sticks are for Robotron. Or how "vintagely appropriate" a maze of 7 buttons is for Defender or Asteroids. Fuck the purists!

 

Was happy to have been there and experienced it in the golden age when creativity was at all-time highs. And happy again to relive the coming-of-age nostalgic moments in the shape and space of my own making. It's like with Tempest, easy enough to make new levels or tweak the difficulty a bit in this or that direction. And that of course extends much further with vintage pre-smartphone PC gaming.

[Atariboy]

I'm surprised to not see Solar Fox mentioned. Perhaps most just don't realize it was an arcade port or maybe I'm just in the minority, but I much prefer the 2600 version.

Edited December 27, 2022 by Atariboy

[atarifan88]

On 12/25/2022 at 12:10 PM, BIGHMW said:

....and nowadays the 2600 sure seems like a great value more than ever, with John Champeau @johnnywc and Champ Games and others churning out incredible games we never thought were possible 40 years ago, like Gorf Arcade, Qyx, Galagon, and Scramble, for instance. All are brilliant, and all are highly recommended, the only thing is is that you can't play them (except Scramble) on a Flashback 9. 

And that is why you get a Retron 77 as you can play the ROM's from Champ Games. They work great!

[schuwalker]

11 hours ago, Keatah said:

 

Canyon Bomber, Air-Sea Battle, Tank/JetFighter in Combat, and similar games, just always made sense to me on the 2600. Like a natural. ASB was even a favorite of mine. Whereas in the arcades they were curiosities and bygones from the B&W era.

 

 

True for the most part for me as well. But in defense, what made some of those earlier B&W games was the the cabinet and the control itself. My local roller rink had a Atari Skydiver with those hoop controls - that's a thing that you just can't replicate on the 2600. It came down, at least to me, was getting say Combat with an amalgamation  of different arcade games; Canyon Bomber is another good one with a version of Atari Destroyer.

 

[schuwalker]

15 hours ago, Shaggy the Atarian said:

Interesting to see Pitfall II get a mention since so few people know of the console-to-arcade port. I got super lucky years ago when I found a PII Arcade for super cheap and it's been in my arcade ever since. It does look and sound much better and playing Pitfall with a giant balltop arcade stick is something else but the difficulty is a bit off-the-rails with the game. Personally I prefer the 2600 version (the 800 version is the best IMO) but the arcade has it's own charm. I agree with pretty much everyone else on Space Invaders; BattleZone, I dunno. I always had a soft spot for the arcade version and owned one for a few years. Nothing gets you immersed into the action like the periscope in the arcade, but the 2600 did a commendable job. It definitely looks awesome like you say; Maybe gameplay-wise I'd give Robot Tank the edge.

 

 

I'll preface this by saying... I'm in awe you have a cabinet for Pitfall II. I do have the whole kit sans the cab and those earlier Sega cabs - good lick finding one. I played the arcade version at a 7-11 once or twice. It wasn't bad, of course being coin-op, the difficulty is higher... my biggest gripe about the game was those graphics - seemed a little cartoony for me at least.

[zzip]

12 hours ago, Keatah said:

On 11/29/2022 at 1:02 PM, zzip said:

Space Invaders  I'm not sure if the 2600 versions is actually better, but I think it is more iconic.   I'll go with it for that reason.

Ohh its better. At the absolute minimum it's less fatiguing. The colors softer. The player shots don't feel as regimented, they don't have to be as precise to still hit their targets. Comes with game variations and a double-shot trick too. And of course it was something special back in the day.

 

In fact the first time I played SpaceInvaders was on 2600, and when subsequently trying the Arcade cab version I was like ughh!! Spent exactly 1 quarter on it and no more! 2 years difference

For me it's close.   Space Invaders was one of the first arcade games I'd ever seen.  I remember they had the cocktail version at my Pizza Hut and I'd be fascinated with it while waiting for the Pizza.   The attract mode with the Space Invaders fixing the upside down letters, or bombing extra letters were amusing-  that doesn't seem like much now,  but the few videogames I'd seen before that were all serious, nothing whimsical about them. 

 

But then my friend got a 2600 and Space Invaders for Christmas one year and we played the hell out of it, so both bring back strong memories.   

 

I don't like the arcade machines with color overlays thought,  would rather play it without the overlays

[+MrZarniwoop]

20 hours ago, BIGHMW said:

Now if we could have a better Q*bert port than the one Parker Bros. gave us in 1983[...] let's see a (renamed, like Galagon and Qyx) [...] version of Q*bert

You have just described rubyQ! by @Silvio Mogno. It was released at PRGE, so soon will be for sale in the AtariAge store.

 

It's fantastic, and even includes some unique takes on the general colored-square-turning theme that bring new dimensions(!) to the classic arcade game.

[Silvio Mogno]

41 minutes ago, MrZarniwoop said:

You have just described rubyQ! by @Silvio Mogno. It was released at PRGE, so soon will be for sale in the AtariAge store.

 

It's fantastic, and even includes some unique takes on the general colored-square-turning theme that bring new dimensions(!) to the classic arcade game.

Thanks for appreciating my game!☺️

[+MrZarniwoop]

47 minutes ago, Silvio Mogno said:

Thanks for appreciating my game!☺️

I bought it at PRGE, so speak from authority! 😜

[Shaggy the Atarian]

12 hours ago, Keatah said:

I've always maintained that BZ was intimidating. I didn't want to spend my tokens on it because I felt like I'd be going through a learning curve. I'd look at two tokens and figure 3 minutes here on BZ or maybe a half-hour on something else. Easy choice. Perhaps t'was my first exposure to a game too advanced and too much ahead of its time. At least I felt that way. But I didn't feel that way about I, Robot. Now that was truly advanced to the point where not everyone knew what has happening. I found it a visual treat.

 

I first discovered BZ arcade in the 90s when I was 13 or so. I rarely got to visit arcades. We didn't live anywhere near one, we didn't have a lot of money, and the closest 7-11 at the time was on the other side of a busy intersection so that was one of the few places I couldn't visit by myself. As it was, I had absolutely no idea as a kid how many of the games on the 2600 were arcade games first. I thought Asteroids and Pac-man were wholly original Atari creations for home - I knew about the Atari 800XL and 400 as my best friend had them but I didn't know about the 5200 or the 7800 either. I eventually got set straight but that did color my impressions of most of these games first and set  certain expectations.

 

Anyways...

 

I liked BZ ok but it wasn't the most played cart for me. When I encountered the arcade version for the first time, I was at an arcade that was jam-packed with machines and they all worked on nickels. I gave BZ a shot because I recognized the name but also because the game I really wanted to play, T-Mek, had a line(I discovered that first and really enjoyed it. Everyone was doing the winner stays, loser leaves and next one pays thing and I managed to get a nice winning streak going, for a time). I don't know exactly what it was about BZ but I ended up going back to it over and over and enjoyed it as much as I enjoyed playing through all of Sega's Die Hard Arcade that day. Managed to get a score of 33,000, as I recall. Between that an T-Mek, I hadn't played anything like them before with the twin sticks and T-Mek's sound blew my mind. While I generally enjoy space games, that day I became a fan of Atari's tank ones. 

 

I get that arcades aren't everyone's cup of tea when you can do all the stuff at home you mentioned but my experience with the controls was different - I really enjoyed the twin stick way of moving around and generally speaking it depends on what it is and how its implemented. Driving games get a huge advantage in having those realistic  controls and a properly designed cab can enhance the immersion more than you can't get with mame. It can also be fun to show off at the arcade. As an older teen I worked at one and we'd play games on our breaks. This allowed me to get rather good at several games without spending money and more than once I managed to attract a crowd of people watching me. I was so in the zone I didn't notice it unless the game went black and I'd see their faces reflected in the screen or I would finish a game and see all these people standing around. There's nothing else like that in gaming

 

Ultimately though, arcades are best as social experiences. My best arcade memories are going with friends and having fun, more than playing by myself. Although I suppose the crowd thing was part of that too. It's just something that home arcade ports or emulation can never recreate, which is why I like them

 

I should mention that sometimes arcade employees intentionally set the difficulty high. We did that on Star Wars Trilogy Arcade as us employees would compete on it and we discovered that the way to get the highest scores was set the difficulty to max. That was bad for customers and unfortunately we weren't really thinking about that. As an arcade operator though, I usually just leave everything at default, if there are options.

 

2 hours ago, schuwalker said:

I'll preface this by saying... I'm in awe you have a cabinet for Pitfall II. I do have the whole kit sans the cab and those earlier Sega cabs - good lick finding one. I played the arcade version at a 7-11 once or twice. It wasn't bad, of course being coin-op, the difficulty is higher... my biggest gripe about the game was those graphics - seemed a little cartoony for me at least.

I really couldn't believe it when it popped up in the classifieds. It was just sitting in a guy's mancave; Didn't power up (it was just a fuse to fix, lol). It was very good timing on my part as these days, pretty much anything of value is snatched up immediately by hawkish collectors who are loaded and swoop in on anything and everything that pops up. I love the art on the cabinet and I've always enjoyed Pitfall II but the game is balls-to-the-wall hard. There's a bug too that prevents you from continuing, which sucks (maybe it's a problem with my board?). The only other place I know of that has one is Galloping Ghost Arcade; the farthest I've ever made it is the ice caves but will need to fix continuing to make it further.

 

Here's a review/play I did of the cabinet back in 2015. No more glasses for me though  Gameplay starts at 3:11

 

 

 

[BIGHMW]

I already downloaded the last demo ROM and from what I see in the videos she looks FAR BETTER than the original Parker Bros. version, well done @Silvio Mogno, I'll let you know what I think after I try her out.

[Keatah]

5 hours ago, schuwalker said:

It came down, at least to me, was getting say Combat with an amalgamation  of different arcade games; Canyon Bomber is another good one with a version of Atari Destroyer.

2 hours ago, Shaggy the Atarian said:

I had absolutely no idea as a kid how many of the games on the 2600 were arcade games first.

Similar here. When I got the 2600 on zero-day I had no clue of Combat's origin. And even as time passed I didn't register the Arcade-to-Home conversion concept. It was pre-nebula even. So diffuse. Pretty sure Missile Command and Breakout and Pong were the first to enter my consciousness as ARCADE game and HOME game. Maybe Night Driver too.

 

In any case I liked the colors of Missile Command, so much more pleasant. In fact IMHO the 2600's palette was better than many cabinets. Cabinets only needed the colors they needed for a specific game. The 2600 had to cover more. I also tended to observe that cabinets were geared more toward hi-contrast, while 2600 wasn't as harsh. Maybe that had something to do with TV tube burn-in? Or environment? Or being able to be seen across the arcade establishment?

[BIGHMW]

41 minutes ago, BIGHMW said:

I already downloaded the last demo ROM and from what I see in the videos she looks FAR BETTER than the original Parker Bros. version, well done @Silvio Mogno, I'll let you know what I think after I try her out.

Tried to play her. No go on Flashback 9

[Lauren Tyler]

Definitely Space Invaders.  Sure it's got only 36 invaders at a time, but with a total of 112 game variations, there's plenty of different challenges to take on so it never gets boring.

 

Asteroids may be lacking the vector graphics of the original, but it still plays like the original and offers a variety of ways to play.

 

Q*Bert and Frogger also get the nod as they were very solid ports in spite of the limitations of the Atari 2600.

 

As an honorable mention, Pole Position may be lacking the roadside obstacles and have no grass on the sides, but the speed of the game is amazing for an Atari 2600 game.  I was expecting it to cruise along like Enduro, but the speed was even faster than I thought.

[Keatah]

16 minutes ago, Lauren Tyler said:

As an honorable mention, Pole Position may be lacking the roadside obstacles and have no grass on the sides, but the speed of the game is amazing for an Atari 2600 game.  I was expecting it to cruise along like Enduro, but the speed was even faster than I thought.

Went back and forth with PolePosition vs Enduro. And I preferred Enduro because it seemed smoother overall and more physicsy. Both were important games for us at the time.

 

I also want to stick Phoenix in here too as an honorable mention. Again the colors were so much more appealing at home, and the higher detail in the arcade wasn't part of the fun-factor. Don't know if it's "superior" to it's arcade counterpart, but I liked it better. I didn't like squealing siren sounds the arcade cab made.

 

The tile-like graphics in the arcade seemed crude compared against the 2600 version. 2600 was butter smooth. Slicker'n a baby's ass.

[Keatah]

Sometime along the way in 1980-1982 a competitive arcade vs home comparison started brewing in my still immature head. It may have been with Tempest. Duplicating the colors and speed and resolution seemed impossible at home and was just something we accepted. After all, our home consoles were tiny one-CPU machines whereas arcade cabinets were supercomputers with room for hundreds of boards and thousands of chips! And so it became a benchmark unmatched. Though the 8-bit era. Through the 16-bit era. Unequaled. Even the mighty Apple II with all its prowess and versatility couldn't come close! But there were some clones & play-a-likes, Axis Assassin, Tubeway ][, Genesis, Tunnel Terror, Hellstorm. And we sucked it all up. Just happy to have it all.

 

Then suddenly one day it was all a moot point because Microsoft Arcade (for Windows 3.1) had Tempest as one of its games. As a re-write however. Certainly not perfect. But the grill's fire was lit. Soon it would explode in a conflagration that only MAME's firehose of accuracy and quantity could quench.

 

4 hours ago, Shaggy the Atarian said:

I get that arcades aren't everyone's cup of tea when you can do all the stuff at home you mentioned but my experience with the controls was different - I really enjoyed the twin stick way of moving around and generally speaking it depends on what it is and how its implemented. Driving games get a huge advantage in having those realistic  controls and a properly designed cab can enhance the immersion more than you can't get with mame.

I'm ok with not having exact authentic controls. Having grown up with both arcades and home consoles I seemed to have gotten used to using a variety of controls. Ones that matched the game, and ones that didn't. I even prefer a scissors keyboard today for its superior response time.

 

As for immersion at home we'd make blanket forts and cardboard cutout cockpits. It was fun! If it was a long-duration space mission computer game we'd even take time to pull off to the side and get drive-thru grub. Hit the pause key and run downstairs for pot-pie and then continue on with whatever mission we were involved in.

 

4 hours ago, Shaggy the Atarian said:

It can also be fun to show off at the arcade.

I did so much of that with Gyruss. Jumping and spinning around. Seemingly playing from sides and back of the machine. If anyone claimed the next game with a quarter I snatched it up and no one was the wiser. A master of distraction and deception I was. Heaven help the operator if he put on appropriate 80's music while I was there! Seriously fun times!

 

4 hours ago, Shaggy the Atarian said:

As an older teen I worked at one and we'd play games on our breaks. This allowed me to get rather good at several games without spending money and more than once I managed to attract a crowd of people watching me. I was so in the zone I didn't notice it unless the game went black and I'd see their faces reflected in the screen or I would finish a game and see all these people standing around. There's nothing else like that in gaming

 

Ultimately though, arcades are best as social experiences. My best arcade memories are going with friends and having fun, more than playing by myself. Although I suppose the crowd thing was part of that too. It's just something that home arcade ports or emulation can never recreate, which is why I like them

I get that and did all that in the 80's - all my outings were with buddies. Essentially up to the point when arcades faded away. I was slowly moving toward more complex computer gaming anyways. And if I wanted a social experience then we'd have our buddies over. Arcades were becoming less and less a destination. I was becoming a less regular customer across the board. There were times I was just going through the motions. Couldn't wait to get there, play my stuff, and get it over with. Wondering if I'd be "ok" if I didn't go. I tried that and the world continued on as normal! Whoot!

 

4 hours ago, Shaggy the Atarian said:

I should mention that sometimes arcade employees intentionally set the difficulty high. We did that on Star Wars Trilogy Arcade as us employees would compete on it and we discovered that the way to get the highest scores was set the difficulty to max. That was bad for customers and unfortunately we weren't really thinking about that. As an arcade operator though, I usually just leave everything at default, if there are options.

As customers we didn't appreciate that sort of thing, the higher difficulty settings. It added frustration to already-intentionally-hard games. We learned to avoid such establishments.

 

At first I was pretty naive and didn't know the difficulty could even be changed on a cab. But rumors remained persistent and word kept getting back to me. Eventually I paid close enough attention to the speed of how something moved and the number of lives per quarter. Then a lightbulb went off in my dimwitted head. And the world became a brighter place.

 

It wasn't the main reason I quit the scene, but it was a supporting factor.. and source of anger toward certain game rooms.

[Shaggy the Atarian]

1 hour ago, Keatah said:

Sometime along the way in 1980-1982 a competitive arcade vs home comparison started brewing in my still immature head. ...

 

I get that and did all that in the 80's - all my outings were with buddies. Essentially up to the point when arcades faded away. I was slowly moving toward more complex computer gaming anyways. And if I wanted a social experience then we'd have our buddies over. Arcades were becoming less and less a destination. I was becoming a less regular customer across the board. There were times I was just going through the motions. Couldn't wait to get there, play my stuff, and get it over with. Wondering if I'd be "ok" if I didn't go. I tried that and the world continued on as normal! Whoot!

 

 

I think for most people, it's an ebb and flow sort of thing as to the appeal of arcades - when you are a teen and you have the right place near you, then it's a great go-to; Then you live life and probably don't think about it until you have kids. I would play games with friends at home too but the first time I came across Gauntlet Legends that was something else - I'd never played with a group of strangers like that, but it was fun as the game incentivized that kind of comrade.

 

But everyone's different - some people get into highly competitive games like DDR, Maximum Tune, pinball or even skeeball tournaments. Others just prefer retro stuff like you and are fine with Arcade 1ups or MAME at home. Big multi-million $ chains are still trying to find attractors, be it VR, or axe throwing or escape rooms, etc. Myself, I'm still just doing the standard game room thing. I probably need to expand into food/drinks to really start making money.

 

I do understand the appeal of home play, I've got plenty of home consoles myself but I think the arcade can co-exist with it and is still worth supporting  But there is something different about arcade play that no home port can truly match - one other element of that being the "money on the line" mentality. I learned this when I brought my first cab home, a 1942. When I could just put endless credits on it, I didn't really give it my all. But when I'm at the arcade and know my money is on the line, I try much harder than I normally would and it's easier to "get into the zone." I know not everyone thinks about that but I've had a few customers realize that too. It makes getting a "1cc" much more of a real achievement, especially if the game is really difficult. 

 

This would be an exception to the rule for individual players but this guy encapsulates a lot of these things to show what makes arcades great (give it a minute - he's playacting the whole thing, cutscenes included)

 

 

Edited December 27, 2022 by Shaggy the Atarian

[Silvio Mogno]

11 hours ago, BIGHMW said:

Tried to play her. No go on Flashback 9

Play it on Stella Emulator or on an original 2600