Systems that saw the greatest "evolution" over their lives?

[WelcomeToTheNextLevel]

I'm sure most of us know that launch games often don't look and feel as good as their counterparts from later in a system's life cycle. Using a classic example, Super Mario Bros. looked better than anything out in 1985 (except for the RDI Halcyon) but Super Mario Bros. 3 looked far better. As much as the NES matured graphically from 1986 to the early 1990s, I nominate a system that had an even bigger gap from launch to maturity.

The Atari 2600.

The specs of the Atari 2600 aren't all that impressive, in fact they aren't a whole lot better than the Fairchild Channel F. But the 2600 had to compete in four generations of systems (I'm not going to call it a 16 bit contemporary, it was pretty much dead by that time). It was around for the first generation, second generation (of which it exemplifies), the "2.5 generation" (ColecoVision, Atari 5200, Vectrex, etc) and the 8-bit generation as a budget alternative. The system survived the video game crash of 1984 and had a lifespan of over 14 years. The system wasn't discontinued until January 1, 1992. By this time, the SNES was out and the Sega CD was out in Japan! This is the same decade that brought us the Dreamcast!
Launch games on the 2600 show this. These 1977 games were a definite step up from Channel F games of the time, but definitely could have been done on the Channel F with some slick programming.
By the time we got to Space Invaders (beginning of 1980) there was evidence of some major maturation of the system. This was an arcade perfect port of a title that launched after the 2600 itself and the system's first "killer app". By 1982, we have Pitfall, a game that graphically looks and plays like an older version of Super Mario Bros. Later, we got games like Tunnel Runner (which had 3D! with scaling monsters), and the post-video game crash games like Solaris. The advancement was such that a game for the 2600 that looked good by 1977 standards looked like a totally different generation by 1983 standards! I credit the system's very flexible hardware, including the lack of a frame buffer. Good developers were able to do things with the 2600.

Any more games that really pushed the 2600? Any other systems that had such a major leap?

[The 1 2 P]

EDIT: You just meant by games. Well I'm going to go with the Gameboy Advance.

[sfchakan]

Can I cheat and say the PC?

I'm familiar enough with the 2600 library to comment on it.

I think the NES evolved quite well from it's earlier games to what we saw as the 1990s rolled in.

The Genesis and SNES saw big leaps at least graphically in just a handful of years in comparison. From games like Last Battle to Vectorman for the Genesis, and early SNES games to Donkey Kong Country, Star Fox, or even Star Ocean.

The PS1 grew leaps and bounds each year. From really crude looking games to some very nice games.

[Tanooki]

If we're staying away from some form of a home computer on the console side I still think it would have been the NES thanks to their tricky business of all those expansion chips/memory mappers they ended up using. On the low end you used the lowly limits of what the Famicom could do which amounted to like a 40K game and Super Mario Bros. By 1990~ you had the MMC5 chip which gave a MB of memory to play with, 4x the pixel density, added colors to use, and some sound enhancement as well, and if you want to get crazier just look on the Konami flip side with the Japanese version of that or better yet the VRC7 with Lagrange Point. No one would have ever foreseen a jump like that off the same old system over a 5 year period.


And if you fall into the Nintendo line of thinking and legacy stuff of not just Gameboy being that but also the GB Color, you had an even larger evolution. Take something like any of their launch window stuff like Tetris, Super Mario Land, Solar Striker and their random sports titles around 1989-early90. Fast forward to a decade later and you've got Dragon's Lair, the laserdisc version no less running, or a true warcraft RTS clone speech and all with large parties of people moving too in Warlocked.

If you don't fall into that group still, you do have a jump from there to Pokemon. More interestingly enough was how fast people found they could evolve the Gameboy. Again think of the launch games, then look within a couple of years. Gargoyle's Quest, the huge quality jump one to another with Super Mario Land 2, Legend of Zelda Link's Awakening DX looking like a SNES game, Donkey Kong, the various NES sequels and spinoffs, or even odd stuff you wouldn't normally think of like Turrican which is nuts.

I think it's would fair to say Sega figured a few things out too with the long life of the Genesis. Look how poor the early releases are on there, then much later in life they found ways to cheat and double the on screen colors, pull off some faux Mode7 like trickery with visuals, and some games didn't end up sounding like a tinny mess later too.

[celerystalker]

It's a tough question, as most systems I think of have a similar growth pattern. Overall, I think I'll go with the first Playstation. The pre 1997 stuff is so wildly different in scope that it's pretty staggering. Comparing Johnny Bazookatone, Gex, Croc, Raiden, etc. to the likes of Metal Gear Solid, Parasite Eve, Guilty Gear, and Xenogears, there's a pretty big leap in textures, use of polygons, better implementation of sprites, and a broader scope to gameplay.

[Tanooki]

It's a tough question, as most systems I think of have a similar growth pattern. Overall, I think I'll go with the first Playstation. The pre 1997 stuff is so wildly different in scope that it's pretty staggering. Comparing Johnny Bazookatone, Gex, Croc, Raiden, etc. to the likes of Metal Gear Solid, Parasite Eve, Guilty Gear, and Xenogears, there's a pretty big leap in textures, use of polygons, better implementation of sprites, and a broader scope to gameplay.

Good point. One I like to go to immediately when PS1 is in question, Square. FF7 with it's awful blocky non-shaded/non-textured polygons and other very crude visuals slapped over nicely made still images to the point it was jarring, then the overworld was just ugly as sin and bland. Jump to the end with FF9 and there's a huge boost in quality in the models both in polygon count but mainly the amount of fine details on everything including non-character/monster stuff like spells and summons so where the still imagery wasn't so jarring.

[Gamevet]

I'd have to go with the Super Nintendo Entertainment system. You had games that used co-processors like the FX to help push the graphics for games like Star Fox, Street Fighter Alpha 2 and Mega-Man X3. Then you had pre-rendered graphics used in games like Donkey Kong Country.

[Pr3tty F1y]

Neo Geo AES. Hands down.

[TheBenenator]

Maybe not the "greatest" evolution, but by the end of the PS2's lifespan it spat out ridiculously good graphics.

Launch: Unreal Tournament


Launch: Ridge Racer V


2001, Gran Turismo 3


2004, Metal Gear Solid 3 (thanks, Gamevet )


2005, Gran Turismo 4


2010, Silent Hil: Shattered Memories

[Leo_A]

Has to be the Atari 2600. This system was designed to bring home experiences like Pong and Tank, but was pushed to the extremes as the years went on.

[Gamevet]

Metal Gear Solid 3 came out in 2004.

[The Adventurer]

I think the NES had a pretty extreme evolution during its life span, comparing the black box launch titles to its later years, is pretty extreme.

[Tanooki]

I'm still sticking with the NES/Gameboy argument. As he said above, it's extreme if you take a black box game, and then a 1990 or later title. I get the arguments though for the playstation side, but it was more of a natural evolution, the Nintendo stuff went and added parts and crap within the carts to do what the hardware just couldn't alone. Now the 2600, take an early or late one, they really don't improve that much, I just don't see it, at least from a retail side. Now if you factor in what some homebrew people have done, like that SMB1 wannabe, that's insane.

[Pr3tty F1y]

Has to be the Atari 2600. This system was designed to bring home experiences like Pong and Tank, but was pushed to the extremes as the years went on.

I think the A2600 long outlived it's original intentions. I still maintain the Neo Geo AES is the home console with the largest change. Not so much by technical marvel, but by simply art direction and development tools.

In the end A2600 games from the early days still looked a lot like A2600 games in the latter days. Sure they may be some more scrolling, a larger character (at the expense of other detail), but Neo Geo went from bland, late 80's looking 8/16-but graphics to highly detailed, smoothly animated 32-bit graphics (albeit, all in 2D). The A2600 could never dream about catching up to the NES. But the Neo Geo went from 1st gen Sega Genesis/Mega Drive graphics to Sega Saturn+ 2D graphics.

[Leo_A]

I don't see something like Solaris or Pitfall II as looking anything like a 1970's era VCS release.

And homebrewers have only raised the bar, with Space Rocks a prime example. Sure, there's additional hardware onboard the cartridge to make this particular game possible, but it's still running on VCS based hardware and such expansion of system capabilities has been happening since the Atari 2600's own glory days.

So just as I'd consider The Official Frogger for the 2600 or Star Fox for the SuperNes as counting as a game from its respective platform, this excellent Asteroids/Asteroids Deluxe homebrew most deservedly counts as a 2600 game.

[Pr3tty F1y]

I don't see something like Solaris or Pitfall II as looking anything like a 1970's era VCS release.

And homebrewers have only raised the bar, with Space Rocks a prime example. Sure, there's additional hardware onboard the cartridge to make this particular game possible, but it's still running on VCS based hardware and such expansion of system capabilities has been happening since the Atari 2600's own glory days.

So just as I'd consider The Official Frogger for the 2600 or Star Fox for the SuperNes as counting as a game from its respective platform, this excellent Asteroids/Asteroids Deluxe homebrew most deservedly counts as a 2600 game.

Undoubtedly, those are technical marvels.

However, whether it's the late 70's or the late 80's (I believe the last official A2600 game was made in 1989), they still look like A2600 games. They don't even look like A5200 games.

But for the Neo Geo we go from:



To



Quite simply, the development tools to digitize renderings, both from 3D modeling programs and 2D drawings from the early 90s to the late 90s was nothing short of amazing. Thus, no new additional hardware was needed for revolution in visuals. It was simply better art direction based on visuals alone. It very well may be an artifact of the era, but I don't believe the A2600 graphics can match anything similar.

And as far as game play, I can't really say that either the A2600 or Neo Geo really progressed, but the Neo Geo's graphics at the end of it's life are significantly nicer than those at the beginning. The A2600, while better, I don't believe that the change is proportionally larger than what the Neo Geo saw.

[BlastProcessing402]

I'm still sticking with the NES/Gameboy argument. As he said above, it's extreme if you take a black box game, and then a 1990 or later title.

Those were pretty much my thoughts clicking into the topic, well for the NES, but I see how it applies to the GB as well.

[Tanooki]

Those were pretty much my thoughts clicking into the topic, well for the NES, but I see how it applies to the GB as well.

Well the GB with the rest you didn't quote is stunning, especially if you include the GBC as Nintendo themselves do (so I guess that's doctrine?) Tetris to start, and stuff like Dragon's Lair, Warlocked, Metal Gear Solid, on the back end, and right in the middle with the hybrids that 100% work on both you have Link's Awakening DX among others.

If you stay within even the confines of 1990 as you quoted it or even into 1991 look at Tetris/Mario Land vs Gargoyle's Quest, Castlevania II, and Final Fantasy Adventure. HUGE jump in quality in audio, visuals, gameplay elements, and control. I think it's fair to say people rapidly grasped what the system could do and blew it up quickly, then kept inching the bar higher after that point until it hit this plateau which then the GBC exclusive titles blew the roof off of it. Dragon's Lair the laserdisc arcade game more or less intact animated and all, Warlocked basically a 24 stage (2x12) copy of warcraft with special wizards, and Metal Gear Solid while unique handles like the PS1 game just in an overhead view with lots of depth ai and attention to some really fine details.

That's why I put that out there because how meager the systems (nes/gb) were on their own in their first year if that, and then just a year later, and then towards the last few years of their existence, no one would have ever guessed it would go that far. Truth is before them Atari and the others set the bar, and they set it low because the games never advanced much in quality as they didn't think outwardly with better chips and things, it was a lateral move across what the hardware would do alone and people just learned to expect that.

[TheBenenator]

Metal Gear Solid 3 came out in 2004.

! Fixed.

I'm still sticking with the NES/Gameboy argument. As he said above, it's extreme if you take a black box game, and then a 1990 or later title. I get the arguments though for the playstation side, but it was more of a natural evolution, the Nintendo stuff went and added parts and crap within the carts to do what the hardware just couldn't alone. Now the 2600, take an early or late one, they really don't improve that much, I just don't see it, at least from a retail side. Now if you factor in what some homebrew people have done, like that SMB1 wannabe, that's insane.

To me, adding chips and such isn't *quite* as impressive as leveraging the stock hardware better. It's kinda cheating to use performance enhancers like that, lol.

As for the Atari 2600, I mostly agree with you, but have to point out the Double Dragon port, Commando, and the split-screen 2-player Xenophobe.

... then the GBC exclusive titles blew the roof off of it. Dragon's Lair the laserdisc arcade game more or less intact animated and all, Warlocked basically a 24 stage (2x12) copy of warcraft with special wizards, and Metal Gear Solid while unique handles like the PS1 game just in an overhead view with lots of depth ai and attention to some really fine details.

And then there's the absolutely RIDICULOUS Shantae.



Loads of colors, smooth animation, tons of programming tricks to do it all. And not those cheapo short tons, either.

To

Yeah, I think you beat my suggestions/examples right into the hospital. Now I gotta put one of those on my long-term list! :lol:

[Tanooki]

Good points. Shantae is a true example to pull as far as details and colorization goes, Wayforward knew their junk, just like they did Wendy Every Witch Way too on GBC. Also along side, might as well throw down Dragon Warrior III which was another GBC only and like the other two when in a GBA boosted the color on screen even further as well.

Sometimes I wonder about some that just did crazy stuff alone on GBC had they tweaked it to abuse the GBA a bit for added perks, especially Warlocked, Cannon Fodder, and Dragon's Lair.