Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
C64 vs. Atari 800XL - 8 games from 1984
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 10. 2022
- Hello and welcome to the second episode of Commodore 64 versus Atari 800XL games.
In this video, 8 games released in 1984 are shown running on both machines so you can see how different (or similar) they were.
Thanks for watching and let me know in the comments section below who "wins".
And, of course, see you in the next RetroNoName episode
When I got an 800XL I was disappointed because I wanted a C64 like my friends. Didn't take long to get over that silly notion. The 800XL was a fantastic machine. Of course I had no storage devices, so Id sit and type for hours to run a program for a few minutes, then reset and try something new. There was no instant gratification, satisfaction had to be earned.
It's amazing how well the Atari 800 holds up vs the C64, considering it came out in 1979.
nothing ammazing when bruce lee was converted from atari to c64, and its so early in the lifespan of the computers, these games use like 80% of atari capabilities and 20% of c64s :)
It's funny in life the creator of the 64 made the Atari ST . As an ATARI fan I can show one game the 64 could NOT duplicate : STAR RAIDERS . Some 64 owners moved on to the AMIGA and praise how greater it is to the ST. I can successfully say both the AMIGA and ST are really ATARI computers . The AMIGA uses ATARI proprietary patents and it's because the Atari 8 bit creator made the AMIGA .
Bruce Lee and Montezuma were my favorites games. I remember waiting 315 cycles of the cassette player. That was literally years in my kid perception of time. So when it was ready (if it didn't fail and had to start over) I played it for hours and hours. The most amazing thing about that game is that it was possible to play 2 players simultaneously.
The expanded colour palette of the Atari is especially obvious in HERO.
Good selection of games here. As you can see, these systems were a pretty close match when it came to commercial software. In these examples, you can occasionally see a slight improvement in one over the other, (Pitstop2 for example on the C64) but I really think it can be chalked up to the difference in programmers. One could choose games that make one system look better than the other, but again, depends on who did the programming. We all know the C64 had better sound, but as a hobbyist in those days, the Atari 800 was considerably easier to program on because of the ease of creating sprites and multiple graphics modes, which could be easily split on the screen. I had the Atari 800, but my 3 closest friends- one owned a C64, another the Apple //e, and the 3rd an IBM PC. The Atari 800 and C64 were clearly superior for games. We constantly compared, but ultimately got to learn the nuances of programming for each of the four leading machines in home computing, as we would help each other port our programs to run on each of the 4 machines... in hindsight, we really should have started a software company...
Atari had a significantly wider color space, and a technically better sound processor.
@@arsa102 Commodore 64 had way more games. :) They were both good systems for gaming though. :)
no dude, c64 was easyer to program for, because it had easyer to use sprites NOT the atari, also easyer to use gfx modes, also split screen was easyer on c64. Atari had a lot of bad gfx modes to choose from that doesnt make programming easyer. Also its 1984 when quality of programming overall is still shit, check later games, atari is no contest for c64.
@@arsa102 wider color space yes, which it was hardly able to use either 4 color gfx mode or huge pixels of one hue , horrible modes really :) atari had better sounds? lmao! :D
Pitstop 2 was awful on the Atari - just poorly programmed - there was no technical reason it could not have been the same.
I prefer the Atari 800XL's more colourful and chunky graphics, with more NATURAL diverse colours, and while the music may be simpler tones on Atari, there are great distinctive funky Atari sound effects that are richer, too. And the general smoothness of the scrolling and sprites on Atari is better, too, even if the detail is lower.
I loved Bruce Lee on the Atari 800/XL/XE.
And I was just thinking of my old systems like this. I love those classic sounds.
They really are sounds that take you back a few decades :)
wow that Atari version of Pitstop... wow
Yes, it's, well, not very good :)
They are both absolutely great machines. Back then, I had the C64 and I knew noone who actually owned the XL, which was released in the end of 83, when the c64 was already a year out. Nowadays, I have them both and I like Bruce Lee, Hero and even Choplifter better than on the 64. They are both awesome and thanks to modern hardware mods you can take them both to their extremes.
The 800 XL (released in '83) was just a cost-in-mind, 64kB update to the original Atari 800, which came out in '79 and with 48kB max. Yes, there were a few differences, like updated Atari OS, built-in Atari BASIC, crappier video output and "only" two joystick ports, but in a way, this is de facto a comparison between a '79 machine (A800) and an '82 one (C64).
Regardless, as a kid, I had the 800 XL and two of my best friends had C64 and ZX Spectrum. We were enjoying all good games, which one of us had and the others did not, and I also recall a few platform-exclusives (e.g. Star Raiders or Tagalon for the Atari, The Staff of Karnath for the C64 and Checquered Flag and Gift of the GOds for the ZX Spectrum). And yes, we played some of the games, that were available for at least two of those platforms, where I recall Pole Position, Bruce Lee, Joust, Ghostbusters and International Karate being the more frequently played ones.
Frankly, we didn't care that much about which platform was better, as a good, well written game was really enjoyable on any computer. E.g. I loved Manic Miner and Saboteur on the ZX Spectrum much more than on the C64 and I preferred C64's Pitstop II to the Atari version. Really, the fun was the key, and all those machines delivered just that.
Even today, I have emulators for all these three computers installed (and a few more) and every now and then I play a round or two of some of my favourite games there. The only exception is the Atari platform, where I do some programming as well, but you get the point 🙂
All in all, beyond the "in regards to this video", all the afore-mentioned 8-bit computers of my youth were fantastic in their own right and I do whole-heartedly miss those times of the naive, innocent joy of being immersed into these games with my friends.
Nicely written and I agree.
These videos are not really meant as a competition anyway, but just to compare the games on these platforms.
Thanks for watching!
Side by side, Pokey vs SID, I expected a clear C64 winner in sound, but it was a dead heat.
(Overworked coders working on unfamiliar hardware trying to make impossible deadlines. The 80's.)
SID can do more complex sounds but it lacks the clarity POKEY can put out plus the extra channel as well, always liked both and couldn't choose a favourite
I liked the Atari graphics a little more. They were very close this time. For sound, I prefer the C64 Sid.
as a c64 owner I always found the colors faded - the c64 palette is instantly recognizable to me.
All games close on both systems bar Pitstop 2. Pitstop 2 on Atari is awful. I was shocked.
@@madd20 I never found this to be true of NTSC C64s. It is true of PAL C64s, though.
I had both and never could tell the Commodore's sound was superior back then - it really isn't hugely superior...
Growing up I had all these games for the Atari 800. My brother always wanted a C64 and I could never understand why. The Atari 800 was superior.😊
The 800xl was a very capable machine and could hold up well against the C64. The thing that let it down was some really bad lazy ports. Luckily I had both systems but much preferred Bruce Lee on the 800xl
Atari had the better color palette
Makes you wonder how they failed to at least equal C64 sales
No one in manufacturing was on the ball to bring costs down and quality up
C64
Good keyboard
Lightweight box
Cheap Disk Drive
SID
If only they had put in 2 SIDS for Stereo
The C64 palette looks much better in NTSC than it does in PAL.
@@rbrtck I just checked Bruce Lee C64 version NTSC, there's a clip on yotube as well still the same strange colours Bruce Lee looks green, but Pit stop looks far better on the C64 but that will be down to the programming
@@NickSBailey The Bruce Lee character has never looked green on NTSC, which is the standard I have always used. He is colored yellow, and that is how he appears to me. My general statement about NTSC vs PAL C64s is mostly in regard to the saturation of the colors. On NTSC (calibrated to the standard), the C64's colors are reasonably saturated--not ultra-saturated like on some computers, but no one in North America noticed anything off about them at the time, and they helped make for some nice, even somewhat natural-looking images. On PAL, unfortunately for some reason the colors are basically the same in terms of hue but severely and annoyingly undersaturated, making PAL C64 images look unappealing and even ugly. And since most emulators come from Europe, they use such ugly colors, and now even those who owned C64s in NTSC countries are convinced that they must have seen the same colors, too. But they didn't.
As for the Atari, its colors weren't particularly saturated on NTSC, either, but like on the C64, the saturation was reasonable. On PAL, the Atari's palette was more limited, but still larger than the C64's, of course. Some games looked and/or played better because of the programming, while others were because of the fact that each computer had some advantages over the other. Obviously, the Atari has a larger color palette with more shading potential, while the C64, for example, has more usable high-resolution modes, can even mix high-res and multicolor graphics horizontally across the screen, and has sprites with twice the horizontal pixel density as the Atari's player-missile graphics and usable playfield/background graphics modes.
@@rbrtckBut that doesn't help UK or European gamers, now does it?
@@Foebane72 I wish I could do more to help, but I think explaining why some things were the way they were, and more generally imparting knowledge where I can, at least helps some. These days, with emulators if you don't have the vintage hardware, one could always run the games on the video standard they were originally intended to run on.
I'm a programmer, so I suppose that I could mod the games to play more like we think they should, but I'm a bit too busy these days for that, and I'm kind of a purist, anyway, when it comes to vintage computing.
Atari 800XL has slightly nicer colors than the C64, in my opinion. Other than that, graphics is the same, because they have the same resolution.
Damn, so it was close then? I didn't realise at the time as I had the 800XL and always assumed C64 was superior. So thay guy at Dixons that sold the Atari to my parents in 1985, he wasn't really lying then!
Pitstop 2 was shocking on the Atari.
Looks like you are travelling backwards in Atari Pole position. Bruce lee' sound effects when touching the lamps are almost iconic, the Atari doesn't have this and you do notice if you spend time with the systems that the C64 sound is a step above.
I love the colors on the Atari versions although Spy vs. Spy seems a bit too dark. Pitstop II on the Atari isn't the same game and seems to be a terrible port. The SID sounds great in Pitstop II but maybe the Atari could sound better too if the port was better. I like the cave backgrounds in H.E.R.O. on the C64. The Atari version should have them too.
I was shocked by Pitstop 2 on Atari. First time I played it and, wow, it's almost unplayable.
Music on Ghostbusters sounds nice on C64
NO! Atari version should NOT: HERO is better on Atari, as are Dropzone, River Raid, Ninja, Star Raiders II
@@b213videoz Most Atari versions of games play better and have better color, but I like the backgrounds because it makes it look like the caves they are.
The C64, Colecovision and MSX versions have the background graphics. The 2600, Apple II and ZX Spectrum don't but those systems don't have sprites. The Atari 800/5200 is the only system with sprites that doesn't have the background graphics. Apparently they were porting from the 2600 version. It's a lazy port graphics wise.
I don't see the point in making games look like the inferior Atari 2600 versions which couldn't do as much complex graphics and didn't have sprites, for example, you can barely even tell what game Atari 2600 BurgerTime based on the simplistic graphics.
Pole Position was always a favorite on Atari, and it stands out as the better version here. However, I can't help but wonder why Pitstop 2 was significantly better on C64. While Atari could have done better, comparing the C64 versions of Pitstop 2 and Pole Position suggests that an updated C64 version of Pole Position could compete successfully. When comparing the games, it's clear that both machines had their strengths, I lean more towards Atari, but that might just be my bias as an Atari kid.
I loved the Bruce Lee game!
Yeap, Bruce Lee is a great game!
In this and the other video you are playing the NTSC games at PAL speed on the C64. This results in the music being lower pitched, slower, and the game itself like 5% slower.
Maybe I am mistaken, but it almost seems like this is comparing a PAL c64 to NTSC Atari? The C64 games seem to be running just a bit slower than I am used to (as PAL ran slower) but the Atari adaptations seem more NTSC speed. I'm not sure if there was a speed difference between NTSC and PAL Atari 8-bits, but it's just how it seems to me.
SID was great, Pokey wasn't bad. Graphics is better on Atari. But - considering Atari was released 3 years before C64 - I'd say it was an engineering marvel.
Jay Miner was a marvelous engineer. If Atari had listened to him back in 1979 when he proposed developing the Atari's successor, they could have been coming out with what became the Amiga when Commodore was coming out with the C64, maybe even before.
atari is a brainfuck to code for if you want more than 4 colors, its just keep stabbing you in the back, engineering marvel? not really
C64 just had an odd color palate that I never could get used to. The SID was fantastic but that's the only thing I enjoyed about the system.
C64 is so much better gaming experience. Commodore always won the race. Later with the glorious Amiga 500 which killed the Atari st.
@@mal-avcisi9783 I still have Amiga 500's, 1000's, and ST's. Always liked the Amiga better. It just felt a generation ahead of the Atari. I don't have any 8-bit systems but I did run a BBS on a 130XE that I expanded to 576k of RAM. I loved that thing.
You have to compare "The Great American Cross Country Road Race" games which feature differences in gameplay.
bruce lee: Atari has better (warm) colors (did they really "painted" BL yellow on the C64!lol).C64 really interesting SFX.(this creates the feeling you mentioned).
Montezuma's revenge: equally good versions but Atari uses better color palette, more satisfying SFX and its faster.
Pole position: Atari has choppy background animation(no hardware support for this game)/.C64 better animation and SFX of the engine.
Zaxxon: Slow on the C64, but colorful. The atari version is fast with fewer but vivid colors.
SFX on C64 are annoying. SFX on the Atari...not that great.
Spy vs Spy is slightly better on the Atari mainly because of the bad work done with the tune on the C64.
H.E.R.O: I prefer the C64 graphics even if the colors used are limited compared to the Atari version.
Ghostbusters: Lazy work with the sprites on the atari 8bit...other than that they appear to offer the same experience.
Pits Stop II: Better colors and graphics on the Atari 8bit but unplayable due to really badly programmed software sprites. Great gameplay on the C64 even if it graphics look "poor". The sprites of the cars really save the day.
The video creator is playing the C64 games NTSC versions on a PAL machine setting. You need to add about 5% speed and imagine the music higher pitched and up tempo. A good example is that in Montezuma's revenge the little ditty it plays when you collect a diamond should sound exactly the same on both.
you know the machine is weaker when its colors are praised, speccy users also like to say how much nicer their 8 ugly colors are :D pit stop II atari cant even have middle dividers because of SW sprites, and uglyer cars, how is that better gfx? urgh :D Zaxxon, not slow on c64, just it can scroll in 320x res unlike atari :D Spy vs Spy terrible musin on atari, really? Ghost busters: ugly sprites because the HW cant do better, etc etc...
My son kept all his consols got them all, and games
I guess I am biased since I played the c64. There were some games that were close graphically speaking However, I think the sound and music was a better quality in the c64. You could make the argument that the Pitstop series were better quality games than Pole Position.
👍👏
Thanks!
Atari❤
I had Comodore 64 myself, but I think comparisons between the Atari 800 and Commodore 64 give an extremely close match. I am actually very surprised the Atari 800 did not see more success, as except the C64 it seems clearly superior to the other competitors.
I had Atari 800xl, because of Atari's fail is game loading process. It took half an hour to load a game ...
@@doruksongun6866 Atari's cassette loading was awful I have to admit, that's why I invested in a disk drive back in the day - most titles would load inside 30 secs. The C64 tape system was really fast, but ironically the C64 disk drive system was pretty awful, I think it was often slower then the tape system? The Atari 8 bit is a lot older than the C64, hardware sprites were from the VCS, but the custom chips allowed it do things way ahead of it's age. Atari were always very lacklustre at marketing and pushing their system, hence why it gradually fell behind.
I think the bottom line comes down the programmer who knows each system best.
@@doruksongun6866 True the tape drives were slow but the Atari disk drives were far better and much faster than C64 drives. @steinarvilnes3954 the 5200 bankrupted Atari and there were delays in the XL series and that's what allowed the C64 to take over market share in late '83. It was very unfortunate situation. The Atari's were built better and had many advantages (and disadvantages like being more costly).
@@gamedoutgamer In 80's of Turkey we couldn't able to find floppy drives and games around. 90' s Turkey able to import the same technology the rest of the world. But it was too late for 64k computers, it was Amiga 500 time. And i agree Atari games, color palette and graphics much better than Commodore.
Yes they are very close. Most of the games of Atari much better than commodore64 in terms of graphics, color palette and sound etc. I think the long loadin time (tape) and marketing choices make commodore more successful. And the soccer games of commodore was very successful especially Mcroprose Soccer. And i must admit that i was so envious about it :)
I had both machines. Soem hands were better on Atari like monezuma revenge. Bigger, faster more colourful. Ninja and plenty others. Amazing systems both.
Big difference with Pitstop 2, otherwise close enough.
Still in 85 the atari looks better in most cases and seems to run much faster, but I would say H.E.R.O is starting to show how they were beginning to learn how to program it properly. The atari Pitstop II is a travesty.
You probably meant 84 (85 video coming soon :) )?
And yes, I was shocked by Pitstop 2 on Atari. First time I played it and it's almost unplayable.
Many Atari games seem to focus on maximum speed, but some play much faster than the original arcade versions, and aren't as nice to play, as a result. C64 games sometimes play too slow because people keep running NTSC versions of the games on PAL hardware. To get the speed right, NTSC versions of games must be played on NTSC systems, and PAL games must be played on PAL systems.
I'd hardly say that the Atari games look better in most cases in this comparison video. This is just my opinion, of course, but here is my game-by-game comparison:
_Bruce Lee_ is nearly identical on the two, although the C64 has greater potential in terms of sprites, both their resolution and number of colors, that wasn't used at all.
_Montezuma's Revenge_ was also almost identical, although the C64 version does have a few additional graphical embellishments.
_Pitstop_ wasn't much different. The C64 palette always looks too dull in CZcams videos. In real life, this is true of PAL C64s, but *not* of NTSC C64s.
_Zaxxon_ looks and especially plays much better on the C64, no question. It's especially obvious when one actually plays the game on both. The C64 version looks a little slow here, but plays like the original arcade game on my C64 (NTSC vs PAL?), but the Atari version is too fast and its effects (explosions and such) are crude and unimpressive.
_Spy vs. Spy_ should be nearly identical, except the C64 version's music is playing too slowly. This is not the fault of the game or computer, because this is not how I've always played it. Obviously, this is the NTSC version being played on a PAL system (or emulator).
_H.E.R.O. _ on the C64 has backgrounds with twice the horizontal resolution of the Atari version, and the graphics look better overall.
_Ghostbusters_ looks and plays better on the C64, in my opinion. The "transparent" slimer ghost effect could have been done better than it was on the Atari, but for some reason it was not done well, while it was done perfectly on the C64. Mostly the differences in this case are due to the developers rather than the computers, but in any case, the C64 version is better.
_Pitstop II_ could have been done a lot better on the Atari than it was. The two versions should have been almost the same, but the developers of the Atari version made strange and off-putting choices. This is definitely on the developers rather than the Atari, but part of the point of these comparison videos is how well the two computers were programmed by developers, not just how the computer themselves compare, and things were looking up for the C64 as time went on.
I LOVE C64 ❤❤❤ FOREVER ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤🎉
The sound in the Atari version of Spy vs Spy is strongly distorted, it should not sound like that.
And the music in the C64 version is way too slow here. It must be the NTSC version of the game being played on a PAL system. When I play this game, the music plays a lot faster.
Definetly Atari 8 bits in the games you show are a little bit faster and has better colors. Atari wins ! About the graphics Atari cand do the same in these games and sound well Sid has more technology although Atari has 4 channels that makes it sounds clearer than C64. ATARI WINS AGAIN !
In games like Karateka and Prince of Persia, I can really tell the Atari didn't feel "laggy" like the C64's slower 6502 chip.
Generally pitstop 2 and bruce lee excepted, atari stuff seems slightly faster and smoother.
Both had the same CPU, but C64 Clock Rate around 1 Mhz and Atari 800 around 1,79 Mhz. Except the slightly superior Sid and bette Atari Colours, both had comparable Hardware. I had a C64, later an Amiga.
Because the Atari's 6502 chip was clocked faster than the Commodore's!
Bruce lee!!! Best game ever.
Never knew how awful pitstop 2 was on the Atari
Atari is better: faster and more fluid graphics (Zaxxon and Ghostbusters shows it the best), better colors and better sound.
Although Pit Stop II is very lame.
Pitstop 2 on Atari was awful - I was shocked how unplayable it is.
I also like the "feel" of Bruce Lee more on C64. Zaxxon and Montezuma are better on Atari for me. Others are very close.
I do like them Atari colors. The palette is very nice.
@@retrononame Pit Stop II is just sloppy programming. But clearly Atari 800XL has the better hardware.
Which was a surprise for me, because I always thought C64 was the best hardware in its era. But watching this video made me realize this was not the case.
@@gabormiklay9209 Best selling does not equal best quality. You will find also that the Atari 8 bit line was far more reliable. Also keep in mind the c64 was later tech...it should have been superior but in most cases it is not.
@@GORF_EMPIRE I owned both systems at the same time so could directly compare them. The only thing the C64 did better was sound.
The C64s actual speed is higher. These games are NTSC versions being played at PAL speeds for some reason.
while I love seeing these videos, its always funny to me the the Atari, released in 1979, is always put up against the C64, a computer released 3 years later. which in dog years is like 10 years apart in technological levels.
Look, I get it, the Atari was the only computer that could stand a chance against the C64. so its obvious why these videos pit them against each other.
but would be as if you took the C64, and compared it to the lets say, NES ,released a few months after the C64 in japan. Now we've all probably played the NES at some time or another, and we all know, the NES games out did almost every Atari and C64 game that came out for all three systems.
So lets be fair here, for a system that was 3 years older, than the C64, I think the Atari did amazingly well, and when you compare the Atari against the computer it was competing against in 1979.
the Apple, well Atari passed it like a corvette passing a VW bug on the highway.
And it would take a computer, 3 years later, the C64 , to do anything compared to what the Atari 8-bits could do.
OH and had Jay miner had his way at Atari, the Amiga, was going to be the next step up for the Atari line, to be release around the sametime as the C64. but Atari was too stupid to see the writing on the wall.
but in the end, both are amazng 8-bits, and we all had fun playin game on them back in the day.
I think with these earlier titles the C64 wasn't as good. I think overall the Atari one this round even with Pitstop 2 in the mix with the Atari version clearly awful. I have to say Hero is one of my all time favourite games I just found it very addictive however I never played either of these versions I played many hours on the VCS version.
Hero, Zaxxon and pole position definitely Atari. Rest c64.
These all are NTSC games, the mileage may vary on PAL systems. Especially Atari games are more sensitive to speed changes.
sensitive? lol
@@nickolasgaspar9660 yes, hear the music in spy vs spy. Pokey is confused.
@@sfurta you arrive to a conclusion based on a single game????It depends on the speed of the music.
@@nickolasgaspar9660 single game? Don’t be funny, I played almost all of them in the last 30 years. Old Atari games were tailored for 60i fps and look, sound and play differently on 50i. The same for C64, if SID timing is tied with screen refresh, the output sound is wrong. Check Skate or Die.
6 - 2 Atari wins
Wow H.E.R.O looks so much better on the C64 and the sounds that just come out of the sid is so much better
more down to a design choice with those graphics there's more bits I thought it looked a bit confusing, they went for a simple clean look on the Atari version, many of the visual differences are down to the graphics designers the sound is definitely a hardware difference, SID is more complex and like a fullly featured synthesizer but with a muddier sound, POKEY is simpler but much crystal clearer (and sometimes annoying) they're both capable of doing of very good sound for the time, listen to the sound effects on Alley Cat atari version for example
@@NickSBailey what ? in hero, atari simply can have only 2 colors on each horizontal line, thats not a design choice, but a HW restriction!!!
There's no compare when it comes to considering the Atari's vibrancy, as opposed to the muddy, muted, dull Commodore64.
atari best
C64 sound superior as expected.
not in SFX.
Atari for the win on every one of these games. C64 has it's strengths, but the color palette is not one of them.
C64 still king in my view. The colours were slightly odd and muted, but at the time they were more than good enough, and never really saw them to be an issue. First computer we owned was the c64 and have to say for its time it was a great little computer.
Graphics color goes to Atari and sound slightly to C64. Which is more important when playing a game? I say graphics.
Sound from Spy vs Spy on the Atari was just awful :(
C64 is so much better gaming experience. Commodore always won the race. Later with the glorious Amiga 500 which killed the Atari st.