ataridave Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Modding isn't the answer depending on the game you want. For example, Star Raiders - won't work in a modded FB. I'm all set with my light sixer, Harmony cart and FB2. Hopefully this rehash of the same product generates enough sales to justify a FB3. What's a light sixer and what's a Harmony cart? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickeycolumbus Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Modding isn't the answer depending on the game you want. For example, Star Raiders - won't work in a modded FB. I'm all set with my light sixer, Harmony cart and FB2. Hopefully this rehash of the same product generates enough sales to justify a FB3. What's a light sixer and what's a Harmony cart? Light sixer Harmony cart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarilovesyou Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 .and I'm certain that with a collection of the GREAT games that made this system what it was would be completely worth a price tag of an average game for a modern console...around 70 USD. Throw in some paddles?...now we're talkin! No way in hell would anything like that fly in a plug and play. A $70 price point for a collection of games that modern gamers wouldn't cast a second glance at? What are you smoking? There's a reason why there's a $30 price point on these, and there's no way any actual game company would see any validity in what you're stating. The value is just not there, you'd get laughed out of the board room trying to present it. Well, perhaps the idea would be laughable to a bunch of bean-couting suits, but 40 to 70 USD is exactly what I would pay for a fully loaded 2600 reissue...I mean, the Jakks remote control unit cost around 50 when it was first released, and it still sold well. Thanks for the answers, however, I do appreciate it. You're right; it's not really fair to critique something that was primarily thought of as a giveaway. My last bit on this topic is this: When a fully loaded Atari 2600 retro product filled with the best games for the system isn't feasible at the 40 to 70 USD price range, it doesn't give me a good feeling about what to expect from future releases in the line, aka FB3. If it only includes non-license related games, it's going to have the same limitations as the FB2; perhaps more, since (let's be honest here) nobody knows what an Atari 7800 was. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emehr Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 I already bought two Flashback 2's for myself and three for my siblings' families a few years ago. I just want the T-Shirt! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnBuell Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Learning what I have through these forums, to keep the dreams alive of bigger/better/badder Flashbacks and other systems, I personally have no problem with $29.99 for the unit for preorder, and I'm considering the $15 shipping to be the effective cost of the T-Shirt. Congrats to everyone who pulled this system off on short notice, and I look forward to the next project! Just my two cents 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onmode-ky Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Does anyone have the exact date when the Flashback 2+ was announced? If there was no press release yet, then I'll take the date when the page for the new machine was put up at Atari.com. So far, I see that the first reference here at AtariAge to the new page was on January 21st. Also, I guess I must have been out of the loop on this, but when was the FB2+ first mentioned at all? Until brojamfootball pointed me to this thread, I had not heard of the term "Flashback 2+." Or maybe it states you're completely misreading things. The whole thing started specifically for General Mills, not Atari. Atari then decided as long as this was being done, they might as well up the number of units manufactured to test the waters on it again through their regular market channels. Wait, General Mills approached Atari about making more Flashbacks? That sure sounds strange. I'd thought Atari was just rethinking their business plans, but if it was the cereal company that made the first move, I'm really curious where they got the idea. After all, the FB2 was from 2005, so it's not exactly fresh in their minds. Do you have any background info on this (that you can tell us), Marty/Curt? I did ADV II, Tony Wong did Return to Haunted House, Dennis Debro did Atari Climber and fixed Yar's Return (that was done by the Chinese guys) and Asteroids Deluxe (Chinese guys original did), John Champaeu fixed Lunar Lander and Caverns of Mars (both done by the Chinese guys) I think I'm out of the loop again here, but who are the Chinese guys, and how did they get involved in the FB2 project? What makes Flashbacks attractive to home brewers given that the system costs about the same as one home brew cart? Or are the profit margins comparable between Flashback and an individual cart? The chance to have their game on an actual commercially produced Atari product? If I were a homebrewer, this would be my number one reason for contributing to a Flashback product. Heck, the fact that they would be paying me rather than the other way around might actually feel surreal. No way in hell would anything like that fly in a plug and play. A $70 price point for a collection of games that modern gamers wouldn't cast a second glance at? What are you smoking? There's a reason why there's a $30 price point on these, and there's no way any actual game company would see any validity in what you're stating. The value is just not there, you'd get laughed out of the board room trying to present it. Well, perhaps the idea would be laughable to a bunch of bean-couting suits, but 40 to 70 USD is exactly what I would pay for a fully loaded 2600 reissue...I mean, the Jakks remote control unit cost around 50 when it was first released, and it still sold well. Thanks for the answers, however, I do appreciate it. You're right; it's not really fair to critique something that was primarily thought of as a giveaway. My last bit on this topic is this: When a fully loaded Atari 2600 retro product filled with the best games for the system isn't feasible at the 40 to 70 USD price range, it doesn't give me a good feeling about what to expect from future releases in the line, aka FB3. If it only includes non-license related games, it's going to have the same limitations as the FB2; perhaps more, since (let's be honest here) nobody knows what an Atari 7800 was. I think "What are you smoking?" really was an appropriate response. First of all, I think $70 would be on the low side for a device whose library contains multiple titles from each of multiple third parties. If you packed the device with all of the 2600's popular third-party titles, I think you'd be looking into the $100+ range to cover all the licensing costs (because I'm sure each publisher would want extra to allow their titles to be diluted by the presence of other publishers' major works alongside; also, consider that having all of your marquee titles in one product is worth more than having them sold separately, in contrast to economy-size thinking, in part due to the fact that you are effectively letting go future revenue streams from the individual titles), and then because you wouldn't be able to sell as many at such a high price point, you'd have to raise the price even higher in order to make the whole venture worth it. Would there be even 500 people in the US willing to pay $300 for a device that plays 100 Atari 2600 games? Yes, I'm making up numbers, but you are missing the point that the "bean-counting suits" have to ensure that the company is not throwing money out the window. They aren't doing this for charity; this isn't like the federal government funding space exploration. This is an organization funded by sales, not taxes. The bottom line is that there are not as many people willing to pay what you are willing to pay as you think there are, and there are even fewer people willing to pay more than what you are willing to pay. One last thing: regarding the Jakks Pacific wireless Namco 2 (Ms. Pac-Man) model, it did not sell well. It was not on the shelves for very long (not counting time spent in clearance aisles). Note that Jakks Pacific has never released a model like that again. I wrote a bunch of stuff in this post. I hope the relevant parties all take the time to answer my multi-targeted questions. onmode-ky 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickeycolumbus Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 I did ADV II, Tony Wong did Return to Haunted House, Dennis Debro did Atari Climber and fixed Yar's Return (that was done by the Chinese guys) and Asteroids Deluxe (Chinese guys original did), John Champaeu fixed Lunar Lander and Caverns of Mars (both done by the Chinese guys) I think I'm out of the loop again here, but who are the Chinese guys, and how did they get involved in the FB2 project? I was also wondering this. Did the Chinese guys do Arcade Pong too? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectorGamer Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 What makes Flashbacks attractive to home brewers given that the system costs about the same as one home brew cart? Or are the profit margins comparable between Flashback and an individual cart? The chance to have their game on an actual commercially produced Atari product? If I were a homebrewer, this would be my number one reason for contributing to a Flashback product. Heck, the fact that they would be paying me rather than the other way around might actually feel surreal. You're right - the opportunity for that kind of distribution is too attractive to turn down 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S1500 Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 So Count Chocula has more pull to get a FB released than we do? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrekkiELO Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 and I'm considering the $15 shipping to be the effective cost of the T-Shirt. Same here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarilovesyou Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 I think "What are you smoking?" really was an appropriate response. First of all, I think $70 would be on the low side for a device whose library contains multiple titles from each of multiple third parties. If you packed the device with all of the 2600's popular third-party titles, I think you'd be looking into the $100+ range to cover all the licensing costs (because I'm sure each publisher would want extra to allow their titles to be diluted by the presence of other publishers' major works alongside; also, consider that having all of your marquee titles in one product is worth more than having them sold separately, in contrast to economy-size thinking, in part due to the fact that you are effectively letting go future revenue streams from the individual titles), and then because you wouldn't be able to sell as many at such a high price point, you'd have to raise the price even higher in order to make the whole venture worth it. Would there be even 500 people in the US willing to pay $300 for a device that plays 100 Atari 2600 games? Yes, I'm making up numbers, but you are missing the point that the "bean-counting suits" have to ensure that the company is not throwing money out the window. They aren't doing this for charity; this isn't like the federal government funding space exploration. This is an organization funded by sales, not taxes. The bottom line is that there are not as many people willing to pay what you are willing to pay as you think there are, and there are even fewer people willing to pay more than what you are willing to pay. onmode-ky I guess I'm not being realistic. Even if the FB2 had a slew of the best Activision titles, the top Imagic and Atari license games, how much more success would it have seen? Who can say, but considering that the bean-counting suits look at the FB's market demographic as 'impulse buyers' we're honestly lucky to be getting anything at all. And since that's the case, I feel it's fair to criticize their 'efforts'. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrekkiELO Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 (edited) I guess I'm not being realistic. Even if the FB2 had a slew of the best Activision titles, the top Imagic and Atari license games, how much more success would it have seen? Who can say, but considering that the bean-counting suits look at the FB's market demographic as 'impulse buyers' we're honestly lucky to be getting anything at all. And since that's the case, I feel it's fair to criticize their 'efforts'. Indeed, but there are those that think otherwise with regards towards fans who voice any concerns, so bottom line, minus all third party licenses, how much more would this have cost them in time or money to just include every Atari owned title and as such making this a true Flashback 2+ with about 50-60 games? Rick Vendl II Edited January 24, 2010 by TrekkiELO 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atariboy Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 (edited) I did ADV II, Tony Wong did Return to Haunted House, Dennis Debro did Atari Climber and fixed Yar's Return (that was done by the Chinese guys) and Asteroids Deluxe (Chinese guys original did), John Champaeu fixed Lunar Lander and Caverns of Mars (both done by the Chinese guys) Since they won't be included, is there a way to get the fixed versions of Asteroids Deluxe and Caverns of Mars? As far as I can remember, Caverns of Mars was renamed and released already, but is there a way to get Asteroids Deluxe? Or do we just have to hope Atari does something else 2600 related in the future and includes it? Edited January 25, 2010 by Atariboy 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrekkiELO Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 (edited) Me too, hence my preorder, but if there is an intent to stifle any questions, constructive criticism or debate, then Atari Age should close this forum because I'm not interested in a mutual ass kissing society! Because there's nothing constructive about it at this point. Same "Why wasn't game x on there?" and "It should have had x, y and z on it" and "It should have a cartridge port", etc. BS as 5 years ago. It was constructive the first few times someone asked those questions here. Now it's just whining, especially when we've answered everything already several times over just as we did back then. Whatever, and people wonder why corporations like Atari along with many others lose equity or go bankrupt every year, it's because they think of their customers in that way, I will now call it the James Cameron attitude effect, see my movie, make me money, but, to put it mildly, forget about any autographs! Signed, Rick Vendl II Edited January 25, 2010 by TrekkiELO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S1500 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 It would have been nice to have ALL of Atari's paddle titles included in the paddle sub-menu. There's plenty of paddle games made by Atari that doesn't need any worries or such about 3rd party licenses. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hornpipe2 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Well, you technically added another hidden paddle game, making it 43, so why not, was this also a time issue or would that have cost more, what? Well now, it's not stated outright that it's a paddle game, just that it uses a non-joystick non-keypad controller. It could very well be Indy 500! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyd97 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 We have to remember this was made specifically for General Mills and it is only $30. Does anybody know if the joysticks are the same as the original 2600? I am sure the portable 7800 fb3 will be all we ever wanted. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mos6507 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 So Count Chocula has more pull to get a FB released than we do? That's nothing new. The original Windows 3.1-based Activisions Classics eventually wound up stuck to a cereal box. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro Rogue Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 Well, you technically added another hidden paddle game, making it 43, so why not, was this also a time issue or would that have cost more, what? Well now, it's not stated outright that it's a paddle game, just that it uses a non-joystick non-keypad controller. It could very well be Indy 500! Nope. Atari doesn't own the rights to the name. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrekkiELO Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 (edited) Well, you technically added another hidden paddle game, making it 43, so why not, was this also a time issue or would that have cost more, what? Well now, it's not stated outright that it's a paddle game, just that it uses a non-joystick non-keypad controller. It could very well be Indy 500! That was my hope as well, but the name Indy 500 is licensed, maybe Curt went with its Race title by Sears or could that also have licensing issues? Rick Vendl II Edited January 25, 2010 by TrekkiELO 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mos6507 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 the James Cameron attitude effect, see my movie, make me money, but, to put it mildly, forget about any autographs! FYI: The Jim Cameron thing was a setup by TMZ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathanallan Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 So far I've tried playing the "instant win" at the general mills site, and three times I've lost. I'm betting the thing is rigged. Still going to buy one, but come on now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrekkiELO Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 (edited) the James Cameron attitude effect, see my movie, make me money, but, to put it mildly, forget about any autographs! FYI: The Jim Cameron thing was a setup by TMZ. So what, Jimmy boy fell right into their trap, but he's not the only one with that kind of attitude anyway, I attended my first/last Star Trek Convention upon finding out how much it cost me just to get an autograph from any Star Trek actor or guest star, then there was different circumstances with Walter Matthau, Mario Andretti, etc, now Jack Lemmon, Jeff Lynne and Richard Tandy are all class acts! Rick Vendl II Edited January 25, 2010 by TrekkiELO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+LS650 Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 I for one am happy to see the FB+. Let's all hope it's a big success... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brojamfootball Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 I for one am happy to see the FB+. Let's all hope it's a big success... Agreed! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.