What would you buy?

[Paul Humbug]

Good conclusion. How did it end up with the FB1? Did they had to bury them in the dessert or could they sell the garbage?

[jbanes]

How did it end up with the FB1? Did they had to bury them in the dessert or could they sell the garbage?

Most of them just sat on the shelves, or were clearanced away by retailers. You can often find one or two collecting dust on the shelves of a local game store. Usually with a lower-than-original pricetag.

[jaybird3rd]

Most of them just sat on the shelves, or were clearanced away by retailers. You can often find one or two collecting dust on the shelves of a local game store. Usually with a lower-than-original pricetag.

I imagine it must have sold well enough for Atari to greenlight the FB2. That was the reason that many of us (including me) bought the FB1 in the first place.

[AussieAtari]

There are heaps of FB1's for sale in Oz at bargain basement prices, and they all have a pretty thick layer of dust on them. Perhaps that is why we did not get a PAL FB2.

 

I'm in the "it does not matter what the internals are as long as the games are the real thing and not lousy emulated or re-made versions ala FB1" school.

 

It would be pretty cool to have a new Atari console that plays old games perfectly and has the grunt for new, advanced homebrew or even commercial games, just like the Wii.

 

I'm just impressed with the ability to have three questions on the one poll.

[mos6507]

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.

 

The FB2 is a simpler device than a FB2 portable. It has all the games internally and has a relatively simple support chip to handle the menuing application. A FB2 portable is an engineering challenge because you have the added cost of the LCD screen and the support hardware necessary to enable USB loading into internal flash. Microcontrollers that can support USB tend to be pretty powerful beasts and it would be tempting to see how far they could go to eliminate other parts. This product will not come in at the right pricepoint unless the cheapest (but effective) combination of hardware is found.

[jaybird3rd]

The FB2 is a simpler device than a FB2 portable. It has all the games internally and has a relatively simple support chip to handle the menuing application. A FB2 portable is an engineering challenge because you have the added cost of the LCD screen and the support hardware necessary to enable USB loading into internal flash. Microcontrollers that can support USB tend to be pretty powerful beasts and it would be tempting to see how far they could go to eliminate other parts. This product will not come in at the right pricepoint unless the cheapest (but effective) combination of hardware is found.

I'm still wondering if USB is absolutely necessary. It would be nice to have, of course, but the price issues you mention can't be ignored, and considering how small the files are (

 

Would a cheaper interface (such as serial) be an acceptable alternative? I know the plug-and-play crowd won't like it, but with the right software at both ends it could be made very user-friendly, and it would certainly be a LOT cheaper and easier to implement than USB. Assuming it's fast enough for transferring the binaries at a decent speed, the 6532 inside the FB2 chipset could even be used to handle the serial I/O (much like it did in the Atari 850), thus avoiding the need to add an extra UART to the design.

Edited December 14, 2006 by jaybird3rd

[Lord Helmet]

IMHO if it isn't capable of playing the legacy roms...it isn't worth a crap.

[Shawn]

The FB2 is a simpler device than a FB2 portable. It has all the games internally and has a relatively simple support chip to handle the menuing application. A FB2 portable is an engineering challenge because you have the added cost of the LCD screen and the support hardware necessary to enable USB loading into internal flash. Microcontrollers that can support USB tend to be pretty powerful beasts and it would be tempting to see how far they could go to eliminate other parts. This product will not come in at the right pricepoint unless the cheapest (but effective) combination of hardware is found.

I'm still wondering if USB is absolutely necessary. It would be nice to have, of course, but the price issues you mention can't be ignored, and considering how small the files are (<=32K) and how infrequently they will be moved to/from the portable, USB almost seems like overkill.

 

Would a cheaper interface (such as serial) be an acceptable alternative? I know the plug-and-play crowd won't like it, but with the right software at both ends it could be made very user-friendly, and it would certainly be a LOT cheaper and easier to implement than USB. Assuming it's fast enough for transferring the binaries at a decent speed, the 6532 inside the FB2 chipset could even be used to handle the serial I/O (much like it did in the Atari 850), thus avoiding the need to add an extra UART to the design.

 

 

USB is cheap enough when mass produced.

[PressureCooker2600]

i would program for the 2600 AND the NES if i could......NES would be a lot harder so I picked 2600...someday when i have time, i'll want to get the basics of programming down so i can get these ideas in my head onto a chip for everyone to enjoy.......i guess making hacks are a good way to start

[Emehr]

I am absolutely not interested in a NOAC dressed up as an Atari. I bought the first Flashback recently for $5 used just out of curiosity. The simulated games were horrific (as many of us here already know).

 

If Atari is considering using NOAC as a cost-cutting measure, one can only bet they will use the same cost-cutting measures when they hire programmers to spew out simulated games for the system, which translates directly into Flashback 1.5, which translates into me not buying it.

 

The beauty of FB2 was that the hardware was running games designed for that architecture and nothing less.

 

If it's not Stella-on-a-chip running Stella code, count me out.

[gamer1682]

Making a NOAC or some other fruity Beijing cocktail is not a stunt worth doing. People may not know that there may be a NOAC on a chip or even know what a NOAC is, but they will easily understand how crappy of a system it is (unless a NES remake) when they play with a cheap plastic controller that doesn't even feel like the orginal and the games have different colorations, differences in animation, and gameplay. We were lucky the FB1 sold as many as it did. The FB2 is easily hot seller. If Atari gets the FB3 through with a 800 on a chip it will sell like hotcakes for sure.

 

 

 

*NOTE: I have nothing against China except some of their values and the communist government. The NOAC is valued hardware, but the NOAC is the reason we have the Super illegal fun joy systems in our mall koisks.

Edited December 16, 2006 by gamer1682

[+pboland]

I would prefer real atari hardware...

I was wondering, do the Jakks plug and plays use NOAC? I want to say yes, but I am not sure. I'm asking this because their games may not be perfect, but outside of using PC emulation they are the closest to the real thing I have seen in a home unit at that price. Now I am not a purist, so I may not notice some of the inconsistencies, but if atari could get the games as close as Jakks did on some of their units then atari may be able to pull off the NOAC chip set. Of course now I am talking of spending mass amount of time programming the games to get them right, and that would defeat the money savings that atari is looking for.

 

I say go with Atari Hardware.

[Paul Humbug]

I would prefer real atari hardware...

I was wondering, do the Jakks plug and plays use NOAC? I want to say yes, but I am not sure. I'm asking this because their games may not be perfect, but outside of using PC emulation they are the closest to the real thing I have seen in a home unit at that price. Now I am not a purist, so I may not notice some of the inconsistencies, but if atari could get the games as close as Jakks did on some of their units then atari may be able to pull off the NOAC chip set. Of course now I am talking of spending mass amount of time programming the games to get them right, and that would defeat the money savings that atari is looking for.

 

I say go with Atari Hardware.

 

 

I want to add that the Jakks/Digital Eclipse Paddles (and of course they are licensed by Atari) are a nice unit also regarding the look & feel of the games BUT after FB2 I couldn´t imagine a new console not able to play original games. It really depends what Atari wants to do. If they just want to release some other built-in-games-paddles/joystick, okay, do your best on the NOAC if it has to be. But if we are speaking of a FB3: it has to run original software without reprogramming. If we are speaking of a real new console system for the low-price market which is designed for the release of new software (who knows, maybe they are planning sth. like that) thats a complete different story.

[Clint Thompson]

I would prefer real atari hardware...

I was wondering, do the Jakks plug and plays use NOAC? I want to say yes, but I am not sure. I'm asking this because their games may not be perfect, but outside of using PC emulation they are the closest to the real thing I have seen in a home unit at that price. Now I am not a purist, so I may not notice some of the inconsistencies, but if atari could get the games as close as Jakks did on some of their units then atari may be able to pull off the NOAC chip set. Of course now I am talking of spending mass amount of time programming the games to get them right, and that would defeat the money savings that atari is looking for.

 

I say go with Atari Hardware.

 

 

I want to add that the Jakks/Digital Eclipse Paddles (and of course they are licensed by Atari) are a nice unit also regarding the look & feel of the games BUT after FB2 I couldn´t imagine a new console not able to play original games. It really depends what Atari wants to do. If they just want to release some other built-in-games-paddles/joystick, okay, do your best on the NOAC if it has to be. But if we are speaking of a FB3: it has to run original software without reprogramming. If we are speaking of a real new console system for the low-price market which is designed for the release of new software (who knows, maybe they are planning sth. like that) thats a complete different story.

 

Wrong..... This is exactly what Atari needs to STAY AWAY from. Maybe the marketing team wakes up and thinks "Oh, screw an authentic product. Let's find ways to disappoint people and still make a profit so we can further injure the Atari brand name." Yea, great idea guys.

 

I was at CVS the other day and got to play the JAKKS Atari joystick they are selling with (12? maybe 15? games inside). Man, that's it right there. I don't like the JAKKS name nor do I think they should be doing the Atari stuff and the games are extremely low in numbers, but it's real. Then I got to thinking.... it's pretty sad when a 3rd party company can get Atari better than Atari itself can (talking pre-Flashback 2 here).

 

Next release is make or break in the trust department with everyone. Atari screwed up with the FB1, somewhat fixed it with showing promise in the FB2... but if they screw it up with the FB3 or any other "Atari" hardware.... then forget it.

[Paul Humbug]

Well, I hope the FB2 has prooved to them that there is a market for authentic hard/software and furthermore I honestly think they understood why to go this way.

 

It is really now depending on the mentality the decisionmakers (maybe new ones should Atari being sold once more in the near future) at Atari are driven by: fast cash squeezing out the last drop of Atari´s name or taking things a little slow paced building up a product line which satisfies the retro gaming scene.

 

Of course after all, everything has to lead to earn profit and I think in our fast paced (retro) gaming scene one can do this following one or the other path.

 

But Atari has to understand nevertheless time (cheap technology) and circumstances (the great desire of retro gaming) has given them the unique opportunity to build up another generation of Atari players. I firmly believe that many of the old Atari Games are the perfect introduction into gaming for kids from 4-10.

 

Build another FB also with the option of low budget cartridges a la "game key" like Jakks is doing. Sell it at ToyRus and Co. for 30 bucks and a variety of game keys seperately. All the Atari parents plus an unknown number are going to buy for sure. And supporting the gake keys for another 3 years is extra money.

[Paranoid]

Build another FB also with the option of low budget cartridges a la "game key" like Jakks is doing. Sell it at ToyRus and Co. for 30 bucks and a variety of game keys seperately. All the Atari parents plus an unknown number are going to buy for sure. And supporting the gake keys for another 3 years is extra money.

 

This is *another* bad idea. The "key" should use a non-proprietary card... probably SD. Same deal as the Palm SD cards that have prebundled titles on them. Basically, you sell this item in Toys R Us, you go ahead and package and sell game packages of your retro titles right along side of it, but you basically make it so that those of us who *know* can access the HUGE variety of rom titles out there via loading the images onto a regular ROM file. The "Atari parents" will still go ahead and buy the Atari packaged titles on SD "gamekeys"... the average consumer who will buy this will pay an extra $20 for a key with 40 games on it of Atari owned titles. The people who know about ROMs are going to break down into two groups... collectors and moralists who WILL buy it... no matter what... and the free-riders who probably will NEVER buy it, under any circumstances, when they can download it for free. There is *nothing* Atari can do to accomodate the last group and get them to buy. But if they make it proprietary, they risk offending a good number of the collectors and moralists. Worrying too much about the few pirates may cause Atari to blow it in all other aspects.

 

It really comes down to this. If they make it a proprietary, locked method, the hardware is useless outside of being able to access strictly ATARI owned intellectual property. This doesn't even encompass the entire *ATARI* library, in the example of the 2600 (or the 8 bits, either). There are titles like Defender and Donkey Kong that are *not* Atari properties, even though the carts and code were done by Atari. So, they *cannot* release THOSE titles without renegotiating their licenses, provided that the actual owners are willing to renegotiate at all. That is *before* we get outside of the Atari library to 3rd party and homebrew titles. This effectively reduces the available titles for any new hardware by at least 3/4ths... maybe more. They might, ala the FB2, be able to put a 3rd party title here and there in the gamekey packages... but the vast majority of titles are simply going to be unavailable.

 

And if that is the case, I won't see a very compelling reason to own the new hardware. Simply put, it has to have a way that I can play something like Adventure 2 on it (assuming it is an 8 bit application), or Montezuma's Revenge, or... whatever. If they limit me to keys that include only Atari properties on them, they diminish the attractiveness of the platform a thousand fold.

 

THAT is the important thing to me, I think. It doesn't matter if it is emulation or real hardware, as long as the emulation is GOOD and it uses original CODE and has a way to feed that original code in *other* than a proprietary Atari method (such as a gamekey).

 

If they get THAT much right... I don't think there will be a huge amount of complaint in the retro community. If they're intent on blowing that, I'd say Curt is better off to find private financing and come out with a competitive product that shows up in the mall kiosks next to the pirate NES crap.

 

It would help for Atari to really understand consumers like "us". In my case, I've got a 2600, a 7800, a 5200, and an 800XL. I've got multicarts for all of these, and basically complete libraries. In that sense, I don't feel like I *need* a FB2 or 3...

 

Yet I have *3* FB2s just boxed away in a closet, for a fairly simple reason. I see the FB2 as an INSURANCE policy. It is NEW hardware that gives me an "out" should my antique stuff die. I can mod it with a cart port from a dead 2600 if I need to. It has two new, compatible joysticks should I run into problems there. In this sense, it is *worth* having... because 20 years from now, I may need to bust one of these out and mod it so I can still play 2600 titles.

 

If they want the 8 bit FB3 to be a success, they need to realize what it is that makes a guy like me want *several* of these things, and address that. In the case of the FB2, I bought spares for joysticks alone. At $29 it was like buying two refurbished sticks from EBay and getting a 2600 thrown in for free.

 

The real point is, that these products don't help me do anything I'm not doing ALREADY. What they need to do is offer me the ability to do what I am already doing with less hassle, for a longer time into the future. That is exactly why the FB2 was such a success. "Everyone" here who bought a FB2 already had a 2600 (I mean, the FB2 brought *me* here, in reality... but I'm talking about the people who were part of this before the FB2 came out). They bought the FB2 for these reasons... Basically because you can mod it with a cart port, and it extends (through the joysticks and the console itself) the insurance that a retro-gamer will continue to have retro-game hardware into the future if the OLD stuff gets scarce.

 

If you're not going to address it this way, if you're just going to look at the typical consumer, then just release more crap and write us, and our positive reviews, off. But I think that this is exactly WHY the FB2 did so well. Not the casual gamers who have bought FB2s and already thrown them in the back of the closet or donated to Goodwill. It is the guys like us who bought 2, 3, or more of the units... that really bump the sales up beyond the initial trend sales.

Edited December 17, 2006 by Paranoid

[Clint Thompson]

...but.... I think the attractive pricing, packaging and the original Atari-looking package help push tons of the Flashbacks out for the casual gamers and gift-givers for the last 2 Christmas holidays.

 

I don't see Atari releasing hardware that will allow someone to use just any rom off the net. While they could probably sell a bagillion units this way, it's the wrong way to handle the situation. I like the idea of the FB2 giving you the ability to solder on a cart port because very limited and only technical people are going to actually do it so it really cuts the whole 'piracy' issue out of the light and focusing more on the core unit itself.

 

There's a much better and legal way to play the back catalog of Atari 2600 games.... Atari just has to respond.

[Paranoid]

...but.... I think the attractive pricing, packaging and the original Atari-looking package help push tons of the Flashbacks out for the casual gamers and gift-givers for the last 2 Christmas holidays.

 

I don't see Atari releasing hardware that will allow someone to use just any rom off the net. While they could probably sell a bagillion units this way, it's the wrong way to handle the situation. I like the idea of the FB2 giving you the ability to solder on a cart port because very limited and only technical people are going to actually do it so it really cuts the whole 'piracy' issue out of the light and focusing more on the core unit itself.

 

There's a much better and legal way to play the back catalog of Atari 2600 games.... Atari just has to respond.

 

 

No... there isn't. The Back Catalog of Atari comprises a selection of games that they have free and clear title to. Let's call it 2/3rds of 1/3rd of the total titles available.

 

There is *nothing* illegal about them releasing a device that happens to use a memory card method that can be used illegally. If this were the case, any music player that is capable of playing MP3s would be "illegal"... and thank God saner heads seem to be prevailing in that matter. Atari would simply be following a precedent set by the music device industry in supporting a well known, documented, and supported format(s) already available on the open market.

 

It is the *right* way to handle the situation. In any case, your other argument that the ability to solder on a cart port "because very limited and only technical people are going to actually do it so it really cuts the whole 'piracy' usse ouf of the light and..." argument is a non-sequitur, at best.

 

First: You could as easily apply this argument to the idea of downloading zips and copying them to a physical device that is then inserted into the FB3. It is a technical thing that only a limited amount of technical people are going to be interested in...

 

Second: There is *no* piracy issue with the cartridge, as you would, we should assume, be playing from a legitimate cartridge, that is... an original piece of software. The reason that they didn't *include* it was probably 1 part cost, 1 part not wanting to support people calling with issues about their 30 year old carts.

 

Finally, if they release a device that supports ROM or .bin images... it actually *creates* a potential legitimate market for other IP holders who may want to make their library available. I maintain that DMR schemes are unnecessary (and I will argue this by illustrating that it is easy to download a protected song, burn it to a CD, and rip it right back to MP3, stripping the DMR protections right from the file). The reason music stores like iTunes and Napster are successful is because people WANT to *buy* music from a LEGITIMATE distribution channel that will stand behind the product. That should be no different with ROM images than with MP3 files. I don't want pop-ups, and trojans, and spyware. I don't want incomplete songs, or badly ripped songs, or things that aren't even songs. I want to know when I click on a download, I'm getting a high quality version of EXACTLY what I think I'm getting, and that if I have a problem, there is a legitimate place to voice that concern. That is worth $.99 a track... and I'd bet it would be a model that would be worth $.99 a ROM, too. If Atari made a device like this, every IP owner could easily release a legitimate downloadable version of their ROMS to a legitimate distribution channel... and guess what... if they made $.99 on the rom... that would be 100% more, in general, than they are making off this old IP now. The only time I go looking for a song outside of the legitimate channels, is when some idiot hasn't made it available there because they think I should "experience the track in the format that they intended it to be enjoyed in" or some other such lame excuse. I hate going that route because, it is like going into the bad side of town... your PC usually needs a shot of antibiotics afterwards. And this same logic applies to ROM images. I hate it when a ROM is hard to find... because the chase for it usually is a hassle. Bad and corrupted dumps, false dumps, bad sites full of all kinds of bad things... I usually *get* it... it doesn't stop me (which is why the guy who owns the image and is keeping it unavailable is a moron)... I'm just usually *pissed* at the IP owner by the time I track it down... because he could have made it much easier for me and I would have gladly paid him for the convienience. I can see Atariage being positoned perfectly to become the iTunes or Napster of the retro-device phenomenon.

 

Which is why the morality/piracy issue is a bunch of bushwah-bollocks-horsepucky.

Edited December 18, 2006 by Paranoid

[n8littlefield]

I'd buy two different options. First, I would buy a true portable FP2, especially with the USB downloadable roms. I'd probably buy a couple for me, friends & family.

 

After that, I would buy a NOAC based handheld with the same feature, USB downloadable roms. If it had some Atari clone games on it fine, but I wouldn't really care, I'd just like a nice NOAC handheld mass produced with memory to throw on a bunch of games. I'd buy a couple of those too.

 

I'd prefer the Atari one, obviously, but I would actually buy both (as would alot of people I assume).

[Shawn]

I'd buy two different options. First, I would buy a true portable FP2, especially with the USB downloadable roms. I'd probably buy a couple for me, friends & family.

 

After that, I would buy a NOAC based handheld with the same feature, USB downloadable roms. If it had some Atari clone games on it fine, but I wouldn't really care, I'd just like a nice NOAC handheld mass produced with memory to throw on a bunch of games. I'd buy a couple of those too.

 

I'd prefer the Atari one, obviously, but I would actually buy both (as would alot of people I assume).

 

 

If NINTENDO was to make such a handheld I could see a NOAC. BUT this is ATARI so I expect ATARI.

[nathanallan]

Are NOAC's reprogrammable? Even if you would have to force it? If so, maybe it would make a cool gaming machine on its own as a hacker's toy. But yeah, not as an Atari (from what I've read n reviews etc.) I think I would buy a NOAC based for that reason.

[applekevin]

Despite what anybody says I believe there is a market for retro-gaming in our youth. Im only thirteen! I never ever saw the 2600 in it's heyday. I got a FB2 for my birthday. I then did some google stuff on it and found out about the cart mod. I have a lot of carts now and play them on my FB2. Also I agree with Paranoid. I think emulation would be a better option because they could easily allow you to play 2600 5200 7800 and Atari 8-bit with almost no hassle. Emulation is fine AS LONG AS IT ISN'T NOAC (which by the way sucks). Trust me on that, NOAC SUCKS!, I've bought many a Super Mecha FUN FUN JOY JOY SWEAThouse made illegal NES clones. HATE 'EM! ANyway with emulation you could include the ports for the carts for the systems. There are som many possibilities with that! I also think if they went that route Atari should reproduce the old 26/52/78/A8 carts. They could also only include say 2600/7800 support and sell the support for 5200 and A8 later. They should also sell blank carts that way you could donwload ROMs from an online Atari store. Of course hackers would simply download the roms from here! Just to throw out ideas

 

Oh also it is much easier to reach 100% compatibilty with emulation rather than recreating the system

 

P.S. SOme people are saying emus are uneconomical. Couldn't you use a 30 Mhz Moto 68000 to do that? DO they stil make those?

Edited December 23, 2006 by applekevin

[Paranoid]

Well... there you go... I mean if you can sell ONE 13 year old kid on the deal, how many others can you sell?

 

And, I think that you *really* need to change the paradigm. You can't approach this as a traditional video-game console marketing product.

 

To elaborate... the *hardware* needs to be where Atari makes the money. On the console and the peripherals (sticks, paddles, trackballs, d-pads, USB adaptors for those sticks, whatever). They need to worry far less about the actual IP, and actually make that almost dispensable. By that I mean, by all means open an Atari store and sell legitimate, verifiable, and reliable downloadable ROM images for a pitance charge. At the very least, this efforts helps Atari defend their IP and Copyright on these titles should anyone else try to infringe. And any sales that are made from such a source become gravy for Atari... especially if they license someone else, like AtariAge, to be the "Official Atari Online Store". Send them the ROMs, and let them handle all the overhead and cost of business, and send Atari a check for a royalty on each title sold. But, they should really use the huge library as a carrot to *sell* consoles... with the idea that the huge library can be had for a song. Hell... offer "Unlimited Download non-expiring rom image Subscriptions" for $100 a year. There are a TON of angles that Atari can work this from... and once more... *every* Rom that Atari *sells* is one that hasn't been given away for free. Instead of going into it *worrying* about the lost sales from piracy, go into it being EXCITED about the gained sales that would have previously been pirated.

 

But I guarantee you some dipshit in a shirt and tie is already slobbering over the idea of selling 30 year old games for $5 a pop or more... *That* will fail. Price them so that kids can get a collection of 10-20 titles for a weeks allowance, and you'll have a model that might work.

 

Fucking music industry was stupid, dragging their feet for several years, while losing millions of dollars, because they were *worried* about piracy. Dumbasses... if you're not offering *something* to compete, Piracy is going to be the only solution, and no one is going to send you a dime under that model.

 

/rant

Edited December 23, 2006 by Paranoid

[R. Jones]

"[ . . . ] 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"

 

FB2-Based device

- If it has a way to add new games (not necessarily a cart slot) I'd buy it.

- My uncle was a big 2600 DK fan, so I'd probably buy him one, and put a copy of Donkey Kong on it. If it's possible, I set it up with a hack that would record high scores, and set the highest score with his highest from back in the day.

- If I finish any games, I'd test them on the new FB2 for compatability. If it wasn't too much work, I'd try to make my games compatable with it, so they could reach a wider audience.

 

Non-Atari 2600 device

- I wouldn't buy it.

- I wouldn't play it if I knew people that had it.

- If I got it as a gift, I'd keep it out of obligation, but I'd just stick in a box and forget about it.

- I'd warn other people not to buy it, if I thought they were considering it.

- I'd be hesitant to buy other atari branded products, knowing that they'd ship out low-quality stuff like this just to make a buck off unsuspecting consumers, when they have the FB2 and a large catalog of games at their disposal.

[nathanallan]

Yes! This is it exactly! Go with Atari to the bone.

 

If Atari simply MUST make something different, then make it so that it's NEW and a next step! I wouldn't do anything with the FB2 portable or the FB3 that would jeopardize any foothold that is already there. So if the bigwigs at the Main Office simply must use different hardware then MAKE GAMES SPECIFICALLY AND ORIGINALLY FOR IT!! Don't simulate good games terribly, make new games that say I AM ATARI! Don't ruin the classics.

 

Maybe I'm being simplistic, but this seems like a pretty simple set of problems for me.

 

The 2600 lovers (I'm one) want a system like the smash hit FB2. So make one! Great ideas have been floating here in this thread along with others. Curt's ideas.

 

The bigwigs want to make something different, using different hardware. Fine, make that TOO but don't try to take the games from the 2600, make NEW ONES! if the Suncom (or whatever it's called) is a 32-bit proc then make some NEW 32-bit games, let them be kinda like sequels or spin-offs but not the originals POORLY implemented. This could be a neat product BUT NOT AS THE FB3 OR THE FB2 PORTABLE! I would buy it as a new, cool Atari product with new games that are pure-blooded Atari products(I actually started a thread about this), but not as a cheap hack of the original.

 

Okay, I'm not trying to start a big argument (not that I don't enjoy getting yelled at) here but I saw point-counterpoint going back and forth (hello! FORTH) and wanted to point out the obvious (at least to me).

 

I don't see the FB3 or the FB2P as major money-pit projects as long as the bigwigs make up their minds and follow Curt's lead. Curt's ideas are good ones and they are proven: Atari hardware with Atari roms, it WORKS. People love them. Why break a good idea? I'm already getting two of them regardless.

 

My back hurts and the painkillers are working. Maybe that's where this is coming from. But it started to get stale. Read the entire thread and the sister threads, please, people.

 

This is SUCH a stimulating thread!

 

Nathan

 

/edit http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?s...c=98582&hl=

Edited December 23, 2006 by nathanallan