Forgotten Game Console: ATARI XEGS Complete Game Collection 

@Jason Voorhees LURDO

Yeah, thumbs down for that reason.

This guy talks and talks so much and play nothing. Whatta waste of time.

Coffee Guy I 2nd that....I'm disappointed in John, he really should of added game play.

It was a rebranded computer with no original games... nothing great about it at all. It was Atari decided "We f*cked up with the 7800, so lets f*ck up just a little bit less with its successor."

@@randalgelking7329 Clearly not enough to make people want to go out and buy one.

Yeah, because of where I was positioned when speaking.

Oh, Mario Bros. He had that too. So many Commodore 64 titles in here...

Atari actually did the MARIO BROS. and DONKEY KONG Nintendo games and other arcade companies' game ports for other 8-bit consoles/computers (C-64, ColecoVision, Intellivision, Apple II, DOS, TI-99, BBC Micro, ZX Spectrum) through it's AtariSoft division. The Nintendo games were only for computers and not consoles, so as not to have console competition for the NES...not sure if Nintendo got upset about the XEGS as a console, though.

xnonsuchx That would be an interesting theory... if they weren’t also being sold by Atari for the 2600 and 7800 at the same time (...and 5200 before then). It’s merely a relic of their licensing arrangement from before the NES. Atari would frequently republish games, unchanged, many years later, even if they didn’t develop the older version. 2600 Donkey Kong, for example, was originally Coleco but later copies were published by Atari. I have a pre-XEGS copy of Choplifter for 400/800/XL/XE that wasn’t published or licensed by Atari, unlike the XEGS copy shown in this video. Same game; same platform; same format (cartridge); different packaging/cartridge. They would continue this for years. Remember: Atari = Tengen, so when they’d re-release unlicensed versions of RBI Baseball, Pac-Man, Gauntlet, etc they were kinda doing the same thing. They were milking the licenses they did have for as long as possible across competing platforms. Heck, Atari themselves formed AtariSoft to publish PAC-Man and other games they had exclusive rights to on competing platforms. It was the status quo back then.

xnonsuchx Oh yeah: Atari did not do the port for ColecoVision Donkey Kong. Coleco did. Coleco also did it for Atari 2600. When Atari re-published it later on, they re-published Coleco’s version... unchanged.

Harry Warburg I’ve heard this too, but there are also homebrews for ColecoVision that are a million times better than Coleco’s. I think both were lazy ports. Still their Atari version may have been intentionally more lazy, but Atari could have made a better version when they republished it. Instead, they chose to republish the version that was supposedly made to make them look bad. Me thinks they only cared about the name “”Donkey Kong.”

I think Atari got their license in early 80s and Nintendo could not revoke it. BTW NES was originally planned to be released under Atari brand in the US.

Yes the Mario is unique to the XEGS and am thankful for that. Too bad they did not do this with other versions of games.

the commercial for this console had it compared to an nes . nintendo buried it's competition back then

That's a rare game? Im 99% I have that one in my collection:)

XE was more powerful.

Both are great I got an XE yesterday and had the NES since I was like 4

Atari 800xl is a cheaper alternative. Sill getting harder to find though.

Joe Christie Art Studio thank you!

I have much more than this including many 8-bit machines.

It was and completely overlooked. What made it even more interesting was that they promoted this as a higher price point game console/computer...that offered inferior versions of some games on it compared to the 7800(Food Fight, Desert Falcon, etc). Donkey Kong was better though by a mile.

C64 version is good too. Try Blue Max on A8 some time. The sound effects are great.