XE was a faliure, I thought it should have been marketed better + joypad!

[Goochman]

Honestly - 2 things really spelled Doom for Atari:

 

1. Seperating the Arcade divison from the Computer/Home System division. Atari could no longer create the 'hits' that would be exclusives on its platform - Nintendo and Sega produced hit titles that Atari couldnt sell

 

2. Turning down Nintendos offer to repackage the NES an Atari unit - hence the new block buster games wouldnt come out on an Atari platform.

 

The 7800 had some interesting titles - but the average gamer didnt hear about many of them and Atari couldnt afford to pay big licensing fees for every one they wanted.

 

The computer market was headed exactly to where it landed. Atari nor Commodore was going to change the PC rush.

[ApolloBoy]

The Atari XE Games System was a faliure, so I think that if it was marketed better and given a joypad instead of that stupid joystick (I loved it on the 2600 when I was playing pacman, but Flight Simulater 2 on the XE is a diffrent matter intirely. Lol!) I think it would have been a sucsess, though I still think it would have been pretty pathetic compared to the Mega Drive and SNES, I think if Atari made a true 16 bit system (Anything, even a ST gs!) the Jag would have been a lot less of a faliure when stacked against the Saturn, PS and N64, infact Atari may have even had enough money to made the Jag 2. Unfourtently this never happened, anyway let me know what you think!

joypad or game pads suck!

:roll: joypad and nes type controllers do suck. joysticks are sooo much better.

What makes you say that?

[mos6507]

Of course a 16K XEGS that was expandable *might* have made a difference in getting it out at a reasonable price in 1982, a la the Atari 5200, but then you would have had future compatibility issues that probably couldn't be addressed, particularly since the 64K C-64 and 48k+ Apple II's would become standards for 8-bit computer software (at least in the US).

 

The Atari 400 and 600XL were 16K. There is no reason it couldn't have been done. In fact by 1982 I think they probably could have just cost-reduced the 400 and sold that as a game machine, or ship a 600XL w/membrane keyboard. I mean, even the O^2 had a membrane keyboard. That's not very expensive. They really didn't work that hard to cost-reduce the 5200. The console was physically huge and they had to R&D brand new controllers (that sucked).

[mos6507]

IMHO, the ST failed in part because it alienated the existing Atari userbase by not being an upgrade across all areas. A8 users would be upgrading to 16-bit computing, but sacrificing a sound voice and having a more restricted color palette, and no hardware sprites. The Amiga was the true heir apparent but required Atari users to cross over into enemy territory to support. 16-bit computing was also very expensive in the mid 80s. Even the ST at its cheaper pricepoint was a big leap up in price vs. the A8 or C=64. Many A8ers like myself just stuck with the A8 and became pissed off at Tramiel Atari's neglect. So Tramiel Atari was pretty bad at bringing in new users to the fold. They won over some musicians with the MIDI, and got some europeans interested in the ST, but that was about it.

[Bill Loguidice]

The Atari 400 and 600XL were 16K. There is no reason it couldn't have been done. In fact by 1982 I think they probably could have just cost-reduced the 400 and sold that as a game machine, or ship a 600XL w/membrane keyboard. I mean, even the O^2 had a membrane keyboard. That's not very expensive. They really didn't work that hard to cost-reduce the 5200. The console was physically huge and they had to R&D brand new controllers (that sucked).

 

 

The Atari 5200 *was* an Atari 400 for all intents and purposes. My explanation was not targeted at what would have been possible or practical to make at the time - certainly Atari could have repackaged a straight 400 in an XEGS form factor in 1982 - my explanation was directed more to what would have gotten Atari through 1984 - 86 and beyond better than the Atari 5200/7800/XEGS triumverate. To my thinking it would have had to have been a minimum 48K spec machine with a real keyboard a la the XEGS. This would have taken care of *both* the console and computer sides with sufficient memory to run the vast majority of competing software.

[mos6507]

What makes you say that?

 

I don't like joypads because the dexterity of my left thumb is nowhere near that of my right hand. The only reason joypads make sense is when you have a lot of buttons to mash, which isn't the case with the A8.

[frenchman]

The Atari XE Games System was a faliure, so I think that if it was marketed better and given a joypad instead of that stupid joystick (I loved it on the 2600 when I was playing pacman, but Flight Simulater 2 on the XE is a diffrent matter intirely. Lol!) I think it would have been a sucsess, though I still think it would have been pretty pathetic compared to the Mega Drive and SNES, I think if Atari made a true 16 bit system (Anything, even a ST gs!) the Jag would have been a lot less of a faliure when stacked against the Saturn, PS and N64, infact Atari may have even had enough money to made the Jag 2. Unfourtently this never happened, anyway let me know what you think!

joypad or game pads suck!

:roll: joypad and nes type controllers do suck. joysticks are sooo much better.

What makes you say that?

 

 

Because pad are the wrong way around: joystick: fire = left, control (movement) = right (right) hand.....pad: control (movement) left (wrong) hand, fire with right hand. And Nintendo can't even get the lettering the right way around. It might work for Japan, but it's just wrong for western premesis.

Edited May 8, 2009 by frenchman

[mos6507]

The Atari 5200 *was* an Atari 400 for all intents and purposes.

 

No it wasn't. It forced developers to write special versions of their games for it. And 5200 users could not use the existing base of software. This makes all the difference in the world. By 1982 the A8 was fast becoming an also-ran. Atari had to leverage the existing userbase and software library as much as possible, not start over again with deliberate incompatibility.

 

what would have gotten Atari through 1984 - 86 and beyond better than the Atari 5200/7800/XEGS triumverate.

 

The whole reason the 5200 came out was that Atari did not have a next gen machine for the 2600 because Jay Miner and company left. The 5200 was Plan B because Atari's other attempts at a next gen 2600 failed in the lab. Clearly by the mid 80s a 16-bit machine was going to be necessary, i.e. the Amiga. Stratifying the console market from the computer market at Atari was a fundamental mistake. They shouldn't have been afraid to market the Atari 400/800 as both computers and game consoles, and each new machine they created should have served both segments whether it had a dedicated "console" variant or not.

 

Despite the fact the NES dominated the mid 80s, a more advanced 16-bit machine could have done so, at least as a Neo Geo style niche.

Edited May 8, 2009 by mos6507

[Bill Loguidice]

Because pad are the wrong way around: joystick: fire = left, control (movement) = right (right) hand.....pad: control (movemant) left (wrong) hand, fire with right hand. And Nintendo can't even get the lettering the right way around. It might work for Japan, but it's just wrong for western premesis.

 

 

It's something to adapt to like any other. I remember when playing Donkey Kong in the arcade and similar left-handed joystick games, I had extreme trouble, just like I had trouble adapting when gamepads became the norm in the mid-to-late 80s. This was of course because like many Westerners, I was raised on the Atari joystick format. Over time, I did adapt and can now freely move between pretty much any game controller, just like I can move between pretty much any keyboard and pointing device. I'll say that one is not necessarily better than the other, and each has their strengths for certain types of games. Adapting is the best way all around, this way you never have to worry about what you're using and can enjoy the uniqueness of each situation and platform.

[sl0re]

Actually, why they did the XEGS was to try and get interest in 8-bit computers in mass merchants that had pretty much abandoned computers for consoles.

 

Actually...

 

Just because the marketing guy said it was his goal, did they, actually, follow through and assign some people to burn up the phones and open new channels for it? Or did they just push them down their existing channel. Or was it some of both (tried to get new vendors for the Atari but failed)? What I've read in Atari histories is they just went down the existing channel. So the question becomes, how hard did they try to market it in new ways (intentions of this guy aside)?

[Bill Loguidice]

Actually...

 

Just because the marketing guy said it was his goal, did they, actually, follow through and assign some people to burn up the phones and open new channels for it? Or did they just push them down their existing channel. Or was it some of both (tried to get new vendors for the Atari but failed)? What I've read in Atari histories is they just went down the existing channel. So the question becomes, how hard did they try to market it in new ways (intentions of this guy aside)?

 

I remember very distinctly seeing the XEGS being sold in Kay Bee Toy Stores here in the US, specifically in New Jersey. Kay Bee did tend to carry crapware/budgetware for 8-bit computers anyway, though (I remember Apple II, C-64 and Atari 8-bit stuff specifically, but there might have been others).

[sl0re]

Actually...

 

Just because the marketing guy said it was his goal, did they, actually, follow through and assign some people to burn up the phones and open new channels for it? Or did they just push them down their existing channel. Or was it some of both (tried to get new vendors for the Atari but failed)? What I've read in Atari histories is they just went down the existing channel. So the question becomes, how hard did they try to market it in new ways (intentions of this guy aside)?

 

I remember very distinctly seeing the XEGS being sold in Kay Bee Toy Stores here in the US, specifically in New Jersey. Kay Bee did tend to carry crapware/budgetware for 8-bit computers anyway, though (I remember Apple II, C-64 and Atari 8-bit stuff specifically, but there might have been others).

 

That's one example... but do you have an opinion on the general trend? Were they able to get into toy / video game stores? The followup question being: did they really try hard to do so?

[ApolloBoy]

The Atari XE Games System was a faliure, so I think that if it was marketed better and given a joypad instead of that stupid joystick (I loved it on the 2600 when I was playing pacman, but Flight Simulater 2 on the XE is a diffrent matter intirely. Lol!) I think it would have been a sucsess, though I still think it would have been pretty pathetic compared to the Mega Drive and SNES, I think if Atari made a true 16 bit system (Anything, even a ST gs!) the Jag would have been a lot less of a faliure when stacked against the Saturn, PS and N64, infact Atari may have even had enough money to made the Jag 2. Unfourtently this never happened, anyway let me know what you think!

joypad or game pads suck!

:roll: joypad and nes type controllers do suck. joysticks are sooo much better.

What makes you say that?

 

 

Because pad are the wrong way around: joystick: fire = left, control (movement) = right (right) hand.....pad: control (movement) left (wrong) hand, fire with right hand. And Nintendo can't even get the lettering the right way around. It might work for Japan, but it's just wrong for western premesis.

I'm right handed and I have no problem with that.

[Thorsten Günther]

The XEGS succeeded in its mission which was to extend the last days of the 8-bit a little bit longer. Same deal with the 2600 Jr. It was never going to be a true contender. Think of it like the cost-reduced PS2s that are still lingering in the stores.

 

The only way the XEGS would have been a contender is had it been released instead of the 5200 much earlier. The 8-bit's lackluster sales are largely attributable to the 5200/8-bit schism.

Full ACK, the XEGS (perhaps in a sleeker case and with the 400's membrane keyboard for cost reasons) should have been published as the 5200.

 

 

Thorsten

[atarian63]

The Atari XE Games System was a faliure, so I think that if it was marketed better and given a joypad instead of that stupid joystick (I loved it on the 2600 when I was playing pacman, but Flight Simulater 2 on the XE is a diffrent matter intirely. Lol!) I think it would have been a sucsess, though I still think it would have been pretty pathetic compared to the Mega Drive and SNES, I think if Atari made a true 16 bit system (Anything, even a ST gs!) the Jag would have been a lot less of a faliure when stacked against the Saturn, PS and N64, infact Atari may have even had enough money to made the Jag 2. Unfourtently this never happened, anyway let me know what you think!

joypad or game pads suck!

:roll: joypad and nes type controllers do suck. joysticks are sooo much better.

What makes you say that?

I guess most of the games I play are the older arcade games. Pac man, dig dug etc. Just don't seem to work right without a joystick. I even play some genesis games with the atari stick. Probably a generational thing.

Kinda like on my DS, I see an arcade collection, but it's but it's hard to control.

[TwiliteZoner]

There is a huge difference in the people that would buy a computer vs people that would buy a video game system. Even more so in the 80s as compared to today. When you factor that in with a lack of 3rd party support it's a recipe for disaster.

 

Personally, I think they should have housed the XEGS in a mini ST style case with a built in floppy drive like the Apple IIc. I am sure Jack would have been able to keep the price point low enough to be a viable option for people. That way it would have been able to play the thousands of games available right out of the box.

 

 

Jack was not some manufacturing genius. You need to separate the capabilities of Jack Tramiel from the capabilities of Commodore. Commodore was able to achieve the economies of scale they did in such an aggressive and sweeping manner because they controlled multiple stages of the manufacturing process/bill of goods. That was Commodore's advantage over other companies and the reason why the C-64 was able to get so cheap so fast and box out the competition. It seems to me that the failure of Tramiel with Atari was trying to apply the same techniques he used at Commodore at Atari, without the same type of manufacturing advantage. It just didn't work. Of course, eventually with the shift beyond 8-bit computing, Commodore lost that advantage themselves.

 

Bill, I understand (C= owning MOS was a huge benefit) what you are saying, but remember, if Warner had come out with the 520ST I can guarantee you that it would not have sold for $499. That is the "Jack" factor that I was referring to.

[AEX]

IMHO, the ST failed in part because it alienated the existing Atari userbase by not being an upgrade across all areas. A8 users would be upgrading to 16-bit computing, but sacrificing a sound voice and having a more restricted color palette, and no hardware sprites. The Amiga was the true heir apparent but required Atari users to cross over into enemy territory to support. 16-bit computing was also very expensive in the mid 80s. Even the ST at its cheaper pricepoint was a big leap up in price vs. the A8 or C=64. Many A8ers like myself just stuck with the A8 and became pissed off at Tramiel Atari's neglect. So Tramiel Atari was pretty bad at bringing in new users to the fold. They won over some musicians with the MIDI, and got some europeans interested in the ST, but that was about it.

 

The ST Failed??? The ST saved the company in the long run, with sales of 8-Bit systems and old Warner inventory supplying cash to keep the company afloat early on. You can't build a new computer just for your current user base, and the ST wasn't just about games (sound, sprites etc). The ST was a new machine and the 8-Bit line continued to be supported right up to 1991, you wouldn't have had any A8 support UNLESS the ST was a success for the company.

 

Karl

[Goochman]

One other tidbit that hurt the ST series was the lack of inventory. Atari couldnt produce enough to supply the US and EMEA markets so the majority of product went to Germany. I know US dealers that could sell product but couldnt get any to sell - this went on for over a year.

[mcjakeqcool]

Wow! I've only been away about a day or two, and I've already got 42 comments! It is great to see this board thriving! I've gotta say though, it's a real shame about the fall of Atari, I mean they had some neat ideas, I mean they made a fifth gen console long before Nintendo, and a cd add on for there fifth gen console long before Nintendo. Anyhow, about the joystick vs joypad auguement, for simpleistic games like pacman on the 2600, I perfer a joystick, however for more advanced games like Flight Simulater 2 on the Atari XE I perfer the Joypad, however I think even after the game crash of '83, if Atari had some better management, they could have game back on top, Super Pacman and a 7800 port of Defender 2 rather then a NES one certainly would have helped, also in every other senario except with Atari, the next gen console is the priorty, however, in the late 80s, Atari pushed the 2600 even more then they did the 7800! However, I could go on all day, but the fact of the matter is, if Atari had'ent lost there market share in the late 80s, the Jaguar would have done a hell of a lot better, by '93, Atari was just a distant memory in terms of market share. A shame really, cos I love Atari!

[atariksi]

They should have spent the research time on making ST better or more compatible with 8-bit systems than making Atari 7800 or XEGS case. Probably could have made a plug-in board in ST that memory maps the 6502 64K machine into a memory area in the 68000 memory space. Amiga 2000 had the bridgeboard to give PC hardware emulation capability to Amiga. Since market was going 16-bit, mine as well offer a better 16-bit machine w/8-bit capability. 80x86 machines have always offered 8-bit mode even up till now.

 

That was already attempted with the Apple IIgs and didn't provide a particular advantage to Apple, though that platform's failure is as much about Apple wanting the Macintosh line to succeed as it was about the IIgs not catching on. I believe history shows while in the short term it's sometimes painful, ultimately the best bet is to make a clean break from backwards compatibility to be able to optimize the new technology. Besides, every new addition adds to the cost and the ST was a "high end" cost leader for several years. It wasn't the lack of 8-bit compatibility that ultimately doomed the ST.

 

It didn't provide advantage to Apple because of other factors like price and IIGS late arrival after the Mac and some incompatibility issues. Compatibility is a major factor why you still have 8-bit C64 and Atari users. On the PC, you keep upgrading with backward compatibility and you don't have to worry about maintaining your 386 (mostly) once you have a 486. In msg #21 you are worried about compatibility and here you reply claiming it's worth the pain to start fresh. It's not worth the pain. People are after happiness-- they don't want to deal with the pain factor (unless forced into it). And this pain doesn't go away if ST has no sprites, inferior shading, etc. History has shown compatibility makes people survive longer. PC survived-- all other companies died or had to turn to PC platform.

[atariksi]

IMHO, the ST failed in part because it alienated the existing Atari userbase by not being an upgrade across all areas. A8 users would be upgrading to 16-bit computing, but sacrificing a sound voice and having a more restricted color palette, and no hardware sprites. The Amiga was the true heir apparent but required Atari users to cross over into enemy territory to support. 16-bit computing was also very expensive in the mid 80s. Even the ST at its cheaper pricepoint was a big leap up in price vs. the A8 or C=64. Many A8ers like myself just stuck with the A8 and became pissed off at Tramiel Atari's neglect. So Tramiel Atari was pretty bad at bringing in new users to the fold. They won over some musicians with the MIDI, and got some europeans interested in the ST, but that was about it.

 

The ST Failed??? The ST saved the company in the long run, with sales of 8-Bit systems and old Warner inventory supplying cash to keep the company afloat early on. You can't build a new computer just for your current user base, and the ST wasn't just about games (sound, sprites etc). The ST was a new machine and the 8-Bit line continued to be supported right up to 1991, you wouldn't have had any A8 support UNLESS the ST was a success for the company.

 

Karl

 

And you would have more A8 support if they made the ST backward compatible (or at least some models with A8 compatibility). They went for the cheaper alternative-- no RF (initially), no blitter, no backward compatibility. People were willing to try different machines back then since market wasn't established to some dominant system, but PC won since it maintained it's userbase while adding newer and newer features to get newer users.

[Curt Vendel]

The XEGS was actually quite a success, it kept the line alive a few extra years and Atari approached publishers with titles no longer selling and injected new life into them in the form of cartridges.

 

I wish they had have wasted all the effort on the keyboard add-on and just made the system into a console only system and could've released one last XE system design using the Mega ST case and their new XE keyboard system (with the extra buttons added back and not in pastel colors) and made a Mega XE system... Everyone wanted an Atari 8bit with detachable keyboard and they would've truly had been the best XE system ever.

 

 

 

Curt

[DracIsBack]

The XEGS was actually quite a success, it kept the line alive a few extra years and Atari approached publishers with titles no longer selling and injected new life into them in the form of cartridges.

 

Do you know how many units it moved? I seem to remember reading that it completely tanked against the NES and SMS ... and that it came in dead last against the 2600 jr and 7800 as well. I remember when Atarian surveyed their customers, the XEGS was owned by the least amount of customers

 

http://www.atariage.com/magazines/magazine...;CurrentPage=23

 

I remember them being really hard to find growing up - even compared to the other Atari machines. In Ottawa Canada, I remember Zellers carrying them for a single Christmas, then dropping them. Toy City also had them briefly and I don't remember them at Toys R. Us Canada at all.

 

I ended up getting mine at a raffle.

[FastRobPlus]

The XEGS was actually quite a success, it kept the line alive a few extra years and Atari approached publishers with titles no longer selling and injected new life into them in the form of cartridges.

 

Do you know how many units it moved? I seem to remember reading that it completely tanked against the NES and SMS ... and that it came in dead last against the 2600 jr and 7800 as well. I remember when Atarian surveyed their customers, the XEGS was owned by the least amount of customers

 

http://www.atariage.com/magazines/magazine...;CurrentPage=23

 

I remember them being really hard to find growing up - even compared to the other Atari machines. In Ottawa Canada, I remember Zellers carrying them for a single Christmas, then dropping them. Toy City also had them briefly and I don't remember them at Toys R. Us Canada at all.

 

I ended up getting mine at a raffle.

 

I got one at Toys R Us. Real cheap too but I don't remember the exact price.

[mcjakeqcool]

I think Atari should have made a ST games system, like they did with the XE, that way they would have at least been a contendor for the 16 bit wars, why did Atari mess up the worst, anyhow? I mean Sega eventully stoped making consoles, but it was no where near is quickly, or as severely as Atari's exit. I can never understand how Atari went downhill so badly after the 2600, was it the 5200, or the 7800 or the XE or all 3?