I just edited the 5200 article on Wikipedia

[4Ks]

Here you go!

 

All I really did was correct the notion in the first part of the page that the 5200 sold terribly because of its controllers, and stated some facts that were left out at first.

[jetset]

Here you go!

 

All I really did was correct the notion in the first part of the page that the 5200 sold terribly because of its controllers, and stated some facts that were left out at first.

 

Nice!

Not sure I had noticed whatever was said about the controllers the 1st time I read the wiki page. I'm so used to hearing people complain about it I probably skimmed over it.

At any rate, definitely a great edit. I agree 100% it wasn't until the internet kicked the "classic" game collecting into high gear that I heard word one about how (supposedly) terrible the controllers were. Back then how good a system was went by word of mouth, and/or the gaming mags of the time. for my part, I never heard of one person passing on the 5200 because of the controllers. The people who had a coleco or intellivision had them because they either wanted Donkey Kong, or thought the sports titles in the intelly were cool. I'm also fairly certain most of the gaming mags said little if anything about the controllers, certainly nothing that would sway the choices of so many.

I also noticed the comment " The controller also had a tendency to lock up.", which needs be edited. not sure what that means exactly, but in all honesty this is THE first I've ever heard of THAT complaint.

 

Good eye though catching and editing that info. Sounds like there was some 5200 hate going on in that info page. Stands to reason. It's wikipedia, and anyone can put (practically) enything they want.

[4Ks]

It appears whoever wrote the original edit didn't appreciate my changes, because he got rid off all my stuff and replaced it with the old "5200 failed and had terrible controllers" bit.

[+Cafeman]

It appears whoever wrote the original edit didn't appreciate my changes, because he got rid off all my stuff and replaced it with the old "5200 failed and had terrible controllers" bit.

 

Yep. Thats the Wikipedia aristocracy for you.

[Retro Rogue]

That was me, and I reverted it because of this paragraph that's completely incorrect (as I clearly stated in the edit summary - "RV incorrect info. 5200 manufacturing stopped before the Tramiel takeover"):

 

"The 5200 met an untimely demise when Jack Tramiel took the helm at Atari and decided that computers were where the money was. This meant no 2600, 5200, or 7800 until Tramiel noticed the rapid sales of the NES and blew out all the old 2600, 5200, and 7800 software. Lucky thing, too, because otherwise there would have been no Gremlins, Ballblazer, or Rescue on Fractalus."

 

Secondly, most of the wording you changed to was either unencyclopedic (see the commentary like "Luck thing too, because otherwise" above), violated what's called "Original Research" (same) and included descriptive wording that violated the guidelines on neutrality.

 

And I did not write the original edit. There's a lot of people that use Wikipedia, reversions occur all the time. You'd need to go through the lengthy edit history to find out who actually wrote it.

Edited August 18, 2010 by wgungfu

[jetset]

Then it needs be edited back if it said the controllers were terrible and the system was a failure.

[4Ks]

That was me, and I reverted it because of this paragraph that's completely incorrect (as I clearly stated in the edit summary - "RV incorrect info. 5200 manufacturing stopped before the Tramiel takeover"):

 

"The 5200 met an untimely demise when Jack Tramiel took the helm at Atari and decided that computers were where the money was. This meant no 2600, 5200, or 7800 until Tramiel noticed the rapid sales of the NES and blew out all the old 2600, 5200, and 7800 software. Lucky thing, too, because otherwise there would have been no Gremlins, Ballblazer, or Rescue on Fractalus."

 

Secondly, most of the wording you changed to was either unencyclopedic (see the commentary like "Luck thing too, because otherwise" above), violated what's called "Original Research" (same) and included descriptive wording that violated the guidelines on neutrality.

 

And I did not write the original edit. There's a lot of people that use Wikipedia, reversions occur all the time. You'd need to go through the lengthy edit history to find out who actually wrote it.

 

So you would rather have neutral falsehoods than opinionated fact?

Edited August 18, 2010 by 4Ks

[jetset]

That was me, and I reverted it because of this paragraph that's completely incorrect (as I clearly stated in the edit summary - "RV incorrect info. 5200 manufacturing stopped before the Tramiel takeover"):

 

"The 5200 met an untimely demise when Jack Tramiel took the helm at Atari and decided that computers were where the money was. This meant no 2600, 5200, or 7800 until Tramiel noticed the rapid sales of the NES and blew out all the old 2600, 5200, and 7800 software. Lucky thing, too, because otherwise there would have been no Gremlins, Ballblazer, or Rescue on Fractalus."

 

Secondly, most of the wording you changed to was either unencyclopedic (see the commentary like "Luck thing too, because otherwise" above), violated what's called "Original Research" (same) and included descriptive wording that violated the guidelines on neutrality.

 

And I did not write the original edit. There's a lot of people that use Wikipedia, reversions occur all the time. You'd need to go through the lengthy edit history to find out who actually wrote it.

 

While I won't debate the tramiel part, calling the controllers "terrible" and saying they were the "cause of the poor sales" would violate the guidelines on neutrality far, far more (I'm only directing that your way if that was your words btw....) They are certainly not terrible, to say so is pure subjective opinion, and certainly speculation at best (reverse fanboyism at worst) to say it was the cause or it's failure, or even affected sales in any mentionable amount.

Again...not directing that towards you unless those were your words.

And again...I won't profess to know what is correct about the 5200's demise being due to tramiels intervention. I have seen that idea/theory/truth many, many times, so going with the averages, I'd tend to believe it true.

Then again, I've read pretty much nothing but hate for the controllers since joining the scene (of sorts) in the late 90's, and it turns out the vast majority of that is not only incorrect, but it's been spewed with little or no true interaction with the controllers themselves.

[4Ks]

I assume this is what wgungfu wrote:

 

The Atari 5200 SuperSystem, or simply the Atari 5200, is a video game console that was introduced in 1982 by Atari Inc. as a replacement for the popular Atari 2600. The 5200 was created to compete with the Intellivision, but wound up more directly competing with the ColecoVision shortly after its release.

 

The 5200 was based on Atari Inc.'s existing 400/800 computers and the internal hardware was almost identical, although software was not directly compatible between the two systems. Many (modern) gamers were unable to adapt to the systems controllers which to this day are considered to have been ahead of their time. In many circles of the classic gaming community, the controllers have gotten such poor reviews years after it's release it is speculated that the system performed poorly on the market due to this one issue. Oddly enough, little if any of the modern day complaints about the controllers were heard during the systems' original production run.

 

So it is his opinion that gamers hate 5200 because they have no skill. I'd say that is much more opinionated than my edit.

[jetset]

I assume this is what wgungfu wrote:

 

The Atari 5200 SuperSystem, or simply the Atari 5200, is a video game console that was introduced in 1982 by Atari Inc. as a replacement for the popular Atari 2600. The 5200 was created to compete with the Intellivision, but wound up more directly competing with the ColecoVision shortly after its release.

 

The 5200 was based on Atari Inc.'s existing 400/800 computers and the internal hardware was almost identical, although software was not directly compatible between the two systems. Many (modern) gamers were unable to adapt to the systems controllers which to this day are considered to have been ahead of their time. In many circles of the classic gaming community, the controllers have gotten such poor reviews years after it's release it is speculated that the system performed poorly on the market due to this one issue. Oddly enough, little if any of the modern day complaints about the controllers were heard during the systems' original production run.

 

So it is his opinion that gamers hate 5200 because they have no skill. I'd say that is much more opinionated than my edit.

 

No that was MY edit. Basically, I genuinely think that is the cause for all the hate of the controller. I never knew of anyone who had trouble with the analog, non-self centering aspect. When you hear many of the people (right here) who bash the controllers, they're mostly citing what they've read on the web after the fact.

With firsthand knowledge, having gotten the system at launch, and many friends and relatives with the system, the controllers were never an issue. I tried NOT to make it sound opinionated much but apparently that fell short.

 

I also edited the section with the lack of 2600 compatibility being a reason for the systems' "failure". That's a joke, and again...opinion? Maybe. But it's one I experienced. Nobody cared about that back then. Neither did the Colecovision owners I knew. They wanted arcade games that looked and sounded like the arcade. If the system had a way to play those games then great, and they both had that ability in the same form, an add-on you had to buy. If the b/c issue was a reason for the 5200's "failure", then the CV would have failed as well.

[Brian R.]

That really reads horribly. It's opinionated, unsupported and has grammatical errors.

 

"Many (modern) gamers were unable to adapt to the systems (sic) controllers..."

 

What, people from 2010 time traveled back to the 80s, tried to use the system's controllers, but couldn't? That's how I read what that says.

 

Considered to be ahead of their time? By whom? Source(s)? That's unsupported opinion. You can say legitimately that they were groundbreaking in offering new features, such as the pause button.

 

The only part of that paragraph I see as valid is the first sentence. The rest needs serious work.

[4Ks]

I assume this is what wgungfu wrote:

 

The Atari 5200 SuperSystem, or simply the Atari 5200, is a video game console that was introduced in 1982 by Atari Inc. as a replacement for the popular Atari 2600. The 5200 was created to compete with the Intellivision, but wound up more directly competing with the ColecoVision shortly after its release.

 

The 5200 was based on Atari Inc.'s existing 400/800 computers and the internal hardware was almost identical, although software was not directly compatible between the two systems. Many (modern) gamers were unable to adapt to the systems controllers which to this day are considered to have been ahead of their time. In many circles of the classic gaming community, the controllers have gotten such poor reviews years after it's release it is speculated that the system performed poorly on the market due to this one issue. Oddly enough, little if any of the modern day complaints about the controllers were heard during the systems' original production run.

 

So it is his opinion that gamers hate 5200 because they have no skill. I'd say that is much more opinionated than my edit.

 

No that was MY edit. Basically, I genuinely think that is the cause for all the hate of the controller. I never knew of anyone who had trouble with the analog, non-self centering aspect. When you hear many of the people (right here) who bash the controllers, they're mostly citing what they've read on the web after the fact.

With firsthand knowledge, having gotten the system at launch, and many friends and relatives with the system, the controllers were never an issue. I tried NOT to make it sound opinionated much but apparently that fell short.

 

I also edited the section with the lack of 2600 compatibility being a reason for the systems' "failure". That's a joke, and again...opinion? Maybe. But it's one I experienced. Nobody cared about that back then. Neither did the Colecovision owners I knew. They wanted arcade games that looked and sounded like the arcade. If the system had a way to play those games then great, and they both had that ability in the same form, an add-on you had to buy. If the b/c issue was a reason for the 5200's "failure", then the CV would have failed as well.

 

So that whole thing about the 5200 being a failure and having horrible controller really WAS wgungfu? For shame, man!

 

Though jetset's peragraph wasn't very good either. That part is supposed to be a summary and brief history of the 5200, not a rant about how people are wrong about the controllers.

[jetset]

That really reads horribly. It's opinionated, unsupported and has grammatical errors.

 

"Many (modern) gamers were unable to adapt to the systems (sic) controllers..."

 

What, people from 2010 time traveled back to the 80s, tried to use the system's controllers, but couldn't? That's how I read what that says.

 

Considered to be ahead of their time? By whom? Source(s)? That's unsupported opinion. You can say legitimately that they were groundbreaking in offering new features, such as the pause button.

 

The only part of that paragraph I see as valid is the first sentence. The rest needs serious work.

 

Well, anyone can edit my post. And maybe it's worded badly, but those of who had the 5200 back when it came out know there was never an issue with the controllers, aside from the fire buttons occasionally wearing down. The controllers are the same as thy were back in 1982, yet fast forward to 2010, and suddenly the majority of people who have touched a 5200 stick say they suck because they don't self center. So we don't need people to travel back in time. Those that were there then and still are now know.

Bottom line, *if* the 5200 was a failure it was in no way due to the controllers.

 

 

 

Though jetset's peragraph wasn't very good either. That part is supposed to be a summary and brief history of the 5200, not a rant about how people are wrong about the controllers.

 

That may be, but seeing as what was there (and what was re-edited) it was also wrong. Someone actually re-edited it to say that the imprecise nature was a bane to games such as pacman and Frogger? Again, this was never an issue back in the day. Now in 2010 it's a problem? C'mon. If someone is going to edit my edit because I gave favorable "opinions" of the controllers, the unsupported hating needs be removed as well.

[4Ks]

Though jetset's peragraph wasn't very good either. That part is supposed to be a summary and brief history of the 5200, not a rant about how people are wrong about the controllers.

 

That may be, but seeing as what was there (and what was re-edited) it was also wrong. Someone actually re-edited it to say that the imprecise nature was a bane to games such as pacman and Frogger? Again, this was never an issue back in the day. Now in 2010 it's a problem?

 

Not saying you're wrong, just saying that what you wrote doesn't fit in that part of the article. If you want to, you could just edit the Controllers section instead.

[jetset]

The 5200 came out after the 2600. It had a huge, black, plastic case.

 

No, it's not been edited to that yet, but looks like that's where this is going!

[+LS650]

They are certainly not terrible, to say so is pure subjective opinion, and certainly speculation at best (reverse fanboyism at worst)

That might be true - but one could easily write something along the lines of "many potential customers felt the controllers were terrible".

 

That would be a fact.

[jetset]

They are certainly not terrible, to say so is pure subjective opinion, and certainly speculation at best (reverse fanboyism at worst)

That might be true - but one could easily write something along the lines of "many potential customers felt the controllers were terrible".

 

That would be a fact.

 

How could potential customers feel the controllers were terrible? Being potential, they've never touched one. That means they are going solely based on the picture on the box, and in that case, couldn't the same could be said if controllers for any system?

[HammR25]

How could potential customers feel the controllers were terrible? Being potential, they've never touched one. That means they are going solely based on the picture on the box, and in that case, couldn't the same could be said if controllers for any system?

I guess this means people who don't have a system can't play it at a store display kiosk or a friend's house. The only people who even care what a wikipedia entry about an antique video game console says post here.

[Retro Rogue]

While I won't debate the tramiel part, calling the controllers "terrible" and saying they were the "cause of the poor sales" would violate the guidelines on neutrality far, far more (I'm only directing that your way if that was your words btw....)

 

 

Once again, was not commenting on anything regarding the controllers.

 

 

And again...I won't profess to know what is correct about the 5200's demise being due to tramiels intervention. I have seen that idea/theory/truth many, many times, so going with the averages, I'd tend to believe it true.

 

It's been discussed in these forums to ad nauseum, 5200 manufacturing was already stopped before the Tramiels bought Atari Consumer. Hell, it was even well reported in newspapers at the time:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/1984/05/22/business/atari-video-game-unit-introduced.html

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=2VMiAAAAIBAJ&sjid=MacFAAAAIBAJ&pg=2665,3172897&dq=atari+5200&hl=en

 

 

The statements regarding Jack have been discussed and corrected here many times over as well, including in the material Curt and I have presented, and the 7800 article I did for Retro Gamer as well. What froze up most of the ongoing projects was the unclear division between Warner initiated and owned projects (that were simply executed by Atari) vs. those actually owned by Atari. The 7800 was held up becuase of negotiations with Warner on who owed GCC for ownership of Maria and the development of the 10 launch games, as the 7800 contract with GCC was actually done by Warner. The 2600 support and sales continued the entire time and did not stop, all the way until the Jr. was launched in Christmas of '85. Unreleased 5200 titles were released under Tramiel after negotiations for those were finished as well (as they had also gone with Warner) at which point he also re-introduced the 5200 console itself to start clearing up inherited stock. Katz was hired specifically to come in and start up a full "electronic entertainment division" after all these negotiations were completed and *before* the NES was test marketed, per Jack's wishes. This was in August/Step. of '85 when he courted him for that, and he officially was "introduced" in his position in very early November.

Edited August 19, 2010 by wgungfu

[Retro Rogue]

So you would rather have neutral falsehoods than opinionated fact?

 

No, I would rather have correct info in general regarding the history of the console.

 

 

So that whole thing about the 5200 being a failure and having horrible controller really WAS wgungfu? For shame, man!

 

Nope. As I stated, none of the content was by me, you'd have to go through the edit history to see who wrote it.

[Retro Rogue]

They are certainly not terrible, to say so is pure subjective opinion, and certainly speculation at best (reverse fanboyism at worst)

That might be true - but one could easily write something along the lines of "many potential customers felt the controllers were terrible".

 

That would be a fact.

 

How could potential customers feel the controllers were terrible? Being potential, they've never touched one. That means they are going solely based on the picture on the box, and in that case, couldn't the same could be said if controllers for any system?

 

 

Either way, both of you can't add the content in the context you're describing. Please see the guidlines for No Original Research and Weasel Words. I also had to put a citation tag for the controller statement, which needs to be backed up with references that are under the policies of Notable and Reliable sources.

 

Also corrected a verb tense issue, per the guidelines of the video game project on tense. 5200 controllers still exist. Hence when you are discussing them, such as you did with their design, you state "are" and not "were". If you were discussing an event, then you would state "were", such as "The 5200 controllers were shown off as a key feature of the console during it's pre-release press period".

 

If you guys need help navigating the rules and guidelines of Wikipedia and it's content, I'm happy to assist.

Edited August 19, 2010 by wgungfu

[Bruce Tomlin]

Here you go!

 

All I really did was correct the notion in the first part of the page that the 5200 sold terribly because of its controllers,

Well, that did need to be changed, because that reeks of opinion, and it deserved a [Citation Needed] at the very least. The simple test here is "says who?"

 

The side fire buttons were ergonomically bad, to the point where I rigged up my own fire button using a bunch of aluminum foil wrapped around my big toe. But they were not bad enough that I wished I didn't have the 5200, and certainly not something I would have known about before having the 5200.

 

The buttons failing due oxidation of the flex circuits (the problem with the controllers NOW) wouldn't happen for a few years.

 

The 5200 sold terribly because it was not a 2600, simple as that. They eventually came up with the adapter module, but had to make a change to the cartridge slot wiring to support it.

 

Let's not go starting an edit war based on a lot of emotion. What belongs in wikipedia is encyclopedic content, the neutral-point-of-view stuff like you would find in a "real" encyclopedia.

[DracIsBack]

The problem i have with the 'selling terribly' comment is that I have yet to see any hard data whatsoever on how well it sold, how well it sold relative to the competition and what Atari's forecasts were relative to its performance. Would love to see some NPD run rate data for the unit relative to competition. Heck, maybe Curt has Atari sales figures like he found for the 7800.

 

 

Same for the reasons for it not selling. We all have opinions on why that is, but unless someone has market research from analysts or Atari from back in the day on why consumers chose to pass on the 5200, it's really all just speculation and personal opinions. And it may also result in over-simplification of the broader issue ... in the vein of "ET caused the video game crash".

[jetset]

Here you go!

 

All I really did was correct the notion in the first part of the page that the 5200 sold terribly because of its controllers,

Well, that did need to be changed, because that reeks of opinion, and it deserved a [Citation Needed] at the very least. The simple test here is "says who?"

 

The side fire buttons were ergonomically bad, ,

 

That is pure opinion. In fact, those of us who owned one in the day knew that was one of the best parts of the design.

 

to the point where I rigged up my own fire button using a bunch of aluminum foil wrapped around my big toe. But they were not bad enough that I wished I didn't have the 5200, and certainly not something I would have known about before having the 5200.

 

The buttons failing due oxidation of the flex circuits (the problem with the controllers NOW) wouldn't happen for a few years.

 

The 5200 sold terribly because it was not a 2600, simple as that. They eventually came up with the adapter module, but had to make a change to the cartridge slot wiring to support it.

Again, opinion 110%. If the 5200 didn't sell because it wasn't the 2600, how and why did the Colecovision and Intelivision sell?

 

Let's not go starting an edit war based on a lot of emotion. What belongs in wikipedia is encyclopedic content, the neutral-point-of-view stuff like you would find in a "real" encyclopedia.

 

Now that we can agree on. There should be no hating based on the opinions of a few any more than there should be lovey-dovey for the system or the controllers. Hopefully there is nothing left about how terrible the controllers, or the system are/were. I think that's what initially started this whole thing.

 

I'm sure if someone went onto the 7800 wiki and mentioned how absolutely horrific those controllers were there'd be a shitstorm. Should be no different for the 5200.

[Christophero Sly]

... in the vein of "ET caused the video game crash".

Speaking of introductory paragraphs on Wikipedia that need editing...