Thomas Jentzsch Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, Ben from Plaion said: A 2600+ playing on a 75inch OLED via HDMI is like Premier League vs some fuzzy nonsense with an original 2600 using composite cables on a crappy old CRT...ugh yuck! I disagree. Many of us have modded their consoles to RGB or S-Video and use higher quality CRTs (Sony PVMs or much cheaper Trinitrons). The classic games were developed for CRTs (e.g. profiting from phosphor effects and scanlines) and look best when played on a good CRT. IMO. Edited October 10, 2023 by Thomas Jentzsch 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauder666 Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 9 minutes ago, Thomas Jentzsch said: I disagree. Many of us have modded their consoles to RGB or S-Video and use higher quality CRTs (Sony PVMs or much cheaper Trinitrons). The classic games were developed for CRTs (e.g. profiting from phosphor effects and scanlines) and look best when played on a good CRT. IMO. Anything up to and including PS2 looks better on CRT. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Defender_2600 Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 34 minutes ago, marauder666 said: Anything up to and including PS2 looks better on CRT. The CRT still has its strengths with the generations after the PS2. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauder666 Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 8 minutes ago, Defender_2600 said: i was thinking of consoles designed for CRTs. Yeah, Sony FW900, I'd love one. Just have to put up with a 35 year old BVM for pre PS2, and a LaCie 19" VGA for Dreamcast, PS2, Gamecube and XBox. If the LaCie was 16:9 then the 360 and PS3 would be through it too. The PSTV is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Karnov Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 I love a good CRT, but every one I tried my unmodded PAL 7800 on gave me a fuzzy image with poor colour. Never has that issue with any other "classic" console. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben from Plaion Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 1 hour ago, Dr Karnov said: One of the main reasons I'm looking forward to the 2600+, is that even back in the day on a CRT, my (PAL) 7800 had a really fuzzy image. The footage of the 2600+ looks much better Its a different league. I was obviously trolling somewhat in my last post, and of course CRT has a certain charm, but the sharpness, size and colour definition of modern TVs makes 2600 games really pop. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Defender_2600 Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 1 hour ago, Dr Karnov said: I love a good CRT, but every one I tried my unmodded PAL 7800 on gave me a fuzzy image with poor colour. Never has that issue with any other "classic" console. Your console may need maintenance (replacing capacitors, etc). Regardless, if you prefer not to modify your console, you can get a good improvement by using a external high-end demodulator (the best ones are expensive, I know). https://www.ambery.com/rfdm2-pi.html 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitsized Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 1 hour ago, Thomas Jentzsch said: I disagree. Many of us have modded their consoles to RGB or S-Video and use higher quality CRTs (Sony PVMs or much cheaper Trinitrons). The classic games were developed for CRTs (e.g. profiting from phosphor effects and scanlines) and look best when played on a good CRT. IMO. Sincere question: How did the classic games benefit or become developed for the phosphor effects or scan lines? I just assumed it was a byproduct of the technology aesthetic. Other than that, is much lost playing on a crisp monitor? I'm also asking to fuel my inner debate on what to purchase for the 2600+. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tep392 Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 8 minutes ago, Bitsized said: Sincere question: How did the classic games benefit or become developed for the phosphor effects or scan lines? I just assumed it was a byproduct of the technology aesthetic. Other than that, is much lost playing on a crisp monitor? I'm also asking to fuel my inner debate on what to purchase for the 2600+. One true benefit is that the low resolution graphics of the time looked smooth instead of jagged. Example: Arcade Pac-man looks round. Power pellets look round. When playing the same games in emulators or modern hardware with high resolution output, you will see the squareness of the low resolution pixels very clearly. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Karnov Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 13 minutes ago, Defender_2600 said: Your console may need maintenance (replacing capacitors, etc). Regardless, if you prefer not to modify your console, you can get a good improvement by using a external high-end demodulator (the best ones are expensive, I know). https://www.ambery.com/rfdm2-pi.html Cheers for the info. I may look into a demodulator in the future but since the one you've recommended is close to the price of the 2600+, I'm going to take my chances with that, since it should be about to play all (or almost all) PAL and NTSC 2600 & 7800 carts that I have and I can use my original controllers too 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+karri Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 2 hours ago, Dr Karnov said: One of the main reasons I'm looking forward to the 2600+, is that even back in the day on a CRT, my (PAL) 7800 had a really fuzzy image. The footage of the 2600+ looks much better I just got tired on my lousy RF output on my 7800 PAL and modified it to deliver S-video and composite instead. Just to find out that my big screen does not support it... Today I added a S-video to HDMI box and got a nice picture. But the path from 7800 -> s-video -> hdmi is a bit long... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tickled_Pink Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 Not sure if this has been asked, but ... why 2600+ and not the 7800+? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Karnov Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 4 minutes ago, karri said: I just got tired on my lousy RF output on my 7800 PAL and modified it to deliver S-video and composite instead. Just to find out that my big screen does not support it... Today I added a S-video to HDMI box and got a nice picture. But the path from 7800 -> s-video -> hdmi is a bit long... Nice work! I've got some analogue to digital scalers including the OSSC and the Micomsoft XRGB1, but none of them accept RF in, so without some modding (or an additional purchase of some kind) I figure I won't get a good image out of my 7800. That's why I'm so excited about the 2600+ 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Karnov Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 3 minutes ago, Tickled_Pink said: Not sure if this has been asked, but ... why 2600+ and not the 7800+? I assumed it was because the 2600 has more market value due to people being familiar with it 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+karri Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 24 minutes ago, Dr Karnov said: I assumed it was because the 2600 has more market value due to people being familiar with it Actually, the 2600 is stylish. A front panel made of "wood" and a good looking top. When 7800 is just booring... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Karnov Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 1 minute ago, karri said: Actually, the 2600 is stylish. A front panel made of "wood" and a good looking top. When 7800 is just booring... I guess the 2600+ is the best of both worlds then: the style of the 2600 with the functionality of the 7800 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tep392 Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 3 minutes ago, karri said: Actually, the 2600 is stylish. A front panel made of "wood" and a good looking top. When 7800 is just booring... Going with the iconic look of the original VCS was a great choice. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 1 hour ago, Bitsized said: Sincere question: How did the classic games benefit or become developed for the phosphor effects or scan lines? I just assumed it was a byproduct of the technology aesthetic. Other than that, is much lost playing on a crisp monitor? I'm also asking to fuel my inner debate on what to purchase for the 2600+. While I have a fondness for playing games on CRTs (and will have a ton of them setup at PRGE this weekend), I rather do like the sharp, clean graphics of the 2600 when using the 2600+ on a quality flat panel screen. ..Al 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyindrew Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 6 minutes ago, karri said: Actually, the 2600 is stylish. A front panel made of "wood" and a good looking top. When 7800 is just booring... I strongly disagree. Both units aesthetics represent the time periods they were released in. This was the one area Atari beat Nintendo in. 2600-Fits in perfectly with home decor circa 1978 7800-Fits in perfectly with home decor circa 1986 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 2 hours ago, Tickled_Pink said: Not sure if this has been asked, but ... why 2600+ and not the 7800+? The Atari 2600 greatly outsold the 7800, has a much larger library (it's not even close), and was the first console to get a foothold in millions of homes in the late 70s and early 80s. It's the retro console most people are familiar with and have a fond nostalgia for. If it was my decision, I would have done the same thing. ..Al 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerseystyle Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 25 minutes ago, Albert said: The Atari 2600 greatly outsold the 2600, has a much larger library (it's not even close), and was the first console to get a foothold in millions of homes in the late 70s and early 80s. It's the retro console most people are familiar with and have a fond nostalgia for. If it was my decision, I would have done the same thing. ..Al And its design is iconic. I love the 7800 but I can’t honestly say the console design itself ever really grabbed me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 2 hours ago, Bitsized said: Sincere question: How did the classic games benefit or become developed for the phosphor effects or scan lines? I just assumed it was a byproduct of the technology aesthetic. Other than that, is much lost playing on a crisp monitor? I'm also asking to fuel my inner debate on what to purchase for the 2600+. There are many videos like these on YT. They should provide the info you need. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flojomojo Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 1 hour ago, Albert said: The Atari 2600 greatly outsold the 2600 2600+ is a good geeky name for people who have a lot of old cartridges. I wonder what the average person thinks of the number as name? I suspect it's all Atari to most people. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzip Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 7 minutes ago, Flojomojo said: I wonder what the average person thinks of the number as name? I suspect it's all Atari to most people. Good point, it was always "Let's Play Atari". Hell, marketing couldn't decide if it was the 2600 or the VCS, and then you had your friends with the Sears Telegames models which was called neither, not to mention the odd kids with the Coleco Gemini... 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben from Plaion Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 2 hours ago, Tickled_Pink said: Not sure if this has been asked, but ... why 2600+ and not the 7800+? It was always going to be 2600 something because of it's shape. I remember a brief conversation about the name and 10400 was floated! But in the end 2600+ was chosen for obvious reasons - it's a 2600 with the + signifying the added 7800 compatibility. 3 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.