When counting your Atari carts ...

[SS]

... do you count Froggo titles as "unique" games or as "duplicates"? I can't decide if Task Force and Gangster Alley count as the same game or not.

[StanJr]

Different name=different game in my book. Like having a Sears "Outlaw" clone (whatever they called it) and the REAL Outlaw, I'd classify them as two individual games (for my collecting purposes). Particularly since the rarity could differ.

[Warren]

Considering some hardcore collectors count label variations as "different", I would say "unique titles".

 

But that's just me, someone who doesn't get into the label variations. Yet.

[SS]

The way I've been counting so far, I'm up to 196 "unique" titles. However, I count Video Olympics and Pong Sports as variations of the same game. Likewise with the Atari and Coleco versions of Donkey Kong. I count label variations, such as a text and picture version of Combat, as one unique game as well. If I were to change my method, then I'd be well over the magic 200 number that I've been shooting for. Tempting, very tempting indeed ...

[StanJr]

For my collection purposes I list any MAJOR variation as a seperate cart, but NOT a unique game (ie the "Raiders Lost Ark"variation). But Donkey Kong Coleco and DK Atari are two seperate unique games. Don't ask me why. I'm crazy that way.

[Lost Monkey]

Here I go off the topic already.. but... if you think about just how crappy the Coleco Donkey Kong was... would you have re-released it?

 

a) Yes, but I wouldn't have slept right for say, - two nights.

 

b) Yes, my name is Tramiel, you should just see the line-up of re-releases we have coming! Oh my stars! Watch your back Nintendo!

 

c) Yes, but why did they re-release it so early, 1992 was the key market year for the 2600!

 

 

TOPICAL: If I have 2 copies of the same game from the same distributor, I count it as 1 title (duh!), regardless of label variations. If they are different publishers, IE Coleco ---- > Atari releases, I count them as 2 "titles".

 

I also count my coveted A#2 FLC labels as separate titles... (and I'm still waiting for a couple....)

[atari70s]

different title= unique cart

label varation style= unique cart

and in my book copywrite years =unique cart.

[ATARIPITBULL]

One game might look and sound just like another, but if one was made by someone else, then you have two different carts, not to be counted as one.

 

[Marco(2)]

I always say I collect manufacturer variations, not label variations. I think most (American) collectors would agree that Sears and Froggo games should be counted as unique carts. In my book, that means that also games by 'distributors' like Quelle and Marpes, that are like European versions of Sears, should be counted as unique. Same with Brazilian 'producers' like Fotomania, Atarimania etc. There's simply no way of distinguishing, so I just count them all. As long as it has a different manufacturer or distributor (or is missing any indication of its maker) it should be counted as another cool piece of Atari 2600 history.

 

That's as far as I go, I never understood the wish to go even one step further and also collect label variations. But that's just me :wink:

 

Cheers,

 

Marco

[MattyXB]

 

I count every game, name, lable, variation. All where a point is diffrent.

 

But I search variation only by my favourite games. I will not buy every single variation from every game. Only when I get it cheap.

[Albert]

I definitely consider the Froggo games unique, even if they are just copies of other games. They were produced by a different company and sold in retail stores with unique packaging. When counting "unique" games in my collection, I would not count label variations within a company (say, Atari text, picture, silver, red variations of the same game), but I will include manufacturer variations (say, Donkey Kong, released by both Coleco and Atari).

 

When taking a *total* count of the carts in my collection, I will then include all the label variations.

 

..Al

[+bfstats]

Here's a slightly different take on the subject of uniqueness. In the case of "cloned" games, the graphics and gameplay, or both , have been altered (perhaps VERY slightly) so as to avoid (presumably) license infringement. Any game that contains original OR modified code is "unique" in my book because it is not an exact CODE copy.

 

Based on this rule, Gangster Alley by Spectravision and Task Force by Froggo are unique because the graphics are different. Sea Hawk by Panda and Sea Hawk by Froggo are unique for the same reason even though they have the same title. On the other hand, the code in ALL of the non-exclusive Sears titles is identical to their Atari counterparts. Nothing unique about these games other than the titles and packaging. This begs the question, Does packaging alone make a game unique?

[Albert]

This begs the question, Does packaging alone make a game unique?

 

I don't think anyone would argue that all the Sears titles should be considered unique from a collecting perspective. However, if you're just in it to play the games, you'd probably only want to get your hands on the three exclusive titles that Sears released (Submarine Commander, Stellar Track, and Steeplechase). In general, I consider the same game released by a different company with different packaging to be "unique", again, from a collecting perspective, and I count these titles as unique when tallying up how many different titles I have in my collection.

 

..Al

[SS]

I don't think anyone would argue that all the Sears titles should be considered unique from a collecting perspective.  However, if you're just in it to play the games, you'd probably only want to get your hands on the three exclusive titles that Sears released (Submarine Commander, Stellar Track, and Steeplechase).

 

Personally, I'm not really interested in Sears releases unless there's really a notable difference in them or unless they were exclusives. Pong Sports is a good example. It's exactly the same as Video Olympics but has a MUCH cooler name. Still, as of yet, I haven't counted it twice when I'm keeping track of the numbers of unique games I own.

[SS]

Based on this rule, Gangster Alley by Spectravision and Task Force by Froggo are unique because the graphics are different.

 

Which is exactly where my original question came from. We know that Froggo games are copies of games from other companies. However, there were some minor graphical changes made so they're not exact copies. This one is a tough call. Basically I'm trying to look at it from the perspective of the average Joe who might ask "So, how many diffrent Atari games do you have?". It seems like I should have two diffrent answers : 204 cartridges and 196 unique games. Task Force is the one that's been throwing me off.

[Albert]

Basically I'm trying to look at it from the perspective of the average Joe who might ask "So, how many diffrent Atari games do you have?".  It seems like I should have two diffrent answers : 204 cartridges and 196 unique games.  Task Force is the one that's been throwing me off.

 

I don't think the Average Joe is going to care that different companies simply rebadged existing games. To him, the fact that they were sold by different companies, with different labels, manuals, etc. are enough to differentiate them. It's only us collectors who start to get into the more intricate details about the fact that some of these games are ripoffs of others, or properly licensed titles.

 

If someone asks me how many Atari games I have, I would just tell them how many unique carts I have (not including label variations). Of course, I don't know what this number is right now, so I usually just say, "Many hundreds".

 

..Al