/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.4131082]

With the resurgence in popularity retro gaming has seen in recent years, it's interesting to note that ATARI and other systems pre-NES are still largely ignored by enthusiasts. For example, even on /vr/ rarely is there any genuine discussion about gaming pre-NES. Why is this? Are ATARI games fundamentally too simple to attract interest? Are NES games the minimum standard of quality people are willing to put up with?

[Anonymous No.4131084]

most of the games flat out suck. They have very little fun value and are too primitive to be interesting.

[Anonymous No.4131121]

There are less good games on the 2600 than on the N64. Only slightly, though.

The library is just full primarily of garbage. I don't think NES is the minimum, plenty of younger people could have fun with a coleco I bet

[Anonymous No.4131152]

>>4131082
Don't you get it yet? The only retro consoles that are popular are the four big Nintendo consoles: the NES, SNES, N64, and Gamecube. Don't you realize that to the average normalfag and or hipster there are literally no other retro consoles besides those?

[Anonymous No.4131159]

Which is excellent, because it leaves tons of mint, boxed games for peanuts available instead of the absurd "baseball card collecting" of shit like NES.

Remember, that this generation includes Intellivision and Coleco along with lots of others. Vectrex is still expensive due to the unique vector display.

[Anonymous No.4131168]

>>4131152
Sega is p popular as well tho
As is PS1

[Anonymous No.4131190]

For me, yes, they're too primitive.

Repetitive high-score-based games don't hold my interest for more than a few minutes, graphics are too simple with not much personality (no backgrounds, sprites are very blocky one-color shapes), and BGM is usually nonexistent too.

[Anonymous No.4131289]

I think there's also too little nostalgia bound to the Atari, no one I knew had one. I'm mostly a Sega Master System retro dude, and I also have some of the games on Super Nintendo and Gamecube since I played those at friends' places, but I'm really not that interested in playing games I never had any relation too.

[Anonymous No.4131293]

>>4131152
>The only retro consoles that are popular are the four big Nintendo consoles

For me this retro market seems fake as fuck, there really should've been made enough games not to have these hyper inflated prices. Afaik there are some people buying up a lot of games, driving the prices so insanely high.

This really pisses me off, since I only want to play games for nostalgia.

[Anonymous No.4131294]

I might get shit for this but I can't even hardly handle NES-era 8-bit. My interest in gaming really only starts with the Genesis. Most NES games are just way too simple for my liking. I understand their place in the canon of gaming history but I personally just do not like NES for reasons that make me dislike the Atari even more (simplicity, repetitiveness, ugly graphics)

[Anonymous No.4131298]

>>4131082
There aren't a lot of Atari games on the virtual console.

[Anonymous No.4131325]

>>4131082
> Are ATARI games fundamentally too simple to attract interest?
No and yes. There are plenty that fall into that. Then there are others that fall into the opposite sort of. That they're interactions are complex despite being simple games and require reading a manual to figure out what the fuck is going on. Manuals aren't available directly in a game so you gotta hunt it down to find out. Then there's option systems on the hardware toggles, which again best referenced with the manual. Then also there's the fact that some titles, some of the best even and some pretty primary, require a spinner that few have let alone emulating properly. Some games are designed around multiplayer barring significant or sometimes any AI. So what you have is a system that's more enigmatic, with a loss of good titles, an abundance of mediocre titles and difficulty in directly accessing or emulating meaning less people care to bother as it's a lot of work and you're going to hit plenty of dead-ends.

Basically you've got a near perfect storm of indifference building there. Whereas on the NES, the graphics are generally intuitive and the controls are simple and the hardware itself doesn't have any other buttons but turning it on which means your remote does whatever you need to do and that's true of most games. You might also notice how people give less of a shit about Power Pad, Power Gloves, Zapper, or Robby games in that respect as well. Similar for the genesis. Powers on, good to go, easy to understand, most games just work and are intuitive, no one cares about the Sega Activator or Enforcer.

The light gun's have a niche audience but most people accept they largely won't be using it and it doesn't make up such a large portion of any library and other than duck hunt are largely secondary titles.

Basically it's a fight to get into. If there was more ease it'd make it bigger but still many of the games lack depth for staying power.

[Anonymous No.4131330]

>>4131082
Yeah, 8 bit is my bare minimum. Some of the platformers on the 2600 are okay but are completely outclassed by platformers that came later.

I was born in 1988 though so a lack of nostalgia might be why I can't get into Atari

[Anonymous No.4131336]

>>4131082
They just weren't that good. It's hard to get excited over Space Invaders.

The NES ushered in games as we know them (on home consoles at least).

[Anonymous No.4131337]

>>4131294
What about SMS? Or DOS?

[Anonymous No.4131339]

>>4131152
What's your definition of "popular"? Among super basic normies who only got into retro games within the last year because of something they saw on youtube, sure, that might be true. Among genuine enthusiasts, what you say isn't true at all. There are always Sega and PS1 threads up on this board. Plenty of people are interested in things like the TG16, Neo Geo stuff, etc. A lot of people focus on DOS and other early computer games. You can find someone who's interested in anything, it's not just Nintendo and nothing else.

[Anonymous No.4131341]

its hard to get into atari if you dont have the manuals in some games and if you dont set the difficulty switches correctly it can make the games seem not as good. Also nes was popular a few years ago and then people moved on snes, now n64 is more popular

[Anonymous No.4131345]

>>4131293
>For me this retro market seems fake as fuck, there really should've been made enough games not to have these hyper inflated prices.
You have a lot of games that have been lost though, or they're owned by people who don't know anything about the retro game market and they would simply never think to sell them. Or they're owned by people like me who simply have a personal policy of never selling games. Over time, more copies wind up in the hands of people like that, decreasing the number of games in circulation.

>Afaik there are some people buying up a lot of games, driving the prices so insanely high.
I think people exaggerate how common this is.

>This really pisses me off, since I only want to play games for nostalgia.
So then play on an emulator?

[Anonymous No.4131371]

>>4131336
>It's hard to get excited over Space Invaders.
What am I even reading

[Anonymous No.4131393]

>>4131121
I never thought about that 2600 to n64 comparison, but shit, you're totally right.

[Anonymous No.4131481]

>>4131082
Normal-fags only care about 16-bit forward. They know of the Atari, but they don't play it because it doesn't hold their attention long. For instance, I pulled out my 2600 when I had a friend coming over and we played some games. Combat was his favorite of what we played, but at the end of it he said it wasn't all that appealing because it was too blocky. Now, he's in his late 20's, I'm in my early 40's, and I can see what he's saying, but I also still enjoy the games.
It's not that the games were bad. They're simple, yeah, but they were meant to be played with friends for the most part. Trust me, the Atari 2600 is much more fun with friends instead of playing against an early bot.

[Anonymous No.4131531]

>>4131082
Why talk about the crappy Atari 2600 port when you could just talk about the original arcade game?

[Anonymous No.4131541]

>>4131481
Should have played Warlords.

[Anonymous No.4131628]

>>4131330
>8 bit is my bare minimum
Atari is 8-bit though.

[Anonymous No.4131632]

The master system gets almost no interest either.

Let's be honest though, if a few e-celebs started larping about how much they love the Atari, or a tranny started speedrunning it and took it to goyim duped quick, you can bet the interest would go through the roof.

[Anonymous No.4131665]

I read the manual and it turns out Yar's Revenge is actually a good game

Who knew

[Anonymous No.4131685]

>>4131082
I've always loved older pre-NES-era gaming in general but i'm not surprised to see almost no one, especially here shares my enthusiasm. My guess is the majority here grew up with vidya in-between 16 & 32 bit and anything prior to that is too simplistic and primitive for them. It's too bad too, I wish there more discussion for obscure 80's arcade games and the amazing glut of homebrew for Colecovison and Atari 7800.

[Anonymous No.4131773]

>Pac Man, Space Invaders, Galaga, Frog Bog, Pepper II, Mappy, Frogger and dozens more classic groundbreaking arcade ports
>somehow not good

PLS GO

[Anonymous No.4131774]

>>4131685
Colecovision was one of the best systems ever.
Nova Blast, Pepper II and Donkey Kong were god tier

[Anonymous No.4131784]

>>4131345
The majority of people regard videogames as childrens toys, and throw them away when they aren't used anymore. People older than ~40 or so often don't even know that old videogames have any resale value whatsoever. It's just old trash.

[Anonymous No.4131810]

>>4131685
>>4131481
I'd love to play some more older school video games prior to the NES but as a europoor we barely have those consoles around here and even if we do, they're so much shittier than the American versions. Not only that but as good as every TV console from the second generation is RF only so if I'd want to play most of those games with an American console, I'd have to either mod them or order an American CRT which would be hell because of import costs.

It's not that I don't like earlier vidya because I played some Williams classics like Robotron and Sinistar and I really like them, even Space Invaders, Pong and some other early classics can still be a lot of fun to me but good luck finding people to be attracted to Atari 2600 games of which most people think they suck like >>4131084
>>4131121
>>4131330
. I can imagine it sucks but it's how nostalgia is. I never really cared about the 6th and 7th generations and probably never will and fans of those generations they probably feel the same like you guys. SNES and N64 were my main consoles in my youth and I'm probably not the only one when I look at a lot of threads here ...

[Anonymous No.4131870]

>>4131773
Before the NES, the home versions of those games were always inferior to the original arcade versions. Pac-Man 2600 was notoriously bad.

[Anonymous No.4131894]

>>4131870
>were always inferior
>before the NES
>implying ports on later home consoles and computers are perfect renditions of the arcade originals
Really anon. Also, just because you name one infamous example doesn't prove a lot. You're not gonna tell me that Final Fight, Double Dragon, Punch-Out!, Street Fighter II, Smash TV, Killer Instinct or other notable arcade games from the 3rd and 4th generations got ported perfectly on those consoles in the same time, are you? And don't say NEO GEO, that system was basically an arcade machine with cartridges and not really intended for the same market as other home consoles.

Most people just wanted to be able to play those arcade games at home. It wasn't till many years later that people started to ignore most of the early ports and emulate the arcade versions instead.

[Anonymous No.4131895]

>>4131152

This is why I'm glad I picked up my N64 back when they went for like $30 instead of the $60-$80 they go for now.

Fortunately thanks to all the Nintendo nostalgia attracting attention, I can probably swing a cheap Genesis soon too. I'll finally be able to play Castlevania: Bloodlines on original hardware.

[Anonymous No.4131897]

>>4131339
typical /vr/ contrarianism for the sake of being contrarian. you know exactly what he meant anon

[Anonymous No.4131913]

>>4131895
I'm sorry to tell you anon but it's too late already. A lot of those nintendofags are buying up Sega as well because their favorite e-celebs told them it's cheap and amazing. Did you see how hard games like Bloodlines, Hard Corps, Ristar and Rocket Knight Adventures climbed up in the past few years? It's only going to get worse, if only because of the self-destroying prophecy that you should buy them now you can and make it more valuable in general to resellers.
Don't get me wrong, I like it that people are interested in more than just Nintendo but it's very likely this situation will escalate to other consoles as well. Shit, even the Saturn is already as crazy as let's say the SNES or the NEO GEO market at this point.

[Anonymous No.4131918]

>>4131895
castlevania bloodlines is ridiculously expensive these days. you could always get a cheap third party cart, but the chip on mine literally fell out. I might have pics

[Anonymous No.4131931]

>>4131913

It's still within my means for the moment, at least.

I'm not angling for a large Genesis collection, just a few choice titles. Castlevania, Shadowrun, maybe also Aladdin and Lion King.

[Anonymous No.4131932]

>>4131870
You have very obviously NEVER played the Colecovision port of Donkey Kong.
It's widely regarded as the best version on any platform besides the arcade machine itself

[Anonymous No.4132045]

>>4131932
No it's not

[Anonymous No.4132062]

>>4131774
My negro, Pepper II is the shit. Speaking of Donkey Kong, have you played Jumpman Returns in MAME? It's a godly romhack and my favorite way of playing DK1. Arcade romhacks need to be more common.

[Anonymous No.4132074]

>>4131773
>using an anime pic to call other people summer

[Anonymous No.4132096]

I didn't grow up with it and I'm not going to pretend it's amazing in a sad attempt to fit in.

[Anonymous No.4132102]

>>4131810
A lot of them do suck. I mean, Pong, Adventure and Pitfall are good, but I'm not sure if I had fun playing any other Atari games.

[Anonymous No.4132142]

>>4131531
2600 Space Invaders is actually better than the arcade game, with color graphics and over 100 variations (like team play).

[Anonymous No.4132151]

>>4131870
Someone never played 2600 Stargate - it's a miraculous port of that Defender sequel. 2600 Ms Pac Man went a long way toward redeeming the travesty of Pac Man, as it was programmed by GCC themselves - the company that programmed the arcade Ms Pac Man for Midway.

[Anonymous No.4132159]

>>4131932
The Atari 8 bit computer port of DK is better, and includes the elusive "pie factory" stage that none of the era ports have.

[Anonymous No.4132194]

I'd say it is simply that people who grew up with those systems are too old, long gone, or fell for the "grow up" meme since it was pushed way more back then.

[Anonymous No.4132203]

>>4132159
Atari 8 Bit computers were better than 2600 imo

[Anonymous No.4132208]

Most good 2600 games were arcade ports, but nowadays it's easy to emulate the superior arcade versions.

[Anonymous No.4132258]

>>4132203
The gulf between the 2 is vast - an Atari 800 had 48k RAM, compared with 128 byte 2600, vastly better POKEY sound chip...and so on. Of course, an 800 cost nearly $1000 when it first came out, a vast sum in those days.

[Anonymous No.4132291]

>>4132258
>had up to 48k
fixed
nonetheless, even 4 kilos of Atari 400 are 32 times better than 128 bytes.

[Anonymous No.4132325]

Because many early arcade-style games lack depth. Not their fault, they had limitations they had to work under. Unless that particular game is your personal jam, you won't be playing longer than 5 to 10 minutes. I can play Joust or Robotron 2084 for hours, but it's not for everyone.

[Anonymous No.4132346]

We talk about pre-NES computers all the time. It's just that no one outside of the US cares about Atari consoles.

[Anonymous No.4132352]

>>4132096
>I'm not going to pretend it's amazing
You don't need to. They are simply fun. Some games are better to be played together, though. I'd name Enduro, Dolphin, Robot Tank, Pong, some space games, Warlords.

[Anonymous No.4132391]

>>4131784
It's actually people over about 60. Anyone under that played them.

[Anonymous No.4132402]

>>4131082
Yeah, really it's bad games and bad graphics at the end of the day.

On the 2600, graphics were at a point where it was just hard to tell what the shit stuff was.

Same thing with gameplay. Severely limited because of 1 button. The NES rolled around with 4, which added so much ability for complexity in games. That and things started to actually look like they should.

Compare a 2600 arcade port to an NES arcade port and it's fucking night and day how much better the NES one is.

[Anonymous No.4132431]

>>4132352
I'm not saying they're bad. I'm sure they're great. I just don't have any experience/interest in them.

I mostly play retro games for closure. Games I knew about but couldn't play as a kid.
Which doesn't include 2nd gen. Which means I don't participate in atari threads.

[Anonymous No.4132549]

>>4132096
>a sad attempt to fit in.
that's ironic, you do seem be be fitting in

>>4132431
>Which means I don't participate in atari threads.
this is also ironic

>>4131774
>>4131685
sadly /v/"r" doesn't know about the other 2nd gen consoles, not that they know about the 2600 either.

[Anonymous No.4132636]

>>4132346
This.

[Anonymous No.4132642]

>>4131082
Berserker is my shit.

[Anonymous No.4132728]

>>4131784
>The majority of people regard videogames as childrens toys
This MIGHT have been true as late as 2000 or so, but it's not true anymore (in the US). Videogames are too mainstream now and too many people play them. There might be something to the rest of your point though. Even if people don't look at games as toys per se, most people still know nothing about the retro game market.

[Anonymous No.4132781]

My balding faggot dad tried to get me to play his 2600 with him last year at Christmas and after playing one game I kicked the thing and broke it. My dad was virtually intears as it was a childhood treasure of his but I told him to stop being a baby and go buy a SNES if he wants me to play games with him (I emulate most my retro vidya on my raspberry Pi 3 but it's mine and I don't let other people touch it.)

[Anonymous No.4132792]

>>4132781
cool story bro

[Anonymous No.4132827]

>>4132781
I hope he beat you as a child

[Anonymous No.4132874]

>>4132827
I hope he did too, lower brain function from blunt trauma would explain the lack of creativity.

[Anonymous No.4132883]

>>4131784
Top kek kid. I'm 48 and have a collection worth more than your dads car, house if you're poorfags.

[Anonymous No.4132896]

>>4132883
Fuck off gramps

[Anonymous No.4132998]

>>4131082
Anyone play any of the 2nd gen console adventure games or RPGs?

[Anonymous No.4133008]

As others in this thread have already said, it's because the hardware is too primitive to be interesting and 95% of the games are absolute garbage.

[Anonymous No.4133017]

>>4132883
>top kek kid
not
>nothin personnel kid
lurn2meme faggot


my gun collection is worth more than your shitty atari collection

[Anonymous No.4133038]

>>4133017
>Mossberg
Better have better stuff than that if you want to rival a good Neo-Geo collection, as many in that scene (like Dion Dakis) are well into their 40's so saying older people have no clue about games is idiotic.

If that crap is representative of what you have for guns, you ain't shit. HK, Holland & Holland shotguns for Fudding, Barrett .50, NFA, high end AR...then you're in the game.

[Anonymous No.4133052]

>>4133038
not my gun gramps, just a stock photo of a floated barrel.

[Anonymous No.4133163]

>>4131870
Pacman on the Atari 2600 wasn't notoriously bad. What you meant to say was that was notoriously unfaithful. The game itself was fine. It was like many ports of it's era, unique to the system it was on but capturing the essence of what it was porting. You weren't going to train up on your arcade play with it, but it was solid for Atari games and while people might have been disappointed by it not being like the arcade it was a perfectly playable game. Ruining expectations is what it's known for, not being unplayable and outright terrible trash not fit to play.
Sure it could have been a better port, it possibly could have been this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clddb79LQcM , but we don't rate things against what they could be, we rate them as they are. And it is an okay atari game.

[Anonymous No.4133264]

I like Starmaster

[Anonymous No.4133268]

>>4131082
Atari always was trash. Just emulate all the arcade versions of the time and you're set.

[Anonymous No.4133271]

>>4131152
Sega genius

[Anonymous No.4133275]

>>4131371
He chose a good game to shit on. Should have said Haunted House or Air/Sea battle.

[Anonymous No.4133569]

>>4133017
>atari collection
>babys first rifle
Is there any hobby you don't fail at kiddo?

[Anonymous No.4133645]

I've always been curious about the pre-NES era. Any good blogs or sites devoted to discussing games from that generation? I'm sure there's a ton of good, obscure games that are just underappreciated. What is emulation like for things like Colecovision and Intellivision?

[Anonymous No.4133729]

>>4133645
>tons of obscure games
yes
>tons of good games
no. unless you yourself are developing for a really limited system (read: you design PCBs), you can't judge whether a game was remarkable for its time or not.

[Anonymous No.4134067]

>>4133729
Why the fuck can't you judge a game good for it's era? With knowledge of the hardware limitations and what else was on the market (i.e. 2600 vs abysmal Odyssey 2) it's pretty damn obvious titles like Pitfall II, HERO, Solaris, Stargate,...were standouts. The RCA Studio II was out the same year as the 2600, and you would need to literally be blind, deaf, and paralyzed (not controllers on RCA) to think a Studio II game good for even 1977.

[Anonymous No.4134139]

>>4132346
What about Intellivision or Colecovision

[Anonymous No.4134626]

>>4131082
I don't dislike 2600 games, but they're just too simple to discuss.

[Anonymous No.4134851]

>>4133729
Ok, maybe not tons, but dozens, maybe? And I take it there's not many resources online devoted to the pre-NES era?

[Anonymous No.4134960]

>>4133163
It was objectively bad. Have you never played it or even seen an LP or something? It's a flickering shitfest.

[Anonymous No.4135804]

>>4134139
Coleco had tons of good arcade ports but nowadays you might as well play the originals

>>4134851
Well atariage

[Anonymous No.4135914]

>>4131084
Pretty much this; many of the VCS games were simply not that great. Yar's Revenge and a bunch (if not most) of the Activision games were good for the time, but they haven't held up terribly well. Keep on meaning to play Indiana Jones one of these years.

Some of the Intellivision games are still interesting (e.g. Microsurgeon and Bomb Squad), and the Colecovision was justly famous at the time for its faithful arcade adaptions but its original games were only kind of meh.

The Atari 5200 and 7200 looked nifty, but I've never actually played them. Vectrex was a cool one-trick pony.

[Anonymous No.4137727]

It is my own complete ignorance but in my mind, the Atari systems, Coleco, and Intellivision all bleed together.
What is a good comparison example? I cant even tell the 2600, 5200 and 7800 apart most of the time.

[Anonymous No.4137769]

>>4134139
Consoles in general were never very popular outside of the US and Japan.

[Anonymous No.4137794]

>>4131084

This, and Atari trashed their own brand while Nintendo was positioning themselves as the DIsney of video games.

[Anonymous No.4137892]

>>4131082
Most people engaged in retro gaming likely started on NES, and are likely buying what they are familiar with.

[Anonymous No.4137901]

>>4131082
The thing is people are buying what they are familiar with. For most people that's NES, SNES, Genesis, and N64. In my area Turbo Graphix, Sega CD, and Saturn are also hard to come by because most of the supply that existed here was all sold online.

[Anonymous No.4137905]

>>4137892
dunno, I was sucking on my mommy's titty when the SNES was released and I'm not in the slightest interested in pre NES games because to me their is no charm to their graphics and most games don't have an appealing gameplay.
but that's just me and maybe I don't know about good Atari games.
Donkey Kong, Pacman, Space Invaders, Frogger, Pong are cool but besides that, meh

[Anonymous No.4137928]

>>4137905
I don't know either, atari was before my time as well, but I know a few people a decade older than I am, that went out of their way to get a commodore 64, and odyssey 2.

[Anonymous No.4137938]

The Ataris , especially the 2600, are just a little too shallow to talk about. The games just don't have the depth.

You can act as if something like Space Invaders is super fun and an interesting topic but it isn't. Atari is more interesting to talk about in terms of market impact and the ramifications of the companies actions than the actual games.

[Anonymous No.4138094]

>>4137769
Thanks for the history lessons kids whos first console was a wii

>>4137905
>mommy's titty
>3rd world grammar
Are they growing them with only one tit in hueland these days? Are you sure it was a tit?

[Anonymous No.4138105]

>>4137938
The hardware of the 2600, it's limitations and how developers pushed those limits are an interesting topic too. I considered reading "Racing the beam" quite entertaining.

128 Bytes of RAM no frame buffer, very limited audio etc., yet still people managed to make enjoyable games for it. Hell, the homebrew scene is pushing the limits way further now.

But to be fair, coding for this thing is extremely challenging. Alone the fact that you literally have to "draw" the pictures to the screen all by yourself (again - now frame buffer whatsoever), thus the term "racing the beam" sounds very challenging.

[Anonymous No.4138107]

>>4138094
>Thanks for the history lessons kids whos first console was a wii
t. American who thinks he knows everything about every country

[Anonymous No.4138112]

>>4138105
Ooops forgot a linkg:
https://www.wired.com/2009/03/racing-the-beam/

[Anonymous No.4138159]

>>4131082
My grandparents have a 2600, I played it as a kid and it was shit when it worked, which was 10% of the time...I don't even remember how to turn one on anymore it's been so long.

But really, other than arcades, everything pre-crisis was shit.

[Anonymous No.4138173]

>>4138159
What was the crisis?

[Anonymous No.4138174]

I would hesitate to really call Atari games 'games' in the first place. They're so basic, look and sound like shit, and barely worked at the best of times. Even as a kid when that shit was new, I couldn't stand it. They're basically no more complex than Pong, so there really isn't much to talk about or care about. The Atari's main claim to fame is that piece of shit ET game, and thats sad.

[Anonymous No.4138402]

>>4138173
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_video_game_crash_of_1983

Consumers lost faith in the video game industry in the early 80s due to a lack of quality control

[Anonymous No.4138409]

>>4131665
Just about everyone with entry level knowledge of the system? It's all downhill from there if you're checking out the library, though.

[Anonymous No.4138414]

>>4138094
But he's right. I remember before the NES was released the only non-arcade games I saw were pic related

t. Britbong

[Anonymous No.4138441]

>>4132781
If you aren't joking and your story is true then you're a despicable human being

[Anonymous No.4138660]

>>4138105

Here's a link to the full book: https://my.mixtape.moe/yeotaj.pdf

[Anonymous No.4139352]

>>4131082
The vast majority of the games are just endless "go for a high score" deals, not the sort of thing you'd want to play for more than maybe 20 minutes

[Anonymous No.4139471]

>>4139352
I feel the same way.

I liked mostly to play multiplayer games with my friends like tennis, boxing, sneek 'n peek, sky diver and OUTLAW.

Sure I did enjoy some single player shit like pitfall, river raid, enduro, keystone capers, missile command, frostbite, ghostbusters and the list goes on, but their novelty wore off after a while to the point I'd rather spend my time with action dolls, lego, bicycle, skate or simply watching cartoons.

I guess the only game I'd bother trying again was H.E.R.O. That was a cool game.

[Anonymous No.4139512]

I like a few games for the 2600. Adventure is fucking boss and then there's river raid which is a fun little distraction. Then there's """games""" like space shuttle which is more of an experience but still worth a run just so you can be in awe of what they were allowed to get away with back in the day.

[Anonymous No.4139523]

I still play my old atari, the games are fun
I am from 89 and had this and the 2600 given by my dad, of course it didn't take long for me to get a NES and stopping playing the atari games
But I can say there are many games that are still fun to play
Nowadays I dont see games on the flea markets, but I want to complete my collection

[Anonymous No.4139609]

>>4131159
Fucking this, can go to the local retro game shop and buy CIB 2600 games for $2 a pop. The same store doesn't part with boxed SNES games for less than $50. I love that Atari has a built-in pleb filter and will never be ruined by artificial rarity.

[Anonymous No.4140076]

How the FUCK do I play Sword Quest!?
THIS is why no one gives a shit about Atari games.

[Anonymous No.4140335]

>>4140076
There really isn't much point to playing the swordquest games now. The whole point of those games was just to get a shot at winning the contest, and to actually decipher the clues the game gives you you'd need the comics that came with the games.

If you want a decent adventure game on the 2600, try out secret quest or pitfall 2.

[Anonymous No.4140449]

>>4138174
>The Atari's main claim to fame is that piece of shit ET game, and thats sad.
>Invented console gaming as we know it
>defining console of the late 70s early 80's
>surprisingly good arcade ports given the age of the hardware and limitation (Stargate, Berzerk for example)
No excuse for being that ignorant, kid.

[Anonymous No.4140454]

>>4140449
>defining console of the 80s
>40 people owned one post-1979
>by 1985 Nintendo was a thing
>and then Sega, and those 50 other console makers
>meanwhile atari has such classics as 'Green Square vs Red Square' and 'Electric Drill noises and Flashing Lines'

I'll give you the 70s, but it wasnt shit after that, and every follow up to it failed spectacularly. It's neat as a novelty, but nothing more. You were lucky if the console even turned on, let alone play those solid color nightmares they called games

[Anonymous No.4140516]

>>4140454
I said the early 80s, not 1985 in the mid 80s - a world of difference pre, and post crash.

>>4140454
>You were lucky if the console even turned on, let alone play those solid color nightmares they called games
You have to be fucking shitting me? For all it's perceived faults, the reliability of the simple 2600 is the highest any console will likely see - no shit NES slot, few chips and slow clock = no heat, and a heavy sixer console is beyond bulletproof and will likely be the last removable ROM based system running in the future when the bathtub curve for chip life hits a high failure level for ancient silicon.

Like I said, don't be ignorant - it's no way to go through life.

[Anonymous No.4140529]

>>4140516
>>Like I said, don't be ignorant - it's no way to go through life.
Ignorance is bliss. Let him be happy.

Anyway, gotta love how old shit were built to last

[Anonymous No.4140549]

>>4140529
Indeed, the Heavy Sixer enclosed the main PCB in a cast metal box that could probably survive the EMP from a nuclear blast. Made in Sunnyvale, CA.

[Anonymous No.4140563]

>>4140454
>>40 people owned one post-1979
In hueland the atari 2600 exploded in popularity exactly when americans were having their crash.

[Anonymous No.4140583]

>>4140563
That place is weird as shit. Why is it always so behind? Why do they love the PS2 so much? Is it really easy to get drugs there? Why the vuvuzuelas? WHY?

I kinda want to go there some day

[Anonymous No.4140607]

>>4140583
Isn't vuvuzela from South Africa? They were popular during their world cup.

Now about the delay, what you're saying is true, although lately it's becoming less frequent. Many cartoons arrived later here than they did in America, so it's pretty common for a 90s kid to have been exposed to, let's say, thundercats while it happened to 80s kids in America. Anyway, this isn't exclusive to us. The NES for example was available to the japanese in 83 while it went to America 2 years later.

I don't know if it's easy to buy drugs here because I never bought drugs in any other country. As long as you're willing to step in a fucking dirty favela you'll find them 10 year old kids selling it no problemo.

From what I remember popularity wise Atari 2600, Master System, SNES, PS1, and PS2 were the most popular in their times. PS2 has many good soccer games and racing games. Gran Turismo and Pro Evolution Soccer are console sellers.

[Anonymous No.4140614]

>>4140516
My 2600 long ago, in fact I dont even know where it is
It was a good console

[Anonymous No.4140624]

>>4140607
>Isn't vuvuzela from South Africa
It is. I guess geography isn't that guy's strong suit

[Anonymous No.4141060]

>>4140454
>You were lucky if the console even turned on
Confirmed for having never played an Atari console, those fuckers were built like goddamn tanks