Game documentary on TLC

I love the Atari and grew up on it and its competitors..

However the leap in game quality (not graphic) from 16 bit over the nes was NO WHERE the leap from "atari" to nes...

Comparing the 2600 to the NES is like comparing the PS2's graphical capabilities to the NES' (which I've sadly seen folks do.) There are too many differences and variables involved for a fair comparison to be made between the two things.

JMET, like Neo said, games on the fucking C64, Colecovision and Intellivision were ahead of the Atari 2600. It didnt go 2600->NES. It went more like 2600->C64+Intellivision+Coleco... there's your leap right there.

For a good analogy... the 2600 existing in 1983 is like the PlayStation existing now. If someone were to see the PSX on the shelf and say "wow, ahahaha, games havent progressed a bit since 1996, that PSX is still selling, the game industry blows", you'd say they're a total idiot, right? Well, it's the same thing with the 2600 - the 2600 was being sold in 1982, it was still popular, but it was by no means top of the line gaming. Likewise, the PSX is still around now, it still sells, but its by no means indicative of the current generation of software.

And if you ask me the C64 is the best game machine ever...

That's a perfect comparison, since the time difference between the NES and 2600 are about the same as the ones for the PSX in comparison with today's stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by diffusionx
JMET, like Neo said, games on the fucking C64, Colecovision and Intellivision were ahead of the Atari 2600. It didnt go 2600->NES. It went more like 2600->C64+Intellivision+Coleco... there's your leap right there.

For a good analogy... the 2600 existing in 1983 is like the PlayStation existing now. If someone were to see the PSX on the shelf and say "wow, ahahaha, games havent progressed a bit since 1996, that PSX is still selling, the game industry blows", you'd say they're a total idiot, right? Well, it's the same thing with the 2600 - the 2600 was being sold in 1982, it was still popular, but it was by no means top of the line gaming. Likewise, the PSX is still around now, it still sells, but its by no means indicative of the current generation of software.

And if you ask me the C64 is the best game machine ever...

---

I understand what your saying but not why you care to argue that fact with me..

I owned all those besides the C64.. they werent touching the Nes..

Regardless this is a dead issue with me.. im talking game play not prettynes...

Technology allows you to do more with a game usually, so I do think it is unfair to compare 1977 technology to 1983 tech. However, I think Text Based games like Zork had better game play than anything on NES and those Text Based games (some of them) are WAAAY older than the NES. Whether or not any were available for the 800 or not is something I am largely unware of.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Technosphile
No, thats not true. Neo, this is not a graphics issue. I'm talking about quality of games, playability of games.

---

Believe it or not, some people enjoy the quality and playability of early videogames more than what's currently available. The games have a simple, straight-forward style of gameplay that is generally missing from today's games. Why else would there be Classic Gaming Expo, PhillyClassic, etc?

Just because you think Super Mario Bros. "spanks all the crap on the 2600", doesn't mean everyone does.

Besides, Mario was on the 2600 way before he was on the NES!

http://www.tomheroes.com/images/Dk.gif

-Kevin

Quote:

---

Originally posted by K3V

Besides, Mario was on the 2600 way before he was on the NES!

http://www.tomheroes.com/images/Dk.gif

-Kevin

---

Word, Nintendo called Atari home for a bit as well... well thier ports found a home with Atari :/

This show is on in less than an hour on the east coast. Don't forget, punks!

I've got my tape ready and rarin' to go.