Jakks Pacific Atari 10-in-1 Game System Review...

[mos6507]

>>

I am wondering if roadblock to doing this is the intelectual propery rights to the 6502 processor. Western Design Center owns the IP rights to the 6502 technology, and it's possible that they don't license the rights at a low enough price to make this economically feasible.

<<

 

Then how do they do the NES-inside-gamepad things?

 

Emulating the 6502 in software with some medium-speed embedded RISC processor isn't that big of a deal. (And embedded 65C02 cores are probably affordable enough for a mass produced unit like this.)

 

Emulating the TIA as well is a different story. (Remember that even on the Playstation 1, Activision couldn't achieve full framerate and that's a 32-bit 33mhz RISC processor.) I'm not even sure today's PocketPCs can even reach 100% throughput. I haven't heard any proof they can, and they use 200mhz processors.) So even today it makes sense to recreate the TIA at the hardware level rather than software emulation because doing a 100% software emulation would be too expensive for a system at this pricepoint.

 

These things coming out sound like they straddle inbetween hardware and software emulation, probably with some degree of porting or recoding of the sources, not really doing the final job properly.

 

If these things had to do a more conventional architecture like the Colecovision I'm sure they'd come out more authentic.

[mos6507]

>>

Doesn't Atari still have the rights to Q*Bert? Seeing as the recent remake had the Atari logo I'd say yes. This would have been on MY list.

<<

 

Hasbro bought out both Parker Brothers and Milton Bradley, both of which would still own the IP to their 2600 games. Don't know if Infogrames would inherit the right to present these games. I doubt it, though.

[Goochman]

After thinking a bit more Dodge'Em and Haunted House prob would've been better games to put in the packin.

 

Video Pinball perhaps also?

 

Not sure how many 'original' games Atari had which is my theory why Atari couldnt/wouldnt survive.

[slapdash]

They are using ROM's, but they have been modified.  According to an e-mail exchange I had with an engineer at JAAKS, they are using a 2600 emulator based in hardware.  They are running the original ROMs, although some have been modified.  JAAKS claims that all they did was adapt the paddle games for a joystick & remove the simultaneous two-player modes.

 

Given the "TEXT" in the easter egg room of Adventure, this is a lie one way or the other -- either they've changed other ROMs too, or they're really not using them.

 

Doesn't Atari still have the rights to Q*Bert? Seeing as the recent remake had the Atari logo I'd say yes. This would have been on MY list.

 

Hasbro bought out both Parker Brothers and Milton Bradley, both of which would still own the IP to their 2600 games. Don't know if Infogrames would inherit the right to present these games. I doubt it, though.

 

To clarify for Xot, as far as anyone knows, Atari only licensed the rights to those games, they didn't actually buy them outright. So as Glenn points out, Hasbro almost certainly owns those games' rights, though they may or may not know it (without research). On the other hand, if Hasbro had pushed those rights under their Interactive division for some reason, then Infogrames might actually own them. But if Hasbro owns them, Infogrames probably did not inherit the license to use them with the Atari property; however, that depends on how the original contracts were written... Oy.

[George Gray]

While I'm sure there may be some disappointment over the unit, I think people are taking it the wrong way. Yeah, the games may not be quite the same, but I think the audience that it is really intended for won't care. It appears, IMHO, that the audience are those who fondly remember playing the games as a kid, are not into emulation and such and want to have their own children experience the games. So what if they don't look quite the same. Most of these people will not notice and probably have not even seen the games in 15 to 20 years. I think some of todays kids will snub them while younger ones will love the thing. And, hey, let's give them credit for even THINKING about a product like this!

Heck, what's next? A Channel F handheld?

 

I'm gonna get one. I have that funky Nintendo styled 10-in-1 Activision thing. My kid loves it (Freeway is his fave.)

[George Gray]

Doesn't Atari still have the rights to Q*Bert? Seeing as the recent remake had the Atari logo I'd say yes. This would have been on MY list.

 

Other purely Atari-owned properties... hmmm.... it's tough because a lot of their arcade titles were licensed too, so that leaves out Dig Dug... Actually, Dodge 'Em, Video Pinball, and Surround would have been good choices. Better than the paddle titles, in any event.

 

I'm not sure about this, but I believe Infogrames did, in fact, get some of those licenses. I *THINK* Atari/Infogrames has SOME kind of license, still, to Pac-Man (but so do a couple of other software makers.) Q*Bert I think went with one of Infogrames other acquisitions. The TYPES of licenses, however, is the key. They may have the PC only rights or they may have console only rights. Since they do not appear to want to dive directly into the console business, those may be reassigned or just forgotten.

 

Perhaps the reason they dinkyed around with the games they did release in the device are rights related as someone has suggested. Remember that old movie 'Its a Wonderful Life'? Every station used to carry it. Now it's only on NBC. Why? They discovered that the SOUNDTRACK still carried a legit copyright. The movie may be public domain now, but the soundtrack is not. It is owned by another entity who, in turn, sold a license to NBC. Now, anyone could still show the film, provided they altered the film and did away with all of the music. Who's going to do that? No one. Not worth it. It's possible something similar happened with the games (but that would not explain the Adventure thing.) An element of the game (Sound, music, graphic, maybe) was 'owned' by someone else so they just changed it. Since they could do that easily enough, it was probably worth it to them.

 

Anyway, this is all speculation by me...I like to rant once in a while...

 

Oh yeah, I don't know Curt, but congrats on the baby! Daddyhood is awesome!

[Witchfynde]

It appears, IMHO, that the audience are those who fondly remember playing the games as a kid, are not into emulation and such and want to have their own children experience the games.  So what if they don't look quite the same.  Most of these people will not notice and probably have not even seen the games in 15 to 20 years.  

 

Oh, I think people WILL notice, all right.

[George Gray]

It appears, IMHO, that the audience are those who fondly remember playing the games as a kid, are not into emulation and such and want to have their own children experience the games.  So what if they don't look quite the same.  Most of these people will not notice and probably have not even seen the games in 15 to 20 years.  

 

Oh, I think people WILL notice, all right.

Maybe. But the diehards and the people who still play them, but I think most will simply think nothing of the differences.

 

I could be wrong...

 

Cheers!

[NE146]

I think the dragons having a difficult time dying is a pretty big deal actually. That in itself has got to take away from the game quite a bit

[mstulir]

Doesn't Atari still have the rights to Q*Bert? Seeing as the recent remake had the Atari logo I'd say yes. This would have been on MY list.

 

I think I can clarify how licensing works. When a company like Infogrames (or previously Hasbro Interactive) acquires publishing rights to a game, they have a specific period of time to publish a game using that license. Also, the publishing rights will specify what platforms they can use. Once they have the publishing rights, they can't just publish the game for any system they want.

 

Let's look at some examples. When Hasbro Interactive had rights to Frogger, they had a window in time to publish Frogger titles, and they could only publish for the PC, PSX, and the Dreamcast. When that period of time expired, the rights reverted back to Konami. (Supposedly, Hasbro Interactive wanted to renew the publishing rights and do a third Frogger game. Konami saw that Frogger & Frogger 2 combined sold over 6 million copies, and decided against renewing Hasbro's rights so they could do their own Frogger game. That is why Konami published the abysmal "Frogger Adventures" last year.)

 

Someone in another message mentioned Pac-Man. Namco did some funky things with their licensing to Hasbro Interactive/Infogrames. First off, they would not allow the Atari name on their titles. Notice that all of the Pac-Man games (Pac-Man Arena, Pac-Man: Adventures In Time, Ms. Pac-Man) all have Infogrames as the publisher despite the fact that the other classic titles were published under the Atari name.

 

Also, did you notice that all of those games were only on the PC? Namco licensed Dig-Dug & the Pac-Man series of games for use on the PC only. The reason is that they planned on doing their own titles (Pac-Man World 2, Pac-Man Fever, etc.) for the consoles, and had no interest in the PC market. Namco's license did include console rights for a few of their games, so what is why we saw a console version of Galaga: Destination Earth. The console license also included Galaxian, Pole Position, etc. The Hasbro Interactive/Namco press release from April of 1999 can still be found on the web, and it explains this in more detail.

 

We could use Donkey Kong as an example for how it worked in the 80's. Nintendo initially licensed console rights to Coleco, who published the game for the Colecovision, Atari 2600, etc. However, Nintendo also licensed the computer rights to Atari, who published Donkey Kong for the 800/XL/XE series, Apple II, C64, TI, etc.

 

So, let's get back to the question above. Hasbro Interactive had publishing rights for Q*Bert on the PC, PSX & Dreamcast. I would imagine that those rights have expired by now. They certainly would not have covered Q*Bert for the 2600.

 

That is why they couldn't include games like Space Invaders, Ms. Pac-Man, etc. in the "10-In-1" unit. Atari's rights to those games expired many years ago. They would have to re-license those titles in order to include them in the "10-In-1" unit.

[Goochman]

So the question still stands - what good games did Atari develop internally?

 

Adventure

Haunted House

Dodge 'Em (maybe it wsa in the arcades)

Missile Command

Video Pinball

 

What else?

[Cassidy Nolen]

IIRC, Dodge em was a hack of a Sega arcade. I cannot think of the name, but the cabinet was burgundy with a top down view monitor. I have played it, its black and white.

 

I would say Asteroids, or was that one a GCC?

 

Cassidy

 

BTW, still trying to convert a Super TV Boy to accept a 4K cartridge! ARgh.

 

[Witchfynde]

IIRC, Dodge em was a hack of a Sega arcade. I cannot think of the name, but the cabinet was burgundy with a top down view monitor.  I have played it, its black and white.  

 

I think it was called Head On...

[gulag picture radio]

Does anyone have contact information for the manufacturer or distributor of the 10-in-1 joystick? I write for an online magazine, and would like to run a review of it. I just haven't been successful in finding the people responsible for talking to the press.

 

Thanks for any help!

[mstulir]

Does anyone have contact information for the manufacturer or distributor of the 10-in-1 joystick?  I write for an online magazine, and would like to run a review of it.  I just haven't been successful in finding the people responsible for talking to the press.

 

Thanks for any help!

I'm sure you could have found this with a simple web search....

 

http://www.jakkspacific.com/

 

Their mailing address & phone number is on their web site. Ask for their media relations rep.

[gulag picture radio]

Thanks. For some reason when I tried that a few days back it wasn't working. The problem could've been on my end or theirs- but it's working just fine now. Thanks for your help! I'll let you guys know when my review goes up... hard to think that I could be more complete than the terrific Backntime review...