General and Gaming > Classic Video Games

What do you consider Atari?

<< < (3/4) > >>

bikingjahuty: I've considered Atari to be before my time and the only Atari console I ever considered owning was the Jaguar, but this ws mostly out of collectorism. Pretty much all their "good" consoles don't appeal to me at all. In a lot of ways Atari reminded me of Sega in the late 90s how they tried to recapture their glory days before almost completely dying out.

sworddude: --- Quote from: bikingjahuty on January 11, 2020, 09:54:43 am ---I've considered Atari to be before my time and the only Atari console I ever considered owning was the Jaguar, but this ws mostly out of collectorism. Pretty much all their "good" consoles don't appeal to me at all. In a lot of ways Atari reminded me of Sega in the late 90s how they tried to recapture their glory days before almost completely dying out. --- End quote --- hoscome though what good stuff did atari release on the jaguar. its pretty mediocre stuff even stuff like alien vs predator. than you had sega late 90's heck even the earl 2000's ports of the best arcade fighting games on dreamcast, 3rd strike all 3 version of the arcade, fatal fury mark of the wolves the last blade. arcade games like canon spike powerstone. or stuff like shenmue also in terms of shootemups like ikaruga or radiant silvergun. heck great rpg's like panzer dragoon saga or skies of arcadia Sega had a killer library till the very end on their last consoles. you could arguably say that it might be better than on the sega genesis if your into certain genre's. one of the first console games with online multiplayer phantasy star. Only action platformers lose in those later consoles really. Atari had a very shitty library on their last consoles. nothing memorable about it yet some of sega's best games where on those late released saturn and dreamcast games. everyone wanted 3d games while sega sticked with 2d and 2.5 d games and weaksauce 3d games. that's their downfall. not to mention that the ps2 was allot cheaper than the dreamcast and more powerfull for the final nail in the coffin. And the atari jaguar wasnt ancient and could make some nice 2d spirtes in say rayman to name one example wich was some way better than snes 2d. atari jaguar was trash from the very beginning it has no potential at all aside from the console specs. the developers for those consoles where just very mediocre so even if the console is good it would have changed very little. atari games where simple. maybe to simple. probably the reason why they never succeeded with their later consoles while all the competition evolved and got rapid results wich even in the beginning where miles ahead compared to the atari 2600. they werent experienced in creating games that where beyond atari 2600 it was to complicated.

pzeke: --- Quote from: pzeke on January 11, 2020, 08:10:57 am ---This? --- End quote --- Jokes aside, they are a dinosaur; a fossil in the annals of video gaming history. As I've stated numerous times before, I appreciate their legacy, but their stuff was and has never been appealing to me. Maybe it's the simplicity of it all, as sworddude stated. But then again, I experienced the Intellivision and liked it more, and it's quite simple as well.

Warmsignal: I consider anything with the Atari label on it, to be Atari. --- Quote from: sworddude on January 11, 2020, 10:12:31 am ---Only action platformers lose in those later consoles really. Atari had a very shitty library on their last consoles. nothing memorable about it yet some of sega's best games where on those late released saturn and dreamcast games. everyone wanted 3d games while sega sticked with 2d and 2.5 d games and weaksauce 3d games. that's their downfall. not to mention that the ps2 was allot cheaper than the dreamcast and more powerfull for the final nail in the coffin. And the atari jaguar wasnt ancient and could make some nice 2d spirtes in say rayman to name one example wich was some way better than snes 2d. atari jaguar was trash from the very beginning it has no potential at all aside from the console specs. the developers for those consoles where just very mediocre so even if the console is good it would have changed very little. --- End quote --- The fifth gen of consoles is probably the most fascinating of all, and is seldom understood without digging into the backstory of the former insiders. There is a common misconception that SEGA or Atari "wanted" to stick with 2D based games. During the development period of the fifth gen consoles, almost nobody in the industry believed that 3D polygon based gaming was feasible for the upcoming hardware, except Sony. After parting ways with Nintendo, Ken Kutaragi of Sony was the sole person in the industry pushing for the development of a fully 3D ready machine. Everyone else was caught off guard by this until it was almost too late. Companies like Commodor, Atari and 3DO released early on with hardware designed to expand upon the sprite based game design of the previous gen, and with the capability of crude 3D rendering as a novelty to mimic the early polygon arcade experiences of the time. Saturn and N64 were also not conceived to be 3D machines, either. SEGA notoriously made last second hardware revisions, adding in a second CPU to theoretically bring the Saturn up to snuff with the upcoming PlayStation, and the N64 development was facing longer development time tables as well. This was all in response to what Sony was about to blindside everyone with. The entire industry was thrust into learning the development of all new 3D game experiences basically overnight where they had thought this was still several years out. Nintendo sought council with Rare dev teams in Europe to learn 3D game development, while SEGA floundered to develop in-house and port their existing arcade games for Saturn, coupled with a panicked western launch they weren't expecting. All Sony had to do was sit back and collect licensing fees on their machine, because they didn't make games. This is why Sony trounced everybody, and in retrospect it can look like everyone else was somehow stuck in the past, it wasn't the case. The PlayStation was simply ahead of it's time in many ways and was probably the most influential thing to hit the console market since the NES. If it weren't for Sony, we'd be looking back at the fifth gen of consoles as a mostly 2D sprite based library of games. Which, there's nothing wrong with that. A lot of people believe 3D games of the fifth gen were too crude and buggy and now haven't aged well because of that. We never really saw the full potential of what 2D games could have become back in the day, because 3D was the new law of the land by 1996. Atari Jaguar wasn't trash from the start, it just missed the mark in a time of rapid change in the industry. Sony made it look a generation behind, when in fact it was better hardware than anything on the market in 1993 and was priced way better than the 3DO. I think the Jaguar had potential, but it was misdirected and would never be realized. Sure, it ended up becoming very insignificant in the end, but I don't necessarily blame Atari for it's failure. Sony made everyone look kinda bad that gen.

sworddude: --- Quote from: Warmsignal on January 11, 2020, 01:55:23 pm ---I consider anything with the Atari label on it, to be Atari. --- Quote from: sworddude on January 11, 2020, 10:12:31 am ---Only action platformers lose in those later consoles really. Atari had a very shitty library on their last consoles. nothing memorable about it yet some of sega's best games where on those late released saturn and dreamcast games. everyone wanted 3d games while sega sticked with 2d and 2.5 d games and weaksauce 3d games. that's their downfall. not to mention that the ps2 was allot cheaper than the dreamcast and more powerfull for the final nail in the coffin. And the atari jaguar wasnt ancient and could make some nice 2d spirtes in say rayman to name one example wich was some way better than snes 2d. atari jaguar was trash from the very beginning it has no potential at all aside from the console specs. the developers for those consoles where just very mediocre so even if the console is good it would have changed very little. --- End quote --- The fifth gen of consoles is probably the most fascinating of all, and is seldom understood without digging into the backstory of the former insiders. There is a common misconception that SEGA or Atari "wanted" to stick with 2D based games. During the development period of the fifth gen consoles, almost nobody in the industry believed that 3D polygon based gaming was feasible for the upcoming hardware, except Sony. After parting ways with Nintendo, Ken Kutaragi of Sony was the sole person in the industry pushing for the development of a fully 3D ready machine. Everyone else was caught off guard by this until it was almost too late. Companies like Commodor, Atari and 3DO released early on with hardware designed to expand upon the sprite based game design of the previous gen, and with the capability of crude 3D rendering as a novelty to mimic the early polygon arcade experiences of the time. Saturn and N64 were also not conceived to be 3D machines, either. SEGA notoriously made last second hardware revisions, adding in a second CPU to theoretically bring the Saturn up to snuff with the upcoming PlayStation, and the N64 development was facing longer development time tables as well. This was all in response to what Sony was about to blindside everyone with. The entire industry was thrust into learning the development of all new 3D game experiences basically overnight where they had thought this was still several years out. Nintendo sought council with Rare dev teams in Europe to learn 3D game development, while SEGA floundered to develop in-house and port their existing arcade games for Saturn, coupled with a panicked western launch they weren't expecting. All Sony had to do was sit back and collect licensing fees on their machine, because they didn't make games. This is why Sony trounced everybody, and in retrospect it can look like everyone else was somehow stuck in the past, it wasn't the case. The PlayStation was simply ahead of it's time in many ways and was probably the most influential thing to hit the console market since the NES. If it weren't for Sony, we'd be looking back at the fifth gen of consoles as a mostly 2D sprite based library of games. Which, there's nothing wrong with that. A lot of people believe 3D games of the fifth gen were too crude and buggy and now haven't aged well because of that. We never really saw the full potential of what 2D games could have become back in the day, because 3D was the new law of the land by 1996. Atari Jaguar wasn't trash from the start, it just missed the mark in a time of rapid change in the industry. Sony made it look a generation behind, when in fact it was better hardware than anything on the market in 1993 and was priced way better than the 3DO. I think the Jaguar had potential, but it was misdirected and would never be realized. Sure, it ended up becoming very insignificant in the end, but I don't necessarily blame Atari for it's failure. Sony made everyone look kinda bad that gen. --- End quote --- dreamcast tried to do 3d but it was to pricy. powerstone shenmue sonic decent 3d games. only saturn had mediocre 3d games ps2 however was like 100$ cheaper on a powerfull console that was what killed sega it released shortly after the dreamcast it was to soon. i dont think that we had 2d sprites only if it wasnt for sony ocarina of time and super mario 64 exist afer all 3d games where the future. in terms of fluent gameplay it was the n64. ps1 was in general for way slower less fluent games n64 had pretty much no 2d games at all all aboard the 3d train with carts while sony had a ton of them. heck ps1 had tons of 2d fighting games that western saturn owners did not get and where excluded to japan only. even in 2d ps1 has a ton of great games. action platformers run & gun shoot em ups. there are exceptions but those where mostly 2d not 3d like mario 64 or ocarina of time majoras mask you name it. ps1 could not handle action packed 3d games aka the reason why games like FF VII resident evil had camera angles at fixed positions. fast pace action games like mario 64 ocarina of time or smash bros would not work on ps1 also it seems to me that atari jaguar lacked great developers. withouth developers your games are mediocre doesnt matter if the console had decent or excellent specs.

Navigation

 Message Index

Next page

Previous page

Go to full version