Atari out of business?

[bloatedmonkey]

I'm guessing this has been discussed but I can't figure out where. The Saturday Night Live News had a bit about "Atari" going out of business this week. Given the crummy games being sold under the Atari name, that's not much of a suprise. Anyone have more info?

[CPUWIZ]

I can tell you that Midway (ex. Atari games) in Milpitas, CA just laid off their entire development staff. Maybe that's what they are talking about ?

[joeybastard]

They were referring to the Midway thing, but didn't specify that it was the Atari Games and not Atari corp.

[AtariDude]

Saturday Night Live probably wouldn't even know the difference. They probably think Atari is just one company instead of the different companies that it became in 1984 when Warner Communications sold off part of Atari to Jack Tramiel.

 

Has anyone notice that Warner always seems to have problems when it merges with other companies? For example, AOL - Time - Warner.

[MegaManFan]

Saturday Night Live probably wouldn't even know the difference. They probably think Atari is just one company instead of the different companies that it became in 1984 when Warner Communications sold off part of Atari to Jack Tramiel.

 

Has anyone notice that Warner always seems to have problems when it merges with other companies? For example, AOL - Time - Warner.

 

Yeah, that one's turning out to be a major dog. If they don't spin off into seperate companies within a year's time, it will probably be the downfall of both.

[King Atari]

I did a post about this right after the show aired.

 

http://www.atariage.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21005

 

Rhindle's right, you can't expect accuracy from the fake news .

[cryptik76]

The Atari name (this is old news, of course) is owned by French-owned Infogrames, who is using the Atari name to peddle various high-profile games (Neverwinter Nights, Unreal Tournament 2003 and Unreal Championship, Unreal II, Test Drive, etc.).

 

I know that Atari no longer really exists but it's nice to see the Atari logo come up when I boot up Neverwinter Nights (a very good game, by the way). I think it's a better fate than what Hasbro was doing, which was simply releasing old Atari games with 3D graphics (like Missile Command, Pong, etc.).

[AtariDude]

I do like the fact that Infogrames is releasing some of their best games and using the Atari logo to build brand recognition. There are some people in the world who have never heard of Atari and hopefully the good titles that they have been releasing with help restore Atari's image of leading technology and fun games.

[Atari Joe]

This is one of those times when Joe has to excercise his right as captian of the atari super-gang to put you fools into the light and explain what goes on.

 

THIS IS WHAT I KNOW FOR A FACT

 

1.) Atari Games which is now Midway West is closing down shop in california. this is the same place that was origincally atari coin-op.

 

2.) Infogrames and Midway West are 2 different things. Atari home consumer division (videogames & computers) was sold to Jackass Tramiel in 1984, atari coin-op division was mostly sold to midway in 1984 with other owners including tramiel and still warner.

 

3.) saturday night live doesnt know the difference. they maybe just heard about it and since they like atari jimmy fallon said it. i know cuz i was on there once.

 

So sit back down and shut your trap. Its time for JOE CALL

 

Joe

[cryptik76]

Atari Joe, are you for real? I mean, is the whole "Atari Joe, captain of the Atari Super-Gang" thing done tongue-in-cheek, or what?

 

Anyway, I agree with AtariDude in that I think it's good that Infogrames is using the Atari name for their better titles (rather than their "budget" titles, which still use the Infogrames name). I read something from one of the heads of Infogrames (was it Bruce Bonnell? Not sure) who basically said that they wanted to use the Atari name for their high-profile, high-budget games because they felt that if Atari were really still around, those are the kinds of games they would be developing and publishing, not just rehashes of their old titles.

[MegaManFan]

Atari Joe, are you for real?  I mean, is the whole "Atari Joe, captain of the Atari Super-Gang" thing done tongue-in-cheek, or what?

 

Joe don't have no time for your jibba jabba. He's a celebrity.

[Osmeroid]

Commentary on Atari from Dutch writer 'Phreak'

 

 

http://www.uncleclive.co.uk/phreak2.html

[mos6507]

When GM started Saturn they deliberately isolated it from most of the rest of the GM universe in order to let the brand develop its own unique infrastructure all the way down to how their management structure worked. Say what you will about Saturn, but it is a far more distinct entity than, for instance, Buick vs. Chevy.

 

If Atari is simply a symbol that Infogrames slaps onto certain titles, it doesn't mean that much. In order for the name to matter, you need to partition Infogrames up and dedicate exclusive resources to the Atari branch and let them develop their own way of doing things. The Atari way, back before Kassar and the Tramiels destroyed things, was to videogames what Xerox Parc was to computers: it was a breeding ground for free-form innovation. It was largely a hands-off policy of trusting the developers to do what they wanted.

 

Innovation is something the game industry solely needs. Not innovation in graphics or sound or theme, but innovation in GAME DESIGN.

 

Neverwinter Nights is an RPG that breaks the mold and I'm glad that Infogrames gave it the Fuji, but the game was not developed by "Atari". It's a real anomoly in the industry and isn't likely to be repeated.

 

The industry in general has largely given up on the idea of a single unified in-house developer-base, but that's what you really need in order to somehow try to recreate the Atari spirit. If every game is a mini-movie with its own teams that come together when the game starts development and then disperses permanently when the game is complete (like long independent contractors) then you can not achieve consistency from game to game. At least not without some Movie-Mogul-like guiding force which I don't think exists at the top of these organizations.

 

Because ultimately it's the people behind the games and the way they are managed that determines how good a game is. The way game development is done today is NOT conducive to great games. Acceptable games, games that barely make you feel like you got your money's worth, games that hold your attention for a couple days, games you "rent" and forget about. That's it.

 

That's just not the Atari way.

 

I think Hasbro remaking the old games was a good concept and some of the remakes were arguably well done. The problem was that they had no game plan on how to go beyond that. Plus some of their final remakes really sucked (Galaga especially) that showed that upper management following the development of these titles never truly "got" what made the original games great and what not to mess with. What they should have done was be bold and write new games that felt as though they were remaking a classic game but were in fact original game concepts. But I think today's game designers lack the know how in nuts and bolts classic game design AND lack the balls to put forward a deliberately simple game concept to be able to do that. Plus management feels the only way they can release a simple game (without the public chopping it to pieces for not being an expansive immersive simulation) is if it's a remake.