How much of a difference the 7800 would have if the XEGS didn't exist?

[8th lutz]

I think there would be a difference in hardware sales. I think the Atari7800 might have 10 to 15 more Atari 7800 titles released in North America.

 

I am guessing that the Atari 7800 had a chance to sale 4 to 4.5 Million Atari 7800's in the United States if the XEGS didn't exist instead the 3,772,751 7800 units that were sold from 1986 to 1990 in North America.

 

I am saying for the 3 reasons:

1.) The Atari 7800 would have a bigger game library if the XEGS didn't exist.

2.) The 7800 would have a bigger budget for advertising or releasing more games.

3.) There would be a smaller confusion for the customer for what Atari system to buy.

 

I am going by the fact Atari spent time on developing games and developing games on the XEGS.

 

The money spent on the XEGS could be used on the Atari 7800 instead. Cause in point would be some the XEGS games would be Atari 7800 games instead like Airball, Archon, Battlezone, Crime Buster, Bug Hunt, Hardball, Lode Runner, and Thunderfox for an example.

 

I think the Atari 7800 could have Moon Patrol, Crystal Castles, and Elevator Action game releases back in the day also depending on the money Atari spent on the XEGS.

Edited May 26, 2009 by 8th lutz

[DracIsBack]

I think the benefit of not having the XEGS as a diversion is that Atari may have reacted a bit quicker to making more competitive titles a bit earlier than they did.

[Atarifever]

I said little effect, and maybe 5-9 games (I'm betting on the 5). Even if the 7800 got 20 more games, it's still not playing Shinobi, Phantasy Star, and After Burner. And that's what is being offered by the runner up in the race! The five games it gets might be Rampart, Sirius, Plutos, Chuck Norris, and a Midnight Mutants sequel or something, and that's still not Super Mario Bros or R-Type. So I can't see games doing that much for the 7800 back then.

 

As for it freeing up a lot of resources. I don't think so. The XEGS I believe was ready to go when Tramiel got Atari, and even if it wasn't, it's still just an 8-bit. Many of the XEGS games are just the 8-bit games (which is exactly how it was advertised). So it isn't like a lot of programming or R&D resources went into the XEGS. At most it took a third of the "console" advertising resources I'd think, and maybe a tiny bit of programming that wouldn't have happened for the 8-bits anyway. So maybe the 7800 gets another couple magazine ads and a tiny bit more TV time, and a small handful of games that don't move any extra systems to anyone who wouldn't be attracted by the ads or the name anyway.

 

The main impact it may have had would be to focus the gaming division a little better (so they knew what was their real race horse alongside their legacy system) and to make things a little clearer to consumers. I mean consumers (mostly parents) had to know that the 2600 Jr. plays the same games as the 2600 and VCS from before. It does not play the same games as the old, now abandoned 5200, which they may have bought an adaptor for a few years ago to let it play 2600 games. That old Sears system you might find marked down somewhere, or that Gemini also play 2600 games. Oh, and your neighbours old Coleco also might play 2600 games. These 2600 games often have new red boxes, but might play the same games you already bought once but won't recognize (see Venture for example). Now, the 7800 ALSO plays those 2600 games, but it also plays 7800 games (which none of the previous systems play). However, some of those 7800 games and 2600 games have the same names anbd artwork, but arean't exactly the same game. Also, the XEGS has many of the same named games, and its own, and is also a computer. It will play other Atari computer games from the 800 series. It will not play 2600 games, although it has the same controller. It will not play 7800 games, although it has the same gun.

 

WHEEEE!

[Almost Rice]

There should be a 0 for choices for more games. XEGS was just made to sell existing 8bit inventory. It would not have diverted much if any resources from software development. The XE games were mostly repackaged carts of disk games. It probably made more money available for Atari because it would help move old inventory and development would cost have been mostly cosmetic. Therefore, it would have been relatively cheap.

[DracIsBack]

Many of the XEGS games are just the 8-bit games (which is exactly how it was advertised). So it isn't like a lot of programming or R&D resources went into the XEGS.

 

True, though there was still some R&D put into game development, additional costs for licensing titles, additional $$$ spent on manufacturing, distribution, retail etc.

 

At most it took a third of the "console" advertising resources I'd think, and maybe a tiny bit of programming that wouldn't have happened for the 8-bits anyway. So maybe the 7800 gets another couple magazine ads and a tiny bit more TV time, and a small handful of games that don't move any extra systems to anyone who wouldn't be attracted by the ads or the name anyway.

 

Add in: additional shelf space; additional retail advertising (ie. flyers etc). More effort in marketing plans (without the XE as a distraction) and potentially faster reaction to the market.

 

My theory (for right or wrong) is that if Atari hadn't been distracted with launching the XEGS in 1987 and 1988, they might have had the 7800 games which came out in 1989 and 1990 a little earlier, when there was more opportunity to make a difference.

 

To me, the XEGS took away resources for the 7800 when it came to

 

Licensing dollars

Manufacturing dollars

Advertising dollars

Retail/Promotion dollars

Distribution dollars

Development dollars

 

Along with the available personal in charge of spending that money (opportunity cost). Atari Corp really didn't have a lot of people. If you have one marketing manager and they have to do two marketing plans for two systems instead of one marketing plan for one system, how much is each going to get?

[SoundGammon]

Atari was competing against itself with 3 systems, 2600jr, 7800 and then the XEGS. Would have been better if the 7800 got sole support. If people wanted to play their old 2600 games, plug 'em in! If they wanted to play computer games...get a computer! The Tramiel Atari was just trying to unload hardware. Money could have been spent on licensing hot arcade titles. Not once did the Tramiels say "Hey, what sold the 2600 in it's heyday?" The arcade game titles! They never did understand the software side of the business...and it showed!

[AdeptRapier]

Atari was competing against itself with 3 systems,

 

Kind of like Sony with PS2, PS3, PSP...

 

[carmel_andrews]

Uncle Jack and brother sam etc weren't realy interested in atari's gaming systems, think about it for a second, the xegs was still a bun in the oven and the 7800 was available, if jack and sam were even in the slightest bit interested in atari's gaming systems, they would have continued with the 7800 instead of putting it on the backburner and also stepped up the release schedule

 

I think jacks phrase or mantra at the time was 'Atari is a COMPUTER company' (no room for gaming systems)

 

Also you forget that a large amount of the xegs line up was rereleases of stuff already available on disk for the xegs, very little of it was original software, like commando, airball, tower toppler etc (or just rereleases of a800 carts in new boxes)

Edited May 28, 2009 by carmel_andrews

[mcjakeqcool]

I would say that 5-9 tiltes extra would have been made for the 7800 and some diffrence would have been made in sales, because most if not all games Atari make would still have had a Arcade, 2600 and 7800 port, just It'll would have been one less system for Atari to make games for. However in the uk, the 7800 as a console made little diffrence as dispite the NES and Master System being on the market, computers such as the c64 and ZX Spectrum were still wildly popular. That's just my experiance.

Edited May 28, 2009 by mcjakeqcool

[monzamess]

Atari was competing against itself with 3 systems,

 

Kind of like Sony with PS2, PS3, PSP...

 

 

 

The PSP is portable and doesn't really compete with the PS2 or PS3. The PS2 and PS3 sort of compete, but really they address the low-budget and high-budget markets.

 

The 7800 and XEGS were direct competitors, and having the 2600jr around, even as a budget machine, muddied things up some more.

 

Back to the topic, Atari dropped the ball after the 5200 and Nintendo (and Sega somewhat) swooped in and took it. Even if Atari had only one single system in the mid-late 80s, even if it were truly revolutionary in capabilities, they still would have been doomed, because most of the good licenses and developers were tied up in the NES by then. This is pretty much the scenario that played out for the Jaguar a few years later.

[Shawn]

No difference, maybe 1 or 2 more games tops if any but I bet it would be 0 games. The XE is a computer, the 7800 is a gaming console.

[DracIsBack]

The XE is a computer, the 7800 is a gaming console.

 

Atari took substantial pains to market the XE as a Gaming Console because the XE computers weren't.

[Shawn]

The XE is a computer, the 7800 is a gaming console.

 

Atari took substantial pains to market the XE as a Gaming Console because the XE computers weren't.

 

 

They could market till they where blue in the face, at the end of the day the XE is a still a suped up A8 computer.

[DracIsBack]

They could market till they where blue in the face, at the end of the day the XE is a still a suped up A8 computer.

 

Technically, sure.

 

But it sucked away marketing dollars from the 7800

And manufacturing dollars to design, manufacture and distribute the console, accessories and games

And licensing dollars for the games

And MDF for retail advertising

And retail shelf space in the "video game" aisles

And catalog space in the mail-order places

And developers who made games for it

 

 

I'm thinking a few people aren't familiar with the concept of "Opportunity Costs" when applied to finite resources or are looking at it only from one one many impact points.

[mcjakeqcool]

The XEGS was a PC/Console combo and quite a sucsessful one, a lot more so then the likes of the Amstrad gx4000 and Commodore 64gs, it was more in the league of the Amiga cd32.

[kool kitty89]

The XEGS was a PC/Console combo and quite a sucsessful one, a lot more so then the likes of the Amstrad gx4000 and Commodore 64gs, it was more in the league of the Amiga cd32.

 

If you'll note, the CD32 was hardly a success... So that statement is accurate.

 

I don't think the XEGS should have been released at all, if there had ever been a time to release a stripped-down A8-bit as a game console, it would have been in place of the 5200 (even then there are some issues, though overall it could have been more successful than the 5200).

 

When it was released the tech was aging and it did confuse things with their own market with the 7800 and 2600.

 

The XE computer line I think is fine, a good budget home computer, the ultimate incarnation of the Atari 8-bit line, and a direct competitor with the venerable C64, and as someone mentioned above, in UK/EU, home computers weighed heavily in the video game market. (and Sega was the most popular otherwise overall, with the SMS then Mega Drive, with the Amiga, and to a lesser extent ST, alongside the latter) However, they could easily have released a gaming pack version of the XE, same computer, but with gaming accesories and pack-in games like the XEGS. Could work well in europe especially, though other platforms like the C64 and Spectrum were very strong there already, though the A8-bit line had advantages, particularly over the Spectrum. One issue might be with the tape drive being custom Atari, not being able to use a generic tape deck, which is important in the sense that this was a dominant media for games (especially budget computers/games) in UK/Europe at the time, with cartridges being next, then disks which were popularly adopted relatively late.

 

If they wanted to release a new system, they should have based it on the ST, stripped down and optimized for the task, rather than an old 8-bit. Then you could phase out the 2600, continue supporting the 7800 (particularly as a budget system) with the "STGS"as their new powerhouse. (or just go with the 7800 alone)

Edited May 29, 2009 by kool kitty89

[Atarifever]

But it sucked away marketing dollars from the 7800

And manufacturing dollars to design, manufacture and distribute the console, accessories and games

And licensing dollars for the games

And MDF for retail advertising

And retail shelf space in the "video game" aisles

And catalog space in the mail-order places

And developers who made games for it

To be fair, I had not considered these things before. I'm still leaving my overall effect guess the same though. I doubt a billion dollars of advertising and an extra rack in every store in America could have helped the 7800 over the Phantasy Star, Alex Kidd, After Burner, Shinobi, Altered Beast, Super Mario Bros, Megaman, Final Fantasy, Tecmo Bowl, etc. mountains in its path. What would they do with the extra marketing and development money?

 

"Hey kids! Remember Commando!? Then you'll love Atari's newest game: Front Line! In stores right around the corner from Nintendo and Sega system games like Contra, Wonderboy 3, Megaman, and Ghouls N Ghosts! Front Line! It's almost as old as you are! Atari: Putting the 1982 in 1988!"

 

They didn't get the market in the mid 80s, and all the extra marketing and a handful of extra games wasn't going to change that.

Edited May 29, 2009 by Atarifever

[DracIsBack]

To be fair, I had not considered these things before. I'm still leaving my overall effect guess the same though. I doubt a billion dollars of advertising and an extra rack in every store in America could have helped the 7800 over the Phantasy Star, Alex Kidd, After Burner, Shinobi, Altered Beast, Super Mario Bros, Megaman, Final Fantasy, Tecmo Bowl, etc. mountains in its path. What would they do with the extra marketing and development money?

 

Oh, I completely agree.

 

Like I've said, I think that - by not having the XEGS distratction, the NES-ike games may have come out earlier. A lot of those games (Xenophobe, Ikari Warriors, Scrapyard Dog, Commando, Midnight Mutants, Double Dragon, Alien Brigade) came out after the XEGS was written off and as the 7800 was losing its shelf space to the Genesis and stuff.

 

Without energy being focused on the XEGS, maybe they would have put more focus on a competitive game lineup in 1987/8 instead of 1990/91.

 

If you look at the game sheets, Atari really held off on those types of games until after the XEGS was buried.

[Atarifever]

To be fair, I had not considered these things before. I'm still leaving my overall effect guess the same though. I doubt a billion dollars of advertising and an extra rack in every store in America could have helped the 7800 over the Phantasy Star, Alex Kidd, After Burner, Shinobi, Altered Beast, Super Mario Bros, Megaman, Final Fantasy, Tecmo Bowl, etc. mountains in its path. What would they do with the extra marketing and development money?

 

Oh, I completely agree.

 

Like I've said, I think that - by not having the XEGS distratction, the NES-ike games may have come out earlier. A lot of those games (Xenophobe, Ikari Warriors, Scrapyard Dog, Commando, Midnight Mutants, Double Dragon, Alien Brigade) came out after the XEGS was written off and as the 7800 was losing its shelf space to the Genesis and stuff.

 

Without energy being focused on the XEGS, maybe they would have put more focus on a competitive game lineup in 1987/8 instead of 1990/91.

 

If you look at the game sheets, Atari really held off on those types of games until after the XEGS was buried.

The biggest problem is that their best games (though I prefer them) weren't the type of games kids wanted for the most part, or weren't as appealing as the best NES games (to those kids at that time). For us, as collectors of the 7800 (some of whom had the system back then) it certainly would have been a blessing if Midnight Mutants, Scrapyeard Dog, etc had come out sooner. We might have a Midnight Mutants 2 by the end of it. Some of the games that released lately (Plutos, Sirius, MIA) may have been completed back then and plentiful now. Other more unfinished games might have been pushed ahead and finished, like Rampart or Pit Fighter. Then we'd have had some other games in the prototype pipe by the end of it, so we'd be trying to track down nearly complete versions of Crystal Castles and Scrapyard Cat.

 

So for collectors or those owning the system then, it'd have been nice. We'd have a much better library. But I can't see it moving systems even in 1988. Super Mario Bros games were too good, and the Genesis was out in 1989 in any case.

[kool kitty89]

To be fair, I had not considered these things before. I'm still leaving my overall effect guess the same though. I doubt a billion dollars of advertising and an extra rack in every store in America could have helped the 7800 over the Phantasy Star, Alex Kidd, After Burner, Shinobi, Altered Beast, Super Mario Bros, Megaman, Final Fantasy, Tecmo Bowl, etc. mountains in its path. What would they do with the extra marketing and development money?

 

"Hey kids! Remember Commando!? Then you'll love Atari's newest game: Front Line! In stores right around the corner from Nintendo and Sega system games like Contra, Wonderboy 3, Megaman, and Ghouls N Ghosts! Front Line! It's almost as old as you are! Atari: Putting the 1982 in 1988!"

 

They didn't get the market in the mid 80s, and all the extra marketing and a handful of extra games wasn't going to change that.

 

Are comparing it to the Master system? Seeing as the 7800 sales (that we've seen so far) show aproxamately 3.77 million sold 1986-1990, and given that the Master System was only marginally popular in the US (the vast majority in Europe and South America, especially Brazil, where I think they still might be manufacturing them, and officially so well past the late 1990's), I think the 7800 may have been pretty close, if not more successful than the Master System in the NA market. (and both were discontinued around the same time in the US, in 1992, Sonic 1 was the final US release on the system)

 

The software was defeinitely a bit more sparce on the 7800, and this is at least in part due to the programming difficulties, the piculiarities (maria) may make it somewhat unfamiliar and more difficult for programmers new to it, but in particular, it made porting gmes from other consoles or the arcade quite difficult. (often meaning it had to be completely rewritten)

The SMS was obviously pretty powerful, moreso than the NES, though both the (non JP) SMS and 7800 were definitely inferior audio wise. (though with the POKEY you'd be ahead of the SMS and with POKEY+TIA sound you'd be getting closer to the NES, you'd have more channels and might be equal or a little ahead, though the NES chip still had some nice features and versitility)

 

The massive 2600 library combined with low cost and a decent number of good new games still made it attractive though. (not to mention the simple name, still interesting old, or even newer atari fans, say those that got their 2600's more recently may decide to stick with the brand they know/like)

 

The 87/88 timeframe is quite important though, basicly the 2 best selling years, based on curts figures (in the 7800 sales thread) over 2.7 million were sold in these 2 years, about 72.5% of all sales 1986-1990 were sold in this timeframe, so the difference could potentially be critical. 1989 sales were fairly strong too, over 650,000, but they were tapering off, and under 100,000 were sold in 1990. (and I'd assume they continuded to fall in '91 through its fromal discontinuation in '92, remember these are US sales only)

 

To better compete with the NES (and SMS) they probably should have released the joypad in North America as well, either as an optiona pack-in, or accessory, and mayb switch over completely if popularity shifted toward that model. (probably keeping the proline controoler available sepeately for those that prefer it and for some games that would be awkward with the joypad, like Robotron)

Edited May 29, 2009 by kool kitty89

[carmel_andrews]

The XEGS was a PC/Console combo and quite a sucsessful one, a lot more so then the likes of the Amstrad gx4000 and Commodore 64gs, it was more in the league of the Amiga cd32.

 

If you'll note, the CD32 was hardly a success... So that statement is accurate.

 

I don't think the XEGS should have been released at all, if there had ever been a time to release a stripped-down A8-bit as a game console, it would have been in place of the 5200 (even then there are some issues, though overall it could have been more successful than the 5200).

 

When it was released the tech was aging and it did confuse things with their own market with the 7800 and 2600.

 

The XE computer line I think is fine, a good budget home computer, the ultimate incarnation of the Atari 8-bit line, and a direct competitor with the venerable C64, and as someone mentioned above, in UK/EU, home computers weighed heavily in the video game market. (and Sega was the most popular otherwise overall, with the SMS then Mega Drive, with the Amiga, and to a lesser extent ST, alongside the latter) However, they could easily have released a gaming pack version of the XE, same computer, but with gaming accesories and pack-in games like the XEGS. Could work well in europe especially, though other platforms like the C64 and Spectrum were very strong there already, though the A8-bit line had advantages, particularly over the Spectrum. One issue might be with the tape drive being custom Atari, not being able to use a generic tape deck, which is important in the sense that this was a dominant media for games (especially budget computers/games) in UK/Europe at the time, with cartridges being next, then disks which were popularly adopted relatively late.

 

If they wanted to release a new system, they should have based it on the ST, stripped down and optimized for the task, rather than an old 8-bit. Then you could phase out the 2600, continue supporting the 7800 (particularly as a budget system) with the "STGS"as their new powerhouse. (or just go with the 7800 alone)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very little was ever released on disk in UK...mostly budget tapes (i.e 1 99 to 2/3 99) only disk stuff that was available were disk versions of the full price tape software (which was few and far between) or anything that was imported from the states

 

In europe from the late 80's onwards there did seem to be the shift to disk based games/software (though some publishers did support tape format, humanoid was originally released on tape if i recall)

 

Not to sure there was much of a market for A8 carts especially in UK fromn the late 80's onwards, mostly due to the fact that they were relaunches of games already available on disk (or tape, in the case of thunderfox) and the original stuff like battlezone, airball tower toppler etc was so poorly distributed i wonder why atari even bothered (even the rereleased a800 carts like defender, pacman and star raiders etc had better distribution then the aforementioned games)

 

I know the cart situation to be true as i was told that by peeps that worked for sillica shop/sdl (UK's main atari distributor/dealer) even the c64gs/amstrad gx series got more 3rd party cartridge games support then the xegs did

[kool kitty89]

It was my understanding that cassettes were very common for budget software (especially) in the UK and Europe, I didn't mean Atari specifically, but the C64 and, Amstrad, and Spectrum.

Technically speaking the A8 series should have been able to compete (in terms of cost and performance), but software availavility would definitely be an issue. (granted the C64 really was good in this respect, though the A8 definitely had advantages over the other 2, especially audio, which was particularly weak on the pre-128 Spectrum)

 

Also, my understanding on the common use of the cassette media is correct, lacking software in this format would be a disadvantage as well.

 

Still, I think releasing a gaming pack version of the normal XE 65/130 would be fine if they wanted to go gaming oriented, and would definitely be a bit less confusing than marketing another game console. (let alone one that's actually a gaming oriented home computer with some disadvantages to the standard computer version, which was already inexpensive in its own right).

Also considder than the Atari 400 was originally presented and intended as the low cost, gaming computer counterpart to the 800.

 

Just support the A8 line as long as its profitable, maybe une to different regional markets a bit better, but not directly compete with the dedicated game console market, rather the budget compuer market and computer gaming. However, if software support and user interest were no longer sufficient to make continued support of the line practical and profitable (despite reasonable efforts to insite interest), it's probabl time to let the line go. After all, it is 1979 hardware, and pretty darn good considdering this, but it definitely has its limitations.

Edited May 29, 2009 by kool kitty89

[Atarifever]

To be fair, I had not considered these things before. I'm still leaving my overall effect guess the same though. I doubt a billion dollars of advertising and an extra rack in every store in America could have helped the 7800 over the Phantasy Star, Alex Kidd, After Burner, Shinobi, Altered Beast, Super Mario Bros, Megaman, Final Fantasy, Tecmo Bowl, etc. mountains in its path. What would they do with the extra marketing and development money?

 

"Hey kids! Remember Commando!? Then you'll love Atari's newest game: Front Line! In stores right around the corner from Nintendo and Sega system games like Contra, Wonderboy 3, Megaman, and Ghouls N Ghosts! Front Line! It's almost as old as you are! Atari: Putting the 1982 in 1988!"

 

They didn't get the market in the mid 80s, and all the extra marketing and a handful of extra games wasn't going to change that.

 

Are comparing it to the Master system? Seeing as the 7800 sales (that we've seen so far) show aproxamately 3.77 million sold 1986-1990, and given that the Master System was only marginally popular in the US (the vast majority in Europe and South America, especially Brazil, where I think they still might be manufacturing them, and officially so well past the late 1990's), I think the 7800 may have been pretty close, if not more successful than the Master System in the NA market. (and both were discontinued around the same time in the US, in 1992, Sonic 1 was the final US release on the system)

 

The software was defeinitely a bit more sparce on the 7800, and this is at least in part due to the programming difficulties, the piculiarities (maria) may make it somewhat unfamiliar and more difficult for programmers new to it, but in particular, it made porting gmes from other consoles or the arcade quite difficult. (often meaning it had to be completely rewritten)

The SMS was obviously pretty powerful, moreso than the NES, though both the (non JP) SMS and 7800 were definitely inferior audio wise. (though with the POKEY you'd be ahead of the SMS and with POKEY+TIA sound you'd be getting closer to the NES, you'd have more channels and might be equal or a little ahead, though the NES chip still had some nice features and versitility)

 

The massive 2600 library combined with low cost and a decent number of good new games still made it attractive though. (not to mention the simple name, still interesting old, or even newer atari fans, say those that got their 2600's more recently may decide to stick with the brand they know/like)

 

The 87/88 timeframe is quite important though, basicly the 2 best selling years, based on curts figures (in the 7800 sales thread) over 2.7 million were sold in these 2 years, about 72.5% of all sales 1986-1990 were sold in this timeframe, so the difference could potentially be critical. 1989 sales were fairly strong too, over 650,000, but they were tapering off, and under 100,000 were sold in 1990. (and I'd assume they continuded to fall in '91 through its fromal discontinuation in '92, remember these are US sales only)

 

To better compete with the NES (and SMS) they probably should have released the joypad in North America as well, either as an optiona pack-in, or accessory, and mayb switch over completely if popularity shifted toward that model. (probably keeping the proline controoler available sepeately for those that prefer it and for some games that would be awkward with the joypad, like Robotron)

Trust me, I've poured over everyone of those numbers now. I have them saved in three separate places for future forum debates. The 7800 is my favorite system ever. I'm aware of how it did. But while the SMS was only marginal in the U.S., the 7800, even with these bigger than expected numbers, was itself still marginal. Meanwhile, in Europe the SMS was anything but marginal. So the Master System owned one market, and was marginal in two. The NES owned two markets and was much less successful in another. The 7800 was fairly marginal in two, and not even there in a third. If the 7800's and the SMS's places could have been switched at a word, I'm sure the Tramiels would have went for it. Owning one market and being in two is better than owning neither and only marginally being in two.

 

When I bring up the SMS library, I am showing how much stronger even the library of another marginal system in the U.S. was compared to the 7800, and that's when simply pretending the NES wasn't there. Throw the NES in there, and the chance the 7800 could have played catch up in 1988 with where it's parent company was is somewhere close to 0 percent.

[Atarifever]

The above post got me thinking about something.

 

Anyone else ever hear that conventional wisdom that in the mid and late 80s Nintendo held 80% of the gaming market, and that Sega had 10% and Atari had the remaining 10% between three consoles. Anyone now think that may be off.

 

I mean, I questioned it before. The Master System did incredible in Europe. Even though Europe is the smallest of the three markets (and was even smaller then), doesn't being first there and selling some systems in the other two imply better than 10% woldwide? And from Curt's numbers, Atari sold something like 9 million 2600 carts and nearly 4 million 5200 carts in that time. They also sold millions of 7800 carts, and at least some carts specifically directed at the XEGS market. Between all systems there, that sounds like probably more than 10%. And certainly the combined Atari sales from all systems, plus the SMS domination of Europe, plus its sales elsewhere, has to be something more than 20% total.

[DracIsBack]

Anyone else ever hear that conventional wisdom that in the mid and late 80s Nintendo held 80% of the gaming market, and that Sega had 10% and Atari had the remaining 10% between three consoles. Anyone now think that may be off.

 

Yeah, Game Player once quoted that. I've also heard NES with 90%.

 

My guess is they may have referred randomly to NPD sales to a specific week in time vs. a collective whole. No doubt, all three systems had weeks where there marketshare went up (ie. a big sale; hot game) and also went down.

 

Interestingly, this data point came out in the Atari-Nintendo trial:

 

"Atari, based in Sunnyvale, Calif., was the largest American home video game company in the early 1980's, before the domestic market sagged. Nintendo marketed its first video game in the United States in 1986 and now controls about 80 percent of the American market, compared with 12 percent for Atari."

 

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/05/16/business...-dismissed.html

 

Regardless of how well they sold, I've love all three.(And my XEGS too)