Retro Rogue

There's no FB3 for them to sell off, AFAIK the proto is Curt's/Legacy's. Unless you meant give the project in general to someone else? I wouldn't be surprised at something like that considering how long things have been in the air with them.

They're probably going to slap another 2600 compilation together (Nintendo on a chip based) and call it an FB3. Most likely has nothing to do with the original version presented here.

CatBus? (Which also is usb shifted one position right).

Heya Rik, welcome to planet earth. That's been out for a good 4 years.

That's because very few of the plug and plays are actual emulation per se. Most of them are ports to custom hardware (ala Jakk's) or NES-on-a-chips.

Its called USB. Seriously, Joe Decuir was part of the USB specifications/standardization/design team when he worked at Microsoft. He mentioned to me that the model for USB was a direct update of the SIO platform.

No, just nude pictures of Nolan Bushnell inside the casing.

I don't believe the FB1 and FB2 were intended to keep Atari afloat - it takes a lot more than 2 low end (price/market wise) systems to keep afloat a company that has aspirations of being another big budget Sony music or hollywood movie studio type software house. However, the FB2 was leading the way to more interesting (and IMHO innovative) products that could have begun making a larger share of the company's revenue. And at the very least pointed towards a much more lucrative way of exercising their legacy properties than just rehashing "greatest hits" rom collections for pc's and consoles. The problem is its an uphill battle with such things when you're constantly treating your legacy as the read headed step child and would rather pump your resources to such "blockbusters" (quotes = sarcasm) as "The Matrix: Path of Neo", and misshandling other modern franchises.

I actually saw (once and only once) a cocktail version of the Sirius game Wavy Navy (a big game on the Apple II). In fact it wasn't until afterwords that I found it on the Apple II. Haven't been able to find a thing on it, as its not listed anywhere.

Its also at the Luxor's arcade in Vegas.

My guess would be that it would entail the same process of cutting the menu chip out of the circuit, though I don't know if the FB1 circuitry was laid out with hacking in mind like the FB2 was.

Just saw this thread. Just to add to this - Atari Inc. owns the trademarks and copyrights, etc. of all titles, and characters pre 1984. However, Midway West owns the actual roms and hardware (that hasn't expired yet) of the pre 1984 titles, as well all rights to their apperance in coin-op format. For exmaple when Keita was seeking licensing for Tempest 3000 on the Nuon, he found he could license it from either Midway or (at that time) Hasbro. Likewise, the roms for the Atari 3 in 1 by Team Play were provided by Midway and the actual Atari name licensed from Infogrames. Hence, when Team Play originally recieved the roms, the Atari name on the copyrights were wiped out and replaced with Midway. Team Play hadn't finalized the Atari name license yet and through in the copyright to Infogrames instead (which is why their name instead of Atari appeared on the coin-op). As another example, all the coin-op roms for Hasbro's (Atari Interactive) and Infogrames (Atari Inc.) arcade rehash collections for consoles and pc's were licensed from and provided by Midway. So to recap, Atari Inc. owns the console, computer, and promotional (shirts, mugs, etc.) licensing rights, but Midway owns the actual coin-op rights and coin-op game code/hardware. 1017769[/snapback]

What I know is this towards the tramiels with spending money. There was plans of doing 512k games that were shot down for the 7800. This is proof Proof of what? It was proof that there's lots of ideas in development at the time (including the keyboard, etc.) that proved not to be feaseable or warranted. Same thing happened at Warner Atari. Do you have any idea how much the manufacturing costs of a 512k game cart would have been in 1987 terms? Most games on systems (NES, MS, 7800) in that timeframe were in the 48k-64k range. Even the "high end" 128k games on the 7800 (like Commando) didn't appear until '89. How would a console that's competing a far distant 3rd at best be generating enough money to support manufacturing and distribution of a 512k game in the '80's? Ask your self, how many 512k games were released on any console in the late 80's? That's correct, because costs for memory of any kind (including battery powered game save memory) were high at the time. They went through the same problems with their computer line (and more traditional ram) as well. Nintendo was based in Japan, they were able to cut out import costs on memory and make deals with Japanese memory manufacturers a lot easier than U.S. based Atari Corp. could. Atari faced the same problems with LCD screens for the Lynx for example, which was why they were never able to drop the price of the Lynx down to be as competitive to the GameBoy as they wanted. Which isn't proof of not wanting to "spend money". Its proof of being realistic on development/manufacturing vs. targeting POS price. Quite honestly, people used to bitch about them barely spending any money on advertising, etc. as well for the 7800 which turned out not to be true - Curt uncovered (and I believe posted info about here) several documents that showed they spent a lot more than people realized.

Every where I read in the internet has stated the Jack shoved the 7800 off table and "said get this crap out of here! We don't do video games back in 1984." Which you're incorrectly interpreting (as others have) to mean they "only bought Atari for computers, not for video game". The event happened during part of the on-again/off again negotiations that occured over 2 years. This oft quoted incidence was one of Jack's typical business tactics to try and get GCC to renogotiate its terms (i.e. the cost). When I interviewed Leonard for the Atari book, he was very specific on what his father did and did not buy Atari for. And as stated, they bought Atari for its manufacturing capabilities, distribution network, and video games (including backstock) to help raise capitol. Don't forget, they were taking over a company that had massive losses and debt, and had to work hard to turn that around (which Jack did over the next 2 years). Not true. That's just parroting missinformation from the web. As stated, they were in negotiations to release it from '84 on, and finally came to terms just before the NES was test marketed. Another missconception. After leaving Commodore in January of '84, he took a vacation (sabbitical) that lasted a good 2 months, initially planning on staying out of the business. While on vacation he realized that while he was well off, his sons weren't and worried about their future. He also was still feeling the "itch" to get back in the business. So he started TTL when he got back, to help create a legacy for his sons. He started shopping around for companies to buy for manufacturing and development that late Spring and finally settled on Atari (which was an on/off/on again deal over the span of a month). After transitioning TTL in to Atari Corp. and getting things settled (which took a couple of years) he stepped down and fully passed the company on to his sons. Jack was for anything that he could make a lot of money off of and keep manufacturing costs down on (so even more money could be made). If Jack didn't want anything to do with video games, then they wouldn't have done a single thing with video games (as Jack was pretty good at getting what he wants). There would have been no 7800, 2600jr, XEGS, Lynx, (Panther development) or Jaguar. Atari would have just done computers. This is not the case. Don't believe everything you read on the web, most sites are just parroting each other. Next you'll be saying Jack was counting on getting a hold of Amiga when he bought Atari or that Amiga figured in to the original ST development. Which it did not. Sam Tramiel took over around '86/'87. Jaguar development suffered because of rediculous support terms for developers (high costs for licensing, dev kits, dev support etc.), and lack of support by big name developers who were hesitant to get involved with the Tramiels. That was long before Sam got sick. Sam got sick towards the end of '95 and Jack returned to help out - which ultimately lead to him pusing towards the reverse merger with JTS with Jack "laying off" his sons (so that they got severance packages) and staying to supervise a "smooth transition".

That would be GREAT! What are you guys smoking? I have nothing against him, but Nolan doesn't exactly have the greatest track record business wise. Just about every company he's started has failed/gone bankrupt, etc. This is his second iteration of uWink now he's on, and its basicly just a cross between his old Chuck E. Cheese and places like Damon's. Some call Atari his big fluke of a success, and are quick to point out that he sold Atari (and then left) before he could run that one in to the ground as well (though the former towel guy that replaced him did a pretty good job of that himself). Under his helm at Atari you have Pong, pong doubles, puppy pong, space race (pong in space), pin pong, quadra pong, super pong, rebound (basketball pong), volleyball (volleyball pong), goal4..... Oh, and then there's home pong that launched the consumer division in '75. With the Sears versions of Pong, Pong IV, Super Pong, Super Pong IV, Pong Sports II, Pong Sports IV, Hockey-Pong, Hockey-Tennis II, and Speedway IV (more pong). And the Atari versions of Pong, pong doubles, super pong, super pong ten, super pong pro-am, super pong pro-am ten, ultra pong, and ultra pong doubles. A lot of innovation going on there. Reminds me of the Monty Python spam sketch. Most of the development of the games and hardware people remember of Atari were either developed by Cyan Engineering (Atari's R&D lab, which developed the VCS/2600), engineers in the coin-op (who developed the more popular games of the mid through late 70's) or consumer division (the Atari 400/800), or (as with most of it) were done after he left. Credit for creating it? Certainly. There's also the credit for driving it in to bankruptcy in 1984 and being bought out by his former competitor.

That's not entirely true, there was actually a lot more spent on things than people realize. Whether it was well spent is another matter. This is not true, and an often repeated missconception. Atari Inc. was bought mainly for its manufacturing and distribution capacities. They had every intent to keep the video game division going because they needed capital until the ST finished development and went in to production. Umm....that was actually Warner Atari that started that trend of buying outside instead of developing from within. Much of their coin-op games in the early 80's were Namco imports, a lot of their console R&D were outsourced to companies like GCC (such as the 7800), etc.. etc.

Knowing Nolan and company at the time, it was probably more about setting the right atmosphere to put the women in the "mood".

Never said anything about doubt. All I said is it always helps to have management know people want a product. This thread has been going on since mid August, and at this point I think its time to say that if people really want the FB3 it doesn't hurt to let management know. Except for it to be vaporware along those lines, it would had to have been announced as being in development or an intended product at some time by Atari. It has not. It's been in no press announcements, no quarterly reports, etc. etc. In fact, the only info regarding it has been from Curt on this board. You'll notice in credits that Curt and company (which includes me as well) are credited as Legacy Engineering. The 14050xld was an announced Atari product, and went through some small trials (where there was a small test production). The 65xem was put out in the press. This is not the case. This is not the case here, and all of which is moot. I never said the FB3 is not or is going to be an official product. All I said was that it always helps to have people state their desire.

Anyone and everyone in management you guys want to really. Have fun with it. http://corporate.infogrames.com/worldwideoffices.html Just so no rumors start, no, sales were great. Sales can speak, doesn't mean everyone listens. Always helps to have extra people to shout it out.

What you talkin' 'bout Willis? 1008143[/snapback] Nothing, just a comment on where most of the Atari Inc. management came from.

Guys, at this point if you want to see an FB3 - write to Atari saying how much you enjoyed the 2 that Curt delivered and would love to see the 3. That's the most assured way to make sure that Sony Mus...I mean Atari Inc. know the demand is there.

Target, BestBuy, and Walmart on the north side (and North Shore area) of Milwaukee were all sold out after Christmas. EBgames here never stocked them, nor did GameStop. Also - was down in Florida at Disney over my honeymoon (just got back from it), and went to the Virgin Megastore on "Pleasure Island". They were completely sold out as well, and one of the salespeople said they had been sold out for a while, that the stock had gone quick. They were very happy with the product and said it sold *much* better than the FB1.

I'd say a bit more than moderately well, and I wouldn't say Zellers' discount move is indicative of the market for them. I know here on the north side of Milwaukee they were completely sold out of them at BestBuy, Walmart and Target as of this past week (some stores earlyer than that).

This is an interesting question. Who has the rights to a 30 year old Star wars title made by Parker Brothers for the atari 2600? 988829[/snapback] Easy, Lucasarts owns the name and likenesses used therein. Parker Bros. (whoever owns the rights to their games and code) would own the code itself.

Don't confuse the fact that in a still fledgling industry many companies were lax on protection with the idea that it sets precendence. The industry is much different now.