Old Atari.

[Aswald]

While trying to repair the bad picture on the ColecoVision, which only appears when you aren't using the VCS module, I played some Yars Revenge, Haunted House, Super Breakout, among others.

How did a company that gave us such wonderful classics change and become (Halloween Scary Music)...Tramiel Atari?

Here's a question- had Old Atari not gone down in 1984, what do you think gaming would look like today?


(If you reply to this, I'll have less time for the Off-Topics zone)

That's better (evil chuckle) :evil: .

[Ed Oscuro]

Uh...Sega would still be making games with monkeys in them and Nintendo would still be selling cards?

Pretty revolu...oh.

[Aswald]

Actually, I mean with the same people, except with better spending habits. Creativity was never the problem, it was reckless spending and the belief that "video gaming was dead." We'll also assume, for a bit of variety, that Nolan Bushnel would've rejoined Atari.

Very likely, Nintendo would've tried to match the Atari 7800, which was set to be released by Old Atari. Was it possible that Atari 5200 owners would've been disgusted and switched to Nintendo, which would've encouraged Sega to try?

[ubersaurus]

The 7800 would've still suffered the problem of "same ol shit, different platform" that it had to deal with for pretty much half it's lifespan. Warner Atari was too attached to the 2600 to ever let anything else succeed, and Tramiel Atari was never really into video games until the Atari computer line died.

[Aswald]

One of these days, I have to ask someone who really knows about these things just what the Atari 7800 was actually capable of. Tower Toppler seemed to indicate quite a bit; I doubt even the ColecoVision could've handled that.

[J2games]

if Commodore hadn't come along, I think gaming would have had a totally different face. I for one can remember trading my Atari to the attic in place of my shiny new Commodore 64 (this was 1984 kiddies!)

Funny, I leaned to program, but ultimately, we traded games on disk (floppy disk... remember those?) All the Commodore turned out to be was a nicer game system (and no problems, like with the 5200 joysticks!)

I can remember reading it was not only the spending habits at Atari, but the reckless management style that want along with it. Although for a pioneer, being left of center is common (look at the start of Apple Computers!) I think it aided in the ultimate downfall. Seems that politics were scary by todays standards and the management was hot under the collar (maybe because things took a nose dive.) Popularity, by the authors summation, went a long way in who developed their game idea and who didn't. Maybe leaving those games that could have saved Atari, from being made.

I can remember in 1987, Atari stock was at $5 a share... and this company once accounted for better than HALF of their parent company's revenues.

Competition eventually makes companies better or shows us who the weak link is. Had Tramiel maybe had more flexibility in his vision or planning, things might have been different (or the same.)

Besides the Atari line of computers, weren't they originally involved with Amiga? Or am I confusing someing?

[Duncan]

Besides the Atari line of computers, weren't they originally involved with Amiga? Or am I confusing someing?

The Amiga concept was briefly offered to Atari by the original developers, before Commodore put up more money and sealed the deal. At least that's the way I've heard it...I'm sure someone else has more, like, detail and stuff. :D

[jjessop]

Atari funded Amiga from it's onset and was to release a game only (first year only) version of the console without keyboard. The project was code named "Micky" and all the modules were code named for Disney charecters. The terms of the agreement with Amiga required Atari to take delivery of final Silicon (IC's) by 9/1/84 or Amiga would default the agreement. Due to stiff penalties Atari would have basically absorbed Amiga at that point. When the Tramiels took over on 6/1/84 they had ZERO interest in the Amiga and the ST design was virtually complete on paper. They abandoned the Amiga deal and then cried foul when they realized they may have burned themselves.

As a person who spent 8 years at the "old" Atari and now 8 years at a "modern" console company I can honestly say I'll take the modern days. I'll always have a soft spot for Atari but I'm certain glad those days are behind me.

JJ

[YoshiM]

Is that kinda like comparing New Coke to Old Coke?

Anyway, using Aswald's scenario I think the Atari might not have fallen but it would become a mere shadow of itself provided it kept on the same established course sans ET and the like. The 5200 and 7800, like 'em or hate 'em, still had the same titles that the 2600 had only prettier, better sounding and probably more boards. There wasn't much to really differentiate between the consoles. Plus at the time there were other competing consoles and so many games that there might still have been a crash.

Either way this alternate universe Atari might have had a better chance of survival as they didn't fall into the financial pitfalls that happened in our universe. Any crash might have just been seen as a "shake out" rather than "the death of a fad" as one of the originators still being in the game would have been a positive thing. However, Nintendo would still probably release the NES in the US and Sega would follow suit with the SMS (only the former might have been a top loader, as retailers wouldn't have been so negative toward "video games"). At this point, it'd be hard to say what could happen. Would Atari improve the 7800 or would it create a new system to truely compete with the NES and SMS? If we used the actual Atari release list for the 7800/2600, I'd think NES and SMS would still have been beaten the Atari consoles.

[ubersaurus]

One of these days, I have to ask someone who really knows about these things just what the Atari 7800 was actually capable of. Tower Toppler seemed to indicate quite a bit; I doubt even the ColecoVision could've handled that.


The 7800 is damn good at manipulating alot of sprites, has several resolution modes(only 2 of which are really useful, though), and in general, is good with games that don't involve much side scrolling and many sprites. Games that work better with tiles, like a platformer, the 7800 is less suited for.

I'm running on memory here, so I may not be totally accurate.

[Aswald]

My fault- I should have been more specific.


By "old Atari," I literally meant old Atari.

"Old Atari" had 4 basic branches: Computers, 2600, 5200, and ARCADE GAMES DIVISION. That last one is especially important.

Since, before the breakup and collapse of 1984 Atari was going to abandon the poor 5200 and replace it with the 7800, we will assume that Atari AFTER 1984 would have been: Computers, 2600, 7800, AND its arcade division. So the company that put out Gauntlet, Rolling Thunder, KLAX, Rampart, and such, would have been the same company that handled the 7800. This was not the case in actual life.

[SoulBlazer]

And that's one of the main reasons Atari fell apart. Four branches was just too MUCH for that company to do. They milked the 2600 way past it's prime and ignored the 5200 and 7800. If, in 1983, managament had stopped support of the 2600, threw full support into the 5200 and worked on getting the 7800 out next year with good games, kept going with the computer and arcade lines, and released a adapater so people could play 2600 games on their 5200/7800/maybe computer systems (and the joysticks as well), they would be alive and well today.

But hindsight is 20/20, is'nt it? ;)

[Graham Mitchell]

One of these days, I have to ask someone who really knows about these things just what the Atari 7800 was actually capable of. Tower Toppler seemed to indicate quite a bit; I doubt even the ColecoVision could've handled that.


The 7800 is damn good at manipulating alot of sprites, has several resolution modes(only 2 of which are really useful, though), and in general, is good with games that don't involve much side scrolling and many sprites. Games that work better with tiles, like a platformer, the 7800 is less suited for.

I'm running on memory here, so I may not be totally accurate.

I just bought a 7800, and that's more or less true. Because of this, I've been disappointed with some of the games I've bought. Karateka runs in a series of "scenes" instead of having the game run in a smooth, cinematic progression like thet Famicom version; probably to avoid scrolling issues.

Ballblazer, meanwhile, is incredible. Easily comparable, if not superior, to NES games of the time. This is probably due to one fact: 7800 carts can contain extra sound chips and microprocessors (I think it's only got 2 built-in sound channels...all the extras have to be in the carts). As such, maybe there's a hell of a lot of potential for that machine (if the technological limitations are are more or less easy to bypass). But that's all just my theory.

[oesiii]

The 7800 still has a lot of potential.

Check it out :D

http://www.atariage.com/forums/download.php?id=31398


http://www.atariage.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=724931
.

[kjmontana]

In the same vein: what if Nintendo hadn't cancelled the Sony CD add-on for the SNES? No Playstation=what? Sega Saturn would've ruled? N64=CD based? Final Fantasy VII on N64 CD-Rom system? I tend to think Sony would've used the experience to create their own system, eventually. But how different would gaming be today? Would Nintendo still hold the top spot instead of third? Yabba dabba do!

[Graham Mitchell]

The 7800 still has a lot of potential.

Check it out :D

http://www.atariage.com/forums/download.php?id=31398


http://www.atariage.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=724931
.

So, can you explain to me what this "CC2" exactly is that they're talking about? I can't seem to figure it out.

[ubersaurus]

CC2=Cuttle Cart 2. Basically it's a 7800 cart that came out last year or something, that lets you save game roms onto it, and then load them up at your leisure. Kind of like a programmable multicart, but without the DIP switches. It's also one of the only tools to check out how your 7800 games look on, well a 7800.

And Beef Drop 7800 looks totally badass :-P

[Ze_ro]

Ugh, not more of these "What if?" questions... Pretty much everything that has happened in video game history has happened for reasons that seemed good at the time, even if they ended up leading to a negative outcome. It was all fate. Also, if you change one thing, everything else changes too... if Atari hadn't changed hands, then other companies would have done stuff differently as well, and the entire industry would be different... No one can predict what would have happened because there are simply way too many possibilities.

I guess what we need is to find some way of contacting an alternate timeline where Bushnell is still in charge of Atari, where he also agreed to market the NES in North America, and where Sega didn't give up on the Dreamcast... then we can finally get people to stop asking these answerless questions :P

--Zero

[Arcade Antics]

My fault- I should have been more specific.


By "old Atari," I literally meant old Atari.

"Old Atari" had 4 basic branches: Computers, 2600, 5200, and ARCADE GAMES DIVISION. That last one is especially important.

Since, before the breakup and collapse of 1984 Atari was going to abandon the poor 5200 and replace it with the 7800, we will assume that Atari AFTER 1984 would have been: Computers, 2600, 7800, AND its arcade division. So the company that put out Gauntlet, Rolling Thunder, KLAX, Rampart, and such, would have been the same company that handled the 7800. This was not the case in actual life.

It wouldn't have been the case no matter what.

Atari Coin was always a separate company from Atari Home.

[Aswald]

Ugh, not more of these "What if?" questions... Pretty much everything that has happened in video game history has happened for reasons that seemed good at the time, even if they ended up leading to a negative outcome. It was all fate. Also, if you change one thing, everything else changes too... if Atari hadn't changed hands, then other companies would have done stuff differently as well, and the entire industry would be different... No one can predict what would have happened because there are simply way too many possibilities.

I guess what we need is to find some way of contacting an alternate timeline where Bushnell is still in charge of Atari, where he also agreed to market the NES in North America, and where Sega didn't give up on the Dreamcast... then we can finally get people to stop asking these answerless questions :P

--Zero

So...I guess you'd rather I spent more time posting in the "Off Topics" section? (Waits while...)

That's better, Ze_ro.

[Aswald]

My fault- I should have been more specific.


By "old Atari," I literally meant old Atari.

"Old Atari" had 4 basic branches: Computers, 2600, 5200, and ARCADE GAMES DIVISION. That last one is especially important.

Since, before the breakup and collapse of 1984 Atari was going to abandon the poor 5200 and replace it with the 7800, we will assume that Atari AFTER 1984 would have been: Computers, 2600, 7800, AND its arcade division. So the company that put out Gauntlet, Rolling Thunder, KLAX, Rampart, and such, would have been the same company that handled the 7800. This was not the case in actual life.

It wouldn't have been the case no matter what.

Atari Coin was always a separate company from Atari Home.

Not quite. This is why the 2600 and 5200 could be counted on to have Atari arcade games, while the 7800 did not. And since the ColecoVision outsold the 5200, logic would dictate that Atari arcade games would have appeared on the CV. They were 2 different parts of the same company; it was nothing like the Tramiel era.


Oddly enough, that Burgertime game for the 7800 doesn't really look much better than the CV version. I am assuming that it does not have the flicker, though.