C64 vs. Atari 800XL - 8 games from 1987

Hello and welcome to the fifth episode of Commodore 64 versus Atari 800XL games.
In this video, 8 games released in 1987 (again with 2 exceptions - noted below) are shown running on both machines so you can see how different (or similar) they were.
PLEASE NOTE : I, again, had difficulties finding relevant, quality games released for both machines in 1987, so I made 2 exceptions here (as far as I know).
1. Ace of aces was released in 1986 for C64 (not 1987)
2. Druid was released in 1986 for C64 (not 1987)
I would appreciate any games suggestions for 1988 (so quality titles that were released in 1988 for both machines).
Let me know in the comments below.
Thanks for watching and let me know who "wins" in your opinion.
And, of course, see you in the next RetroNoName episode

[@ckatheman]

A lot of it just came down to how much effort the programmers put in on their respective systems.

[@JB.zero.zero.1]

Loved both systems. Atari had potential, in the right hands.

[@adroharv9213]

love both these great machines

[@alaggan]

The Atari 8-bit conversions hold up well, considering the hardware was released 3 years prior to the C64, and whilst the sprite support and colour display modes tend to be slightly more constrained, you did have the advantage of a faster CPU and more expansive colour palette. The 16 shades of a single hue graphics mode seen in Atari Fued was impressive for it's time, Xybex uses a similar technique 🙂

[@Gamevet]

The Atari 800 XL was an update to the 800 you are referring too.

[@kangarht]

slightly more constrained? c64 can do with 2-3 of its 8 sprites what all the sprite HW can do on atari :D also these are far from the games considered the best on the c64, with these games the c64 is hardly trying.

[@alaggan]

@@kangarht I'm referring to the sprite system on the Atari (the player missile graphics), as being more limited than the C64's VIC II's sprites, not the other way round!

[@alaggan]

@@Gamevet Was there much of a hardware difference between the 400/800 and the later XL range other than increased memory?

[@Gamevet]

@@alaggan Microsoft Basic was built into the computer.

[@nickolasgaspar9660]

dude...these comments! C64 fanboys are the worst....the machine was good though.

[@mortimore4030]

I love the Atari POKEY sound chip.

[@eriskooo]

kinda difficult to judge, mostly both versions has pros and cons (iam ex-c64 owner)

[@neilthomas8070]

Interesting comparison, didn't own each computer, so it's so hard to judge.

[@saigokun]

Interesting comparision. I played Druid on the MSX2 but didn't know it was also released on these two systems.

[@CaptainRufus]

I did a full playthrough of it on KZbin. I thought it was C64 only for years. I need the A8 port for my collection though im thinking Famicom Disk version is probably the best.

[@IsaacKuo]

It looks like Fued and Basil The Great Mouse Detective really show off what C64's Multicolor Bitmap mode could do (MUCH more flexible color usage than MC character mode, but not suitable for scrolling). As far as gameplay goes, The Living Daylights is pretty interesting for being a sort of scrolling Cabal type game - but being armed with a pistol grants a very different feel from hosing away with machine guns.

[@bonzobanana1]

I loved both systems wasted many hours on both of them playing the great games of the day. I think I had a slight preference for the Atari though overall. I had quite a few cartridge games for the Atari so the instant loading meant quick gaming. I remember the colour effects and explosions of Dropzone being amazing on the Atari.

[@bryede]

Even though the Atari was an incredibly elegant design for its time, the C64's hardware was more in line with what gaming would become.

[@Edgel-in6bs]

Superb video as ever. Generally a c64 clean sweep (albeit most seem very close). Lots of games I didn't know were on the Atari like Feud.

[@retrononame]

Thank you!

[@owen800xl]

Feud was infinitely better on the Atari. C64 version was a mess :/

[@bjbell52]

trying to compare computers by comparing video games is a waste of time. what usually happens is an original game comes out and later a port to another computer. The programmer of the "other" computer program might NOT take advantages of the power that the "other" computer has. Some of those examples clearly show this happening. I remember when I first got my Atari 400, many of the games were ports of Apple games that didn't use the many colors, sounds and sprites the Atari had at its disposal.

[@mortimore4030]

Druid and Jo Blade were better on the Atari. I wouldn’t call it a clean sweep at all.

[@anatolbaskak]

1988 games (all i could find at atarimania): alternate reality: the dungeon bismarck choplifter! crystal castles draconus gauntlet mario bros rockford star wars (domark) winter olympiad 88 zybex i omitted dubious, low-score and with a substantial release year gap, but generally all the above are supposed to be 1988 for atari, not necessarily for c64. also some release years are reported incorrectly, it's worth double-checking. looking forward, mention me if you'll use this list!

[@doctorsocrates4413]

Think this was the atari machine that amiga founder jay miner developed....both great machines.

[@retrotronics1845]

You VICE palette is totally messed up, the gamma is all wrong compared to my C64 on a CRT Sony for a start, brown is not brighter than orange on a real 64 ;)

[@tonyduffy7441]

By this point in the machines' lifetimes, coders had become more proficient with the C64's abilities and it's greater sprite capabilities/capacity for more than four colours generally per line than the Atari (Feud is so very, very brown..). Plus, I think these are mostly UK made games? C64 was more popular than Atari 8 here in the UK so that was the 6502 format targeted. An Atari version, if we were lucky to get one, would often be perhaps an afterthought maybe coded by Software Houses not 'hella' experienced with that architecture? Just a thought.. But it was nice to get mainstream releases on A8 and I played the frick out of Druid myself

[@welshtechie6832]

Yup loved Druid on the Atari!

[@TeeroyHammermill]

The differences are negligible. It all boils down to which brand you prefer

[@PaxHominibusBonaeVoluntatis]

Druid and Joe Blade better on Atari, Arkanoid - no preference, the rest better on C64

[@David_JA_Noble]

Some sound missing

[@Heaven-dy9lj]

Prefer Druid and Joe Blade on the Atari, apart from that C64 seems to be pulling away from the neglected Atari at this time. I mean compare Joe Blade 2 to the original on the Atari. It's terrible in comparison.

[@tomyyoung2624]

Yes servers will load for me just like 100 max

[@chriscowey7464]

You can see this year was around the time, the c64 start to show its strength against the competition. (though still close)

[@zulucain]

I heard interesting things about atari 800xl gpu? dont laugh so are these just lousy implementations or it has no way to go against sprites on vic2?

[@IsaacKuo]

The Atari's sprites are far more limited than the VIC-II sprites. They are only 8 pixels wide, with no multi-color option and no high resolution option. The VIC-II sprites are either 24 pixels wide or 12 pixels wide with multi-color option. Nevertheless, the Atari's sprites are perfectly adequate for a lot of fun games. For example, I really love Realm of Impossibility, where the animation of the 8 pixel wide sprites really makes them feel alive. The C64 port did not enhance the sprite pixel art (which it could have, but I think it looks good as is).

[@gamedoutgamer]

Sprites are only one part of the graphics chips' capabilities of either system. C64 has better sprite hardware but that often didn't always translate into a better game or gameplay. Comparing the entire graphics capabilities of the two systems it's very difficult where each has strengths over the other. The 800XL can do a lot the C64 can not.

[@robert2098]

@@IsaacKuo The Atari had the possibility to combine two monochrome sprites into one multi-color sprite (3 color + transparent, third color is binay OR of the two sprites colors). So multi-color sprites are possibly at the cost of a sprite.

[@bjbell52]

@@IsaacKuo posted "The Atari's sprites are far more limited than the VIC-II sprites. They are only 8 pixels wide, with no multi-color option and no high resolution option......" except for the FACTS that the Atari sprites had THREE widths, not just one. "... with no multi-color option" except when one combined 2 sprites to make a 3 color sprite and then used display list interrupts to change the colors (and width, and height, and horizontal positions) ".... no high resolution option" except when the sprites use high resolution mode". Whereas the C64 has ZERO sprites, no color, and your monitor blows up when you power up the C64. See, I can make crap up too.....

[@ZxSpectrumplus]

Isn't the 800XL supposed to be graphically superior to the C64 with 256 colors? Why does most of the time it look worse? In fact, sometimes the color looks like EGA with 4 colors!

[@Nevidimka0]

👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

[@tofik5939]

👍👍

[@esathegreat]

Atari is faster,,more arcade-ish

[@El_Guapo74]

Jeez those Atari engineers, just got outclassed there by the mighty C64. I wondered what happened to them, hope they got up to something good.

[@robert2098]

Jay Miner, the lead designer of the Atari 2600 and Atari 800 series, left Atari with some colleagues and founded Amiga. After Jack Tramiel was kicked out of Commodore and bought Atari and was designing the Atari ST with some ex-Commodore exployees, Commodore bought Amiga and released the Amiga computer. The interconnected history of Atari and Commodore is very interesting. Sadly, Jay Miner passed away in 1994 at an age of only 62.

[@adroharv9213]

to be fair though the Atari computers were released quite a bit before in november 1979 so no real surprise. I owned the C64 which released in january 1981 and it was mostly superior but not in all aspects actually. The C64 was certainly the machine to own though for just overall greatness

[@funkydmunky1]

Very low IQ statement. More to add?

[@timlocke3159]

Feud: The Atari version is in monochrome. Both are 160 pixels. Sound is good in both. The bottom panel on the C64 is 320 pixels. The Living Daylights: I like the Atari graphics better. Sound is OK in both. Basil: No sound in either? Atari is monochrome again. Resolution looks like 160 pixels wide in both. Druid: Both are good. I like that the Atari one is darker. Arkanoid: The Atari version is too dark. No scoreboard. C64 sound is better. I think the Atari version could have been better than it is. Maybe it was a lazy port. Joe Blade: I think the Atari wins this one. It looks great. The C64 player sprite looks faded. The C64 version may be a lazy port here. Rampage: The Atari monsters are monochrome. The C64 version has no sound but I think the game actually does so the C64 wins. Ace of Aces: The C64 sounds better and looks better. The Atari could have sounded better and should be able to have a higher refresh with it's faster CPU. I think the Atari version is a lazy port.

[@retrononame]

Maybe I have a "wonky" C64 Rampage file, because there is sound at the beginning, but not in the game itself. Tried everything and couldn't make it work.

[@asgi99]

Come on, Druids looks a lot better on the Atari.

[@SChristianCollins]

@@retrononame There are also two versions of Rampage for the C64, if I recall, one released in Europe and the other in North America. I don't remember which is which or which is better.

[@dennyhaynes3]

Definitely the C64 wins hands down here. Fantastic video as always.

[@bjbell52]

GIve me a C64 and I could write a substandard port on it also. You should also do some research on the abilities of the Atari 8-bit before trying to blow it away. Here's a thought - run the Atari Robot demo video from KZbin and then show me a C64 capable of matching it!

[@Heaven-dy9lj]

Prefer Druid and Joe Blade on the Atari. Rampage looks the same on both systems as with 007. C64 seems to be programmed better for other games, Atari neglect beginning.

[@kevin34ct]

Never even hear of half these games. I had the Atari 800XL and a lot of the games I played look much better than these. But I used my computer for more than games. Desktop publishing, programming and BBS's.

[@timecapsule9701]

C64 all the way!

[@smila007]

Feud - c64 Living daylights - c64 but close Basil mouse detective - c64 Druid - draw Arkanoid - c64 Joe blade - Atari but close Rampage - draw Ace of aces - c64 but close

[@owen800xl]

Feud was a broken mess on the c64 though? The Atari version played fine.

[@JustMe99999]

I thought Arkanoid looked much better on the Atari.

[@Heaven-dy9lj]

Id agree apart from 007 draw and Arkanoid draw with Druid better on the Atari.

[@frantavychopen8281]

Mercenary byla moje nejoblíbenější hra.

[@C64sidVSsid]

C64 is the best :) best 8 bits in the world

[@YoreHistory]

The only real Atari games I can think of better are M.U.L.E and Alternate Reality: The Dungeon

[@gamedoutgamer]

Eidolon, Ballblazer, Fractalus, Fort Apocalypse, Blue Max and many many more that are better on the 800's.

[@YoreHistory]

@@gamedoutgamer Yes agree with you on Fractalus and Eidolon for sure.

[@JB.zero.zero.1]

@@YoreHistory Drop zone imo

[@YoreHistory]

@@JB.zero.zero.1 Aye good call.

[@owen800xl]

Boulderdash, Feud, Henrys House, Oliies Follies are ones that were all better on Atari

[@RussMichaels]

Atari wins with joe blade, c64 be with everything else Joe blade was an awful game though.