Early Intellivision 2609 with Math Fun pack-in game

[+Psycho Stormtrooper- Rog]

Well, i finally received it.

Lots of interesting things included! The original 2609 box with Math Fun pack-in game. The box is in fair condition with "Math Fun" decal on front. The game that came with it was the early version USA Math Fun with color manual, first edition glossy overlays, and no-line game cart/ heavy and shielded board. The manual is earliest known version 2609-0920(D).  Serial number on box does not match the system inside. Box s/n 028925. System s/n 002669. The system number is the 2nd lowest in my collection.

Edited September 28, 2022 by Psycho Stormtrooper- Rog

[+Psycho Stormtrooper- Rog]

One more thing..

It also came with early warranty card 2609-0850 and announcement card 2609-0990.

 

Has anyone ever seen the Mattel Flair pen that was supposed to be included with it?

[Humblejack]

1 hour ago, Psycho Stormtrooper- Rog said:

The manual is earliest known version 2609-0920(D). 

I think you meant the (A) version as the (D) version is the yellow one, not the full color version.

 

[Humblejack]

1 hour ago, Psycho Stormtrooper- Rog said:

Box s/n 028925. System s/n 002669. The system number is the 2nd lowest in my collection.

It's too bad they don't match.  I often said that if Rev kept up on the SN database we could use it for AA members to match consoles to boxes.  I have about 10 boxes that do not match the consoles and about 2 loose consoles that someone may have the box for.  

[+Psycho Stormtrooper- Rog]

22 minutes ago, Humblejack said:

I think you meant the (A) version as the (D) version is the yellow one, not the full color version.

 

I was referring to the system manual Hank.

[mr_me]

So a Math Fun pack-in at serial 28925 and another at serial 148832.  Maybe they had one customer that wanted a different pack-in.

[mthompson]

I thought I read that, even though the early boxes showed NFL Football as the pack-in game, Las Vegas Poker & Blackjack was substituted because of (a) a potential dispute with Atari over video game mechanics, and (b) having to pay royalties on a game bundled with every console sale. Why would they have included Electric Company Math Fun? Can someone clarify?

 

Also, to me it sounds like a terrible idea for Mattel to bundle Math Fun with its new console. Poker & Blackjack was weak enough, but a kids’ math game? It’s bad enough that on top of the $280 price tag, buying an additional game or two with the console was pretty much a necessity. Math Fun would have struck my 22-year-old self as a throwaway. (Yeah, I know I’m dating myself.)

[Atari_Bill]

3 hours ago, Psycho Stormtrooper- Rog said:

One more thing..

It also came with early warranty card 2609-0850 and announcement card 2609-0990.

 

Has anyone ever seen the Mattel Flair pen that was supposed to be included with it?

I got this warranty card with my #99 box as well.  No pen though.  I would guess it was just a normal pen with nothing linking it to Intellivision.  

[+Psycho Stormtrooper- Rog]

19 minutes ago, mthompson said:

I thought I read that, even though the early boxes showed NFL Football as the pack-in game, Las Vegas Poker & Blackjack was substituted because of (a) a potential dispute with Atari over video game mechanics, and (b) having to pay royalties on a game bundled with every console sale. Why would they have included Electric Company Math Fun? Can someone clarify?

 

Also, to me it sounds like a terrible idea for Mattel to bundle Math Fun with its new console. Poker & Blackjack was weak enough, but a kids’ math game? It’s bad enough that on top of the $280 price tag, buying an additional game or two with the console was pretty much a necessity. Math Fun would have struck my 22-year-old self as a throwaway. (Yeah, I know I’m dating myself.)

Thats what were trying to figure out. Its strange.. There's only 2 of these known so far with a Math Fun pack-in game (this one, and Cmarts). But they are too far apart in serial #s to suggest it was an overlap between the first 2 box printing types (my box with football pic on tv serial# 028925, and Cmart's box with Poker & BJ pic on tv serial# 148832).

 

Could it be Mattel used the Math Fun pack-in as some sort of backup game to include if/when there were was ever an issue with Poker production? That way, if they ran low on Poker games, they could substitute Math Fun for a while until they had enough Poker games to continue?  Just a thought.

Edited September 29, 2022 by Psycho Stormtrooper- Rog

[mr_me]

14 minutes ago, mthompson said:

I thought I read that, even though the early boxes showed NFL Football as the pack-in game, Las Vegas Poker & Blackjack was substituted because of (a) a potential dispute with Atari over video game mechanics, and (b) having to pay royalties on a game bundled with every console sale. Why would they have included Electric Company Math Fun? Can someone clarify?

 

Also, to me it sounds like a terrible idea for Mattel to bundle Math Fun with its new console. Poker & Blackjack was weak enough, but a kids’ math game? It’s bad enough that on top of the $280 price tag, buying an additional game or two with the console was pretty much a necessity. Math Fun would have struck my 22-year-old self as a throwaway. (Yeah, I know I’m dating myself.)

It was Magnavox that sued Mattel (and just about everyone else) over the Sanders Associates video game patent.  Poker & Blackjack was selected because it had no interaction between objects and the thinking was it would minimise exposure to damages.  Math Fun as a pack-in would also work with their reasoning.  The case was ultimately settled in early 1983.  Terms were not disclosed but I remember Keith Robinson saying Mattel paid a lot.  It could have contributed to Mattel's decision to exit video games.  By 1983 the Intellivision II was out with no pack-in.

 

These Math Fun pack-ins are extremely rare, Poker & Blackjack is the pack-in in almost all the 2609 Intellivisions.  They did have the free Astrosmash offer for a few months in 1982.

[+cmart604]

5 hours ago, mr_me said:

So a Math Fun pack-in at serial 28925 and another at serial 148832.  Maybe they had one customer that wanted a different pack-in.

This had occurred to me as a possibility. Very curious that these exist. 

[+DZ-Jay]

6 hours ago, mr_me said:

It was Magnavox that sued Mattel (and just about everyone else) over the Sanders Associates video game patent.

 

I knew that.

 

6 hours ago, mr_me said:

Poker & Blackjack was selected because it had no interaction between objects and the thinking was it would minimise exposure to damages.

 

I did not know that!  😱

 

6 hours ago, mr_me said:

Math Fun as a pack-in would also work with their reasoning.

 

This makes sense in he context of the previous statement, but ... I had no idea that was the case.  😲

 

I got mine with Poker, and I always wondered why they would do that.  Poker! ... of all games!!!

I thought that if they were aiming at adults, NFL Football would make more sense (or any other sports title).  If they were aiming at children, an obvious choice would be an action or space game! or something.

 

But noooooo ... they chose a gambling game for adults as their flagship game inside the box?!  WTF?

 

That they substituted the games due to the lawsuit, is very a interesting notion, and would explain this.  I guess Poker is the most interesting "adult" game they had that would fit their legal reasoning (as describe above); and likewise, Math Fun would be the most "child" game in that class. (Personally, I liked it when I was a kid.  I asked for it for Christmas and played the heck out of it. *shrug*)

 

Where did you about hear about that the reason for choosing the pack-in games was related to the lawsuit? Where can I get more information on this?

 

    dZ.

[mr_me]

Keith Robinson mentioned the packin reasoning in a podcast.  Now he wasn't at Mattel Electronics at the time of the decision but he was there during the Magnavox trial and apparently Dr. Chandler was discussing it with them as it was going on.

 

There are court transcripts at the internet archive.  NHL Hockey,  NBA Basketball, and NASL Soccer were the three cartridges accused.  It's a bit funny hearing Dr. Chandler demonstrate these games in court.  There's a lot of talk about interaction between objects, and Dr.  Chandler stressing that sometimes the puck/ball goes through the player according to conditions determined by the computer.

 

As a kid I just assumed Mattel chose a cartridge like Poker & Blackjack for the pack-in because giving away a popular cartridge would be a bigger loss in cartridge sales.  I had no idea NFL Football was their first choice, and MLB their second.

[Atari_Bill]

7 hours ago, mr_me said:

It was Magnavox that sued Mattel (and just about everyone else) over the Sanders Associates video game patent.  Poker & Blackjack was selected because it had no interaction between objects and the thinking was it would minimise exposure to damages.  Math Fun as a pack-in would also work with their reasoning.  The case was ultimately settled in early 1983.  Terms were not disclosed but I remember Keith Robinson saying Mattel paid a lot.  It could have contributed to Mattel's decision to exit video games.  By 1983 the Intellivision II was out with no pack-in.

 

These Math Fun pack-ins are extremely rare, Poker & Blackjack is the pack-in in almost all the 2609 Intellivisions.  They did have the free Astrosmash offer for a few months in 1982.

Major League Baseball was also a pack in for their very earliest units before they had NFL Football ready for release.  

[+DZ-Jay]

15 minutes ago, mr_me said:

Keith Robinson mentioned the packin reasoning in a podcast.  Now he wasn't at Mattel Electronics at the time of the decision but he was there during the Magnavox trial and apparently Dr. Chandler was discussing it with them as it was going on.

 

I haven't kept up with the Intellivisionaries podcast in many years, but I would love to listen to this interview.  Do you by chance know which one?

 

15 minutes ago, mr_me said:

There are court transcripts at the internet archive.  NHL Hockey,  NBA Basketball, and NASL Soccer were the three cartridges accused.  It's a bit funny hearing Dr. Chandler demonstrate these games in court.  There's a lot of talk about interaction between objects, and Dr.  Chandler stressing that sometimes the puck/ball goes through the player according to conditions determined by the computer.

 

Hehehe, I'd love to take a look at that transcript.  Can you provide a link, or at least what I should search for?

 

15 minutes ago, mr_me said:

As a kid I just assumed Mattel chose a cartridge like Poker & Blackjack for the pack-in because giving away a popular cartridge would be a bigger loss in cartridge sales.  I had no idea NFL Football was their first choice, and MLB their second.

 

That makes sense.  To be honest, as a kid I didn't put too much thought to it.  I do know that my Master Component came with Las Vegas Poker & Blackjack, which I thought was laaaaaaaaame.  The good thing is that my Grandfather bought the unit with a couple of cartridges as well, so I was a happy camper. :)

 

Back then, I had a very naïve understanding of game development and production, if I understood anything about it at all.  For instance, I could never fathom why a programmer would make a game with gorgeous background graphics (or an impressive title screen artwork) and then cheapen out with simple, single-colour sprites.  I thought, "man, that programmer must be an idiot -- he forgot to put the detail on the sprites.  Blah!"  It never occurred to me that it could be due to some specific technical limitation -- I thought, "there are colours!  He was able to put them in the title screen!!! Obviously the hardware supports more more than one colour.  Why couldn't he just work a little harder and put them on the sprites as well??"

 

Anyway ...

 

I did play quite a bit of Blackjack with my sisters and friends (back then we played the games we had).  I never could understand much about Poker at that early age, it felt mostly random.  I was pretty good at Blackjack -- it was a game kids played on cards anyway (year, the 1970s and 80s were weird).

 

Thanks for the info!

 

    -dZ.

[mr_me]

Keith was on many Intellivisionairies podcast, e.g. episodes 5, 9, 11, 12.  I can't remember which one. 

 

Here are the court transcripts.

https://archive.org/details/1982-07-07-magnavox-v-mattel-trial-transcript-903-1029

Edited September 29, 2022 by mr_me

[+DZ-Jay]

7 minutes ago, mr_me said:

Keith was on many Intellivisionairies podcast, e.g. episodes 5, 9, 11, 12.  I can't remember which one. 

 

Here are the court transcripts.

https://archive.org/details/1982-07-07-magnavox-v-mattel-trial-transcript-903-1029

 

Thanks.  I'll search the Intellivisionaries page and try to find the podcasts.  👍

 

I just learned something new about a 40 year-old console.  Goodness gracious me! 😄

 

    -dZ.

[+Psycho Stormtrooper- Rog]

1 hour ago, DZ-Jay said:

I just learned something new about a 40 year-old console.  Goodness gracious me! 😄

That's why we should all post information.

I learned  few new things this year as well.

 

[+BBWW]

It's been a few years but I recall Word Fun being the pack in for the Sylvania version? That or my mom was just messin' with the grandchildren. 

 

[Atari_Bill]

12 minutes ago, BBWW said:

It's been a few years but I recall Word Fun being the pack in for the Sylvania version? That or my mom was just messin' with the grandchildren. 

 

I don’t recall that being labeled on the box, but maybe they just didn’t label it as such.

[Walter Ives]

On 9/28/2022 at 8:07 PM, mr_me said:

Poker & Blackjack was selected because it had no interaction between objects and the thinking was it would minimise exposure to damages.

Nope. That concern wasn't raised until later. Just got lucky there.

 

On 9/28/2022 at 7:39 PM, mthompson said:

Math Fun would have struck my 22-year-old self as a throwaway.

I somehow suspect that your 22-year-old self would have been struck with a similar reaction to most of Children's Television Workshop's Electric Company on-air programming. What would it have thought of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAUjO2gEfXI ?

Math Fun was the one game in which the licensor exerted significant content control. The CTW contact wanted the cartridge to be very easy-going, non-competitive and non-threatening. For example, she was adamant about not allowing the inclusion of a timer and in her choice of keypad input control. Her vision was not completely wrong: someone once posted a video of a father playing the game with his young daughter—she was doing age-appropriate problems, he was trying to do absurdly complex ones in his head—showing the two of them engaged and laughing, and obviously having a good time.

Every attempt by Chang/APh to add excitement and urgency to the cartridge was rebuffed. Chang threw up his hands in frustration. APh even proposed a completely different concept, which it called Math Rocks!, that was a very fun single-player game that even your 22-year-old self would have liked, but Rochlis was intent on using the Children's Television Workshop license and had no patience for considering alternatives. The obvious licensee for that Math Rocks!, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schoolhouse_Rock!, was never contacted. It's too bad Robinson didn't release it on his second CD.

 

 

[+DZ-Jay]

1 hour ago, Walter Ives said:

Nope. That concern wasn't raised until later. Just got lucky there.

 

I somehow suspect that your 22-year-old self would have been struck with a similar reaction to most of Children's Television Workshop's Electric Company on-air programming. What would it have thought of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAUjO2gEfXI ?

 

Math Fun was the one game in which the licensor exerted significant content control. The CTW contact wanted the cartridge to be very easy-going, non-competitive and non-threatening. For example, she was adamant about not allowing the inclusion of a timer and in her choice of keypad input control. Her vision was not completely wrong: someone once posted a video of a father playing the game with his young daughter—she was doing age-appropriate problems, he was trying to do absurdly complex ones in his head—showing the two of them engaged and laughing, and obviously having a good time.

 

Every attempt by Chang/APh to add excitement and urgency to the cartridge was rebuffed. Chang threw up his hands in frustration. APh even proposed a completely different concept, which it called Math Rocks!, that was a very fun single-player game that even your 22-year-old self would have liked, but Rochlis was intent on using the Children's Television Workshop license and had no patience for considering alternatives. The obvious licensee for that Math Rocks!, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schoolhouse_Rock!, was never contacted. It's too bad Robinson didn't release it on his second CD.

 

 

 

 

For what it's worth, I did like Math Fun when I was a child, and have very fond memories of playing it with my Father and enjoying it. :)

 

    -dZ.