Why Did the Atari Lynx Fail?

[backguard]

It seems like a pretty cool little system. It had color way before the game boy and what seems like some pretty cool titles (chip's challenge etc.).

[Carey85]

Poor battery life, near non-existent third party support, and bulky size just to name a few. Atari as a name brand was a joke at that point...

[tomaitheous]

I remember the graphics looking pretty low res. Worst than Gameboy even though it was in color. Too chunky for me.

[Cornelius]

I think that the GameBoy got portability and battery life right, and none of the others managed those things until it was too late and the GameBoy was the 'only' one worth owning.

[j_factor]

Almost non-existent marketing, and the original model was way too bulky. The higher price certainly didn't help, and the Lynx never had a very strong presense in stores.

[digitalpress]

I bought a Lynx when it was launched in this area as a test market. I was VERY excited when I first got it, and played Blue Lightning and Electro Cop to death...


Poor battery life, near non-existent third party support, and bulky size just to name a few. Atari as a name brand was a joke at that point...

Agreed on the battery life and third party support. The size didn't bother me personally... the Game Boy wasn't exactly pocket-size either so at the time anything that didn't need to be plugged into the wall seemed "portable" enough. As for Atari being a joke, for shame... don't look at it in retrospect, remember the way it WAS. This was Atari's big comeback. Everybody knew that.


I remember the graphics looking pretty low res. Worst than Gameboy even though it was in color. Too chunky for me.

What the hell? Please try comparing Lynx to Game Boy again and say this with conviction. If you can, you are on crack.


Almost non-existent marketing, and the original model was way too bulky. The higher price certainly didn't help, and the Lynx never had a very strong presense in stores.

Dead on.

In my opinion, it was the lack of software that killed it. I loved the system, and still love Blue Lightning. Kinda the same love affair I have with the Jaguar - a few great exclusives that don't merit purchasing the system but nonetheless make it memorable, if not a footnote in gaming annals.

[Cornelius]

The size didn't bother me personally... the Game Boy wasn't exactly pocket-size either so at the time anything that didn't need to be plugged into the wall seemed "portable" enough.

For me, the original gameboy seemed just small enough where I could just put it in a bag with some other stuff I was taking on a trip or wherever. The Lynx and similarly sized Game Gear seemed just over the threshold of requiring their own separate bag. Probably just me, though. It might have also had something to do with price... I might just chuck the gameboy in a bag, but the Lynx had to be cared for more. I certainly dig the Lynx more now, but I only maybe take a GBASP with me on a trip now.

[7th lutz]

The Atari Lnyx had better graphics then the game Gear and the Game boy did. I wonder what games did that person played by claiming the lynx had worse graphics then gameboy. I didn't have a lynx or gameboy back in the day. I played a gameboy game on a friends gameboy at the time, and the gameboy was harder for me to see. I am person that has poor eyesight. The gameboy is worse for people like me then the lynx is. The lynx was very advance in what it could do like having a back light screen.

The lynx cause for failure besides marketing, 3rd party support, and battery life was the price of the system. I recalled Gameboy being released at a cheaper price then the lynx was in the early 90's. I knew people who bought the gameboy over the lynx was the cost of the system and the games back when the two systems came out. Gameboy and the Lynx came out when I was in 5th grade. The people I knew had one was around the same age as me.

11 years old kids depend on parents to buy stuff. They are not old enough to have a job yet. Parents look at price of a system and its games. My parents looked at prices of stuff for my younger brother and I growing up. I am sure other kids had parents that did the same thing. Expecting a parent to spend over $179.00 for a handheld in being unrealistic compared to Gameboy Costing around $110.00.

Common sense says buy the system that is more affordable.

[retroman]

The Lynx was my favorite handheld back in the day, and still is my favorite retro handheld.

[Hawksmoor]

I've got to echo the responses from the pro-Lynx crowd. Tomaitheos, to say or even suggest that the Lynx's graphics were inferior to the B&W Gameboy's is ludicrous in my view. The Lynx was capable of scaling (well before the SNES popularized that feature), could be played left or right handed, had GREAT arcade ports, was in COLOR, and far surpassed the Game Boy and Game Gear in graphical and audio capabilities. The only handheld of roughly the same generation that was equivalent or superior to the Lynx was the Turbo Express. End of story.

I bought a Lynx when it launched and have loved it ever since. Sadly, my Lynx I kicked the bucket, but I've got a Lynx II that's been going strong for quite a few years now. Yes, the battery life wasn't great, but the size was never an issue for me and there were certainly lots of quality games, regardless of inadequate 3rd party support.

[swlovinist]

I owned one back in the day, and actually owned one for a couple of years before breaking down and buying a game boy. The lynx graphically was amazing. Gauntlet III was my most fav game, followed by Rygar. Availability to me was a factor. I lived in the country, and the only place selling lynx was Toys R US, 50 miles away. Everyone and their mom was selling Game Boy. Price was a factor as well, not to mention advertiseing. The lynx was good, but the Game Boy had killer games, not to mention better battery life. Sure the games looked like crap, but Super Mario Land and a little game called Tetris rocked!

[DigitalSpace]

near non-existent third party support

Fun fact: Crystal Mines 2 is the only licensed Color Dreams game on any system. That's how desperate Atari was for third party support.

[Cambot]

To me, the GameBoy had better looking games, even though in B&W. I have a Lynx, and it certainly is a conversation piece, nowadays, but GB just had better games.

[tomaitheous]

Tomaitheos, to say or even suggest that the Lynx's graphics were inferior to the B&W Gameboy's is ludicrous in my view. The Lynx was capable of scaling (well before the SNES popularized that feature), could be played left or right handed, had GREAT arcade ports, was in COLOR, and far surpassed the Game Boy and Game Gear in graphical and audio capabilities.


Yeah, because scaling is the only way to measure good graphics. I was referring to it's resolution.


What the hell? Please try comparing Lynx to Game Boy again and say this with conviction. If you can, you are on crack.

If I were smoking crack, the graphics wouldn't look so chunky ;)

In all seriousness, all the great scaling and sprite implementation were pretty much made worthless with such crappy resolution. The GB and GG had 42% more vertical resolution than the Lynx. Also the GG has 32 colors per scanline out of 4096 color palette and with better res. I remember playing my friends lynx and thinking it looked like a pixelated mess. The lynx res is just to low for my tastes.



As for Atari being a joke, for shame... don't look at it in retrospect, remember the way it WAS. This was Atari's big comeback. Everybody knew that.
You know the system wasn't developed by Atari, right? It was developed and made by a group of ex Amiga guys. They were trying to pitch the system to companies at the time and Atari picked it up. The dev kits were only for Amiga systems and not for any of the Atari line of systems like the ST.

[j_factor]

The Lynx was actually my first portable. I loved it at the time. It had some great arcade ports, including possibly the best version of Klax ever made.

I ended up trading in my Lynx for a Game Gear. I did that because of the overall lack of Lynx games, and particularly the lack of Lynx games in stores. I wanted to be able to get new games for Christmas and stuff. I chose the Game Gear over the Game Boy because the Game Boy seemed too primitive and "icky", and it didn't really have many interesting games to me.

At the time, the Game Gear seemed very comparable to the Lynx. It had a somewhat higher resolution and more simultaneous colors, but lacked the sprite scaling. It also lacked the Lynx's GPU, but for non-scaling games it seemed only a minor step down.

[Hawksmoor]

Yeah, because scaling is the only way to measure good graphics. I was referring to it's resolution.

I don't recall saying it was, nor do I think I cited the Lynx's scaling ability only. I own all three systems in question and just don't agree with you.


You know the system wasn't developed by Atari, right? It was developed and made by a group of ex Amiga guys. They were trying to pitch the system to companies at the time and Atari picked it up. The dev kits were only for Amiga systems and not for any of the Atari line of systems like the ST.

The "Amiga guys" in question were known as Epyx, and that has nothing to do with digitalpress' point. For all intents and purposes it was Atari's machine and was their attempt to reemerge as a force in the industry. They weren't successful for a lot of reasons, but you seem to want to slam Atari regardless.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I'm endlessly amused that Tomaitheous is asking us to compare this

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/FrankieViturello/MarioLand.jpg

to this

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/FrankieViturello/ShadowOfTheBeast_7.png

Yes. The original Gameboy CLEARLY (cough) wins the graphics competition.

Seriously.

:-D

[tomaitheous]

I own all three systems in question and just don't agree with you.

That the system has blocky/low resolution?


but you seem to want to slam Atari regardless.

No, I'm don't. I just don't see how someone can say it was Atari's system when they had *nothing* to do with the development process, except for slapping their name on someone else's finished product.


Frankie_Says_Relax: Yeah.. let's take one of the earliest planest looking game from the GB and compare it to one of Lynx best looking game. You're not biased at all :finger:

[Wraith Storm]

The Lynx was and still is a fantastic system. To this day I’m not really sure why it didn’t help save Atari. Sure, like most people are quick to point out, it didn’t have much 3rd party support. In all truth however, that has NEVER bothered me. When it came to games, people laughed at me and my friends in High School because everyone had a Playstation or an N64. My friends and I however, each had a Sega Saturn. We felt no regret in our decision, even though the Saturn had very little 3rd party support on these shores because of one reason; We bought SEGA systems to play SEGA games. Anything extra by a 3rd party was just a bonus!

The same reasoning applied to the Lynx. I bought the ATARI Lynx to play ATARI games. It had a TON of quality arcade ports and exclusives. I still think the Lynx version of Paperboy is, maybe not the most accurate, but by far the most fun port the game ever received on any platform (I have played most of them). So when it came to the selection of games the Lynx never disappointed me.

Around the time of its release it was promoted all around the Tulsa area that I live. They had a display model complete with Blue Lightning setup at J.C. Penneys that I used to play and my local Babbage’s had a big selection of Lynx games next to a display model with Gauntlet up by the registers. Not to mention I still have an awesome Atari Lynx magazine one store was giving out for free! It was like a Nintendo Power but tailored for the Lynx. It had strategies, maps, codes, previews and there was an article that had several pics of an untitled game that I thought looked so cool but was never released unfortunately. So, in store, I found the lynx to be very well promoted in my area.

The Lynx was also a VERY next-gen system at the time. As stated before it was more than capable of scaling and rotational effects and it loved to show them off in most games. Then there was the sound chip, which was incredible. Sometimes I boot up the Lynx just to listen to the title screen music in Batman or Checkered flag. To this day the capabilities of the lynx impress me. At the time of release I would have been very impressed with a home console as powerful as this. The fact they crammed it all into a portable was simply jaw dropping.

But as much as I love the Lynx and as much as I defended it back in the day I do agree with the comments Tomaitheous made to some extent. It’s not a major complaint of mine... but If I could have ONE thing on the Lynx improved it would certainly and without second thought, be the resolution. Like with the game Battle Wheels, I love it to death, but the outlines to the characters, cars, and buildings look like someone traced over them with a fat sharpie marker. Had the Lynx a better resolution this problem would have been alleviated.

So all in all the Lynx had a lot going for it and mostly delivered on what it promised. So, other than low battery life and being a bit bulky I’m not sure why the Lynx failed, but then again I am still pondering why the Saturn didn’t fair better either.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

That the system has blocky/low resolution?



No, I'm don't. I just don't see how someone can say it was Atari's system when they had *nothing* to do with the development process, except for slapping their name on someone else's finished product.


Frankie_Says_Relax: Yeah.. let's take one of the earliest planest looking game from the GB and compare it to one of Lynx best looking game. You're not biased at all :finger:

LOL, biased?

Do I know you?

Do you know me?

Sorry, but, comparing the graphical quality of spinach-green-screen Gameboy to the Lynx to me, is just a bit ... silly.

It's pretty obvious to me that you probably don't feel the same way, but I'm not going to make some kind of blanket statement about your level of "bias".

And, as far as my choice of games ... asking somebody to find the most "graphically impressive" original gameboy game is quite the task.

Let's revise my comparison, or, you can feel free to offer up a choice if you'd like.

So ... here are two Gameboy games that "pushed the graphical envelope" for the system, and I pick them with all sincerity - since you seem to think that I have some type of "anti-Gameboy" bias thing going on...

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/FrankieViturello/KI_GB.jpg

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/FrankieViturello/DKLand_GB.jpg

Pretty impressive for the tiny, lcd screen for sure...

...but, when compared side-by-side to the graphical prowess of the Lynx ... come on, do you expect us NOT to chuckle when you claim that the original Gameboy can best it in a graphics contest?

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/FrankieViturello/ShadowOfTheBeast_7.png
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/FrankieViturello/Todds.jpg
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/FrankieViturello/KungFood.jpg
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/FrankieViturello/Batman.jpg

... as far as the "earliest, plainest" Gameboy game ... this was what the Lynx's launch software looked like :

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/FrankieViturello/Blue.jpg
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/FrankieViturello/California.jpg
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/FrankieViturello/Electro.jpg

...and, yeah, if you want to do something stupid like call me "biased" again ... please take into account that I bought an original Gameboy at launch, and a Gameboy Pocket, and a Gameboy Color, and an SP...and at one point in time my Gameboy cartridge collection absolutely dwarfed most of my other cartridge system collections.

Nobody's saying that Gameboy was "less than" anything ... but, I find it rather absurd that you're comparing two graphically divergent (in terms of sheer processing power, much less ON SCREEN COLOR) machines.

[tomaitheous]

If you're not biased, then just a moron? Because using those two screen shots was really a fair comparison. /sarcasm off

Did I say anything about "in terms of sheer processing power, much less ON SCREEN COLOR" ? No, I didn't. The game boy has an underpowered x80 clone that doesn't come close to the lynx and the graphics processor of the lynx was incredible at the time - so much more so than the GB and the GG.

I'll say it again so you'll u-n-d-e-r-s-t-a-n-d, ok? For all the graphical feats the Lynx could pull off, the resolution was too blockly in my opinion. I wasn't impressed by the lower(crappy) resolution. Blocky, crappy, shitty, whatever. Yes, I'd take even the B&W GB game over the lynx game in *almost* every case.



(a pixelated mess)
http://pcedev.net/tmp/563.png




(a not so pixelated mess)
http://pcedev.net/tmp/568.png


If you think the other advantages of the lynx out weight it's resolution short coming, then that's fine - but I don't.

[swlovinist]

Here is one for you Frankie: Show me an actual Lynx screens that has the actual above resolution and color :). I have two Atari Lynx systems and if they had the screen resolution of the above shots there would not be an argument :) Screenshots are one thing, but in motion...the lynx was a blurry mess. Dont get me wrong, the GB was a blurry mess as well, but it got rid of alot of the blurriness with the GB pocket. I also think that the sound on the lynx was not that much better.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

OH ... since you said it SO slowly, I totally understand now.

You think the Lynx is an inferior system due to it's "blocky" R-E-S-O-L-U-T-I-O-N.

(nods knowingly for about two minutes straight whilst stroking his beard)

Uh-huh...

...

PFFFTT, sorry, I just can't do it. I usually avoid this kind of thing on gaming message boards ... but, looking at the quote over the picture of Ninja Gaiden for Gameboy ... I can't even TYPE with a straight face.

Tom. You sir, are bat-shit loco.

As far as "actual resolution", since all "screen shots" of Lynx and Gameboy games are handled via screen captures of emulators ... the only way to see "actual resolution" of Lynx or Gameboy games is to play a Lynx or Gameboy (As for all I know you're viewing this on a Commodore 64 monitor, and for all you know I'm viewing it on a PSP Web Browser)... I really have no control over what Photobucket does to JPEGS in terms of color compression/lossy-ness that aides or hinders the visual representation of "resolution".

And, for the record blowing games up to 300 - 400 percent doesn't help the "resolution" argument either.

So. Yes. My two cents are in on this matter... and you can consider that my final financal contribution.

[-_-Nintendo-_-]

Can I have what ever you are smoking tomaitheous? Because you either must be incredibly high or some sort of retard. Comon, GB beats the Lynx? Get real.

[tom]

Here is one for you Frankie: Show me an actual Lynx screens that has the actual above resolution and color :). I have two Atari Lynx systems and if they had the screen resolution of the above shots there would not be an argument :) Screenshots are one thing, but in motion...the lynx was a blurry mess.

You oughta try Checkered Flag, Blue Lightning, for example, no blurry mess there. And Checkered Flag is bloody fast.

Actually GB pixels: 160 x 144
Actual Lynx pixels: 160 x 102 (in standard resolution, of course it can do higher res).

so yes, the Lynx has less res, but only when compared standard mode, Suzy, a 16-bit graphic chip, is capable of higher res if needed.


GB didn't need any high resolution, as the top selling game which actually sold the machine, was Tetris, which was like blocky blocks.

..

[playgeneration]

Gameboy does have better graphics. Not in terms of colour or scaling obviously, but in terms of actually looking at it when playing the gameboy wins. The Lynxs low resolution made many games ugly and hard to make out. Its not a good thing when the playing charcter fills a massive amount of the screen leaving little room for actual level. Games like Mario Land 2 are clearer to look at and stylistically better than any lynx game.

[tom]

You play Star Wars on Game Boy, now you're talking blurry mess.

[tom]

Gameboy does have better graphics. Not in terms of colour or scaling obviously, but in terms of actually looking at it when playing the gameboy wins. The Lynxs low resolution made many games ugly and hard to make out. Its not a good thing when the playing charcter fills a massive amount of the screen leaving little room for actual level. Games like Mario Land 2 are clearer to look at and stylistically better than any lynx game.

Not quite true, Toki, Viking Child, Fat Bobby, Power Factor, Pac-Land, Gordo 106, Slime World, these are all excellent platform titles on Lynx, imho. And they not only play good, but look good too.

Of course, you have excellent platform titles on GB and more choice too, but then the GB library consist of 2000 titles, whilst the Lynx got approx 80. No one managed to tap into the real potential on Lynx because of it's short lifespan.

.

[FrakAttack]

Well, I owned a Lynx, Game Boy and Game Gear back in the day and it all came down to availability of software. Game Boy games were easy to find and Lynx games were hard to find, with Game Gear falling somewhere between. I had to mail order the few Lynx titles I had out of a catalog. I loved my Lynx and wish it had had better software support. Coulda been such a beautiful thing.

[tomaitheous]

Can I have what ever you are smoking tomaitheous? Because you either must be incredibly high or some sort of retard. Comon, GB beats the Lynx? Get real.

It appears you're the retard here (or "incredibly high"). Did I say the Lynx beats the GB? No. Jesus Christ, do people bother to even read before posting. Here I go, repeating myself again... the lynx graphics/resolution are too blocky/low res for my liking. If it doesn't bother you, then great... fantastic..whatever. Silly Atari fanboys.


Tom: How are you going to get a higher vertical resolution out of a fixed pixel matrix LCD?

[xaer0knight]

well I'm a fan of Gameboy but I discreated companies like SEGA, NEC, NEO-GEO, Sony, or even Atari for trying something. Companies have tried to come into the Handheld market and flop... even Nintendo flopped once and we call the Virtual Boy. There also are others like Tiger's GameCom and Bandai Wonderswan that also flopped. The Lynx is a nice system one of the first to every be a handheld that had color. You can help to notice how many companies were trying to take a slice of the market at the time.

At the time of the Lynx, We had:
* Game Boy
* Atari Lynx
* TurboExpress
* Sega Game Gear
* Game.com
* Game Boy Color
* Neo Geo Pocket Color
* Wonderswan Color

heck they are still trying now.. It all comes down to supply and demand, 3rd party support, and advertising, thats how it works. Can't help it if i thought the NEC TurboExpress was kick ass at the time but that didn't help them.

If you want to compare maybe tech specs for Wikipedia will give some insight (GB, Lynx,GG, TurboExpress):

Gameboy:
CPU: Custom 8-bit Sharp x80 core at 4.19 MHz which is similar to an Intel8080 in that all of the registers introduced in the Z80 are not present. However, some of the instruction set enhancements from the Z80, particularly bit manipulation are present. Still other instructions are unique to this particular flavor of x80 CPU. The core also contains integrated sound generation
RAM: 8 kbyte internal S-RAM
Video RAM: 8 kbyte internal
ROM: On-CPU-Die 256-byte bootstrap; 256 kbit, 512 kbit, 1 Mbit, 2 Mbit and 4 Mbit and 8 Mbit cartridges
Sound: 2 Square Waves, 1 programmable 32-sample 4-bit PCM Wave, 1 White noise. The unit only has one speaker, but headphones provide stereo sound
Display: Reflective LCD 160 × 144 pixels
Screen size: 66 mm (2.6 in) diagonal
Color Palette: 4 shades of "gray" (green to (very) dark green)
Communication: Up to 4 Game Boys can be linked together via serial ports
Power: 6 V, 0.7 W (4 AA batteries provide ~#35 hours)
Dimensions: 90 mm(W) × 148 mm(H) × 32 mm(D)/3.5 × 5.8 × 1.3 (in)

Lynx:
* MOS 65SC02 processor running at up to 4 MHz (~3.6 MHz average)
o 8-bit CPU, 16-bit address space
o Sound engine
+ 4 channel sound (Lynx II with panning)
+ 8-bit DAC for each channel (4 channels × 8-bits/channel = 32 bits commonly quoted)
o Video DMA driver for liquid-crystal display
+ 4,096 color (12-bit) palette
+ 16 simultaneous colors (4 bits) from palette per scanline (more than 16 colors can be displayed by changing palettes after each scanline)
o 8 System timers (2 reserved for LCD timing, one for UART)
o Interrupt controller
o UART (for ComLynx) (fixed format 8E1, up to 62500Bd)
o 512 bytes of bootstrap and game-card loading ROM
* Suzy (16-bit custom CMOS chip running at 16 MHz)
o Graphics engine
+ Hardware drawing support
+ Unlimited number of high-speed sprites with collision detection
+ Hardware high-speed sprite scaling, distortion, and tilting effects
+ Hardware decoding of compressed sprite data
+ Hardware clipping and multi-directional scrolling
+ Variable frame rate (up to 75 frames/second)
+ 160 x 102 standard resolution (16,320 addressable pixels)
o Math co-processor
+ Hardware 16-bit × 16-bit → 32-bit multiply with optional accumulation; 32-bit ÷ 16-bit → 16-bit divide
+ Parallel processing of CPU and a single multiply or a divide instruction
* RAM: 64 KB 120ns DRAM
* Storage: Cartridge - 128, 256 and 512 KB exist, up to 2 MB is possible with bank-switching logic.

Some (homebrew) carts with EEPROM to save hi-scores.

* Ports:
o Headphone port (mini-DIN 3.5 mm stereo; wired for mono on the original Lynx)
o ComLynx (multiple unit communications, serial)
* LCD Screen: 3.5" diagonal
* Battery holder (six AA) ~4-5 hours

Gamegear:
* Main processor: Zilog Z80 (8-bit)
* Processor speed: 3.58 MHz (same as NTSC dot clock)
* Resolution: 160 x 146 pixels
* Colors available: 4,096
* Colors on screen: 32
* Maximum sprites: 64
* Sprite size: 8x8 or 8x16
* Screen size: 3.2 inches (81 mm)
* Audio: 3 square wave generators, 1 noise generator, the system has a mono speaker, but stereo sound can be had via headphone input.
* RAM: 24 KB
* Power:
o internal: 6 AA batteries
o external: 9V DC, 300mA, 3W [8]

* Physical:
o dimensions: 20cm x 11,3cm x ?
o weight: ~400g

TurboExpress (Just a smaller portable version of a TG16/PC-Engine):
It was the most advanced handheld of its time and could play all the TurboGrafx-16's games (which were on a small, credit-card sized media called HuCards). It had a 66 mm (2.6 in.) screen, the same as the original Game Boy, and could display 64 sprites at once, 16 per scanline, in 482 colors from a palette of 512. It had 8 kilobytes of RAM. The Turbo ran its 6820 CPU at 3.58 or 7.16 MHz.

* Resolution:
o X (Horizontal) Resolution: variable, maximum of 512 (programmable to 256, 352 or 512 pixels)
o Y (Vertical) Resolution: variable, maximum of 242 (programmable in increments of 1 scanline)
o The vast majority of TurboGrafx-16 games use 256×240, though some games, such as Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective did use 512×224. Chris Covell's 'High-Resolution Slideshow' uses 512×240.
* Color:
o Depth: 9 bit
o Colors available: 512
o Colors onscreen: Maximum of 482 (241 background, 241 sprite)
o Palettes: Maximum of 32 (16 for background tiles, 16 for sprites)
o Colors per palette: Maximum of 16
* Sprites:
o Simultaneously displayable: 64
o Sizes: 16×16, 16×32, 16x64, 32×16, 32×32, 32×64
o Palette: Each sprite can use up to 15 unique colors (one color must be reserved as transparent) via one of the 16 available sprite palettes.
o Layers: The HuC6270A VDC was capable of displaying one sprite layer. Sprites could be placed either in front of or behind background tiles.
* Tiles:
o Size: 8×8
o Palette: Each background tile can use up to 16 unique colors via one of the 16 available background palettes. The first color entry of each background palette must be the same across all background palettes.
o Layers: The HuC6270A VDC was capable of displaying one background layer.
Memory:
* Work RAM: 8 KB
* Video RAM: 64 KB
Audio capacity:
* 6 PSG audio channels, programmable through the HuC6280A CPU.
* Each channel had a frequency of 111.87 kHz (while not in D/A mode) with a bit depth of 5 bits. Each channel also was allotted 20 bytes (32×5 bits) of RAM for sample data.
* The waveforms were programmable so the composers were not limited to the standard selection of waveforms (square, sine, sawtooth, triangle, etc.).
* The first two audio channels (1 and 2) were capable of LFO when channel #2 was used to modulate channel #1. This was used to achieve FM-like sound qualities.
* The final two audio channels (5 and 6) were capable of Noise generation.
* Optional software enabled Direct D/A which allows for sampled sound to be streamed into any of the six PSG audio channels. When a channel is in D/A mode the frequency is as fast as the CPU can stream bytes to the port, though in practicality it's limited to 6.99 kHz when using the TIMER interrupt with the smallest loop setting (1023 cpu cycles).
* There is a method that combines two channels in Direct D/A mode to play back 8-bit, 9-bit, or 10-bit samples.

Game media:
* HuCard (Turbo Chip in North America): A thin, card-like game media. The largest Japanese HuCard games were up to 20 Mbit in size (Street Fight 2 CE).

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

[tom]

Tom: How are you going to get a higher vertical resolution out of a fixed pixel matrix LCD?

not vertical, but nonetheless good enough, because you can always use the Lynx 'long-way' (taken from my Lynx faq):
160 x 102 "triad" standard resolution (16,320 addressable pixels)
(A triad is three LCD elements: red, green, and blue)
Capability of 480 x 102 artificially high resolution

Turn the Lynx longways, and horizontal becomes vertical, neat.

[j_factor]

The Lynx only had a lower vertical resolution. They had the same horizontal resolution. The resolution difference just means that the Lynx picture is shorter and has a weird aspect ratio. The Game Boy resolution isn't any sharper, it just has more screen space at the top. I can understand the comment about sprites taking up too much room on the screen for the Lynx, but not the other stuff.

[tom]

anyway, i like my Game Boy, best version of Donkey Kong ever

[xaer0knight]

As far as "actual resolution", since all "screen shots" of Lynx and Gameboy games are handled via screen captures of emulators ... the only way to see "actual resolution" of Lynx or Gameboy games is to play a Lynx or Gameboy (As for all I know you're viewing this on a Commodore 64 monitor, and for all you know I'm viewing it on a PSP Web Browser)... I really have no control over what Photobucket does to JPEGS in terms of color compression/lossy-ness that aides or hinders the visual representation of "resolution".

And, for the record blowing games up to 300 - 400 percent doesn't help the "resolution" argument either.

So. Yes. My two cents are in on this matter... and you can consider that my final financal contribution.

Well then.. if have to show you this in some defense then. Here are the Resolution Tech Specs for both the LYNX (original) and Gameboy (original):

Gameboy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Boy):
# Video RAM: 8 kbyte internal
# Display: Reflective LCD 160 × 144 pixels
# Screen size: 2.6 in diagonal
# Color Palette: 4 shades of "gray" (green to (very) dark green)

Lynx (http://www.electric-escape.net/atari/Lynx/FAQ):
# Video RAM: Complicated.. look at the FAQ :-D
# Display: 3.5in diagonal
# Screen size: 160 x 102 standard resolution (16,320 addressable pixels)
# Color Palette:4,096 color (12-bit) palette. 16 simultaneous colors (4 bits) from palette per scanline (more than 16 colors can be displayed by changing palettes after each scanline)


So IMHO the Lynx is way much more advanced than the GB will ever be..

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

In defense of what?

I didn't believe I was saying anything "offensive" about either system.

Just that looking at something on the web is no substitute for viewing it in it's actual form, especially game systems like Lynx and Gameboy, whose respective screens are both drastically different than most internet viewing monitors.

[xaer0knight]

In defense of what?

I didn't believe I was saying anything "offensive" about either system.

Just that looking at something on the web is no substitute for viewing it in it's actual form, especially game systems like Lynx and Gameboy, whose respective screens are both drastically different than most internet viewing monitors.

Rygar for Lynx:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyQB_Au_PTI

To me, that game really shows of the Lynx. More so than anything I've seen thus far. Then you compare it to this

Mega Man 2 for Gameboy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJhLxfKgbac

Both Games show off the ability of each hand held. They both look awesome compared to there Counterparts. Rygar was awesome in the Arcade but the Lynx tried to port it and did a good job at that. Mega Man for both Arcade and NES were awesome and the GameBoy conversion was just Flawless. So.. both the lynx and GB had there great looking games and they both had crappy games. But it all boils down to is the lack of Advertising, 3rd party support, and the saturation of Handhelds at the time. All 3 of those killed the Lynx, that is all.

[MarioMania]

now I see it the Lynx is kinda a Handheld 7800

[boatofcar]

now I see it the Lynx is kinda a Handheld 7800

Did the Lynx outsell the 7800? Anybody know?

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Did the Lynx outsell the 7800? Anybody know?

By about a million according to Wikipedia.

Of course, the Lynx was in the market during the presence of "game stores" like Software Etc. and Electronics Boutique.

[boatofcar]

By about a million according to Wikipedia.


D'oh, I had a feeling I should have checked Wikipedia first.



Of course, the Lynx was in the market during the presence of "game stores" like Software Etc. and Electronics Boutique.

Interesting. The 7800 was officially discontinued on Jan. 1, 1992, but does anyone remember roughly when most stores pulled them off the shelves? The dates alone suggest both the 7800 and Lynx had an overlap of 3 years or so.

[tom]

now I see it the Lynx is kinda a Handheld 7800

The Lynx is actually kinda a handheld Amiga (Dave Needle, RJ Mical (Amiga hardware designers))

[FrakAttack]

I loved the Lynx, but it really was a different beast than the Game Boy because of its massive size. Even the original Game Boy seems huge nowadays compared to SP or DS, but at least it could fit in your pocket. The Lynx was very awkward to walk around with in your day to day life, and very difficult to see in daylight.

[ROTS MKII]

Gameboy was great since

1. Even the earlier graphics was even comparable to the SNES. All it ever needed was the right amount of color.

2. It was made in Japan. Thus had more creative support from anime artists that was highly respected during the 1980's.

3. The gamebody had Mario, Kirby, and many more titles that supported but mainly it had high support in the east.

4. Back then we had bigger pockets. I remember I could fit hasters and see deep into my pockets.
In fact the coats I had ( that is now small for my size ) has pockets that are deep. We even have pockets on the insides of our coats and pants. women even carried things in the shirt that formed a pocket.

[Greg2600]

I am not a hand-held fan at all, never have been. Screens are just too small for my liking. I still have the Game Boy. The biggest problems against the Game Gear and Lynx, IMO, was the cost. The cost of the system, the games, and the batteries used. Not only that, and this might sound strange, but as kids I recall we never really thought much of the Game Gear or Lynx because many of the games were available on regular consoles. Even though the systems were portable, we kind of felt that the games should have been more unique. This was often the case with the Game Boy. In addition, due to the cost, next to no one had either unit, so word of mouth amongst kids was non-existent. That's the biggest selling point of all, you have to get the games into the kids' hands. All the advertising in the world is not going to help you.

[tom]

Women...
.
Women loved the Game Boy. 3/4 of all GB buyers were women.
.
If it wasn't for women, Lynx would have won.
.

[Jimid2]

You know the system wasn't developed by Atari, right? It was developed and made by a group of ex Amiga guys. They were trying to pitch the system to companies at the time and Atari picked it up. The dev kits were only for Amiga systems and not for any of the Atari line of systems like the ST.
Atari didn't so much "pick up" the Handy as steal it! The original agreement was that Atari would manufacture and market the Lynx under license to Epyx. They would then purchase games from Epyx for the Lynx. Unfortunately, there was a stipulation written into the contract that the games would have to meet Atari's okay, and any requested changes made within a certain time period or Epyx wouldn't get paid. The cash-strapped Epyx found Atari returning games with requirements for major changes only days before the production deadline would pass, and Atari would use their inability to meet the deadlines as justification for withholding payment for the games... Epyx was broke, in debt, and holding a bunch of IOUs from Atari that they couldn't get payment on, when Jack Tramiel offered them an out; he would pay them the cash they were owed by Atari, if they signed over the rights to the Lynx hardware... Epyx effectively had no choice - they signed over the system. The Handy's chief architects, RJ Mical and Dave Needle, declined Atari's generous offer of employment and went on to other things...

All that aside, I think that despite the lower resolution, the Lynx is still capable of compelling game graphics, and looked great in comparison to the competition (remember, the Game Gear didn't get to North America until nearly two years after the Lynx was released). The main problem was essentially a lack of games; I worked in a video game store back then, and when people saw the Lynx and the 20 or so games we had stocked for it, versus the much lower priced Game Boy and the hundred plus games we had for it at lower prices, they would almost always choose the Game Boy. Of course, the abysmal battery life didn't help, especially since the rechargable batteries of the time wouldn't work in the Lynx. I owned and played one and so did many of my friends, but we were almost always tethered to the AC adapter.... I still have my system today though, as well as a couple Lynx IIs and plenty of games... :)

[Hawksmoor]

Gameboy was great since

1. Even the earlier graphics was even comparable to the SNES. All it ever needed was the right amount of color.

Are you kidding? What Game Boy games are comparable to SNES games? I can't think of any.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Are you kidding? What Game Boy games are comparable to SNES games? I can't think of any.

The amount of delusional graphical comparisons on this thread borderlines on a near epic level of absurdity.

[tom]

Are you kidding? What Game Boy games are comparable to SNES games? I can't think of any.

Star Wars.
Star Wars on Game Boy is graphically even superior to SNES Super Star Wars.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Star Wars.
Star Wars on Game Boy is graphically even superior to SNES Super Star Wars.

http://danielcontreras.net/temp/StarWars_(GBY)_1992_Screenshots/Star_Wars_(GBY)_1992_031_Level_01_Tatooine_Blue_Ca ve.jpg

http://danielcontreras.net/temp/StarWars_(GBY)_1992_Screenshots/Star_Wars_(GBY)_1992_072_Level_01_Mos_Eisley.jpg

http://www.videogamecritic.net/images/snes/super_star_wars.jpg

http://www.consoleclassix.com/info_img/Super_Star_Wars_SNES_ScreenShot2.gif

Superior?

Really??

[tom]

see what i mean? (some people didn't get this, I WAS JOKING)

[digitalpress]

Unless someone posts a "Pong vs. XBox 360" thread really soon THIS one might be remembered as most humorous thread of 2007 AND 2008. So quick, end this or watch it make stupid history. It is almost 2008.

[ROTS MKII]

[IMG]http://www.videogamecritic.net/images/snes/super_star_wars.jpg

http://www.consoleclassix.com/info_img/Super_Star_Wars_SNES_ScreenShot2.gif

Superior?

Really??

http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/4909/jklllklur3.jpg

Gameboy material no?

[joshnickerson]

The amount of delusional graphical comparisons on this thread borderlines on a near epic level of absurdity.

I dunno, I could see where one could compare a Gameboy game graphically to a SNES game...

Please don't send Creepy Locke Avatar after me just yet...

Take Super Mario World
http://www.gamethink.net/IMG/jpg/snes_super_mario_world_2.jpg

now, take Super Mario Land 2
http://img2.kult-mag.com/photos/00/00/44/75/ME0000447562_2.jpg

Lack of color aside, the Mario sprite looks VERY similar in both games. Granted, the backgrounds are not as detailed and the sprite takes up more screen space in SML, but it still looks very nice, considering it's in black and white.

I agree the Lynx had better graphics, especially when compared to the green screen of the brick Gameboy. But you've got to admit that some of the Gameboy games looked pretty damn good despite its flaws.

[digitalpress]

But you've got to admit that some of the Gameboy games looked pretty damn good despite its flaws.

I will give you this much and no more: some of the Game Boy games looked pretty damn good despite its flaws IN STILL IMAGES. Once things start moving, we get into the blurry issues that we haven't even started to address because stills alone tell the story in a "comparison" here.

I mean, you'd think the original poster would at least go as far as Game Boy Color, then we could have a serious discussion. You might even win a few battles with Game Boy Pocket, which resolved some of those blurry movement issues.

Oh well. There's always 2008: the year we make intelligent comparisons.

[Greg2600]

Perhaps he has only seen Gameboy games on a Super Gameboy, hence the comment comparing GB to SNES? *_*

[scooterb23]

Oh well. There's always 2008: the year we make intelligent comparisons.

Joe: forever the optimist...

[ROTS MKII]

blurry movement issues.


1. That is like real life where you move everything goes by you in a blurr. Also it is not like we are three years old and can see the early wrinkle marks
on every single body who is older then us. I highly doubt that a twelve year old would care about the blurry movement in a gameboy game. Gameboy was all we ever had in most cases.

2. I never noticed this on the original Gameboy but the Gameboy color yes it is blurry but as for the gameboy Advance no I have not seen blurrs.

3. In later 3d games they used a simular blurr effect all over the place not just the N64.

4. Is anybody really looking at the pretty background when there is like enemy spirte gunning for you and there is a pit ahead???

[digitalpress]

1. That is like real life where you move everything goes by you in a blurr. Also it is not like we are three years old and can see the early wrinkle marks
on every single body who is older then us. I highly doubt that a twelve year old would care about the blurry movement in a gameboy game. Gameboy was all we ever had in most cases.

2. I never noticed this on the original Gameboy but the Gameboy color yes it is blurry but as for the gameboy Advance no I have not seen blurrs.

3. In later 3d games they used a simular blurr effect all over the place not just the N64.

4. Is anybody really looking at the pretty background when there is like enemy spirte gunning for you and there is a pit ahead???

You almost had me there. At first I thought you were *trying* to be funny with #1. Later I realized you ARE funny with the rest of the post. Your impersonation of someone who has never played a video game and at the same time learning the English language is simply classic. It truly puts an exclamation point on this thread. Thanks for the chuckles!

[Rob2600]

The Lynx failed for seven reasons:

1. The main reason: Atari wasn't cool anymore. It was out-of-style. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Nintendo was the cool new brand and Atari was the old, outdated brand.

2. The Lynx was two-and-a-half times the size of the Game Boy.

3. The Lynx launched at almost twice the price of the Game Boy ($190 vs. $110).

4. Six AA batteries lasted about three hours in the Lynx. By comparison, four AA batteries lasted about thirty hours in the Game Boy.

5. First-generation Lynx cartridges were impossible to remove from the Lynx without using pliers or some kind of rubber grip pad. Atari realized this and changed the shape of future Lynx cartridges.

6. The Game Boy had better developers (Capcom, Konami, Sunsoft, etc.) and better licensed characters for its games (TMNT, Gremlins, Ghostbusters, Spider-Man, etc.).

7. Tetris. It was extremely popular at the time and was included with the Game Boy.


That said, I think Atari did a good job marketing the Lynx, at least for the first year or so. I remember seeing plenty of commercials for it on TV in 1989 and 1990. Remember the one where a group of boys went into their school's bathroom, ran ComLynx cables under each stall, and played multiplayer California Games? It was cool, but again, children didn't care about Atari anymore.

My parents bought a Lynx for me in mid 1990. Compared to the Game Boy, I preferred the Lynx's larger, color, back-lit screen, louder sound, scaling abilities, and screen rotation feature. Portability wasn't important to me at the time. Where was I going to bring it, to school? No way. It'd get broken by some hyperactive borderline-retarded nitwit. I just plugged the Lynx in and played it in my bedroom. For me, the Lynx was a new 16-bit home console with a built-in screen. :)

At the time, I would much rather play impressive games on the Lynx like California Games, Electrocop, Klax, Blue Lightning, and Ninja Gaiden, than blurry, grayscale games on the Game Boy like Kwirk the Chilled Tomato, Hyper Lode Runner, Motocross Maniacs, or TMNT: Fall of the Foot Clan.


Of course, now I keep a Game Boy Advance in my bag and play Tetris on the subway train during my commute. :)

[boatofcar]

I've always thought the final word on whether a handheld is successful or not comes down to

1. Size
2. Battery Life

The Game Boy had both of these over the Lynx, GG, TurboExpress, etc. The first time (correct me if I'm wrong here) a handheld came out that could rival the GB in size and battery life was the NGPC, which was too late to the party despite it being an awesome little system.

[ROTS MKII]

Your impersonation of someone who has never played a video game and at the same time learning the English language is simply classic.

Ha ha ha now you are really impressinating somebody who walks around with the helmet of the dark vador space balls rip-off in there own skin color ha ha ha ha nice one yeah I will send a skin color copy of Dick Tracy's watch to go with that helmet ha ha ha. Maybe it will fit right under your helmet ha ha ha. It will be the life-saver model ha ha ha ha ha


The Lynx failed

Nobody knew what a Atari Linx until recently. I myself only fashioned it after hearing about
Ninja Gaiden being released on it.

[Rob2600]

I've always thought the final word on whether a handheld is successful or not comes down to

1. Size
2. Battery Life

Yes, those are two important reasons, which I included in my list above. However, the fact that Atari was no longer cool is really what killed the Lynx.

Imagine if Coleco released a new portable game console this year. Even if it were smaller than a Game Boy Advance SP, more powerful than a PSP, required only one AA battery which lasted 45 hours, and cost only $100, hardly anybody would care and it would flop. Why? Because Coleco is old news, just like Atari was in 1989 and 1990. People want cool, trendy things, not necessarily good things. Why do you think SUVs keep selling?

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I'd like to personally apologize for participating in this thread with logical, reasonable comparisons, therefore contributing to it's continued existence.

Not that there weren't a few other people in here struggling to make a logical point or three...

...but, seriously, the sooner this thread goes away, the sooner our collective I.Q.'s can start re-generating.

[tom]

Yes, those are two important reasons, which I included in my list above. However, the fact that Atari was no longer cool is really what killed the Lynx.

Imagine if Coleco released a new portable game console this year. Even if it were smaller than a Game Boy Advance SP, more powerful than a PSP, required only one AA battery which lasted 45 hours, and cost only $100, hardly anybody would care and it would flop. Why? Because Coleco is old news, just like Atari was in 1989 and 1990. People want cool, trendy things, not necessarily good things. Why do you think SUVs keep selling?

You mean like this? Released in 2007, $49.99:

[scooterb23]

Ha ha ha now you are really impressinating somebody who walks around with the helmet of the dark vador space balls rip-off in there own skin color ha ha ha ha nice one yeah I will send a skin color copy of Dick Tracy's watch to go with that helmet ha ha ha. Maybe it will fit right under your helmet ha ha ha. It will be the life-saver model ha ha ha ha ha



Nobody knew what a Atari Linx until recently. I myself only fashioned it after hearing about
Ninja Gaiden being released on it.


I hereby vote this frontrunner for post of the year 2008. ha ha ha

[FrakAttack]

1. Who needs constant electronic video stimulation when theres Ball-in-a-cup?

2. Mexico's favorite toy for over 340 years.

3. Toss the ball, catch it in the cup, dump it out of the cup, toss it, and catch it in the cup again.

4. The ball is on a string and attached to the cup, so there's no worry if you dont catch the ball in the cup.

5. And clean up is as easy as catching a ball, in a cup.

6. So why spend another day not catching a ball in a cup when you can be catching a Ball-in-a-cup?

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m112/FrakAttack/ballinacup.jpg "Ball-in-a-cup, Ball-in-a-cup, its a ball in a cup! BALL-IN-A-CUP! Ball-in-a-cup!"