Atari vs C64 // was: 8-Bit Computer Poll

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

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

Locked

Best 8-Bit

ZX Spectrum
109
41%
Commodore 64
121
46%
Amstrad CPC 464
25
10%
BBC Micro
8
3%
 
Total votes: 263

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5529
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Post by Matt_B » Tue May 08, 2007 7:41 am

oswald wrote:those high resolution modes cannot be use for a playfield since they are slow and has like 2 colors == > unusable.
That's an utterly ludicrous statement. Those modes are no "slower" than any others on the machines. Whilst most of the games that use them are text adventures, it's perfectly possible to write arcade action games in them. Have a look at Fres Attack - a fast scrolling shooter - on the CPC for an example.

Also there are games like Head Over Heels and Batman on the Amstrad PCW that run at an even higher resolution (720x256) and are just as fast as the C64 versions. Not having a really slow CPU helps a lot here, of course.
I'm glad the vic chip has the best of all compared to any other 8bit gfx chips :)
Saying it over and over again won't make it true, you know. :P

gury
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 4:45 am
Contact:

Post by gury » Tue May 08, 2007 7:49 am

oswald wrote:still the c64 kixx atari ass :) because ppl bought c64s and not atari 8 bits.
This is childish statement, really. And why then ppl bought Atari 8bit, and not C64? Look around, don't rely on C64 userbase please. The C64 userbase is huge indeed, but Atari has its own dedicated users, which are not few. As for many C64 ppl will not go for Atari, Atari people will never go for C64. I would rather go for ZX Spectrum as the second retro machine of the choice.
You are welcome to visit http://gury.atari8.info/

User avatar
RetroRik
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:00 am
Location: Corby, England, UK
Contact:

Post by RetroRik » Tue May 08, 2007 8:02 am

You know i don't get all this Allegiance stuff.

Personally i think you are missing out if you only like or play on a system made by a certain company.

Most systems have their good and bad points but all have their charms.

I have owned a ZX81 and Speccy from the Sinclair side and VIC20 and Amiga 500 from the Commodore side. I have also enjoyed the Atari 800 xl so never got involved with the play ground arguments.

Regards

RIK
Image

gury
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 4:45 am
Contact:

Post by gury » Tue May 08, 2007 8:09 am

RetroRik wrote:You know i don't get all this Allegiance stuff.

Personally i think you are missing out if you only like or play on a system made by a certain company.

Most systems have their good and bad points but all have their charms.

I have owned a ZX81 and Speccy from the Sinclair side and VIC20 and Amiga 500 from the Commodore side. I have also enjoyed the Atari 800 xl so never got involved with the play ground arguments.

Regards

RIK
Sorry for that, but some people are so biased about their computers that make others inferior, which is FAR from that. Every computer has its bad and good points, of course. But please, don't make other one so inferior! I can give many bad points about the other computer, but it is really unnecessary. Good points makes it great machine also, good for it.
You are welcome to visit http://gury.atari8.info/

User avatar
Dudley
Posts: 8716
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 7:53 pm
Contact:

Post by Dudley » Tue May 08, 2007 8:22 am

oswald wrote: yeah, the c64 is in the guinnes world book as the best selling machine ever probably because the Atari 8-bit was better. Get real man.
Indeed, just like the Toyota Corolla is the greatest car ever made and the best single ever is "Do they know its Christmas" and the best PC game ever is Myst.
Yesterzine - The Literal Magazine Show
http://yesterzine.co.uk | @Yesterzine on Twitter | yesterzineshow@gmail.com

gury
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 4:45 am
Contact:

Post by gury » Tue May 08, 2007 8:34 am

oswald wrote: the c64 can animate and move BIG sprites using its hardware, no color clashes, no cpu power needed for it, 50fps straight. To do animation / movement/ colors you just set up 7-8 registers and they there are.
Atari 8-bit is doing the same/similar thing.
You are welcome to visit http://gury.atari8.info/

psj3809
Posts: 19049
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 10:28 am

Post by psj3809 » Tue May 08, 2007 8:40 am

Dudley wrote:
oswald wrote: yeah, the c64 is in the guinnes world book as the best selling machine ever probably because the Atari 8-bit was better. Get real man.
Indeed, just like the Toyota Corolla is the greatest car ever made and the best single ever is "Do they know its Christmas" and the best PC game ever is Myst.
Exactly ! Perhaps Westlife are one of the best bands of all time because of the amount of number 1's they have !

The C64 is a great machine but top sales dont make it the best machine. Its up there at the top though along with the Speccy

At the end of the day practically EVERYONE here is voting for the machine they had as a kid, if i had a C64 for 10 years back in the 80's i would love that number 1, i had a Speccy so i love that. Its all a bit pointless the usual playground arguments.

HOWEVER due to emulation i love trying new systems, enjoy the C64 much more now that i play a fair few games on a C64 emulator. I'm not one of these muppets though who slate a machine and slate a game from just a screenshot and who hasnt even tried it though.

darthy
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:10 am
Location: aye

Post by darthy » Tue May 08, 2007 9:04 am

muppet ? me a muppet ? , just because i dont agree with you .
youve made me all upset now.

:lol:
aye

User avatar
Pengwin
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 6:33 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Post by Pengwin » Tue May 08, 2007 9:46 am

Not wanting to fan the flames too much (or maybe I do :wink: )
Whilst I do agree the C64 was a good machine (hell I nearly bought one myself), I feel the Atari was superior in some aspects, particularly the graphics. It also had a better basic language then the C64 and it hit the market 3 years before the C64, in fact 3 years before anything else that could touch it (IMHO).

psj3809
Posts: 19049
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 10:28 am

Post by psj3809 » Tue May 08, 2007 10:04 am

darthy wrote:muppet ? me a muppet ? , just because i dont agree with you .
youve made me all upset now.

:lol:
Wasnt directed at you, was directed at the person going on about the Commando screenshots and slating the Speccy version from a single screenshot. Never had tried to play that version or anything. Ridiculous

User avatar
TMR
Posts: 5756
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 10:56 am
Location: Leeds, U.K.
Contact:

Post by TMR » Tue May 08, 2007 10:29 am

Matt_B wrote:Whilst most of the games that use them are text adventures, it's perfectly possible to write arcade action games in them. Have a look at Fres Attack - a fast scrolling shooter - on the CPC for an example.
Which scrolls ridiculously fast because the hardware can't move it any more finely (the CTRC steps through in two byte increments i believe?) - from what i gather, Fres Attack was written more as a proof-of-concept for the scrolling than as an actual game and it's not the most playable title on the CPC because of the speed it moves and the amount of time the player spends hammering into the landscape. Which is a shame, i quite liked it apart from how bloody difficult it is...

The C64's bigger brother the C128 has it's VDC display that can match the highest resolution on the BBC or CPC but attribute maps it like the Spectrum. And it's character-based and has hardware scroll. =-)

User avatar
neuromancer
Posts: 1581
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 6:04 pm
Location: /dev/null
Contact:

Post by neuromancer » Tue May 08, 2007 10:44 am

Pengwin wrote:Not wanting to fan the flames too much (or maybe I do :wink: )
Whilst I do agree the C64 was a good machine (hell I nearly bought one myself), I feel the Atari was superior in some aspects, particularly the graphics. It also had a better basic language then the C64 and it hit the market 3 years before the C64, in fact 3 years before anything else that could touch it (IMHO).
As is generally the case there's certain things that one machine can do better than another. I've been checking out some C64 demos having been posting here about Atari 8bit demos. There's another thread about this, but having compared the two side by side there are indeed certain things the Atari can do graphically which the C64 can't match (and vice versa) - a case in point is bump mapping and plasma effects on the Atari - the much larger palette and DLI tricks to get all the colours on screen together make for some spectacular demos. The C64 demos show that the sprite capabilities of the C64 gives it the advantage in certain types of demo.

Basically I've enjoyed the best offerings of both machines.

The fact that the Atari came out c. 3 years earlier means it didn't have as up to date hardware as the c64 (obviously), so what it can do in comparison to the c64 is even more impressive, imho

I certainly don't want to get into a 'my Atari's better than your c64' debate as I can see merits in both machines (and the speccy, which I voted for)

User avatar
Pengwin
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 6:33 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Post by Pengwin » Tue May 08, 2007 10:56 am

neuromancer wrote: I certainly don't want to get into a 'my Atari's better than your c64' debate as I can see merits in both machines (and the speccy, which I voted for)
Oh I agree, I'm not into arguing about that. I agree that all the computers of the era had something to offer (The jupiter Ace springs to mind here, with it's Forth language as dows the MSX with the backing of several eastern companies).

I think it all really boils down to personal preference, and to some extent familiarity.

User avatar
TMR
Posts: 5756
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 10:56 am
Location: Leeds, U.K.
Contact:

Post by TMR » Tue May 08, 2007 11:04 am

gury wrote:
oswald wrote: the c64 can animate and move BIG sprites using its hardware, no color clashes, no cpu power needed for it, 50fps straight. To do animation / movement/ colors you just set up 7-8 registers and they there are.
Atari 8-bit is doing the same/similar thing.
It's not doing anything near the same. C64 sprites are 24 hi-res pixels across (12 multicolour), Atari players are 8 multicolour, there are eight on the C64 and five if the missiles work in unison so that's 96 multicolour pixels versus 40 - less than half and the C64 sprites are in three colours whilst the Atari is only doing one per player so if you want to match colour depth it goes down to a mere 20 multicolour pixels wide as they pair off.

Animating a sprite on the C64 is a matter of one write to it's data pointer, moving it vertically is similarly one write to it's vertical register. Doing these jobs on the Atari requires the old image to be cleaned out of the player RAM and a new one written in, so assuming both jobs are combined, that's 42 memory transactions per sprite compared to one on the C64 and 210 bytes written compared to a mere 16 on the C64 - so it does require CPU power.

User avatar
neuromancer
Posts: 1581
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 6:04 pm
Location: /dev/null
Contact:

Post by neuromancer » Tue May 08, 2007 11:10 am

Pengwin wrote:
neuromancer wrote: I certainly don't want to get into a 'my Atari's better than your c64' debate as I can see merits in both machines (and the speccy, which I voted for)
Oh I agree, I'm not into arguing about that. I agree that all the computers of the era had something to offer (The jupiter Ace springs to mind here, with it's Forth language as dows the MSX with the backing of several eastern companies).

I think it all really boils down to personal preference, and to some extent familiarity.
Sorry, my comment wasn't directly aimed at yours - I think we're both in agreement on this one!

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Matt_B and 3 guests