3 ms·

One interesting thing about the Atari 50 collection is to really see the games laid out on a timeline to see how the design sensibility and technical knowledge

One interesting thing about the Atari 50 collection is to really see the games laid out on a timeline to see how the design sensibility and technical knowledge advances over time. As they point out in the interviews, this was the first ever "console lifecycle" and nobody really had any idea how things would change or eventually end. Stuff like Demons to Diamonds really is a huge step above Canyon Bomber despite being the same shooting gallery idea. And Solaris, which I hadn't played before, was just unbelievable - the gap between Combat and it dwarfs even the gap between e.g. FantaVision and God of War 2, if you know a bit about the 2600's technical design. > To me, the Atari 2600 is where video games hit mainstream, but the NES is where it really took off and solidified video games a place in history. This, I think, is pure recent bias. Nintendo is still around and Atari isn't, but Atari was massive in pop culture in their day.

jader201 4y ago
> This, I think, is pure recent bias I don’t believe so. The Atari almost killed the VG industry until the NES revived it. [1] I think a big reason for this is how much better the games on NES were vs. the 2600 (but also the business and market saturation). Some of the ports were just awful. I particularly remember how disappointed I was when I played Pac-Man, thinking it felt nothing like the arcade version. I had fond memories of going to Service Merchandise playing Donkey Kong on the Colecovision, amazed at how much better a port it was vs. Atari 2600. Also, it’s hard to claim recency bias when you’re looking at 37 vs. 41 years ago — those periods blur together for me at this point. :) A lot of NES games I still enjoy today are long dead and irrelevant today (Guardian Legend, Willow, Destiny of an Emporor, Crystalis, Faxanadu, just to name a few). [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_crash_of_1983 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_crash_of_1983
- morelisp 4y ago
  > The Atari almost killed the VG industry until the NES revived it. This is... not really an accurate way to describe the crash. Primarily overenthusiastic retailers, secondarily low-quality non-Atari developers, thirdly Atari itself tripping over itself to react to both, almost killed the industry. That's not really "the Atari [VCS]" - 15 million people still wanted Atari games, they just didn't want rushed licenses and cash-ins. > it’s hard to claim recency bias when you’re looking at 37 vs. 41 years ago It's not 37 vs. 41 years old, it's Nintendo last week vs. Atari 41 years ago - even if you followed it all the way through the mess of the Jaguar years (which I won't defend), still 20 years ago. Meanwhile you can't not know what Mario or a pokémon is even if you never played the games. > A lot of NES games I still enjoy today are long dead and irrelevant today (Guardian Legend, Willow, Destiny of an Emporor, Crystalis, Faxanadu, just to name a few). These games regularly top "best NES games" lists, LotW as a sequel to Faxanadu also. (Except maybe Willow, which is a little more polarizing - but in part because everyone compares it to Crystalis...) There a ton of genuinely forgotten NES games; you didn't name them because you've forgotten them.

jader201 4y ago

> This, I think, is pure recent bias I don’t believe so. The Atari almost killed the VG industry until the NES revived it. [1] I think a big reason for this is how much better the games on NES were vs. the 2600 (but also the business and market saturation). Some of the ports were just awful. I particularly remember how disappointed I was when I played Pac-Man, thinking it felt nothing like the arcade version. I had fond memories of going to Service Merchandise playing Donkey Kong on the Colecovision, amazed at how much better a port it was vs. Atari 2600. Also, it’s hard to claim recency bias when you’re looking at 37 vs. 41 years ago — those periods blur together for me at this point. :) A lot of NES games I still enjoy today are long dead and irrelevant today (Guardian Legend, Willow, Destiny of an Emporor, Crystalis, Faxanadu, just to name a few). [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_crash_of_1983 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_crash_of_1983

morelisp 4y ago
> The Atari almost killed the VG industry until the NES revived it. This is... not really an accurate way to describe the crash. Primarily overenthusiastic retailers, secondarily low-quality non-Atari developers, thirdly Atari itself tripping over itself to react to both, almost killed the industry. That's not really "the Atari [VCS]" - 15 million people still wanted Atari games, they just didn't want rushed licenses and cash-ins. > it’s hard to claim recency bias when you’re looking at 37 vs. 41 years ago It's not 37 vs. 41 years old, it's Nintendo last week vs. Atari 41 years ago - even if you followed it all the way through the mess of the Jaguar years (which I won't defend), still 20 years ago. Meanwhile you can't not know what Mario or a pokémon is even if you never played the games. > A lot of NES games I still enjoy today are long dead and irrelevant today (Guardian Legend, Willow, Destiny of an Emporor, Crystalis, Faxanadu, just to name a few). These games regularly top "best NES games" lists, LotW as a sequel to Faxanadu also. (Except maybe Willow, which is a little more polarizing - but in part because everyone compares it to Crystalis...) There a ton of genuinely forgotten NES games; you didn't name them because you've forgotten them.