Atari 50: The Anniversary Celebration - (in VCS Store)

[Cousin Vinnie]

On 7/14/2022 at 4:37 PM, jbrodack said:

Everything looks great with this collection except I groan seeing realsports games on the list.  Atari 2600 games have been released so many times and those are always the filler. 

Some of the Realsports games arent bad. RS Volleyball is good... RS Boxing is fun for a bit. RS Tennis is good but there are 9000 good tennis games in the ether- so who really cares. Also, someone said Realsports Basketball is being released in this mess... that would be an insane addition since it was never released. 

[zzip]

9 hours ago, Cousin Vinnie said:

Some of the Realsports games arent bad. RS Volleyball is good... RS Boxing is fun for a bit. RS Tennis is good but there are 9000 good tennis games in the ether- so who really cares. Also, someone said Realsports Basketball is being released in this mess... that would be an insane addition since it was never released. 

I used to enjoy playing RS Baseball and Football.  Nobody every told me they were bad   I found them comparable to the M-Network releases.   They were the best you could hope for in sports games in that era.

[jbrodack]

On 7/19/2022 at 12:49 AM, Cousin Vinnie said:

Some of the Realsports games arent bad. RS Volleyball is good... RS Boxing is fun for a bit. RS Tennis is good but there are 9000 good tennis games in the ether- so who really cares. Also, someone said Realsports Basketball is being released in this mess... that would be an insane addition since it was never released. 

 

On 7/19/2022 at 10:19 AM, zzip said:

I used to enjoy playing RS Baseball and Football.  Nobody every told me they were bad   I found them comparable to the M-Network releases.   They were the best you could hope for in sports games in that era.

I get that some could definitely enjoy them especially if you played originally. But to me they always felt super clunky. I could do nes and 16 sports games but most sports of the Atari age weren't fun for me. Exception being the game just named baseball for the 2600. It wasn't exactly realistic but was fun and easy to play. 

 

Mainly I'm saying just cut down how many are included so people don't see the 90 game list and get disappointed with 20 Atari 2600 sports games. They're including many Atari consoles for this collection so it would make sense to only include the best or most important/interesting games. 

[Cousin Vinnie]

16 hours ago, jbrodack said:

 

I get that some could definitely enjoy them especially if you played originally. But to me they always felt super clunky. I could do nes and 16 sports games but most sports of the Atari age weren't fun for me. Exception being the game just named baseball for the 2600. It wasn't exactly realistic but was fun and easy to play. 

 

Mainly I'm saying just cut down how many are included so people don't see the 90 game list and get disappointed with 20 Atari 2600 sports games. They're including many Atari consoles for this collection so it would make sense to only include the best or most important/interesting games. 

What I have found out (sadly) after looking into this is that Atari has been bought and sold so many times that many of their best IPs have been sold or tangled up somehow. Atari could release 90 games that would absolute crush, but games like Battlezone, Paperboy, Pole Position, Midni

ght Mutants, Tetris, Klax, Rampart, Marble Madness, etc etc have been sold off. So they gotta throw in some filler. Hence... "Hey guys! Canyon Bomber! You pumped?" 

[zzip]

19 hours ago, jbrodack said:

I get that some could definitely enjoy them especially if you played originally. But to me they always felt super clunky. I could do nes and 16 sports games but most sports of the Atari age weren't fun for me. Exception being the game just named baseball for the 2600. It wasn't exactly realistic but was fun and easy to play. 

At the time Atari had Home Run and whatever the Football game was called.   These were bashed mercilessly in the Intellivision commercials giving the impression that Atari couldn't do sports.   So Realsports was an answer to that I guess.      They played simlarly to other videogame and electronic baseball/football of that time, but I can see how they wouldn't age well.

[Zoyous]

6 minutes ago, zzip said:

At the time Atari had Home Run and whatever the Football game was called.

I believe the title was... "Football." I remember, before the very good conversion of Donkey Kong came to the 2600, I would play Football on an easy setting and then run side to side up the stripes of the field, pretending I was playing Donkey Kong. ?

[+save2600]

Yep, just plain old Football. Or "Trashcan Football" as some called it.  ?

 

[+save2600]

21 hours ago, jbrodack said:

...Exception being the game just named baseball for the 2600. It wasn't exactly realistic but was fun and easy to play. 

Yeah, the Sears Telegames' version was just called 'Baseball'. Atari's 'Home Run' is the same game, and agree that it was easy to play and kinda fun BITD. For a little while, in that refreshingly simple kind of way.

 

I still play RealSports Baseball once in a while, but never Super Baseball. They really screwed that one up. ?

[Atariboy]

8 hours ago, Cousin Vinnie said:

What I have found out (sadly) after looking into this is that Atari has been bought and sold so many times that many of their best IPs have been sold or tangled up somehow. Atari could release 90 games that would absolute crush, but games like Battlezone, Paperboy, Pole Position, Midni

ght Mutants, Tetris, Klax, Rampart, Marble Madness, etc etc have been sold off. So they gotta throw in some filler. Hence... "Hey guys! Canyon Bomber! You pumped?" 

Atari SA only sold off Battlezone and a handful of others (Fun With Numbers for the 2600 is another, I believe). Only Battlezone is likely missed by anyone. The rest of the handful they sold off before thankfully changing their course appeared to go to buyers that just wanted to own a little slice of Atari history, buying them because they were cheap rather than because they had intentions to take advantage of them commercially. 

 

Paperboy, Klax, Rampart, and Marble Madness were from another Atari known as Atari Games and remain with the rest of the Atari Games library today at Warner Brothers Interactive. Atari SA quite possibly still owns the Lynx port of Rampart, but without licensing Rampart from WB just as Atari Corp did back in the early 1990's from Atari Games in order to legally be able to develop and publish a Lynx port, they're unable to do anything with it.

 

Same situation with Klax from Atari Games and the various home Atari ports of it from Atari Corp, which presumably are Atari SA property today but can't be utilized unless they secure a license from WB for Klax just as Atari Corp also did back in the day. And as far as I know, Atari Corp never had anything to do with bringing Marble Madness home, with the sole home port on an Atari platform being from Electronic Arts on the ST. Thus there's no home ports from Atari Corp sitting in limbo in Atari SA's archives waiting on securing permission first from WB in order to utilize the Marble Madness brand.

 

Atari Inc/Corp's various home ports of Pole Position and Pole Position II presumably are Atari SA property in 2022 as well. But they never owned the rights to Pole Position itself. It was a Namco creation and has always been a Namco property, with Atari Inc. licensing it for North American arcade distribution (As well as securing the rights to develop and release home adaptations of it on consoles and computers). Thus unless Atari SA successfully gets a license from Namco giving them legal permission again to touch the Pole Position brand like back in the 80's, these sit.

 

Atari in pre-split form (Atari Inc) and the home division post-split when it was sold off to Jack Tramiel (Atari Corp, which was the owner of what Atari SA now owns) never had any connection with Tetris. It was Atari Games (the arcade half of Atari after the home side was sold in 1984) that licensed Tetris and developed and published an arcade adaptation of. Presumably Warner Brothers Interactive, the rights hold of the Atari Games library (As well as the Williams, Midway, and Leland videogame arcade heritage), still owns this. But just like Atari SA with something like 2600 Pole Position, they can't commercialize it in 2022 in something like a Midway arcade compilation or an Arcade1Up cabinet without again securing permission and paying the Tetris rights holders just as Atari Games originally did back in the late 1980's.

 

Lastly, it's unclear if Atari Corp or today's Atari SA ever owned Midnight Mutants. The box says "is licensed from Pixcel Software Inc" while Atari Corp is credited with a copyright. And the manual says "copyright 1990 SNK Corporation. Midnight Mutants is a trademark of SNK Corporation." It all reads as if Atari simply licensed and published it. But we don't really know who owns what at this point. We don't even know that Atari SA doesn't own this in 2022. It could easily be the presence of "Grampa" holding it back if Atari SA indeed does own it today. While I don't see it in fine print, they obviously licensed his likeness back in the day. And to rerelease it intact today would mean re-securing that permission from the estate of Al Lewis. 

Edited July 29, 2022 by Atariboy

[Mockduck]

The good news re: Pole Position is Atari of today has several IPs that would be suitable for a new racing game. Klax and Paperboy, though, they don't.

[DavidD]

9 hours ago, Atariboy said:

Lastly, it's unclear if Atari Corp or today's Atari SA ever owned Midnight Mutants. The box says "is licensed from Pixcel Software Inc" while Atari Corp is credited with a copyright. And the manual says "copyright 1990 SNK Corporation. Midnight Mutants is a trademark of SNK Corporation."

Okay. This is interesting to me... SNK?

Is there any other 7800 title that was an SNK property licensed by Atari?  I'm just wondering if there is any chance of a typographical error/old text from a prior manual...

 

The Atari Compendium site claims this is an error, and the game was developed by Radioactive Software:

http://www.ataricompendium.com/game_library/easter_eggs/7800/78midnightmutants.html

 

Radioactive Software corporation registration info:

https://www.bizapedia.com/ca/radioactive-software-incorporated.html

 

Interestingly enough, Radioactive Software appears to have also developed Eliminator Boat Duel for the NES, one of the recent titles released on the NES Online bundle on the switch.  Published by a different company, but...

Edited July 30, 2022 by DavidD

[Atariboy]

Ikari Warriors was one. Here's the relevant manual page from Ikari Warriors and the one from Midnight Mutants. Doesn't look like it was accidentally repurposed to me with SNK inadvertently left in.

 

It of course seems weird that SNK would be credited if they had no involvement, but stranger things have happened. Especially as late in the system's life as this one was, it perhaps didn't get the care it might've received earlier in the 7800's life. So perhaps some clerk did screw up in some strange way and it just slipped by unnoticed.

 

Could Radioactive Software perhaps have had some sort of connection with SNK's North American arm? Seems like there's precious little information out there on the internet about them. That makes more sense than a completely unrelated company getting credit in the manual, although it certainly doesn't mean that's the case. 

 

It also leaves the mystery of who the heck Pixcel Software was (They're the only company noted on the box alongside Atari). Did they perhaps change their name after Midnight Mutants to Radioactive Software?

Edited July 30, 2022 by Atariboy

[+jeremiahjt]

12 hours ago, Atariboy said:

Atari SA only sold off Battlezone and a handful of others (Fun With Numbers for the 2600 is another, I believe). Only Battlezone is likely missed by anyone.

I believe it was Math Grand Prix that was sold. Considering Fun With Numbers is the exact same game as Basic Math and Atari released a new Basic Math online for April Fool's Day recently I am sure they still have that one. Unless they somehow sold the name but not the game itself.

[Atariboy]

I think you're right. I believe Basic Math is also on the Atari Flashback Classics compilations from recent years, well after Atari SA had sold off a few things.

 

I'm not real big on the educational titles so I don't think I ever realized that they were one and the same (Or that Atari ever had renamed a non-Sears release for the 2600). But I knew I hadn't seen a game named Fun With Numbers on those Code Mystics collections and that Atari SA had sold off an educational title for the 2600, so my memories got a bit twisted around it seems into thinking that was the one that got sold.

Edited July 30, 2022 by Atariboy

[DavidD]

13 hours ago, jeremiahjt said:

I believe it was Math Grand Prix that was sold.

I still don't understand why anyone bought that.... unless the term was trademarked, and they got the trademark.  I guess I could see the NAME being useful.

[+jeremiahjt]

1 hour ago, DavidD said:

I still don't understand why anyone bought that.... unless the term was trademarked, and they got the trademark.  I guess I could see the NAME being useful.

I believe it was lumped in with some Infogrammes educational titles. I doubt the company that bought the group of titles cared about Math Grand Prix, but it was part of the sale.

[Atariboy]

It's too bad it wasn't Basic Math/Fun With Numbers that got sold off instead.

 

While there's not much there, Math Grand Prix is at least an actual game and mildly entertaining to briefly fire up one in a blue moon. And while I've never played that one with someone else, it might not be half bad in multiplayer.

 

I feel for the poor kids that got stuck with the former though back in the day. Of all the text label games that Atari Corp could've revived for the 2600 Junior, how the heck did they ever decide on Basic Math. 

[+SabertoothRetro]

There is a great interview from Stoneage Gamer with Stephen Frost from Digital Eclipse that touches on some of the challenges of licensing various titles for the collection. 

 

They also talk at length about their general approach to the project, the reimagined games, Jag emulation, and more.

 

https://stoneagegamer.com/blog/sag-podcast-421-talking-with-digital-eclipses-stephen-frost/

[Atariboy]

I hate to say it, but I wasn't left particularly impressed listening to that.

 

As the manager of the project, I would've hoped that he had more familiarity with the history that he's in charge of presenting here. Yet he honestly doesn't seem to understand that Atari SA isn't "Atari". Rather, he's quite enthusiastic about Atari reaching a major milestone of fifty years of corporate existence. I hope he's done better research on Atari's past than how that came off sounding.

 

Some other quibbles as well. Tons of talk about a curated game list with games selected that tell the important parts of Atari's history. It's his go to answer whenever he's asked why a certain game, even a popular one, is absent here. Yet we know now that the entire Realsports range of games for the 2600 are here, including an unreleased prototype. Some good to mediocre games, but that and other instances like Fight For Life for the Jaguar simply doesn't align with his "curated" response to explain away absent games. Why not just be honest about budget limitations preventing the pursuit of licensing and clearing some historic and popular games that deserve to be represented as important facets of Atari history?

 

And then popular licensed 1st party arcade ports from Atari were inquired about, with Atari's Space Invaders and Pac-Man ports asked about specifically as examples. The Digital Eclipse guy proceeds to give a non answer and then talks about how it's basically impossible to track down rights holders for these arcade games of old or to be able to confirm with certainty that they actually own what they say they do and can legally give permission for Atari SA to rerelease Atari's home conversions of these games. 

 

While perhaps true for a few 1st party ports, I certainly don't need to explain about Taito and Bandai Namco being ongoing concerns where Space Invaders and Pac-Man are concerned. Again, an honest answer about budget constraints would've been preferred with perhaps a side note about the difficulty in some instances of even ascertaining who owns what. Jungle Hunt for instance might be one of those now difficult examples, with Coleco Holdings (River West) claim jumping it a decade or so ago when Taito's legal department screwed up and failed to renew the trademark in a timely manner. They still own the arcade game, just not the name (unless Taito took action to reestablish it when Coleco Holdings failed to file their Section 8 declaration in 2020).

 

We did at least get confirmation of another 2600 inclusion. Indy 500 will be present, just not as Indy 500 (Basically confirming it's going under the Sears Telegames name for it, 'Race'). They also confirmed that Airworld isn't 2600 code. And he essentially confirmed a physical release for the collection. While unwilling to confirm it outright, to paraphrase he essentially said something like "I'll say this much about it, all of our past big projects except I think one received a physical release" (I assume in reference to the digital exclusive Disney Afternoon Collection).

[zzip]

9 minutes ago, Atariboy said:

As the manager of the project, I would've hoped that he had more familiarity with the history that he's in charge of presenting here. Yet he honestly doesn't seem to understand that Atari SA isn't "Atari". Rather, he's quite enthusiastic about Atari reaching a major milestone of fifty years of corporate existence. I hope he's done better research on Atari's past than how that came off sounding.

 

Some other quibbles as well. Tons of talk about a curated game list with games selected that tell the important parts of Atari's history. It's his go to answer whenever he's asked why a certain game, even a popular one, is absent here. Yet we know now that the entire Realsports range of games for the 2600 are here, including an unreleased prototype. Some good to mediocre games, but that and other instances like Fight For Life for the Jaguar simply doesn't align with his "curated" response to explain away absent games. Why not just be honest about budget limitations preventing the pursuit of licensing and clearing some historic and popular games that deserve to be represented as important facets of Atari history?

 

And then popular licensed 1st party arcade ports from Atari were inquired about, with Atari's Space Invaders and Pac-Man ports asked about specifically as examples. The Digital Eclipse guy proceeds to give a non answer and then talks about how it's basically impossible to track down rights holders for these arcade games of old or to be able to confirm with certainty that they actually own what they say they do and can legally give permission for Atari SA to rerelease Atari's home conversions of these games. 

 

He's promoting a product,  it's his job to talk up the positives and steer people away from any perceived negatives.   The average consumer has zero awareness of the complex history of the Atari brand, so why bring that up and potentially dampen enthusiasm for 50th anniversary?   When asked about missing IPs   "Well Atari doesn't own the rights to those anymore and is too cheap to pony up the money to license them for this release" is a terrible answer if you want to sell a product

[Atariboy]

All are very valid points.

 

In particular, I hadn't thought about how it might've portrayed Atari SA in a negative light if the answer kept popping up about the limited budget they have to work within making it unrealistic to chase down certain games for this collection. 

 

That said, for a podcast aimed at classic gaming enthusiasts, I was left underwhelmed and felt it was way too dumbed down. I'm quite sure for instance that he knows that the parent arcade IP of scores of Atari's licensed arcade ports are still owned by going concerns, have often been rereleased in emulated form through the years on mainstream devices, etc. And most of the people bothering to listen to this also know that as well.

Edited August 10, 2022 by Atariboy

[Flojomojo]

18 minutes ago, Atariboy said:

And then popular licensed 1st party arcade ports from Atari were inquired about, with Atari's Space Invaders and Pac-Man ports asked about specifically as examples. The Digital Eclipse guy proceeds to give a non answer and then talks about how it's basically impossible to track down rights holders for these arcade games of old or to be able to confirm with certainty that they actually own what they say they do and can legally give permission for Atari SA to rerelease Atari's home conversions of these games.

I haven't heard the interview yet, but sympathize with Digital Eclipse here based on what you're saying. They're contracted to Atari, but for them to get involved with licensing questions of Taito (now owned by Square Enix) and Namco is almost certainly out of the scope of their work, and they don't have the authority to ask on Atari's behalf. Also, I would think those companies would want a little something in return for using their IP, because the original license agreement was 40 years ago. 

[Atariboy]

Certainly.

 

I'm not at all being critical of the absence of licensed properties like Space Invaders, Pole Position, etc. It's the expected course of action and I think most folks in communities like this that have followed classic gaming compilations since the 1990's understand that.

 

They only have so much money to spend on this project (And other than a single outlier that leaps to mind with Activision's Commando port for the 2600 that Capcom allowed them to use for free on Activision Anthology, these companies want to get paid for their IP making an appearance).

 

And it's not going to proceed to sell 10 million copies after it's released. So there has to be realistic restraint in what's spent since Atari SA wants to turn a respectable profit on this project and Digital Eclipse wants this to succeed financially as well.

 

It was how he portrayed it as a near impossibility to track down any of these rights holders in 2022 that I took objection to. Most of the arcade IP that Atari licensed for porting like Vanguard are far from mysterious where present day ownership is concerned. 

Edited August 10, 2022 by Atariboy

[AAA177]

Does anyone know yet what the release dates will be for Atari Mania and Atari 50th?

 

Besides coming into the thread to ask that, let me say I haven't read all the posts yet or listened to the link, but this seems to be a great dissection of the whole rights issue. I definitely understand why this has to limit things, but I have to say, it sure does make enjoying this hobby difficult. 

 

What's too bad, as per the previous post, is that the license holders want to be paid for their product...and I take that to mean paid in advance. If Atari could convince the holders to accept royalty payments without an advance, or perhaps a very nominal one, then we might be in business with more games. 

 

In terms of tracking down rights holders...actually, that could be difficult, although I do express that frustration as well at times. I'm assuming many of these rights may have been traded away. Think of music publishing...nowadays investment companies are buying many holders out. Perhaps some of these games belong to hedge funds or other entities similar to patent holders...and that's maybe why Atari has to be cautious, considering some of these business models may have litigation strategies built in (who knows who owns the rights to Grandpa, for instance, the estate could have sold that away; and I have to say as an aside, seriously in fact, if any lobbying with Rob Zombie, a noted Munsters fan, would help in getting this game released on a compilation someday; one would have to think someone like him is aware of the title, although certainly not a given). 

 

If Warner Interactive owns some rights, given that that company post its merger with Discovery is looking to cut costs any way it can and perhaps monetize whatever it can to attack debt levels, then maybe now would be a good time to do some negotiation to buy rights back or to do some innovative licensing deals. No, that wouldn't pay down billions in debt, but it might help to catalyze something.

 

 

[Mockduck]

Target has a release date of November 8th for it, although that could simply be placeholder: https://www.target.com/p/atari-50-the-anniversary-celebration-nintendo-switch/-/A-87457287