Atari 50: The Anniversary Celebration announced

[Atariboy]

2 hours ago, jgkspsx said:

It depends on what the contract with Williams said. It may be that Williams/Midway/WB/Discovery owns the actual 2600 program.

I don't think so. My impression having followed this hobby for years is that Atari owned their own conversions. For instance if we take a look at a Defender cartridge, we'll see "Label, Program, and Audiovisual © 1981 Atari, Inc." Only next to the title itself is an indicator that an outside party is involved, with the trademark for the Defender name credited to Williams Electronics.

 

But much like something like say SimCity for the Super Nintendo (a 1st party release that's owned by Nintendo, but obviously involves outside IP that has to be relicensed if it ever resurfaces commercially), they can't just rerelease it at will years after contracts expired. They'd have to approach the current rights holder of the source material and resecure permission.

 

But I genuinely believe that some of these adaptations are far enough removed from the source material that the only infringement would be with the name itself if Atari SA were to rerelease them. Rebrand such games and I think something like this example would be free and clear since it's not a particularly close adaptation of the arcade game with the gameplay, audio, or visuals.

 

It's a moot point though since they're obviously not too interested in pursuing such matters. And I think it's clear for all of us that aren't lawyers that many of the in-demand arcade conversions did their job well enough where a simple renaming isn't going to eliminate copyright infringement (Space Invaders, Ms. Pac-Man, Jungle Hunt, Phoenix, etc.).

Edited January 3, 2023 by Atariboy

[Agent X]

On 12/30/2022 at 5:24 PM, Atariboy said:

I bet some of these licensed games like Defender could work with a simple renaming, as seen with Indy 500.

 

Of course the more accurate ports like Space Invaders did their job too well at replicating the source material to make that possible with any degree of confidence of being safe from legal action. But something like the example above with Defender is far enough removed from the original these days where I couldn't imagine WB Interactive even recognizing the 2600 game as an adaptation of their IP or if they did became aware, their legal team feeling like they had a chance in court if they pursued a lawsuit.

 

Rename it to something generic like Alien Abduction and spend a few minutes retouching art assets to replace the name (Just as they did for Indy 500 in Atari 50), and it would be fully in the clear.

 

I have to disagree with you here, for multiple reasons.

 

Although the Atari 2600 version of Defender isn't an especially faithful conversion of the arcade game (compared to Stargate/Defender II on the same console), it's still replicated enough of the elements and play mechanics that it is recognizable as Defender. A game like Chopper Command (which you cited above) has some elements that are likely inspired by Defender (bidirectional scrolling, scanner, protecting unarmed innocents on the ground level), but there are also other outstanding differences in enemy movements and attack patterns. By comparison, 2600 Defender has all of that, along with numerous other more distinctive elements like certain enemies plucking the unarmed innocents off of the ground (Landers and Humanoids), certain other enemies that break apart into multiple smaller enemies (Pods and Swarmers), smart bombs, and hyperspace.

 

If you changed the graphics a little bit, but kept the play mechanics the same, then it would merely become a slightly less accurate rendition of Defender. It wouldn't fool longtime players, and it wouldn't fool lawyers.

 

If you changed the graphics a lot, and then decided to get rid of some of the more distinctive elements (e.g. Landers don't abduct humanoids anymore, Pods don't break into Swarmers, and remove smart bombs and hyperspace altogether), then it would transform into a sort of weird derivative product. At this point, it would probably escape legal scrutiny...but at the same time, it's not the Defender we all remember. It's not representative of accurate Atari works from "back in the day". It would come off looking like some cheesy bootleg "hack". In that case, why bother to include such a product in this collection?

 

If they can't give us the Defender we grew up with, warts and all, then they're better off omitting it altogether. Shoving an altered hack into the collection would dilute the value of the overall package, as it satisfies neither nostalgia nor authenticity.

 

[Agent X]

Edit: Double post.

Edited January 4, 2023 by Agent X
Double post

[+jgkspsx]

It is worth pointing out that courts worldwide have found that gameplay mechanics are NOT copyrightable.

[Atariboy]

I'm not particularly interested in debating it, so we'll leave it at that.

 

My point primarily was that I feel like there's a few more games here like Indy 500 that could escape with similar alterations to what they did with Indy 500 (without affecting the game itself), if the desire is ever there at Atari SA to expand their roster of games that they're able to commercially take advantage of without the need of outside involvement.

 

Which games are and aren't realistic possibilities wasn't really what I was after with my initial comment. I'm no lawyer and chances are that none of us in this thread are (and even if one of us were, I imagine anything revolving around copyrights is a rather specialized part of the profession, especially at the corporation level).

[roots.genoa]

The problem is these releases are mostly motivated by nostalgia, so re-releasing a game with a different name (let alone a different look) could be frustrating for the audience that expect what they had growing up...

[Atariboy]

True, at least in regards to a prospective buyer scanning a game list. A classic that has been rebranded with a generic name isn't going to be able to influence their purchase decision then. But someone with childhood memories of Indy 500/Race is going to immediately recognize that Race 500 on Atari 50 is their game if they select it from the menu or see a screenshot or video of it, since the game itself is unaltered.

 

Unless it was one of those rare games with a title screen like Pole Position, the only editing ever needed for rebranding is to art assets like boxart. Any serious reworking of a game itself in an attempt to make something non-infringing would be more work than it's worth, I'm sure. Not only due to the point that you just raised, but also because it's likely going to be significantly more expensive to dig into 2600 code in order to alter it. 

 

The only effort outside of adjusting artwork that I can think of that potentially makes any sense here is possibly Othello. The name is easy to address (Reversi is in the public domain), but the distinctive green game board also ties it to Othello and potentially poses an issue. Yet if you switch the color switch to black & white mode, all color is disabled in this game (just like many earlier 1st party releases).

 

So to make it non-infringing it's potentially as easy as forcing it to run in black & white mode. I imagine if this was a popular 2600 classic that we'd of seen exactly that happen by now, just as Indy 500 has resurfaced in recent collections.

Edited January 4, 2023 by Atariboy

[dudeguy]

https://fusionrgamer.com/2023/01/12/first-update-for-atari-50-teased-by-digital-eclipse/

 

Still won't be able to save high scores but at least theyre still supporting this thing

[DavidD]

2 hours ago, dudeguy said:

https://fusionrgamer.com/2023/01/12/first-update-for-atari-50-teased-by-digital-eclipse/

 

Still won't be able to save high scores but at least theyre still supporting this thing

If I update, I lose Warbirds, though...

[dudeguy]

3 hours ago, DavidD said:

If I update, I lose Warbirds, though...

By the end of the year, Analogue is releasing the Lynx adapter for the Pocket, so you do have that as an option to play a legal version of the game on a modern console, if that's your goal. I never could get into the game. Maybe Ill give it another chance some day

[DavidD]

14 hours ago, dudeguy said:

By the end of the year, Analogue is releasing the Lynx adapter for the Pocket, so you do have that as an option to play a legal version of the game on a modern console, if that's your goal. I never could get into the game. Maybe Ill give it another chance some day

See, I don't get the game either -- frankly, I'm disappointed by the Lynx selection in the collection.  All the good stuff I would prefer are the Epyx titles, I assume... I just don't feel like LOSING a game unless I get another game in return.

 

It sounds like there are veiled hints of an extra game coming with the update, but...

[+jgkspsx]

20 minutes ago, DavidD said:

See, I don't get the game either -- frankly, I'm disappointed by the Lynx selection in the collection.  All the good stuff I would prefer are the Epyx titles, I assume... I just don't feel like LOSING a game unless I get another game in return.

Atari sold Warbirds to Tommo in the bankruptcy. I was surprised to hear it was included and not surprised when it disappeared.

[Atariboy]

6 hours ago, DavidD said:

It sounds like there are veiled hints of an extra game coming with the update, but...

They've thrown cold water on that it seems. This was their social media response to someone posting the news that Digital Eclipse was patching Atari 50, with control of DIP switches and DLC (i.e., additional games) "in the pipe".

Quote

DLC is not "in the pipe". We would love to extend the experience if given the chance, but all we've said is that it's a possibility. That is not the same as in production. We truly believe transparency can set realistic player expectations. We'll keep you posted.

[Agent X]

On 1/14/2023 at 12:06 AM, dudeguy said:

https://fusionrgamer.com/2023/01/12/first-update-for-atari-50-teased-by-digital-eclipse/

 

Still won't be able to save high scores but at least theyre still supporting this thing

 

It's good to see that they're adding DIP switch settings for the arcade games. I was disappointed that they omitted them to begin with, especially considering that some of the digitized flyers mention some of the available options.

 

While they're at it, perhaps they can improve the graphical rendering (see here), and implement all of the Lynx buttons, too (see here).

 

[Austin]

Finally got around to playing this tonight and I came out really impressed with the collection.

 

The Jaguar stuff in particular is quite interesting. The games run better and so this might be the best way to experience them. Even Ruiner is far less choppy than in its original form, which really helps the enjoyment of it.