New Atari Console that Ataribox?

[toiletunes]

Setting aside any/all behind the scenes drama, frivolous lawsuits, Frugal Marc, etc:

I do not love or hate That Ataribox, but I am very wary of Any "Give me money upfront and I'll make something- I won't say exactly what, when, or how, but it will be AwEsOmE!!!"

That's where I'm at.

[vcoleiro1]

Setting aside any/all behind the scenes drama, frivolous lawsuits, Frugal Marc, etc:

I do not love or hate That Ataribox, but I am very wary of Any "Give me money upfront and I'll make something- I won't say exactly what, when, or how, but it will be AwEsOmE!!!"

That's where I'm at.

 

Well the Indiegogo campaign should have full specs of the device - so there is that

[CPUWIZ]

 

Well the Indiegogo campaign should have full specs of the device - so there is that

 

You mean like the Chameleon. Sounds promising.

[The Historian]

You mean like the Chameleon. Sounds promising.

I don't think they had a major chip maker on board, did they? Legit asking because I don't know.

[SignGuy81]

@The Historian

 

I hope you are at least getting a free Ataribox for all this cheerleading you are doing.

[Rhindle the Dragon]

OK, I'm out of the loop. Who's Feargal Mac?

Or Fraggle Mac?
Or Frugal Marc, or whoever he is?

 

Jeez, the spelling around here is as inconsistent as spider droppings.

[PlaysWithWolves]

RetroVGS was going to use the ARM Cortex-A9, per the IndieGoGo.

It later became the Coleco Chameleon, which I don't believe ever made it to the public-specs stage.

[Osgeld]

I don't think they had a major chip maker on board, did they? Legit asking because I don't know.

 

lets be fair here, just about anyone can call their local sales rep, talk about goals and solutions and "be on board" with a major chip maker

 

I mean crap I am "on board" with ST cause I talked to Rick about a side project I was working on about 2 years ago, now I know Rick very well though my dealings with him though my work, so I got 4 sample kits mailed to my house and a low quantity price guide for the ARM product line I was looking at, just in casual conversation over lunch one day.

 

Both my work and personal project ended up going with microchip solutions cause of cost and features, but its ok he reps them too heh

Edited October 29, 2017 by Osgeld

[The Historian]

@The Historian

 

I hope you are at least getting a free Ataribox for all this cheerleading you are doing.

 

Nope. Have to be careful with that kind of stuff. Compensation of any kind could cause tax and labor implications for one or both of us.

 

RetroVGS was going to use the ARM Cortex-A9, per the IndieGoGo.

It later became the Coleco Chameleon, which I don't believe ever made it to the public-specs stage.

Thanks, I honestly didn't know. Edited October 29, 2017 by The Historian

[+x=usr(1536)]

Sorry I missed this. Just to be clear I'm not in any way employed by AtariBox. I've just volunteered to help where I can. I'm a Community Manager by trade, having worked with Acclaim Games and BioWare. I don't currently work in the gaming industry and haven't for some years but it is where I learned to manage communities.

 

I should not be considered an official voice in any way and I have no insight into the market(s) that they are specifically targeting.

That's an absolutely fair response, and thank you for it. More:

 

I'd imagine that trying to please as many types of people as possible would allow for greater success of any product.

And I am in agreement with you on that point. With that said: my concern here is strictly how Ataribox views this community, and, unfortunately, from what I am seeing of their actions, they do not appear to have much of an interest in how this community may (or may not) have a vested interest in their proposed product(s). Further to that:

 

I do communicate the thoughts and concerns of this and other communities to my contact within AtariBox and I feel like they are genuinely listening to the input.

While there is no reason to doubt that you do communicate those thoughts and concerns, Ataribox' actions do not appear to reflect them in their actions towards the Community. I am not saying this to denigrate your efforts, but rather because there appears to be a disconnect between the information communicated to Ataribox and Ataribox' perception of and behaviour towards the Community.

 

As for Atari... From what I can tell, it looks like the various Atari projects are distinct entities. AtariBox has nothing to do with the AtariLife Speaker Hat, both of which have nothing to do with the recent mobile game. This is my perception as someone outside looking in.

Right, but the question that I asked of you has nothing to do with with either of those items. My focus was strictly on Ataribox' view of this Community, and how it appears to consistently act in ways that are designed to alienate it.

 

To my mind, this suggests that Ataribox does not see us as necessary to their success. As much as I would like to think that this is not the case, Ataribox has - repeatedly - done nothing to prove otherwise.

 

So, back to my original question: does Ataribox even want our support? Almost everything they've done up to this point indicates that they don't, and their honesty and openness would be appreciated. It would be even more appreciated if it wasn't an obviously marketing-driven answer.

 

I know some have made up your minds already. Some will support it and some are just itching to see this go up in flames.

 

Its safe to say people know which side I'm on. I know this isn't going to change the world the way the 2600 did. But I'm hopeful, none the less.

The side that you're on is irrelevant for the purpose of this discussion; we already know the answer to that. It's also disheartening to note that you apparently view asking questions as descending into one side against the other when all that's really being asked for are answers to questions that have been outstanding from the start.

 

As regards Ataribox, the proposed product: I'm willing to bet that very few of us are expecting this product to be the 2600 all over again 40 years later; that would just be unrealistic. But there are more than a few of us who feel that Ataribox' actions leave a lot to be desired, and who have also been made to feel like we're the recipients of a giant snowjob at the same time by virtue of those same actions.

 

With that out of the way, what is Ataribox' answer regarding whether or not we are the Community that they want the support of?

[The Historian]

With that out of the way, what is Ataribox' answer regarding whether or not we are the Community that they want the support of?

I'm afraid I don't have an answer for you, but can we agree that it would be unwise to purposefully alienate any passionate audience?

 

And I don't think of questions as taking one side or another, I'm not sure why you would think I do. There have been plenty of statements of opinions for both sides, after all.

Edited October 29, 2017 by The Historian

[vcoleiro1]

Looking back, the Coleco Chameleon never actually made it to Kickstarter. It got canned before it started

[SignGuy81]

 

I don't try to influence the discussion in any way, but I am reading and sharing things that I feel should be noticed by the AtariBox Team. When I do, I don't gloss over anything. If you think it sucks, I tell them "the collector community thinks it sucks".

 

No offense to you but who the heck does Atari think you are to speak for all of us anyway? What you feel should be noticed? If they had any brains they wouldn't be relying on some volunteer to watch and report back, and instead would be involved themselves and not need you to report back with what you feel is important. But like I said before they can't even manage to manage the campaign themselves so they are using Rain Factory, Inc who handles

 

"Comments, likes, shares, retweets, and replies: our team puts your brand right at the center of conversation." and "Our team of content specialists helps to build your brand into thought leaders and creates the copy your audience is craving." - taken from https://www.rainfactory.com/services/

 

Why does thought leader keep getting brought up in this thread?

 

They also developed the ataribox website instead of Atari doing that themselves, and it was let out. I'm guessing that is one of the things you felt should be noticed by the AtariBox team because those pages got taken down very soon after. Well here is another they can hide too. https://ataribox.com/author/diego/ look who that is https://www.rainfactory.com/team/

 

I'm sorry for being pessimistic here but for Atari to be successful with this Ataribox they have to be passionate about it. How many people here have full time jobs, probably even you Historian, yet still have time to come on here and keep up with people and reply back. But nobody at Atari can look themselves to see what their fan base wants, relies on a volunteer to check out what we think, and hire a company to completely manage the crowdfunding campaign, website, social media and all. That doesn't sound very passionate about the product you're selling to me so forgive me and some others who may seem a little negative.

 

Even the Atari website atari.com has no mention of the Ataribox on the home page, you have to click on community first, then click on news and updates, then it is at the bottom an update about the Ataribox. As big as this thing is supposed to be you'd think they'd show a picture of it on Atari.com on the home page with a link to direct you to Ataribox.com but maybe they want to wait and see how it does first just like us.

[vcoleiro1]

@SignGuy81

 

I don't really have much of an issue with them hiring a company to do all that. It's not exactly unusual to be fair.

 

As for Atari's passion. IMO, your looking at this all wrong. This is an Ataribox project. I could be wrong, but the way I see it, Ataribox approached Atari for a license to put Atari's name on the Ataribox .

Atari's passion ends with them receiving a licensing cheque once a month from Ataribox.

Edited October 29, 2017 by vcoleiro1

[SignGuy81]

@vcoleiro

 

I believe you see it correctly vcoleiro but that is exactly my point "Atari's passion ends with them receiving a licensing cheque once a month from Ataribox." but we are supposed to be thrilled with this new great thing from a brand we can trust.

 

EDIT:

About the unfairness about judging the company for hiring another for all that stuff because others do it to, whether or not Ataribox and Atari are two separate entities(which you should know I agree with you by my last paragraph in my last post) that Ataribox is working on a game console that should have an OS, GUI, and online connectivity for purchasing games, and maybe multiplayer online, and much more but yet they can't create a simple webpage like that themselves or just choose not to for whatever reason I guess I could be looking at it wrong but either way we will see what they come up with I guess.

 

But also just because so many other companies do something doesn't make it right, I don't think any company should hire another company to handle social media, tweet, comment and reply to customer or potential customer comments on their behalf. Especially when should be trying to build trust early on. I believe that should be in house staff doing that because to me it is just a dishonest practice that is now widespread among a lot of companies. I'm sure others feel different and that is fine.

Edited October 29, 2017 by SignGuy81

[Keatah]

OK, I'm out of the loop. Who's Feargal Mac?

Or Fraggle Mac?

Or Frugal Marc, or whoever he is?

 

Jeez, the spelling around here is as inconsistent as spider droppings.

 

Some of it is done on purpose to indicate lackadaisical I-don't-care attitude. I sometime call snapchat snapperchat, instagram instant gramma or instantgram.

Edited October 29, 2017 by Keatah

[Keatah]

I don't think they had a major chip maker on board, did they? Legit asking because I don't know.

 

Do they have a chip actually taped out? Or a simple agreement to work together.

[Keatah]

@SignGuy81

 

I don't really have much of an issue with them hiring a company to do all that. It's not exactly unusual to be fair.

 

As for Atari's passion. IMO, your looking at this all wrong. This is an Ataribox project. I could be wrong, but the way I see it, Ataribox approached Atari for a license to put Atari's name on the Ataribox .

Atari's passion ends with them receiving a licensing cheque once a month from Ataribox.

 

So this is not a real atari product even..then..

[lifemadesimple]

@The Historian

 

I will say that, as much as I may not be thrilled with the idea of a community thought leader/manager/whatever, I do appreciate that you're at least open with us about that. I'll be honest, I'd be shocked if anything you reported here was taken very seriously OR whether or not it will impact whether or not this comes out at all or succeeds. But thanks for being open at your connections to Atari. A lot of the criticisms of your role here have been pretty valid in my opinion, and civil to boot, but I wanted to mention that I do appreciate you making these things pretty clear.

[PlaysWithWolves]

As for Atari's passion. IMO, your looking at this all wrong. This is an Ataribox project. I could be wrong, but the way I see it, Ataribox approached Atari for a license to put Atari's name on the Ataribox .

Atari's passion ends with them receiving a licensing cheque once a month from Ataribox.

 

It's not a stretch to imagine this. We very easily could be discussing the new Atari Dreamcade had Dream Arcades, Inc. worked a deal with Atari first.

This is exactly what happened with the Coleco Chameleon.

[+x=usr(1536)]

 

This is exactly what happened with the Coleco Chameleon.

 

There was one significant difference with the Coleco Chameleon, however: one of the principal players in that saga has a prison record in California for repeatedly defrauding multiple arcade game collectors. While I won't go so far as to say that the intent behind his involvement with the Chameleon was to defraud, I will say that it's very interesting to note that he was a part of that particular debacle - and based on how that particular story unfolded it's an unsurprising detail.

 

The remainder of this (rather lengthy) post is largely stream-of-consciousness, and unless otherwise noted is not directly in reply to anyone else in the thread.

 

Re: 'thought leader(s)': this is a term that I particularly despise. It manages to both insinuate that an individual is incapable of making up their own mind on a subject without the aid of a third party while simultaneously elevating that third party to a position of perceived superiority over the individual by virtue of the thoughts that the 'leader' espouses. The veneer of perceived acceptability over the term is really just covering up its coercive and propagandistic nature, which is likely why, in a professional capacity, I tend to see it largely used in marketing-generated materials with sickening regularity.

 

Fatigue. This word has been kicked around a few times in this thread, and it strikes me as a particularly descriptive (and appropriate) one. All that Ataribox has really accomplished at this point - at least as far as I'm concerned - is to fatigue me regarding their company, product, and community interaction. While I will fully admit that I came into this discussion with certain preconceived notions regarding both the company and its product, that company's actions (including its interactions with the Community) have done nothing to change those notions; if anything, it's managed to reinforce them in certain ways. In effect, they've failed at turning my opinion in a way that makes me believe that I should change my mind regarding their company and product - and now I'm just tired of watching the whole thing (and by that I don't mean just the discussion here) go in circles. That's the fatigue, and it's fatigue that's lead me to apathy towards Ataribox and anything they may or may not end up selling.

 

Giving some insight into that fatigue for a moment: one part of it that seems to be being most greatly fed is that I feel as though I (and many others) have been viewed by Ataribox as passive actors in a deeply-cynical marketing exercise. Our role is to sit here in front of our screens, consume whatever bits of info are popped into our mouths, and wait until we're told to open our wallets and place an order. And while this may be cynicism on my behalf, it's cynicism that's being driven in part by Feargal Mac Conuladh's incessant use of the words 'brand' and 'branding'.

 

Ataribox is a business (much as the original Atari was), and the ultimate goal of any business is to be - and remain - successful. Whether or not that happens is an entirely different discussion, but it is certainly both expected of any company and acceptable. However, when I repeatedly hear discussions from Ataribox' executive leadership in which brands and branding are significant portions of those discussions, it's difficult to understand if the goal is to build a successful company in the long term by offering unique and/or superior products in a given portion of the market, or to simply build brand equity by shoveling anything out the door that someone might whip out their credit card to purchase because there's a Fuji on it somewhere. Given Ataribox' approach to marketing thus far, I'm suspecting the latter.

 

Finally - and this is in a small degree of fairness to Ataribox - they can't be Atari. Atari was very much a case of being in the right place at the right time with the right people and right products. Granted, we all know how their history went, leading us to where we are today - but, at least initially, they got it right. By comparison, Ataribox is entering into an established market with more-than-healthy competition to face and a rather sizeable community of people who are watching their actions like a cast of hawks (and quite rightly so, in my opinion). But this is where any remaining shred of sympathy I may have for Ataribox ends: their actions are not showing that they understand that market, or the people who comprise it.

 

Video games are an emotional thing, regardless of the platform in use - or the brand behind that platform. Nostalgia for a brand and emotion from interaction are not the same thing, and I do not see Ataribox understanding that concept. They might get the marketing of nostalgia to some extent, to be sure, but why that nostalgia is there in the first place seems to be lost on them in the rush to build a brand. People play video games; consumers buy products. They're not the same thing, and based on Ataribox' actions so far, I don't feel that they understand this - just wave a Fuji at them and take their money.

 

What's interesting to me about that is that Warner-era Atari had to learn the outcome of that lesson the hard way in the video game crash. Note that I'm not saying that Ataribox is heading into another crash, but their cynicism doesn't bode well for their long-term well-being.

 

This turned out much longer than I expected, and if anyone's stuck through it all the way, I really appreciate you taking the time to read through it. Sometimes I just need to get these thoughts out of my head; it helps with figuring out where things are going.

Edited October 29, 2017 by x=usr(1536)

[JBerel]

Still, Atari and thought leaders can pound sand.

[Flojomojo]

I think that's well stated. Mike Kennedy's efforts to pin the blame on someone else were legendary. "I'm not a scammer, I'm a patsy" he implied, posting images of multi-thousand-dollar personal checks he wrote to the genius who put a SNES in a Jaguar case for Toy Fair.

 

At the risk of running around in circles, I want to recap why it makes sense NOT to "wait and see" or "give them a chance."

 

1. Atari is literally nothing but a holding company for the old brand. They have precious little (if any) native development or design skill among their 18 full time employees. Their last financial disclosure (look for it on Yahoo Finance) is not congruent with the notion that "Atari is back."

 

2. Atari is crowd-funding this thing to "reduce risk" (for them). That means the risk is borne by the backers (you, for those foolish enough to buy into this). It won't be like buying a product in a store, with a warranty or a return process. It will be (their) "best effort," and if they're late or deliver a brick, that's tough luck for any backer. Kickstarter is not a store, IndieGogo even less so. his is an old story by now. The whole escapade, if funded, will create a lot more tears and shame than Chameleon, which never got crowd money.

 

3. Even if Atari builds and delivers its (admittedly feasible, not overly ambitious) AMD-based Linux computer in a cute case for $300, it's going to be a dead end as a platform -- don't expect years of software support with many exclusive releases. Best case would be open-source ports of the sort that's literally available on every other, better-supported platform. Comparing "AtariBox" to something like Xbox or PlayStation, even as an "interesting underdog," is ridiculous.

 

4. Nostalgia for the brand is understandable, but so misplaced it's not even funny. The last vestiges of Atari were liquidated more than 20 years ago. Supporting charlatans like F-Mac who merely exploit ancient goodwill are not deserving of respect or attention.

 

If you want to buy a new Atari thing, that's great, but all the warning signs that "a fool and his money are soon parted" could not be any more clear. $80K was pledged to he no-name RetroVGS. "AtariBox" might have enough (ugh) brand value (barf) to actually get funded.

[Flojomojo]

Still, Atari and thought leaders can pound sand.

They're only leading insofar as people choose to follow them.

[The Historian]

They're only leading insofar as people choose to follow them.

Well said.