we ll of course commodore has some better graphics and sprites. it came out 4 years after the atari did. (but who gave them the idea to begin with?) The thing is it only has 16 colors total. The atari was still worth writing games for even into the 1990s in my opinion.
A bit fake because the Atari Jet Set Willie is in high resolution. Atari 8bit could not do high resolution as I know. And it is a remake, the original is way different. I vote to the C64, but I welcome every very old computers.
First of all, C64 does C64 things well, and XL does XL things well. Second, the C64 games in the video are Original releases. The XL games are REMAKES, just look at the dates! This is truly unfair comparison. Personally, I love my XL, because I had it as a teenager. If I had had the C64, I would love it. Stop The Bickering. Appreciate the differences everyone. Retro still has some very kewl traits, it only helps if you lived back then. Peace All...
Care to compare Star Raiders, Rescue on Fractalus or Ballblazer?
64 people won't want to do that. For one thing, there's an advantage to having a bigger color palette. For another, the Atari ran at almost a full MHz faster than the c64 - a fact that didn't really matter until 3D games.
If you want character-based games and better music/sounds - like what you'll find on the old Nintendo, than the c64 is definitely better.
Raster, palette, or 3D games - Atari wins, end of story.
@Chordonblue Not exactly a good way to go about comparing. Yes, Each system had their strengths, but you can't base a comparison off of ports of games.
I owned both in their time, and still own a C64. Generally speaking the C64 was a better gaming system all around. Sprite based games and Sound/Music quality was NO comparison between the two.
I have been and always will be loyal to Commodore, but people who bash on the 800 without proper knowledge of both systems capabilities are just dumb.
@rmcdev Agreed. I had a real C64, & an Atari 5200, which gaming was, is basically the same as the Atari 400/800. Personally, I find the 64 to be superior in terms of sound/graphics. That's not to say I didn't enjoy them both. I did, & thanks to emulation, I still do. I still have a real Atari 5200 but the joysticks are nearly shot. As for my C64, this hurts to to even think about *shudder*, an uncle (the prick!) threw it + games away back in the early 90's. Said it was "old", Grrrr! }:o{
It's very late. I`ve spend lot of hours watching on youtube old/new games, demos, listen to the music of XL and C64. At last I`ve read debate below. Now I `ve got more respect for the people who developed these machines and programmers, music composers. Than you all.
Moge spytac, jakiego oprogramowania uzyles do zgrywania gier z C64? Ja mam z tym spore problemy, Fraps zawodzi, a inne programy zdaja sie miec tez problemy...
Music just flat sucks. Why not use the original game music. Also, games usually came out the same time, so there was no time to work on better graphics. I had both systems.
were these games first published for C-64 and then ported to the Atari ? all the atari games say they are ported versions which would mean there was time to improve the graphics etc from the original game
@xadam2dudex c64 is a superior gaming machine, no doubt. it doesnt mean atrai is bad cause it isnt. the problem with atari is the lack of sprites in hi res.
At first sight, I simply thought: "Just another Atari-Freak!" who keeps telling about the advantages the XE -more or less- had compared to the C-128, for example. What annoys me a bit... you simply compare XE games (256 kbyte) with only 64 kbyte C-64 Games. That's no comparison, I think. Four times of Ram could have used VERY well in these days... And quite a few games released exclusively for the C-128 kicked someone's butt - sad but true you didn't mention any of them!
useless... selection of games is crappy and tell me one thing - how can you compare written in 1986 bomb jack with a 2008 atari conversion? thats just stupid
Feel free to make an idiot out of yourself. Fetch a MOS 6567/6569 datasheet and look at register $11 and $16. What name do the three least significant bits have, hmmm?
The VIC is capable of shifting the display in single pixel increments horizontally and vertically with minimal CPU assistance. This is exactly the definition of hardware scrolling. The Atari ST has none of that capabilities. You answer has no relation to the issue.
@porcorosso81 True hardware scrolling consists of a chip that can store, or has direct memory access to a dedicated portion of ram where the screen image is stored, or can build and scroll an image from lines in memory independent of the CPU. The VIC cannot do that. Furthermore, the VIC cannot work at the same time as the CPU, so it has to sacrifice scrolling for CPU clock cycles.
You are now trying to throw smoke bombs here. Fact remains_ The Atari ST CAN NOT scroll in hardware. The VIC can, because it can shift the display in single pixel increments. This is everything a tile-based hardware needs to move the display smoothly with little CPU intervention.
Besides, you obviously have never heard of C64 coding techniques like VSP, which can scroll the whole screen by just updating the a few bytes on the screen border.
@meowmmmmm: "Furthermore, the VIC cannot work at the same time as the CPU, so it has to sacrifice scrolling for CPU clock cycles." neither can atari gfx chip do that, and true HW scroll or not...the label doesnt matter, VICII can do it. Atari has better HW scroll, but it does not results in better games, sprites are more important.
Useless with remix audio - sorta shows he does really believ the XE was as good as the C64. But in any event, given the C64 sold about 80 times the units and had 20 times the software titles I would say any argument about what gamers thought was the best is pretty mute.
Comparisons lack a lot when sound is replaced with some boring remix crap music. Please use the authentic sounds and musics of the games - sound is an important part of any game, for crying out loud!
"I know of no atari 8 bit game which displays more than 16 colors and that is with limitations. EGA (an early pc video standard) can display true 4 bit color (16 colors) where any pixel on the screen can be any of 16 colors (the 8 bit atari can't do that)"
EGA was introduced in 1984 by IBM for its PC-AT line of computers.
Atari 8 bit was introduced in 1979 (5 years early) and able to display 256 colors at the same time. Atari was better as IBM was in 1979.
About that Bombjack - I do think this Atari version has great title and loading screens, but the game itself looks ugly and depressing, and not 'clear' at all. The C64 version is much more pleasing to the eye with it's bright colors and -actual- clarity, and most importantly, VARYING colors, not the same, ugly brown-ish mess (which one Atari user once claimed all C64 graphics look to him.. how ironic, huh?)
A '08 version for C64 could be made to look astonishing (hires sprites etc)
Lol, this is the funniest "comparison" vid' I have ever seen - great work! I laughed my ass off!
Of course, this was done as a joke. I mean, you cannot compare a game written in 1985 on one platform to one written over 20 years later.... and then only show graphics, not sound.
Speaking of graphics and sound, even after 20 more years of experience being gathered on Atari 8bits, the animation still stinks! It would be nice if you re-did this video & replaced the fag music with game sound.
Why did you waste so much time on the loading screens, emulator selection screens and so on? 10 seconds of gameplay from each game/system would have been perfect. Otherwise a neat video.
Instead of comparing the 1979 Atari 8bit to an 1982 Commdore 64, why not compare the graphix and sound power of the 1979 Atari 8bit computer to any other computer from 1979. Then Atari wins, as it did in 1979. The Apple and TRS-80 and IBM systems did not have 128/256 colours, 4 channel sound, etc.etc. Atari was the best in 1979, the C64 was made in 1982, so the C64 is a machine that was made 3 years later with some improvements. So, better compare an Atari 8bit with a machine from 1979. cheers
I kind of thought the Atari came out ahead here. To me both Commando and BombJack looked better on the Atari. Even though the Atari had fewer colors and looks a bit like mud, they are much clearer and more defined. Bombjack looks terrible on the c64 and even the Amiga.
"Bomb Jack Conversion in 2008"? Well, if a 2008 version of Bomb Jack existed for the C64, you can bet it would look much better than the 80's version. Though I would still most likely prefer the 80's version for it's great feeling and gameplay, and I personally like how the C64 Bomb Jack looks (besides, using emulators distorts how it ACTUALLY looks and sounds anyway, and the sound is a very important part of a computer game). So I think this is CHEATING a bit.. using '08 versions.
It might be an 08 version, but it's not like there is any 08 technology there. Assembly language programming is largely a lost art, so if anything the modern version is handicapped. I do wish that Commodore had allocated more than 8k to video memory. Despite them being 16 color machines, none of the old 8 bits can display 16 colors at the same time. An 8x8 grid can only display 4 colors, so while you can have all 16 colors on the screen, any given pixel is limited and it's because of ram.
How many great classic games were made in 1979 that would make a neat video? I think it's a bit unreasonable request, although logical from a certain viewpoint. I mean, the games themselves were made much later than in the 1979, so the comparison is only fair to any equipment that the game was made for.
Personally I think these vs. comparison things are a bit silly between C64 and Atari 800(etc), because both have strenghts over each other and weaknesses the same way. Both are great systems!
I know of no atari 8 bit game which displays more than 16 colors and that is with limitations. EGA (an early pc video standard) can display true 4 bit color (16 colors) where any pixel on the screen can be any of 16 colors (the 8 bit atari can't do that)
Its mainly down to Lazy programming. The XE and C64 were quite matched in general performance, The ATARI format was usually the casualty of the most lame programming out of the 2.
nice excuse. but the truth is that the c64 was much easyer to program, with its easyer to use sprites, graphics, & sound. on the atari u were stuck with having to do software sprites, 4 colors in 160x200, ugly pokey sound.
you should have left original audio so we could also compare the music. the music played a very important role in creating the atmosphere and would be vital to hear that too to really be able to compare them. otherwise i think this was interesting video. if you chose to play remix like this it would have been cool with splitscreen.
Why compare boundary braking games made in 2008 to average games made 20 years earlier?
It's amazing what clever coders can do with a given hardware 30 years later. It almost seems like they are running on a completely different machine :)
The XL definitely has SOME advantages over the C64, but for most tasks the C64 is better.
To Atari żyje G2Font,VBXE soft programy PC wspomagające pracę czy wy to macie. Nie za to macie mnóstwo do powiedzenia o Historii . Lecz już dawno wasz czas przeminął bo sami na to pozwoliliście nic nie robiąc.
jest masa Płaczu i pretensji pytam czemu??? dla autorów którzy udowodnili że wasz sprzęt wcale nie jest taki cudowny czy dla siebie by usprawiedliwić swoją bezsilność .
The commodore 128 sucked. It had the 64 mode built in, but some of the 64 games would not run on the 128s 64 emulation mode. My friend had a 128 and he had games that he could not run on his 128 that I could run perfectly on my genuine 64. Plus there weren't too many titles available for the 128 itself (in 128 mode) The 128 was a major waste of money to produce, and in my opinion it was the major thing that brought the company down. Sure they had the Amiga which was awesome...
Continuing from my last statement..., but even though the Amiga was at the time just as good, if not better than a PC (at least gaming wise) it was too little too late for Commodore. It's no wonder Commodore had to resort to making PC clones to try to stay afloat.
Do you know anything about computers you post comments about?It seems not!
The Amiga A1000 was ready to rock and roll in late 84 except for themMULTITASKING operating system. Anyway you could buy one in 1985. The A1000 was so far advanced that people didn't know what you would do with it (photorealistic images, 4 channel DACs for sound, 30 fps anim, 4mb max memory to the PCs 640k speaker buzzer, CGA or EGA piece of crap)
May have been better...haha what an idiot..research before posting ok ;o)
You do know the Commodore 64 had something like 16,000 games right? And the C128 had something like 99% compatibility.
You do know that even some C64s aren't identical and can't play some games like Mayhem in Monsterland and will just crash?
Didn't think so ;o) The C128 was more compatible than the Xbox 360, PS3, Spectrum +3, Amiga AGA OCS/ECS. The mere fact you can plug in a C64 Action Replay on a C128 and boot it is a miracle seeing as there are parts of C128 hardware that aren't identical.
Some C-64s will not play Mayhem? That's almost unbeliveable. Anyway, there is a big problem as for the compatibility of C-64s - 6581 vs 8580 SIDs. They simply sound too different and have different internals (samples playback on 8580 etc.).
@RoderickStrong The C128 came out almost a decade before their demise. AFAICT C= were brought down by (a) not investing enough in upgrading the once-revolutionary Amiga hardware so that when the PC did eventually catch up then overtake them, their response was too little, too late.
The other thing that brought them down (AFAIK) was some very dubious business practices by the management which they wouldn't have got away with if they were still (legally) based in the US rather than the Bahamas.
Speaking about Commando, the ZX Spectrum version is easily the best conversion if speaking about gameplay. The horrible sprite flicker and overflow in C-64 version and limited numbers of bullets onscreen makes C-64 version only a second grade product. The Atari version has even more troubles displaying huge quantities of objects also with very limited colours as usually. Nothing can beat a fast processor made in Hell in the hands of a true Satam coder. Long live Spectrum.
spectrum commando flickers all the time, coz there's no framebuffer whatsoever, even the background flickers while scrolling. not to talk about color clash, horrible bleeps &blops as sound, etc. speaking of colorsvgfx the worst is spectrum of the 3 machines. certainly not the atary.
play the perfect Spectrum version before posting this nonsence, please... THERE IS NO FLICKERING in ZX Spectrum Commando... the enemies flicker ONLY when they are shot dead and then disappear - so it is by purpose, it is not a bug like Atari/C-64 where you get that common sprite overflow and you lose portions (!!!) of the objects on the screen when playing... ZX Spectrum Commando with its hundreds of bullets and enemies at once, with perfect balanced gameplay is certainly the best 8-bit version
Well you certainly wouldn't have had Bombjack, that needs 320KB to run! lol (so does commando come to think of it.) Don't get me wrong, I love all the latecomers to the A8 scene, is just not a good way of comparing systems without starting a lot of arguments. Hell all the XBOX360 owners gripe that its unfair using GTA as a comparison on their machine cause the PS3 version came out four months later! :s
Not really a fair comparison as all the XL/XE titles were relatively new, while the C-64 versions hark back to the eighties. Plus it would have been better to use the sound from the games too, as we all know the music that the SID can produce it truly wonderful.
Atari 8 bit line dates back to 1979!!! NES is 1982/83 I believe, Amiga 84. The weakest point of all 8bit Atari computers is "pixel performance" if I may call it like that. Absolutely unsuficient HW sprite capabilities (C-64 much better, NES 100 times better) and actually no hires mode that allows to use more colours... if you want colour you get stuck with horrible resolution and vice versa... it's 1979 technology and you cannot change that... Still I like the colour palette and nice Pokey sound
Bomb Jack has 2008 written on it, the C64 port is terrible and was slated at the time as a shoddy conversion doing the bare minimum but still only took weeks to finish. And it don't run in 64k which in 1985 was the only market for Atari games...hmmm ;o)
really cool, some of those games I never knew they existed for the Atari XL / XE! :-) Where did you get them ? I miss my Atari's!!!! Thanks for such great videos..
The three atari conversions were finished in the last couple of years, Bomb Jack being the most recent one. All will run on a stock atari, but may need some extra memory. You want to check out the conversion of Space harrier that's underway. Tempest xtreem and outrun too soon ;)
Po za tym głównie chodzi o pokazanie że na Atari i dziś są ludzie którzy nadal piszą soft czego o Commodore powiedzieć nie można. A extra memory to już standard tak jak covox czy sio2pc.
"All will run on a stock atari, but may need some extra memory"
so it will not run on a stock atari at all, while the c64 versions do. also some extra memory == soldier stuff on motherboard, I wouldnt call that "will run on a stock atari"
Comment removed
NexussVI 2 months ago
we ll of course commodore has some better graphics and sprites. it came out 4 years after the atari did. (but who gave them the idea to begin with?) The thing is it only has 16 colors total. The atari was still worth writing games for even into the 1990s in my opinion.
NiTRoGLLYCERiN 3 months ago
Muza na poczatku w tle z gry SPYvsSPY.......
pilat1977 7 months ago
What is the music starting at 8:24 it's awesome
TheInformalstyle 7 months ago
@TheInformalstyle Remix of the Sanxion loader tune from the Commodore 64 by Rob Hubbard.
TeamRocketReviews 4 months ago
1986 c64 and now 2000 and whatever don't compare these machines please!
azshaw123 9 months ago
Comment removed
NexussVI 10 months ago
You need to time travel to the past and make these games available for the Atari for real.
josezapata76 10 months ago
It doesnt really matter now which one was better. Both are great machines for what they were.
OGRMaster 10 months ago 3
Why no game music? It would be great to hear how the games sounded.
adric22 11 months ago
@adamarchambault i would like to see the atari attempt turrican 2.
thesman32 1 year ago
its not a proper Comparisons cos we cant compare the sound only the graphics & gameplay.
and i dont think the bomb jack Comparison was fair cos the c64 version is from 1986 and the atari version is from 2008.
thesman32 1 year ago
A bit fake because the Atari Jet Set Willie is in high resolution. Atari 8bit could not do high resolution as I know. And it is a remake, the original is way different. I vote to the C64, but I welcome every very old computers.
1xWertzui 1 year ago
First of all, C64 does C64 things well, and XL does XL things well. Second, the C64 games in the video are Original releases. The XL games are REMAKES, just look at the dates! This is truly unfair comparison. Personally, I love my XL, because I had it as a teenager. If I had had the C64, I would love it. Stop The Bickering. Appreciate the differences everyone. Retro still has some very kewl traits, it only helps if you lived back then. Peace All...
jitterz7 1 year ago
Care to compare Star Raiders, Rescue on Fractalus or Ballblazer?
64 people won't want to do that. For one thing, there's an advantage to having a bigger color palette. For another, the Atari ran at almost a full MHz faster than the c64 - a fact that didn't really matter until 3D games.
If you want character-based games and better music/sounds - like what you'll find on the old Nintendo, than the c64 is definitely better.
Raster, palette, or 3D games - Atari wins, end of story.
Chordonblue 1 year ago
@Chordonblue Not exactly a good way to go about comparing. Yes, Each system had their strengths, but you can't base a comparison off of ports of games.
I owned both in their time, and still own a C64. Generally speaking the C64 was a better gaming system all around. Sprite based games and Sound/Music quality was NO comparison between the two.
I have been and always will be loyal to Commodore, but people who bash on the 800 without proper knowledge of both systems capabilities are just dumb.
rmcdev 1 year ago
@rmcdev Agreed. I had a real C64, & an Atari 5200, which gaming was, is basically the same as the Atari 400/800. Personally, I find the 64 to be superior in terms of sound/graphics. That's not to say I didn't enjoy them both. I did, & thanks to emulation, I still do. I still have a real Atari 5200 but the joysticks are nearly shot. As for my C64, this hurts to to even think about *shudder*, an uncle (the prick!) threw it + games away back in the early 90's. Said it was "old", Grrrr! }:o{
gjc82071 10 months ago
It's very late. I`ve spend lot of hours watching on youtube old/new games, demos, listen to the music of XL and C64. At last I`ve read debate below. Now I `ve got more respect for the people who developed these machines and programmers, music composers. Than you all.
adv7678 1 year ago
Moge spytac, jakiego oprogramowania uzyles do zgrywania gier z C64? Ja mam z tym spore problemy, Fraps zawodzi, a inne programy zdaja sie miec tez problemy...
kad3t 1 year ago
Music just flat sucks. Why not use the original game music. Also, games usually came out the same time, so there was no time to work on better graphics. I had both systems.
elgatoshadow 1 year ago
C64 all the way no doubt. The soundtrack was added to hide the shit atari sound chip.End off.
bazfanv2 1 year ago
xe commando looks much better more colorfull
atariteki 1 year ago
were these games first published for C-64 and then ported to the Atari ? all the atari games say they are ported versions which would mean there was time to improve the graphics etc from the original game
xadam2dudex 1 year ago
@xadam2dudex c64 is a superior gaming machine, no doubt. it doesnt mean atrai is bad cause it isnt. the problem with atari is the lack of sprites in hi res.
thorgallpl 1 year ago
At first sight, I simply thought: "Just another Atari-Freak!" who keeps telling about the advantages the XE -more or less- had compared to the C-128, for example. What annoys me a bit... you simply compare XE games (256 kbyte) with only 64 kbyte C-64 Games. That's no comparison, I think. Four times of Ram could have used VERY well in these days... And quite a few games released exclusively for the C-128 kicked someone's butt - sad but true you didn't mention any of them!
SlightlyDeath 1 year ago 2
the commodore version of commando makes the atari version look like shit. *opinion* :)
mirabilis 1 year ago 5
Ja miałem comodore 64 jaka to była maszyna, pamiętam te noce jak grałem cały czas.
EnGeL9329 1 year ago
ce comadeyams
azshaw123 1 year ago
compression of the sound is importend as any. in this case the commodore has much better sound.
comsoft 1 year ago
would be cool if you didnt use that shitty music
malc1976 1 year ago
Atari fail :)
khunag 1 year ago
useless... selection of games is crappy and tell me one thing - how can you compare written in 1986 bomb jack with a 2008 atari conversion? thats just stupid
szerlizzl 1 year ago
Co to za muzyczka od 2:05 ?
How is name of song at 2:05 -> 6:04 ?
dRzEwCuX 2 years ago
Atari XL is like Amiga and C64 is like Atari ST.
vlgtube 2 years ago
@vlgtube
Ummm, the Atari ST has no scrolling, no hardware sprites and an awful sound chip. Nothing in the ST compares to the C64.
Btw, clever move from the author of this video to replace the sound with generic remixes, instead of comparing the real 800 and C64 audio... ;)
porcorosso81 1 year ago
@porcorosso81 The Atari ST did not have hardware scrolling until the STE version, but then again neither did the C64. Like me to go on?
meowmmmmm 1 year ago
@meowmmmmm
Feel free to make an idiot out of yourself. Fetch a MOS 6567/6569 datasheet and look at register $11 and $16. What name do the three least significant bits have, hmmm?
I am awaiting your amusing response.
porcorosso81 1 year ago
@porcorosso81 A hardware scroll buffer and hardware scrolling at totally different.
meowmmmmm 1 year ago
@meowmmmmm
The VIC is capable of shifting the display in single pixel increments horizontally and vertically with minimal CPU assistance. This is exactly the definition of hardware scrolling. The Atari ST has none of that capabilities. You answer has no relation to the issue.
porcorosso81 1 year ago
@porcorosso81 True hardware scrolling consists of a chip that can store, or has direct memory access to a dedicated portion of ram where the screen image is stored, or can build and scroll an image from lines in memory independent of the CPU. The VIC cannot do that. Furthermore, the VIC cannot work at the same time as the CPU, so it has to sacrifice scrolling for CPU clock cycles.
meowmmmmm 1 year ago
@meowmmmmm
You are now trying to throw smoke bombs here. Fact remains_ The Atari ST CAN NOT scroll in hardware. The VIC can, because it can shift the display in single pixel increments. This is everything a tile-based hardware needs to move the display smoothly with little CPU intervention.
Besides, you obviously have never heard of C64 coding techniques like VSP, which can scroll the whole screen by just updating the a few bytes on the screen border.
porcorosso81 1 year ago
@porcorosso81
Games like "Mayhem in Monsterland" have colourful and silky smooth scrolling thanks to the hardware scrolling of the VIC.
So, no matter what random definitions you are trying to throw at me, you are clearly wrong when you claim that the C64 has no hardware scrolling.
porcorosso81 1 year ago
@meowmmmmm: "Furthermore, the VIC cannot work at the same time as the CPU, so it has to sacrifice scrolling for CPU clock cycles." neither can atari gfx chip do that, and true HW scroll or not...the label doesnt matter, VICII can do it. Atari has better HW scroll, but it does not results in better games, sprites are more important.
waskoma 1 year ago
Useless with remix audio - sorta shows he does really believ the XE was as good as the C64. But in any event, given the C64 sold about 80 times the units and had 20 times the software titles I would say any argument about what gamers thought was the best is pretty mute.
HardWarUK 2 years ago 2
Yeah, sound would add a whole new dimension to the comparison... Hey, I recognize this tune, its the same one used in the game "Spy Vs Spy"!
GreatLakesDrifta 2 years ago
@GreatLakesDrifta yes it is I played spy vs spy even on nes :D
propinki 2 years ago
Comparisons lack a lot when sound is replaced with some boring remix crap music. Please use the authentic sounds and musics of the games - sound is an important part of any game, for crying out loud!
Lutanamo 2 years ago 32
Replying to christo930, who said:
"I know of no atari 8 bit game which displays more than 16 colors and that is with limitations. EGA (an early pc video standard) can display true 4 bit color (16 colors) where any pixel on the screen can be any of 16 colors (the 8 bit atari can't do that)"
EGA was introduced in 1984 by IBM for its PC-AT line of computers.
Atari 8 bit was introduced in 1979 (5 years early) and able to display 256 colors at the same time. Atari was better as IBM was in 1979.
RichardCyberPunk 2 years ago
About that Bombjack - I do think this Atari version has great title and loading screens, but the game itself looks ugly and depressing, and not 'clear' at all. The C64 version is much more pleasing to the eye with it's bright colors and -actual- clarity, and most importantly, VARYING colors, not the same, ugly brown-ish mess (which one Atari user once claimed all C64 graphics look to him.. how ironic, huh?)
A '08 version for C64 could be made to look astonishing (hires sprites etc)
Lutanamo 2 years ago
Comment removed
JacekBenSilberstein 2 years ago
@JacekBenSilberstein to wpisz sobie crownland.takiego czegos nie widzialem na komodzie... commando na atari zgoda. jakis gluchy pisal muzyke.
thorgallpl 1 year ago
Sorry... but Atari have two versions of the Jet set Willy !
This is form the ZX...
tdc6502 2 years ago
Lol, this is the funniest "comparison" vid' I have ever seen - great work! I laughed my ass off!
Of course, this was done as a joke. I mean, you cannot compare a game written in 1985 on one platform to one written over 20 years later.... and then only show graphics, not sound.
Speaking of graphics and sound, even after 20 more years of experience being gathered on Atari 8bits, the animation still stinks! It would be nice if you re-did this video & replaced the fag music with game sound.
JasperAbraxxious 2 years ago
What's that great tune at about 6:30? It's amazing, I already know it but I don't have in mind where it's from... could anyone please tell me?
SlightlyDeath 2 years ago
Why did you waste so much time on the loading screens, emulator selection screens and so on? 10 seconds of gameplay from each game/system would have been perfect. Otherwise a neat video.
christo930 2 years ago
And when you compare the Atari 800 with a Commodore Vic20, who was introduced in 1980, then the Atari is better as the Vic20. haha.
RichardCyberPunk 2 years ago
Instead of comparing the 1979 Atari 8bit to an 1982 Commdore 64, why not compare the graphix and sound power of the 1979 Atari 8bit computer to any other computer from 1979. Then Atari wins, as it did in 1979. The Apple and TRS-80 and IBM systems did not have 128/256 colours, 4 channel sound, etc.etc. Atari was the best in 1979, the C64 was made in 1982, so the C64 is a machine that was made 3 years later with some improvements. So, better compare an Atari 8bit with a machine from 1979. cheers
RichardCyberPunk 2 years ago
I kind of thought the Atari came out ahead here. To me both Commando and BombJack looked better on the Atari. Even though the Atari had fewer colors and looks a bit like mud, they are much clearer and more defined. Bombjack looks terrible on the c64 and even the Amiga.
christo930 2 years ago
"Bomb Jack Conversion in 2008"? Well, if a 2008 version of Bomb Jack existed for the C64, you can bet it would look much better than the 80's version. Though I would still most likely prefer the 80's version for it's great feeling and gameplay, and I personally like how the C64 Bomb Jack looks (besides, using emulators distorts how it ACTUALLY looks and sounds anyway, and the sound is a very important part of a computer game). So I think this is CHEATING a bit.. using '08 versions.
Lutanamo 2 years ago
It might be an 08 version, but it's not like there is any 08 technology there. Assembly language programming is largely a lost art, so if anything the modern version is handicapped. I do wish that Commodore had allocated more than 8k to video memory. Despite them being 16 color machines, none of the old 8 bits can display 16 colors at the same time. An 8x8 grid can only display 4 colors, so while you can have all 16 colors on the screen, any given pixel is limited and it's because of ram.
christo930 2 years ago
How many great classic games were made in 1979 that would make a neat video? I think it's a bit unreasonable request, although logical from a certain viewpoint. I mean, the games themselves were made much later than in the 1979, so the comparison is only fair to any equipment that the game was made for.
Personally I think these vs. comparison things are a bit silly between C64 and Atari 800(etc), because both have strenghts over each other and weaknesses the same way. Both are great systems!
Lutanamo 2 years ago
I know of no atari 8 bit game which displays more than 16 colors and that is with limitations. EGA (an early pc video standard) can display true 4 bit color (16 colors) where any pixel on the screen can be any of 16 colors (the 8 bit atari can't do that)
christo930 2 years ago
@christo930 crownland for the A8 has 24 on screen colors with paralax scrolling and looks more like a NES game.
thorgallpl 1 year ago
Fajna ten pierwszy kawałek, symfoniczna wersja spy vs spy.
Bartnick81 2 years ago
whats the tune you use for the xl bombjack video? its fantastic!
MrMiister 2 years ago
WDF? If you try to compare games created on 1985 for the C64 to 2008 games for the XE. The difference is clear...
Why don't you compara something to Last Ninja for example? Eh?
Both machines were great, but this comparison is way unfair.... :(
DyLucke 2 years ago
Commando wyszło lepiej na commodore.
Bomb Jack porównywalnie.
Jet Set Willy dla commodore ze względu na kolory.
Też lubie sobie pograć przez ten emulator, mam pare produkcji na yt z commodore hehe , zostawiam 5*****
PS- odpisuj im po angielsku bo polskiego nie zrozumieją. ;)
STUGAUF01 2 years ago
omgwtflolz modern spy vs spy musix ^-^
anotherdayinthecore 2 years ago 2
Its mainly down to Lazy programming. The XE and C64 were quite matched in general performance, The ATARI format was usually the casualty of the most lame programming out of the 2.
BFCboi 2 years ago
nice excuse. but the truth is that the c64 was much easyer to program, with its easyer to use sprites, graphics, & sound. on the atari u were stuck with having to do software sprites, 4 colors in 160x200, ugly pokey sound.
waskoma 2 years ago
you should have left original audio so we could also compare the music. the music played a very important role in creating the atmosphere and would be vital to hear that too to really be able to compare them. otherwise i think this was interesting video. if you chose to play remix like this it would have been cool with splitscreen.
TheCommodore64Player 2 years ago
Anybody know where the tunes in this video come from and what their names are?
wycliff3 2 years ago
What a STUPID comparison.
Why compare boundary braking games made in 2008 to average games made 20 years earlier?
It's amazing what clever coders can do with a given hardware 30 years later. It almost seems like they are running on a completely different machine :)
The XL definitely has SOME advantages over the C64, but for most tasks the C64 is better.
Music:
1. Spy versus Spy
2. ??? - Sounds like an NES remix
3. Wings of fury - Title music
4. Sanxion - Loader music
Ahle2 2 years ago
To Atari żyje G2Font,VBXE soft programy PC wspomagające pracę czy wy to macie. Nie za to macie mnóstwo do powiedzenia o Historii . Lecz już dawno wasz czas przeminął bo sami na to pozwoliliście nic nie robiąc.
xxxaaasssdddfferere 3 years ago
SPY_vs_SPY - sympho... it is great... my bear drinks vodka and crying.... why you are so evil?
listerinerrr 10 months ago
jest masa Płaczu i pretensji pytam czemu??? dla autorów którzy udowodnili że wasz sprzęt wcale nie jest taki cudowny czy dla siebie by usprawiedliwić swoją bezsilność .
Zamiast gadać pokażcie coś ......l
xxxaaasssdddfferere 3 years ago
why not use the original tunes instead of some strange shit ?
jarjar2b 3 years ago 15
Jest masa krytyki i masa płaczu pytanie czemu zamiast krytykować nie zrobicie czegoś lepszego aaa??????
xxxaaasssdddfferere 3 years ago
@jarjar2b
I LIKE THE MUSIC. IT'S FROM SPY VS. SPY.
benjie414 6 months ago
@benjie414 Hell yeah! Sounds great too :)
LanderCBM 1 month ago
The commodore 128 sucked. It had the 64 mode built in, but some of the 64 games would not run on the 128s 64 emulation mode. My friend had a 128 and he had games that he could not run on his 128 that I could run perfectly on my genuine 64. Plus there weren't too many titles available for the 128 itself (in 128 mode) The 128 was a major waste of money to produce, and in my opinion it was the major thing that brought the company down. Sure they had the Amiga which was awesome...
RoderickStrong 3 years ago
Continuing from my last statement..., but even though the Amiga was at the time just as good, if not better than a PC (at least gaming wise) it was too little too late for Commodore. It's no wonder Commodore had to resort to making PC clones to try to stay afloat.
RoderickStrong 3 years ago
Do you know anything about computers you post comments about?It seems not!
The Amiga A1000 was ready to rock and roll in late 84 except for themMULTITASKING operating system. Anyway you could buy one in 1985. The A1000 was so far advanced that people didn't know what you would do with it (photorealistic images, 4 channel DACs for sound, 30 fps anim, 4mb max memory to the PCs 640k speaker buzzer, CGA or EGA piece of crap)
May have been better...haha what an idiot..research before posting ok ;o)
MadCommodore 3 years ago
You do know the Commodore 64 had something like 16,000 games right? And the C128 had something like 99% compatibility.
You do know that even some C64s aren't identical and can't play some games like Mayhem in Monsterland and will just crash?
Didn't think so ;o) The C128 was more compatible than the Xbox 360, PS3, Spectrum +3, Amiga AGA OCS/ECS. The mere fact you can plug in a C64 Action Replay on a C128 and boot it is a miracle seeing as there are parts of C128 hardware that aren't identical.
MadCommodore 3 years ago 3
Some C-64s will not play Mayhem? That's almost unbeliveable. Anyway, there is a big problem as for the compatibility of C-64s - 6581 vs 8580 SIDs. They simply sound too different and have different internals (samples playback on 8580 etc.).
maiki60fps 2 years ago
@RoderickStrong The C128 came out almost a decade before their demise. AFAICT C= were brought down by (a) not investing enough in upgrading the once-revolutionary Amiga hardware so that when the PC did eventually catch up then overtake them, their response was too little, too late.
The other thing that brought them down (AFAIK) was some very dubious business practices by the management which they wouldn't have got away with if they were still (legally) based in the US rather than the Bahamas.
NotATube 1 year ago
Speaking about Commando, the ZX Spectrum version is easily the best conversion if speaking about gameplay. The horrible sprite flicker and overflow in C-64 version and limited numbers of bullets onscreen makes C-64 version only a second grade product. The Atari version has even more troubles displaying huge quantities of objects also with very limited colours as usually. Nothing can beat a fast processor made in Hell in the hands of a true Satam coder. Long live Spectrum.
maiki60fps 3 years ago
spectrum commando flickers all the time, coz there's no framebuffer whatsoever, even the background flickers while scrolling. not to talk about color clash, horrible bleeps &blops as sound, etc. speaking of colorsvgfx the worst is spectrum of the 3 machines. certainly not the atary.
waskoma 2 years ago
play the perfect Spectrum version before posting this nonsence, please... THERE IS NO FLICKERING in ZX Spectrum Commando... the enemies flicker ONLY when they are shot dead and then disappear - so it is by purpose, it is not a bug like Atari/C-64 where you get that common sprite overflow and you lose portions (!!!) of the objects on the screen when playing... ZX Spectrum Commando with its hundreds of bullets and enemies at once, with perfect balanced gameplay is certainly the best 8-bit version
maiki60fps 2 years ago
The Atari Commando version was done back in the 80s but never released.
People may say that the comparision isn't fair, but was it fair not to have those titles on the A8 back in the 80s?
olynxmano 3 years ago
Well you certainly wouldn't have had Bombjack, that needs 320KB to run! lol (so does commando come to think of it.) Don't get me wrong, I love all the latecomers to the A8 scene, is just not a good way of comparing systems without starting a lot of arguments. Hell all the XBOX360 owners gripe that its unfair using GTA as a comparison on their machine cause the PS3 version came out four months later! :s
gamein60seconds 3 years ago
Not really a fair comparison as all the XL/XE titles were relatively new, while the C-64 versions hark back to the eighties. Plus it would have been better to use the sound from the games too, as we all know the music that the SID can produce it truly wonderful.
gamein60seconds 3 years ago 2
If you were to compare the XL/XE versions to anything, than it should be to the Amiga or NES versions
RoderickStrong 3 years ago
Atari 8 bit line dates back to 1979!!! NES is 1982/83 I believe, Amiga 84. The weakest point of all 8bit Atari computers is "pixel performance" if I may call it like that. Absolutely unsuficient HW sprite capabilities (C-64 much better, NES 100 times better) and actually no hires mode that allows to use more colours... if you want colour you get stuck with horrible resolution and vice versa... it's 1979 technology and you cannot change that... Still I like the colour palette and nice Pokey sound
maiki60fps 3 years ago
Bomb Jack has 2008 written on it, the C64 port is terrible and was slated at the time as a shoddy conversion doing the bare minimum but still only took weeks to finish. And it don't run in 64k which in 1985 was the only market for Atari games...hmmm ;o)
MadCommodore 3 years ago
really cool, some of those games I never knew they existed for the Atari XL / XE! :-) Where did you get them ? I miss my Atari's!!!! Thanks for such great videos..
lfcohen 3 years ago
The three atari conversions were finished in the last couple of years, Bomb Jack being the most recent one. All will run on a stock atari, but may need some extra memory. You want to check out the conversion of Space harrier that's underway. Tempest xtreem and outrun too soon ;)
gamein60seconds 3 years ago
A czy PC dziś też nadal posiada 640kb RAM ????
Po za tym głównie chodzi o pokazanie że na Atari i dziś są ludzie którzy nadal piszą soft czego o Commodore powiedzieć nie można. A extra memory to już standard tak jak covox czy sio2pc.
Pozdrawiam.
xxxaaasssdddfferere 3 years ago
"All will run on a stock atari, but may need some extra memory"
so it will not run on a stock atari at all, while the c64 versions do. also some extra memory == soldier stuff on motherboard, I wouldnt call that "will run on a stock atari"
waskoma 2 years ago
gra z 1985 r porownywana z remakiem z obecnych czasow:):):) troche to nieuczciwe.
thorgallpl 3 years ago