|
Post by gamezone on Oct 18, 2011 9:31:11 GMT -5
I bought it last year at a neighbor's auction. It works!! Never knew he had one and I don't think he did either. Must have put it away in storage in the seventies. He was moving into an assisted living home and was selling everything and at the age of 92 I seen him still driving the other day. I hope I'm that spry or live to be that healthy, because there are still a lot of video games I want to play.
|
|
|
Post by VectorX on Oct 18, 2011 10:08:45 GMT -5
I hope I'm that spry or live to be that healthy, because there are still a lot of video games I want to play. Yeah, HAVE to make an excuse to live that long, eh? ;D
|
|
|
Post by gamezone on Oct 18, 2011 10:11:53 GMT -5
:DAlways have to have a goal or purpose in life and maybe if I can ever retire I could be a game tester.
|
|
|
Post by gliptitude on Nov 11, 2013 17:59:48 GMT -5
Well I have stumbled on this old thread while searching for something else. I thought I remembered participating in this one, but don't see any posts from me, so I will weigh in now, perhaps scandalously.
I HATE THE 2600!
I've been dancing around that statement for years, but now I'm committing to it. The controller sucks. The console is unreliable and clumsy. The massive game library consists almost entirely of inferior games and games that have better versions on other consoles/arcades/computers. It's success was based entirely on the perception of it, just as it's demise was.
Vectrex is number one for me, and I don't see a need to make excuses for the comparably small library of original games when so many of them are good games. Web Wars, Fortress of Narzod, Cosmic Chasm, Pole Position, Rip Off, Bedlam, Minestorm - each one entirely awesome, and entirely playable right now, without requiring any effort to like. Armor Attack, Solar Quest, Polar Rescue, Starhawk, Scramble, Space Wars - also fun and playable. Art Master and Animaction? Is there ANYTHING that remotely compares to those on the 2600?
So that's 15 completely worthy games, and a great diversity among them. Not to mention the most dynamic homebrew scene there is, if not the most prolific.
It would be great if the vintage Vectrex library contained the same volume of QUALITY games as the NES. But the ratio of good games to bad games is so good on the Vectrex, that there is a higher net number of good games than there is on the vast majority of consoles. ... If you randomly select a Vectrex game there is a 65% chance it will be a good game. Randomly select an Atari 2600 game and it is 95% chance TERRIBLE, 4% TOLERABLE, and <1% GOOD.
1. Vectrex 2. NES 3. Game Boy
.. There are some consoles that I can't comment on because I have little or no experience with them. VCS is not one of them.
I like the Super Nintendo a lot, for what it does and how it does it. I think it's a great console. But there are more than double as many great Vectrex games than there are great SNES games, in my opinion. .. The ONLY console that has more essential games for it than Vectrex is the NES, in my opinion.
Considering what the Vectrex offers, the game library may be fairly described as "more than adequate". .. If the only 5 games ever made for Vectrex were (for example): Web Wars, Art Master, Solar Quest, Rip Off and Starhawk - I would still consider it to be among my top 3 consoles.
By "what the Vectrex offers" I mostly mean VECTOR GRAPHICS, but also the integral use of overlays, the implementation of a controller that could accommodate the vast majority of control schemes used at the time and the creative innovation of the light pen (very much indicative of the general preoccupation with innovation surrounding Vectrex).
Web Wars is arguably among the top 5 vector graphics video games, and it is exclusive to the Vectrex console.
I don't think you can make a similar statement for any other console prior to the NES. ... And POST-NES you are dealing with a world where arcade gaming was progressing towards obsolescence.
Atari may have invented console gaming as we know it, with the 2600. But they also solidified the idea that a console is a consumer version (i.e. an inferior version) of video games.
..These days console gaming is the essential (and almost the only) way to play video games, and to a large extent you have Nintendo to thank for that. If Nintendo didn't invent it, they certainly brought the idea home, that there is an optimal way of gaming that is only suited to playing in private.
The games you play at home are different from the games you play in public, and the games that you play at home have prevailed.
.. So if you're going to play video games on a "classic console", why in the world would you give preference to the system that, above all else, offered inferior-style arcade gaming?
The only games that stand out to me on the VCS are the (primitive) adventure games. Adventure/Secret Quest/Haunted House/Swordquest were innovative games. But it is extremely rare that I hear anyone cite these games as among the reasons that they play this console.
I would like to hear otherwise from anyone who did not grow up playing 2600. Or from those that did, what did this console have to offer that its contemporaries did not? Given the circumstances, "volume of games" is not a very persuasive answer.
|
|
|
Post by VectorX on Nov 11, 2013 20:30:08 GMT -5
It's success was based entirely on the perception of it, Not really, it came out during the very first years of home gaming. There wasn't much else to compare it to. Vectrex is number one for me, and I don't see a need to make excuses for the comparably small library of original games when so many of them are good games. Web Wars, Fortress of Narzod, Cosmic Chasm, Pole Position, Rip Off, Bedlam, Minestorm - each one entirely awesome, Of course, some of this would be opinionated, as I consider Bedlam to not being very replayable due to not having many levels, and some have given it a low score. Pole Position doesn't seem to be Pole Position to me because the track was totally changed (where's the sign that you wipe out on if you don't know how to handle that one curve? That totally takes out a very important aspect of the coin-op original, in my opinion, which I don't consider to be "awesome" there), Rip Off is only halfway there since it's only fun with two people (again, my opinion), etc. Armor Attack, Solar Quest, Polar Rescue, Starhawk, Scramble, Space Wars - also fun and playable. A. Attack to me also isn't that great unless you have two people (again), I didn't like S. Quest that much, and Star Hawk I found to be too easy and boring with its smaller screen as compared to the arcade original. Scramble and S. Wars I'll definitely agree on, but P. Rescue I haven't played, so no opinion there. Not trying to dilute the argument here or anything, but like I inferred earlier, peoples' opinions will differ. Randomly select an Atari 2600 game and it is 95% chance TERRIBLE, 4% TOLERABLE, and <1% GOOD. Have you played literally 300-400 Atari games? There were I believe 500 games made in the day, with 1000 overall for the non-U. S. stuff included. In order to evaluate "95%" of it, you'd have to PLAY 95% of it. Atari may have invented console gaming as we know it, with the 2600. They didn't, as there were many Pong and other game-type consoles before it. If you mean that it was the first programmable console, that isn't correct either, as the Fairchild Channel F came out several months before it. Try a Channel F to see how crappy gaming can be if you don't like the 2600! So if you're going to play video games on a "classic console", why in the world would you give preference to the system that, above all else, offered inferior-style arcade gaming? As compared to what back then? There were only a small handful of other consoles before it, many of which just played Pong and/or a few other games, and that was it. The only games that stand out to me on the VCS are the (primitive) adventure games. Adventure/Secret Quest/Haunted House/Swordquest were innovative games. To me it'd be stuff like H. E. R. O. (nearly twenty levels, which was totally unheard of back then), the Pitfalls (over a hundred screens each), Indy 500 (couple dozen racing games), Communist Mutants from Space (onscreen menu to choose many features), Escape from the MindMaster (killer 3-D game with several mini-games on it), Tunnel Runner (actually SCARY 3-D maze game once it started going fast), Dragonstomper (one of, if not THE only true RPG for the system), Fast Food (funny and fast gameplay, plus simple and easy to pick up), Kaboom! (for the same reason), Megamania (many different attack patterns; each enemy's was unique, which was unique back then), Mountain King (very different and somewhat complicated platformer, plus challenging), Ram It (simple but hard to get real far on game 3), Seaquest (original shooter/rescue game), Space Invaders (112 different games, co-play/competitive, etc.), Stellar Track (turn-based text simulation like no other game in the library), River Raid (tons of screens, no other scrolling shooters like it then), Fathom (original puzzle game), and many others. Now, of course peoples' opinions will vary, like those who wouldn't care about Space Invaders nowadays, for example. But to have an improvement on the arcade game by having many game variations and all, that was something that hardly ever happened back then, since arcade games were way more powerful than any home console back then. As I said the other week on another thread, quite a few people don't like Stellar Track, but it was still a standout, being the only turn-based simulation on the system. Megamania wouldn't seem original nowadays, as it was influenced by Astro Blaster, but back then it was pretty different (try getting through the Steam Iron wave without dying the first time unless you know how to deal with them, it won't happen, I guarantee you!). Superman was also very different by having tons and screens and all, so it was a standout game, although a pain in the ass to teach people new to it where to go and what to do, so I didn't list that initially. But it was quite different. Ram It needed a combination of strategy and luck to make it on game 3, plus its concept is simple, yet hard to master. There's many others for various reasons (Yars' Revenge, but I'm sure it seems simple now, but there wasn't much else like it then, although it was kind of a "reverse Star Castle"), but I'm not going though tons more. Or from those that did, what did this console have to offer that its contemporaries did not? Given the circumstances, "volume of games" is not a very persuasive answer. It did have volumes of games and many pretty good ones, along with there being hardly anything else at the time. Once gaming got huge and more and more companies sprang up trying to make a buck, sure, there were indeed plenty of sh*t titles later on, but also very good ones as technology evolved and Atari put out as much quality stuff as they could due to bankswitching (very superior versions of Ms. and Junior Pac-Man to their original Pac-Man dud, Stargate blowing away their blah version of Defender that played nothing like the arcade original, etc.).
|
|
|
Post by TrekMD on Nov 11, 2013 20:52:06 GMT -5
Not to mention the most dynamic homebrew scene there is, if not the most prolific. The 2600 homebrew scene is more prolific than that of the Vectrex but the Vectrex homebrew community is definitely very active and has released many excellent titles. The 2600 homebrew community has also released some excellent games for the system which are quite remarkable when you consider what the system was originally designed to do. Games like Boulder Dash, Evil Magician Returns II, Pac-Man 4K, Medieval Mayhem, and Thrust+ Platinum are but a small sample of high quality games for the system. Are there better versions on newer consoles? Sure, but what is accomplished on the 2600 is what makes it impressive and many people love to challenge themselves by programming for the system.
|
|
|
Post by VectorX on Nov 11, 2013 21:00:44 GMT -5
Are there better versions on newer consoles? Sure, but what is accomplished on the 2600 is what makes it impressive and many people love to challenge themselves by programming for the system. Yeah, that's why quite a few things can't be "compared" with that and the very few other systems out back then, along with the Vectrex years later, such as one of the variations on Surround where you can, yes, make pictures like with Art Master. True, they're just blocky and all, but that's like going back to the very first cars and saying that all problems with what the first cars should have been fixed and that cars should've had air bags, seat belts, air conditioning, cameras, etc. within 10 years. Not to try to make excuses with the 2600, but back then, home gaming was brand new (which the gaming business still is arguably not even very old today, even!) and you couldn't expect everything to make sense with what was done then (only one controller button, no extra processor for in-game music and no pause feature for consoles seems laughable as hell nowadays, as well as many other things, but you couldn't expect a whole lot from a brand new entertainment entity such as home video gaming back then. Yet many of us were very happy back then!).
|
|
|
Post by gliptitude on Nov 12, 2013 1:38:33 GMT -5
Not to mention the most dynamic homebrew scene there is, if not the most prolific. The 2600 homebrew scene is more prolific than that of the Vectrex but the Vectrex homebrew community is definitely very active and has released many excellent titles. The 2600 homebrew community has also released some excellent games for the system which are quite remarkable when you consider what the system was originally designed to do. Games like Boulder Dash, Evil Magician Returns II, Pac-Man 4K, Medieval Mayhem, and Thrust+ Platinum are but a small sample of high quality games for the system. Are there better versions on newer consoles? Sure, but what is accomplished on the 2600 is what makes it impressive and many people love to challenge themselves by programming for the system. Yes, that's the reason I used the words that I did, (which you quoted). I was aware that there are more homebrews for the 2600, and that many people are very passionate about them. That's why I said "if NOT the most prolific". I am not (and was not) claiming that the Vectrex homebrews are more in number, or that the 2600 ones are unworthy, but just that the Vectrex ones are better, more interesting, more diverse and more original. I didn't mean to cite the Atari homebrew scene as a mark against the 2600, as I feel the opposite. My point here was that the Vectrex homebrew is extremely competitive, and that the Vectrex is arguably the best supported "classic console" in this respect. I am very skeptical that the 2600 scene has arcade ports as good as Protector and Gravitrex or complete originals as unique and inspired as I,Cyborg. These Vectrex games are not games that you have to make excuses for. ... Am I wrong?
|
|
|
Post by gliptitude on Nov 12, 2013 5:15:46 GMT -5
My overall statement is that the 2600 has an unfair advantage, and an unwarranted advantage in the world of "classic consoles", as well as in the world of video games in general. When I say that the VCS "may have invented console gaming as we know it", I say that knowing that it is not the first game console, nor the first to introduce any of its recognizable features. But "... as we know it" is largely entailed in the ubiquity of these devices, which I think you can fairly say was something established by Atari. VCS introduced "the craze". It's success was based entirely on the perception of it, Perhaps so bold as to be incorrect. But largely what I meant by this is that the console only got the software support that it got because Atari managed to get one of their machines in seemingly every household. The fact that everyone had one is an arbitrary reality, rather than the result of them "getting it right". Randomly select an Atari 2600 game and it is 95% chance TERRIBLE, 4% TOLERABLE, and <1% GOOD. Have you played literally 300-400 Atari games? There were I believe 500 games made in the day, with 1000 overall for the non-U. S. stuff included. In order to evaluate "95%" of it, you'd have to PLAY 95% of it. I can consider amending my figures, but it is not necessary for me to play 500 games in order to make an overall evaluation. After all, I do not consider my individual opinions of these individual games to be the definitive opinions. The people who have played them, including yourself, agree that a large number of them are bad. I think you named 19 games. If you add to that the 6 that I referred to (counting versions of franchises I named) you have 25. Wikipedia lists 516 unique 2600 games, (not counting homebrews). .. So so far that is good for 4.8% of the library, which is still within my quote. None of the ones I named are better than "tolerable" for me. Several of them are very very interesting to me, but also so frustrating as to not be fun. I think you're splitting hairs in your criticism of Starhawk, Armor Attack etc, but I suppose I asked for that when I used the terms that I used, (great, tolerable, etc). If I simplify and just use the terms 'worthy' and 'not worthy' for both consoles, I think the argument for Vectrex gets even better. There are only a handful of CANDIDATES for downright bad (unworthy) Vectrex games, (I count 8 CANDIDATES). So even if NONE of those make the cut, that's still 70% worthy. And we're still at 95% not worthy with the 2600. 18 Vectrex games vs 25 VCS games. I know that you have more worthy games to list, but can you exceed even 20% not terrible? That's 103 games. I do think it's fair to commend the Vectrex for this ratio, but also somewhat unfair to fault the 2600's when you are talking about such a large library, (so still a substantial number of worthy games). But the lack of foresight and quality control in the software is only the most apparent indication of the poor design that plagues this console. OVERALL, it may be no worse than the CONSOLES that came before it, or around the same time as it. But it's shortcomings are unbearable for me. ... I might think that I just can't go quite that far back, or that primitive, in my video gaming. .. But I've played Computer Space (at a museum years ago) and it was immediately enjoyable for me.
|
|
|
Post by TrekMD on Nov 12, 2013 11:05:00 GMT -5
I am very skeptical that the 2600 scene has arcade ports as good as Protector and Gravitrex or complete originals as unique and inspired as I,Cyborg. These Vectrex games are not games that you have to make excuses for. ... Am I wrong? In my opinion you are. Have you tried Stargate/Defender II on the 2600? That is one of the best, if not the best arcade ports, on the 2600. How about Solaris, Escape from the Mindmaster, or The Official Frogger? None of those games need to have any excuses made for them as they are all superb games. The Official Frogger, to this day, is my most favorite port of that arcade game.
|
|
|
Post by VectorGamer on Nov 12, 2013 11:20:22 GMT -5
ColecoVision - for all the arcade ports from BITD to all the new homebrew releases.
Second pick would be Atari 2600 for all the great memories it gave me in the early 80s.
|
|
|
Post by gliptitude on Nov 12, 2013 13:43:28 GMT -5
I am very skeptical that the 2600 scene has arcade ports as good as Protector and Gravitrex or complete originals as unique and inspired as I,Cyborg. These Vectrex games are not games that you have to make excuses for. ... Am I wrong? In my opinion you are. Have you tried Stargate/Defender II on the 2600? That is one of the best, if not the best arcade ports, on the 2600. How about Solaris, Escape from the Mindmaster, or The Official Frogger? None of those games need to have any excuses made for them as they are all superb games. The Official Frogger, to this day, is my most favorite port of that arcade game. No I haven't played any 2600 homebrews, only read reviews and watched some videos. I know I have read about some that you mention, but I can't really remember and will have to revisit them on your recommendation, (will also check out Darryl's recommendations). Thank you to both of you for the concrete examples. I'm still entirely skeptical though, as none of those original arcade games can hold a candle to Defender or Gravitar, in my opinion. ... I have taken note of Juno First, which seems to have been very well received, and which is one that I actually really like the arcade version of. But I see that one of my favorite aspects of Juno First, (the scrolling and shifting lines) had to be eliminated on the 2600. And of course I would have much rather seen this game ported to Vectrex. ... And Juno First is no Defender. (Neither is Defender II) The very existence of Defender is pretty much the only reason that I know for sure that I am not completely biased in favor of vector games, when it comes to classic arcade fare. .. I'm not sure if you addressed my question, or intended to. Am I wrong? .. "On the 2600" is specifically the qualification that I don't want to hear. Protector is an incredible port, "on the Vectrex", but it is also an altogether amazing game, regardless of this limitation. ... Are you telling me that Official Frogger is as good as Protector, all things being equal? Also, I don't know yet if any of the ones you mentioned are totally original homebrews, (haven't looked them up yet). .. I would need to hear a very insightful argument if I'm going to believe that they come close to beating I,Cyborg in that category. .. Literally being an original, (rather than a remake) would be a start, (and a prerequisite). But I named I,Cyborg above many other Vectrex homebrew originals for a reason. It is much more than a new take on an old idea and I've yet to see anything like it in homebrew gaming for any console. Honestly I am skeptical that the 2600 community would even support a game as unique as I,Cyborg, much less give birth to an idea with this much weight. It's still amazing that it even happened on the Vectrex. Even though the Vectrex community is more characteristically in favor of new and novel ideas, it is still one dominated by sentimentality and nostalgia, and I'Cyborg is without rival even there. ... I've yet to mention War of the Worlds, and it provides yet another distinct advantage of the Vectrex homebrew scene. Aside from the game itself being outstanding, it constitutes the ability of this console and the susceptibility of this scene to preserve games that were otherwise almost entirely lost. If not for that game and this console, most of us would likely have gone our entire lives without seeing this game in anything like the way it was originally intended. WotW is not the only example of this.
|
|
|
Post by VectorX on Nov 12, 2013 14:31:57 GMT -5
Have you played literally 300-400 Atari games? There were I believe 500 games made in the day, with 1000 overall for the non-U. S. stuff included. In order to evaluate "95%" of it, you'd have to PLAY 95% of it. I can consider amending my figures, but it is not necessary for me to play 500 games in order to make an overall evaluation. No, but I'd say you'd have to have a go of 200-300 of them. How many have you played, exactly? A couple of dozen? The people who have played them, including yourself, agree that a large number of them are bad. Again, many companies jumped onto the gaming craze (leading to the crash), putting out bad games. That's part of it. Many games were only 1-2K as well. You can't do a whole lot with that. You also mentioned this: But the lack of foresight and quality control in the software is only the most apparent indication of the poor design that plagues this console. Again, home video gaming was brand new then. It wasn't until people ridiculously, unfairly tried to blame Atari on Custer's Revenge (an X-rated game) that Atari decided to figure out a quality control thing, hence why with the NES (or maybe it was before then), gaming companies started up a control process so companies could make games for their consoles only on an "official" basis. And you couldn't exactly have a "foresight" on a home video game console when there was barely anything to compare it with back then (again, one button only for a controller was ok for a while, along with no pause button and such would come out years later, which not even the Vectrex had). I think you named 19 games. If you add to that the 6 that I referred to (counting versions of franchises I named) you have 25. Wikipedia lists 516 unique 2600 games, (not counting homebrews). .. So so far that is good for 4.8% of the library, which is still within my quote. And we're still at 95% not worthy with the 2600. 18 Vectrex games vs 25 VCS games. I know that you have more worthy games to list, but can you exceed even 20% not terrible? That's 103 games. I have chronic fatigue, I'm constantly tired and take literally a dozen naps a day. Sure, I'm still on a lot due to having no life and currently have free reign at this computer (which will change soon, since the owner is due back in town within a week, I think). So no, I didn't really feel like going through all kinds of lists and adding more and more and explaining more and more yesterday as it was (the post took me like 10 minutes past a nap time as it was, but I wanted to get it out of the way...hence why I wasn't able to reply until just now today [yet I've been up since 7 a. m.] due to my mom's tablet interfering with our internet, since her service goes out a lot where she's currently staying, which is what happened earlier during a time when I was planning on writing back but couldn't). So yes, Demon Attack is another addition (might not seem like much nowadays, but it was pretty cool then), Atlantis (Missile Command clone, but still played a little differently), Cosmic Ark (totally original and the storyline tied to Atlantis), Bumper Bash (best pinball game out of all released for the 2600, and Midnight Magic was good too), Asteroids, Missile Command, and others that I'd have to look around for and not just off the top of my head. And as you also mentioned arcade ports, again, arcade games were way more powerful than home consoles. Not even the ColecoVision (way more powerful than the 2600) could do a very good port of Congo Bongo. Atari still did good versions (as was mentioned earlier) of Stargate, Jr. and Ms. Pac-Man, along with Galaxian and Super Breakout, others that weren't outright ports (Dodge 'Em and Circus Atari, as there were the Dodgem and Clowns arcade originals that they were clones of, so there's several more to add to the list) and other companies made Frogger and The Official Frogger (two versions, both of which were very good, and that reminds me, Parker Bros. also did The Empire Strikes Back [also considered a classic] and a decent port of the Star Wars vector coin-op). And the irony was mentioning Gravitar, which the 2600 version IS good. Sure, it looks like crap, but the 2600 (nor any other console) could do vector, plus it had many variations, such as being able to play with 99 ships and all, easier versions, no saucers during a planetary sweep, etc. And of course the 2600 couldn't do a game like I, Cyborg because it can't handle 3-D hardly at all! Raiders of the Lost Ark is one that I can think of that was very complicated and had very different gameplay than anything else from back then, as well as Superman, which I also mentioned. Opinion is divided over Raiders though, as it takes two joysticks, so I won't say it's a great game (I thought it was fairly ok), but you asked for ambitious stuff for the 2600. Superman and Stellar Track also count in that category. Some of the rare ones I'm not real familiar with are too, such as one where you disarm bombs (I can't think of the name of it right now; might be Avalon Hill that made it), and more and more. Again, I don't really feel like looking up a bunch of games and listing them all against a general assessment. 4-16K (in general, and many of the early games were only 1-2K) isn't a whole lot that can be done with games, even the Vectrex stalled in quite a few things with that little itself, such as far fewer variations than 2600 Berzerk had (by the way, the 2600 port was better than the Vectrex one, even though the robots didn't fire diagionaly and it was for only one player).
|
|
|
Post by TrekMD on Nov 12, 2013 23:30:24 GMT -5
.. I'm not sure if you addressed my question, or intended to. Am I wrong? .. "On the 2600" is specifically the qualification that I don't want to hear. Protector is an incredible port, "on the Vectrex", but it is also an altogether amazing game, regardless of this limitation. ... Are you telling me that Official Frogger is as good as Protector, all things being equal? None of those games I listed are homebrews. They were all released back in the day. When it comes to arcade ports, the Official Frogger is definitely a superb one. Protector and Frogger are very different games but if what you are looking for is accurate arcade gameplay, Official Frogger is there.
|
|
|
Post by VectorX on Nov 13, 2013 0:25:57 GMT -5
Other good arcade translations from back then include Amidar...I THINK. I never played the original, so I can't say for sure. If not, it's a good game in my opinion.
Even though your ship moves a little slow in Vanguard, that's also a decent translation, due to having so much content/the majority of the original game in it. And even though it looks "wrong" to have Mario and L. (however that's spelled) being tall and skinny, Mario Bros. is also a good one, as is Lock 'n Chase and Crystal Castles, although for the latter, I never liked the original a whole lot. However, the gameplay was captured pretty decently, and I'll bet it was a pain to get its 3/4 3-D to work on the 2600!
Mouse Trap also works decently, even though the three colored door buttons obviously had to be cut out. Same goes for Carnival: even though they cut out the bonus bear target, it still plays a lot like the original. If you can learn the wonky joystick control on Q*Bert, that's actually a decent port too, as is Phoenix, even though the warbirds were left out on the fifth wave (but at least the shield glitch was fixed). Joust is also a good port, even though the eggs don't bounce around the same from the original.
More to add to the list.
|
|