Activision versus Atari

[John Van Ryzin]

Activision had a higher 2600 game quality standard (for example in graphics) than Atari.  But did that really matter?  Meaning, a game is fun or it is not. Does it really matter if the graphics suck or flicker, if the player thinks the game is fun?

[zzip]

I've told this story before, but I remember when I got my first PC in the 90s,  I found the Activision Anthology and instantly bought it.   I was excited to play those games again.

 

But then I did, and immediately realized that most of those games were boring, the gameplay didn't hold up

 

The early Activision games especially where all about the graphics and very little gameplay.   Skyjinks-   Just a simple slalom,  Barnstorming - very repetitive.   Megamania - a slightly more imaginative Space Invaders clone.    Grand Prix- wow those cars looked amazing! but there wasn't much game there.

 

When my friends and I were collecting for the 2600 in the 80s, we considered Activision games the cream of the crop.    But now most of the 2600 games that I'll still play are from other publishers.

 

I suppose the graphics don't matter all that much.    One of my favorite games is Adventure,  A game that I though looked horrendous even back in 82!   I think because it's open-ended enough you could make your own challenges ("I'm not going to just collect the chalice, but all the items including dead dragon carcasses in my castle" challenge.  "Sneak items past the bat" challenge, "fly around the kingdom using the bridge and magnet in combination without getting stuck")

[John Van Ryzin]

I thought many Activision titles were fun, and others just looked good.  But there were titles like River Raid, that did not look good but were very fun.  Not faulting Activision or Atari, just always seemed odd to me that fun games with simple graphics can be compelling anyway.

[+jeremiahjt]

I like Activision games, I mean my favorite 2600 game is Pitfall!, but I have never thought they were heads and shoulders above everybody else that many think.  I play more Atari published games than anything else, of course they published a lot more games than everybody else.  I think Parker Brothers and Imagic were just as good percentage wise as Activision.  Activision did release more than twice as many games (44 in the US) as the second most productive publisher, Parker Brothers (21 games).

 

Some of my favorite Activision games are Pitfall!, Pitfall II: Lost Caverns, Stampede, Space Shuttle, Starmaster, Robot Tank, Keystone Kapers, H.E.R.O., Commando, and Double Dragon.  Yes, I enjoy Double Dragon.  On the other hand, some of the most popular Activision games have never been favorites of mine like Kaboom!, River Raid, Enduro, and Dragster.

 

Edit: I like Ghostbusters and Chopper Command too, but I prefer Defender to Chopper Command.

[+Cafeman]

It didn't matter after the first day of owning a game - fun is fun , dull is dull, regardless if a game flickers or not.     I will say that  Activision's no-flicker policy, and because they designed to the strengths of the 2600 hardware as opposed to porting a far more advanced coin-op game, made their games visually impressive over many of Atari's - at least for a while.    Once GCC got involved, the Atari published games became a lot more exciting and impressive.  I'm surprised Activision didn't make a maze chase game after Pac-Man became so popular. 

 

I also have also found many of the earliest 2600 Activision games to be on the dull side.    The earliest Activision game I actually liked was 1981's Kaboom!  It had simple visuals, but it moved so fast with great sound effects and paddle-controls, that game is still one of my favorite 2600 games.  I liked a lot of the next wave of Activision titles (1982 and later) like Megamania, Pitfall, especially River Raid,  Enduro, Keystone Kapers, and HERO.  But I love the Activision Anthology compilations and love to explore all those other games - like Barnstorming, a game I'd never have bought back then. 

 

Incidentally, I think the worst game I've ever seen on 2600 was 3D Tic Tac Toe.  Ugly and annoying to play!  But then its author Carol Shaw went on to make my favorite game,  River Raid!

[tradyblix]

Everytime I look at the amazing Score Font in Demon Attack, and then look at the Pixelated crap served out for years on every other game, even 7800 games, I think yeah, Activision was quality. 

[+cvga]

26 minutes ago, tradyblix said:

Everytime I look at the amazing Score Font in Demon Attack, and then look at the Pixelated crap served out for years on every other game, even 7800 games, I think yeah, Activision was quality. 

Demon Attack was published by Imagic, not Activision but it is true that Activision was quality.

[tradyblix]

You're right my bad. Still, just look at that font. I think only one other game, and It also was an Imagic game, had that font. 

 

I guess for Activision my favorite was Seaquest. So replayable. Still one of the games you reach for today because you know you can last at least a little while. 

 

Nice difficulty curve. 

Edited December 31, 2023 by tradyblix

[+cvga]

1 hour ago, tradyblix said:

You're right my bad. Still, just look at that font. I think only one other game, and It also was an Imagic game, had that font. 

 

You're probably thinking about Cosmic Ark

[tradyblix]

3 minutes ago, cvga said:

You're probably thinking about Cosmic Ark

Maybe, but I also have a few games with that and I don't have Cosmic Ark (played too many times as a child, sadly). 

 

I think it's moonsweeper. There's another non-imagic game too I have. but you just look at it compared to the other post 1982 games and think, did anyone else CARE ? lol 

 

I do need to get cosmic ark and atlantis. I love the classic UFO representation. just shows how not much has changed since the 70s

Edited December 31, 2023 by tradyblix

[+cvga]

I'm fairly certain I have an extra Cosmic Ark. PM me your address and I'll send it to you.

[StormyWeathers]

i like surround by Atari but also ice hockey by activision where loads of people probably do not. its a matter of opinion i guess. 

[scifidude79]

I'm not a person who loves one publisher over another. I'm also not a person who cares as much about graphics as I do if a game is fun or not. Both Atari and Activision made some amazing games for the 2600, and both produced some stinkers. But, the great games vastly outweigh the stinkers. Some of my favorite Atari 2600 games are Asteroids, Centipede, Berzerk, River Raid and Pitfall. In fact, I need to get cartridges of both River Raid and Pitfall. They're a bit pricier as 2600 games go, but worth it, in my opinion. The 2600+ has me collecting cartridges again. I'm getting games based on how fun they are, or if they look like they might be of interest to me. Just last night, I ordered Defender and Fishing Derby. Defender of course is a Williams game, but the 2600 version was programmed at Atari and Fishing Derby is an Activision game. Both are really fun. 😁

[+jeremiahjt]

10 hours ago, StormyWeathers said:

i like surround by Atari but also ice hockey by activision where loads of people probably do not. its a matter of opinion i guess. 

My five year old likes to play Surround together. I have not tried Ice Hockey with her yet. Currently she has been trying to play Superman. She captured Lex Luthor and all five of his henchmen by herself.

[StormyWeathers]

1 minute ago, jeremiahjt said:

My five year old likes to play Surround together. I have not tried Ice Hockey with her yet. Currently she has been trying to play Superman. She captured Lex Luthor and all five of his henchmen by herself.

well, ice hockey is most important game to me so far. played it a lot as a child and still am. give it a try 👍🙂

[moycon]

On 12/30/2023 at 9:56 PM, zzip said:

I've told this story before, but I remember when I got my first PC in the 90s,  I found the Activision Anthology and instantly bought it.   I was excited to play those games again.

But then I did, and immediately realized that most of those games were boring, the gameplay didn't hold up

 Tell that story every year zzip, we're mostly old men who can't remember why we walked into a room, so feel free to remind us!

 

I agree earliest Activision was pretty bland. I wasn't even a HUGE fan of Pitfall at that time which came a bit later, and don't get me started on Laser Blast. YAWN

 

As an adult I can appreciate the time they took to make sure games were flicker free, but as a kid, there first games they released were mostly snooze fests. 

 

 

[+GoldLeader]

I Love Pitfall! and hated Laser Blast.   I also dig Megamania (I call it Activision's answer to Astro Blaster),  which I'd played and borrowed but never owned BITD,...And Spider Fighter.  But yeah,  Imagic had Demon Attack,  Atari had Adventure and Yars' Revenge,  M-Network had Dark Cavern and Tron Deadly Discs,  Data Age had Frankenstein's Monster,  Spectravision had Nexar,  Parker Brothers had Empire Strikes Back, etc. so no use worrying about Publisher,  Only whether or not a game was good.  I still think a lot of great stuff came out for Atari and each publisher had their stars.

[scifidude79]

Parker Brothers had Frogger and Q*Bert, two of my favorite games. And the 2600 versions hold up really nicely, even against later releases. In fact, PB had a lot of decent games. But, I think they were one of the companies that stopped making video games after the crash.

[+LS650]

4 hours ago, scifidude79 said:

Parker Brothers had Frogger and Q*Bert, two of my favorite games. And the 2600 versions hold up really nicely, even against later releases. In fact, PB had a lot of decent games. But, I think they were one of the companies that stopped making video games after the crash.

I agree.  Parker Bros also made Popeye, Gyruss, and The Empire Strikes Back.  Of course, they also made put out some not so great games such as 007...

[BillDMatt]

-----

Edited January 1 by BillDMatt

[BillDMatt]

On 12/30/2023 at 9:31 PM, John Van Ryzin said:

Activision had a higher 2600 game quality standard (for example in graphics) than Atari.  But did that really matter?  Meaning, a game is fun or it is not. Does it really matter if the graphics suck or flicker, if the player thinks the game is fun?

that is a common perception but IMHO a little overblown, it's certainly the case in some games but  people act like every game from Atari was like on the level of the first Atari Golf, but they did some really great ports of some tough arcade Games,  Vanguard,  StarGate (Defender II) Space Invaders, I can go on.  and on games where  where the graphics weren't looking too close to the arcade version, Atari did a fantastic job of game play, something that gets so overlooked by many people.   Ms. Pacman, Centipede, Millipede,  Dig Dug,  Asteroids,  Missel Command again I could keep going.   Atari  nailed game play.   I think it says something when the original Atari Basketball is thoroughly enjoyed by my 10 year old son and his freinds .   

Edited January 1 by BillDMatt

[John Van Ryzin]

I agree, fun meant more back then.  But if a game had both, all the better I guess.

 

Wow, had no idea young kids would even try old games today.

[BillDMatt]

3 minutes ago, John Van Ryzin said:

I agree, fun meant more back then.  But if a game had both, all the better I guess.

 

Wow, had no idea young kids would even try old games today.

Yeah they have fun with some of the classics, they get jumping around yelling etc,   they really like Frogs and Flies as well   LOL    it's quite a sight. 

Edited January 1 by BillDMatt

[davyK]

Activision , like all devs, have a chequered library. But like great devs, their best are great. Their hit/miss ratio is favourable. Unlike Atari they didn't have to try and squeeze arcade games onto the 2600 so they could design games that played to the console's strengths which is why they looked so good, but also sometimes they can feel samey.

 

I still rate Kaboom! as one of the best on the 2600 library. I consider Megamania the best shooting game on the system too. It's a proper modern shmup with loops that introduce new enemy patterns. A superb game.

 

Tennis is a mini masterpiece - seemingly a primitive pong clone with sugar coating but it has depth of play and is a truly great 2 player game when skills are well matched.

 

I also like Keystone Kapers - at first I wasn't impressed with it as once you caught the thief it seems to become repetitive - but the way the game introduces changes on each loop is masterful.

 

HERO is probably them at their technical peak and it's an excellent game as well.  

 

Fishing Derby is an original and highly enjoyable game and the 2P mode is great once you mastered the CPU.

 

Space Shuttle is a masterpiece of synergy - a sequence of micro games that add up to more than a sum of its parts and it's got superb presentation.

 

Pitfall! is a bit of a bore and its sequel is impressive but I've never liked explorathons. There were too many time trial games, though they can be enjoyable if you play with someone and try to best each other. The slalom style games like Sky Jinks and Skiing are the best of the bunch.

 

Laser Blast is a dreadful game - you've seen everything after about 30 seconds. That could be OK but it's basic action isn't enjoyable. Never liked River Raid - I appreciate many liked it but it's too repetitive.  Spider Fighter is lovely but it's too easy.

 

Practically all the games have their hallmark graphical presentation that makes them instantly recognisable. The point is they have something for everyone. And most of  the games I don't like I can admire.

 

Where Atari at their best trumps Activision is how their games feel which compensated for sprite flicker etc. But that's down to their arcade heritage. How they pushed some of the later ports out is a miracle.  But we were lucky to have them both as they pushed each other to excellence.

Edited January 2 by davyK

[zzip]

On 1/1/2024 at 1:38 AM, moycon said:

I agree earliest Activision was pretty bland. I wasn't even a HUGE fan of Pitfall at that time which came a bit later, and don't get me started on Laser Blast. YAWN

 

As an adult I can appreciate the time they took to make sure games were flicker free, but as a kid, there first games they released were mostly snooze fests. 

Pitfall was fun at first,  but it got repetitive quickly.   I liked Pitfall II a lot more because of the greater variety of the caverns.

 

In the 2600 games, seemed like my friends or I were getting a new game all the time,  everything was a new experience.   So with Activision, it was a Fishing Game!   A "catch the falling bomb" game! catch the crook in the department store,  drag racing.  Space Invaders with Hamburgers!   Then we moved on to other systems and never really noticed how basic the gameplay was until we played more advanced games I suppose.   So a lot of those were fun at the time but didn't hold up.