NES vs ColecoVision

[Recycled]

Could CV have held up against the NES if the right games were developed and better marketing (among other things)?

 

or would it have been no-contest...no matter what.

[8bitgamer]

Could CV have held up against the NES if the right games were developed and better marketing (among other things)?

 

or would it have been no-contest...no matter what.

 

The ColecoVision would have needed better, sturdier controllers. I liked the CV controllers, but lots of people didn't, and they wore out relatively quickly with extended play.

[Atarifever]

Nothing could have held up to the NES. Once Super Mario Bros. came along, the system would have sold truckloads, and once they sold the first 15 or 20 million, they would have started to strangle the market, just like they ended up doing. Super Mario Bros. would have made that generation a monopoly, regardless who else was there.

[Technosis]

Doubt it. ColecoVision carts just didn't have the same memory capacity as the NES carts, and I believe that the sprite handling routines (i.e. multicolored ones) are more limited in the ColecoVision system.

 

Even if all was equal, it still would have been hard to stop the NES express. I knew lots of people who had big C64 libraries and still put it aside for the NES (but that's a story for another day........)

[Pixelboy]

The CV could have given the NES a run for its money if Coleco had released an expansion module to give the CV some additional capabilities, like a larger color pallette, hardware scrolling, etc. It would have upgraded the CV to something close to the NES technologically. Couple that with a new bankswitching architecture for CV carts (just like Opcode Games is doing with the MegaCart), and with its back-catalogue of over 100 released games, perhaps Nintendo would have prefered to release Super Mario Bros on the CV instead of its own console.

 

Of course, without such an expansion module, the CV wouldn't have stood a chance against the NES...

[Atari Dogs]

The CV could have given the NES a run for its money if Coleco had released an expansion module to give the CV some additional capabilities, like a larger color pallette, hardware scrolling, etc. It would have upgraded the CV to something close to the NES technologically. Couple that with a new bankswitching architecture for CV carts (just like Opcode Games is doing with the MegaCart), and with its back-catalogue of over 100 released games, perhaps Nintendo would have prefered to release Super Mario Bros on the CV instead of its own console.

 

Of course, without such an expansion module, the CV wouldn't have stood a chance against the NES...

 

Better Question: If the Colecovision was still around when the Nintendo hit the market, would Nintendo have asked Coleco to release its system as the "Colecovion II"?

[jboypacman]

The NES would of killed the Colecovision unless Coleco was on its second game system(with improved graphics and such).

 

And how would of the Colecovision faired with out Donkey Kong or Donkey Kong JR. because Nintendo would of yanked that away from Coleco because they own thoses great games.

 

But who knows really if there was a "Colecovision II" it might of done quite well and Nintendo might of never released the NES or they might of released the "CV II" in Japan for Coleco as the NES or Nincoleco Entertainment System.

[DragonmasterDan]

The NES would of killed the Colecovision unless Coleco was on its second game system(with improved graphics and such).

 

And how would of the Colecovision faired with out Donkey Kong or Donkey Kong JR. because Nintendo would of yanked that away from Coleco because they own thoses great games.

 

But who knows really if there was a "Colecovision II" it might of done quite well and Nintendo might of never released the NES or they might of released the "CV II" in Japan for Coleco as the NES or Nincoleco Entertainment System.

 

 

I think the more important thing than hardware specifications that the NES brought to the table was new and innovative types of games. Nintendo's first party games like Super Mario Bros, Metroid, Kid Icarus, Zelda and others really changed the way the home console industry worked. Prior to the NES most home games were very similar to arcade style games (with a few interface light PC style games here and there).

 

With the NES Nintendo didn't just make a home system, Nintendo created new rules for what a home video game should be. Prior to the NES almost all console games were originally designed as arcade games. A game like Zelda or Metroid wouldn't work well in an arcade (I'm aware of the PlayChoice 10 thing) since it requires saving (or passwords) and can be frustrating for an arcade owner since death isn't always imminent and a player could play for hours without dying. As a result new genres of games were created, games that were designed specifically to be played for longer durations. This is something that I doubt Coleco would have brought to the table newer hardware or not.

 

Remember the Sega Master System was also a superior piece of hardware to the NES and it didn't fair that well (at least in the US) either.

[MacbthPSW]

Yeah, the NES's hardware was ideally suited to the genre that would rule the rest of the 8-bit era: the scrolling platformer. Pretty much all the earlier consoles, including the CV really couldn't handle the genre well. The hardware, plus the right games, put the NES on top.

 

The C-64 hung in as long as it did (until 1992-1993 in some parts of the world) because it was able to do a pretty good job of it: Turrican II, and Mayhem in Monsterland for example.

[+Psionic]

But who knows really if there was a "Colecovision II" it might of done quite well and Nintendo might of never released the NES or they might of released the "CV II" in Japan for Coleco as the NES or Nincoleco Entertainment System.

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?s...t&p=1364892

[Jess Ragan]

You're kidding me, right?

 

Seriously?

 

I plainly recall getting my hands on the ColecoVision for the first time. I also recall how devastatingly disappointed I was with it. "This is that arcade-perfect translation of Donkey Kong?," I shouted after ten minutes of play. "THIS is it? Where's the bonus for leaping over three barrels at once? Where the heck do the barrels go after they roll past Mario? Where's the cement factory round? Where's the FUN?!"

 

Now the NES version was missing a lot from the arcade game too... just not as much. The graphics in particular were much more faithful, with more detail and better color choices. Compared to the ColecoVision game, well, there WAS no comparison. As I continued to play CV games, I continued to be disappointed... very few titles on the system could be considered up to the standards of the NES, and that was BEFORE Nintendo stepped up their game with memory mappers and graphics enhancement chips.

 

Sorry, but the ColecoVision doesn't just get owned by the NES... it gets P-owned. You get better graphics, better sound, better gameplay, better controllers, and an overall better experience with Nintendo's first console.

[Atarifever]

You're kidding me, right?

 

Seriously?

 

I plainly recall getting my hands on the ColecoVision for the first time. I also recall how devastatingly disappointed I was with it. "This is that arcade-perfect translation of Donkey Kong?," I shouted after ten minutes of play. "THIS is it? Where's the bonus for leaping over three barrels at once? Where the heck do the barrels go after they roll past Mario? Where's the cement factory round? Where's the FUN?!"

 

Now the NES version was missing a lot from the arcade game too... just not as much. The graphics in particular were much more faithful, with more detail and better color choices. Compared to the ColecoVision game, well, there WAS no comparison. As I continued to play CV games, I continued to be disappointed... very few titles on the system could be considered up to the standards of the NES, and that was BEFORE Nintendo stepped up their game with memory mappers and graphics enhancement chips.

 

Sorry, but the ColecoVision doesn't just get owned by the NES... it gets P-owned. You get better graphics, better sound, better gameplay, better controllers, and an overall better experience with Nintendo's first console.

What always got me about the NES version of Donkey Kong was the blinking screen I'd get when I tried to play it. Come to think of it, that's basically what annoyed me about every NES game.

 

Seriously though, I never understood why the NES Donkey Kong was so deficient. Missing animations, missing intermission screen (how high can you go), a missing board, and only two difficulty settings (even the 7800 version had 3). I'm sure the NES could have easily had an arcade accurate port, and probably could have bested it by adding a few options, and it WAS Nintendo's property. How in the world did they decide to release such a limited port when they could have easily done better.

Edited November 22, 2007 by Atarifever

[Jess Ragan]

That's easy... it was released in 1984, when cartridge memory was still at a premium. Nintendo just ported it verbatim when they released it in the United States. Hey, I wasn't happy with all the game was missing, but the fact remains that it still buries its ColecoVision counterpart. Kind of unfortunate that the recently released 5200 version (which would have been possible in 1983 if it weren't for the licensing restrictions) is superior to them both.

[Gregory DG]

Nothing could have stopped or slowed the NES. It was a juggernaut. It was released at exactly the right time and marketed in the exact right way. As a toy.

[Jess Ragan]

Gotta agree with Greg on this one. Nintendo's marketing strategy was surprisingly shrewd for a newcomer to the American market. They just had "the touch," thanks in large part to NOA's lawyer... he did such a bang-up job protecting them from the Universal lawsuit that he was hired as Nintendo of America's vice president!

 

Plus, Nintendo ushered in a whole new era of gaming. Games like Metroid and Zelda were so advanced and so dependent on the system's advanced capabilities that they just wouldn't have been possible on the ColecoVision. It was a necessary evolution... if the crash and Nintendo's subsequent industry dominance had never happened, we may still be playing games that last ten minutes, rather than ten hours or longer.

[chrisbid]

Nothing could have stopped or slowed the NES. It was a juggernaut. It was released at exactly the right time and marketed in the exact right way. As a toy.

 

 

if coleco had not blundered with the ADAM, it couldve lived through the crash and dictate the industry. people forget that nintendo took over an empty market, if the market had not been empty, coleco couldve been the market leader through the mid 80's, as could atari, mattel or somebody else.

 

but thats the problem with hypothetical questions, there is no right answer.

[A Sprite]

Nothing could have stopped or slowed the NES. It was a juggernaut. It was released at exactly the right time and marketed in the exact right way. As a toy.

 

 

if coleco had not blundered with the ADAM, it couldve lived through the crash and dictate the industry. people forget that nintendo took over an empty market, if the market had not been empty, coleco couldve been the market leader through the mid 80's, as could atari, mattel or somebody else.

 

Coleco, minus Nintendo (Donkey Kong), Konami (Cabbage Patch Kids), Sega (Zaxxon), and Atari (the usual suspects) vs. Super Mario 3, Megaman 2, Tecmo SuperBowl, Tetris, and Ninja Gaiden?

 

In the North American market?

 

Maybe. At a value price. But even if the Famicom remained in Japan, and the Adam decided life was worth living, we're looking at a near clone of the nearly forgotten TI/994a with a split console/add on computer market vs. IBM, Apple, Commodore, Atari, Tandy, and Sega.

 

And it has no original IP worth playing.

 

Colecovision's money was made from liscensing big names when no one else could compete with their technology. How long would they hold out, with quick arcade ports and toy tie ins, on that hardware? Would people choose them again if forced to upgrade?

Edited November 22, 2007 by A Sprite

[Prodos8]

One thing that helped the NES was the fact that all (or at least most of) the cheap 8-bit computers had disapeared from the market at the time Nintendo released it. I think the $99 computer is primarily what killed off the early gaming consoles along with too many shoddy games. Coleco probably did well by exiting when they did, otherwise they just would of lost all the money the Cabbage Patch dolls were making for them.

[Atarifever]

if the crash and Nintendo's subsequent industry dominance had never happened, we may still be playing games that last ten minutes, rather than ten hours or longer.

So games would be MUCH better without Nintendo then?

[A Sprite]

if the crash and Nintendo's subsequent industry dominance had never happened, we may still be paying full price for games that last ten minutes, rather than waiting the 5 seconds it takes for the Flash to begin.

So games would be MOSTLY Minesweeper and Space Invaders without Nintendo then?

 

Fixed.

 

And to answer the question; no. At the time, graphic adventures, simulations, and RPGs were knocking computer playtimes into weeks. Nintendo was given credit for dumbing things down at the time.

[Atarifever]

And to answer the question; no. At the time, graphic adventures, simulations, and RPGs were knocking computer playtimes into weeks. Nintendo was given credit for dumbing things down at the time.

I didn't believe what I wrote, but was questioning Jess' assertation that somehow 10 hour games are a blessing. I know games on the NES were generally much, much shorter than 10 hours, and thus, saying they started a trend to longer games (even though as you said, computer games were already plenty long) might be tying Nintendo to a terrible trend they actually played very little part in. The only generation I can think of where Nintendo would have been a leader in providing bigger games would be the SNES generation. FFVII has a lot more credit for the current trends, as does the PS1 generally, than Nintendo. The Gamecube, Gameboy line, DS, Wii, and NES, if anything, aimed for more simple gameplay than other options, while the N64 was keeping it somewhat simpler than the competition.

[chrisbid]

Nothing could have stopped or slowed the NES. It was a juggernaut. It was released at exactly the right time and marketed in the exact right way. As a toy.

 

 

if coleco had not blundered with the ADAM, it couldve lived through the crash and dictate the industry. people forget that nintendo took over an empty market, if the market had not been empty, coleco couldve been the market leader through the mid 80's, as could atari, mattel or somebody else.

 

Coleco, minus Nintendo (Donkey Kong), Konami (Cabbage Patch Kids), Sega (Zaxxon), and Atari (the usual suspects) vs. Super Mario 3, Megaman 2, Tecmo SuperBowl, Tetris, and Ninja Gaiden?

 

In the North American market?

 

Maybe. At a value price. But even if the Famicom remained in Japan, and the Adam decided life was worth living, we're looking at a near clone of the nearly forgotten TI/994a with a split console/add on computer market vs. IBM, Apple, Commodore, Atari, Tandy, and Sega.

 

And it has no original IP worth playing.

 

Colecovision's money was made from liscensing big names when no one else could compete with their technology. How long would they hold out, with quick arcade ports and toy tie ins, on that hardware? Would people choose them again if forced to upgrade?

 

nintendo was hesitant to release the NES in the US on their own. they went to atari to distribute the system first and was turned down. if coleco didnt bomb with the adam, they wouldve been in a good position to negotiate, as they had a previous and profitable relationship with nintendo.

 

also, SMB was the system seller for the NES, it couldve been done on another system with sloppier graphics than the FC and still been a huge hit

 

like i said, there are no real answers to hypothetical questions,