|SamGaz - 22/07/2017|
The cartridge version works with every stock Atari 8bit 64k!
|own it - 19/11/2016|
I'd like to apologize for that bit of immaturity. There is no excuse, and I commend you for calling me out in a polite and concise way. You do bring up valid points, and I acted childish. It's easy to go keyboard commando when you are in a foul mood. Cheers
|Monk - 18/11/2016|
That's not much of an argument or well-thought statement. Do you really want to live in illusions? Do you hate people, who tell the truth? Why should I go away, I LOVE Atari machines, and I own two and use them a lot.
Learn to think, be rational, and discuss like an adult.
|go away - 30/06/2016|
|Monk - 30/06/2016|
So, this is a 'nicely done port for emulators and rare, hacked configurations' more than it's an actual Atari game.
As a sidenote, I don't consider C64's "Prince of Persia" to be a C64 game, either, as faithful as it is to the original(s). It also requires a hardware hack that no one had back in the day, and that most people still don't have.
Maybe this game should be removed from this site, as it's not really an Atari game, as it doesn't run on Atari-only hardware.
I could also make a game that requires one atari chip, but also requires i7 computer and 2 GB of memory. Would you list that as an Atari game?
|Monk - 30/06/2016|
Atari 'wins' (though there's no official competition going on anyway) in the way that it has a large color palette, relatively fast CPU, and a selection of nice, old games.
However, those games are considered quite primitive, when compared to later offerings of the C64 - and the C64 didn't require ANY expansions. You could take a vanilla C64 made in 1982 and play a 1994 game with it just fine.
You can't do that with Atari - take a vanilla Atari, and try to play this thing on it. Can't be done. This is not an Atari game, it's an "Atari + expensive hardware modification that not many people have" game.
Or, as some people said, it's made for EMULATION, not for Ataris. Can emulated Ataris really be called Ataris anymore anyway?
As someone said, "Doing stuff for Atari means 'Atari', and not 'Atari + addon, which only a few people have'.
This non-canon version of Bomb Jack has the bad points of the coin-up, but not the good points. Sprites are clearly ripped from the C64 version, and there's not as much going on in the screen. Also, the aspect ratio makes everything claustrophobic and squashed.
Atari wins in some areas, but it loses in others. C64 is the better compromise for 8-bit games, which is the reason why it lasted so long, while Atari never saw most of the great, newer games.
Anything that's as advanced as "Impossbile Mission" or more, is just a dream on the Atari. But Atari is a winner for the older stuff in many cases (not all).
|rave.N - 22/09/2015|
- how does atari accomplish this winning?
With a co-chip named ANTIC and with another co-chip named POKEY.
- what does it win?
reelection, and our hearts.
Programs needing more than 64K are indeed not authentic to the 80's 8 bit experience. But neither is the "fast SIO patch" which I'm not about to disable for the sake of experiencing slow load time authenticity.
You certainly came to the wrong place to argue technicals Atari 800 vs. Commodore 64. Rediscovering the 8 bit software of one's youth takes on a religious experience, the fighting was vicious the first time around, to go there now would get worse.
|sparkle - 21/09/2015|
having been written in 2008, no doubt the authors expected most of their game's exposure to come through emulators not oem atari, emulators do allow 320KB RAM or more, no soldering required. to me atari home computer is a "winner" for its games being the most fun, the most like old school arcade consoles which took quarters to play. even today i'd rather fool with these old games on my emulator than new games, i must not be "good for the economy".
|Monk - 20/09/2015|
Thax, Atari 8-bit can't be 'this good'.
This requires not only Atari 8-bit, but also a 320 k memory expansion. That can't be store-bought or easily installed, nor is it official - it requires changing the actual hardware by SOLDERING. Altered hardware is not the 'Atari 8-bit' anymore, it's a hacked, changed machine that now includes unofficial 320k expansion that most people don't have (and couldn't even dream of in the era of the 8-bit computers).
Doing something for Atari 8-bit is something that would work on the Atari 8-bit computers, not things that only work with hacked and modified unofficial 320k addon-Ataris, that only a few people have.
You must not have many 8-bit machines, if Atari 'wins hands down'. What does it win, and how does it accomplish this winning?
The C64 can do quite amazing things with REU expansion as well - have you seen the REU demos?
Don't get me wrong, the Atari is a lovely and a wonderful machine, but winning all other 8-bit machines.. that's a bit of a stretch and quite a boastful claim that requires some clarification..
.. unless your other machines are a Spectrum and Apple II, of course.
|thax - 03/12/2013|
Never knew Atari 8 bit could be this good. From all the 8 bit machines I have, the Atari wins hands down. respect to the guys that create these games. and thanks for showing the true capabilitys of Atari.
|Jeff Fulton - 16/05/2013|
Simply Incredible Effort! It require 320K, but it looks like an ST or Amiga game!!
|Paul Westphal - 16/10/2008|
It's newly developed games like this that make me very proud to be associated with the dedicated Atari community. Great work guys!
|Other version with the same title: |
Requires 320 KB RAM.