/vr/ - Retro Games

>5200: cool
This should be an interesting thread.

>5200: cool

I guess you mean

2600: cool
5200: trash
7800: delayed
Lynx: primitive
Phanter: vaporware
Jaguar: isolated

Also they failed to be relevant because the terrible way they treated their devs in the 2600 era. All of them left when the NES became popular. I have always thought that Atari would have been an excellent arcade game developer, pretty much like SNK.

>>3239043
Atari arcades > Atari computers > Atari consoles

FACT

>>3239043
>>3239048
>5200: cool

Atari hit it off in the arcades, but I don't really see people looking at their consoles beyond the 2600 and saying good things about them.

And saying
>Jaguar - undersupported
implies that it should have been supported more, which is an opinion I don't agree with.

>>3239072

I cant disagree with that

>2018
>Mike Kennedy acquires the rights to the tengen brand and announces the launch of the Tengen Titan
>their prototype is a jaguar shell with a raspberry pi inside

>>3239169
That's indeed pretty amazing

>>3239285
how so?

>>3239043
Rate the 7800, I never hear anyone talk about it.
Would you put it on par with the snes?
Why did Atari keep the phone layout up until the Jaguar? Did games even use all those buttons?

>>3239043
>>5200: cool
>>7800: crash

5200 came out right around the crash. 7800 was NES era.

>>3239293

care to name another company that make a full render 3D game in 1983 with such a weak processor and graphics card?

Atari should had sticken to Arcades and computers.

>>3239498
>graphics card
>1983

>>3239498
Mods do your job

>>3239756
They didn't release the Panther.

They could have had a shot.

>>3239043
Atari got wrecked by the Japs both at home and the arcade. It was a glorious sight.

>>3239498
>full render 3D game
Atari didn't either

How could people pay money for 2600 games? Nearly all were utter shit.

>>3239169
that's sweet as fuck

>>3240137
there was very little comparable at the time, and there was a fascination to play with technology.

>>3240132
>there was very little comparable at the time, and there was a fascination to play with technology.

>>3240132
>How could people pay money for 2600 games? Nearly all were utter shit.
>inadvertently proving that games really can age

>>3240132
It takes a certain type of person to enjoy 2600 games if you didn't grow up with them. If you like early 80s arcade games you're much more likely to enjoy the 2600 library.

can somebody check that out please.
thx

magnet:?xt=urn:btih:e9d7d8e06211f39810ec56be5429a93befe23311&dn=LemmingeOriginal.exe

>>3240132
It was cool and novel at the time.

>>3240945
I agree, I'm 20 and I play Atari a fair bit, there's just something mesmerizing about the fact that they created something from basically nothing. If you can make something playable on a machine that has 128 BYTES of RAM and games that range from 2-16KB, you know there's some real magic going on. But if you don't care about all that and can't have fun with arcade-style games, you likely won't enjoy the 2600.

>>3241648
>If you can make something playable on a machine that has 128 BYTES of RAM and games that range from 2-16KB, you know there's some real magic going on
have you ever written assembly?