Blots on the gaming landscape.

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, lcarlson, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed

User avatar
r0jaws
Posts: 1860
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by r0jaws » Mon Aug 25, 2014 8:03 am

Why not? He asked for personal opinions. The 2600 just didn't figure in my life at all, and I don't particularly like the system, so personally I think it's a blot.

User avatar
RodimusPrime
Posts: 4141
Joined: Sat May 25, 2013 12:16 pm

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by RodimusPrime » Mon Aug 25, 2014 8:42 am

r0jaws wrote:Why not? He asked for personal opinions. The 2600 just didn't figure in my life at all, and I don't particularly like the system, so personally I think it's a blot.

Thats right he did ask for personal opinions, but what he was aking for was personal opinions on why gaming as a whole could have done without these machines.

What he did not ask was " which machines could you have personally done without " which is what many people in here are doing.

I have never seen a question so misunderstood on a forum this much for a long time.

Whether you like something like the atari 2600 is irrelevant, I personally do not like it, but it was an important part of gaming history. A lot of famous games were introduced on that platform and a lot of great game designers honed their skills on that platform and it helped move the industry forward.


Imagine it this way, if the question was what bands could music have done without was asked, and I said The beatles, mettalica, Queen, etc just because they were not my cup of tea. that would quite rightly be seen as ridiculous, because despite having no importance to me I fully realise the historical importance and impact of those bands.

to really suggest the 2600 is of no imporatnce to the industry is just baffling.

User avatar
RodimusPrime
Posts: 4141
Joined: Sat May 25, 2013 12:16 pm

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by RodimusPrime » Mon Aug 25, 2014 8:45 am

The Laird wrote:
r0jaws wrote:With that in mind, I still contend that the world could have done without the 2600. It didn't bring anything new to the table, it was just very popular in parts of the world. Undoubtedly it was good for Atari, but for the whole Gaming world? I'm not convinced.

We managed without it quite well, infact I don't remember anyone in my group of friends at school ever owning one. It was all 8 bit computers, until the third gen consoles appeared.
The Atari 2600 came out 5 years before the Spectrum and C64. It was the first home machine to offer up official arcade conversions, saw the rise of Activision and third parties, the DB9 joystick (that became the standard), bankswitching and pretty much launched the home console market single handedly. I honestly can't believe the 2600 has been nominated, let alone up for discussion.
Even as a non 2600 fan, I have to agree with this 100%. I will just put it down to ignorance of what the atari 2600 brought to the industry. I mean even the crash at the end is a highly important and significant part of gaming history.

User avatar
r0jaws
Posts: 1860
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by r0jaws » Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:06 am

But the 2600 wasn't alone at the time, the industry, as a whole was still emerging, and if the 2600 didn't exist, then would the world have been very different? There were enough players around to have filled the gap, or do you think that only the 2600 could have fulfilled the role?
I don't.

And just because I don't agree with your interpretation of the question, doesn't mean my opinion is invalid.

User avatar
clarance
Posts: 2702
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:54 pm
Location: The Fens
Contact:

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by clarance » Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:47 am

RodimusPrime wrote:
r0jaws wrote:Why not? He asked for personal opinions. The 2600 just didn't figure in my life at all, and I don't particularly like the system, so personally I think it's a blot.

Thats right he did ask for personal opinions, but what he was aking for was personal opinions on why gaming as a whole could have done without these machines.

What he did not ask was " which machines could you have personally done without " which is what many people in here are doing.

I have never seen a question so misunderstood on a forum this much for a long time.

Whether you like something like the atari 2600 is irrelevant, I personally do not like it, but it was an important part of gaming history. A lot of famous games were introduced on that platform and a lot of great game designers honed their skills on that platform and it helped move the industry forward.


Imagine it this way, if the question was what bands could music have done without was asked, and I said The beatles, mettalica, Queen, etc just because they were not my cup of tea. that would quite rightly be seen as ridiculous, because despite having no importance to me I fully realise the historical importance and impact of those bands.

to really suggest the 2600 is of no imporatnce to the industry is just baffling.
The OP actually asked - "...basically what I want to know is what system do you personally think the world could have done without back in the day?..."

That's kind of a loose question terms of interpretation - so how about you stop being t'internet police and let people have their say in a light-hearted, fun, not to serious kind of way?

And I could quite easily make a case for Queen, Metalica and the Beatles to be wiped from their existence in the firmament right now...
Death may be your Santa Claus.

User avatar
ianpmarks
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:49 am

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by ianpmarks » Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:17 am

Dragon 32
No great original games, poor sales, weird colour scheme, really a rebadged TRS80.

Atari Jaguar
Ugly and plasticky, poor controller, only about 3 good games

Bandai Pippin
An underpowered Mac in a box with poor controllers and no games.

PSP Go
Did nothing the original PSP didn't do, but tried to force download only onto us.

User avatar
RodimusPrime
Posts: 4141
Joined: Sat May 25, 2013 12:16 pm

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by RodimusPrime » Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:18 am

clarance wrote:
RodimusPrime wrote:
r0jaws wrote:Why not? He asked for personal opinions. The 2600 just didn't figure in my life at all, and I don't particularly like the system, so personally I think it's a blot.

Thats right he did ask for personal opinions, but what he was aking for was personal opinions on why gaming as a whole could have done without these machines.

What he did not ask was " which machines could you have personally done without " which is what many people in here are doing.

I have never seen a question so misunderstood on a forum this much for a long time.

Whether you like something like the atari 2600 is irrelevant, I personally do not like it, but it was an important part of gaming history. A lot of famous games were introduced on that platform and a lot of great game designers honed their skills on that platform and it helped move the industry forward.


Imagine it this way, if the question was what bands could music have done without was asked, and I said The beatles, mettalica, Queen, etc just because they were not my cup of tea. that would quite rightly be seen as ridiculous, because despite having no importance to me I fully realise the historical importance and impact of those bands.

to really suggest the 2600 is of no imporatnce to the industry is just baffling.
The OP actually asked - "...basically what I want to know is what system do you personally think the world could have done without back in the day?..."

That's kind of a loose question terms of interpretation - so how about you stop being t'internet police and let people have their say in a light-hearted, fun, not to serious kind of way?

And I could quite easily make a case for Queen, Metalica and the Beatles to be wiped from their existence in the firmament right now...
" what do you personally think THE WORLD could have done without. Jesus, has reading comprehension really got that bad these days.

As for the 2600, The decisions atari made and the way it treat staff caused a splinter group to form activision. Who then started created third party gamnes that atari did not want that resulted in claims and court cases that ended up bringing in certain rules and regulations about what could, and could not be done in regards to that.

Not to mention the crash itself caused by ataris contempt for customers. now this opened the door indirectly for Nintendo and they tailored their approach after seeing what happened to Atari. Seeing what happend to Atari was the basis of Nintendos approach to introducing the NES.

So Sorry, but no matter how you want to pretend that the 2600,s place in history cvould have been took up by another machine, the fact is it had a massive impact in the direction of the videogame industry.

But hey, lets just all go " Duh, I did not have that machine and so it must not have been important "

User avatar
RodimusPrime
Posts: 4141
Joined: Sat May 25, 2013 12:16 pm

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by RodimusPrime » Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:24 am

People like Gman, and Misery, along with other people nominating things like the Ngage, Game.com, etc are more like what I agree with. they came and went with a whimper and never influenced much. Those I can see the reasoning.

User avatar
clarance
Posts: 2702
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:54 pm
Location: The Fens
Contact:

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by clarance » Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:32 am

Just because other people are interpreting the OPs question in a way not fitting with your ability to comprehend, it does not mean they are lacking in comprehension :)

For the record, I own a C16 and a Plus/4, An Atari 7800, A Lynx and a fuggin CD32, play games on all of them, but still think they were pretty irrelevant in the grand scheme of things - all have their place in gaming history, but all could have been equally interchangeable with some other fluff-of-a-system.
Death may be your Santa Claus.

User avatar
RodimusPrime
Posts: 4141
Joined: Sat May 25, 2013 12:16 pm

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by RodimusPrime » Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:42 am

clarance wrote:Just because other people are interpreting the OPs question in a way not fitting with your ability to comprehend, it does not mean they are lacking in comprehension :)

For the record, I own a C16 and a Plus/4, An Atari 7800, A Lynx and a fuggin CD32, play games on all of them, but still think they were pretty irrelevant in the grand scheme of things - all have their place in gaming history, but all could have been equally interchangeable with some other fluff-of-a-system.

There is no misinterpreting it.

He asked what console do you personally think the world could have done without.

The first part ( personally ) implies he wants your opinion, the second ( the world could do without ) sets the hypothesis and setting within the question is asked.

You are answering as if he asked " what console could you have personally done without " . a completely different question.

Its a pretty straightforward question, and its a shame as the original question is actually a very good question and it would have been really interesting to hear what people thought.

User avatar
clarance
Posts: 2702
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:54 pm
Location: The Fens
Contact:

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by clarance » Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:59 am

RodimusPrime wrote:
clarance wrote:Just because other people are interpreting the OPs question in a way not fitting with your ability to comprehend, it does not mean they are lacking in comprehension :)

For the record, I own a C16 and a Plus/4, An Atari 7800, A Lynx and a fuggin CD32, play games on all of them, but still think they were pretty irrelevant in the grand scheme of things - all have their place in gaming history, but all could have been equally interchangeable with some other fluff-of-a-system.

There is no misinterpreting it.

He asked what console do you personally think the world could have done without.

The first part ( personally ) implies he wants your opinion, the second ( the world could do without ) sets the hypothesis and setting within the question is asked.

You are answering as if he asked " what console could you have personally done without " . a completely different question.

Its a pretty straightforward question, and its a shame as the original question is actually a very good question and it would have been really interesting to hear what people thought.
This sentence makes little sense :lol:

Stop willy-wanging over your mastery of the English language, cos you've not got that much to wang...

The opening post has many interpretations, and maybe it would be better to just, you know, let people interpret it as they wish - not really misinterpretation, rather personal interpretation. And so it goes...
Death may be your Santa Claus.

User avatar
noobish hat
Posts: 1018
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:35 pm
Location: West Yorkshire

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by noobish hat » Mon Aug 25, 2014 11:24 am

Must this happen in every thread? It's just a bit of banter ffs.
Image

User avatar
clarance
Posts: 2702
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:54 pm
Location: The Fens
Contact:

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by clarance » Mon Aug 25, 2014 11:37 am

Which is kind of my point, but well put :)
Death may be your Santa Claus.

User avatar
Nemesis
Posts: 1967
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:55 am
Location: Norwich, UK

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by Nemesis » Mon Aug 25, 2014 11:58 am

World Cup Carnival?............
Oh and if you want to do little social experiments on our forum don't post about them on your own you plum - Darren@Retro Gamer

User avatar
outdated_gamer
Posts: 2599
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:14 pm

Re: Blots on the gaming landscape.

Post by outdated_gamer » Mon Aug 25, 2014 12:06 pm

Spector wrote:Anyone remember the major rival to the Gameboy in 1990, the Gamate?

Image


Neither do I.

I do. I wanted one of those... :wink:

I have to agree with Rodimus about the "each system is interesting" view. I don't dislike any system and I think even the failed ones have a place in gaming history and make it more diverse. Infact, I'd say it's often more interesting to discuss about those lesser popular or known systems than the systems everyone knows and appreciates.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DPrinny and 3 guests