What would you buy?

[Curt Vendel]

Vote in the poll - but most importantly, lets hear your direct comments if Atari were to release a non-Atari 2600 chip powered device onto the market vs a real Atari product based on the Flashback 2 chipset.

[Paul Humbug]

Vote in the poll - but most importantly, lets hear your direct comments if Atari were to release a non-Atari 2600 chip powered device onto the market vs a real Atari product based on the Flashback 2 chipset.

 

Non-Atari 2600 Hardware: from to

 

Atari 2600 Hardware: from to and finally

 

 

The Flashback 1 I never bought after I read the reviews about the internals and the look and feel.

 

FB2 is ordered since Friday.

 

If anything as good/better than the FB2 was to hit the market, no doubt I would buy it.

[+orpheuswaking]

Vote in the poll - but most importantly, lets hear your direct comments if Atari were to release a non-Atari 2600 chip powered device onto the market vs a real Atari product based on the Flashback 2 chipset.

 

I say if it has the Atari name on it why have it be something else? The FB2 was real hardware and it appears to have been much better recieved than the FB1 that was not Atari HW based. If I had the option of playing my Atari 800XL or a "Clone" that wasn't hardware based then I know I would choose the 800XL, however if I had the opportunity to have new Atari hardware that I could plug and play, with the option to MOD for full capacity then I would buy the new hardware... The only reason I didn't get a FB2 was that I never owned or collected for the 2600... The 800XL on the other hand I have tons of stuff for...

 

Ok I'll quit rambling on now... I think we all get the point

[jaybird3rd]

I can only reiterate that, if Atari is to build on its successes in dedicated games, it must continue to use the legacy Atari hardware and classic Atari software titles. These titles represent hundreds of man-years of development, testing, and refinement. Newly-created imitations of these titles built upon alternative chipsets, in spite of their superficial resemblance, cannot hope to match the production values, the nostalgic appeal, or the outstanding quality of the originals. Any offerings based on such imitations will consequently be seen as low-quality products, and will get as cold a reception as other failed efforts (like the Atari Keychain Games) have received.

 

Atari has already demonstrated its commitment to quality by using authentic Atari hardware and software in the Flashback 2. By doing so, Atari has raised the bar--permanently--in the dedicated games market. Backpedaling on that commitment in the design of subsequent products, and falling back on imitations for the sake of saving money in the short-term, can only be a serious mistake for Atari. It would lead to products that are demonstrably inferior to competitive products from Radica and Jakks, it would create significant bad will among Atari's most ardent customers and collectors, and it would further erode the positive brand awareness that Atari has build--and invested heavily in--with the Flashback 2.

 

It isn't 1999 anymore, and consumers have come to expect much more than low-budget products built around entry-level technologies like the NES chipset. They expect to experience the same level of entertainment that they enjoyed before, and that is only possible with the ORIGINAL software running on the ORIGINAL hardware. As Atari moves forward and evaluates its options, I urge them to proceed with a renewed commitment to building quality products, to meeting and exceeding their customers' expectations, and to breaking new ground in the dedicated games market once again.

[Room 34]

I'm confused by these poll questions (particularly the first one). But I'll just say this: the first Flashback, with the "fake" games, sucked. The Flashback 2 is fantastic (even if the new games are buggy).

[nathanallan]

I'm kinda confused by the poll questions, too. If a quality product can be released using other hardware but with quality Atari games on it then I'm for it. I agree that low-quality items would be bad business. I also figger that if it can be released with non-Atari parts and still be homebrewed it'll be a good thing. I simply request quality, regardless. If Atari can profit from it AND use non-Atari hardware, AND have a great item like the FB2, then so be it.

[Paranoid]

Curt,

 

I'm going to take a kind of dangerous stand here. I think I see what you're trying to do here, and bear with me for a minute...

 

I'm absolutely a believer that the RIGHT hardware can run emulation of classic atari code effectively, efficiently, and with results that, in a blind preference test, could fool even the most picky users on this board. It is possible, and happening today. No doubt about that.

 

But the key thing here is the *right* hardware. And in the case of doing something like the FLASHBACK right through... you're going to want to somehow faithfully recreate the original joystick/paddle IO. Which means something like a Stelladaptor built in that converts modern hardware USB to a serial DB9.

 

And the NOAC isn't the right solution. The cheap solutions just aren't robust enough. To do it right, you need something like a StrongARM, or an IA86 architecture... and you would need to license the code from one of the well established emulators (most of which aren't going to allow you to use their GNU licensed code in a commercial product). In any case, either of these solutions are going to quickly defeat the cost saving measures you're going for with an emulation on non-atari hardware solution.

 

Simply put, to do the emulation well, your host processor better beat your emulated platform by a factor of a couple hundred at least. A NOAC can't do that.

 

So, once you boil that down, it just seems like there isn't a *cost effective* solution available that will create a quality product *and* be affordable enough to fit the right price point. Certainly, if you wanted to design some sort of high-end exclusive "executive" retro toy that was all luxury, that might be one way you could go with emulation. Imagine a Sharper Image type VCS in a Platinum plated titanium case with deluxe joysticks and every title ever released on ROM and a bunch of other features for $400. Sure... build that system around a PPC strongarm 640Mhz or an IA or AMD chip. But for the system you're going to sell at Walmart between $20-$100... if it is NOAC it is going to bomb, if it is emulation on decent hardware it is going to be TOO expensive (around $100, you're competing with the PS2)... so it seems to me the only solution you have left is the REAL deal, hardware wise, if you want to do it efficiently.

 

And I don't think for a second this is something YOU are considering. Sounds like it is something that is being forced down your throat. Tell them they're fucking it up, and it'll just perpetuate the problems they already face. I hope that wasn't too bold of me to assume.

 

(just what I need. One *more* reason to hate the French...)

 

I was thinking about it, and I want to add...

 

Even *with* superior emulation... it is still difficult to really capture the original feeling. I've invested quite a bit in high quality aftermarket input solutions. The Speedlink Competition Pro USB stick for PCs, the X-Arcade (PC/XBox) and Radica Gamester (XBox) joysticks... and they just don't *quite* live up to their promise of brining that original joystick feeling home. They're close... SO close. But, they're not perfect. However close a WinCE PPC, a PC, or an XBox can come to the feeling of an *original* Atari 2600... the FB2 is just that much *closer* (and we all know, among the purists, even the FB2 is seen as having limitations in operation and feel compared to the real deal).

 

I know it is a numbers game of "how close can we come, how inexpensively", and emulation is seen as a shortcut to get to that point. Something that will please MOST of the people, MOST of the time, while cutting costs tremendously. The thing is, to do that, to please MOST of the people MOST of the time, using emulation, I think you'll see the cost benefit erode. Instead, you'll find that to do it right, it is more expensive than just recreating the original chipset in question. And I'm probably the number 1 proponent of emulation here. I play retro games through emulation more often than by any other means. But, I've invested a LOT to get emulation to a point where it is good enough to be worth doing this - in time, effort and money. I don't think you'll see a large enough economy of scale to make it significantly cheaper to do it as a large operation, if you're going to commit to creating the kind of experience I have here, and I think anything less, and you'll disappoint your target audience. THAT is how Atari corp should be looking at this, if they want to actually succeed.

 

The question isn't if it can be done good enough through emulation. I think it absolutely can (although I didn't vote for that in the poll). I think the question is if emulation, done good enough, can be cost effective. And my gut intuition is that it cannot. Unless they've got something revolutionary up their sleeve.

Edited December 12, 2006 by Paranoid

[atwwong]

I do not understand why Atari even consider/would settle for a cheaper (non-authentic) product if it is crap - the public will know it, not buy it, and Atari will have a modern day ET landfill in their hands. Hasn't history taught Atari (the new Atari, at least) anything or are they just doomed to repeat it?! When the word "Atari" is mentioned in public, the first thing that comes to mind for most people in the know is the VCS, and not the Matrix or Driver (point: the newer products are not associated with the brand name). If Atari wants to make retro hardware, they should do it right and be authentic.

 

People will buy a product (not just the retro-fans) if it is well produced and gets good reviews; what happened to those cheap little NOAC joysticks? I have not even seen one around my area because no retailer is going to stock junk like that and the cheap company that developed those knock-offs can stick 'em in their ears. Those knock-offs are not even worth playing. Also regarding NOACs, I cannot remember the last time I unpacked and played my FB1 (no offence to Curt intended; I fully understand that story) but I still have my FB2 hooked up to my modern day TV.

 

Regarding authoring, I have dabbled with 6502 assembly programming; the tools and documentation are readily accessible to the public and once the steep learning curve is achieved, the fun begins. I have no desire to make a simulated Atari game for another chipset if I can make one that will run on a real system.

[Paul Humbug]

One thought about emulation:

 

For almost 2 years now I enjoy emulation on my Mac. I emulate all the hardware I never owned back then but always wanted. From what I remember these emulations look and sound like the real deal but I am not a purist on that. My expectations were not striving for perfection when I started to dive in this world.

 

Things are different when I buy for example Atari branded hardware. I would expect the perfect experience and also be willing to pay some bucks more to achieve it.

 

But then of course this hardware nowadays has to be very very competitive in price since it is regarded as a toy by the mass market.

 

But Atari has the unique chance with products like the FB2 to once again raise a whole generation at the age of 5+ (5-10 maybe) with the original Atari feeling. ( I am not considering us retro gamers for a moment). This audience maybe is not that picky regarding the used hardware but as the FB1 showed, what sense does bad emulation make when the whole product suffers?

[Shawn]

I have no use for yet another NOAC doing a crap job trying to dance like a 2600. The real deal or nothing at all. Atari should be releasing Atari products not some cheapass 8 bit nintendo rip off, Let's leave that up to the folks at Jakks. Atari needs to stick to Atari.

 

EDIT: To put it nice and clear I will NOT buy it if it's a NOAC or the like. I WILL buy if it's a real ATARI. REAL ATARI OR I DON'T BUY IT AT ALL. IT'S REALLY IS THAT SIMPLE.

Edited December 12, 2006 by Shawn Sr.

[+karri]

As a programmer I would either port modern games for original Atari hardware (like my Stardreamer for the Lynx - a space adventure inspired by Elite).

 

_or_

 

write completely new code that recreates the feel of original games on brand new hardware like the Sony PSP (like my HeroQuest project creating the atmosphere of the Amiga/Atari ST on the Sony PSP).

 

Spending time in learning to write code for a new cheap low-end system is not interesting.

 

--

Karri

[lord_mike]

This question is confusing... Personally, I don't care who makes the hardware, or even what platform it is as long as it emulates the old ataris 100% and runs native Atari code 100%. It can be a motorola 68000 running emulation, or an Intel or whatnot... it doesn't matter... but it better look to me, as a programmer, as an Atari inside. The flashback 2 was great because it combined all the old hardware onto a chip. The flashback 1 sucked, because it didn't even atempt to run atari code.. games were "ported" to the NES, and were basically rough simulations, not even emulations.

 

As long as it looks, acts, feels, and behaves like an atari, I could care less what's actually inside. Obviously, the best thing would be to have a chip or circuit board that reproduces the functionality of the original harware, but it doesn't have to be Atari who makes it, and it deosn't have to look like the old harware "under the hood" either. In other words, the chips and design doesn't have to be the same, but the logic bettter be.

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

[+remowilliams]

I'm a bit confused at the questions as well, so I'll just lay out my thoughts.

 

- I want real Atari and/or 3rd party classic original software running.

 

- I want that software running on hardware that is 100% (or as close as humanly possible) compatible with the original targets for any given platform.

 

- I do not want and will not purchase any device that is based on existing (or new) noncompatible/off the shelf (i.e. NOAC) hardware. I will not purchase any hardware that is running software that is a rewrite or port.

[Paranoid]

I'm a bit confused at the questions as well, so I'll just lay out my thoughts.

 

- I want real Atari and/or 3rd party classic original software running.

 

- I want that software running on hardware that is 100% (or as close as humanly possible) compatible with the original targets for any given platform.

 

- I do not want and will not purchase any device that is based on existing (or new) noncompatible/off the shelf (i.e. NOAC) hardware. I will not purchase any hardware that is running software that is a rewrite or port.

 

What if you couldn't tell the difference? What if I set you down at a box that looked exactly like a 2600, let you play a dozen different games, and afterwards, you said, "that is the real deal" and I showed you inside, and it wasn't?

 

What if it wasn't the real deal, but the code it was running *was*, via emulation?

 

There are some variables to consider here. If it is the difference between Atari abandoning retro gaming or supporting it, and I can't tell the difference, then I really don't care. I don't even care if it is a complete rewrite of the original title in the native mode of some newer solution... *provided* that the gaming experience is *flawless*.

 

Clearly, the FB1 was a failure at this, and it wasn't an issue with the FB2, so much, because it was basically the original code on the original hardware.

 

But let's say they could come up with something that addressed the challenges of the original FB1 and delivered an emulated experience that was virtually indistinguishible from the real thing. Would you really care then?

 

The thing to keep in mind in this case is things like... "What about repair on a system like this"... for example, the joysticks. If it looks like a real atari joystick, and *feels* like a real atari joystick, but I open it up and it is something completely different that I can't get the parts to repair and maintain... I'm going to be pissed. Especially if it is so complex that I can't build an alternative. How much of that are you willing to give away? Because a FB2 is infintely LESS user repairable than a real 2600, I believe, although I could be wrong. Even here though, clearly, there are going to be trade-offs and in *general* something is better than nothing at all. (although you could argue that this isn't the case with the FB1...)

 

Again, I'm on the fence.

[nathanallan]

I'm with paranoid but less on the fence. If I couldn't tell the difference with gameplay AND I could get parts or replacement units to do maintenance I wouldn't care. I just wonder if this was the case when the 2600VCS originally came out, about parts and availability. I got on the boat late. I got a 2600 when the NES was out and established, so I wasn't around to see. But as for today, I can get FB2 parts/units quite easily if I needed them. Controllers, mainboards, cables/connectors, too easy. And with the way you can order practically *anything* from the manufacturer (or from Mouser, DigiKey, etc.) I don't think it'll ever be a problem (barring some freak next Dark Age, like in Escape from L.A.)

 

I mean, I am looking right now at my cheap Chinese clock, and have seen most of the parts for sale individually while roaming the net that constitute it. ($5 word, woohoo!)

 

Nathan

Edited December 13, 2006 by nathanallan

[jaybird3rd]

An emulation option might be an acceptable (if disappointing) alternative if it was done right, but there's at least one problem: in the quantities that Atari is manufacturing, the hardware powerful enough to do 100% emulation is still WAY more expensive per unit than a dedicated chipset like the one used in the FB2. That's why Curt and Co. went to the trouble of shrinking the 2600 chipset onto a single glop-top instead of building a little computer and dumping an emulator and a bunch of ROMs onto it.

 

When I see Curt mentioning "third-party hardware" and "simulations" as options in his poll, my first impression is that Atari is considering using a third-party chipset (like the NOAC) and reprogrammed versions of the games, similar to what they did with the FB1. Nothing in the poll implies that an emulation option is even being discussed; I doubt that even the Sunplus S+Core product (which I'm assuming is what Curt was referring to in the third poll) would be fast enough for 100% emulation.

Edited December 13, 2006 by jaybird3rd

[Paranoid]

I agree, Jay. The problem really is that for them to do emulation effectively, it would require so much processor that any cost savings would be lost.

 

And I agree, the poll does imply a "Fb1" type of strategy... which is just dumb. Again, not that I think Curt is contemplating it.

 

[jaybird3rd]

I agree, Jay. The problem really is that for them to do emulation effectively, it would require so much processor that any cost savings would be lost.

 

And I agree, the poll does imply a "Fb1" type of strategy... which is just dumb. Again, not that I think Curt is contemplating it.

The ONLY circumstance in which I would even consider supporting a NOAC-based product is if they went in the same direction that Jakks did with their Atari 13-in-1 Paddle. That particular unit was built around a NOAC, but it was clear that Digital Eclipse used the original code of both the 2600 games and Arcade Warlords and somehow managed to rework it to run on the NOAC (which is, after all, a 6502 derivative). The result wasn't absolutely 100% accurate, but it was so damn close and so nicely polished that I can still play it without feeling affronted, and I have so much respect for their accomplishment on a technical level that the product left me with a very positive impression overall.

 

If somebody at Atari is actually thinking of shipping another batch of NOACs ... first of all, they need to be beaten over the head with a rolled-up newspaper. Second, they need to go out and build something even better than the Atari Paddle. That means using the original code, testing it until it runs in a pixel-perfect fashion on the new hardware, arranging it into an intuitive, painless menu system (the Atari Paddle menu was absolutely perfect, even better than the FB2 menu), and building it all into a solid, well-constructed package that won't fall apart in my hand. Then they need to throw in one or two really nice extras (Digital Eclipse could have left us with nothing but 2600 Warlords in the Atari Paddle, but they threw in Arcade Warlords because the NOAC could handle it), and then they need to sell it to me for about $5 less per unit than the FB2 (hey, if they're going to use the NOAC to save money, they'd better pass those savings right to me).

 

I doubt Atari is capable of pulling something like that off, though. "Basic Fun" sure as hell isn't capable, judging from the re-heated FB1 leftovers they recycled in those damn crappy keychains.

[Clint Thompson]

I would say by all means if original "authenic" Atari hardware/technology can be used, do it. Simulation/Emulation could mean something bigger so it's unfair to completely rule out that possibility... but as others have stated, NO FB1.

 

Anything lesser of FB2 quality would be a disappointment. Price cutting is not an option when it interferes with the 'authenticity' of an Atari product. Example - 3rd party licensed products are a disgrace to the Atari name and frowned upon by the end consumer who feels not only cheated but ultimately screwed in putting faith in the Atari name making them leery in purchasing future products sporting the Atari name/logo.

[Flojomojo]

Assuming the Flashback 2 is considered "real Atari hardware," something like that is what I want. It doesn't have to be vintage, just compatible. Not simulated, but "VCS-on-a-chip" is fine.

[Paul Humbug]

@Curt Vendel: what actually is the reason for this poll? Is Atari again "bitching" about not using the VCS-on-a-chip anymore for a portable version of the FB2 or is it regarding the FB3 project?

 

Prob. you are not allowed to bring light into the dark but maybe lightening a small match (hint) would be very interesting.....

[lord_mike]

Assuming the Flashback 2 is considered "real Atari hardware," something like that is what I want. It doesn't have to be vintage, just compatible. Not simulated, but "VCS-on-a-chip" is fine.

 

Second Flojomojo on that one!!!

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

[lord_mike]

@Curt Vendel: what actually is the reason for this poll? Is Atari again "bitching" about not using the VCS-on-a-chip anymore for a portable version of the FB2 or is it regarding the FB3 project?

 

Prob. you are not allowed to bring light into the dark but maybe lightening a small match (hint) would be very interesting.....

 

It sounds to me that Atari is trying to pull a flashback 1 on us, and Curt is trying to show them grassroots support against it. I'm not buying no NEW system that has an atari sticker on it. If this is oging to be an Atari flashback, it better play my old atari games somehow (whether it be the atari computer line or the vcs line).

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

[ATARIeric]

lets hear your direct comments if Atari were to release a non-Atari 2600 chip powered device onto the market vs a real Atari product based on the Flashback 2 chipset.

 

 

I never owned a FB1 because of all the complaints people have expressed towards it (non atari 2600 chip powered). I do own the FB2 and think it is a great little toy, my answer is simple, atari should keep improving the FB2 chipset for future hardware releases due to being able to play authentic games/homebrews.

 

Eric

Edited December 14, 2006 by ATARIeric

[jbanes]

Since Paranoid has been mentioning emulation quite a bit, let me just step back for a moment and clarify the Flashback 1 for our lurkers who are unfamiliar.

 

The original Atari Flashback (aka FB1) was an NES system from bottom to top, but was designed to look like an Atari system. The games that ran on the system were not emulations of the original Atari 2600 games! Rather, they were remakes of the games, designed to fool the player into believing that they were playing the originals. Of course, the devil is in the details.

 

Anyone who was familiar with the original 2600 titles was easily able to spot the differences between the originals and the remakes. This was partly due to the rushing required to finish the games on time, but it was also caused by a failure to reproduce the nuances of the games. Nuances are incredibly hard to identify and reproduce. They can come from something as simple as the shape of the screen, or the resolution of the sprites. It could even be an accidental glitch that players had taken to be an intentional part of the game. Any way you cut it, it's a nearly impossible task to not give away that the game is a remake.

 

So what's the big deal, right? As long as enough of the original game is captured, no one will care. Right?

 

Wrong. In those days, the nuances stretched all the way down to the hardware. NES games have the wrong resolution, cannot reproduce the same sprites as the 2600, have a different color palette, and have a completely different technology powering the background. The two systems are about as incompatible as you can get. The NES is superior for games written for it, but it will never be able to accurately reproduce Atari 2600 games. Considering that we're talking about a nostalgia product, that's a bad thing.

 

What Atari needs to understand is that Jakks' success with their joysticks has been due to accurate reproductions of arcade classics rather than poor attempts at using incompatible hardware. While the results haven't been perfect, the most popular joystick in their lineup (Ms. Pacman) got pretty darn close. Enough for consumers to forgive the poor ergonomics of the system.

 

If that's the truth, then the Flashback 2 (aka FB2) must have been an unmitigated success, right? Well, sort of. One needs to understand that Atari 2600 games are unlikely to appeal to many modern gamers. The FB2 in particular received a variety of negative reviews from outlets that just didn't like its flavor of gameplay. So the system will mostly be targetted at those who remember the system, or have an interest in classic gaming. That's still a huge market, but it's nowhere near even the Gamecube market. Atari can do well with a classic system, but they cannot expect to grow the market by any significant amount.

 

Therein lies the double-edged sword.

 

If Atari pursues the classic gaming market, then their profit-margins will be smaller due to the costs of custom hardware. If Atari instead releases a NOAC product, they can make more money on each unit and just hope that enough people purchase the system. What Atari needs to understand is that the classic gaming community is the only real market for these products. A higher profit-margin doesn't help you if you can't sell any of the units!

 

Basically:

 

2600 on a Chip == Classic Gaming Market
NES on a Chip  == NO MARKET

 

In closing, I'd like to reiterate some of the things said here:

1. We want 100% (or at least close to that) compatibility with the original Atari hardware.
   
2. Emulation is okay. If Atari wants to release a platform designed to accurately emulate the old platforms (e.g. 2600, 5200, 7800, etc.), then we're fine with that. As long as it correctly runs the original games!
   
3. If you have to reprogram the games, IT'S WRONG.
   
4. The classic gaming enthusiasts and former Atari players are the only realistic market for this stuff.
   
5. The only way to grow the market for these systems is to grow the size of the classic gaming community.
   
6. Releasing compatible hardware is a great way to grow the classic gaming community, and thus make more money.
   

A few business points for Atari to consider:

• Classic gamers spend hundreds to thousands of dollars on classic gaming hardware per person each year. This makes it a very rich market to target, despite its small size.
  
• With a market as restricted as the classic gaming market, it's best to ensure recurring purchases. Classic gamers would love to give you money for extra games, peripherals, add-ons, and homebrews.
  
• The classic gaming community often overlaps with the modern gaming community. Goodwill earned in the classic community will spill over into the modern community.
  
• That community can be used as a springboard to re-release more modern Atari hardware (Lynx and Jaguar anyone?) as toys for the modern generation. Nothing stops Atari from following Jakks into the market they created by releasing new PnP games based on popular licenses. Just remember to keep the Classic Gamers happy.
  
• Be careful about what "market analysts" tell you. They have very simplistic economic models that cannot take consumer reaction to a product into account. As a result, they can mistakenly dangle a multi-billion dollar market in front of you that does not exist.