what pack in game could compete with DK?

[SoulBlazer]

I think a lot of people are going to be happy that this dead 11 year old thread was bumped.

[thevnaguy]

I did not realize it was that old , i need to look at the dates but what does it matter anyway, it was new to me

[Noah98]

Robotron with the joystick coupler would have been awesome. Centipede is also a good choice, but many of us already played it to death on the 2600.

[Jaynz]

As big as Donkey Kong was, it would have had to have been that level of a hit to be competitive. Pac-Man or Ms. Pac-Man would have been their best bets. Space Invaders would be a 'maybe'. Really, nothing less than a A+ port of a triple-A arcade game would have done it.

[Lynxpro]

As big as Donkey Kong was, it would have had to have been that level of a hit to be competitive. Pac-Man or Ms. Pac-Man would have been their best bets. Space Invaders would be a 'maybe'. Really, nothing less than a A+ port of a triple-A arcade game would have done it.

 

Centipede would've been the one to go with because it would've also stimulated sales of the Trak-Ball controller.

 

Really, the only things the 5200 needed to become a blockbuster was a 2600 cartridge slot built-in for backwards compatibility - which several Atari engineers asked for but was overruled by that "French" manager - and joystick controllers that worked. The pack-in was essentially irrelevant to those two more important considerations.

[Big_Mo]

Well, since this zombie thread has been re-animated, I'll chime in. Of the original launch and shortly-after launch titles only PAC-MAN or Galaxian would've worked. Centipede (I forget when it came out) could have worked, but it plays much better with a Trakball, and you really want your launch title to play well with the pack-in controllers.

 

Missile Command wasn't different enough from the 2600 version to be exciting.

 

Star Raiders would have been a terrible pack-in. I remember lots of my friends trying it and being confused trying to navigate in 3D space. No good as a pack-in.

 

Space Invaders was too old, AND the 5200 version is, well, lame. It's only saving grace is the sheer amount of animation in the game, not starting the Invaders off-screen and having them march in always made the game too easy, and the saucers were worth so little they weren't worth bothering with.

 

 

[Bill Loguidice]

To add to the thread resurrection, I'll say that unfortunately, Pac-Man was the only real choice here. It was of course a great game, but I think like the rest of the initial Atari 5200 launch library, already rather tired, i.e., played to death at home (if not in its licensed form, certainly in copycat form). There was simply nothing to compete with the "freshness" or cache of Donkey Kong.

 

As was stated earlier, the only genuinely wrong answer was "Breakout" and perhaps "Space Invaders." The former because it's too simplistic (even with four player support), and the latter because it already sold to death on countless other platforms. Perhaps speeding up development on "Kangaroo" and packing that in might have offered some interesting counter programming to "Donkey Kong," though again, despite being well ported and a solid game in general, fails the name recognition test.

[toiletunes]

You would need two games to compete, DK was too big. Centipede and Pac-Man might have worked, if priced right.

[Jaynz]

You would need two games to compete, DK was too big. Centipede and Pac-Man might have worked, if priced right.

As already stated, Centipede sold the trackball. Unless you're including the trackball in the base unit, it's not a good idea for a pack-in.

 

Ms Pac-Man would have been a good choice. Galaxian, maybe Galaga as well. Phoenix? Vanguard? Stargate? One of the other late-run 2600-era games that weren't seriously over-released yet? As I said, for the pack-in to be competitive, it had to be a big name and an excellent port that could show off the 5200. Breakout? That was a choice only an absolute moron would make. "Fire that man!"

[Nutsy Doodleheimer]

I would say Centipede as well. It was such a popular game in 1982. And also with the trak ball controller it was the perfect peripheral for the game. And another mention is Missle Command. That is the best game to use with trak ball controller. The cursor surprisingly moves smooth and fluid when you roll the ball. Just my .02.

[Bill Loguidice]

As already stated, Centipede sold the trackball. Unless you're including the trackball in the base unit, it's not a good idea for a pack-in.

 

This. Centipede only makes sense as a trackball pack-in (it's a shame they didn't do a pack-in for that), not a console pack-in. I was always thrilled with Slither as the ColecoVision Roller Controller pack-in.

 

The only reason why I can fathom they'd include Breakout as the pack-in is that it supported both four players and the trackball, so maybe they thought it would encourage additional sales to "complete the set." For a feature checklist game it was fine, but for a demo of the audio-visual prowess of the system, obviously a total failure. (Frankly, from my perspective, trackball or no, this is the type of game that MUST be played with a paddle or spinner. I've never liked using a trackball with any paddle/spinner game.)

[Lynxpro]

To add to the thread resurrection, I'll say that unfortunately, Pac-Man was the only real choice here. It was of course a great game, but I think like the rest of the initial Atari 5200 launch library, already rather tired, i.e., played to death at home (if not in its licensed form, certainly in copycat form). There was simply nothing to compete with the "freshness" or cache of Donkey Kong.

 

As was stated earlier, the only genuinely wrong answer was "Breakout" and perhaps "Space Invaders." The former because it's too simplistic (even with four player support), and the latter because it already sold to death on countless other platforms. Perhaps speeding up development on "Kangaroo" and packing that in might have offered some interesting counter programming to "Donkey Kong," though again, despite being well ported and a solid game in general, fails the name recognition test.

 

Other than Super Breakout, I'm not sure if I buy into that often-repeated claim. Sure, almost all 5200 titles were also available on the 2600 but us kids knew which console of the two had the better graphics and sound. For most of us though, we ended up settling with our existing 2600s because of the cost of the 5200, not to mention the parents waiting for the dust to settle on the console war in that hyper competitive market then.

 

Donkey Kong looked good but from my recollection, it was Zaxxon [and Turbo] out of those two non-Atari arcade games of the time that lots of kids wanted to play. Rocky III also got a lot of buzz.

 

Pac-Man would've been a good original pack-in. You wouldn't want Ms. Pac-Man as the pack-in because most people wouldn't buy Pac-Man if Ms. already came bundled for free.

[Bill Loguidice]

 

Other than Super Breakout, I'm not sure if I buy into that often-repeated claim. Sure, almost all 5200 titles were also available on the 2600 but us kids knew which console of the two had the better graphics and sound. For most of us though, we ended up settling with our existing 2600s because of the cost of the 5200, not to mention the parents waiting for the dust to settle on the console war in that hyper competitive market then.

 

Donkey Kong looked good but from my recollection, it was Zaxxon [and Turbo] out of those two non-Atari arcade games of the time that lots of kids wanted to play. Rocky III also got a lot of buzz.

 

Pac-Man would've been a good original pack-in. You wouldn't want Ms. Pac-Man as the pack-in because most people wouldn't buy Pac-Man if Ms. already came bundled for free.

 

It's not only the Atari 2600 we're talking about here, but every other platform that had versions or clones of those games. Also, that oft-repeated claim was a contemporary claim and a contemporary impression. The ColecoVision was indeed the more popular choice due in large part to a more exciting seeming line-up.

[Jaynz]

Pac-Man would've been a good original pack-in. You wouldn't want Ms. Pac-Man as the pack-in because most people wouldn't buy Pac-Man if Ms. already came bundled for free.

By the time of the 5200's release, even "Pac-Man" was a bit old news. You have to remember that it did BECOME the pack-in (ahem) game eventually, but that it did nothing to help the 5200. People would have bought Pac-Man separately, yes, but it wouldn't sell a system when everything else had it, and the game was hitting 'old' already. Ms. Pac-Man, however, was still a bit fresh and it wasn't yet ported to everything.

[Lynxpro]

 

It's not only the Atari 2600 we're talking about here, but every other platform that had versions or clones of those games. Also, that oft-repeated claim was a contemporary claim and a contemporary impression. The ColecoVision was indeed the more popular choice due in large part to a more exciting seeming line-up.

 

Initially, the Colecovision was more popular since it got out the door first before the 5200 and they had great marketing. However, the 5200 was outselling the Colecovision in 1983 before Warner decided to pull the plug on it in favor of what became the 7800. Neither console came close to matching the popularity of the 2600. The 7800 ultimately outsold them both most likely due to the backwards compatibility with the 2600 standard; it certainly wasn't due to Tramiel's pathetic marketing of it.

 

Jaynz, my point was you couldn't exactly sell Pac-Man to 5200 owners if the console had come with Ms. Pac-Man standard. Atari Inc most likely would've had to sell it as part of a game bundle pack like they created for the 8-bit computer line.

[coachbrj]

9 years after the last comment, I will add that I bought my 5200 new with Pac-Man as the pack-in and I loved it. No regrets on my end. But that 5200 Donkey Kong that I have since added to my collection would have ruined Coleco pretty quickly, in my opinion.

[Rockymin]

Perhaps Atari didn't want to pay royalties for every console sold to the rights holder and that's why they didn't go with Pac-Man as the pack in and used one of their own games.  Nintendo got paid royalties for every Colecovision console sold with DK in it.

[space_dungeon]

If Atari would have started with PacMan, and made available the 2600 adapter, it would have captured a greater market. Many people didn't want to give up their 2600. A 2600 adapter from the beginning would have helped people make the switch. 

[Rockymin]

3 minutes ago, space_dungeon said:

If Atari would have started with PacMan, and made available the 2600 adapter, it would have captured a greater market. Many people didn't want to give up their 2600. A 2600 adapter from the beginning would have helped people make the switch. 

 

Whoever said they had to give up their 2600 if they got a 5200?  When I got my 5200 on Christmas the year it came out, it sat on my shelf right next to my 2600 and I would still play both consoles. 

[SoundGammon]

At the time the 5200 was released, GALAXIAN, would have been a great pack-in game! It would have been a good exclusive for the system and a lot of people were familiar with it and not release it for the 8-bits, yet! I don't believe Atari ever planned a 2600 adapter for it because the original version of the 5200 had to be MODIFIED to use it! Also, if Atari would have released hit games BEFORE the 2600 version, the system would have really taken off! Imagine Pac-Man coming out first before the 2600 version!

[space_dungeon]

2 hours ago, Rockymin said:

 

Whoever said they had to give up their 2600 if they got a 5200?  When I got my 5200 on Christmas the year it came out, it sat on my shelf right next to my 2600 and I would still play both consoles. 

There were people during that time that didn't want to purchase a 5200 because it didn't play their beloved 2600 original titles. My 2600 was placed in the attic after we got our 5200. 

[GaryH917]

On 3/2/2024 at 3:35 PM, space_dungeon said:

There were people during that time that didn't want to purchase a 5200 because it didn't play their beloved 2600 original titles. My 2600 was placed in the attic after we got our 5200. 

In my case I was never interested in owning a 2600 (bland graphics) or the Atari line of computers which only a few people I knew owned a computer back in the day. We went to the local mall arcades to play games in the late 70's-early 80's. To me the only system to offer the at home arcade experience was the 5200. Go to the arcades, play your fav game, purchase same game for the 5200, play at home! That's what I wanted back then and the 5200 provided that and still does to this day! Pacman would've been a better pack-in game but it was already 2 years old by the time the 5200 was released.

Edited March 4 by GaryH917

[zzip]

On 3/1/2024 at 7:13 PM, Rockymin said:

Perhaps Atari didn't want to pay royalties for every console sold to the rights holder and that's why they didn't go with Pac-Man as the pack in and used one of their own games.  Nintendo got paid royalties for every Colecovision console sold with DK in it.

Atari themselves expected to make profits on Pac-man.   Back then you simply didn't bundle your best game with a console,  people would pay extra for it.   Coleco pulled a coup by bundling DK and Atari was caught off-guard.

 

On 3/2/2024 at 1:01 PM, space_dungeon said:

If Atari would have started with PacMan, and made available the 2600 adapter, it would have captured a greater market. Many people didn't want to give up their 2600. A 2600 adapter from the beginning would have helped people make the switch. 

Why would anyone give up their 2600?  Especially to buy an "adapter" that cost almost as much as a 2600.   It's much cheaper to buy a TV switchbox and power strip that allowed both consoles to be connected to your TV.

 

A bigger issue was the 5200 was expensive,  cost $70-100 more than Colecovision.  I lost interest in owning a 5200 when I was able to get a 600XL (which is just as powerful) the next year for half the price of a 5200.

[Bill Loguidice]

Whether manufactured by the press at the time or not, there was a perception at the time that the reason why the 5200 didn't do better was because it was not backwards compatible, or could be made backwards compatible with the 2600. Of course, we know there were a lot of other factors at play, but certainly, that was one of them. At the same time, there was no proven playbook to go by, so there was really no way of knowing (outside of good market research) that the lack of backwards compatibility would be an issue. It was all still "throw anything and everything at the wall" pre-Crash, which is also why we saw, for example, such a big push for computer add-ons for consoles, a market that never really materialized.

[Bill Loguidice]

Just now, Bill Loguidice said:

Whether manufactured by the press at the time or not, there was a perception at the time that the reason why the 5200 didn't do better was because it was not backwards compatible, or could be made backwards compatible with the 2600. Of course, we know there were a lot of other factors at play, but certainly, that was one of them. At the same time, there was no proven playbook to go by, so there was really no way of knowing (outside of good market research) that the lack of backwards compatibility would be an issue. It was all still "throw anything and everything at the wall" pre-Crash, which is also why we saw, for example, such a big push for computer add-ons for consoles, a market that never really materialized.

And I just want to add that this goes both ways. Consumers weren't exactly educated enough as of yet to understand that you didn't necessarily need backwards compatibility. That a new system was a new system. Most people at that point were only through one real console cycle. Consumers evolved along with the the various console generations and associated business practices.