Nolan Bushnell Appointed to Atari Board

[atarian63]

Actually, my feelings on the whole thing can be summed up thusly:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Irtcv1SVvJ8

 

LOL!

 

Yeah, it's pretty funny. I mean, even if the guy really was everything he claimed to be vis a vis Atari (just for the sake of argument), he's been nothing special for the last 35 years. Even as seen in the best light, he's the business equivalent of a one hit wonder. He was in the right place at the right time. So putting him on the board of a company called "Atari" isn't going to do anything but get them (Atari and Nolan) a bit of PR.

 

Such a sad, pitiful move...

It's quite a bit more than "right place,right time" thats a silly statement. He took the risks, it was his company and we all wouldnt be here bitching if he had not done it.Hat's off to Nolan for making it,getting it started.

[accousticguitar]

Is there an ETA on when the book is coming out?

[Retro Rogue]

It's quite a bit more than "right place,right time" thats a silly statement. He took the risks, it was his company and we all wouldnt be here bitching if he had not done it.Hat's off to Nolan for making it,getting it started.

 

Nolan and Ted.

[Retro Rogue]

Is there an ETA on when the book is coming out?

 

Two books (one on Atari Inc. and one on Atari Corp.). Inc will be coming out sooner, and is actively advancing, but we're still vetting a lot of material and uncovering more material to answer questions to our satisfaction. Every question answered leaves another 5 uncovered it seems.

[accousticguitar]

Looking forward to it.

[DracIsBack]

Is there an ETA on when the book is coming out?

 

Two books (one on Atari Inc. and one on Atari Corp.). Inc will be coming out sooner, and is actively advancing, but we're still vetting a lot of material and uncovering more material to answer questions to our satisfaction. Every question answered leaves another 5 uncovered it seems.

 

I actually am more looking forward to the "Corp" book. Despite all the misinfo you guys have uncovered, Inc seemed much more 'public' due to profile, industry standing, scrutiny over the crash etc.

 

Corp always seemed shrouded in mystery in comparison. And "Corp" was when I really became an Atari fan.

[atarian63]

It's quite a bit more than "right place,right time" thats a silly statement. He took the risks, it was his company and we all wouldnt be here bitching if he had not done it.Hat's off to Nolan for making it,getting it started.

 

Nolan and Ted.

I stand corrected, didn't mean to leave Ted out.

Looking forward to the book!

[Atari2600Lives]

Wow! Is NintendoAge or AtariAge? I have never seen so much vitriol for Nolan Bushnell in one thread here at AtariAge. Wow, I had no idea so many despised the man.

 

Well I for one still think the man rocks. I found out about this at DigitalPress, and the people there seem to be more cool with this idea, than over here.

 

Whether you like the man or not Nolan Bushnell still founded the Atari company. He was the one who did the hiring. You have to admit the man had an eye for talent, and he was the one who was able to get the investors to spend the money to make it work. To make an analogy, if Atari was a circus, than Nolan was the ringmaster. Without the ringmaster you have no circus. And while the talent, and the animals are the ones who people come to see, the organizing that talent, and bringing faces to the show revolves around the ringmaster. And because of Nolan we had Atari. And I will forever be thankful for him because of that. As far as what he did after Atari, I kind of like to view him like Bobby Fischer. What Bobby Fischer did after being the Chess champion of the world is another man entirely. And the man after selling the Atari 2600 company is another man entirely.

 

So welcome back Nolan. Should be really interesting to see what direction or what ideas he has to bring forward. Let's be honest Atari screwed itself over without Nolans help. In fact the list of heads of Atari after Nolans departure have nothing to prove that Atari was better off without the man.

 

 

I am with Homer on this one.

 

Nolan Bushnell can not be written out of the incredible history of Atari afterall he CO FOUNDED THE COMPANY! Congratulations to him in getting back on the board (and yes I know it's a different company).

 

It takes vision and guts to start a company from scratch in a brand new field. Don't underestimate that factor and not everyone has what it takes. No matter what you personally think of him , if not for Nolan we would not have this wonderful Atari collecting hobby today.

Edited April 20, 2010 by Atari2600Lives

[Retro Rogue]

I am with Homer on this one. It's hard to belive some of the hate here.

 

No hate, just facts.

 

Nolan Bushnell can not be written out of the incredible history of Atari afterall he CO FOUNDED THE COMPANY! Congratulations to him.

 

I'm sorry, but it's the other way around - Nolan tried to write other people out of the incredible history of Atari. Your statement on who founded it is a perfect example of that.

 

It takes vision and guts to start a company from scratch in a brand new field. Don't underestimate that.

 

LOL, the vision and guts was a shared one, which is the point.

Edited April 20, 2010 by wgungfu

[Atari2600Lives]

I am with Homer on this one. It's hard to belive some of the hate here.

 

No hate, just facts.

 

Nolan Bushnell can not be written out of the incredible history of Atari afterall he CO FOUNDED THE COMPANY! Congratulations to him.

 

I'm sorry, but it's the other way around - Nolan tried to write other people out of the incredible history of Atari. Your statement on who founded it is a perfect example of that.

 

It takes vision and guts to start a company from scratch in a brand new field. Don't underestimate that.

 

LOL, the vision and guts was a shared one, which is the point.

 

Bushnell bought out Dabney who was worried about the video game industry . DABNEY SOLD HIS PART OF THE COMPANY...hardly showing vision as you mention.

 

No one has ever said only Nolan Bushnell was responsible for Atari's success.

 

I have read just about every book on the history of Atari that has been made and no one said Bushnell did it by himself but he certianly played a BIG role in it.

 

and by the way how is my statement that he co -founded the company not accurate?

Edited April 20, 2010 by Atari2600Lives

[Retro Rogue]

Bushnell bought out Dabney who was worried about the video game industry .

 

Nope. That's what Nolan likes to claim. According to Dabney, he was *forced* out. When Curt asked Nolan directly via email after we found out, he didn't deny it - and in fact went so far as to say "It was business, nothing personal."

 

DABNEY SOLD HIS PART OF THE COMPANY...hardly showing vision as you mention.

 

Nope, he was forced out. That's Nolan's PR and claim that he was worried about the video game industry. Nolan actually began trying to marginalize Ted's participation more and more to the point where there was nowhere left but out, it had nothing to do with being worried about the video game industry. In fact during that time, they were also doing business and contracts for pinball design as well. Ted, by his own words, was not looking to leave or be bought out. And then, as Curt already mentioned, when Nolan gave him the take it or leave it deal he got screwed even further on the routes (which he didn't have for that long either). As Curt also already mentioned, we vetted everything with Al Alcorn and the rest of the first 10 Syzygy/Atari employees and the Cyan guys.

 

And sorry, but creating all the major circuitry and display technology for Computer Space, and deciding to do everything right along side Nolan including CO-FOUNDING ATARI, is not vision? Haha.

 

I have read just about every book on the history of Atari

 

That would explain where you're getting the misinformation from. Remember, all of the information from that time period regarding Ted has come from Nolan until last year.

 

and by the way how is my statement that he co -founded the company not accurate?

 

My mistake, misread that to say simply founded.

Edited April 20, 2010 by wgungfu

[+wood_jl]

Next will be Atari namesake and IP (games) licenced cheaply to uWink. Then, a desperate Atari will try to give the appearance of a pseudo-Steve Jobs-esque comeback and put him in charge, since they've been through so many lead dogs already.....

[roberto]

Wow! It's interesting to see how the same facts can be seen from completely different perspectives... Actually, no one credits Nolan for being the "father" of videogames (a title which is rightfully attributed to Ralph Baer, even though, to be 100% precise, the first videogame on a CRT device, like a TV, goes back to 1947 and Mr. Baer had nothing to do with it) but it seems undeniable that Nolan was the father of the "industry": this is how he is usually credited for and I don't think anyone'd seriously question this which, by the way, implies he was more of a shrewd businessman than a creative guy (with all the consequences that being a "shrewd businessman" can imply...)

 

About modern "Atari", well, no one seems to know what to do with it and it's really a shame to see such a legacy languish in this way.

 

BTW, I heard a few years ago that there was a movie in the works on Nolan's life featuring Di Caprio. Anyone knows anything about this? Is this actually in production/coming out soon or the project was canceled already?

 

Cheers!

 

PS. Just read the latest posts on those upcoming books (which strangely didn't show up when i started writing this post...): I'm extremely interested too and really looking forward to them!

Edited April 20, 2010 by roberto

[carmel_andrews]

you going to do both books in the style of 'home computer wars', wgungfu

[kool kitty89]

Two books (one on Atari Inc. and one on Atari Corp.). Inc will be coming out sooner, and is actively advancing, but we're still vetting a lot of material and uncovering more material to answer questions to our satisfaction. Every question answered leaves another 5 uncovered it seems.

 

Isn't there another book planned including a more general overview on the industry of that time too? (I seem to recall it being mentioned that a lot of interesting non-Atari related stuff was unearthed as well, meriting such a venture)

 

 

 

Wow! It's interesting to see how the same facts can be seen from completely different perspectives... Actually, no one credits Nolan for being the "father" of videogames (a title which is rightfully attributed to Ralph Baer, even though, to be 100% precise, the first videogame on a CRT device, like a TV, goes back to 1947 and Mr. Baer had nothing to do with it) but it seems undeniable that Nolan was the father of the "industry": this is how he is usually credited for and I don't think anyone'd seriously question this which, by the way, implies he was more of a shrewd businessman than a creative guy (with all the consequences that being a "shrewd businessman" can imply...)

Hmm, there was raster based hardware constituting game-like devices at that time? I know there were examples of vector based devices on CRTs, but that's not video. (that's what Baer patented and why pretty much every company producing raster based entertainment devices had to pay royalties over that patent while it was valid -and all contesting it in court failed)

 

It really seems a shame that someone much more business minded, industrious, and persuasive (if self serving) hadn't ended up starting a similar venture with Dabney instead... (Jobs is a bit more like that, like Nolan in some respects, but has a lot more of what it takes for a successful business)

Another big example of that would be Tom Kalinske at Sega: pretty full of himself and all (with some BS PR -though unlike Bushnell he focused it much more on the company, not himself: *we*, not *I*), but good at what he did/does. (I think I like the more "straight shooter" nature of some others like Micheal Katz personally)

 

Anyway, with someone more like that, the original Atari would likely have been a lot more successful, probably managing a more competitive deal with Warner too. (if they didn't have sufficient fundign for such a venture on their own)

This is totally getting off topic though.

 

About modern "Atari", well, no one seems to know what to do with it and it's really a shame to see such a legacy languish in this way.

I think the last ember of the original Atari Inc. died with Midway shutting down Midway Games West in 2003 -shutting arcade activities down previously in 2001. (Midway Games West, of course being what was left of Atari Games)

Edited April 20, 2010 by kool kitty89

[Shannon]

Oh no! Another childhood belief crushed! I'm devastated.

[roberto]

 

Hmm, there was raster based hardware constituting game-like devices at that time? I know there were examples of vector based devices on CRTs, but that's not video. (that's what Baer patented and why pretty much every company producing raster based entertainment devices had to pay royalties over that patent while it was valid -and all contesting it in court failed)

 

 

You are right, the electron beam was actually moved from point to point instead of by line, still it was the first experiment of a "game" played on a video screen...

 

I think the last ember of the original Atari Inc. died with Midway shutting down Midway Games West in 2003 -shutting arcade activities down previously in 2001. (Midway Games West, of course being what was left of Atari Games)

 

Right, in fact I was just referring to the "Atari" name and IPs...

 

This is totally getting off topic though.

 

Right again!

Edited April 20, 2010 by roberto

[Retro Rogue]

Actually, no one credits Nolan for being the "father" of videogames

 

Roberto, meet Nolan's PR. Nolan's PR, meet Roberto.

 

http://games.venturebeat.com/2010/04/19/going-full-circle-nolan-bushnell-rejoins-ataris-board/

http://archive.videogamesdaily.com/features/nolan-bushnell-interview-april-2009-p1.asp

http://web.mit.edu/invent/iow/bushnell.html

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=fV8aAAAAIBAJ&sjid=MCoEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4402,5448583&dq=nolan-bushnell+father-of-video-games&hl=en

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22nolan+bushnell%22+%22father+of+video+games%22&btnG=Search+Archives&hl=en&ned=us&scoring=a

 

(a title which is rightfully attributed to Ralph Baer, even though, to be 100% precise, the first videogame on a CRT device, like a TV, goes back to 1947 and Mr. Baer had nothing to do with it)

 

No, that's the first patent for a CRT based amusement device. It was simply a CRT monitor used to draw a dot on the screen that was moved around by the player mechanically (with gears and such) controlling the beam like an etch-a-sketch. Motion was made difficult through changes in the gear motion's precision. Targets were pieces of paper taped on the screen, and "collision" was detected mechanically through the literal motion of the beam mechanism as well. The CRT was a simple novelty, and the entire game was actually an EM game which could have just as easily used a flashlight and paper in place of the CRT. It was not a videogame by any stretch of the imagination.

[Retro Rogue]

You are right, the electron beam was actually moved from point to point instead of by line, still it was the first experiment of a "game" played on a video screen...

 

Nope, that's a mishmashing of the actual terminology and definitions. A CRT != a video screen by definition, nor does a CRT automatically mean video: A CRT is simply a tube with an electron gun in it. There's two different types of display technology that run in a CRT environment: Vector and Video. Vector is the manual control of the electron gun to produce an image by tracing straight lines between arbitrary points. Video is the technology of electronically capturing, recording, processing, storing, transmitting, and reconstructing a sequence of still images representing scenes in motion. It uses a raster display method, and takes a literal video signal which is then decoded and displayed on the CRT. Vector, of course, has no transmitted signal, no stored or captured image, and nothing being reconstructed. It is simply a mechanical line image drawn manually, on the spot.

 

What the game is, is the first experiment of a game done on a CRT, not a "video screen". That's exactly why it was also cited in Ralph's patents. To be the first on a "video screen" it would have be a dot that was raster rendered and controlled via a video signal. Ralph and his team were the first ones to figure out how to do that through a video signal.

Edited April 20, 2010 by wgungfu

[Retro Rogue]

Isn't there another book planned including a more general overview on the industry of that time too? (I seem to recall it being mentioned that a lot of interesting non-Atari related stuff was unearthed as well, meriting such a venture)

 

Yes, but that one is coming from more of the arcade/coin-op perspective, covering the transition of the industry from EM to video. It'll cover from the mid-60's through to '84. Most usually start with video coin-ops (Computer Space, PONG) and, except for a few main games (such as Space Invaders and Pac-Man), usually switch right over to the home/consumer industry. The reality was the coin industry was actually calling the shots in video game development up through to the crash. I.E. the main titles were all developed for the arcades first (with the exception of a few notable console only titles here and there). That changed after the crash of course with the NES, when consoles became the primary platform for game development and new game releases.

[roberto]

Nope, that's a mishmashing of the actual terminology and definitions.

 

Of course your definition is technically correct and, according to it, we can't classify the CRT amusement device as a "video" game.

Still, in this context, I'd like to be a little more flexible in the definition of "video", which is actually from a Latin word meaning "to see". Under the original literal meaning of the word, a game which we can play by "seeing" and manipulating something on a screen makes it a "video game" to me (also because I wouldn't know how to call it otherwise in a short form: "interactive electronic screen based game"? I guess most people would take this as a generic description of what videogames are all about, regardless of how the signal displayed on the screen is actually handled/generated... ), even though I'm aware the exact modern engineering terminology doesn't classify it as such.

 

Anyway, it wasn't my intention to stir a discussion about the definition of "video" under a literal or engineering perspective: there's already so much interesting stuff to read on the original topic (and thanks for those links... quite enlightening )!

Edited April 20, 2010 by roberto

[Chickybaby]

I am glad the book(s) is(will) be covering the emotional component as well because that's not always easy to document on paper/in words but yet can influence so much.

My one concern is some sort of backlash legal or otherwise from those diehard individuals who don't want to believe the truth even with the massive amounts of proof from many sources.

 

Thank you also to Curt and Wgunfu for taking their time and going through and sharing so much information here which cannot be the easiest of subjects to discuss at all. It also took a lot for those individuals they located to speak up and bring back many apparent unpleasant memories.

 

We are so very lucky to have them as well as many other very talented individuals as long standing members of this community as they have contributed so much and continue to do so.

Thank you.

[Grooveraider]

I've never seen a single topic split AtariAge so angrily before.

 

I would say our collective enjoyment for the Atari brand has influenced what we feel about Nolan and those who have had direct involvement with him have clearly experienced some negative practices.

 

Personally I am glad Atari happened and it's easy for me to mistakenly give Nolan credit for that (even though the stuff I love about Atari happened after he left the company). I think it's similar to Nintendo fanboys who can't bring themselves to fault Shigeru Miyamoto for just copying Doki Doki Panic, calling it Super Mario Bros 2 and calling it a day. You would never hear them ever say Shigeru ever did anything wrong. Those same fans also look back at the Nintendo handhelds with great affection, declaring them all cherished treasures, not realizing Gunpei Yokoi was lambasted by Hiroshi Yamauchi for the failure of the Virtual Boy and punished with demotion in the company.

 

Being a gaming fan often clouds our memories or perception of companies and their real personalities.

 

Before going around accusing people of being blind Nintendo fanboys. Shigeru Miyamoto is quoted on a 2004 British documentary http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txDlxdtWzYs&feature=related @ 4:17 as being the Producer of Doki Doki Panic. Not to mention, no American in 1988 ever heard nor played Doki Doki Panic at the time - so why the complaints?

Edited April 20, 2010 by Grooveraider

[Zoyx]

I like this pic...

 

[Ransom]

Two books (one on Atari Inc. and one on Atari Corp.). Inc will be coming out sooner, and is actively advancing, but we're still vetting a lot of material and uncovering more material to answer questions to our satisfaction. Every question answered leaves another 5 uncovered it seems.

 

Why go to all that trouble? Have you learned nothing? Just copy some Wikipedia articles, print them up on your computer, staple them together, and then hire a PR firm to tout the fact that you've written the definitive history of video games! You'll be on the talk circuit in no time, and a celebrity before you know it.

 

Then you can cash in on your celebrity status . . .

 

That's where the real money is!