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

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

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

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
Mayhem
Posts: 4739
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 7:05 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Post by Mayhem » Thu May 17, 2007 5:43 am

Allas wrote:Until 1984 Atari produced a lot of games, most of them quality portings, over the C64 versions. As: Frogger, all the family Pacman, Twerps, Astrochase, Bandits!, Choplifter, Galaxian, Microprose flight simulators, Seawolf, Attack of the mutant Camels, Lucasfilm titles, Bristles, Buck Rogers, Donkey Kong family, Flip and Flop, Activision titles, Rally Speedway, Montezuma, Space Shuttle, Wavy Navy, Decathlon, Dropzone, Flak, Frogger 2, Hero, Seven cities of Gold,....... a lot more.

And even more, arcade conversions didn't exist in C64 before 1984 as Space Invaders, Blue Print, Dig Dug, Kangaroo, Capture the flag!, Alley cat, Encounter, Joust, Jungle Hunt, Pole Position, Tennis, Defender, Last Starfighter, ..... a lot more
I didn't think Jeff ported AMC to the Atari until 1985? Unless I'm mistaken here... I recall reviews here from 1985 of the game. And it wasn't hard to get a better version of Buck Rogers, it's utterly crap on the C64 ;)

And Blue Print did exist on the C64 in 1983, it was a Commodore own conversion licensed from Bally Midway.

There were plenty of very good C64 titles from the 82-84 region... though I only have to mention Impossible Mission which trumps EVERY single Atari game you've already mentioned heh...
Lie with passion and be forever damned...

Image

oswald
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 7:55 am

Post by oswald » Thu May 17, 2007 7:08 am

Mayhem wrote:
Allas wrote:Until 1984 Atari produced a lot of games, most of them quality portings, over the C64 versions. As: Frogger, all the family Pacman, Twerps, Astrochase, Bandits!, Choplifter, Galaxian, Microprose flight simulators, Seawolf, Attack of the mutant Camels, Lucasfilm titles, Bristles, Buck Rogers, Donkey Kong family, Flip and Flop, Activision titles, Rally Speedway, Montezuma, Space Shuttle, Wavy Navy, Decathlon, Dropzone, Flak, Frogger 2, Hero, Seven cities of Gold,....... a lot more.

And even more, arcade conversions didn't exist in C64 before 1984 as Space Invaders, Blue Print, Dig Dug, Kangaroo, Capture the flag!, Alley cat, Encounter, Joust, Jungle Hunt, Pole Position, Tennis, Defender, Last Starfighter, ..... a lot more
I didn't think Jeff ported AMC to the Atari until 1985? Unless I'm mistaken here... I recall reviews here from 1985 of the game. And it wasn't hard to get a better version of Buck Rogers, it's utterly crap on the C64 ;)

And Blue Print did exist on the C64 in 1983, it was a Commodore own conversion licensed from Bally Midway.

There were plenty of very good C64 titles from the 82-84 region... though I only have to mention Impossible Mission which trumps EVERY single Atari game you've already mentioned heh...
guess atari fucked it up with thinking they will make the games for their own machine thus not documenting the HW, etc.

User avatar
pforson
Posts: 2735
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 7:32 am
Location: uk london
Contact:

Post by pforson » Thu May 17, 2007 7:51 am

better late than never, I've got my vote in for the good old Speccy.

Now all I have to do is trawl through the thread noting all the names of c64 voters and remind myself to ignore all their future posts. For they will have no relevance.

Pete ;)
WANTED: Amiga CD32 games. PM me. :)

Image

Atari Frog
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 5:57 am

Post by Atari Frog » Thu May 17, 2007 8:45 am

Mayhem wrote:I didn't think Jeff ported AMC to the Atari until 1985? Unless I'm mistaken here... I recall reviews here from 1985 of the game.
Nope, mid-1984: http://www.atarimania.com/detail_soft.p ... 422&MENU=8 (ads confirm this as well).
There were plenty of very good C64 titles from the 82-84 region... though I only have to mention Impossible Mission which trumps EVERY single Atari game you've already mentioned heh...
Thank God for the Atari 8-bit ports though... Sheesh, for some Freudian reason, you're not even thankful for giving you Boulder Dash :wink:

--
Atari Frog
http://www.atarimania.com

Atari Frog
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 5:57 am

Post by Atari Frog » Thu May 17, 2007 9:18 am

oswald wrote:guess atari fucked it up with thinking they will make the games for their own machine thus not documenting the HW, etc.
I don't think that's the reason... Probably has to do that, before 1982, there was no real competition for Atari and the userbase wasn't big enough for bigger projects. This was also the time of 8-16K games, which were always technically better on the Atari no matter what.

IMO, Atari's major f***-ups were:
- the 1200XL
- the disastrous decisions before Christmas 1982 and 1983
- the company's weak presence in the UK when the 400 and 800 could've had a real impact before the Spectrum and C64 launched
- the high price of hardware and software in the UK.

--
Atari Frog
http://www.atarimania.com

User avatar
paranoid marvin
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: 21st Century Earth

Post by paranoid marvin » Thu May 17, 2007 10:09 am

So was the 800xl a technicaly better machine than the C64 or not?

I know in the early days games , usually from the US , were as good if not better on the Atari than the C64 - games like Mercenary and Elektraglide
Mr Flibble says...
"Game over , boys!"

User avatar
mrmessy
Posts: 309
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:06 am
Location: The middle of England
Contact:

Post by mrmessy » Thu May 17, 2007 10:11 am

paranoid marvin wrote:the C64 was unaffordabe for 99% of the kids at my Comprehensive school
Same here (for 1983). I recon, by 1984, the Spectrum owners in my school outnumbered the C64 owners by about 5 to 1. In '83 the C64 was hugely expensive in the UK (equivalent of around £900 today, aparantly) and it was considered a rich kid's computer where I grew up.

I assume the C64 sold much better in the late 80's judging by the puzzlingly high percentage of votes on the poll (at the moment). But then, this poll is not a "which computer did you own?" poll.
'79:Micro5500> '83:Spec(48K)> '84:Spec+(kit)> '86:Spec128> '88:ST> '90:A500> '93:A1200> '93:SNES> '95:PS1> '99:PC> '02:PS2> '05:Xbox> '12:X360> '14:PS4... XboxLive:messy73, PSN:mrmessy73, YouTube:mrmessyschannel

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

Post by neuromancer » Thu May 17, 2007 10:46 am

Allas wrote: Until 1984 Atari produced a lot of games, most of them quality portings, over the C64 versions. As: Frogger...
Just a minor point; Atari frogger wasn't a C64 port, it was written by John Harris whilst he worked for Sierra. Bonus side fact: when he'd nearly finished his masterpiece he took the source code (and backup disk) to a show where all his kit was stolen. He was so depressed he didn't code again for a couple of months, then had to start the entire project again from scratch.

oswald
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 7:55 am

Post by oswald » Thu May 17, 2007 11:06 am

Atari Frog wrote:
oswald wrote:guess atari fucked it up with thinking they will make the games for their own machine thus not documenting the HW, etc.
I don't think that's the reason... Probably has to do that, before 1982, there was no real competition for Atari and the userbase wasn't big enough for bigger projects. This was also the time of 8-16K games, which were always technically better on the Atari no matter what.

IMO, Atari's major f***-ups were:
- the 1200XL
- the disastrous decisions before Christmas 1982 and 1983
- the company's weak presence in the UK when the 400 and 800 could've had a real impact before the Spectrum and C64 launched
- the high price of hardware and software in the UK.

--
Atari Frog
http://www.atarimania.com
- available software is often more important than the machine itself
- the c64 was both much cheaper and had more games, the HW was game wise better, bizz app wise and OS wise weaker. (slow disk drive, no 80 column display, lame basic etc)
- UK is a small market compared to US, Europe, Japan etc, dont think it was decisive.
- "computers for the masses not the classes" that was jack tramiel's saying, while atari targeted the classes, c= came out with the technically roughly same level, in a lot of areas beter, c64 cheaper.
- some ppl brought up the better basic&os of the atari, but weirdly that was a drawback imho, roms were pricey this made the atari more pricey.

I dont know about this but if atari really had the specs closed away, that was the biggest mistake they could do (suicide)

what decisions did they take in 82 83 xmas?

oswald
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 7:55 am

Post by oswald » Thu May 17, 2007 11:08 am

pforson wrote:better late than never, I've got my vote in for the good old Speccy.

Now all I have to do is trawl through the thread noting all the names of c64 voters and remind myself to ignore all their future posts. For they will have no relevance.

Pete ;)
really wise... stick your head in the sand and ignore the reality.

oswald
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 7:55 am

Post by oswald » Thu May 17, 2007 11:11 am

mrmessy wrote:
paranoid marvin wrote:the C64 was unaffordabe for 99% of the kids at my Comprehensive school
Same here (for 1983). I recon, by 1984, the Spectrum owners in my school outnumbered the C64 owners by about 5 to 1. In '83 the C64 was hugely expensive in the UK (equivalent of around £900 today, aparantly) and it was considered a rich kid's computer where I grew up.

I assume the C64 sold much better in the late 80's judging by the puzzlingly high percentage of votes on the poll (at the moment). But then, this poll is not a "which computer did you own?" poll.
speccy was only big in the UK. I am actually ammazed it was a winner platform there. In hungary it was vice versa, c64 was the normal, and speccy was the poor man's computer. but that was later in time.

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

Post by neuromancer » Thu May 17, 2007 11:23 am

oswald wrote: In hungary ... speccy was the poor man's computer. but that was later in time.
I guess there were a lot of 'poor men' in the UK in the early 80s - we loved the speccy all the more for being the 'computer of the people' :D

User avatar
Allas
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 11:11 pm

Post by Allas » Thu May 17, 2007 11:30 am

neuromancer wrote:
Allas wrote: Until 1984 Atari produced a lot of games, most of them quality portings, over the C64 versions. As: Frogger...
Just a minor point; Atari frogger wasn't a C64 port, it was written by John Harris whilst he worked for Sierra. Bonus side fact: when he'd nearly finished his masterpiece he took the source code (and backup disk) to a show where all his kit was stolen. He was so depressed he didn't code again for a couple of months, then had to start the entire project again from scratch.
Well, a little confusion, maybe my fold. With "portings" I try to said "arcade portings", some examples first in Atari, some examples first in C64.

Just "Impossible Mission" is the first title that I remember that wasn't porting to Atari for Epix. That's the beggining of the down of Atari.

The worst thing is, these companies had Atari programming techniques that were loosed. For example, I think the best multiplexing sprites techniques was created before 1985 in Atari computers.
Oswald say
guess atari fucked it up with thinking they will make the games for their own machine thus not documenting the HW, etc.
That's true, but before 1982.

Blueprint in C64.... interesting... I have to play it, but the Atari version looks very good.

P.D. I recently played the Blue print in a C64 emulator. Definitively, Atari version is the best. I guess C64 only starting to discover the quality of his features.
---------
Allas

Atari Frog
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 5:57 am

Post by Atari Frog » Thu May 17, 2007 12:12 pm

You're quoting me but not really answering the points I raised... I was referring to the 1980-1983 era which you obviously don't know about.
oswald wrote:available software is often more important than the machine itself
What do you mean exactly? How many titles did the C64 have in the early days? Not much... There WAS quality software on the Atari. There could've been even more but it was better than what the C64 had in the beginning.
the c64 was both much cheaper and had more games, the HW was game wise better, bizz app wise and OS wise weaker. (slow disk drive, no 80 column display, lame basic etc)
More games in general were developed for the C64 after 1984 but it took two years for it to take the lead as far as "better games" are concerned. Your "more games" argument is weak, especially coming from someone claiming the Atari only had 400 programs...
UK is a small market compared to US, Europe, Japan etc, dont think it was decisive.
Of course, that's why software publishers from the UK never made any money when the Spectrum and C64 were launched in the country :roll:
"computers for the masses not the classes" that was jack tramiel's saying, while atari targeted the classes, c= came out with the technically roughly same level, in a lot of areas beter, c64 cheaper.
Management was just terrible. God knows who the target was, not the classes anyway, considering the general user-friendliness and educational potential of the platform...
some ppl brought up the better basic&os of the atari, but weirdly that was a drawback imho, roms were pricey this made the atari more pricey.
I don't understand this sentence.
I dont know about this but if atari really had the specs closed away, that was the biggest mistake they could do (suicide)
Atari probably didn't handle that part well, I remember John Harris complaining about it... Still, this was the 1980-81 era: having a beast like the 800 with custom chips was different than coding on a crappy TRS-80.

--
Atari Frog
http://www.atarimania.com

oswald
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri May 04, 2007 7:55 am

Post by oswald » Thu May 17, 2007 1:27 pm

What do you mean exactly? How many titles did the C64 have in the early days? Not much... There WAS quality software on the Atari. There could've been even more but it was better than what the C64 had in the beginning.
sure, its natural that a 3 year older computer had more titles than a brand new, can it be the other way around? :shock: what I mean is that atari with keeping the docs in the shelf killed the 8bit line.
More games in general were developed for the C64 after 1984 but it took two years for it to take the lead as far as "better games" are concerned. Your "more games" argument is weak, especially coming from someone claiming the Atari only had 400 programs...
I mean more games in a wider timeline than 82-84. Anyway take a look at lemon64.com according to it the c64 had about 500 games till the end of 83. What were the best games on atari till the end of 83 ? We can decide who had better games pretty fast.
Of course, that's why software publishers from the UK never made any money when the Spectrum and C64 were launched in the country :roll:
now thats irony? compare the population of the USA to the UK, and see how my argument is true about which is a bigger market.
Management was just terrible. God knows who the target was, not the classes anyway, considering the general user-friendliness and educational potential of the platform...
that implies the classes will go for un-userfriendly machines without educational potential.. doesnt seem to be right.

Still, this was the 1980-81 era: having a beast like the 800 with custom chips was different than coding on a crappy TRS-80.
I think it was easyer to work on ataris than on trs80s...

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests