Why did Atari even release the 5200 ? I mean, nearly all its library is made of Atari 8-bit computer games. Check out any game made for Atari 5200 and then look for it on the Atari 400/800, usually both are nearly identical.
Not to mention the 5200's limited library (the 8-bit computers had many more games), the terrible controllers (the 8-bits used controllers similar to the 2600's), and the lack of backwards compatibilty (with both the 8-bits and the 2600).
This commercial blows my mind. Imagine today if MS was making a commercial "You CAN play our games on PS3 ,BUT we have this OTHER console that plays the same games,but better looking. This was the last straw of Atari in trying to sell that trainwreck called the 5200.
The colecovision version of pacman is the same as the 5200 version, with a few modifications. Atari knew the 2600 version of pacman sucked, because there ms.pacman commercial stated how much better it's 2600 version was than pacman. It's dumb that they tried blaming it on coleco. Who wouldn't know that it wasn't coleco pacman. Alot of people, who were suckered in to pacman awfulness
i dont get it, so whats the adaptor for? to play atari 2600 games on the 5200? or vice versa? lol, i wonder how red dead looks on the 5200 compared to the ol' 2600 lmao
Too bad the 5200 was a massive piece of shit with the absolute worst controllers in history. Atari also dropped the ball by not making it backwards compatible out of the gate. So they always fell back on repackaging the 2600 even well after it's heyday AND the market crash of 1983-84. "2600 Jr." anyone?
The Colecovision controllers were no better, and why should they have made it backward compatible? They were creating a second tier to capture more gamers. The 2600 would continue as the system for gamers with less money to spend while the 5200 went for the Intellivision market which always cost about $100 more than the 2600. The Intellivision was the competitor Atari was aiming for with the 5200 but because it got delayed it ended up coming out at the same time as the Colecovision.
@gamewizard No, they weren't much better. The 5200 controllers didn't have re-centering joysticks and the Coleco's directional knobs were stiff as can be. Backwards compatibility helps to justify the new higher price point in telling them they can still play everything else they have on the new system. And Atari continued to beat a dead horse well into the late 80s with the archaic 2600 hardware in the form of the fifty dollar 2600 Jr. Consumers had lost too much faith in Atari by that point.
People were obviously still buying the 2600 in large enough numbers for it to be profitable or else they would have discontinued it sooner so it wasn't beating a dead horse at all. Look at all the Chinese systems for sale on ebay today that play NES/SNES or Sega Genesis carts for $40 or $50. Is that beating a dead horse when people are buying them?
@gamewizard Not even the same thing. Nintendo and Sega don't make any money on those Chinese systems especially if they're unlicensed pirate machines like most are nor do they make anything on the reselling of pre-owned games. Atari was the largest contributor to the great crash of 1983-84 which required Nintendo to revitalize the industry with the NES. Even at the height of NES's popularity in the late 80s, Atari tried to repackage to aged 2600 as the $50 "2600 Jr." that no one cared about.
As for the 5200, if you want to push a new system that is touted as cutting edge to your established consumers, it's prudent that it be able to use the software they've been purchasing from you for the past several years. When the competition, Coleco, creates an add-on for their console that can play YOUR games, that's a HUGE hit to your bottom line. Granted, it was legal since none of the 2600 hardware was patented, but having your own new system do it is still a big boon for your sales.
Simply put, Atari didn't have the foresight to see how a lack of regulating software releases would saturate and crash the market. They didn't have the foresight to bolster customer loyalty by including 2600 compatibility in the 5200. They were too arrogant when they turned down Nintendo's offer to manufacture the NES for them in the US. Hindsight is 20/20 but even at that time is painfully obvious how terrible their business practices were. Or I could just say it was all Jack Tramiel's fault.
You need to go over to the AtariAge forums because everything you said in all of your posts has been thoroughly debunked by people who were inside Atari at the time.
@robinkom Tramiel didn't care much about consoles anymore. He wanted to focus on home computers which he saw as supplanting consoles. What he didn't get was that consoles and home computers would continue to exist side by side, both being equally lucrative markets.
So Atari attacked Coleco, so what? This is console wars. Any commercial designed to attack a competitor directly is gonna seem rude and nasty years afterwards. "Genesis does what Nintendon't", anyone?
Ok, when you say "Here's Pac-man for Colecovision", that's the same thing as saying that cartridge was made for the "Colecovision". So when Atari made Pac-man, they were making it FOR colecovision. Worst foible ever.
I have to say that the "pause" feature on the 5200 was impressive for its time. Finally, you could stop your game and get up to take a piss, a shit, scratch your balls, or to grab some Donkey Kong cereal. Or maybe even do all four of those things in any order that you like.
What a misleading commercial. LOL ColecoVision was better than Atari 2600 & 5200. The only way to play that crappy 2600 Pac-Man game was through an expansion module which allowed Coleco to play Atari 2600 games.
Are you guys stupid talking about the Pac Man thing? Atari was just saying that if you wanted to play Pac Man on the Colecovision that you had to play the 2600 version because a real Colecovision version didn't exist and that the 5200 version was closer to the arcade. They are in no way 'blaming' Colecovision for how the 2600 version turned out or trying to say that Coleco had anything to do with writing it. You people seriously need to get off the fanboy drugs because it's affecting your brains
Well a lot of these guys weren't even alive at the time....and don't realize that it was COLECO who opened this can of worms by claiming they could play "Atari games"....it was one of their most heavily pushed selling points....Atari answered very appropriately here.
What's really funny is Mattel also had a 2600 module for the Intellivision II but Atari actually made an Intellivision version of Pac Man, Defender and Centipede that looked better than the Atari 2600 versions. Atari also released a few of their games in Colecovision format but not their best ones. If Coleco had kept their mouth shut and not created the 2600 module, Atari might have released a better Pac Man and other games like they did for Intellivision.
Yes....the Atarisoft games were a mixed bag for sure. I remember at the time, some thought they were purposely sandbagging them...seems the debate is still going on that one! Certainly though, some of the games just didn't play into the CV's strengths...and perhaps the Atari programmers weren't too experience with the CV! Some were really good....like Moon Patrol!
PS. I heard there was a CV Pacman prototype that went unreleased...perhaps exactly for the reason you speculate on!
In the beginning of the commercial, he said, "If you think colecovision plays all atari cartridges" talking about the 2600 adapter. When he said, "heres pac-man on colecovision", i think they ment Pac-man for the 2600 playing on colecovision. Just a thought :3
You're totally correct...having lived through the time...that was a MAJOR selling point that Coleco was pushing...the ability to play all Atari games....this was Atari's answer.
Of course...even if you weren't alive at the time, if you just watched the commercial, anyone SHOULD be able to figure that out, just as you did....but....sigh....
U know, shit like that pisses me off. I know Coleco didn't just sit there & let Atari blame them 4 that shitty version of Pac-Man. Thats false advertising. I wonder if they sued.
Pac-Man WAS going to be released on Coleco but a final version was never made, only a prototype exists (as well as prototypes for 2 other Atari games, Dig Dug and Joust)
Atari 5200 did have some great graphics (for the time) & cool games, but was hampered by terrible controllers/joysticks. In theory the design was good & innovative, but in practice, they were hard to use. The stick doesn't "reset" to center. So while cool for some games it totally sucked for games like Pacman. Not to mention they wore out quickly, (do to the design?). Eventually they remedied the problem but by then competition was increasing & the '83 video game crash loomed on the horizon.
I remember the Xmas we got the 5200. I also remember the day my step-father & I bought the Atari 2600, back in '77. I was the first kid in school with 1. I also had Commodore Vic20 & 64 but can't actually remember getting them. I do remember my grandma bringing home a Timex Sinclair 1000 from, a supermarket! Somewhere along the line I had Intellivision & Magnavox Odyssey 2, which I traded for. Traded an Atari 2600 for 1, & bought the other for $100. Still have (most of) & play'em a lot.
@cryinglion i had that adapter. it was a beast in size. BASICALLY all it was was a 2600 system without a power grid network you just plugged it in to the cartridge port for power. Too bad the 5200 graphics processor couldnt do ANYTHING for the 2600 games. 4 bit games on an 8 bit system.
@LordBicen: Correct & Wrong. Correct: Yes, like most 80s hardware emulators the adapter was indeed a complete & independent 2600 only missing the power supply leeching off the 5200 - not really impressive tech. Wrong: How can it enhance existing 2600 games though without any pre-programming? For example, how can a game from 79, with no prior knowledge of a yet-to-exist forward system be "better" with the same 2600 coding in it?. Let me see if my VHS tapes play better on my blu-ray player...
@00PuzZLeR I NEVER said that It COULD. I SAID that it was too bad the 5200 COULDN'T do anything about the old 2600 games. It was a Hypothetical. I think you took the joke too literally. ERGO the 2600 games were a joke in comparrison to the 5200 ones. the modern equvilent would be playing NES games on an Sony Playstation 3. Poor example i know cause AT LEAST the NES games are still playable. the 2600 games EEEK, i cringe at the thought. Best 2600 games were Activision games. Pitfall, Pitfall 2.
What do you mean Pac Man for the Colecovision? That port was made BY ATARI for THEIR 2600 in the first place!! Realizing how bad they screwed up on it, they decided to put the blame on Colecovision because it could play all the 2600 games as well as their own Coleco games which angered Atari.
No. It was Coleco who began this line of argument by heavily promoting their 2600 adaptor, and saying they could pay all the Atari games. Atari was simply giving a rather clever jab back here...as in sure....play our 2600 versions..
I promise you, nobody at the time was confused, nor was Atari trying to convince people that those were native Coleco games...you have to understand the historical context.
No....I keep posting this trying to debunk this myth.....
Coleco STARTED that tangent by claiming over and over that they could play "all Atari games". Here, Atari is pointing out that "no, you can't play the 5200 version".
It seems like a cheap shot by Atari but really the cheap shot came from Coleco, this was just a response.
Colecovision had the best hardware but the games didnt really measure up. Also Atari 5200 rehashed a lot of old titles.
Atari screwed up and ticked all the creative designers off who left to form computer game companies. The video game crash didnt signal people slowing down playing videogames. It signalled the shit to computer gaming.
@Silvertrine I would say the 5200 had much better hardware, but the controllers were terrible. If Atari hadn't insisted on releasing a non-centering analog joystick that has the worst build quality in Atari history, it probably would have done very well.
You own a version of pacman made by Coleco when Coleco didn't even have the license for that game? I'm sure the entire classic gaming community would love to see a video of it in action!
Or would you be talking about the version that technically doesn't exist because it was an unreleased PROTOTYPE? You know...the one made by ATARI?
Or did you mean some homebrew version made decades later?
@Luigi84289 Since when does colecovision have an officially released version of Pacman? Go try to find one, it doesn't exist. There was a prototype, but it was made by Atari but never released.
Well, other than the Atari VCS adapter and the Roller Ball controller, you really didn't need to buy many add-ons for the 5200.
For example, while the Intellivision and Odyssey 2 required voice synthesis modules for voices in games, the 5200 was already built to have voices in their games, such as the arcade classic "Berzerk."
Colecovision was a great system, but then Coleco Inc. ruined their reputation with all the add-ons you had to buy for better gaming.
Yeah! Colecovision actually had a commercial criticizing ATARI for making you have to buy a new system. And then they listed all the add-ons you could buy for Colecovision.
It kind of contradicted itself!! Quite hilariously.
You can hardly blame the Tramiels for what happened. They were behaving like any reasonable businessmen would have. There was a market crash. Experts predicted the same as the Tramiels. They made the best decision they could. Its just a shame, that's all.
they're talking about the expansion that let you play 2600 games on the Colecovision...Atari were backed by Namco so Coleco didn't get their own Pac-Man(at least I don't think they did) but were able to play that crappy game.
Its a bad ad only because they had to bad mouth something their own company made to help push this new system over their rivals that can play their old games. Not to mention that they go on to mention that with an adapter you can play said 2600 games that they bashed for the whole ad prior on this superior 5200. Its just not a very good advertisement. Yeah sucks for Atari that Coleco made an adapter to play their games but they could have gone about this ad for the 5200 better.
yeah 5200 really was the death of atari and contributed to the crash, the company never regained their prowess and fell right into Tremiel's clutches and the rest is history
atari is around in name only, time warner dumped them to tremeil in '84, he too wanted the name to market his computers and shelved the 7800 and dumped the games division, the real atari died in 84
I also just noticed that when they were advertising ms.pacman they showed the player screwing up trying to go down but ended up going left. God if that is not more evidence to that terrible controller I don't know that is.
Wow I can watch pacman on my atari 5200! Watch because that piece of shit controller broke! Also the games on the colecovision looked better then the 5200 counterparts.
You kidding? Atari 2600 AND Colecovision are both AWESOME. The Atari 5200 controllers suck, though. But aside from that, it's a good console. The Colecovision's controllers suck too, but at least the sticks self center.
I know... Pac-Man wasn't even ON Colecovision...except by using the module that can play 2600 games. Cheap Atari bastards, they're blaming their own crappy port of Pac-Man on Coleco, while hyping their superior looking and sounding 5200 version with shoddy controllers. Weird.
No. You have to know the context. Coleco had run a marketing campaign with the claim that they could play all the big hit Atari games. This of course infuriated Atari, and there was a lawsuit over Coleco's emulator. Atari fired back with this commercial to promote the 5200, and demonstrate that while Coleco could play atari 2600 hits, it could not play the 5200 versions, which was the actual rival of the Colecovision. In that context, Atari's claims are understandable and fair.
No. It was Coleco who began this line of argument by heavily promoting their 2600 adaptor, and saying they could pay all the Atari games. Atari was simply giving a rather clever jab back here...as in sure....play our 2600 versions..
I promise you, nobody at the time was confused, nor was Atari trying to convince people that those were native Coleco games...you have to understand the historical context.
@wildsmiley Exactly. I recall playing Donkey Kong and Donkey Kong Jr. on BOTH an Atari 2600 and a Colecovision. It looked EXACTLY like the arcade version on ColecoVision, and looked like SHIT on the Atari 2600. . .
I'd have to open up the controller with a screwdriver & actually scratch the circuit board connectors with a penny or knife. The buttons would then work again, but then the rubber underneath and around the analog stick would start to rip and eventually come off. Then the stick itself would get wobbly & you couldn't controller anything in the right direction. It would take maybe a month for all this to happen. Until you bought a new one and month later it was broken again.
The 5200 controller was evil. When you first hold a new 5200 controller. You tell yourself. This one is going to last! Things seem okay at first, buttons seem to work okay and hey look it even has a start, pause & reset button. Analog stick! Nice. As time went on though. The buttons would stop working.
A lot of people hated the 5200, but I loved it. I owned 3 different ones in my youth. Broke about a dozen 5200 controllers, but that was common. I really loved Countermeasure, Mountain King, Wizard of Wor. I have fond memories of the 5200.
I remember buying my 5200 on sale at Montgomery Ward in 1984. As someoe who had a 2600 & 50-60 cartridges, the 5200 was a lot better except for the lame controller.
Actually, this commercial is very misleading. In order to be accurate, they should have done side by side comparisons of Pacman (Atari 2600) on both systems. Now if the 5200 could make that look better than it would be super.
From what I hear and have read about the 5200 it was lets be honest an very bad games system. One: the controllers really sucked. Two: the console is huge. Three: it didn't survive the games crash of 1984. Four: it must be rubbish since Atari couldn't be bothered to sell it outside the US.
These 2 guys below are funny as hell! Both grown men, fighting over which 80's system was better! You 2 need to both take your blood pressure meds and get back to watching Matlock!
Today, the best way to play Atari 5200 is on a modded Xbox. No faulty controllers, no irreplaceable RF switchboxes that have power cords plugging into them, no need for 2600 converters, you can still play on a TV screen, and you can take a screenshot of your highest score in a game.
I guess that goes for most early systems though. They are interesting to collect and experience but if you really want to get into the gameplay, those controllers are not so great when compared to NES and on.
The NES finally came in Ocotber 1985, five months after it begin test marketing in NYC. SEGA released the decent Master System in September 1986 and Atari waited until July to unlease the dated 7800 in July '86.
The system isn't that bad I mean ya the controlers brake pretty easily but nowadays you can have them fixed and make them were better and its actually a comfortable controller not to mention the 5200 has a lot of good ports and exclusives
the only reson why pacman looks like that on colecovision is because of the sorry 2600 programmers. a game made for lecovision would look better than that
It gets even better. "Atarisoft" -- the Atari division of the company that used its licenses for non-Atari platforms actually DID develop Pac Man for the Colecovision. When it turned out better than Atari's on 5200 version, they put it on the shelf. I've played a prototype, and its awesome.
This is not true. It's sheer speculation and even an Atarisoft programmer has said he did not hear of this strategy. There are numerous reasons it might not have gotten past prototype, VERY LARGE reasons in fact. 83 was the year the industry crashed, operations were in disarray everywhere. In 84, Tramiel very abrutly axed the division. MANY prototypes for the 5200 and Colecovision have now come to light. In fact, it doesn't even make sense, Atari could have purposely sabotaged pacman and....
released a much worse version. They still would have made money off it using the Pacman name. I think it's arguable which version is better, but I think the ghosts look much better in the Coleco version. Whether or not this was a reason why it was never released is unknown and is becoming the stuff of urban legend.
Its not speculation. When I was a big Coleco collector, I e-mailed with some old Atarisoft developers I met at a game-con.
The Atarisoft label was just hitting the ground in 83 as a spin off sort of division but under Atari's mothership. They developed games for tons of platforms: 2600, 5200 of course; but also Commodore 64, Apple II, TI-99, etc.
Each game on each system had a team. The guy I talked to said Atari was pissed the Coleco ports were better than the 5200. I believe him.
Then who was the developer and what exactly did he say? If he said "Atari was pissed" thats a far cry from "so they held back Coleco Pac Man because it was too good."
You should simply get ask your friend to if you can make his statment public so that you can share your inside story with all the retro-gamers.
It was a nice trump card since Coleco had been heavily promoting their system as the only one that could play "all" the games and had the "biggest library of games". LOL. They were playing the misleading game and Atari fired back. I wonder how many people were actually fooled by either?
Everyone was buying computers at the time. Thats what really killed the early consoles Why? Because you could steal games. Every kid who had a C64 or Atari 400/800 had a hundred discs full of games. It wasnt until Nintendo was released and it had perfect arcade ports like Super Mario Bros that people considered a console again.
Yeah. . . I was one of those kids with hundreds of "cracked" Atari 800 games on disc. There was crazy stuff the console owners never saw or imagined. I say the greatest game machine of that era wasn't the ColecoVision or the 5200, it was the Atari 800XL computer.
The 5200 was an Atari 400/800 computer that had been repackaged, a computer that came out three years earlier. It was graphically superior to the Colecovision but the controllers sucked and the system was big and overpriced. If Atari had released it in 1979 instead of a computer (Warner, Atari's owners at the time, insisted on a computer over the objections of Atari's founder, who wanted a game system), and if the controllers had worked, Atari very well might be running the world today.
WHAT? Defender is one of the worst Colecovision ports if you played the Arcade version. Atari's played MUCH MUCH closer to the arcade. The Coleco version was slow, astonishingly you could only have ONE shot on the screen at a time, the sound was brutal....no comparison whatsoever. As to the other games you mentioned, Galaxian and Congo Bongo were better on Coleco. Jungle Hunt and Zaxxon were better on 5200. Gyruss sucked on both compared to the arcade, it just didn't play well.
Well this is just silly now. My statement is easily verifiable for anybody who cares and then they can judge for themselves who the liar and the fanboy is. You really need to grow up. As I said in your ridiculous statments elsewhere in this thread, the systems both had strengths and weaknesses technically in terms of sprites, bitmapped and CV modes, audio, colors etc. Both had better versions of certain games, which depended mainly on the programmer and the game itself.
You can use all the big words you like to make yourself look smart, but the fact remains that you are wrong about being able to have only one shot on the screen at a time. That is false. Furthermore, I don't understand why you call me "childish" when you were the one who began the personal attacks because I chose to use a few slang words.
MAME FTW!
southport97 4 months ago
nah atari 2600 is waay better
heartkiller1974 4 months ago
Why did Atari even release the 5200 ? I mean, nearly all its library is made of Atari 8-bit computer games. Check out any game made for Atari 5200 and then look for it on the Atari 400/800, usually both are nearly identical.
Not to mention the 5200's limited library (the 8-bit computers had many more games), the terrible controllers (the 8-bits used controllers similar to the 2600's), and the lack of backwards compatibilty (with both the 8-bits and the 2600).
technoshock11 4 months ago
I wish I could live my childhood over and over again.. I actually had fun with no internet and video games with no graphics.
VirginiaBeachNative 5 months ago
This commercial blows my mind. Imagine today if MS was making a commercial "You CAN play our games on PS3 ,BUT we have this OTHER console that plays the same games,but better looking. This was the last straw of Atari in trying to sell that trainwreck called the 5200.
SardaukarPrime 5 months ago
The colecovision version of pacman is the same as the 5200 version, with a few modifications. Atari knew the 2600 version of pacman sucked, because there ms.pacman commercial stated how much better it's 2600 version was than pacman. It's dumb that they tried blaming it on coleco. Who wouldn't know that it wasn't coleco pacman. Alot of people, who were suckered in to pacman awfulness
NesFreak101 7 months ago
@NesFreak101
There was no Colecovision Pacman released dumbass.
gamewizard 7 months ago
Didn't know there was a game adapter, now if only they had made an adapter to let you use 2600 controllers on the 5200.
BgRdMchne 7 months ago
Now let's see Mr. Do's Castle on the Colecovision. Very nice! All 3 colors of unicorns are here! Now on 5200. Hmm... it's missing the green...
DJCandyManMike 8 months ago
i dont get it, so whats the adaptor for? to play atari 2600 games on the 5200? or vice versa? lol, i wonder how red dead looks on the 5200 compared to the ol' 2600 lmao
punji73 8 months ago
Coleco should have sued Atari for this slanderous commercial. This whole commercial is an obvious lie.
phrixil 8 months ago
@phrixil
What lies? What could Coleco have possibly sued over?
19psi 8 months ago
Is that Frank Zoyglah at :21?
pardyhardly 10 months ago
i never heard of that adaptor before. was it even released?
Christianpreaching 11 months ago
Too bad the 5200 was a massive piece of shit with the absolute worst controllers in history. Atari also dropped the ball by not making it backwards compatible out of the gate. So they always fell back on repackaging the 2600 even well after it's heyday AND the market crash of 1983-84. "2600 Jr." anyone?
robinkom 11 months ago
@robinkom
The Colecovision controllers were no better, and why should they have made it backward compatible? They were creating a second tier to capture more gamers. The 2600 would continue as the system for gamers with less money to spend while the 5200 went for the Intellivision market which always cost about $100 more than the 2600. The Intellivision was the competitor Atari was aiming for with the 5200 but because it got delayed it ended up coming out at the same time as the Colecovision.
gamewizard 7 months ago
@gamewizard No, they weren't much better. The 5200 controllers didn't have re-centering joysticks and the Coleco's directional knobs were stiff as can be. Backwards compatibility helps to justify the new higher price point in telling them they can still play everything else they have on the new system. And Atari continued to beat a dead horse well into the late 80s with the archaic 2600 hardware in the form of the fifty dollar 2600 Jr. Consumers had lost too much faith in Atari by that point.
robinkom 7 months ago
@robinkom
People were obviously still buying the 2600 in large enough numbers for it to be profitable or else they would have discontinued it sooner so it wasn't beating a dead horse at all. Look at all the Chinese systems for sale on ebay today that play NES/SNES or Sega Genesis carts for $40 or $50. Is that beating a dead horse when people are buying them?
gamewizard 7 months ago
@gamewizard Not even the same thing. Nintendo and Sega don't make any money on those Chinese systems especially if they're unlicensed pirate machines like most are nor do they make anything on the reselling of pre-owned games. Atari was the largest contributor to the great crash of 1983-84 which required Nintendo to revitalize the industry with the NES. Even at the height of NES's popularity in the late 80s, Atari tried to repackage to aged 2600 as the $50 "2600 Jr." that no one cared about.
robinkom 6 months ago
As for the 5200, if you want to push a new system that is touted as cutting edge to your established consumers, it's prudent that it be able to use the software they've been purchasing from you for the past several years. When the competition, Coleco, creates an add-on for their console that can play YOUR games, that's a HUGE hit to your bottom line. Granted, it was legal since none of the 2600 hardware was patented, but having your own new system do it is still a big boon for your sales.
robinkom 6 months ago
Simply put, Atari didn't have the foresight to see how a lack of regulating software releases would saturate and crash the market. They didn't have the foresight to bolster customer loyalty by including 2600 compatibility in the 5200. They were too arrogant when they turned down Nintendo's offer to manufacture the NES for them in the US. Hindsight is 20/20 but even at that time is painfully obvious how terrible their business practices were. Or I could just say it was all Jack Tramiel's fault.
robinkom 6 months ago
@robinkom
You need to go over to the AtariAge forums because everything you said in all of your posts has been thoroughly debunked by people who were inside Atari at the time.
gamewizard 6 months ago
@robinkom Tramiel didn't care much about consoles anymore. He wanted to focus on home computers which he saw as supplanting consoles. What he didn't get was that consoles and home computers would continue to exist side by side, both being equally lucrative markets.
uzi9millimetuh 1 month ago
yes, the Atari 5200's graphics were slightly better than ColecoVision's; but let's face it, the controllers were absolute CRAP!
XMChipXM 1 year ago
@XMChipXM well, the controllers were crap on Colecovision too, so you were screwed either way
Theriot6592 1 year ago
@Theriot6592 I had Intellivision! (which also had pretty crappy controllers!) So... Yea, I guess you're kinda right! LOL
XMChipXM 1 year ago
wait they did not say the holder to hold ur rolling rock!
TheAtari2600fan 1 year ago
So Atari attacked Coleco, so what? This is console wars. Any commercial designed to attack a competitor directly is gonna seem rude and nasty years afterwards. "Genesis does what Nintendon't", anyone?
MattTheSaiyan 1 year ago
Ok, when you say "Here's Pac-man for Colecovision", that's the same thing as saying that cartridge was made for the "Colecovision". So when Atari made Pac-man, they were making it FOR colecovision. Worst foible ever.
dogeymon83 1 year ago
I have to say that the "pause" feature on the 5200 was impressive for its time. Finally, you could stop your game and get up to take a piss, a shit, scratch your balls, or to grab some Donkey Kong cereal. Or maybe even do all four of those things in any order that you like.
AgaMbadi 1 year ago
What a misleading commercial. LOL ColecoVision was better than Atari 2600 & 5200. The only way to play that crappy 2600 Pac-Man game was through an expansion module which allowed Coleco to play Atari 2600 games.
justin76pa 1 year ago
Are you guys stupid talking about the Pac Man thing? Atari was just saying that if you wanted to play Pac Man on the Colecovision that you had to play the 2600 version because a real Colecovision version didn't exist and that the 5200 version was closer to the arcade. They are in no way 'blaming' Colecovision for how the 2600 version turned out or trying to say that Coleco had anything to do with writing it. You people seriously need to get off the fanboy drugs because it's affecting your brains
gamewizard 1 year ago
@gamewizard
Well a lot of these guys weren't even alive at the time....and don't realize that it was COLECO who opened this can of worms by claiming they could play "Atari games"....it was one of their most heavily pushed selling points....Atari answered very appropriately here.
datacipher 1 year ago
@datacipher
What's really funny is Mattel also had a 2600 module for the Intellivision II but Atari actually made an Intellivision version of Pac Man, Defender and Centipede that looked better than the Atari 2600 versions. Atari also released a few of their games in Colecovision format but not their best ones. If Coleco had kept their mouth shut and not created the 2600 module, Atari might have released a better Pac Man and other games like they did for Intellivision.
gamewizard 1 year ago
@gamewizard
Yes....the Atarisoft games were a mixed bag for sure. I remember at the time, some thought they were purposely sandbagging them...seems the debate is still going on that one! Certainly though, some of the games just didn't play into the CV's strengths...and perhaps the Atari programmers weren't too experience with the CV! Some were really good....like Moon Patrol!
PS. I heard there was a CV Pacman prototype that went unreleased...perhaps exactly for the reason you speculate on!
datacipher 1 year ago
wow so there was even a adapter to play atari 2600 games on the atari 5200 system.
put a refurbished working controller with it,and there you have it a super oversized system.
johneymute 1 year ago
In the beginning of the commercial, he said, "If you think colecovision plays all atari cartridges" talking about the 2600 adapter. When he said, "heres pac-man on colecovision", i think they ment Pac-man for the 2600 playing on colecovision. Just a thought :3
iwanabrawl 1 year ago 2
@iwanabrawl Yeah, I know, no one seems to pay attention to that main point of the commercial. ;)
koolkitty8989 1 year ago
@iwanabrawl
You're totally correct...having lived through the time...that was a MAJOR selling point that Coleco was pushing...the ability to play all Atari games....this was Atari's answer.
Of course...even if you weren't alive at the time, if you just watched the commercial, anyone SHOULD be able to figure that out, just as you did....but....sigh....
datacipher 1 year ago
U know, shit like that pisses me off. I know Coleco didn't just sit there & let Atari blame them 4 that shitty version of Pac-Man. Thats false advertising. I wonder if they sued.
RalphyDee 1 year ago
3,002,600 games...Super!
daKandiman14 1 year ago
Pac-Man WAS going to be released on Coleco but a final version was never made, only a prototype exists (as well as prototypes for 2 other Atari games, Dig Dug and Joust)
MarioZone69 1 year ago
@MarioZone69 Why didn't they just release the prototype, thats what Atari did with Pac-man.
thatguyontheright1 1 year ago
5200 had a pretty nice looking version of Ms. Pac-Man in its time
tom11zz884 1 year ago
I like how Atari try to fob off their crap 2600 port of pac man off as a coleco game
julsyDCst 1 year ago
Colecovision had a very nice pac man clone that was called "Lady Bug"
Crotafin 1 year ago
Wait a minute...Pac man was on Atari...THEY made that crappy port
why are they blaming it on Colecovision??
chuckchizzle 1 year ago
Too bad the controllers were so fragile.
NinjaGhostScorpion 1 year ago
Wait-Are they criticizing Coleco for their horrific 2600 Pac Man??
jugglingembalmer 1 year ago
yeah.... it sure looks like it !!
BaltimoreAndOhioRR 1 year ago
NOW you're talking!!!....lol
stripes5150 1 year ago
Atari 5200 did have some great graphics (for the time) & cool games, but was hampered by terrible controllers/joysticks. In theory the design was good & innovative, but in practice, they were hard to use. The stick doesn't "reset" to center. So while cool for some games it totally sucked for games like Pacman. Not to mention they wore out quickly, (do to the design?). Eventually they remedied the problem but by then competition was increasing & the '83 video game crash loomed on the horizon.
gjc82071 1 year ago
I remember the Xmas we got the 5200. I also remember the day my step-father & I bought the Atari 2600, back in '77. I was the first kid in school with 1. I also had Commodore Vic20 & 64 but can't actually remember getting them. I do remember my grandma bringing home a Timex Sinclair 1000 from, a supermarket! Somewhere along the line I had Intellivision & Magnavox Odyssey 2, which I traded for. Traded an Atari 2600 for 1, & bought the other for $100. Still have (most of) & play'em a lot.
gjc82071 1 year ago 3
Even the 2600 adapter was a beast in size. What were they thinking?!
cryinglion 2 years ago
@cryinglion i had that adapter. it was a beast in size. BASICALLY all it was was a 2600 system without a power grid network you just plugged it in to the cartridge port for power. Too bad the 5200 graphics processor couldnt do ANYTHING for the 2600 games. 4 bit games on an 8 bit system.
LordBicen 1 year ago
@LordBicen: Correct & Wrong. Correct: Yes, like most 80s hardware emulators the adapter was indeed a complete & independent 2600 only missing the power supply leeching off the 5200 - not really impressive tech. Wrong: How can it enhance existing 2600 games though without any pre-programming? For example, how can a game from 79, with no prior knowledge of a yet-to-exist forward system be "better" with the same 2600 coding in it?. Let me see if my VHS tapes play better on my blu-ray player...
00PuzZLeR 1 year ago
@00PuzZLeR I NEVER said that It COULD. I SAID that it was too bad the 5200 COULDN'T do anything about the old 2600 games. It was a Hypothetical. I think you took the joke too literally. ERGO the 2600 games were a joke in comparrison to the 5200 ones. the modern equvilent would be playing NES games on an Sony Playstation 3. Poor example i know cause AT LEAST the NES games are still playable. the 2600 games EEEK, i cringe at the thought. Best 2600 games were Activision games. Pitfall, Pitfall 2.
LordBicen 1 year ago
What do you mean Pac Man for the Colecovision? That port was made BY ATARI for THEIR 2600 in the first place!! Realizing how bad they screwed up on it, they decided to put the blame on Colecovision because it could play all the 2600 games as well as their own Coleco games which angered Atari.
senorverde09 2 years ago 20
@senorverde09 Thank you. Yes, this commercial LIES!!! Incredible what they could get away with back in the 80s...
dystopika 2 years ago 4
@senorverde09
No. It was Coleco who began this line of argument by heavily promoting their 2600 adaptor, and saying they could pay all the Atari games. Atari was simply giving a rather clever jab back here...as in sure....play our 2600 versions..
I promise you, nobody at the time was confused, nor was Atari trying to convince people that those were native Coleco games...you have to understand the historical context.
datacipher 1 year ago
@senorverde09 Atari never made mistakes. Didn't you know that?
wildsmiley 5 months ago
@senorverde09
No....I keep posting this trying to debunk this myth.....
Coleco STARTED that tangent by claiming over and over that they could play "all Atari games". Here, Atari is pointing out that "no, you can't play the 5200 version".
It seems like a cheap shot by Atari but really the cheap shot came from Coleco, this was just a response.
datacipher 4 months ago
A black man, in a 80s commercial whoa.
prototype21 2 years ago
haha.. nice commercial..
luishomeroremohsiul 2 years ago
Hmmmm, so I can buy a Colecovision and have to buy a 2600 adapter.
Or buy a monstrosity of a console..... and also have to buy a 2600 adapter. Hmmmmm. What a choice!
dogeymon83 2 years ago
Colecovision had the best hardware but the games didnt really measure up. Also Atari 5200 rehashed a lot of old titles.
Atari screwed up and ticked all the creative designers off who left to form computer game companies. The video game crash didnt signal people slowing down playing videogames. It signalled the shit to computer gaming.
Silvertrine 2 years ago
@Silvertrine I would say the 5200 had much better hardware, but the controllers were terrible. If Atari hadn't insisted on releasing a non-centering analog joystick that has the worst build quality in Atari history, it probably would have done very well.
christo930 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This shit is stupid consider coleco released their own pacman far superior to the horrible looking 5200 wannabe.
Luigi84289 2 years ago
You own a version of pacman made by Coleco when Coleco didn't even have the license for that game? I'm sure the entire classic gaming community would love to see a video of it in action!
Or would you be talking about the version that technically doesn't exist because it was an unreleased PROTOTYPE? You know...the one made by ATARI?
Or did you mean some homebrew version made decades later?
19psi 2 years ago 3
I have a copy thanks to a friend who's Dad worked their. Didn't know it was a prototype. I'll see what it goes for.
Luigi84289 2 years ago 2
@Luigi84289 Since when does colecovision have an officially released version of Pacman? Go try to find one, it doesn't exist. There was a prototype, but it was made by Atari but never released.
christo930 2 years ago 3
0:21 - "For 2600 games?! Super!"
staticks 2 years ago
Colecovision kicked ass.
BigSCTVfan 2 years ago 2
Yup best console of the early 80's.
Luigi84289 2 years ago
an adapter for the 2600?
that thing looked like a piece of crap.
xDaXAFImoshmonkey 2 years ago
The 2600 adapter is almost the same size as an Atari 2600 Jr.!!!!!
dogeymon83 2 years ago
wtf is this shit
AVGNfanNO1 2 years ago
Hahaha, so you have to buy an adapter for both systems??? So what gives 5200 the edge??
dogeymon83 2 years ago
Well, other than the Atari VCS adapter and the Roller Ball controller, you really didn't need to buy many add-ons for the 5200.
For example, while the Intellivision and Odyssey 2 required voice synthesis modules for voices in games, the 5200 was already built to have voices in their games, such as the arcade classic "Berzerk."
Colecovision was a great system, but then Coleco Inc. ruined their reputation with all the add-ons you had to buy for better gaming.
adog262 2 years ago
Yeah! Colecovision actually had a commercial criticizing ATARI for making you have to buy a new system. And then they listed all the add-ons you could buy for Colecovision.
It kind of contradicted itself!! Quite hilariously.
dogeymon83 2 years ago
Lolz, especially with the Coleco Adam.
adog262 2 years ago
I remember that ad!! Brings back memories of my youth!! If ONLY I had a chance to run Atari! The Tramiels wouldve been out on their ass!!
joebabe302 2 years ago
You can hardly blame the Tramiels for what happened. They were behaving like any reasonable businessmen would have. There was a market crash. Experts predicted the same as the Tramiels. They made the best decision they could. Its just a shame, that's all.
dogeymon83 2 years ago
LOL That's not pacman on ColecoVision that's the sad 2600 version.
XxSTICH666xX 2 years ago 2
they're talking about the expansion that let you play 2600 games on the Colecovision...Atari were backed by Namco so Coleco didn't get their own Pac-Man(at least I don't think they did) but were able to play that crappy game.
Rhoadhead 2 years ago
I know. I have it. I was saying they were being very misleading.
XxSTICH666xX 2 years ago
Its a bad ad only because they had to bad mouth something their own company made to help push this new system over their rivals that can play their old games. Not to mention that they go on to mention that with an adapter you can play said 2600 games that they bashed for the whole ad prior on this superior 5200. Its just not a very good advertisement. Yeah sucks for Atari that Coleco made an adapter to play their games but they could have gone about this ad for the 5200 better.
RogersRoyal 2 years ago
and is that the 2600 pacman playing on coleco?!?
toptenmaterial 2 years ago
yes it is.
combatdigiq 2 years ago
yeah 5200 really was the death of atari and contributed to the crash, the company never regained their prowess and fell right into Tremiel's clutches and the rest is history
toptenmaterial 2 years ago 2
death of atari? I'm pretty sure they're still around and still making games
ultraviper 2 years ago
atari is around in name only, time warner dumped them to tremeil in '84, he too wanted the name to market his computers and shelved the 7800 and dumped the games division, the real atari died in 84
toptenmaterial 2 years ago
Nope, Atari as we knew them is dead. Only the name still exists. But it's not the original company. The name was bought by Infogrames.
dogeymon83 2 years ago
I also just noticed that when they were advertising ms.pacman they showed the player screwing up trying to go down but ended up going left. God if that is not more evidence to that terrible controller I don't know that is.
bogart266 2 years ago
Wow I can watch pacman on my atari 5200! Watch because that piece of shit controller broke! Also the games on the colecovision looked better then the 5200 counterparts.
bogart266 2 years ago
The Colecovision owned the shit out of Atari. Especially after they made that adapter.
bamapagedesign 2 years ago 2
lol, coleco version?
i rofled... thats the 2600 version xD
fanoultimatev2 2 years ago 4
Atari, as awesome as it was couldn't hold a candle to Colecovision!
carsonsmith 2 years ago 2
They didn't advertise the big cubboard at the back of the system...super!
julsyDCst 2 years ago
You kidding? Atari 2600 AND Colecovision are both AWESOME. The Atari 5200 controllers suck, though. But aside from that, it's a good console. The Colecovision's controllers suck too, but at least the sticks self center.
wildsmiley 2 years ago
Actually I found the Atari 5200 controllers to be quit good; horribly unreliable but still good.
Just like the XBOX 360, horribly unreliable yet it still holds merit.
dougd1015 2 years ago
Ha yeah... they showed weak ass Pacman for the 2600 to burn Coleco... wtf??
Delmoko 2 years ago
I know... Pac-Man wasn't even ON Colecovision...except by using the module that can play 2600 games. Cheap Atari bastards, they're blaming their own crappy port of Pac-Man on Coleco, while hyping their superior looking and sounding 5200 version with shoddy controllers. Weird.
wildsmiley 2 years ago 29
@wildsmiley yes you are right! nice ad blaming others for your own crap
droutsolias 1 year ago
@wildsmiley
No. You have to know the context. Coleco had run a marketing campaign with the claim that they could play all the big hit Atari games. This of course infuriated Atari, and there was a lawsuit over Coleco's emulator. Atari fired back with this commercial to promote the 5200, and demonstrate that while Coleco could play atari 2600 hits, it could not play the 5200 versions, which was the actual rival of the Colecovision. In that context, Atari's claims are understandable and fair.
datacipher 1 year ago
@wildsmiley Agreed...those were there very own 2600 games they were bashing..notice they didn't compare their games to colecovision's very own games.
tom11zz884 1 year ago
@wildsmiley
No. It was Coleco who began this line of argument by heavily promoting their 2600 adaptor, and saying they could pay all the Atari games. Atari was simply giving a rather clever jab back here...as in sure....play our 2600 versions..
I promise you, nobody at the time was confused, nor was Atari trying to convince people that those were native Coleco games...you have to understand the historical context.
datacipher 1 year ago
@wildsmiley Exactly. I recall playing Donkey Kong and Donkey Kong Jr. on BOTH an Atari 2600 and a Colecovision. It looked EXACTLY like the arcade version on ColecoVision, and looked like SHIT on the Atari 2600. . .
chj2 9 months ago
I love how Atari used their own crappy Pac Man against Coleco! Pretty smooth.
Dylanfanh61 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Colecovision was way better than this crap machine.
nuktubian 2 years ago
actually they both sucked
METALIST1989 2 years ago
I can agree with that...even though the 2600 was far superior!
Bittergamer1886 2 years ago
I have Pac-Man for the Nintendo and the Atari 5200, and boy I must say that the Atari version kicks ass!
The graphics are very accurate and the gameplay is fun and challenging!
adog262 2 years ago 3
I'd have to open up the controller with a screwdriver & actually scratch the circuit board connectors with a penny or knife. The buttons would then work again, but then the rubber underneath and around the analog stick would start to rip and eventually come off. Then the stick itself would get wobbly & you couldn't controller anything in the right direction. It would take maybe a month for all this to happen. Until you bought a new one and month later it was broken again.
RetroVGamer 2 years ago
The 5200 controller was evil. When you first hold a new 5200 controller. You tell yourself. This one is going to last! Things seem okay at first, buttons seem to work okay and hey look it even has a start, pause & reset button. Analog stick! Nice. As time went on though. The buttons would stop working.
RetroVGamer 2 years ago
A lot of people hated the 5200, but I loved it. I owned 3 different ones in my youth. Broke about a dozen 5200 controllers, but that was common. I really loved Countermeasure, Mountain King, Wizard of Wor. I have fond memories of the 5200.
RetroVGamer 2 years ago
Even Atari's admitting that Pac-Man 2600 was crap
AJBSONIC 2 years ago 4
you need a working controller good luck finding one...........maybe they did work if you took good care of them
1313131313113 2 years ago
I remember buying my 5200 on sale at Montgomery Ward in 1984. As someoe who had a 2600 & 50-60 cartridges, the 5200 was a lot better except for the lame controller.
RLFLOWS 2 years ago
Actually, this commercial is very misleading. In order to be accurate, they should have done side by side comparisons of Pacman (Atari 2600) on both systems. Now if the 5200 could make that look better than it would be super.
buickgod 2 years ago
Yep, this was a misleading commercial.
DarkCylon 2 years ago
Well being in the UK we never got the 5200 here.
From what I hear and have read about the 5200 it was lets be honest an very bad games system. One: the controllers really sucked. Two: the console is huge. Three: it didn't survive the games crash of 1984. Four: it must be rubbish since Atari couldn't be bothered to sell it outside the US.
daro2096 2 years ago
Nothing survived the games crash of 1983.
Honestly if you have a working controller/third party controller its a nice system. I know its huge but...it looks badass! =P
TenguGuy 2 years ago
These 2 guys below are funny as hell! Both grown men, fighting over which 80's system was better! You 2 need to both take your blood pressure meds and get back to watching Matlock!
aholladay99 3 years ago
What fucking liars, that's Pac Man on 2600.
Anyway Atari 2600>ColecoVision>Atari 5200
Link4587452 3 years ago
The ColecoVision could play Atari 2600 games with an adapter, that's what this commerical is talking about.
RKY06 3 years ago
the colecovision version of pac-man was probaly not made yet
SuperDave341 2 years ago
lol thats right
trock626 3 years ago
:05-:07, pacman on Colecovision?! i dont think so, they are showing the Atari 2600 version here.
plurp7 3 years ago 2
ColecoVison is alot better.
PHILRYABKIN 3 years ago
Today, the best way to play Atari 5200 is on a modded Xbox. No faulty controllers, no irreplaceable RF switchboxes that have power cords plugging into them, no need for 2600 converters, you can still play on a TV screen, and you can take a screenshot of your highest score in a game.
I guess that goes for most early systems though. They are interesting to collect and experience but if you really want to get into the gameplay, those controllers are not so great when compared to NES and on.
Rickstilwell1 3 years ago
Atari created the first backwards compatiable games for their systems...
mroddy0862 3 years ago
aww early technology
fade2black001 3 years ago
Look at how huge that adaptor looks. WTF were they thinking when they made the 5200?????
Headbanger142 3 years ago
How can we take a 400 computer and turn it into a giant black monolith with shitty joysticks?
FrakAttack 3 years ago 2
I think that was their only choice...if it was small it would look dwarfed.
TenguGuy 3 years ago
The VCS adaptor only received *TWO* seconds of screen time. If this commercial was the spider man movie, then the adaptor was VENOM!
Skylinesandsunsets 3 years ago
You're telling me that the adapter only worked for 2 seconds? Even though you could use the more reliable 2600 controllers with it? Wow.
TenguGuy 3 years ago
No, you misunderstood. The VCS adaptor only received two seconds of screen time *ON THIS COMMERCIAL*
Skylinesandsunsets 3 years ago
okay for one thing at first they showed the 2600 pac man and then they showed the collecovision beta
wolfjak 3 years ago
That second pac man game was for the Atari 5200, not the colecovision beta. I know because I used to own a 5200 pac man game.
Skylinesandsunsets 3 years ago
fuck you atari 5200 desingers
matte1592 3 years ago 4
The NES finally came in Ocotber 1985, five months after it begin test marketing in NYC. SEGA released the decent Master System in September 1986 and Atari waited until July to unlease the dated 7800 in July '86.
Tornado1994 3 years ago
Atari gives out an adaptor for 2600 games, but they don't do anything to fix the 5200's biggest flaw: It's blasted controllers.
snakes3425 3 years ago 3
that was a huge um that thig to make backwards compatibl I cant spell it or compatibel
seanwtfgamer 3 years ago
The system isn't that bad I mean ya the controlers brake pretty easily but nowadays you can have them fixed and make them were better and its actually a comfortable controller not to mention the 5200 has a lot of good ports and exclusives
DeldottoProduction07 3 years ago
the only reson why pacman looks like that on colecovision is because of the sorry 2600 programmers. a game made for lecovision would look better than that
luigi2999 3 years ago
Yeah, they used their own shitty Pac-Man game against Coleco...LOL
Marketing Genius!
pocketmego 3 years ago
It gets even better. "Atarisoft" -- the Atari division of the company that used its licenses for non-Atari platforms actually DID develop Pac Man for the Colecovision. When it turned out better than Atari's on 5200 version, they put it on the shelf. I've played a prototype, and its awesome.
LeguleiusGonzo 3 years ago
This is not true. It's sheer speculation and even an Atarisoft programmer has said he did not hear of this strategy. There are numerous reasons it might not have gotten past prototype, VERY LARGE reasons in fact. 83 was the year the industry crashed, operations were in disarray everywhere. In 84, Tramiel very abrutly axed the division. MANY prototypes for the 5200 and Colecovision have now come to light. In fact, it doesn't even make sense, Atari could have purposely sabotaged pacman and....
datacipher 3 years ago
released a much worse version. They still would have made money off it using the Pacman name. I think it's arguable which version is better, but I think the ghosts look much better in the Coleco version. Whether or not this was a reason why it was never released is unknown and is becoming the stuff of urban legend.
datacipher 3 years ago
Its not speculation. When I was a big Coleco collector, I e-mailed with some old Atarisoft developers I met at a game-con.
The Atarisoft label was just hitting the ground in 83 as a spin off sort of division but under Atari's mothership. They developed games for tons of platforms: 2600, 5200 of course; but also Commodore 64, Apple II, TI-99, etc.
Each game on each system had a team. The guy I talked to said Atari was pissed the Coleco ports were better than the 5200. I believe him.
LeguleiusGonzo 3 years ago
Then who was the developer and what exactly did he say? If he said "Atari was pissed" thats a far cry from "so they held back Coleco Pac Man because it was too good."
You should simply get ask your friend to if you can make his statment public so that you can share your inside story with all the retro-gamers.
And yes, we all know what "atarisoft" is.
datacipher 3 years ago
It was a nice trump card since Coleco had been heavily promoting their system as the only one that could play "all" the games and had the "biggest library of games". LOL. They were playing the misleading game and Atari fired back. I wonder how many people were actually fooled by either?
datacipher 3 years ago
Not to mention THE MOST HATED CONTROLLER OF ALL TIME!
ToyMachineBum 3 years ago
The award for "most hated controller of all time" goes to the thumb torturing disc used by Intellivision.
Skylinesandsunsets 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Oooooo...Colecovision got owned...
ownagedawggy 3 years ago
Because the 5200 was a commercial fiasco.
kzbxvz 3 years ago
Because the 5200 was a commercial fiasco.
kzbxvz 3 years ago
Don't remember the 5200, I remember the 2600 and the 7800.
Snoopy2299 3 years ago
That's why you get a MasterPlay ;)
prodos8 3 years ago
there's alot to make fun of
jrguillett2 3 years ago
did they just make fun of the atari 2600 verson of pacman?
GermanZ5 3 years ago 4
Everyone was buying computers at the time. Thats what really killed the early consoles Why? Because you could steal games. Every kid who had a C64 or Atari 400/800 had a hundred discs full of games. It wasnt until Nintendo was released and it had perfect arcade ports like Super Mario Bros that people considered a console again.
duncan36 3 years ago
Yeah. . . I was one of those kids with hundreds of "cracked" Atari 800 games on disc. There was crazy stuff the console owners never saw or imagined. I say the greatest game machine of that era wasn't the ColecoVision or the 5200, it was the Atari 800XL computer.
Zobeid 3 years ago
thats one big ass adaptor
overmind2 3 years ago
That was the Atari 2600 version of pacman not Colecovisions.Atari just dissed themselves.
MclovinKillerMX 3 years ago 4
dude the mother fucking controlers never worked@@@@@@
1lawl1 3 years ago
They broke in a few hours... LAME
countsmegula 3 years ago
O_o
prodos8 3 years ago
The 5200 was an Atari 400/800 computer that had been repackaged, a computer that came out three years earlier. It was graphically superior to the Colecovision but the controllers sucked and the system was big and overpriced. If Atari had released it in 1979 instead of a computer (Warner, Atari's owners at the time, insisted on a computer over the objections of Atari's founder, who wanted a game system), and if the controllers had worked, Atari very well might be running the world today.
DowntownHound 3 years ago
The graphics of the 5200 were NOT superior to Colecovision.
Compare the game DEFENDER. The Colecovision version is much better than the 5200 version.
also compare the game GALAXIAN. also the Colecovision version is better.
Jungle Hunt, Zaxxon, Gyruss, Congo Bongo, and more.... ALL BETTER ON COLECOVISION!
find any game that was released on both systems and compare the two. The Colecovision versions are always better.
xYxYxYxYxYx 3 years ago
WHAT? Defender is one of the worst Colecovision ports if you played the Arcade version. Atari's played MUCH MUCH closer to the arcade. The Coleco version was slow, astonishingly you could only have ONE shot on the screen at a time, the sound was brutal....no comparison whatsoever. As to the other games you mentioned, Galaxian and Congo Bongo were better on Coleco. Jungle Hunt and Zaxxon were better on 5200. Gyruss sucked on both compared to the arcade, it just didn't play well.
datacipher 3 years ago
You lie about Defender.
You could absolutely have more than one shot on screen at a time.
I have played probably every version of defender there is, and the Coleco version was definitely the closest to the arcade.
xYxYxYxYxYx 3 years ago
Well this is just silly now. My statement is easily verifiable for anybody who cares and then they can judge for themselves who the liar and the fanboy is. You really need to grow up. As I said in your ridiculous statments elsewhere in this thread, the systems both had strengths and weaknesses technically in terms of sprites, bitmapped and CV modes, audio, colors etc. Both had better versions of certain games, which depended mainly on the programmer and the game itself.
datacipher 3 years ago
You can use all the big words you like to make yourself look smart, but the fact remains that you are wrong about being able to have only one shot on the screen at a time. That is false. Furthermore, I don't understand why you call me "childish" when you were the one who began the personal attacks because I chose to use a few slang words.