Atari Is Down For the Count.....

[Atariboy2600]

Well still, I missed the old Atari:P

[calfranklin]

I agree. The Atari I love and collect no longer exists. Atari ceased in 1991!

 

 

1991?

 

I think he meant 1996. I agree with him.

[calfranklin]

I agree. The Atari I love and collect no longer exists. Atari ceased in 1991!

 

 

1991?

 

I think he meant 1996. I agree with him.

Sorry about the date error. I guess Atari was just about to release the Jaguar in 1991.

[Keatah]

The essence of Atari is bound to the times as well as the great games. Atari is synonynous with the 70's and mid-80's. Anything beyond that and Atari is out of place. It simply does not belong in today's time.

[Benheck]

I'd agree on the "software branding doesn't work" points. Atari to most people is still a hardware company - an Atari is a console, a physical thing, not a label on a game box.

 

Perhaps some large company, say Microsoft or Panasonic, will buy the rights as use it as branding for a game console. Atari 3600, anyone? Since the data still points to most gamers being 25+ in age, perhaps they'd remember the brand and buy the console.

 

I may get flamed for this, but remember Macintosh/Apple was pretty much "gone" for much of the 90's before their big "i" comeback. So it can happen, but it takes hardware, not a name on a box. But of course hardware is very expensive, so it'd be a gamble for any company doing it.

 

RE cartridge slots, they're expensive.

[MrAtari2600]

OK well Atari had its time and its a piece of history which everybody should know about

and maybe in 100 years time we will look back in our 3D virtual reality games with the sunglasses for like the viewing.

And our finger tip gloves for movement, And stuff, lol.

WE will just say Well look what we came from

and hey!

If we keep atari living,

Maybe some geniuses will remake the system and games

( not like flashback i mean like make the cart system new and carts in like 25 years time)

lol

:]

I love atari

^^

[Keatah]

Yeh make a modern-day atari 3600 from microsoft, include 360 original atari games, better yet, include them all. That would only add a dollar or two for the flashrom..!

 

Well all that aside, I'm going to play playstation, er maybe intellivision, or 2600 air-sea battle.. Damn! I think I'll play them at the same time! on the same system.. Thank YOU *E*M*U*L*A*T*I*O*N*.

 

Yeh, EMULATION STATION..! WOW!

[mos6507]

Back when I first started getting into this hobby, most people thought anyone still into Atari or other old games was insane. Since then, old Atari has been properly canonized by pop culture. It's been in stamps, music videos, movies, T-shirts, TV-shows, songs, and toy or software shelves in one form or another for over a decade. These 20+ year old intellectual properties have made more profit over a longer period in the modern era than many big budget bombs. On that point, mission accomplished. If Atari can not extend itself to modern gaming anymore, then so be it.

[birdie3]

This might be blaphemous but is it possible that "Atari" really doesn't mean as much to the general consumer market as we think it does and this may very well be the reason why it continues to be a bad investment?

 

1970's - All of a sudden.. Atari invents the most amazing entertainment device product in the history of entertainment.

 

2007 - ?? Maybe Atari should attempt to invent something completely new and entertaining perhaps existing outside of the video game box (ala Nintendo Wii or something far more advanced)

 

Is it conceivable that the evolution of video games has fully peaked and humans now need to be entertained in new and even more exciteing ways? This way of thinking seems to be more along the lines of how the Atari of old approached this issue. Something new that is going to completely fucking blow the minds of people everywhere. This is where Atari needs to be.

[Hornpipe2]

if Atari Went in with the MMo field im sure as heck they'd succeed

Right, because The Matrix Online was such a phenomenal success.

 

Lots of people are under the misconception that MMOs are basically a license to print money, but there's a lot more that goes into the expense of running them beyond just the game's development (and it's stuff you don't pay for until after the game is done being written). That's stuff like... a big data center to house and secure your servers (air conditioning alone costs a fortune), a staffed and equipped call center for the inevitable millions of tech support needs, a dev. team to keep churning out new content week after week so the subscribers don't get bored and leave, in-game moderators, and more. That doesn't include the team needed to write the inevitable expansion for your game. Gamasutra has a pretty neat article on the hidden costs of MMOs if you're interested.

 

On another note though, not everything Atari put its stamp on has been total crap these past few years. Unreal Tournament 2004, for example, is a great game and is probably still selling new copies today. I suspect that even if Atari's in-house developments are doing poorly, at least they can still get by as a distributor...

[mos6507]

Is it conceivable that the evolution of video games has fully peaked and humans now need to be entertained in new and even more exciteing ways? This way of thinking seems to be more along the lines of how the Atari of old approached this issue. Something new that is going to completely fucking blow the minds of people everywhere. This is where Atari needs to be.

 

When I first saw Space Invaders running on a 2600, I didn't know what Atari was and I didn't care! All I knew was the game ROCKED and I wanted a VCS! That's the way it should be. No preconceived notions. No legacy to live up to. No franchises. You see something and you judge it on its own merits.

 

A "brand" is just of a loose concept for something that is constantly changing, sometimes for the better, sometimes worse. Usually the company's fortunes are tied to a core group of people who, after they leave, suck the lifeblood out of it. That was largely the case with Atari. The spirit of Atari became subdivided over time. Some if it split off into Activision, some to Imagic, some to Commodore, and so on. It's no wonder then that most of us Atari fans also appreciate the work these other companies did. But now there is very little left to grab hold of that directly relates back to the original big bang, so to speak. It's just a lot of microwave background radiation.

 

So maybe people should just lose their affection for the logo, stop pining for a rebirth, and seek out game experiences that give them the same vibe they got from Atari stuff.

[S1500]

Yeh make a modern-day atari 3600 from microsoft, include 360 original atari games, better yet, include them all. That would only add a dollar or two for the flashrom..!

 

Well all that aside, I'm going to play playstation, er maybe intellivision, or 2600 air-sea battle.. Damn! I think I'll play them at the same time! on the same system.. Thank YOU *E*M*U*L*A*T*I*O*N*.

 

I always imagined an Onion-like satire article of "Atari unveils new 10400 console". It would be touted as a console that runs on cartridges(no CDs to scratch!) 256 color palette and 1-button joysticks. The marketing droid would say "hey, who needs all these complicated games with tons of buttons and a storyline?" and generally sounding old-fashioned. It would be not unlike that SNL commercial with Will Ferrel selling glue actually made from horse hooves.

 

At least the humor of Atari would still be funny in 2007, and that' some entertainment.

[MrAtari2600]

Atari just needs a hit game thats serioulsy the issue,

They've tried and tired again unsuccessfully, but here seems to be what i see now

 

The few titles which are played most of time are in these series,

The best selling games,

look at these titles, everyone knows them

 

Final Fantasy

Halo

Mario

 

Like honestly,

Those are 3 biggest selling names.

 

 

Atari is probably screwed. to be flatout honest.

A bigger game with their name on it

is unreal tournament

thing is

Atari's name isnt on the new one,

2004 UT was one of best sellers,

i bet it profited them well,

If they could stay in that series maybe keep them living at the mark they are at currently.

[Hornpipe2]

Atari just needs a hit game thats serioulsy the issue,

They've tried and tired again unsuccessfully, but here seems to be what i see now

Companies can and do get by with 'minor hit' games, and Atari has their name on a number of those now - Neverwinter Nights for example was a huge hit among computer RPG fans and no doubt made them some significant cash. Here's a partial list of other successful Atari-published games - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari#Atari.2...s_and_direction

 

I imagine what they'll end up doing is folding up most of their business operations and concentrating solely on the things they know to be 'sure bets' to keep themselves afloat. That means continued publishing of their biggest selling series while dropping a lot of (all) R&D efforts. The Atari brand will surely still be around, but there will be have to be some pretty significant changes in order to survive. I think the end result of any reorganization can only be good for them.

Edited September 19, 2007 by Hornpipe2

[Curt Vendel]

There is a great deal of expense, but not as much as you would think. I installed and managed the Anarchy Online server farm in the Exodus Datacenter in New Jersey, just over 100 1U servers with a custom version of Linux running on them and other then physical hotswapping, the system performed quite well. Everything was load balanced behind 2 pairs of Alteon Load Balancers with a backend firewalled connection to the offsite database servers in the Netherlands.

 

It was a nice clean setup and worked very well.

 

 

 

Curt

 

if Atari Went in with the MMo field im sure as heck they'd succeed

Right, because The Matrix Online was such a phenomenal success.

 

Lots of people are under the misconception that MMOs are basically a license to print money, but there's a lot more that goes into the expense of running them beyond just the game's development (and it's stuff you don't pay for until after the game is done being written). That's stuff like... a big data center to house and secure your servers (air conditioning alone costs a fortune), a staffed and equipped call center for the inevitable millions of tech support needs, a dev. team to keep churning out new content week after week so the subscribers don't get bored and leave, in-game moderators, and more. That doesn't include the team needed to write the inevitable expansion for your game. Gamasutra has a pretty neat article on the hidden costs of MMOs if you're interested.

 

On another note though, not everything Atari put its stamp on has been total crap these past few years. Unreal Tournament 2004, for example, is a great game and is probably still selling new copies today. I suspect that even if Atari's in-house developments are doing poorly, at least they can still get by as a distributor...

[Retro Rogue]

Just bumping this. Stock was down to $1.28 today (closed at $1.30), and they're facing another delisting.

[Clint Thompson]

Just bumping this. Stock was down to $1.28 today (closed at $1.30), and they're facing another delisting.

 

disappointing.... or maybe disappointed is the word. There's no bounce back for them this time.

 

I still don't think they (suits) have any idea what they (should) have been doing with Atari, but I assume it's far too late in the game to talk about that. I really had higher hopes and expectations when I had a few positive exchanges with David, thinking someone would actually consider taking Atari into another and more profitable direction and someone that really was there to change things. Apparently I was wrong (or maybe they were for not trying and instead... continued striving down their more comfortable, broken path).

 

Buuuut..... what do I know.

Edited December 29, 2007 by Clint Thompson

[mos6507]

Just bumping this. Stock was down to $1.28 today (closed at $1.30), and they're facing another delisting.

 

Heard it on the radio. The press is starting to write their obituary. I really think the odds are stacked against Atari surviving much longer as a valid company.

Edited December 29, 2007 by mos6507

[Atari-Jess]

It makes me kind of sad, not so much that this rebranded company is going under, but that it means less Atari branded products as created by the community or apologetic developers.

[+Charlie Cat]

Hi Guys:

 

I wouldn't be too astonished if "Ubisoft" would purchase Atari! The way they've been getting certain franchises "for a song", Ubisoft would make a tremendous profit if they had a "Second Licences". With a name like Atari, & what's it worth on the exchange, it would be a foolish business decision on there part to pass on Atari.

 

 

Anthony....

[Math You]

I still don't think they (suits) have any idea what they (should) have been doing with Atari

True. It would make more sense for Infogrames to use their own name on PC and console software and save the Atari name for retro products.

 

The Atari name has such a powerful '1980's' image that using it with modern software just doesn't seem appropriate.

[Gregory DG]

The Atari name has such a powerful '1980's' image that using it with modern software just doesn't seem appropriate.

True, but it seems to work fine for Activision...

[Retro Rogue]

Hi Guys:

 

I wouldn't be too astonished if "Ubisoft" would purchase Atari! The way they've been getting certain franchises "for a song", Ubisoft would make a tremendous profit if they had a "Second Licences". With a name like Atari, & what's it worth on the exchange, it would be a foolish business decision on there part to pass on Atari.

 

 

Anthony....

 

Anthony, not sure what you mean, Atari Inc. doesn't own the Atari name and properties - they only lease it. The Atari name and properties are wholly owned by Infogrames via its subsidiary Atari Interactive. The current Atari Inc. is the former GT Interactive, which when purchased along with several other companies/properties was renamed Infogrames Inc. and performed as Infogrames Ent.'s North American branch. Infogrames then acquired Hasbro Interactive and renamed it Infogrames Interactive. Then in 2003 they renamed Infogrames Interactive to Atari Interactive and spun of Infogrames Inc. as a separate company which was renamed Atari Inc., whereby they lease the Atari name and properties from Atari Interactive.

 

So anyone buying Atari Inc. would be getting the GT Interactive properties, the other properties that haven't been sold off, and the lease to the Atari properties (which they'd still be paying through 2013). Even then though, its highly unlikely. The recent loan from Infogrames to Atari Inc. completely locks it down to Infogrames, and the gutting and restructuring to move people, licenses, etc. back over to Infogrames basically further sets things up for either the eventual merging back in to Infogrames or the shutting down of the company.

Edited December 29, 2007 by wgungfu

[Retro Rogue]

The Atari name has such a powerful '1980's' image that using it with modern software just doesn't seem appropriate.

True, but it seems to work fine for Activision...

 

 

Not really the same situation, there's a continuation as a purely "modern" software company with Activision. When Mediagenic reformed as Activision in '92, they continued (as before) to focus on "modern" titles, acquiring more properties, etc. and promoting itself as a "current" company. In contrast, the context of Atari being a "modern" and "current" brand ceased in 1984. Atari Corp.'s game titles were still mainly reliant on old Atari Inc. properties that kept getting rehashed, which then became the main focus under Hasbro - i.e. the brand became focused as a purely retro brand. When Infogrames bought the properties, they became schizophrenic about it and wanted to recreate the image as a modern brand while at the same time playing on the retro association that had been built up (going so far as to identify itself with the original Atari Inc.) They can't have it both ways. Activision clearly distances itself from any sort of reliance on its old old properties, and in fact most kids today don't associate it with the original Activision we grew up with. If Infogrames and the current Atari Inc. had gone the route of Activision from the get go I could agree with you, but that's not the case here.

Edited December 29, 2007 by wgungfu

[Retro Rogue]

I still don't think they (suits) have any idea what they (should) have been doing with Atari,

 

I agree. Look at the current situation again - relying on Xbox 360 Xbox live releases and the PSP "Atari Classics Evolved" for income, yet they completely miss the important Christmas release date and release it the week *after* Christmas. Thereby insuring they miss a large portion of the sales that were so badly needed.

 

But what do I know, I was just a tech adviser for a part of the project that Stainless Games conveniently left out of the credits.