Matt_B

I thought you were supposed to join the French Foreign Legion to forget, not pre-order a French foreign console.

Orphan work usually refers to when the IP holder is unknown or impossible to contact. For instance, if a company went bust and nobody else bought the rights, or an author retires into obscurity. This is a particular problem with copyrights because, unlike trademarks and patents, they usually don't need to be positively asserted. So far as Atari and Nintendo are concerned, none of their works could be considered to be orphan.

Yeah, you can read about the beginnings of the current relationship between Atari and Llamasoft here: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/mar/19/atari-threatens-jeff-minter-copyright-claims-playstation-txk-tempest Thankfully, they seem to have worked things out eventually but I think it gives a pretty good insight into why there aren't more indie developers working away at re-imagining Atari's classics.

I take you mean just doing games like Tempest 4000 rather than the way they went about it. I'd think that threatening indie devs with lawsuits because their games look a bit like one of your old IPs in the hope that they'll eventually go into partnership with you, is probably going to backfire in a lot more cases than it works out.

I'm all for making orphaned works public domain, but the problem is that Atari and Nintendo's old games aren't orphaned, and they aren't shy about letting people know that. All in all though there are relatively few companies who are inclined to get litigious about these things, so it just pays to know who they are and avoid having anything to do with their works.

The hat isn't the only thing that looks photoshopped in that picture.

I'm happy to have my Raspberry Pi computers in cases that makes it obvious what they are. Let's face it, they're a bigger brand than Atari now.

I'll have you know that Bill is working as hard as anyone to make the VCS a reality.

So, I guess the VCS is going to trash the opposition then. Anyway, I like the way how the original XBox put up such a valiant fight where the 360 pretty much disintegrated immediately on contact. That speaks volumes about their relative build quality.

I'd think that the Dreamcast appeals to people for a lot of different reasons, not all of which make it marketable. It's certainly got some great games, coincided with the last gasp of arcade gaming, was notable for some highly innovative features, and is one of the most powerful systems that can be emulated well. However, Sega ultimately didn't sell that many of them and it had a commercial lifetime of just a couple of years. For every fan who waxes lyrical about it, there are going to be several more who still felt that they got burned because they bought it only to see the supply of games dry up very quickly. Neither is wrong as far as I'm concerned, as both viewpoints have their merits, but only one is going to be interested in buying a relaunched version. So far as Atari's home computers go, they fit somewhere in between the massively successful 2600 and the other consoles, which would all generally be regarded as failures. However, making a plug-n-play system for either the 8-bits or the ST is going to have all the problems of the C64 that we've discussed before, in addition to not being nearly as successful as it. Most of the memorable games were made by third parties, and a substantial proportion of the userbase will be looking to use a keyboard, dust off their programming skills and/or run some non-games software on them. You could perhaps compare it with the various attempts to get various modern versions of the ZX Spectrum to market, some of which were more successful than others, but all were rather niche with total sales in the thousands. Enterprising hobbyists could perhaps cater to that better than a large corporation too. It's hard to tell where the Atari-Llamasoft partnership will go from here. Jeff Minter is obviously a big fan of many old Atari games, so it'd be nice to see him giving others that he's already riffed on numerous times - such as Asteroids, Caverns of Mars and Centipede - the 4000 treatment. However, at the same time, relations were obviously strained by the legal wrangling over TxK so maybe he'll prefer to end things there. Either way, I don't see enough games coming that way to sell much in the way of VCS hardware, especially if they're also going to be available on other platforms. And they're going to have to be if he wants to earn more than pocket change out of it.

It's pretty much already the case that the internals of all these devices are nearly identical in that they're all done with an ARM SoC and some ROM and RAM on a board. You'd need a more powerful SoC for more modern systems - such as the Dreamcast - and the cost of the ROM would also increase if you want a large game collection. Emulation is far from perfect for the more modern systems, but this can be worked around by carefully curating the content to avoid any game-breaking issues; most of the games that don't work at all tend to be obscure ones that'd be of little interest to most people buying a plug-n-play device anyway. Demand is also a big issue though; Sega only really hit the big time with the Genesis/Megadrive and Atari with the 2600; their other systems would be a nice cherry on top for the few who actually know what they are, but for most they're pretty obscure. The VCS is already promised the arcade games that are a part of Atari Vault, so it should have that over the Flashback. However, I doubt they're that compelling for most people and you could have picked up Vault itself for a shade over $3 in the recent Steam sale, so they need to be offering much more. And yes, they've not got any development teams in house, they only manage the licensing of the IP. Most of the studios they work with, Llamasoft included, are pretty small with numbers of development staff you can count on one hand and don't even work exclusively with Atari.

I'd think the relative merits of AtGames's devices are pretty much down to the quality of the software emulation. The Atari ones do an accurate enough job, while the Sega ones are somewhat less than the state of the art to put it mildly. Sadly, they've known of the deficiencies of the emulation for many years yet certain features stay broken while entirely new ones get added, so I wouldn't hold up much hope of them being fixed in the next iteration either. You can at least buy some rather better compilations of Sega games for the PC and most consoles though. So far as a combined system goes, it'd be a doddle technically as they're basically just different software emulators running on almost exactly the same hardware. However, it'd break all common sense so far as a branding exercise goes. Let's face it; these things are as much meant to sit on the TV cabinet as an objet d'art as they are to be used for actually playing games and the look is a big part of their appeal so they really have to be identifiable as one system or the other. As for where the VCS sits in all this, I'd think that Atari must have realized rather early on that they can't just create another device in the same price range, as that'd just compete with the AtGames devices. Therefore the price had to be significantly higher with more offered, and the only thing they've got that they possibly could offer is their collection of PC games. After that though, it's just been a descent into wild fantasy or, if you'd prefer, "wishful thinking."

I'd like to think that Sega have too much sense to do something like this.

Yeah, there are certainly some ways to beat the odds but they generally require more than looking at sequences in the results. A Canadian statistician famously managed to crack a lottery by analysis of the serial numbers on the tickets although, presumably having worked out that the benefits of exploiting it would be marginal, decided to come clean about how it could be done: https://www.wired.com/2011/01/ff-lottery/

The thing that impresses me most is that they managed to do it all with just three chips, two of which were just off the shelf, and in 1977. The amount of functionality that was crammed into the TIA was simply astounding. Compare and contrast that with the Apple II, a machine from the same period that's also lauded for its elegant simplicity, but uses literally dozens of chips.

I didn't back TheC64 myself, but I can see why those who did remain confident that they'll eventually get what they ordered. What's different between it and the Vega+ - and I suppose the Atari VCS too - is that they've been providing regular updates about what they've been doing and the reasons behind their choices, all of which have subsequently checked out. There have been prototypes demonstrated, game licensing deals announced, ratings and certifications applied for, and at least some products delivered. Meanwhile, there's been a notable lack of deception about the progress they've made, mocked up footage of games they haven't got, frivolous lawsuits, angry rants about journalists, etc. The reason for the switch to the C64 Mini was that there weren't enough orders for the original designs - the crowdfunding falling well short - and that they needed to bring in a commercial partner. The one they eventually found, Koch Media, wanted to jump on the NES Classic bandwagon, so the others had to go on the back burner. However, they offered everyone a Mini for the time being as a sweetener. They're still maintaining that they'll eventually deliver the original versions promised once the Mini has been rolled out globally. Maybe the wheels will come off at some point and they'll fail to do that, but they've at least been true to their word so far and everyone got a Mini even if it ends there. In contrast, I don't think anyone is going to get anything out of the Vega+, and it's pretty clear that the people behind TheC64 had left that project before they got the money and had nothing to do with how it was subsequently squandered. The jury is still out for me on the Atari VCS; well, at least in terms of whether it'll be delivered or not and good luck to those who put their money down without so much as seeing a working prototype as even the Vega+ had one of those. I'm pretty sure that it's going to be technically underhwelming and a commercial disaster even if it does though.

It's more like 20,000 C64 games although that includes a lot of self-published ones, magazine listings and such. There are certainly a heck of a lot more than there are NES games though, so it'd have been a thankless task trying to distill that library down into just 64 representative titles and that's without the complications of needing to find the licence holders and do deals with them. Also, although there were certainly a lot of tech savvy C64 users back in the day, most of the people I knew with it bought it solely as a games machine where the only keys that ever got used were the ones you needed to load a tape. Consoles pretty much died a death in Europe in the early 80s and it wasn't really until the arrival of the 16-bit machines from Sega and Nintendo that they made a serious comeback, so there was nearly a decade when home micros were pretty much the go-to games machines. Realistically, it's those people that they're mainly marketing this to.

Unfortunately, it is fair to compare it to Nintendo's mini consoles because, regardless of the commercial disparities between the manufacturers, the products are likely going to be sat next to each other on the shelves of your local games store and asking for similar amounts of money from the customers. I don't think the games selection with the C64 Mini is that bad though. It's just that it's rather on the Eurocentric side, and most of the games that were big hits there never had much of an impact on the US market, so a lot of people will incorrectly conclude that it's just a bunch of Epyx games and some filler.

I'd think that we'd all like Atari to partner up with the best indie developers to make high quality revamps of their classic IPs, but realistically they've only manged to do that successfully a couple of times in the past four years with Rollercoaster Tycoon Classic and Tempest 4000. Everything else in that vein just turned out to be dreadful or vanished without trace. I don't think that making the VCS is going to do anything to change the fundamental problems with their business that's causing such a low hit rate either, because the problem isn't the lack of a platform. Rather, they just seem too willing to back bad projects and have a reputation for being difficult to work with that puts off many of the people who have managed to do something vaguely successful with them in the past.

Yeah, it's definitely not in worst game ever territory and everyone who has taken the time to play it properly ought to know that by now. Rather, it's just that the mythology requires it to be the game that killed the original Atari. The reality, that the company financials were dire because they'd bet the farm on continued massive growth rather than dealing with the realities of a changing market, is just too mundane to compete with that.

Any mathematician worth his salt will have worked out the probabilities of winning lotteries and won't enter them. The pseudo-scientific practice of spotting partial sequences in random data falls under the realms of numerology. You should therefore be surprised that a numerologist didn't win it.

There are three taco chains in Australia, and they're all something of a product of needing twenty-odd hours air travel to get to somewhere where they know what Mexican food is. Guzman Y Gomez - It's got a Mexican name so I guess that makes it the most authentic. Mad Mex - If you can picture what tacos might be like in the post-apocalyptic radioactive wasteland, they're the joint for you. Salsa's - If you scatter red dust over crinkle cut chips, apparently that's Mexican too. Suffice it to say that I'll be making my own for dinner.

Look on the bright side, at least you got to see Priest in their prime. I'm not terribly optimistic that the VCS is going to have an up side that good.

It's half the size of a real C64, so way too small to be worth the effort of putting a working keyboard in. You'd need to have Blackberry-sized keys and it'd add a lot onto the price for something that none of the included games really need. They're planning to make a full sized version at some point that will have a functional keyboard. However, with the market wanting mini consoles at throwaway prices rather than fully functional retro computers at a $200+ price point, that's been on the back burner for a couple of years now. On the whole, they're just about OK. The controller and the games selection are rather disappointing if you compare them to Nintendo's offerings, but I'd think that they measure up fairly well against the Flashback 8.

With the A10 it's not just the quantity of RAM that matters but the speed, since you've got the CPU and the GPU on the same bus and that's a major bottleneck. You should be asking for a commitment to DDR4-2400 before getting too excited about there being 8GB of it. Also, bear in mind that those videos you see on YouTube will be on systems with 65-100W parts, probably overclocked, with after-market cooling, running on Windows and with the games heavily configured for performance. It's unrealistic to expect the VCS to match up with them, especially when trying to run a game with the default settings.