7800 vs.....

[CV Gus]

Well, we've just had a "7800 vs. NES" thread.

(note- in case I bring up the "Atari 6400" again, it was a hypothetical system. Just so some people know.)

 

After those two pages that answered my questions about the 7800, I'm wondering if, at least in many ways, the ColecoVision wasn't better than the 7800. In sound, the answer is obviously "yes," but what about anything else?

 

My own observations:

 

Sound was obviously better on the ColecoVision. As was that of the 5200.

 

The CV could only show 16 colors/shades to the 7800's 256, but apparently there's more to it than that. "Brightness of colors," which is why NES games look more vibrant, for example. How many colors can be shown with what resolution mode is another, which is why, in the Atari ads comparing the CV to the 5200, they would mention 256 colors and 25% better resolution (200X320?), but never actually the two together.

 

A CV sprite could be 16X16, and one color (note- I do NOT consider "background color" to be a color for anything but the screen). Also, no more than 3 could be lined up horizontally, before you'd get flickering, although with Matt Patrol there seemed to be ways of dealing with this. The CV could show a maximum of 32 sprites.

 

Although the CV did not have built-in scrolling, which no doubt required extra processing power for games that did scroll, it did have scrolling games. Front Line and the otherwise magnificent Sky Jaguar had poor scrolling, but Bump `N Jump had better scrolling; and did Nova Blast, Matt Patrol, and the hidden message in Kevtris have pixel-to-pixel scrolling?

 

The CV had a maximum resolution of 192(V)X256(H), or 24X32 (8X8 pixel) spaces.

 

The CV could handle plenty of on-screen motion, as in Slither and Frenzy (and Sky Jaguar). It would be interesting to see an NES-style Guantlet or 5200-style Robotron on the CV.

 

For screen colors, each horizontal line in each space (8 pixels) could have a MAXIMUM of 2 colors. Any 2 colors, but that would include background. So if you had a black screen, a line could have BLACK/RED, BLACK/GREEN, BLUE/RED, PURPLE/BLUE, etc., but not, say, RED/BLUE/BLACK, hence the appearance of the mazes in Opcode's Ms. Pac-Man- it was either multi-color mazes, or arcade-perfect-shaped mazes. He made the right choice.

 

Evidently there is a special visual mode that was used in Mr Do!'s Castle, that allows for some nifty-looking playfields (albeit static). Beyond that, I don't know.

 

Pretty basic stuff, but at least I have some idea of what a CV could do.

 

 

So- let the Atari 7800 vs. ColecoVision comparison begin!

Edited August 13, 2008 by CV Gus

[Shawn]

7800 VS 7800! Which is better?

[accousticguitar]

Colecovision games are way different than 7800 games. I couldn't get used to them. The hardware makes no difference if you don't like the games.

[malducci]

Strange that you list the res with vertical value first. Is that an atari thing/way? The CV had 4 sprites per scanline before it dropped on them on the that specific scanline. Nothing flicker couldn't fix.

 

Except for sound, the 7800 destroys the CV. I'd take lower res with more color flexibility over the color clashing of the CV, Speccy, and MSX (version 1).

[Crazyace]

and no flickering is a big help for the 7800

[CV Gus]

It's just after the NES vs. 7800 thread, it seemed that the 7800 was just not as big a leap from the CV as I had thought. In fact, if CV Joust, Dig Dug, and Pac-Man had all been 100% completed and released, I probably never would've gotten a 7800, esp. since the CV had a much better variety- Fortune Builder, for example.

 

Just last night, I played Bump `N Jump, and was impressed by how good it was- fast-moving, decent enough scrolling, and multi-colored vehicles, not to mention remarkably detailed playfields. Mr. Do!'s Castle was another (well, o.k., single-colored enemies, but still- could the 7800 have done a much better-looking playfield?). And Opcode's fantastic Space Invaders Collection still amazes me- right down to the out-of-sync way the invaders move. Pepper 2 has those VERY colorful and detailed playfields. Cosmo Fighter 2 shows tremendous amounts of on-screen movement, as does Sky Jaguar. And the end boss in Cosmo Fighter 2, with the nicely-scrolling multi-plane starfields, was something I did not think possible.

Not to mention Matt Patrol. The 3-level scrolling, along with many enemies and things happening, has to be seen to be believed- what a 100% finished product would look like would be something one did not expect on any third-generation system.

 

It doesn't seem as though the move from CV to 7800 is as great as 7800 to NES. I actually like the 5200 better than the 7800, although that has more to do with the library of games than anything else. Then again, are the colors brighter on a 5200 than a 7800?

[DracIsBack]

It's just after the NES vs. 7800 thread, it seemed that the 7800 was just not as big a leap from the CV as I had thought. In fact, if CV Joust, Dig Dug, and Pac-Man had all been 100% completed and released, I probably never would've gotten a 7800, esp. since the CV had a much better variety- Fortune Builder, for example.

 

Cool. Show me ALIEN BRIGADE on a Colecovision or SIRIUS on a Colecovision. Then you'll convince me. ;-

 

It doesn't seem as though the move from CV to 7800 is as great as 7800 to NES.

 

 

I think you're missing Vigo's entire point of the 7800 and NES being significantly different architectures, vs. one being an evolution on another.

 

Think about it this way:

 

Can the Colecovision move 100 objects around the screen like the 7800?

Can the Colecovision play a tile based side scroller like the NES?

What can the Colecovision do that either the 7800 or NES cannot?

[Gregory DG]

7800 wins, no contest. The CV just doesn't have the horsepower.

[+remowilliams]

7800 vs Chong Li!

 

[Crazyace]

I think the NES is more an evolution of the colecovision ( or the SegaMaster system is a direct evolution )

An evolution of the 7800 is the jaguar.

 

One way the stock coleco is way better than the jaguar is the ram - 16k vram ( +1k work ram ) vs. 4k

[A Sprite]

So- let the Atari 7800 vs. ColecoVision comparison begin!

 

[DracIsBack]

One way the stock coleco is way better than the jaguar is the ram - 16k vram ( +1k work ram ) vs. 4k

 

 

Sure but can you give more explanation on how that benefit can be used in practice? the Colecovision has substantially more memory than the 7800 or NES.

[Atarifever]

So- let the Atari 7800 vs. ColecoVision comparison begin!

Notice the differences in Q-Bert himself, the ball, and the cube orientation.

Edited August 15, 2008 by Atarifever

[Crazyace]

One way the stock coleco is way better than the jaguar is the ram - 16k vram ( +1k work ram ) vs. 4k

 

 

Sure but can you give more explanation on how that benefit can be used in practice? the Colecovision has substantially more memory than the 7800 or NES.

 

I should have said 7800 - got jaguar on the brain here..

 

I prefer the 7800 style, I think it's way more advanced than the coleco - the only big advance is the res.

 

I looked at some of the games on the coleco - the scrolling is pretty poor in most of them. I've not been interested in programming it much though, but I found the 4k ram on the 7800 pretty limiting

[akator]

Since I can presently play games from both systems and compare, my opinion in 2008 is that the 7800 is superior to the CV. But these consoles were relevant in the 80s. Others may have had different experiences, but in the 1980s the CV was perceived by myself and others I knew as superior.

 

The CV was available in 1983. There was no 7800 to purchase in 1983. That makes the CV years ahead because it was available years ahead. It doesn't matter if 7800s were sitting in warehouses, consumers couldn't buy one until 1986. It doesn't matter if the 7800 hardware was superior, it wasn't around when it would have made a difference.

[vdub_bobby]

The CV has a much more usable high-res mode and the tile support is much nicer.

 

It doesn't support hardware softscroll and the color selection is limited, both in total palette and in number of colors per tile/sprite.

 

And sound is better, I guess, though I don't really know what kind of sound capabilities the CV has - but it would be hard to be worse than the TIA in 1983.

 

Which is better...? Depends on the game, I'd say. Non-scrolling hi-res tile games will almost certainly look better on the CV. Games with simple backgrounds and many many sprites will almost certainly look better on the 7800.

Edited August 15, 2008 by vdub_bobby

[sd32]

How about this one, the 7800 Vs the original competition for the NES in Japan, i am talking about the Epoch Super Cassettevision. I know some dont know much about it so here are some links with info, screenshots:

http://www5e.biglobe.ne.jp/~kiden/supakase.htm

http://www.game-nostalgia.net/scv/scv.htm

http://www2.odn.ne.jp/~haf09260/Scv/EnrScv.htm

http://www1.interq.or.jp/~t-takeda/top.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Cassette_Vision

I dont know much about interpreting specs so reading them on Wiki doesnt do much for me, but from the games i have played i would say that it is similar to the 7800 in that it appears to me, to be better at moving many objects on a single screen, rather than at doing games that are heavy on scrolling (NES type).

In the games i have, scrolling is sometimes a bit jerky (not always) but quiet better than say, MSX. But on the other hand, the Galaga clone called Battle in Galaxy, is really fast with some pretty interesting enemy patterns, its really good. Also, the into the screen racer Star Speeder is very impresive with very fast action, but has little background detail.Also its similar to the 7800 in that it uses the same sound chip from its predecesor, the original Cassettevision just as the 7800 uses the one from the 2600. So both are quite inferior to the NES in that regard.

Games that appeared on both the Super Cassette and the NES are usually better on NES. Like Mappy, Pops and Chips, Sky Kid. But the Super Cassette ports are still usually pretty good, not bad at all.

Can anyone here can talk a bit more in depth about this japanese console?, i am not a coder so i dont know too much about hardware specs.

[sd32]

Another cool Super Cassettevision link:

http://homepage3.nifty.com/doritomo/game/Scv/SCV-3.htm

Edited August 16, 2008 by sd32

[sd32]

Oops, double post.

Edited August 16, 2008 by sd32

[Rik]

CV vs 7800?It all depends on what you consider important or what works better for you.Without getting technical,which im not,so i wont comment on something i dont know squat about,as a GAMER or a FAN,I'd have to say i love both,but the CV has such great sound and music,and the graphics look better to me,even that is debatable also. The same game version could be crap on the CV,but great on the 7800,and vice versa.Lets just pretend for a moment that if i was given the choice between the 2 systems,if i only had one choice,id pick the CV,not only for its sound,buit has lots more games too!But then again the 7800 has great F##$kin games too...man thats a HARD question,its like saying choose which one of your kids you want to keep!

Edited August 15, 2008 by Rik

[Crazyace]

For me it's interesting that the Atari competition for the Colecovision was the 5200, not the 7800.

( especially given the Colecovision uses the graphics chip from the TI99/4A, which competed with the Atari/Apple/C64 )

 

The 7800 sound did suck - ( apart from Ballblazer )

 

I think apart from that it's just the choice of the 160 vs 256 resolution.

[kroogur]

Hmmm 7800 vs....?

How about the Sega Master System?

 

Could the 7800 have handled Sonic, Rocky, or maybe Altered Beast? or maybe Captain Silver?

[Artlover]

Hmmm 7800 vs....?

How about the Sega Master System?

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?s...opic=65654&

 

Also

 

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?s...opic=27172&

 

[kroogur]

Cool thanks for the links! It's very interesting to see how the venerable 7800 stacked up against the SMS.

Edited August 16, 2008 by kroogur

[Joey Kay]

So- let the Atari 7800 vs. ColecoVision comparison begin!

Notice the differences in Q-Bert himself, the ball, and the cube orientation.

 

Well... let's be realistic here. At least you could play Q-Bert on the Colecovision!!!

 

With Warner's craptacular (albeit well-translated) line-up of fossilized rehashes for the 7800's 1984 launch, there was nothing really better on the 7800 in terms of originality/gameplay than what was already on the Coleco. How the hell do you launch a new system entirely with five-year-old games?

 

I guess there was Desert Falcon, but Zaxxon with a bird hardly constitutes new thinking.

 

It's no wonder Atari was dumped by Warner in exchange for promissary notes from Jack Tramiel. Looking at the brain-damaged 7800 launch plan, clearly Atari management went from smoking weed in the 70s to smoking copious amounts of crack by mid-80s.