I don't agree. Put yourselves in GCCs shoes. You've arranged a deal with Warner to make a system, supply games, supply parts and sell it at a certain price for your troubles. Then your partner goes to hell and breaks apart the company, selling off pieces. Now you've got a new owner and he wants to pay you a fraction of what you previously negotiated. Of course you'd balk at this idea.
And honestly, I still don't believe that Atari just releasing the 7800 nationwide early would have solved the problem. Not with retailers hating video games, seeing Atari as the devil, and a line-up of same-old same old games at launch. Nintendo did a lot of work to massage the retail channel, change the type of games offered and promote the NES as something different. They should get credit for that.
The retailers wanted the 7800 for Christmas 1984. It tested favorably. The retailers were outright hostile to Nintendo in 1985 because the retailers didn't want to carry a new console that wasn't backwards compatible with the 2600 because they wanted the possibility of unloading a bunch of their various 2600 cartridges they were stuck with.
As for GCC, they really got what they deserved. After all, they claimed they couldn't fit the POKEY onto the 7800 motherboard so they could coax Warner into buying their GUMBY chip for every single future cartridge produced.
What should've happened - assuming Warner still sold Atari Inc's Consumer Division assets to Jack Tramiel - is that Atari Games [which was Atari Inc] should've convinced Warner to give them the 7800 and arranged to use the "Atari" name for the 7800 and then released it themselves. No future Tengen BS, pure "Atari". They should've also convinced Warner to go after Commodore over the Amiga and transfer the tech to them for the same reason.
Edited by Lynxpro, Thu Feb 1, 2018 10:15 PM.