Shaun.Bebbington

Thanks chaps. I'm rather curious about the Atari XE/XL simply because it didn't get much commercial support much after 1986 from what I recall, at least here in the UK, whereas the big publishers did support other 8-bits such as the Amstrad CPC, C64 and ZX Spectrum. And yet the Atari scene seems much more active than the Amstrad - unless I'm missing something.

I'll be using some of the points here for an article I'm writing for a UK-published magazine, so if you don't want your comments to be used or referenced then please contact me or edit your posts appropriately.

I will contact anyone if I plan to quote them directly to make sure that it's okay for me to do so.

Many thanks,

Shaun.

potatohead, on Sun May 13, 2012 7:52 PM, said:

The question should work in any part of the world, and it is simply this: "What is the appeal of new 8-bit games?" - to clarify what I'm getting at, what I mean is, if you like new 8-bit games, why do you like new 8-bit games?

Regards,

Shaun.

atarian63, on Sun May 13, 2012 6:39 PM, said:

That's very anecdotal. I've been writing about new games on old systems for a decade now - just because you have a drawer full of new 8-bit games does not mean that's the norm. Most people just like the nostalgia, reliving age-old arguments of this format is better than that, or playing the classics on a particular system.

What I'm asking is what is the appeal of 8-bit games. I'm not interested in anything else other than this. So, why do you have a drawer full of newly published 8-bit games then? Do you collect them, or play them? To do worry about how good those games are? Or would you buy them anyway because it's something new on your favourite old system(s)?

Regards,

Shaun.

potatohead, on Sun May 13, 2012 4:04 PM, said:

Yes, I see. For a colleague of mine, who wouldn't be working in IT today without owning a Sinclair ZX Spectrum all of those years ago, is somewhat bemused by new software - games or otherwise - for it. The Spectrum is extremely relevant to his career choice and his life, but he's not interested. It's too 1983 for him, and he wants the here and now.

Quote

This is true. So, if a computer system is relevant to you and your life, you either want to own the original hardware as a collector, to look at, to preserve, but not to use, or you want to use the original hardware, but only 'play the classics', or use the hardware and see what new developments are out there, and how programmers are pushing the boundaries, or emulate for any of the reasons mentioned. Or, it's just old hat to you and regardless of how relevant the system might be, it's in the past where it's staying.

Quote

Indeed, new games can only exist on new hardware for most gamers.

Quote

Exactly my point. And yours was that if a system is relevant to someone, they'd automatically want to see the latest games or demos. This is clearly not the case. Retro computing and gaming comes in many guises.

Quote

Err... okay. I'm not sure if I quite understand you on that point.

Many thanks,

Shaun.

potatohead, on Sun May 13, 2012 1:52 PM, said:

No, apparently not. Most people just like the nostalgia, and only a minority like actual new games on old systems. Check out Retro Gamer's forums, amongst other places for evidence of this.

Also consider that, if this was the case, the real-media games would sell more units than, say, 100 on a Commodore 64 - apparently the world's best selling single-spec personal computer. There must be more than 100 working C64s in the world?

Regards,

Shaun.