7 ms·

Retro gamer/collector here that’s been in and out of the Jaguar scene since the ‘93 launch, and I can say this with the utmost respect: Atari systems don’t die

Retro gamer/collector here that’s been in and out of the Jaguar scene since the ‘93 launch, and I can say this with the utmost respect: Atari systems don’t die, they just go into the public domain where they tend to live forever on an inexhaustible well of community involvement. The Jaguar and Lynx both have a _lot_ of activity every year, and this one more than usual.

cptskippy 7y ago
It it possible to play the Lynx games on original hardware?
- vanadium 7y ago
  There’s a Lynx SD flash cart out there by RetroHQ that would allow for it; he’s a one man wrecking crew though with a bunch of other flash carts on the market so inventory’s hard to get. But yeah, it’s an option.
codesushi42 7y ago
True, the Jaguar is disproportionately popular in the homebrew community compared to how many units it sold.
- dmix 7y ago
  Why is that? I tried watching the Angry Nerd review of Jaguar and it was all negative. Is it because it had some good under-utilized hardware?
  - vanadium 7y ago
    Pretty much; very few homebrew groups out there have been able to do much with the hardware except to complete previously unreleased games. However, there’re a lot of Atari ST ports coming from AtariAge, and a good half-dozen homebrew titles of variant quality being sold on physical cartridges (and CDs for that vanishingly small demographic) each year. YMMV.
    - dmix 7y ago
      Interesting, I've been meaning to play Another World on a retro system...
  - codesushi42 7y ago
    Yeah, partly that. Here is a quote from John Carmack on the Jaguar hardware design: Skilled programmer Steven Scavone, key member of 3D Stooges which released Gorf, still develops for Jaguar. Comparing it to systems he’s worked on, Scavone elaborated on tech-specs, also explaining in laymen’s terms. “It should be coded in as much assembler as possible. This machine flies when fuelled by assembler. The RISCs in proper concert with the 68k will do some absolutely amazing graphics. The Jaguar could [utterly] crush any 2D system. It’s a lot easier to program 2D for than the PSX or N64. You can thank the Tramiels for it being ‘underpowered’. The chips were not complete and had bugs. The designers, who weren’t experts in silicon design, missed fundamentals. Just one more register and [it could have run without stalling all the time]! If they [had fixed this], the Jag would have blown away the PSX. Later 3D titles like Battlesphere proved that systems at the time were no match for it. https://steemit.com/gaming/@alexbeyman/john-carmack-s-thoughts-on-the-atari-jaguar https://steemit.com/gaming/@alexbeyman/john-carmack-s-though... Another problem was that the Jaguar included a Motorola 68000, the same processor in the Sega Genesis. Why was that an issue? A lot of developers would simply implement their games against that CPU because it was well documented without utilizing the Tom/Jerry CPUs. That led to a lot of the Jag's library looking no better, and even worse than its 16-bit competition. That made the Jag look like a joke to gamers since it was being touted as a 64-bit machine. Not many consoles got as much abuse from the gaming community in the States as the Jag back in the day. Though with the failures of the 32X, Virtual Boy, and 3DO (and later the Saturn), everyone was getting 3D wrong until Sony showed up to the party. And all of those consoles failed partly because of poor hardware design. So maybe Atari can be cut some slack here.
    - Grazester 7y ago
      I dont have much love for Atari and the Jaguar from false advertising about it being a 64 bit machine to its flawed hardware. Yes the Saturn did have a flaw in the implementation in how the dual processor were tacked together at last minute but there were many factors that affected the way things turned out for the Saturn. Some are: 1) The surprise launch when Sega started to panicked about the PSX which caught everyone off guard and not in a good way 2) Not very many titles at lunch. 3) Retailers angry about the surprise lunch and system allocation and some vowed never to carry Saturn period(which they really never carried). 4) A terrible first generation development kit which was huge clunky, ineffective and expensive(something like 50K). This lead to a lot of devs having to write their own tools. The PSX dev kits were apparently amazing in comparison. It didn't help that the system used quads and not polygons. Of course Sega had massive experience in the Arcade with 3D title using quads but that was on powerful expensive hardware. 5) Gamers were burnt by the SegaCD and 32X addon which Sega dropped support for in no time. 6)$400 price tag Despite this Saturn was not a true failure. In Japan it sold very well. The Dreamcast however can be categorized as a true failure despite Sega getting just about everything right with the system. It was just too late. They didnt have the cash to keep the system going and fight the Sony hype machine.
  - rasz 7y ago
    Hardware was good on paper, but broken by design. Even SDK shipped by Atari had buggy compiler not accounting for defects.
sehugg 7y ago
Atari 7800, too. Even though only about 100K were produced.
fit2rule 7y ago
Old Computers Never Die - Their Users Do!

cptskippy 7y ago

It it possible to play the Lynx games on original hardware?

vanadium 7y ago
There’s a Lynx SD flash cart out there by RetroHQ that would allow for it; he’s a one man wrecking crew though with a bunch of other flash carts on the market so inventory’s hard to get. But yeah, it’s an option.

codesushi42 7y ago

True, the Jaguar is disproportionately popular in the homebrew community compared to how many units it sold.

dmix 7y ago
Why is that? I tried watching the Angry Nerd review of Jaguar and it was all negative. Is it because it had some good under-utilized hardware?
- vanadium 7y ago
  Pretty much; very few homebrew groups out there have been able to do much with the hardware except to complete previously unreleased games. However, there’re a lot of Atari ST ports coming from AtariAge, and a good half-dozen homebrew titles of variant quality being sold on physical cartridges (and CDs for that vanishingly small demographic) each year. YMMV.
  - dmix 7y ago
    Interesting, I've been meaning to play Another World on a retro system...
- codesushi42 7y ago
  Yeah, partly that. Here is a quote from John Carmack on the Jaguar hardware design: Skilled programmer Steven Scavone, key member of 3D Stooges which released Gorf, still develops for Jaguar. Comparing it to systems he’s worked on, Scavone elaborated on tech-specs, also explaining in laymen’s terms. “It should be coded in as much assembler as possible. This machine flies when fuelled by assembler. The RISCs in proper concert with the 68k will do some absolutely amazing graphics. The Jaguar could [utterly] crush any 2D system. It’s a lot easier to program 2D for than the PSX or N64. You can thank the Tramiels for it being ‘underpowered’. The chips were not complete and had bugs. The designers, who weren’t experts in silicon design, missed fundamentals. Just one more register and [it could have run without stalling all the time]! If they [had fixed this], the Jag would have blown away the PSX. Later 3D titles like Battlesphere proved that systems at the time were no match for it. https://steemit.com/gaming/@alexbeyman/john-carmack-s-thoughts-on-the-atari-jaguar https://steemit.com/gaming/@alexbeyman/john-carmack-s-though... Another problem was that the Jaguar included a Motorola 68000, the same processor in the Sega Genesis. Why was that an issue? A lot of developers would simply implement their games against that CPU because it was well documented without utilizing the Tom/Jerry CPUs. That led to a lot of the Jag's library looking no better, and even worse than its 16-bit competition. That made the Jag look like a joke to gamers since it was being touted as a 64-bit machine. Not many consoles got as much abuse from the gaming community in the States as the Jag back in the day. Though with the failures of the 32X, Virtual Boy, and 3DO (and later the Saturn), everyone was getting 3D wrong until Sony showed up to the party. And all of those consoles failed partly because of poor hardware design. So maybe Atari can be cut some slack here.
  - Grazester 7y ago
    I dont have much love for Atari and the Jaguar from false advertising about it being a 64 bit machine to its flawed hardware. Yes the Saturn did have a flaw in the implementation in how the dual processor were tacked together at last minute but there were many factors that affected the way things turned out for the Saturn. Some are: 1) The surprise launch when Sega started to panicked about the PSX which caught everyone off guard and not in a good way 2) Not very many titles at lunch. 3) Retailers angry about the surprise lunch and system allocation and some vowed never to carry Saturn period(which they really never carried). 4) A terrible first generation development kit which was huge clunky, ineffective and expensive(something like 50K). This lead to a lot of devs having to write their own tools. The PSX dev kits were apparently amazing in comparison. It didn't help that the system used quads and not polygons. Of course Sega had massive experience in the Arcade with 3D title using quads but that was on powerful expensive hardware. 5) Gamers were burnt by the SegaCD and 32X addon which Sega dropped support for in no time. 6)$400 price tag Despite this Saturn was not a true failure. In Japan it sold very well. The Dreamcast however can be categorized as a true failure despite Sega getting just about everything right with the system. It was just too late. They didnt have the cash to keep the system going and fight the Sony hype machine.
- rasz 7y ago
  Hardware was good on paper, but broken by design. Even SDK shipped by Atari had buggy compiler not accounting for defects.

sehugg 7y ago

Atari 7800, too. Even though only about 100K were produced.

fit2rule 7y ago

Old Computers Never Die - Their Users Do!