Jump to content
opcode

The ADAM killed the ColecoVision

Recommended Posts

but he (Nolan Bushnell) was brought back numerous times in one way, shape or form to Atari in high level positions or as a puppet figure to conjure up memories of good times past

 

No, he was not. He was not in high level positions, he was not brought back as a puppet figure, he was not brought back at all. He was never at any company associated with the Atari brand until just now with the Atari SA board. Not from december of 1978 until now. A single instance of contracting Axlon (owned by Nolan via Catalyst Technologies) for a single released game done by Steve DeFrisco in 1989, does not equate to coming back or coming back numerous times.

 

Also, I see that you and Bill are very well versed on videogame history and appreciate that fact and welcome both of your opinions and helping clearify things at times,

 

That's because I'm a professional industry historian NIAD. I actually do this and get paid for it, and paid to be accurate and factual. And I don't go by just "press releases and interviews". There's talking directly to the people, internal documents, legal documents, engineering logs, etc., etc.

 

and you know this is coming... BUT!

 

Do you really think that every agreement, contract, deal that companies made back then and through the years were and are completely and 100% reported by said company through press releases, interviews, etc.? Just have to take one look at how Atari conducted themselves in the 70's and 80's to know that we only know or have heard what Atari wanted released and therefore the news agencies and magazines only had this to report on. If someone, like Nolan B., signed a contract or was rehired with, say Atari, and there were things involved in the agreement that Atari did not want made public... do you think that a GAG ORDER was NOT put in place?

 

Wow, you're really reaching for straws with that one. Please just quit while you're not ahead already, you're sounding foolish. Are you seriously reading what you're writing? Gag orders for a game contract? Nolan was not back at Atari, he's never been back until now. It was a contract for his game company to develop a few games as has been stated over and over and over again. Leonard Tramiel is an acquaintance of mine, Jack's son head of Software for Atari Corp at the time. I talked to Michael Katz, head of the entire Electronic Entertainment Division this was done under just a few weeks ago. As per people who were actually there, Nolan was not back at Atari then. And there'd be no reason to hide it if he was, in fact Nolan would have been trumpeting from the highest building like he is now. It was simply a publicity stunt by the Tramiels, towards the end of the 2600's time on the market to have the company Nolan owned at the time, Axlon, do a few games and slap his face on the box. Hell you can even talk to the guys who actually did the games as well (including the ones not released).

 

Not trying to take this discussion about Coleco and the ADAM down a different road and argue with you guys back and forth, but I tend to believe half of what I hear and none of what I'm told when it comes to stuff like this! Especially since bringing someone of Nolan's stature back into the fold after they so rudely showed him the door seems like it would be a slap in the face to the current CEO and uppper management!

 

What are you talking about? Atari Corporation was a completely different company, Atari Inc. was the one Nolan resigned from and that ceased to exist in 1984. Completely different owners, management, etc., etc. Just as the current Atari Inc. has zero relation to the original one, it's simply a derived name from Infogrames Inc being rebranded to Atari Inc. You're just sounding completely out there now. Like you'll be looking for the men in black helicopters any minute.

 

 

Basically put, they needed him and he needed them and all was good for both sides, whatever the arrangement and in the end we got some great Consoles, Computers and videogames to play to our brains out back then and still to this very day! :ponder: :ponder: :ponder:

 

??? Are you seriously claiming he had anything to do with Atari products from the 80's from either Atari? That's almost as bad as current misstatement by an Atari SA person that he had something to do with Centipede.

Edited by wgungfu
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[

Basically put, they needed him and he needed them and all was good for both sides, whatever the arrangement and in the end we got some great Consoles, Computers and videogames to play to our brains out back then and still to this very day! :ponder: :ponder: :ponder:

 

??? Are you seriously claiming he had anything to do with Atari products from the 80's from either Atari? That's almost as bad as current misstatement by an Atari SA person that he had something to do with Centipede.

Back the truck up... you are over analyzing what I have said now and that is pretty obvious.

 

The "in the end" statement is all-encompassing, LIKE FROM THE BEGINNING OF VIDEOGAMES. But then again, I guess anything I or someone else says will get that kind of treatment.

 

Don't think too highly of yourself.... I KNOW I DON'T THINK TOO HIGHLY OF MYSELF when it comes down to this stuff, it's all about having fun and sharing, not jumping down eveyone's throat when an oppportunit presents itself. Be it right or wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a puppet figure to conjure up memories of good times past

 

 

A publicity stunt to slap his face on the box sounds pretty much like "a puppet figure to conjure up memories of good times past.

Edited by NIAD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still standing by my claim that at the time the market was too small for the Colecovision to survive. There was no viable video game market left at the time. Even without the Adam disaster Coleco did not have the resources to survive the slump in the market. I remember as a kid wanting a ColecoVision and then shortly thereafter seeing the INTV drop to $30 and the carts for $5. I ended up spending $200 on an INTV and 30 or 40 carts. Within a month the place that I bought them had no video games at all, including the Colecovision. Without proper distribution channels companies can't survive.

 

And, Atari under Jack did dump carts on the market at reduced prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "in the end" statement is all-encompassing, LIKE FROM THE BEGINNING OF VIDEOGAMES.

 

That's arbitrary, you might as well credit Ralph Baer more so and Ted Dabney just as much.

 

But then again, I guess anything I or someone else says will get that kind of treatment.

 

You're the one that (like usually happens with newer posters) comes in pontificating on your ideas as if they're facts (or even new claims) and then goes around in circles when shown it's not the case.

 

Don't think too highly of yourself.... I KNOW I DON'T THINK TOO HIGHLY OF MYSELF when it comes down to this stuff, it's all about having fun and sharing, not jumping down eveyone's throat when an oppportunit presents itself. Be it right or wrong.

 

Don't read in emotions and such in to it that just aren't there. When I post, it's purely removed from any such personal insertion and just a statement of material and facts. If someone states something calling in to question what I'm presenting and my ability to do research, I will matter of factly state I do this professionally and people rely on me professionaly for my accuracy. If someone makes claims about past events, situations, and happenings that just aren't factually accurate, I will state that and give the current accurate information. If you choose to take that as ego and jumping down someones throat, that's your issue then. Jumping down everyone's throat is what newer posters do by continuously posting this kind of stuff, and then going around in circles (including continuously reaching for straws and rewording what they claim to have said in an effort to further reach for some sort "See I'm right" moment), and then getting offended when more established researchers and regulars here (myself, Bill, Curt, Lenny, etc.) show it's not the case.

 

 

a puppet figure to conjure up memories of good times past

 

 

A publicity stunt to slap his face on the box sounds pretty much like "a puppet figure to conjure up memories of good times past.

 

 

Nope. A puppet figure or figurehead is someone who is brought out as being involved in a company as it's leader when someone else is really pulling the strings. That is not the case here. Did they do a publicity stunt with a single game that leveraged Nolan's involvement with a 2600 game again? Yes. Was it Atari's game and did it imply Nolan was back at Atari? No. It was Nolan's company Axlon, and the game is credited and copyrighted to that company both on cartridge, case, and in game credits. Hence Nolan's picture and statement "I'm excited again to be designing games for the best selling video game system of all time." No puppet figure, no figurehead at Atari, nor does it constitute "brought back numerous times....in high level positions or as a puppet figure to conjure up memories of good times past". A single instance of contracting an outside firm that he heads to do a game, and having him put his own picture and name on his own company's game does not demonstrate numerous times, nor does it cast him as a puppet figure at Atari. A puppet figure is what he was the year leading up to when he left, giving interviews and such as heading Atari when he was no longer pulling the strings of the company. He's never been brought back to Atari in any form from 1978 until now when he went to the current Atari SA as a board member. Round and round we go.

Edited by wgungfu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "in the end" statement is all-encompassing, LIKE FROM THE BEGINNING OF VIDEOGAMES.

 

That's arbitrary, you might as well credit Ralph Baer more so and Ted Dabney just as much.

 

But then again, I guess anything I or someone else says will get that kind of treatment.

 

You're the one that (like usually happens with newer posters) comes in pontificating on your ideas as if they're facts (or even new claims) and then goes around in circles when shown it's not the case.

 

Don't think too highly of yourself.... I KNOW I DON'T THINK TOO HIGHLY OF MYSELF when it comes down to this stuff, it's all about having fun and sharing, not jumping down eveyone's throat when an oppportunit presents itself. Be it right or wrong.

 

Don't read in emotions and such in to it that just aren't there. When I post, it's purely removed from any such personal insertion and just a statement of material and facts. If someone states something calling in to question what I'm presenting and my ability to do research, I will matter of factly state I do this professionally and people rely on me professionaly for my accuracy. If someone makes claims about past events, situations, and happenings that just aren't factually accurate, I will state that and give the current accurate information. If you choose to take that as ego and jumping down someones throat, that's your issue then. Jumping down everyone's throat is what newer posters do by continuously posting this kind of stuff, and then going around in circles (including continuously reaching for straws and rewording what they claim to have said in an effort to further reach for some sort "See I'm right" moment), and then getting offended when more established researchers and regulars here (myself, Bill, Curt, Lenny, etc.) show it's not the case.

 

 

a puppet figure to conjure up memories of good times past

 

 

A publicity stunt to slap his face on the box sounds pretty much like "a puppet figure to conjure up memories of good times past.

 

 

Nope. A puppet figure or figurehead is someone who is brought out as being involved in a company as it's leader when someone else is really pulling the strings. That is not the case here. Did they do a publicity stunt with a single game that leveraged Nolan's involvement with a 2600 game again? Yes. Was it Atari's game and did it imply Nolan was back at Atari? No. It was Nolan's company Axlon, and the game is credited and copyrighted to that company both on cartridge, case, and in game credits. Hence Nolan's picture and statement "I'm excited again to be designing games for the best selling video game system of all time." No puppet figure, no figurehead at Atari, nor does it constitute "brought back numerous times....in high level positions or as a puppet figure to conjure up memories of good times past". A single instance of contracting an outside firm that he heads to do a game, and having him put his own picture and name on his own company's game does not demonstrate numerous times, nor does it cast him as a puppet figure at Atari. A puppet figure is what he was the year leading up to when he left, giving interviews and such as heading Atari when he was no longer pulling the strings of the company. He's never been brought back to Atari in any form from 1978 until now when he went to the current Atari SA as a board member. Round and round we go.

Sounds good, but I do have to get that picture posted (ie: check the forum posting docs, I've attached zip before!) as it would have flowed perfectly with the back and forth we have been having... as a joke!

 

BTW, while I am newer to posting on the forums, I have lurked going back to the early days of AtariAge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...