Ricardo Cividanes da Silva

It's true. Initially SEGA was developing the SC-3000 computer. They relied on off-the-shelf parts.

5. Playstation 3 4. Mega Drive / Genesis 3. Nintendo Entertainment System / NES 2. Atari 2600 1. Maganavox Odyssey2 / Philips Odyssey

The history are in book "Beyond Donkey Kong: A History of Nintendo Arcade Games" from the page 75. The history is in https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2010/09/feature_how_colecovision_became_the_king_of_kong too. Sorry, but the most youtubers do research with little or no depth. Of all I watched, little goes into a deeper survey crossing several sources.

Dude, i'd be so grateful. Can you put me in contact with him?

Hi folks. I have researched and read a lot about the history of the Nintendo 64, but there is one detail that seems to escape in all the texts. How did Nintendo actually make the deal with SGI? There are quotes that Tom Kalinske, CEO of Sega, referred Howard Lincoln to SGI's Jim Clar. But it seems to have not been just that. Everything suggests that Rare Inc. was very close to SGI at the time and Nintendo saw this work. The union of everything led to the agreement with SGI. Does anyone know or know someone who knows the details of how this agreement was possible? A North American company developing hardware for the reserved Nintendo.

As far as my research has arrived, there are two versions for this Kutaragi involvement with Nintendo: 1) Kutaragi created the SPC700 using Sony's features and technology, thinking of improving Famicom's sound. Sony's direction discovered and gave Kutaragi a tail food that even though the chip. When Nintendo sought Sony, behind a sound chip, they already had the solution practically ready and Kutaragi worked with Nintendo to bring technology to Super Famicom. 2) Nintendo sought Sony looking for a sound technology for its new video game, but heard a no Sony. Kutaragi, however, entered the conversation and offered the chip he was creating. Nintendo accepted and they developed the chip for Nintendo, with Sony's direction only being warned about it when everything was ready and Nintendo was ready to sign the contract. Sony executives were pissed off, but Ohga thought Kutaragi had taken the correct action.

I I read this article. It say: " Ironically, the father of the playstation began working in secret with Nintendo when they needed a wave table sound chip for Nintendo's upcoming new 16-bit system as Sony expressed little interest in the video game industry at the time." And that is the problem. Japanese companies do not work like this. Kutaragi could even do, but Nintendo is not a deal such a deal with a single person.

In fact, Kutaragi was already working on this chip on his own. The question is: Had Nintendo asked him or he did so deliberately and only then did Nintendo sought Sony that he was already super advanced thanks to Kutaragi?

I am researching the story of Super Nintendo and I came across a hole in all the texts I read. All texts say that Ken Kutaragi has created the sound chip of Super Nintendo/Super Famicom, the SPC 700. Ok. But no text says how it happened. Kutaragi created the chip on his own and only then to Nintendo, looking for a sound system, did he arrived at Sony? Or Kutaragi sought Nintendo on his own, which, for me, makes no sense. Does anyone know the real story?

I'm studying and writing about the history of video games. I would like to help and participate.

I would say it was two: - Ray Kassar, who thought he could live on Atari 2600 forever and, with his arrogance, pushed great talents from the company. - Sam Tramiel, who was responsible for burn a fortune in the Atari Panther (who never saw the light of day) and the Atari Jaguar, who was a monumental fiasc and ended the company's finances. Very arrogance and little vision of the future.

For Atari 5200 I use MAME or MESS. It's a little boring to configure, but it works well.

@kool kitty89 thank you!!! Dude, what an amazing material. I was impressed how much the Panther project was advanced. This reinforces the theory that cancellation occurred due to problems in the graphic chip.

It's true. I agree. Nintendo was lucky where the others did not have.

I can give my testimony about it after plunging into the history of video games and Atari. I think it's easy to look at the situation today after almost 40 years. But think the following. These guys were creating this market. They had no history of other companies doing the same. So I understand the mistakes made, but also intrigue certain administrative decisions. For example, have the 7800 console practically ready and choose to launch the 5200 to try to win one more. This kind of decision really impresses today. The problem is that Atari lost its innovation bias with Bushnell's departure and everything got even worse with Tramiel's purchase, a guy who only looked at costs and ended up losing the train of history when Nintendo and Sega passed over from him. Nintendo knew how to enjoy the gaps left and got it right where Atari missed. Yamauchi-san had a much better sage than Tramiel's, after all.

I found Panther's development, very strange. Why create a new graphic chipset when they could have used existing PCs or even created by Flare? As far as I understand in the research, Atari decides to create something new and, possibly cheaper and, as regards Flare, decided to send everything to the Jaguar project, leaving the Panther in the background.

Brother, very grateful for your clarifications. It helped me a lot!

It will surely help! Thanks!

Dude, this a lot of information. Thanks!

Really a real madness. It seems that Atari, in the best Tremiel style, tried to bite more than fit in the mouth. They tried to create two generations of console to recover time and ended up losing the fourth and launching a console more or less in the fifth generation. While Nintendo and Sega raised followers and new developers Atari lost the train of history and tried to gain space on the scream, saying that her console had more bits than those of competitors.

In my research, what I found was that Sega didn't want to use third parties on the SG-1000, but envisioned the possibility when she realized that games define a console. But when they had this lighting, Nintendo had already cooperated most of the third parties and applied their exclusivity contract. Sega's departure, especially at the time of Sega Mark III/Master System, went to license the games and herself to make the versions. But they didn't have enough teams. While Nintendo launched piles of games to Sega was for the way. Sega learned the lesson and focused a lot on third parties during the Mega Drive/Genesis era.

This are the specs tha I found in internet.

Well for that. Jack liked to, shall we say, stretch things out.

Yes, but given the year of the project, I think it's unlikely that it was the 32-bit processor.

Hi guys. I am researching the story of the Atari Panther for the book I am writing and a question has intrigued me. I found it a lot of material about this not released console and everyone says the Panther would be a 32 bits video game. OK. But, the problem is that the specification provided by Atari says that the Panther would use a Motorola 68000 processor, equal to the Mega Drive/Genesis, Neo Geo among others. And we know that, although internally the 68K has 32 bits registers it is, in essence, a 16 bits processor. So is this one of those Atari tactics to use a processor and get as many as possible? Just as she did with the Jaguar when she added two 32 bits processors and said it was 64 bits? Does anyone know something that really indicates that Atari Panther would be a 32 bits video game?