Comparing the 5200 to the Atari 8-bit

[simbalion]

I decided to do a comparison tonight between my Atari 800 and my 5200. I tried out Centipede on both systems and all I can say is: WHAT WAS ATARI THINKING?! The version for the 8-bits looks horrible compared to the 5200! Even the version that Atari made for the TI-99/4a looks better than the version on the 8-bit. Any other games do better on either the computer or 5200? I realize that this has probably already been done, but I do know that the 5200 version of Centipede is sweet and it will be even better once the Trakball I won on eBay arrives. Now Donkey Kong on the Atari 800 looks pretty good. I like my old 800 computer well enough, I got it for free several years ago. Another thing, I found out that I have to turn my TV up louder for the 800 for some reason. The 5200 just about blows my TV speaker out if I leave it up to the same level as the 800. I wonder why? Very interesting.

[JB]

DigDug was totally redone for the 5200 as well.

 

Qix is also different. And superior, if for no other reason than it has 2 fire buttons to work with.

[Brian R.]

Pac-Man on the 5200 has the intermissions, while the 8 bit cart doesn't. Not sure if there are any other differences.

[Major_Havoc]

Pac-Man on the 5200 has the intermissions, while the 8 bit cart doesn't. Not sure if there are any other differences.

 

There are different pacmans on the 8bit.. I know two have a MUCH MORE accurate sound effect on the dot eating ("waka waka waka").. if the 5200 version with the intermissions had that sound effect, then it'd be almost perfect. I say 'almost' since on all versions, the collision detection with the ghosts still needs some tweaking to be more forgiving of course.

 

Anyway, comparing the 5200 to the 8-bits I think is futile. They're the same friggin thing (yeah yeah nitpick the small technicals all you want.. we all know they are more or less THE SAME). It's almost like comparing a toaster NES to a top loader NES.

 

I think it's more accurate to simply compare the variations of games themselves.

[mos6507]

They seemed to put more effort on the games with the 5200 but from a hardware point of view, the 8-bit is better because it has a real keyboard, the PIA chip for joysticks, and SIO for peripherals.

 

Most if not all the 5200 games were back-ported to the home computer so comparing the different versions of the same game isn't relevant anymore.

[Rybags]

Mario Bros, although in it's case it was the 5200 version that suffered.

 

Some games gained a rework for the 5200, so improvements were seen.

 

Some games were exclusive to the 5200 but were converted to the 8-bit by cracking crews. Others were released later on by Atari (especially when the XEGS came along).

[Shannon]

Frogger and Gorf play better on the 8-bit. (More like a controller issue than anything) and there is a version of frogger for the 8-bit with fantastic music (sierra on-line).

 

Or was Gorf just fine with the 5200 stick?

[rxd]

I've always wanted to ask one question about the whole 5200 vs. 8bit thing. Virtually every thread I read ends up with people saying "Get the 8bit, it's the same as the 5200 only more convienant..." Now honestly that's not 100% true, the look and feel of alot of the games is different, the controllers are totally different (both the joysticks and the trackball), and I just prefer to play games on a game machine with all the controls in my hand, no keyboard. But yes the 8bit has more games that's for sure. Now my point isn't that people who prefer the 8bit are wrong, it's a totally cool way to play these old games. But I never see one question asked or answered, and that is this. If you see no difference between playing 5200 games on the Atari 8bit computers then why bother stopping there? Get a Atari 8bit emulator and play on your pc. Hell I think the difference between playing on a Atari computer using a keyboard and a one button joystick and a pc using a keyboard and a one button joystick is much less than the difference between the 5200 and the Atari computers. Plus you can have every game ever made in an incredibly tiny part of a pc hard disk. What can be more convenient than that? And the emulation today is virtually spot on, so just sit in front of a newer computer rather than an older one.

 

Now that is not really what I'm advocating here. I think it's a totally different feeling playing real games on real hardware. But that's my point, if you also feel that way then you can't really say just get the 8bit computer rather than a 5200. It's not really the same as the 5200 is it? In fact in my opinion a pc emulating an Atari 8bit is closer to the real thing than a Atari 8bit is to a 5200...

 

Just my 2 cents, I'm curious what others think about this.

[simbalion]

I've always wanted to ask one question about the whole 5200 vs. 8bit thing. Virtually every thread I read ends up with people saying "Get the 8bit, it's the same as the 5200 only more convienant..." Now honestly that's not 100% true, the look and feel of alot of the games is different, the controllers are totally different (both the joysticks and the trackball), and I just prefer to play games on a game machine with all the controls in my hand, no keyboard. But yes the 8bit has more games that's for sure. Now my point isn't that people who prefer the 8bit are wrong, it's a totally cool way to play these old games. But I never see one question asked or answered, and that is this. If you see no difference between playing 5200 games on the Atari 8bit computers then why bother stopping there? Get a Atari 8bit emulator and play on your pc. Hell I think the difference between playing on a Atari computer using a keyboard and a one button joystick and a pc using a keyboard and a one button joystick is much less than the difference between the 5200 and the Atari computers. Plus you can have every game ever made in an incredibly tiny part of a pc hard disk. What can be more convenient than that? And the emulation today is virtually spot on, so just sit in front of a newer computer rather than an older one.

 

Now that is not really what I'm advocating here. I think it's a totally different feeling playing real games on real hardware. But that's my point, if you also feel that way then you can't really say just get the 8bit computer rather than a 5200. It's not really the same as the 5200 is it? In fact in my opinion a pc emulating an Atari 8bit is closer to the real thing than a Atari 8bit is to a 5200...

 

Just my 2 cents, I'm curious what others think about this.

 

 

The 5200 experience is definately different from the 8bit from what I have experienced. I like the Atari 8bits just fine, heck I have three of them: an 800, a 1200xl needing keyboard repair, and a 130xe. Even though it can be high maintanence, the controllers on the 5200 give alot of options and everything besides the power switch is right at your fingertips. Add in the big arcade style trakball controller and you can really get the experience. (Hope mine comes today) Also, I have a harder time locating games for the 8bits compared to the 5200, even on eBay.

[Shannon]

I dunno.. As has been said the 5200 games have been ported over to the 8-bit anyways so no big loss there.

 

With the exception of Qix and it's two button action, and Star raiders with it's keypad use (you can use the A8 keyboard). There is really not much difference. Obviously games like frogger and Gorf are better on the A8, so you have two advantages and two (depending on your view) disadvantages.

 

I have a trackball for the 5200 and never really cared much for it. Didn't seem to improve the experience that much for me. Not as much as a trackball in an arcade does.

 

Paddle game like kaboom and super breakout are much more interesting with an actual paddle than the 5200 controller. I'd take a paddle controller over the 5200 analog stick anyday.

 

The 5200 controller is not really well designed for games that require quick direction changes. Sure some people say they are used to it, or have no problem with it, but it still is not technically desiged for digital input. Did you know that the pacman game reads in your moves ahead of time. Well actually only one move. Ever wonder why?

 

I don't ever remember having to disassemble any of my controllers to fix them or clean them on the A8. On top of that I don't like the 5200 fire buttons. Too mushy.

 

The A8 actually takes up less space than a 5200 and has a keyboard to boot. Try playing an Infocom or Scott Adams text adventure on a 5200. The A8, unlike most PC's, can be hooked up to a TV. The A8, unlike a PC (unless you have a stella adapter), can handle a paddle controller. There are several programming languages for the A8 so you can write stuff yourself.

 

Your argument for A8 emulation could be extended to the 5200 as well, but I'm not gonna go that route. It's a silly premise to begin with.

 

The A8 has a far more extensive software collection available. I could probably name 40-50 titles in addition to the ones that are on the 5200 that are worthy of attention. A8 conversions to 5200 excluded. That being said the 5200's software library pretty much consists of a good percentage of the A8 titles even worth bothering with.

 

Nothing against the 5200 it's a nice console, but the advantages of the 8-bit FAR outweigh the ones of the 5200.

[simbalion]

I dunno.. As has been said the 5200 games have been ported over to the 8-bit anyways so no big loss there.

 

With the exception of Qix and it's two button action, and Star raiders with it's keypad use (you can use the A8 keyboard). There is really not much difference. Obviously games like frogger and Gorf are better on the A8, so you have two advantages and two (depending on your view) disadvantages.

 

I have a trackball for the 5200 and never really cared much for it. Didn't seem to improve the experience that much for me. Not as much as a trackball in an arcade does.

 

Paddle game like kaboom and super breakout are much more interesting with an actual paddle than the 5200 controller. I'd take a paddle controller over the 5200 analog stick anyday.

 

The 5200 controller is not really well designed for games that require quick direction changes. Sure some people say they are used to it, or have no problem with it, but it still is not technically desiged for digital input. Did you know that the pacman game reads in your moves ahead of time. Well actually only one move. Ever wonder why?

 

I don't ever remember having to disassemble any of my controllers to fix them or clean them on the A8. On top of that I don't like the 5200 fire buttons. Too mushy.

 

The A8 actually takes up less space than a 5200 and has a keyboard to boot. Try playing an Infocom or Scott Adams text adventure on a 5200. The A8, unlike most PC's, can be hooked up to a TV. The A8, unlike a PC (unless you have a stella adapter), can handle a paddle controller. There are several programming languages for the A8 so you can write stuff yourself.

 

Your argument for A8 emulation could be extended to the 5200 as well, but I'm not gonna go that route. It's a silly premise to begin with.

 

The A8 has a far more extensive software collection available. I could probably name 40-50 titles in addition to the ones that are on the 5200 that are worthy of attention. A8 conversions to 5200 excluded. That being said the 5200's software library pretty much consists of a good percentage of the A8 titles even worth bothering with.

 

Nothing against the 5200 it's a nice console, but the advantages of the 8-bit FAR outweigh the ones of the 5200.

 

I seem to remember that somewhere I saw and read about improvements that were being done for the 5200 before it got axed. One was a smaller console and the other was improved self-centering controllers. I have been tinkering around with my 800 and what limited games I have for it. The 8-bit XEGS would have probably been a better thing to go with when Atari got back into games, but I have always felt that the 5200 got axed way too soon. For one thing, I hate having to let loose of the joystick to reach out and slap the space bar or some other key on the computer. Add to that the fact that most games found in the wild have no instructions and it can be a crap shoot guessing what keys do what and that keyboard has alot of keys!

 

I still think Atari would have been better off implementing the improvements on the 5200 instead of trying to shift gears and going with the sadly inferior 7800. The crash and the Tramiels didn't help much either. The 5200 might have made a good carry-over system if it had only gotten the chance to have its limits pushed. Maybe it could have been a more fair competitor for the NES when it came out. At least a thorn in Nintendo's side until Atari could have gotten another system off the ground. Just my theory.

[Paranoid]

I've always wanted to ask one question about the whole 5200 vs. 8bit thing. Virtually every thread I read ends up with people saying "Get the 8bit, it's the same as the 5200 only more convienant..." Now honestly that's not 100% true, the look and feel of alot of the games is different, the controllers are totally different (both the joysticks and the trackball), and I just prefer to play games on a game machine with all the controls in my hand, no keyboard. But yes the 8bit has more games that's for sure. Now my point isn't that people who prefer the 8bit are wrong, it's a totally cool way to play these old games. But I never see one question asked or answered, and that is this. If you see no difference between playing 5200 games on the Atari 8bit computers then why bother stopping there? Get a Atari 8bit emulator and play on your pc. Hell I think the difference between playing on a Atari computer using a keyboard and a one button joystick and a pc using a keyboard and a one button joystick is much less than the difference between the 5200 and the Atari computers. Plus you can have every game ever made in an incredibly tiny part of a pc hard disk. What can be more convenient than that? And the emulation today is virtually spot on, so just sit in front of a newer computer rather than an older one.

 

Now that is not really what I'm advocating here. I think it's a totally different feeling playing real games on real hardware. But that's my point, if you also feel that way then you can't really say just get the 8bit computer rather than a 5200. It's not really the same as the 5200 is it? In fact in my opinion a pc emulating an Atari 8bit is closer to the real thing than a Atari 8bit is to a 5200...

 

Just my 2 cents, I'm curious what others think about this.

 

Despite often agreeing with Shannon on a variety of topics, this is one where we we differ. I don't think it is a silly premise at all, and I've argued virtually the same thing in similar threads. It isn't a PERFECT premise, but, it isn't *silly*.

 

I've got an 800xl with a MyIDE multicart, and a 5200 with a 128-in-1 usb cart. I've also got emulation on any number of different platforms for both 8 bit and 5200, so I can play the same titles on basically any machine I have.

 

What it boils down to for me is that the #1 factor is the user interface... and this is all inclusive. Emulation tends to be a PITA because either you're on a PC with a PC keyboard and remapped keys and a USB joystick (hopefully NOT a dpad, but instead a stelladaptor or Speedlink Pro), or you're on something like an XBox and limited to the interface options there (which could also quite easily be a PC style keyboard and a d-pad).

 

The 5200 is what I got first, and once I got the 128 in 1, I realized I was really interested in a lot of the backports from 8 bit to 5200. I quickly realized that I'd want a digital stick for most of those titles. Pursuing that was a bit aggravating. I achieved my goal, more or less, thanks to PacManPlus and his RSI->5200 conversion. But there are still some foundation issues with analog on the 5200 that become real noticable when you're playing 8 bit conversions. At that point, I realized that for a fairly small investment, (less than the 128-in-1 cart), I could have an Atari 8 bit and a MyIDE multicart and play those games on the kind of stick they were intended for, as well as not have to wait for generous members of the community to port 8 bit titles to the 5200. So I got an 8 bit, too. But the idea that you should just go with an 8 bit because they've got all the titles the 5200 has is simply wrong. Frogger gets a lot of flack for the control method, but I prefer it, and I think 5200 has the best graphics and sounds of any home version of frogger (and, like 8 bit DK, in some ways, superior to the arcade version as well), and the 8 bit versions do NOT stack up as well, IMO. There are a number of other titles as mentioned here that have unique advantages on the 5200. Not to mention, where the 8 bit versions ARE the same (often because the 5200 title was ported BACK to the 8 bit, for example, Pac Man, I believe)... you get into a thing with the 8 bit where there are a dozen different images floating around out there and you really end up with a hard-to-manage library of titles with you know, 12 different copies of Frogger by 4 different publishers, plus a couple of ports by hackers. You might just find yourself overwhelmed with options. The 5200 is far more elegent in it's simplicity in this regard. Additionally, the 8 bits have PC type issues with compatability and such that the 5200 radically reduces on (having just two major revisions that each can have 2 minor revisions each, as opposed to an entire family line from the 400 to the XEGS with different variations floating around in each member of each generation, as with the 8 bits).

 

The problem is, if you have zero experience with EITHER, history and popular opinion shows that the 5200 is somewhat of an acquired taste. It can be a little daunting for someone that isn't prepared for some of its strange quirks and idosyncricies. Based on that, when you get someone who is shopping for their FIRST experience with Atari in this family linage, from a modern point of view, often I feel that the 8 bit PC is probably a better choice. It is cheaper, it has a far bigger library that is ALMOST the same, it uses regular Atari joysticks. 5200s cost a lot, they cost a lot to ship, their accessories are more expensive, and they tend to have higher value to those of us who really have a fondness for them.

 

If you don't HAVE that special nostalgia for the 5200, then an 8 bit probably WILL suit you, more or less, just as well, and cost you a lot less... *AND* a 5200 is liable to disappoint and frustrate you, also (especially those joysticks). For someone who understands just how good Super Breakout is with a well adjusted 5200 analog controller, (or Star Raiders, or Robotron or Space Dungeon, or a number of other titles), the 8 bit becomes a poor substitute... Again... it *does* come down to the user interface, even deciding between the 5200 and an 8 bit... But, if you didn't cut your teeth on these titles while learning how to work with the quirky nature of those 5200 sticks, the odds are you're *never* going to get it and be converted TODAY... again... stick with the 8 bit and the digital sticks and the 2600 paddles.

[Shannon]

I never bought the "too many titles so don't get it thinking". So what if there are too many..

 

Like I said I can name a good many titles 40-50 (I'm being a little conservative) outside of the 5200 library. If one purchased an 8-bit they could look at the 5200 library to get a good idea of 80% of the best titles for the 8-bit.

 

Figuring out the rest would simply be a matter of asking people.

 

As for robotron and space dungeon, they use dual joysticks on the 8-bit. Try it...

 

Key bashing? Well the only game I ever remember having an issue with that was defender. Star Raiders moves along slow enough that you don't have to worry. Besides it's fun trying to figure out the key commands for games. I used to do it all the time since I was too young to be able to afford buying the stuff (shhh don't tell anyone).

 

One thing that does make 5200 collection fun, though is the cartridges. Just to have that physical cart in the hand is worth it.

[Paranoid]

Heh... re:carts, I do away with them and get Multicarts as soon as possible anyhow, and, the entire 8 bit line is a fairly cart oriented platform. I mean, you CAN use disks, but a HUGE number of titles are available on cart, too...

 

And the too many titles argument is valid... just a matter of perspective. It is an OVERWHELMING library that spans what, 25 years in production, more or less? HUGE. Frickin HARD to manage. And there are MOUNTAINS of crap in that library. With the 5200, it is HARD to find the turkeys. With the 8 bit, the reverse is the case. Although I see your point... yeah... look at the 5200 library and pick those all up, and you've got a GREAT collection of titles for the 8 bit, with 1 or two minor exceptions where the 8 bit version sucks balls.

 

Does the 8 bit version of RT and SD support dual joysticks? Really? Still, though... not the same thing with a digital stick versus analog. You can really get that analog working for you on these two titles, as well as a few others. Not to mention, it seems like getting two 2600 style sticks to stick together like the 5200 controller holder does would be a chore. (although, I don't have a 5200 controller holder for these titles, so I rigged up my own clunky solution, anyhow).

 

I think this is another example though, where the BEST solution really is to have both, if you can. I mean, that *is* my solution. Best of both worlds.

[simbalion]

I guess I'm a bit weird. I had my 8bit first, but the 5200 won me over once I got used to it. I now have 2. A 4 port and a 2 port version and I finally got my trak-ball over the weekend. Next step is to have the rest of my controllers rebuilt. Also can't wait for Adventure II! I am pondering getting a few things and putting my Atari 800 to work. Maybe for word processing or one of those experiment sets you could get for it. I have an Atari printer around here somewhere...

[Shannon]

Don't get me wrong. I really like the 5200, but it is really hard for me to ignore titles like MULE, Seven Cities Of Gold, Koronis Rift, The Eidolon, Trivia Quest, the XE version of Crystal Castles, Alternate Reality, Archon, Ultima 3 & 4, AutoDuel, most anything by Synapse, Bruce Lee, Gumball, Spelunker, Lords Of Conquest, Goonies, Dandy, Drol, the Lode Runner series, Spare Change, Whistler's Brother, Karateka, Dropzone, Kennedy Approach, Hacker, Murder On The Zinderneuf, Pinball Construction Set, Jumpman, Master Of The Lamps, Mercenary (1&2), Mr Robot and His Robot Factory, Pastfinder, Great American Cross Country Road Race, Pitstop I & II, Realm Of Impossibility, the Spy vs Spy series, Summer Games, Temple Of Apsha.

 

Just to name a handful of disk based games.

[DracIsBack]

I still think Atari would have been better off implementing the improvements on the 5200 instead of trying to shift gears and going with the sadly inferior 7800.

 

 

Oh for crying out loud, here we go again ...

 

Honestly guys, is it a mantra for entry in the 5200 group to start randomly cutting down the 7800? This is how flame wars get started!

 

I'm glad people dig the 5200 and its games. I'm glad people prefer the libraries they prefer.

 

But it's really friggen annoying to see the constant 7800 bashing that goes on in here. Hell, if 7800 fans came in here and started bashing the 5200, there would be a damn holy war.

Edited November 21, 2006 by DracIsBack

[Paranoid]

Shannon...

 

The one thing you kind of miss in your example... is all of those great titles are more or less uniquely PC style games. Outside of a few specific titles (Jumpman is the one that really jumps out), all of those titles require a lot more time and effort, you can't just really sit down at them and start playing. There is a distinct difference between console and PC gaming and if anything, the current PC gaming & 3D Console platform markets illustrate this. I'm not saying you are wrong. Those are great examples of the expanded library available on the 8 bit. But they might not have as much draw for someone oriented solely toward console gaming.

 

Listen... I think I'm onto something with the modern analogy. The XBox is simply an Intel 733. Yet, I prefer a game like GTA/SA on the XBox rather than my PC. As a matter of fact, there are a LOT of games I'd rather play on the XBox, despite the fact that the PC version may, technically offer a lot more enhanced features. For example, GTA/SA will display on my PC in far higher resolution, and there is no doubt my 3.4ghz PCI-E gaming PC is more "capable" than the XBox. But the very *console* design of the XBox makes it a superior gaming platform in some more intangible ways. And yet again, #1 is a *consistent* and logical user interface right out of the box, from one XBox to another, without any inconvienient configuration. The game is designed around the XBox controller. And that makes a huge difference. PCs, by their flexibility, now and ALWAYS have had some limitations as far as having a clean (or the cleanest) user interface. Game consoles, in comparisson, by their single purpose, now and ALWAYS have had some advantages as far as having a clean (or the cleanest) user interface. There are certainly counter examples (Halo is probably a superior experience for a seasoned FPS player on the PC with a mouse, for example), but in general, this does exist, and it is a big reason why the modern consoles survive alongside gaming PCs. Let's not even touch on the difference between plugging something in and having it go and having to tweak around with whatever to get it to run on a PC (something that the Atari 8 bits are not immune to). With an XBox, if it says, "XBox" on the box, you know it is going to work in your XBox. With a PC, if it says, "Requirements, yada yada yada", you may meet all of those, go to load it up, and find that you really need to get under the hood and make some changes in order to run it. For example, downloading the latest Direct X or GPU driver or... whatever...

 

Those examples may not be as distinct between the 5200 and 8 bits, but they still exist.

 

 

Regarding 5200 guys bashing the 7800... well... first off, I've said this before... we're an angry bunch with a chip on our shoulder, and it is only human nature when you've been picked on to point at someone in worse shape than you and go, "leave me alone, pick on THAT dork... he is far worse than me..."

 

Especially when it is TRUE and you're still getting picked on more.

 

Perhaps a difference is that we DO get people from the other various forums coming in here SPECIFICALLY to bash on the 5200, for some reason. People who are into the other Atari lines but not the 5200 seem to get a 5200, or play on one, decide it sucks, and feel the need to come in here and say so. They also seem to like to say so throughout the other forums around here... and in the press, and... anywhere else someone might be talking about a 20 year old game console.

 

And, I agree with the perspective that if you're going to bash an Atari console, the 7800 is a much better target than the 5200, all things considered. The 7800 *itself*, taken on it's own merits, in its own time, is really a pretty dismal machine. Good graphics, but lackluster game play. Horrible sound. Miserable stock joysticks... and competing against a system that (unfairly) dominated the market at that time (thus making 3rd party support slim and hurting the library overall).

 

Now, in a modern context, the 7800 has a lot of advantages. The CC2 alone makes it worth having. The fact that it has some really good classic arcade ports (this is the strength of MOST of its library actually), doesn't hurt, and that the VAST majority of 2600 titles play troublefree on it is what pushes it over the edge, and from a gamers perspective, makes it a MORE logical choice than the 2600 for someone who wants a 2600 retrofix. It is a 2600+, basically. So, the 7800 *aged* well, it is a system that matured to find it had a very important place that took it from an "also-ran" to perhaps one of the most important consoles in the Atari retro lineup. Personally, I don't see that as BASHING on the 7800. I see it as an honest appraisal of where and why it failed, and when and how it redeemed itself.

[Paranoid]

Keep in mind too, that these are subjective opinions, all of them. It is ok for you to think I'm wrong, and for me to think you're wrong. It is ok for us to make judgements about which one is better and which one is worse, and *why* we think that. If we went by sheer popularity, the 2600 remains the dominant retro console, and while it clearly has its charms, I think the reason no one bashes on its limitations is because they're really quite obvious. It is like pointing out that Sarah Jessica Parker is turning into Ruth Buzzy as she grows old. Why point out something that anyone with eyes can see?

[DracIsBack]

Regarding 5200 guys bashing the 7800... well... first off, I've said this before... we're an angry bunch with a chip on our shoulder, and it is only human nature when you've been picked on to point at someone in worse shape than you and go, "leave me alone, pick on THAT dork... he is far worse than me..."

 

Fair enough. At least you admit it. Still, do onto others ....

 

 

And, I agree with the perspective that if you're going to bash an Atari console, the 7800 is a much better target than the 5200, all things considered.

 

I don't, but you are entitled to your opinion! Personally, I quite like the Jaguar, but I'd go after it first.

 

The 7800 *itself*, taken on it's own merits, in its own time, is really a pretty dismal machine. Good graphics, but lackluster game play. Horrible sound. Miserable stock joysticks... and competing against a system that (unfairly) dominated the market at that time (thus making 3rd party support slim and hurting the library overall).

 

You're entitled to your opinion, but remember it is an opinion and not everyone shares it. This is the basis of flame wars. There's a world of difference between,

 

"is really a pretty dismal machine" (expressed as fact) and "I thought it was a pretty dismal machine" (expressed as opinion).

 

In fairness, I agree with some of your points, but I don't completely share your opinion.

 

I *personally* liked a lot of its games. I personally liked its graphics. I didn't really like the joysticks but I had played others I liked less (not 5200 actually but intellivision). I personally liked the mix of games -- old 2600 library could be played; solid classics could be played; computer translations could be played; and NES style games could be played. In that respect, I found the library unique in the Atari lineup and I appreciated it, even if Tramiel didn't always deliver.

 

 

In short I (and others) didn't need a Cuttle Cart to enjoy our 7800s. We were fans before there was such a beast, but CC2 has made it that much more exciting.

 

I do admire your fandom and you won't see me insulting the 5200. But I would hope that 5200 fans would do the same.

 

It's one thing to cheer for the 5200. It's another to start randomly expressing personal subjective opinions as fact in order to cut down another system ('a sadly inferior system')

[JB]

Honestly guys, is it a mantra for entry in the 5200 group to start randomly cutting down the 7800?

Only if you don't want to argue about controllers.

[www.atarimania.com]

Frogger gets a lot of flack for the control method, but I prefer it, and I think 5200 has the best graphics and sounds of any home version of frogger (and, like 8 bit DK, in some ways, superior to the arcade version as well), and the 8 bit versions do NOT stack up as well, IMO.

For the 8497th time, the cartridge versions of Frogger on the A8 and 5200 are IDENTICAL.

 

--

Atari Frog

http://www.atarimania.com

[DracIsBack]

Honestly guys, is it a mantra for entry in the 5200 group to start randomly cutting down the 7800?

Only if you don't want to argue about controllers.

 

I'm going to totally go against the grain but ...

 

I don't think Atari had particularly good controllers on any system.

[Paranoid]

I'm going to agree with DracisBack on his last couple of posts completely. I'd like to expand, though. It depends on how you define your criteria when you're comparing these different consoles. Are we just putting different Atari systems, or all consoles... is the Jag a retro console, or a modern one? Lots of different opinions possible here. As far as controllers go, I also agree, the 7800 controllers suck, but not as bad as the INTV controllers. The 7800 controllers are probably in a lot of ways on par with the Coleco controllers, IMO. BUT, despite that, there *are* games on the INTV that leverage those controllers well and actually offer unique and compelling gameplay BECAUSE of the controller that would be hard to duplicate on ANY other system because of the LACK of that controller (which is my argument for why the 5200 controller ISN'T bad, as well). I don't think you can say that about either the Colecovision or Prosystem sticks. They're just *bad*. Generally *usable*, but never a joy to use. Whereas the INTV and 5200, sometimes the sticks are utterly UNUSABLE, yet, in some cases, the 5200 and INTV controllers are a "joy" to use in the fact that you wouldn't want to play a particular title on any OTHER kind of controller. Does that make sense? Because it is an important detail, I think.

 

As for the Cart version of Frogger 8 bit/5200... that may be true. The images that are floating around out there are NOT a rom dump of the cart, then, but disk images of a variety of OTHER versions of Frogger. I've got probably 6 different copies of Frogger on my MyIDE cart, and NONE of them are the 5200 PB version. I mean, I suppose if your contention is that if this is a deal breaker, it shouldn't be, because it DOES exist, your point is taken. But, it seems like MOST of the 8 bit versions out there are NOT the same as the 5200 version.

[Lord Helmet]

Frogger gets a lot of flack for the control method, but I prefer it, and I think 5200 has the best graphics and sounds of any home version of frogger (and, like 8 bit DK, in some ways, superior to the arcade version as well), and the 8 bit versions do NOT stack up as well, IMO.

For the 8497th time, the cartridge versions of Frogger on the A8 and 5200 are IDENTICAL.

 

--

Atari Frog

http://www.atarimania.com

 

Except for the control scheme