VB v. Atari 2600: Battle for the worst console.

Which console was the worst of all time? VB, Atari 2600, or "other."Ultimate__Gamer

how exactly was the atari 2600 a bad console?

Don't know much about classic gaming, do you?

Saying the Atari 2600 is the worst of all time, when it was the 1st successful platform is shortsighted, to say the least.

I would say other and goo with GB's Spectrum, which was just the generic Timax Sinclair computer...

Apple Pippin...

No more horrifying console in existance.

It's just a poll. And the Atari caused the "videogame crash of 1983," so I'm considering it to be a bad console.Ultimate__Gamer

You don't know your history at all. You should change your name. The Atari 2600 did not cause the crash, Warner Brothers did. Their totally incompotent running of Atari caused the crash. Want a few examples? Producing more copies of ET then sold 2600, thinking the name would sell the game and my fav, using the 2600 version of a game, stating it was for Coleco, to compare it to the 5200 to try to sell it...

RRoDbox 360 gets my vote.

Maybe the Atari was the overall most successful console, but it was mostly due to games like pac-man that most people thought was abysmal after they bought it and discovered how different from the original it was. Pac-man sold over 7 million copies, but only because of the arcade game, and it contributed to the crash of '83Ultimate__Gamer

not it was due to great games like pitfall breakout missile command or tempest

It is only a false myth that there were more ETs made than Atari's sold. And here is more proof.

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

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]It's just a poll. And the Atari caused the "videogame crash of 1983," so I'm considering it to be a bad console.DXGreat1_HGL

You don't know your history at all. You should change your name. The Atari 2600 did not cause the crash, Warner Brothers did. Their totally incompotent running of Atari caused the crash. Want a few examples? Producing more copies of ET then sold 2600, thinking the name would sell the game and my fav, using the 2600 version of a game, stating it was for Coleco, to compare it to the 5200 to try to sell it...

It is only a myth that there were more ETs made than Ataris, and here more proof of the crash:

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

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]Maybe the Atari was the overall most successful console, but it was mostly due to games like pac-man that most people thought was abysmal after they bought it and discovered how different from the original it was. Pac-man sold over 7 million copies, but only because of the arcade game, and it contributed to the crash of '83stika

not it was due to great games like pitfall breakout missile command or tempest

That is the truth...

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]Maybe the Atari was the overall most successful console, but it was mostly due to games like pac-man that most people thought was abysmal after they bought it and discovered how different from the original it was. Pac-man sold over 7 million copies, but only because of the arcade game, and it contributed to the crash of '83stika

not it was due to great games like pitfall breakout missile command or tempest

Space Invaders.....

lol to say the 2600 was awful shows you wiki'd for info rather than based it on experience ;).

Maybe the Atari was the overall most successful console, but it was mostly due to games like pac-man that most people thought was abysmal after they bought it and discovered how different from the original it was. Pac-man sold over 7 million copies, but only because of the arcade game, and it contributed to the crash of '83Ultimate__Gamer

You do not know your history, so you should stop posting.

Implying that the 2600 was the main cause of the crash is uninformed and misleading. It was WB overall business model for Atari that caused the crash. Learn your history before you post...

[QUOTE="stika"]

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]Maybe the Atari was the overall most successful console, but it was mostly due to games like pac-man that most people thought was abysmal after they bought it and discovered how different from the original it was. Pac-man sold over 7 million copies, but only because of the arcade game, and it contributed to the crash of '83Stonin

not it was due to great games like pitfall breakout missile command or tempest

Space Invaders.....

lol to say the 2600 was awful shows you wiki'd for info rather than based it on experience ;).

Yes, but I think that at the very least, 90% of that article is true fact.

[QUOTE="Stonin"][QUOTE="stika"]

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]Maybe the Atari was the overall most successful console, but it was mostly due to games like pac-man that most people thought was abysmal after they bought it and discovered how different from the original it was. Pac-man sold over 7 million copies, but only because of the arcade game, and it contributed to the crash of '83Ultimate__Gamer

not it was due to great games like pitfall breakout missile command or tempest

Space Invaders.....

lol to say the 2600 was awful shows you wiki'd for info rather than based it on experience ;).

Yes, but I think that at the very least, 90% of that article is true fact.

Ok define 'worst'. See for me a console is about games, not business. The 2600 was badly run from behind the scenes but as a gamer it had the best stuff before anyone else and was the console that brough gaming into the front room of peoples homes.

For me the worst console is really between the Atari Jaguar and the 3DO. Although the Jaguar did have the amazing AVP and the best port of Doom available at the time :D.

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]Maybe the Atari was the overall most successful console, but it was mostly due to games like pac-man that most people thought was abysmal after they bought it and discovered how different from the original it was. Pac-man sold over 7 million copies, but only because of the arcade game, and it contributed to the crash of '83DXGreat1_HGL

You do not know your history, so you should stop posting.

Implying that the 2600 was the main cause of the crash is uninformed and misleading. It was WB overall business model for Atari that caused the crash. Learn your history before you post...

Actually, the Atari 2600's games were the main cause, and that is FACT.

[QUOTE="DXGreat1_HGL"]

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]Maybe the Atari was the overall most successful console, but it was mostly due to games like pac-man that most people thought was abysmal after they bought it and discovered how different from the original it was. Pac-man sold over 7 million copies, but only because of the arcade game, and it contributed to the crash of '83Ultimate__Gamer

You do not know your history, so you should stop posting.

Implying that the 2600 was the main cause of the crash is uninformed and misleading. It was WB overall business model for Atari that caused the crash. Learn your history before you post...

Actually, the Atari 2600's games were the main cause, and that is FACT.

Why so hung up on the videogame crash? If it wasn't for the 2600 then Nintendo would never have risen to dominance and I wouldn't have had Mario Kart and SF to grow up with.

[QUOTE="DXGreat1_HGL"]

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]Maybe the Atari was the overall most successful console, but it was mostly due to games like pac-man that most people thought was abysmal after they bought it and discovered how different from the original it was. Pac-man sold over 7 million copies, but only because of the arcade game, and it contributed to the crash of '83Ultimate__Gamer

You do not know your history, so you should stop posting.

Implying that the 2600 was the main cause of the crash is uninformed and misleading. It was WB overall business model for Atari that caused the crash. Learn your history before you post...

Actually, the Atari 2600's games were the main cause, and that is FACT.

Thus the differance of a person who actually lived through it (me) and a person that didn't and is trying to use a source (you).

Learn your facts before posting...

I am now shifting this topic towards "the console with the worst business ever."

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"][QUOTE="DXGreat1_HGL"]

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]Maybe the Atari was the overall most successful console, but it was mostly due to games like pac-man that most people thought was abysmal after they bought it and discovered how different from the original it was. Pac-man sold over 7 million copies, but only because of the arcade game, and it contributed to the crash of '83DXGreat1_HGL

You do not know your history, so you should stop posting.

Implying that the 2600 was the main cause of the crash is uninformed and misleading. It was WB overall business model for Atari that caused the crash. Learn your history before you post...

Actually, the Atari 2600's games were the main cause, and that is FACT.

Thus the differance of a person who actually lived through it (me) and a person that didn't and is trying to use a source (you).

Learn your facts before posting...

FACT is FACT whether you live through it or not.

Virtual Boy was brutal, absolutely brutal,
without the 2600, you wouldn't have the kind of home consoles you have today,
and if you are blaming the 2600 for the video game crash,
why on earth aren't you blaming the more expensive and under-qualitied Intellivision?
Andrew_Xavier

The Atari's worst games caused the crash, not Intellivision.

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]Virtual Boy was brutal, absolutely brutal,
without the 2600, you wouldn't have the kind of home consoles you have today,
and if you are blaming the 2600 for the video game crash,
why on earth aren't you blaming the more expensive and under-qualitied Intellivision?
Ultimate__Gamer

The Atari's worst games caused the crash, not Intellivision.

and their best games founded the console business

Virtual Boy was brutal, absolutely brutal,
without the 2600, you wouldn't have the kind of home consoles you have today,
and if you are blaming the 2600 for the video game crash,
why on earth aren't you blaming the more expensive and under-qualitied Intellivision?
Andrew_Xavier

And the VB was not brutal. It was better than Atari by a comfortable mile, and people didn't like it because it gave them headaches. Actually, the only reason that the VB is on this poll is because people discarded it due to the headaches and possible eye damage.

FACT is FACT whether you live through it or not.

Ultimate__Gamer

FACT You have lost this argument and should quit why you are way behind

FACT It was the oversaturation of 3rd party companies creating generic, low priced games , other companies oversaturating the market with consoles and WB's mishandling of Atari that cause the crash.

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]Virtual Boy was brutal, absolutely brutal,
without the 2600, you wouldn't have the kind of home consoles you have today,
and if you are blaming the 2600 for the video game crash,
why on earth aren't you blaming the more expensive and under-qualitied Intellivision?
stika

The Atari's worst games caused the crash, not Intellivision.

and their best games founded the console business

And their worst games destroyed it. Actually the Magnavox Oddysey was the first console. It just didn't have great games.

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]Virtual Boy was brutal, absolutely brutal,
without the 2600, you wouldn't have the kind of home consoles you have today,
and if you are blaming the 2600 for the video game crash,
why on earth aren't you blaming the more expensive and under-qualitied Intellivision?
Ultimate__Gamer

The Atari's worst games caused the crash, not Intellivision.

According to your own link,
that's not true. Apparently 2600 reigned supreme for years before a flood of consoles hit the market, which caused atari to release more games, and third partys to release total crap, but the real killer of it, other than the console flood, was the home computer price war, which made computers with great gaming capabilities inexpensive, and therefore made consoles obsolete.
Read you own link :?

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]Virtual Boy was brutal, absolutely brutal,
without the 2600, you wouldn't have the kind of home consoles you have today,
and if you are blaming the 2600 for the video game crash,
why on earth aren't you blaming the more expensive and under-qualitied Intellivision?
Ultimate__Gamer

And the VB was not brutal. It was better than Atari by a comfortable mile, and people didn't like it because it gave them headaches. Actually, the only reason that the VB is on this poll is because people discarded it due to the headaches and possible eye damage.

so between a console that only had like 20 games, died in the year it was launched and caused headaches for playing for an hour or so

VS

a console that started the console business as we know it, had hundreds of games inclunding many quality games that people still play today after 30 years

you would go for the first? :|

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]Which console was the worst of all time? VB, Atari 2600, or "other."stika

how exactly was the atari 2600 a bad console?

I started gaming on the 2600... I still consider seaquest, jungle hunt, and the mighty combat to be some of my favorites...

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]

FACT is FACT whether you live through it or not.

DXGreat1_HGL

FACT You have lost this argument and should quit why you are way behind

FACT It was the oversaturation of 3rd party companies creating generic, low priced games , other companies oversaturating the market with consoles and WB's mishandling of Atari that cause the crash.

FACT- I'm only losing because everyone liked pitfall.

FACT- Your second fact is true

FACT-I'm not giving up this arguement until I win.

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]Virtual Boy was brutal, absolutely brutal,
without the 2600, you wouldn't have the kind of home consoles you have today,
and if you are blaming the 2600 for the video game crash,
why on earth aren't you blaming the more expensive and under-qualitied Intellivision?
Ultimate__Gamer

And the VB was not brutal. It was better than Atari by a comfortable mile, and people didn't like it because it gave them headaches. Actually, the only reason that the VB is on this poll is because people discarded it due to the headaches and possible eye damage.

It wasn't the headache thing,
it was the fact that in an era of colourful gaming, it promised to be like those VR simulators at the amusement parks, but then came out, and only had 1 colour: red, used red and the natural black to make horrible horrible quality pictures.
That certainly was ahead of a console that made console gaming what it is today. Makes sense to me :D

[QUOTE="stika"]

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]Which console was the worst of all time? VB, Atari 2600, or "other."colmusterd28

how exactly was the atari 2600 a bad console?

I started gaming on the 2600... I still consider seaquest, jungle hunt, and the mighty combat to be some of my favorites...

dont forget pitfall and tempest, i still play it on... a certain handheld ;)

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]Virtual Boy was brutal, absolutely brutal,
without the 2600, you wouldn't have the kind of home consoles you have today,
and if you are blaming the 2600 for the video game crash,
why on earth aren't you blaming the more expensive and under-qualitied Intellivision?
stika

And the VB was not brutal. It was better than Atari by a comfortable mile, and people didn't like it because it gave them headaches. Actually, the only reason that the VB is on this poll is because people discarded it due to the headaches and possible eye damage.

so between a console that only had like 20 games, died in the year it was launched and caused headaches for playing for an hour or so

VS

a console that started the console business as we know it, had hundreds of games inclunding many quality games that people still play today after 30 years

you would go for the first? :|

Of course I would! I think Atari 2600 should have been a failure, and it was. Case closed.

[QUOTE="DXGreat1_HGL"][QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]

FACT is FACT whether you live through it or not.

Ultimate__Gamer

FACT You have lost this argument and should quit why you are way behind

FACT It was the oversaturation of 3rd party companies creating generic, low priced games , other companies oversaturating the market with consoles and WB's mishandling of Atari that cause the crash.

FACT- I'm only losing because everyone liked pitfall.

FACT- Your second fact is true

FACT-I'm not giving up this arguement until I win.

http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/00647/Yellow-gamecrash.htm

It was the introduction of PC gaming, specifically the Commodore 64...../thread

[QUOTE="stika"][QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]Virtual Boy was brutal, absolutely brutal,
without the 2600, you wouldn't have the kind of home consoles you have today,
and if you are blaming the 2600 for the video game crash,
why on earth aren't you blaming the more expensive and under-qualitied Intellivision?
Ultimate__Gamer

And the VB was not brutal. It was better than Atari by a comfortable mile, and people didn't like it because it gave them headaches. Actually, the only reason that the VB is on this poll is because people discarded it due to the headaches and possible eye damage.

so between a console that only had like 20 games, died in the year it was launched and caused headaches for playing for an hour or so

VS

a console that started the console business as we know it, had hundreds of games inclunding many quality games that people still play today after 30 years

you would go for the first? :|

Of course I would! I think Atari 2600 should have been a failure, and it was. Case closed.

Once the public realized it was possible to play video games other than Pong, and programmers learned how to push its hardware's capabilities, the 2600 gained popularity. By this point, Fairchild had given up, thinking video games were a passed fad -- thereby handing the entire quickly growing market to Atari. By 1979, the 2600 was the best-selling Christmas gift (and console), mainly because of its exclusive content, and a million were sold that year.

Atari then licensed the smash arcade hit Space Invaders by Taito, which greatly increased the unit's popularity when it was released in January 1980, doubling sales again to over 2 million units. The 2600 and its cartridges were the main factor behind Atari grossing more than $2 billion in profits in 1980. Sales then doubled again for the next two years, with almost 8 million units selling in 1982.

^^^^^Copied and pasted...
at least 6 billion $ in profits, and STILL played today, over 30 years later, sure sounds like a flop to me :D

And their worst games destroyed it. Actually the Magnavox Oddysey was the first console. It just didn't have great games.

Ultimate__Gamer

it destroyed console gaming? but its still here isnt it? thanks to nintendo yes, but if it wasnt for the atari there wouldnt be any industry to save or loose to begin with

It is only a false myth that there were more ETs made than Atari's sold. And here is more proof.

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

[QUOTE="DXGreat1_HGL"]

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]It's just a poll. And the Atari caused the "videogame crash of 1983," so I'm considering it to be a bad console.Ultimate__Gamer

You don't know your history at all. You should change your name. The Atari 2600 did not cause the crash, Warner Brothers did. Their totally incompotent running of Atari caused the crash. Want a few examples? Producing more copies of ET then sold 2600, thinking the name would sell the game and my fav, using the 2600 version of a game, stating it was for Coleco, to compare it to the 5200 to try to sell it...

It is only a myth that there were more ETs made than Ataris, and here more proof of the crash:

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

1. Pac-Man had 13 million copies made, there were less than 10 million consoles. E.T. wasn't the one overproduced, it was the one that Atari paid 25 million for the rights for and forced production to be finished in 6 weeks in order to make the christmas season.

2. The 2600 was at the end of its lifespan. The lack of successors is what caused the crash, not the system itself.

3. You're confusing the Atari 2600, and the company itself.

Calling the 2600 a bad console just really illustrates how little you know of the situation you're trying to speak of. The 5200 and 7800 would be good examples of bad consoles...using the one that kick started the industry is stupid.

[QUOTE="stika"][QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]

[QUOTE="Andrew_Xavier"]Virtual Boy was brutal, absolutely brutal,
without the 2600, you wouldn't have the kind of home consoles you have today,
and if you are blaming the 2600 for the video game crash,
why on earth aren't you blaming the more expensive and under-qualitied Intellivision?
Ultimate__Gamer

And the VB was not brutal. It was better than Atari by a comfortable mile, and people didn't like it because it gave them headaches. Actually, the only reason that the VB is on this poll is because people discarded it due to the headaches and possible eye damage.

so between a console that only had like 20 games, died in the year it was launched and caused headaches for playing for an hour or so

VS

a console that started the console business as we know it, had hundreds of games inclunding many quality games that people still play today after 30 years

you would go for the first? :|

Of course I would! I think Atari 2600 should have been a failure, and it was. Case closed.

yes a failiure of 40 million units sold, something that the genesis, the xbox and the gamecuve could not do

Why is the Atari 2600 on that list anyway?Can-o-Mark

It went to the TC's house, and kicked his dog, he is bitter about it :cry:

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"][QUOTE="DXGreat1_HGL"][QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]

FACT is FACT whether you live through it or not.

DXGreat1_HGL

FACT You have lost this argument and should quit why you are way behind

FACT It was the oversaturation of 3rd party companies creating generic, low priced games , other companies oversaturating the market with consoles and WB's mishandling of Atari that cause the crash.

FACT- I'm only losing because everyone liked pitfall.

FACT- Your second fact is true

FACT-I'm not giving up this arguement until I win.

http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/00647/Yellow-gamecrash.htm

It was the introduction of PC gaming, specifically the Commodore 64...../thread

That was only a minor, but true, reason. Atari 2600 was a failure. Case closed again.

[QUOTE="DXGreat1_HGL"][QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"][QUOTE="DXGreat1_HGL"][QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]

FACT is FACT whether you live through it or not.

Ultimate__Gamer

FACT You have lost this argument and should quit why you are way behind

FACT It was the oversaturation of 3rd party companies creating generic, low priced games , other companies oversaturating the market with consoles and WB's mishandling of Atari that cause the crash.

FACT- I'm only losing because everyone liked pitfall.

FACT- Your second fact is true

FACT-I'm not giving up this arguement until I win.

http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/00647/Yellow-gamecrash.htm

It was the introduction of PC gaming, specifically the Commodore 64...../thread

That was only a minor, but true, reason. Atari 2600 was a failure. Case closed again.

No , your argument is a failure...

[QUOTE="colmusterd28"][QUOTE="stika"]

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]Which console was the worst of all time? VB, Atari 2600, or "other."stika

how exactly was the atari 2600 a bad console?

I started gaming on the 2600... I still consider seaquest, jungle hunt, and the mighty combat to be some of my favorites...

dont forget pitfall and tempest, i still play it on... a certain handheld ;)

Pitfall was awesome, also, how about return of the jedi... awesome... as a kid, it probably stinks now but as a kid I loved it. Kangaroo and Donkey Kong Jr. were awesome...

[QUOTE="DXGreat1_HGL"][QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"][QUOTE="DXGreat1_HGL"][QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]

FACT is FACT whether you live through it or not.

Ultimate__Gamer

FACT You have lost this argument and should quit why you are way behind

FACT It was the oversaturation of 3rd party companies creating generic, low priced games , other companies oversaturating the market with consoles and WB's mishandling of Atari that cause the crash.

FACT- I'm only losing because everyone liked pitfall.

FACT- Your second fact is true

FACT-I'm not giving up this arguement until I win.

http://library.thinkquest.org/05aug/00647/Yellow-gamecrash.htm

It was the introduction of PC gaming, specifically the Commodore 64...../thread

That was only a minor, but true, reason. Atari 2600 was a failure. Case closed again.

lol ignore the facts and state case closed isnt going to change anything, common sense says the 2600 hundred was a great console, facts say the 2600 hundred was a great console, and gamers say it was great console

That was only a minor, but true, reason. Atari 2600 was a failure. Case closed again.

Ultimate__Gamer

So, I'm assuming you are 7-8 years old or so,
but, once you grow up, you'll realize that just because you want something to be true,
does not make it so. I could make up some stupid impossible argument too,
like...iono...Canada is identical to Mars, in every way, including climate, city structure,
population, and human created landmarks! I'm not giving up until I win!
But, without any evidence to back it up (like you have currently, no evidence),
I will be proven both insane, and wrong :cry:

[QUOTE="Can-o-Mark"]Why is the Atari 2600 on that list anyway?Andrew_Xavier

It went to the TC's house, and kicked his dog, he is bitter about it :cry:

Just read through the entire discussion. Pretty hilarious how the TC went into this "LALALA I CANT HEAR YOU!" mode.

[QUOTE="Ultimate__Gamer"]

That was only a minor, but true, reason. Atari 2600 was a failure. Case closed again.

Andrew_Xavier

So, I'm assuming you are 7-8 years old or so,
but, once you grow up, you'll realize that just because you want something to be true,
does not make it so. I could make up some stupid impossible argument too,
like...iono...Canada is identical to Mars, in every way, including climate, city structure,
population, and human created landmarks! I'm not giving up until I win!
But, without any evidence to back it up (like you have currently, no evidence),
I will be proven both insane, and wrong :cry:

well im sure underneath all that chocolate and caramel layer mars is just like canada