Flashback 2+ for preorder on Atari.com, get a free T-shirt

[+LS650]

Guys, I have no idea why you're looking at retailers now for them. We never stated they were at retailers now.

But Curt never said they weren't available either...

 

My guess is people are hoping that the 2+ will show in stores quickly, and if that happens without prior notice, so be it.

[Austin]

I went ahead and checked Target today, thinking there might be a very, very slight possibility that they could have them (I was out and about already, anyway). My reasoning was that if it says "retail only" on the web site and you are unable to order one from there, then maybe they had some shipping plans that they didn't tell you guys about.. No worries though. For anyone else reading, I would wait on checking again if I were you--They're not even listed on said-retailers' web sites, so they're clearly not available retail now.

[ZIMM]

Guys, I have no idea why you're looking at retailers now for them. We never stated they were at retailers now. What was stated -

 

 

Sorry, I don't have that info. I believe they are looking to I think Walmart and possibly Target, but that is not a solid thing, if/when I have more info that I can release I will let everyone know.

 

 

 

Curt

because I was out, I have 1 walmart and 2 targets within a 5 mile radius, people were wondering (like me), the site says retail only, and for a new release the product hits the stores on release date or a couple days after.

[+swlovinist]

After thinking the large box that was in my living room was for my wife, I finally opened it to see the box and shirt have safely made it to my home. I am going to wear the shirt, and store the system and packing slip in the game room. I like the new color of the box. I am glad I ordered it when I did.

[+eebuckeye]

Guys, I have no idea why you're looking at retailers now for them. We never stated they were at retailers now. What was stated -

 

 

Sorry, I don't have that info. I believe they are looking to I think Walmart and possibly Target, but that is not a solid thing, if/when I have more info that I can release I will let everyone know.

 

 

 

Curt

 

Ugh.. good point.. I just looked at Walmart and Target. :-) I can't understand why they would take them off the site if people want to buy them?!?

[nathanallan]

Right, Atari is totally known for making *great* business decisions.

 

I'm not surprised that they yanked them when they were wanted, it just suits them. It's historical with the people that run Atari.

 

In any case, glad the FB2+ is out and coming out again for more people to have them.

[Retro Rogue]

My reasoning was that if it says "retail only" on the web site

 

It doesn't.

[Retro Rogue]

Ugh.. good point.. I just looked at Walmart and Target. :-) I can't understand why they would take them off the site if people want to buy them?!?

 

Because it was a limited run.

[Retro Rogue]

the site says retail only

 

Where? There is no FB2+ page anymore, that's what sparked this convo.

[jaybird3rd]

I can't understand why they would take them off the site if people want to buy them?!?

This is just a guess, but it might have something to do with the fact that they're now being offered as contest prizes. If they were still available online, there would be less incentive for people to enter a contest to get one.

[+jsmith73]

Ugh.. good point.. I just looked at Walmart and Target. :-) I can't understand why they would take them off the site if people want to buy them?!?

 

Because it was a limited run.

 

Well that begs the question "How limited?"

Would you have those numbers?

[ZIMM]

the site says retail only

 

Where? There is no FB2+ page anymore, that's what sparked this convo.

yeah, good point. I was just repeating what others said. my bad.

[onmode-ky]

Because it was a limited run.

 

Well that begs the question "How limited?"

Would you have those numbers?

 

A post from Curt Vendel in page 2 of the "Got My Atari Flashback 2+" thread says that the initial run of FB2+ is only 15,000.

 

I would like to add that I have bought myself one of the Honey Nut Cheerios boxes with the FB2+ promo ad on the back. It looks like this is all part of a larger "retro cereal" campaign General Mills is doing. The box uses what appears to be a decades-old Honey Nut Cheerios design. This look appeared as well in boxes of Lucky Charms and normal Cheerios that were in the aisle alongside the Honey Nut Cheerios; the normal Cheerios had a Rocky & Bullwinkle cartoon on the back (curiously, there were no trademark/copyright notices, though). This really helps explain why General Mills would approach Atari to reproduce a 5-year-old retro video game product in the current market.

 

onmode-ky

[Curt Vendel]

15,000

 

 

Ugh.. good point.. I just looked at Walmart and Target. :-) I can't understand why they would take them off the site if people want to buy them?!?

 

Because it was a limited run.

 

Well that begs the question "How limited?"

Would you have those numbers?

[Lynxpro]

Good for people who didn't pick up a Flashback 2 the first time around, but disappointing for those of us looking for the next machine. I hope this sells well to enable new product, but I just don't know. Atari must still be in pretty dire financial straights though if they have to go with a "+" version of the same exact thing that already had its time on the market.

 

 

I'm sure its only a matter of time before Time Warner buys "Atari" back again and merges it with all the other entities that now comprise Warner Bros. Interactive. They acquired bankrupt Midway which owns all the Atari Games Corp. IP and is the actual descendent of the original Atari Inc. arcade division.

 

 

I have heard (but can't confirm) they are talking with Target and Walmart about carrying them.

 

 

I was at Target yesterday and as usual, the help knew nothing. They had the Honeynut Cherrios Atari boxes though. I wish I would've known that there was no actual entry in the box and thus I wouldn't have bought it...

 

 

Aw man. I wish Pole Position had been on the list.

That's a Namco title. As was stated, they wanted to keep costs to a minimum hence no licensed titles. Likewise, the idea was to create a new themed section hence the sports titles. People are never satisfied, no matter what games are included they'd always say "Why didn't you include such and such?"

 

 

What does that matter? Original Atari had pretty much exclusive rights to the Namco titles they individually licensed for use on all Atari hardware... 2600, 5200, 7800, 400/800/XL/XE. But I guess the existing license does not cover ROM images. It couldn't be because of the change in ownership of what constitutes "Atari" because if that were the case, those licensing agreements would've expired in June 1984 when Jack Tramiel took control of the company.

 

The same goes for Williams titles. Their ownership is not in question... they now belong to Warner Bros. Interactive, the spiritual heir to the "real" Atari.

 

 

Licensing means $$$$

Atari went with only its owned assets on this project. No licenses.

Also Midnight Magic and Dark Chambers are no wholey owned by Atari, so they aren't used.

Curt

 

 

What??? How does Atari not own "Dark Chambers"? The Tramiels merely licensed that title for the 2600/7800 back in the day? Then again, had they been shrewd, they would've fought Atari Games over ownership of "Gauntlet" since it came from that authors APX title "Dandy".

 

 

This is awesome news! I still have my FB2 with box, and hook it up for play every now and then...

 

LATER: aw, only available in the US... :-(

Awww... craptacular! (We Canadians always get the shaft for these special releases.)

 

There's a way to cure that little problem... Annexation. Well, maybe after we enact health care reform and then settle that lawsuit with the descendants of the Loyalists who had their land stolen from them during-and-after the Revolution that the US was supposed to repay as negotiated in the Treaty of Paris...

 

 

Modding isn't the answer depending on the game you want. For example, Star Raiders - won't work in a modded FB.

I'm all set with my light sixer, Harmony cart and FB2. Hopefully this rehash of the same product generates enough sales to justify a FB3.

If I were to have one modded, would it be able to play 7800 games as well as 2600?

 

 

I would like to see any future 7800 model - if it is using actual chips derived from the original Atari chips and not running emulation - use an actual Pokey chip and thus incorporate the music from the 8-bit computer versions. Then again, I'm surprised nobody's ever tried upgrading any of the 8-bit computers with a Maria chip. Then there's the AMY chip...if only of the design paperwork still existed...

 

Speaking of mods, I wonder why none of the ST fans have tried upgrading their wares with the Motorola DSP that was in the NeXT Cube and the Atari Falcon. They're currently being used in the Apple iPod Shuffle.

 

 

So why not Video Pinball, then Swordquest: Earthworld, Fireworld and Waterworld?

 

 

Licensing means $$$$

 

Atari went with only its owned assets on this project. No licenses.

Also Midnight Magic and Dark Chambers are no wholey owned by Atari, so they aren't used.

Curt

 

There's no point in offering the "Sword Quest" games because no matter how well you play, you still won't be able to win the $25k sword because playa hatin' Jack Tramiel has possession of it.

 

 

It would have been nice to have ALL of Atari's paddle titles included in the paddle sub-menu. There's plenty of paddle games made by Atari that doesn't need any worries or such about 3rd party licenses.

 

 

Amen. "Warlords" was the sh*t. 4player fun.

 

 

Please don't anyone get mad at me but I actually like the game line up even Hangman and Human Cannonball I may not ever play it. But to me that's not the point I will at least show it to my little cozens as a bit of history. Although I think Human Cannonball would be a bit of fun.

What I do find interesting is how every or at least a lot of consoles and systems seem to be a rush. I remember in an interview Curt said that with the 7800 Flashback he was not given a lot of time for. And I know that the Vic 20 was a rush, I had thought that with the 64 they were given a lot more time. But apparently not, once the go-ahead was given by Jack the engineers were given very little time. Once the powers that be at IBM had given the go-ahead for the PC the engineers were given very little time. and the list goes on maybe its just me but I just find that interesting.

 

 

I wouldn't cite the IBM PC as a quality job done in a short amount of time. None of that was IBM tech. They just threw it together and outsourced everything else. Thanks, IBM, for stupidly giving the industry to that wanker in Redmond.

 

 

 

 

So, what's the address and contact person at Atari we should write a physical letter to in order to make suggestions for a Flashback 3?

 

 

And as always, you rock, Curt...

[nathanallan]

What a post!! As for the Atsri ST part, many people have upgraded the processors in theirs but it's not a very straightforward process, so it makes adding them difficult. Ram upgrades are easier, and I have yet to mod any of my ST machines (though life caught up to me and time is of the essence).

 

I'd also love to see the 7800 revisited but this time not like the original Flashback, but more like the O'Shea prototypes-- not necessarily a full case replica looking one, but one that has as much appeal as the FB2 (though the FB is appealing in its own right and will defend it till I die).

[Buck]

Will it be available online again after release?

I believe just in retail stores after that, not sure which ones yet.

Ok, I'll quit whinning now. I saw Marty's post in the Atari.com Flashback forum. Retail only now. Time to go shopping!

the site says retail only

 

Where? There is no FB2+ page anymore, that's what sparked this convo.

yeah, good point. I was just repeating what others said. my bad.

 

I think I need to take the blame for that confusion. I read the post from Marty at Atari.com and took it as though the FB2+ would be coming. I did not mean for my staement to say the Atari.com site said retail only. Only that retail would be the next avenue to purchase. Sorry...

[Retro Rogue]

Wow, another newbie making ill-informed, yet assertive commentary. How refreshing.

 

I'm sure its only a matter of time before Time Warner buys "Atari" back again and merges it with all the other entities that now comprise Warner Bros. Interactive. They acquired bankrupt Midway which owns all the Atari Games Corp. IP and is the actual descendent of the original Atari Inc. arcade division.

 

 

1) Not going to happen for a long long time. France isn't selling the properties any time soon.

 

2) There is no "descendant", anything left of the descendant was closed down years ago. There is simply IP, and that makes what Warner Bros. Interactive has no more a descendant than the current Atari Inc.

 

That's a Namco title. As was stated, they wanted to keep costs to a minimum hence no licensed titles. Likewise, the idea was to create a new themed section hence the sports titles. People are never satisfied, no matter what games are included they'd always say "Why didn't you include such and such?"

 

 

What does that matter?

 

Because it was a license. Licenses expire.

 

Original Atari had pretty much exclusive rights to the Namco titles they individually licensed for use on all Atari hardware... 2600, 5200, 7800, 400/800/XL/XE.

 

They had a license - i.e. a lease. Those are not indefinite. Any games with properties from other companies we would have had to of licensed that property again. Period.

 

But I guess the existing license does not cover ROM images.

 

There is no existing license.

 

It couldn't be because of the change in ownership of what constitutes "Atari" because if that were the case, those licensing agreements would've expired in June 1984 when Jack Tramiel took control of the company.

 

1) Licenses are non-transferable unless they're negotiated to be transferable.

 

2) Jack did not take over the company. Atari Inc. ceased to exist. Jack's Atari Corporation was a new company formed when the purchased Atari Consumer assets were folded under Tramel Technology Ltd., and TTL was renamed Atari Corporation.

 

The same goes for Williams titles. Their ownership is not in question...

 

That makes no sense as an attempt at comparison. Williams bought Midway from Bally. They then folded their video game properties in to Midway, and several years later reformed Midway as a spin off company. That company recently filed for liquidation bankruptcy and that's when Time/Warner purchased much of the assets and the Chicago studio. None of that has anything to do with any licensing, transfer of licensing, or anything of the like.

 

they now belong to Warner Bros. Interactive, the spiritual heir to the "real" Atari.

 

They are no more the spiritual heir than the current Atari Inc. is. There are no original facilities, no original employees, no resources, no anything. Just paper that says they own the IP's and copies of roms. Scott Evans has most of what was left resources wise of the original Atari Games, which he purchased when Midway was closing down the the Atari Games studio years ago and junking everything.

 

 

 

What??? How does Atari not own "Dark Chambers"? The Tramiels merely licensed that title for the 2600/7800 back in the day? Then again, had they been shrewd, they would've fought Atari Games over ownership of "Gauntlet" since it came from that authors APX title "Dandy".

 

Wow, where do I start with that one. 1) Atari never owned Dandy, any games done through APX were done in conjunction with authors, who were still given ownership. That's why we had to pull another APX title off on this version. 2) John Palevich owned Dandy. He did sue Atari Games, and they worked out an agreement. 3) Dark Chambers was a re-release of Dandy. 4) John sold off the rights of Dandy to Electric Dreams Software. Hence anything to do with Dandy/Dark Chambers we'd have to lease from whoever still owns the assets to that company.

 

 

 

 

 

There's no point in offering the "Sword Quest" games because no matter how well you play, you still won't be able to win the $25k sword because playa hatin' Jack Tramiel has possession of it.

 

There's zero proof of that other than someone stating they may have seen it at Jack's house many years ago. In our talks with his son Leonard, who's been very forthcoming and honest (and has yet to tell us something we found later to be untrue - in fact quite the opposite) he has stated his father has none of those prizes and never has. In fact, I think it's more likely that either someone at Warner kept it (since they kept ownership of any of the ongoing or open accounts).

Edited February 28, 2010 by wgungfu

[Video]

wait? Ar you guys saying they don't have anymore FB2+'s??!? That sucks. I wanted to get some more for christmas presents later this year (I would have bought more if I hadn't already been drawn out on my credit card )

 

Thing that gets me is...their sold out....right? Why make 15k of them, sell them out and not make more?

 

Anyhow, hopefully more will show up before christmas gets here.

[Retro Rogue]

wait? Ar you guys saying they don't have anymore FB2+'s??!? That sucks. I wanted to get some more for christmas presents later this year (I would have bought more if I hadn't already been drawn out on my credit card )

 

Thing that gets me is...their sold out....right? Why make 15k of them, sell them out and not make more?

 

Anyhow, hopefully more will show up before christmas gets here.

 

 

Read the entire thread. These were a limited run to test the waters, piggybacking off the General Mills run. We have no idea at this point if they're still going to move forward with the retail idea or not, that's entirely up to them and what they decide.

[TrekkiELO]

So why not Video Pinball, then Swordquest: Earthworld, Fireworld and Waterworld?

 

 

Licensing means $$$$

 

Atari went with only its owned assets on this project. No licenses.

Also Midnight Magic and Dark Chambers are no wholey owned by Atari, so they aren't used.

Curt

 

There's no point in offering the "Sword Quest" games because no matter how well you play, you still won't be able to win the $25k sword because playa hatin' Jack Tramiel has possession of it.

 

That didn't stop Atari from including all 3 on "Atari: 80 Classic Games in One" for the PC and "Atari Anthology".

 

Signed,

 

Rick

[TrekkiELO]

(though the FB is appealing in its own right and will defend it till I die).

 

If you are talking about the mini 7800 original Atari Flashback from 2004, I'm also proud to have it in my collection along with an Atari Flashback 2/2+!

 

Signed,

 

Rick

Edited February 28, 2010 by TrekkiELO

[jaybird3rd]

There's zero proof of that other than someone stating they may have seen it at Jack's house many years ago. In our talks with his son Leonard, who's been very forthcoming and honest (and has yet to tell us something we found later to be untrue - in fact quite the opposite) he has stated his father has none of those prizes and never has. In fact, I think it's more likely that either someone at Warner kept it (since they kept ownership of any of the ongoing or open accounts).

I don't want to take this off-topic, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that you are working on an upcoming book. Am I correct in assuming that your conversations with Leonard are part of your research? If so, I can't wait to see the book finished: this particular story about the SwordQuest prizes is only one of the many tiresome misconceptions and urban legends that have gained a kind of false credibility through sheer repetition on the Internet, and they're long overdue for an authoritative rebuttal.

[Retro Rogue]

I don't want to take this off-topic, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that you are working on an upcoming book.

 

Yes, Curt and I are working on a two volume set.

 

 

Am I correct in assuming that your conversations with Leonard are part of your research?

 

Yes.

 

If so, I can't wait to see the book finished: this particular story about the SwordQuest prizes is only one of the many tiresome misconceptions and urban legends that have gained a kind of false credibility through sheer repetition on the Internet, and they're long overdue for an authoritative rebuttal.

 

Well, if anything we usually take stories with a grain of salt until they can be verified - that was including Leonard. We've found that people's memories tend to be faulty over time (sometimes because of jadedness), exaggerated, or some have outright lied. So we try to corroborate from multiple sources, including internal paperwork and emails, engineering log books, marketing books, etc. and even unrelated interviewees. Since I first interviewed him back in 2002, everything that we've researched has in hind site wound up backing him up. Anything he said regarding the whole Amiga mess, the on again and off again negotiations with GCC regarding the 7800, different outlooks on internal matters such as them actually spending a significant amount of money on advertising, etc. He's always been very honest and forthcoming with anything we've asked him, supplied materials we've asked of him, etc. So with all that in mind, and knowing what we know about Warner and what they wound up keeping, all things point to him telling the truth about this as well.

[VectorGamer]

(though the FB is appealing in its own right and will defend it till I die).

 

If you are talking about the mini 7800 original Atari Flashback from 2004, I'm also proud to have it in my collection along with an Atari Flashback 2/2+!

 

Signed,

 

Rick

 

I found one of those at a garage sale. Are they worth more than the other Flashbacks?