Nolan Bushnell Appointed to Atari Board

[Curt Vendel]

Oh this is DEFINITELY nothing more then a PR stunt.

 

Nolan was brought in for his on-line game experience?!?!? Did I miss something? The closest he ever got to anything like online gaming was having his son setup a network in his uWink restaurant.

 

Also, just a year ago Nolan was badmouthing on-line gaming:

 

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/nolan-bushnell-rubbishes-online-gaming_3

 

 

 

Curt

 

 

 

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28149/Bushnell_Virden_Appointed_To_Atari_Board.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GamasutraNews+%28Gamasutra+News%29

 

My first thoughts were "I mean it's a late April fools joke, right? Or a PR stunt? They're

not actually going to take direction from that guy?!?!?!"

[Curt Vendel]

We had to choose to go to two separate books as we don't want to have books like others that just skim over details and make one line references, we are going far and wide with a lot of stories. Again just as Marty said, everytime we get one answer - 5 more questions crop up.

 

We just concluded an exhaustive research effort into Atari and Amiga and uncovered the true, real story and we ended up finding out a lot more then we originally were looking for and it spurred additional research efforts.

 

Also just a few months ago Marty and I were given over 8 banker boxes of court testimonies and license agreements from the very early days of videogaming and there is some eye opening "dirt" that has been dug up. We are going to uncover area's never before written about.

 

 

Curt

 

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.

[carmel_andrews]

Curt....seems that Nolan has a forgetful memory....or perhaps he's forgotten about what battle swarm (he's own offering) is all about

 

http://www.metatix.com/news/15/

 

Perhaps Nolan is suffering the onset of Alzheimers or Parkinson's or something like that

[Retro Rogue]

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

 

Nobody on either side of the fence has ever classified it as such. Even people that like to generically classify vector games as "videogames". It's like you're trying to take the videogame definition argument and applying it to something that neither side even remotely considers a "videogame". It's an EM game. And you don't start things out by saying "to be 100% precise" and then throw precision out the window.

 

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

 

That still conflicts itself and is just plain wrong. Like you're trying to make stuff up as you go along. The original word video derived from, videre or "I see", has nothing to do with a screen. Unless you're going to claim Romans had CRT screens. You can't say "I'm going to use the latin origin of videre which simply means seeing anything in front of me, and they cherry pick the idea of a screen from the definition of video and combine the two." You can't be sorta accurate in one part, accurate in another, and completely inaccurate in another to try and create your own personal definition. That's just silly.

 

To further clarify, Websters clearly defines the etymology of video as the Latin vidēre to see + -o (as in audio), which was entered in 1937 and of course refers to the combination of the words within the context of television. Likewise, the definition of video is specifically tied to Television which has to do with the broadcasting and transmission of encoded signals representing still images and sound. Or as Websters defines video: "being, relating to, or used in the transmission or reception of the television image <a video channel>". Furthermore, they define video game as "an electronic game played by means of images on a video screen and often emphasizing fast action", which was entered in 1973. Now if you want to say the technical definition has evolved in to a more generic one since then because of it's pop-culture usage, you could certainly say that. But to try and go back and rewrite the origin and original usage of the word(s) based on your own made up etymology and usage of etymology, is as I said - just silly.

 

(also because I wouldn't know how to call it otherwise in a short form: "interactive electronic screen based game"?

 

It's what it's creators defined as and described it as very clearly throughout his patent filing, a cathode-ray tube amusement device. It's an EM game, it uses the CRT beam for it's direct mechanical control and motions and not any displayed "image", and why I said it could have just as easily used a flashlight. If it had anything to do with video or the "etymology" of video as you're trying to warp it, the inventors would have titled it as "video amusement game" and used the word "video" somewhere in the filing. We've already clearly shown that word and usage to be in existence a decade before the CRT amusement device patent was filed.

 

The reason it was referenced in Ralph's patent, is because it represents the earliest known patent of human interaction (i.e. control) with a CRT for a game, even if it was only in the mechanical sense. Remember, besides raster scan display technology, Ralph's patents had to do with the generation and manipulation of symbols on a video screen via a video signal. The interaction between person and television.

 

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 people who use the modern generic definition have never defined an EM game, and specifically that one, as a "videogame" by any stretch of the imagination. Tennis for two and Spacewar!, sure. It's like you're going in reverse, trying to take the technical term and warp it in to the current pop-culture usage, when it's the opposite. The current pop-culture usage simply arose from dropping the technical usage and simply applying it to any drawn, interactive game on screen.

Edited April 20, 2010 by wgungfu

[Herbarius]

By the way, isn't Infogrames/Atari in financial trouble these days and may go down soon?

[accousticguitar]

We had to choose to go to two separate books as we don't want to have books like others that just skim over details and make one line references, we are going far and wide with a lot of stories. Again just as Marty said, everytime we get one answer - 5 more questions crop up.

 

We just concluded an exhaustive research effort into Atari and Amiga and uncovered the true, real story and we ended up finding out a lot more then we originally were looking for and it spurred additional research efforts.

 

Also just a few months ago Marty and I were given over 8 banker boxes of court testimonies and license agreements from the very early days of videogaming and there is some eye opening "dirt" that has been dug up. We are going to uncover area's never before written about.

 

 

Curt

 

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.

Man, you are really making me want to read this stuff and it'll probably be years before I get to, so please stop!

[Retro Rogue]

We just concluded an exhaustive research effort into Atari and Amiga and uncovered the true, real story and we ended up finding out a lot more then we originally were looking for and it spurred additional research efforts.

 

Yah, for example in tracking down the Mickey team, we started uncovering the previous teams they came from and what they were working on before that (which lead to the discovery of GUMP, clarification on Sierra and Gaza, Rainbow, and more). That lead to finding out even more material that needed to be researched just on those alone, but then of course a whole era of computer and console projects ('82-'84) that nobody had any idea about. And of course that doesn't include coin material, or other departments and divisions. And even then, that's just that two year time period. Just so much information.

Edited April 20, 2010 by wgungfu

[SoulBlazer]

That's the real reason Atari did this, I think. The company is not doing that well. They must think by apointing Nolan to their board of directors that his name alone will help them to obtain additional money and/or licences.

Edited April 20, 2010 by SoulBlazer

[segasaturn]

Maybe Nolan will actually help Atari into being something special....

[Cliff Friedel]

Actually, he was a two-hit wonder. Chucky Cheese made him more money by far than Atari did.

 

So, being a millionaire not once, but twice, isn't an accomplishment? I could handle ridicule from the retro game playing masses if it meant having a bank account with a $1000000+ balance in it!

[Rik]

Nolan may be smart enough to have started Atari.He sure WASN'T smart with his money management.He sold Atari for AFAIR $28 million?,went bankrupt, lost the shirt off his back.He couldn't play it smart with 28 mill,made stupid investments.Man he could have lived comfortably with those millions. That's my view.I guess he was a gambler,and that's what he did with that 28 million,gambled it away,with his own stupidity.But i guess many with that kind of money do squander it away,hes only human.I mean come on,28 million,man one can live off the yearly interest!

[+Random Terrain]

Oh - and hey Nolan - what the F*CK did you spend $24million on at uWink - sure as hell wasn't the hardware or games or anything else that went into uWink --- more investment cash poured into the black hole of Nolan's failures.

Those hot tub hooker orgies aren't cheap, you know. And what hooker is going to be a human humidor for free? Do you really expect him to keep his cigars anywhere else? The type of lifestyle he has become accustomed to costs money.

[+moycon]

Two books (one on Atari Inc. and one on Atari Corp.).

 

Which one includes the chapter on the landfill?

[DracIsBack]

went bankrupt, lost the shirt off his back.

 

Did he actually go bankrupt personally? I know he had financial issues, but I don't think it went that far.

[+Nathan Strum]

Honestly, hearing this is like waking up to hear Daffy Duck joined and replaced one of the board members of Time/Warner.

Now that would be an improvement.

[Atari2600Lives]

Curt & Marty, I do applaud you for writing about video game history and specifically about Atari but I caution you that sometimes there really are two sides to every story.

 

As an example (this is only an example and not to be considered factual) it could well be that Dabney simply was not pulling his weight and was forced out so the company could move forward (and of course Dabney would view that as being forced out while the partner or partners that stayed would view it as survival).

 

There was a tremendous amount of success after Dabney left that lasted for a while.

 

Have you contacted Nolan himself to get his side of the story?

Also two things, I said I read every book and NONE claimed that Nolan did it by himself, so you saying I have miss information is not correct as I am telling you that Nolan was not a one man show.

Also I know a thing or two about vision and success as an entrepreneur and I am telling you anyone that sold his shares before having success did not have it no matter what circuitry he designed. Good engineers are sometimes not good business men. Vision is not just about design.

Edited April 20, 2010 by Atari2600Lives

[Curt Vendel]

Here an article from a few years back, its one of the better and more honest articles out there, its still a little sugar coated, but gives you at least a small sense of the string of blunders and the massive haunting debt that weighed on him for over a decade. The article regurgitates Nolans stolen claim that it was his house and his daughters bedroom where Computer Space was built and conceived. No, that was Ted's house and his daughters bedroom. Just one of the many myths that are being busted in the long history of lies that is Nolan's career.

 

 

http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/09.16.99/cover/bushnell2-9937.html

 

 

Curt

 

went bankrupt, lost the shirt off his back.

 

Did he actually go bankrupt personally? I know he had financial issues, but I don't think it went that far.

Edited April 20, 2010 by Curt Vendel

[Crazy Climber]

I guess it is no big deal to me since I don't purchase Dragonball z or the Backyard sports series games...

[Ross PK]

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 too am really surprised at the slating Nolan has been getting in this topic.

[Tickled_Pink]

I think that some people have lost their sense of perspective slightly and have gone all weak at the knees at the thought of their Messiah returning. Yes, we've had a great deal of fun over the years thanks to the company that Nolan co-founded. But that doesn't make him a saint. From what I've read here, Bushnell is a decidedly dodgy character with questionable business practices.

 

If people are so willing to ignore those faults then perhaps they might also forgive the Tramiels. After all they did rescue Atari from Warner when it was making heavy losses and managed to keep it going for another 10 years or so.

 

Anyone? No? Didn't think so.

[Ross PK]

I think that some people have lost their sense of perspective slightly and have gone all weak at the knees at the thought of their Messiah returning. Yes, we've had a great deal of fun over the years thanks to the company that Nolan co-founded. But that doesn't make him a saint. From what I've read here, Bushnell is a decidedly dodgy character with questionable business practices.

 

If people are so willing to ignore those faults then perhaps they might also forgive the Tramiels. After all they did rescue Atari from Warner when it was making heavy losses and managed to keep it going for another 10 years or so.

 

Anyone? No? Didn't think so.

 

Don't disrespect our God.

[+moycon]

PR stunt or no, I'm glad Nolan is again part of a company he helped create.

[cimerians]

Ok after reading the negative comments I have one thing to say.

 

Get the fuck over it.

 

If he was a thieving prick who copied stuff and......made it better......so what.

(or made others make it better like most owners do)

 

See Bill Gates.

[Bakasama]

That may be so but would YOU want to start up a business with this guy?

[carmel_andrews]

I think that the only money he (Bushnell) made from chuck e cheese/pizza time was when he counter sued one of his investors for trying to pull out (the investor in question was Robert Brock, then one of the leading Holiday inn franchisees in the U S)