ATARI back to hardware?

[José Pereira]

No it is not computers or consoles:

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2014/05/atari-looking-to-get-back-into-hardware/

 

[Justin Payne]

Yep, it's thinking" and the thing they might be thinking about is a game watch. A game watch!?

[Bryan]

I’m not talking about a new console … but, like, a watch. A gamified watch. It’s not what we are going to do, but think about [something like] that. Like a new type of watch is something we ‘could do.’ A watch, branded, where you don’t have an ‘ordinary watch.’”

 

Boy, that sentence sounds like a squirrel on espresso.

[+MrFish]

Irrelevance takes on [something like] a new shape [sorta]...

[fast eddie]

Dont know what he means by new type of watch but I would love to see remakes of those LCD game watches or a reuse of the idea. Most of those were licensed properties though.

[+Allan]

I was just thinking about the irony of how in the Inc./Corp. years of Atari, how so many people wanted them to survive, compared to now, were many of us just want them to die.

 

Allan

[+MrFish]

I was just thinking about the irony of how in the Inc./Corp. years of Atari, how so many people wanted them to survive, compared to now, were many of us just want them to die.

 

Actually, I prefer to see them endlessly floundering, in video-game purgatory...

Edited May 30, 2014 by MrFish

[+pboland]

No it is not computers or consoles:

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2014/05/atari-looking-to-get-back-into-hardware/

 

That's an interesting article. If I was to guess what they mean by hardware, I would say something along the lines of the flashback units and small inexpensive tech toys. A watch would be easy to do. With a true dot matrix screen, a video game watch (at an inexpensive price) could work.

[Bryan]

I only want Atari to survive if someone has a really good idea that doesn't involve flogging Combat and Asteroids for the umpteenth time. The game market is so cutthroat, though, that I don't see anyone breaking into it at this point.

[flashjazzcat]

I’m not talking about a new console … but, like, a watch. A gamified watch. It’s not what we are going to do, but think about [something like] that. Like a new type of watch is something we ‘could do.’ A watch, branded, where you don’t have an ‘ordinary watch.’”

 

Boy, that sentence sounds like a squirrel on espresso.

 

Someone quite illustratively substituted "toaster" for "watch" elsewhere on this forum a few days ago, and it made almost as much sense.

[jaybird3rd]

Someone quite illustratively substituted "toaster" for "watch" elsewhere on this forum a few days ago, and it made almost as much sense.

Thanks for remembering! Here's the post:

 

That paragraph doesn't even scan particularly well. You could plug in almost anything for "watch" and it would make about as much sense. Give it a try:

 

"I'm not talking about just a new toaster ... but, like, a toaster. A gamified toaster. It's not what we are going to do, but think about something like that! Like, a new type of toaster is something we 'could do.' A toaster, branded, where you don't have just an 'ordinary toaster.'"

 

It's fun!

 

I wonder if this "CEO" talks to his board of directors that way.

[flashjazzcat]

Thanks for remembering!

Ah - thanks. I couldn't remember who'd written it (nor where), but it gave me a chuckle on the bus one day.

[+MrFish]

If you put Space Invaders on the side of a toaster, you could play while you're waiting for your bread to cook.

[+pboland]

The game market is so cutthroat, though, that I don't see anyone breaking into it at this point.

The traditional video game market maybe. I doubt that is the market atari is talking about when they say "hardware". The truth is, at this point having better graphics power doesn't mean much. Games these day are practically photo realistic to begin with (heck they were in the last gen as well). The only way to make it in the game market today if your not going the photo realistic route, is to think outside the box and come up with something truly unique and innovative and doesn't need a lot of horse power to pull off (and of course fun).

[fibrewire]

How about teaching people about electronics and computers and basic and 6502 assembly? How to manage an OS in 64K of ram? The people that accomplished this in their youth built the internet that is today by making them not afraid of what could be. Just like heathkit and copycats made the people that created the home computer revolution, a well structured self-education system like these forums and open source software are what will craft the golden age of whatever's next.

 

Call me captain obvious, but Atari could start by giving us some slack in a way that's fair to both parties. Every cease and desist costs an attorney's fee and puts them that much closer to closing their doors AGAIN.

[jaybird3rd]

How about teaching people about electronics and computers and basic and 6502 assembly? How to manage an OS in 64K of ram? The people that accomplished this in their youth built the internet that is today by making them not afraid of what could be. Just like heathkit and copycats made the people that created the home computer revolution, a well structured self-education system like these forums and open source software are what will craft the golden age of whatever's next.

I still wish that the real "Flashback 3," the one from Legacy Engineering that was to be based on the Atari 400/800 computer series, had become a product. I wrote my own humble attempt at a sales pitch for it over seven years ago, when it seemed likely that Atari/Infogrames might consider going ahead with that project. Reading it again now, I can see certain aspects that I would change, but I still think it's the most promising route for Atari to take if they were to release a new console in today's market. As Bryan said earlier, you can only serve up the same old 2600 games over and over again so many times. Yet another 2600-based Flashback seems to me like a dead end.

 

One of my hopes was that, if Legacy's "Flashback 3" had become a reality, it could also be marketed as an educational embedded gaming system, something similar to what the XGameStation later became. That would make it useful for the kinds of educational projects you describe. Learning about electronics and the internals of computers can add so much to a computer scientist's education, as I wrote recently in another thread, and the Atari 8-bit computer is still a great platform for that kind of experimentation and exploration: it's a mature platform with a very active support community, loads of documentation, lots of options for interfacing with other devices, a variety of different programming languages, and of course, an incredible catalog of games!

[Bryan]

I'm just brainstorming here, but I think if Atari wants a niche they should do something like get into home entertainment systems. Build equipment for immersive gaming in your living room- not the consoles but the control and environment. Maybe the union of home theater and some of the MAME stuff that's going on with a touch of Imax. Again, I'm not sure what the result would look like, but home gaming could certainly be augmented beyond a flat panel TV and some HT-in-a-box system.

[Lynxpro]

I've been saying this for years…why not make an Atari TV? Same goes for Amiga. Why can't these numbskulls come up with similar ideas? After all, Vizio came out of nowhere to become a powerhouse in TVs. There's nothing stopping Atari or Amiga from doing the same except for corporate brainpower.

[+pboland]

I still wish that the real "Flashback 3," the one from Legacy Engineering that was to be based on the Atari 400/800 computer series, had become a product. I wrote my own humble attempt at a sales pitch for it over seven years ago, when it seemed likely that Atari/Infogrames might consider going ahead with that project. Reading it again now, I can see certain aspects that I would change, but I still think it's the most promising route for Atari to take if they were to release a new console in today's market. As Bryan said earlier, you can only serve up the same old 2600 games over and over again so many times. Yet another 2600-based Flashback seems to me like a dead end.

 

I remember that topic. That was a good topic, however I still think things haven't changed much. People still only recognize the VCS/2600 Atari console. That point was basically proven by Bill Loguidice who talked with AtGames about the new Flashback 5. You can read that post here: http://atariage.com/forums/topic/221409-atari-flashback-5-new-features-dream-list/page-3?do=findComment&comment=2941885. I'm sorry but what ever Atari decides to do with real hardware will need to look like a VCS/2600. That doesn't necessary mean it has to be a 2600. I've made this point many times. I think I made that point in your topic you wrote seven years ago. Heck, I made the same point recently once again here: http://atariage.com/forums/topic/221409-atari-flashback-5-new-features-dream-list/page-3?do=findComment&comment=2946350. I can't stress enough that this is the only way to move forward successfully if people are only buying on what they recognize. I'm really surprised Atari hasn't come to the same conclusion.

 

I'm just brainstorming here, but I think if Atari wants a niche they should do something like get into home entertainment systems. Build equipment for immersive gaming in your living room- not the consoles but the control and environment. Maybe the union of home theater and some of the MAME stuff that's going on with a touch of Imax. Again, I'm not sure what the result would look like, but home gaming could certainly be augmented beyond a flat panel TV and some HT-in-a-box system.

 

Isn't this basically the marketing for the new Xbox One?

[jaybird3rd]

I'm sorry but what ever Atari decides to do with real hardware will need to look like a VCS/2600. That doesn't necessary mean it has to be a 2600.

You're probably right (and I do remember that you made that point in the old thread), which is why I'm not holding out hope anymore for Atari/AtGames to make it happen. The entertainment/educational hybrid system that I have in mind doesn't fit their present strategy, which is apparently focused entirely on exploiting nostalgia for recognizable game properties. Perhaps I'm just feeling cynical, but this strategy seems to guarantee that we're going to keep seeing the same old lineup of 2600 and arcade titles, repeatedly warmed over and served up again like yesterday's meatloaf, with perhaps a few new titles sprinkled on top to keep people buying more Flashbacks.

 

A third party with sufficient resources may be able to do something more creative and innovative with the 400/800 technology, since the patents will have expired by now. It would still be a challenge to make it into a quality consumer product at a workable price point, and assembling a sufficiently varied library of licensed applications and games would be the most difficult challenge of all.

[pixelmischief]

That Atari we all loved is gone. The people, the ideas, hell...the time in which what they were was right for its context...gone. Whatever the people who own control of the name now do under the banner of that name is not, cannot be, and will never be again, anything like OUR Atari. Wake up! Grow up! Give up!

 

You're right. I am a bitter old man who has now officially gone too far. My bad.

Edited June 1, 2014 by pixelmischief

[+pboland]

Perhaps I'm just feeling cynical, but this strategy seems to guarantee that we're going to keep seeing the same old lineup of 2600 and arcade titles, repeatedly warmed over and served up again like yesterday's meatloaf, with perhaps a few new titles sprinkled on top to keep people buying more Flashbacks.

 

Not necessary. I really believe that as long as it just looks like a 2600 Atari can put anything in it. You and I both would like to see something based on the 400/800 line (which would include the 5200 as well). Yes it can be done, as long as it looks like a 2600.

 

Let's take it to the ultimate conclusion. Make a Flashback that looks like a 2600, but put Jag hardware/emu in it. The Jag is capable (at least from what I've read in the past) of emulating the entire back catalog of Atari hardware. Don't like Jag hardware, how about Falcon or ST hardware? Even the entire Falcon/ST hardware today should be able to fit on one chip. Just think of all the add-on/hacks you could do with a flashback like that. It just take someone at Atari with some backbone (and a creative marketing person) to pull it off. It would also give Atari a little more horsepower under the hood to do a little more. Maybe even a new title or two. Remember the vast majority of gamers just want a fun game. It doesn't have to be on the latest and greatest hardware to be successful.

[Bryan]

Atari should have been the ones to come up with the OUYA idea- a console thst uses existing hardware and games. It would have been a perfect strategy to sneak back in.

[+Stephen]

Atari should have been the ones to come up with the OUYA idea- a console thst uses existing hardware and games. It would have been a perfect strategy to sneak back in.

Not sure - I think that's all about luck. The NUON chipset should have back-doored a console into every damn DVD player. But it just didn't happen.

[Bill Loguidice]

Atari should have been the ones to come up with the OUYA idea- a console thst uses existing hardware and games. It would have been a perfect strategy to sneak back in.

 

It's not a bad thought, though one wonders if the timing would have worked out considering what's happened to the Atari entity in the past year. Unfortunately, the argument against such a move is that that market segment is very competitive and has depressingly low margins, the latter of which a financially drained company like Atari can't really tolerate (having to sell the thing at $99 or less pretty much guarantees that). There's also little that could be done to distinguish such a product from the sea of other products out there, i.e., you either provide access to Google Play, or you go the Ouya route and have your own app store. Either way, there are pluses and minuses. There's also the potential for market confusion with the average consumer with using the Atari name, which may either help or hurt the sales of such a device (e.g., an average consumer might thing it only plays old Atari games, or that it doesn't play enough old Atari games, etc.).

In any case, lack of vision or not, I don't necessarily envy the present owners of the Atari IP. They're as much shackled by the name as they are helped by it. As was stated earlier, you can only milk the same classic IPs so many times, and to do anything of any significant would require the type of capital that Atari flat out lacks.