mc300baud
Well-known member
i really like Quantum and i'm kicking myself that i didn't snag the "reasonably-priced" one that came up for sale near Portland last year. fortunately a friend of mine did and i've gotten in quite a few games without having to pay a cent. picking up a few pointers from better players definitely helped me to improve my skills and increase my interest in the game.
i think for many who like the game it is a combination of rarity and the play... it's something almost totally different from any other game (Reactor being the closest i can think of,) difficult enough for even good players to be challenged, and yet simple enough that it's not a brainless button masher. my only big gripe is that the movement patterns aren't random which would make it much more difficult to take advantage of some of the best scoring opportunities and up the replay value significantly.
the rarity also makes it nice to have in a collection. sure, i love Tempest (finally got myself one last week,) but i have at least a half-dozen friends and acquaintances that own one. Zoo Keeper? three off the top of my head. but i feel rather lucky to have a friend who has a Quantum i can play in part because i know there aren't a lot of collectors out there that get that chance.
and there seems to always be something special about Atari games, especially the color vectors, a cache that other manufacturers never achieved. the cabs are well designed with the art, graphics and [often unique] controls coming together to create a standard of quality and enjoyment well above the rest of industry. so many rare games were that way because they sucked to play and some will argue that Quantum too falls into this category, but i believe it was just too difficult for the average player at a time when interest in arcades was already slipping. overall i think it's a perfect storm of a rare game with great game play in a nice-looking cab that makes it desirable in a way that few others are.
will everyone agree? certainly not. but then again, i don't really care for Major Havoc and i'd be hard-pressed to waste space in my collection for one despite knowing a lot of collectors that salivate at the mere thought of owning a dedicated cab.
i think for many who like the game it is a combination of rarity and the play... it's something almost totally different from any other game (Reactor being the closest i can think of,) difficult enough for even good players to be challenged, and yet simple enough that it's not a brainless button masher. my only big gripe is that the movement patterns aren't random which would make it much more difficult to take advantage of some of the best scoring opportunities and up the replay value significantly.
the rarity also makes it nice to have in a collection. sure, i love Tempest (finally got myself one last week,) but i have at least a half-dozen friends and acquaintances that own one. Zoo Keeper? three off the top of my head. but i feel rather lucky to have a friend who has a Quantum i can play in part because i know there aren't a lot of collectors out there that get that chance.
and there seems to always be something special about Atari games, especially the color vectors, a cache that other manufacturers never achieved. the cabs are well designed with the art, graphics and [often unique] controls coming together to create a standard of quality and enjoyment well above the rest of industry. so many rare games were that way because they sucked to play and some will argue that Quantum too falls into this category, but i believe it was just too difficult for the average player at a time when interest in arcades was already slipping. overall i think it's a perfect storm of a rare game with great game play in a nice-looking cab that makes it desirable in a way that few others are.
will everyone agree? certainly not. but then again, i don't really care for Major Havoc and i'd be hard-pressed to waste space in my collection for one despite knowing a lot of collectors that salivate at the mere thought of owning a dedicated cab.
