-Why did less commercial titles for Atari 8Bit?

[high voltage]

48k didn't hurt Spectrum

[JamesD]

You have to consider several things when you look at this.
We can look back and say Atari 8 bit machines were produced until 1992 but developers had no way of knowing that at the time.

Atari didn't exactly have stable management through the 80s.
Atari introduced the 5200 giving game manufacturers two different platforms to support; then cancelled the 5200 only two years later.
Atari introduced the 1200 (which had compatibility issues with the 400/800) and then dropped it. It wasn't cost competitive anyway.
The 600 and 800XL were more cost competitive but Atari was now trailing everyone else to market with 64K and there were signs the market would be moving to 128K thanks to Apple.
Atari was the last company with double density disk drives where other companies had them from day one. Developers were left with multiple drive formats to support. Do you ship your game on single density and include more disks or do you ship fewer disks and risk loosing customers?

Then the ST series was introduced and was Atari's major push. Sure Atari introduced a 128K 8 bit but by that time I'm not sure anyone believed it would last very long once ST sales took off.
8 bit competitors like Tandy and Commodore began offering 128K machines with 80 column screens, more speed and other operating systems for an influx of new business programs.
Tandy also offered PCs who's popularity was really taking off and Commodore offered the Amiga.
The Spectrum had evolved from a rubber key model to something you could actually touch type on and it was still a low price leader.
Apple released the IIc which had 128K and a small portable package. The IIgs drastically updated the Apple II series with more speed, more RAM, better graphics, backwards compatibility and one of the best sound chips on the market. And the Macintosh brought Apple into the 16/32 bit market and started the GUI rage.
On top of all that you have dozens of other new machines announced between '82 and '85, followed by many failures in the market including the TI-99/4a and Timex which had both lead the market in sales at one point or another.

If you consider that, the Atari 8 bit's future was unsure, Atari products trailed the competition and Atari wasn't a sales leader anymore.
Bringing new products out for the Atari 8 bit was a risk.

[Matej]

But there was all huge videogames on first Atari 800 or 800XL (1983-1986) like Centipede, Joust, Space Invaders, Donkey Kong etc etc. If you miss games like Last Ninja, Shadow Of The Beast on 800XE (1986) -> It is just because XE was in ATARI 520STs (1985) shadow. ST gots all that gaming pearls (they put all money and resources to ST division and then latter to XE, 7800 and XEGS but it was too late... ) Just look at ST game titles from that time!

Simply ST was their priority. And ST was very good at that time remember that in 1985 MAC had only 128KB RAM and only MONO display... Plus no MIDI and very well case design and nice mouse. Atari ST had better HW it that time...

Edited November 6, 2013 by Matej

[+Philsan]

lowest common denominator. 48K. They had to make programs 48k compatible to get max audience for Atari 8bits. Apple 2 and C 64 were 64k minimum by mid 80s. atari 8 bits were still stuck with 48k programs.

 

 

48k didn't hurt Spectrum

 

In fact for years Atari lowest common denominator was 16KB only.

[atarian63]

The Atari computer line was early hit as a 'pirate' community - EA was one of the biggest publishers and pretty much backed out of the 8bit line pretty early.

 

After that many others started to follow suit.

I remember my EA rep being in my store back then. I was pretty pissed about lack of 8 bit new titles(1986). Her view was that it was piracy.. I told her C64 was much worse and if we did not see some A8 titles/support we would be avoiding or lessening our EA purchases on all platforms,which we did. Never made sense since she said A8 sales were much higher than Apple II sales.

[atarian63]

You have to consider several things when you look at this.

We can look back and say Atari 8 bit machines were produced until 1992 but developers had no way of knowing that at the time.

 

Atari didn't exactly have stable management through the 80s.

Atari introduced the 5200 giving game manufacturers two different platforms to support; then cancelled the 5200 only two years later.

Atari introduced the 1200 (which had compatibility issues with the 400/800) and then dropped it. It wasn't cost competitive anyway.

The 600 and 800XL were more cost competitive but Atari was now trailing everyone else to market with 64K and there were signs the market would be moving to 128K thanks to Apple.

Atari was the last company with double density disk drives where other companies had them from day one. Developers were left with multiple drive formats to support. Do you ship your game on single density and include more disks or do you ship fewer disks and risk loosing customers?

Then the ST series was introduced and was Atari's major push. Sure Atari introduced a 128K 8 bit but by that time I'm not sure anyone believed it would last very long once ST sales took off.

8 bit competitors like Tandy and Commodore began offering 128K machines with 80 column screens, more speed and other operating systems for an influx of new business programs.

Tandy also offered PCs who's popularity was really taking off and Commodore offered the Amiga.

The Spectrum had evolved from a rubber key model to something you could actually touch type on and it was still a low price leader.

Apple released the IIc which had 128K and a small portable package. The IIgs drastically updated the Apple II series with more speed, more RAM, better graphics, backwards compatibility and one of the best sound chips on the market. And the Macintosh brought Apple into the 16/32 bit market and started the GUI rage.

On top of all that you have dozens of other new machines announced between '82 and '85, followed by many failures in the market including the TI-99/4a and Timex which had both lead the market in sales at one point or another.

 

If you consider that, the Atari 8 bit's future was unsure, Atari products trailed the competition and Atari wasn't a sales leader anymore.

Bringing new products out for the Atari 8 bit was a risk.

 

sorry, I have to say Tandy was a non entity in the home pc market back then, nobody carried stuff for it, hard to find a joystick. it was one of the few systems we would not accept for trade either (Coleco adam being the other or PC Jr). Even during the confusion were selling TONS of 800xl. Like a semi load per week. As I recall was not the 800xl pc of the year in 86 due to the new pricing under Jack?

[JamesD]

sorry, I have to say Tandy was a non entity in the home pc market back then, nobody carried stuff for it, hard to find a joystick. it was one of the few systems we would not accept for trade either (Coleco adam being the other or PC Jr). Even during the confusion were selling TONS of 800xl. Like a semi load per week. As I recall was not the 800xl pc of the year in 86 due to the new pricing under Jack

Atari may have been big where you were but they were non-existent where I grew up. Even when I went to college I only met a couple people with Atari 8 bit computers.

The local Fred Meyer dumped the XLs they had because they couldn't sell them next to the C64's which were very popular in that area. They didn't pick up the XE line either if I remember right.

 

 

If you do a little research you will find the following.

 

Tandy had about 40.5% of the market in 1979 but that dropped to about 9% of the market by 1983 with the price war and cheap machines like the VIC20 and Sinclair 1000 undercutting them on price. Tandy countered by releasing the CoCo2 which could be produced cheaper and introduced their PC compatible line in 1983. This was also about the time Tandy started letting customers purchase 3rd party software though local stores. Tandy's PC compatible line held top market share among PC compatibles from 1985-1990 and Tandy publicly stated the CoCo was their top selling machine every year of it's life to the editor of Rainbow magazine shortly before they discontinued the CoCo. Now, since the PC compatibles had the largest market share from around 1988 on and Tandy had the largest share of the PC market, it's a good bet the Tandy PCs were outselling anything Atari made at the time and since the CoCos were outselling Tandy's PC line... well... you figure it out.

 

Tandy may have lost market share due to the price war but they had higher profit margins than their competition and raked in over $2.5 billion in 1983 alone which was mostly due to computer sales.

That's more than Atari made at it's peak which was about $2 billion and that was largely due to the 2600. Atari sales dropped by half the first year of the price war (also largely due to the drop in videogame sales) and they were loosing money but Tandy stayed profitable. I can't find sales figures for Commodore after the $1 billion in sales for a year mention so I doubt they ever topped $2 billion. Apple reached $1 billion in sales in 1982 and they didn't even approach $2 billion in sales until 1985.

 

FWIW, Tandy had over $6 billion in sales per year by the early 90's but they overextended themselves when they opened Incredible Universe stores all over.

But what you need to know is that compared to Tandy, Atari and Commodore were relatively small companies. I'm not saying those profits were computers, but to write Tandy off as a non-entity? Apple didn't exceed Tandy in sales until around '93 or later. Meanwhile, Atari didn't even top $500 million in sales the entire life of the ST series which would include 8 bit sales in Europe that everyone touts.

Just sayin.

[+wood_jl]

If you consider that, the Atari 8 bit's future was unsure, Atari products trailed the competition and Atari wasn't a sales leader anymore.

Bringing new products out for the Atari 8 bit was a risk.

 

 

You're right, of course. But Atari "trailed the competition" is a bit strong. Atari had the best *color* graphics for a long time. The Atari hardware became outdated over time, but was never an exceptional slouch. Atari MANAGEMENT is more to blame with the "failure" of the Atari computer line, rather than the hardware. I'm speaking in general, but your points (also, in general) are well-taken.

[atarian63]

Atari may have been big where you were but they were non-existent where I grew up. Even when I went to college I only met a couple people with Atari 8 bit computers.

The local Fred Meyer dumped the XLs they had because they couldn't sell them next to the C64's which were very popular in that area. They didn't pick up the XE line either if I remember right.

If you do a little research you will find the following.

Tandy had about 40.5% of the market in 1979 but that dropped to about 9% of the market by 1983 with the price war and cheap machines like the VIC20 and Sinclair 1000 undercutting them on price. Tandy countered by releasing the CoCo2 which could be produced cheaper and introduced their PC compatible line in 1983. This was also about the time Tandy started letting customers purchase 3rd party software though local stores. Tandy's PC compatible line held top market share among PC compatibles from 1985-1990 and Tandy publicly stated the CoCo was their top selling machine every year of it's life to the editor of Rainbow magazine shortly before they discontinued the CoCo. Now, since the PC compatibles had the largest market share from around 1988 on and Tandy had the largest share of the PC market, it's a good bet the Tandy PCs were outselling anything Atari made at the time and since the CoCos were outselling Tandy's PC line... well... you figure it out.

Tandy may have lost market share due to the price war but they had higher profit margins than their competition and raked in over $2.5 billion in 1983 alone which was mostly due to computer sales.

That's more than Atari made at it's peak which was about $2 billion and that was largely due to the 2600. Atari sales dropped by half the first year of the price war (also largely due to the drop in videogame sales) and they were loosing money but Tandy stayed profitable. I can't find sales figures for Commodore after the $1 billion in sales for a year mention so I doubt they ever topped $2 billion. Apple reached $1 billion in sales in 1982 and they didn't even approach $2 billion in sales until 1985.

I was traveling the country during that time and was at all ces conventions. Whatever little burg you are from,you must know that on a national level they basically did not exist,unless you happened to stop at jap shack,the olny place that sold that stuff or carried things for it

 

FWIW, Tandy had over $6 billion in sales per year by the early 90's but they overextended themselves when they opened Incredible Universe stores all over.

But what you need to know is that compared to Tandy, Atari and Commodore were relatively small companies. I'm not saying those profits were computers, but to write Tandy off as a non-entity? Apple didn't exceed Tandy in sales until around '93 or later. Meanwhile, Atari didn't even top $500 million in sales the entire life of the ST series which would include 8 bit sales in Europe that everyone touts.

 

Just sayin.

I was traveling the country at this time and visiting distributors and attended all ces conventions. Tandy was no where to be found,was not relevant whatsoever,unless you happened to be at a jap shack where they carried items fair it.basically a non entity when c64 and atari we're fighting it out. Edited November 7, 2013 by atarian63

[atarian63]

I would say and did not know until 1980 they were huge

http://www.trs-80.org/was-the-trs-80-once-the-top-selling-computer/

[José Pereira]

In Europe there wasn't Apples IIs nowhere and TRS only at U.K. with the Dragon (that from what I read couldn't even use the U.S. Coco things).

At the 80s here in Europe the biggest Markets were (and the top selling computers):

U.K.: British ones like ZX and CPC together with BBC (although I think it wasn't indeed sales at stores but offers and agreements with government to put on the schools that then give them some sales for teachers and some kids whose parents had more money). When C64 cames it was at the first places.

GERMANY: Don't know much of ZXs there but from a magazine from them I got that time from a friend with large multi-format games listings it was C= all Machines (VIC=20, C16 and C64), the Schneider (Germany company that had the agreement with Amstrad to produce their CPC range and I think also other products), our 8bits Atari and strange that there was also Apple II (the only Europe country I remember seeing it on a magazine).

FRANCE: Don't know much but from their Software Houses like our well known Infogrames, Titus,... it seems an almost only CPC land and they even had their own 'ordinateur' those strange for all us Thomson MOs with not anywhere ever used own chip and the PAL SECAM T.V. signal.

 

SPAIN: I think it had the 2nd Market place after England and was indeed in games production (Dinamic, Topo Soft, Ziggurat,...) was a strange only Z80 land with ZXs, CPCs and all sort of MSXs (allmost all British games got Spain only releases with the uggly mono and colour clash direct port of the ZX's version. But if you had money you had all places all those Konami carts. A full price tape costs that time around 1.995 and those carts around 5.500/6.000pesetas that was around or more than 25£. Never really understood how all those Japan companies cross all Europe just to placed only on Spain). At stores there wasn't almost no C64 at the stores and at the begining Spanish Software just ignored it, slowly it grew but some of their C64 was ordered to the British C64 and Software Houses. Atari NOWHERE.

[José Pereira]

Now South America:

You can see that our A8s were very well at the Spanish language countries like we can see from our Chile and Peru guys. Had they a strongest Market and had build something like MSXs in Spain and maybe we could had those Arcae ports we missed. Or like A8 on Eastern Europe and maybe lots of Software Houses and games.

In the Portuguese language Brasil they started on the early Videopac but then they turned into our 2600, but they have their own Brasilian factories not with the Atari name but paying to Atari and it sold many, many thousands.

Only some years late, maybe around the middle of the 80s they saw the invasion of the Japanese MSX brands that later oppened their Market to the Sega Master System and the Nintendo NES in small quantities.

[Magic Knight]

Interesting the viewpoints based highly on where in the world we live or grew up during the era.

 

Can I ask what some of the most popular platforms were in your country for commercial game releases and also consider a vailability too. Probably in the mid 80's before the 16 bits had a concrete foothold

 

My pitch is the UK market for amount of games/popularity of machine/availability of games:

 

(Top 3 in order)

 

ZX spectrum

C64

Amstrad Cpc

 

And in no particular order atari 8 bit, BBC B, electron, Dragon 32, all had the surprising release from the majors companies that others didn't like last ninja for the electron which I still don't believe got done and the atari didn't!

 

I have left the Apple and IBM as really they were not a presence at all in high street retailers against the first 3 and were too expensive.

 

The US, Canadian, Australian versions etc of the above I'd be interested to see in comparison,

[José Pereira]

Australia I don't know but because of our Rybags friend here (and he can explain that to us...) and from his great 6502 knowledge it seems an A8 and C64 land.

 

Japan we all know that it was MSXs, first the Sega-1000, Collecovision and then Nintendo NES and Sega Master System.

 

Only much later we had our Eastern Europe friends and there it seems the traditional Atari VS Commodore war with some ZX/Timex also (Timex 2048/2068 that were indeed done here in Portugal and here we had to import their Poland green phosfor monitor that was the agreement they got with the U.S. Main Timex). Only Russia were an almost ZX land but there they were done by 'third parties' with other names and I think, not paying anything to Sinclair/Amstrad.

Of course that there was ZXs at Poland, Checo or Hungarian but were they more than Ataris or Commodores? Were they the real Spectrum or the licensed compatible Timex or some were the pirate Russian ones?

[José Pereira]

Forgot to say that had they oppened the Eastern Europe in the begining of the 80s or even around 85 and from what we all can see and still growing tp today in new ways, P.C. developing programs and games together with their easy to learn and develop together with a great knowledge and maybe we had another way of in the A8 games avaibility.

Had they back then other economic situation with people whit higher salaries and things would be much more different.

It seems that Tramiel was a clever guy and saw the opportunity to sell them the XEs he can't no-more sell to anyone and nowhere else (created the 800XE just for them? And what and why? Do you ever thought that maybe because they had hundreds or thousands of cases and chips in stock that maybe had gone into trash if there wasn't the Eastern Europe oppening).

 

Maybe they had more like Mirage and L.K.Avalon just to name a few, and even these could had done like the same type did in Spain for MSX or in the States Epyx or Mindscape did for AppleII and instead of pirate and uggly 'nothing' to do with the original like Barbarian, instead made agreements and import from U.K. and U.S.A for the ZX and C64 that then will make the first needed money to have some time later an A8 version .

[JamesD]

I was traveling the country at this time and visiting distributors and attended all ces conventions. Tandy was no where to be found,was not relevant whatsoever,unless you happened to be at a jap shack where they carried items fair it.basically a non entity when c64 and atari we're fighting it out.

Tandy didn't attend CES conventions. That doesn't mean they aren't relevant. Lots of companies attended CES and their products flopped. Were they relevant?

Tandy did things very differently but the sales number don't lie.

 

[José Pereira]

Now the conclusion and this is my own feeling and like if I was presenting my end of University 'tese' (and I am talking mainly untill 86 and only a bit later for Eastern Europe because even later was like if they was in 85/86 years):

Eachone of the biggest countries or regional had they own top selling machines.

If in U.S.A. is out of question the power of the AppleII and in some part the Tandy/CoCo the A8 and C64 were very well.

Other own feeling I always had and never saw anywhere nor ever said to anyone is that maybe Atari and Commodore have to 'send a Big Thanks' to Apple and in a smaller 'thanks' also to Tandy for their large sells and presence in the United States Market and they hadn't really cross the seas to sell what really what they will/can never sell on their own land.

On the other hand, had Apple not be the first and top selling at the States and maybe we had the inverse.

 

Now the World:

-> ZX were mainly only in U.K., Spain and some other countries of Europe. Even in some it were not ZXs but Timex that pay a percentage to Sinclair Research (like I said before, the Timex were build here in Portugal to us but also to export and was the same price as a ZX, some stores only had Timex and remember that without the Microdrive cart they were an 'own' Machine and had some own games, programs and I think even a sort of CP/M that was easy to find here but they soon ended as just to play ZXs games (there was a small but was a very small number, if I remmember it right that didn't ran on the Timex 2068). Maybe here around, at least 30%/40% were, for sure Timex).

Russia were 'clones' done by third parties mostly, for sure, pirates. Who would try or ever got anything in a court from the U.S.S.R. back on those days (or even now...) ?

[José Pereira]

-> Amstrad CPC begin at their own land but because of the other U.K. ones never/ever got the first sales place.

The main machine with a tape or drive attached and the nice professional keyboard together with, most of the times, more and vibrant colours (depends of each one taste ) result in a not cheap machine was a no way to be the top seller.

Now to this add that you even need to buy the monitor and I am untill today to understand how Amstrad could had entered in the Top3.

Tapes games were more one or two bucks than it was the same game on the ZX.

So, Amstrad got 3rd place at U.K., a 2nd or 3rd at Spain, maybe most of the times the times a 1st place in France and maybe a 1st before the 'real C64 invasion' in Germany (from that old Germany magazines it seems that Commodore were more interested in C=16 and even continue with the VIC=20). But in Germany it was made and with Schneider name. Was it worthing the same as if they had sold it with the amstrad name?

What other countries really sold anything worth of by Amstrad? I think that none!

-> BBC was smart with the agreement with the and place computers in the U.K. schools. But how many were offered to had this presence?

How many more were sold and present at the U.K. stores?

Again, because of the Higher Price, who bought a BBC? Maybe not much more than teachers and families economically medium high. And kids want is to play games and the BBC soon lost or never got (it was seen as an educational machine) the majour or most of the releases. Had they released and did a better promotion of the Electron with 16colours and probably 48/64KBs and maybe it had be the Electron and not the Amstrad CPC in the U.K.s 3rd place.

(For the future it gave us one of the first together with AppleII on the States intention of 'offering' computers to kids and the importance of that. But totally not understandable that then Apples and BBCs were so higher priced that most of the family couldn't bought them. And that strange but outstanding so complete Basic with Assembly.

[José Pereira]

P.s.- BBC Basic was together with that lots of POKES C64 the two that I never got not a single program doing anything on my 800XL.

 

-> And MSX was Japan and then Spain and Brasil.

Bust even three large Markets it's a name and how many companies used the MSX brand? I think I read it somewhere how many and I think the complete names list but I don't remember where. Anyone here knows?

 

 

Ufff!... Ending now:

At the first half part of the eighties there were only two global companies/brands present in almost all countries/continents and they were Atari and Commodore.

It has no debate possible that because of the C=64 Commore got the first place.

But not P.C.s and only Games Machines (Atari had at the same time 2600 and 8-bit computers and later 5200 and 7800 where Commodore had VIC=20, C=16 + Plus4 and C=64) and with so many countries in their presence in so many countries in the World that specific only one country like an Apple II or a Tandy Coco could sell more than Atari or Commodore.

Problem here is that we are talking in what? Number of Machines sold or the money 'sum' of all that number they sold?

Of course that it 'sum' of money two higher price Apple IIs are what? 3 A8s and 4 C64s?

This same talking for BBC/Electron that is an almost only U.K. and Amstrad CPC in 3 or 4 only and that never got anything 'worth of' in more countries. Ah! And the same Number VS Money thing!

The only unique here maybe it's the Spectrum that was present in many countries and that if we 'sum' all the Models for me I think it was the one that sold more machines and even maked more money than the C=64 (even with the less priced ZX48K).

But global world thinking presence I am really convincted that was atari and Commodore that were present in more countries.

And in more countries means real number of unities import, stores,...

If not then, for sure, most of the countries had much of these Machines, even that for a 'crazy' about these things as you all can see now , I never saw anyone and anywhere any AppleII,BBC B or CPC here.

[TMR]

U.K.: British ones like ZX and CPC together with BBC (although I think it wasn't indeed sales at stores but offers and agreements with government to put on the schools that then give them some sales for teachers and some kids whose parents had more money).

The BBC Micro was sold in shops, my first "hangout" as a kid was a local branch of Boots (a chain of chemists whose photographic department gained a computer aisle during the early 1980s) and there was a BBC B at the end of a row of machines; from memory there was a Spectrum, VIC 20, Dragon 32, C64 and that Beeb... ah the memories, that's where i learnt BASIC on the VIC!

 

Teachers could buy a BBC at reduced cost because the government realised they'd need a machine at home to practice what they were teaching... i wonder if they're going to do that again now the National Curriculum is leaning back towards programming?

 

-> BBC was smart with the agreement with the and place computers in the U.K. schools. But how many were offered to had this presence?

Schools at the time either went with BBC Micros or Research Machines RM 480Z machines (we had quite a few of both and one 380Z as well) - i don't think there were any other options for them to choose from though, although some of the local schools had half a dozen Spectrums for their regular computer clubs from what i heard; i only went to one of ours and it was BYOD.

 

But totally not understandable that then Apples and BBCs were so higher priced that most of the family couldn't bought them. And that strange but outstanding so complete Basic with Assembly.

The BBC, Apple II and to a fair degree 480Z have something in common; they're both heavily expandable and you pay more for that expandability which, along with being robust enough to survive in an educational environment, bumps the production costs up.

[Thorsten Günther]

As the German magazine "Chip" published a special issue yesterday covering cult computers of the 1980s, I feel obliged to add to this thread these two pages reprinted from 1986 with sales figures (the dichotomy between "home computers" and "personal computers" is a German thing - don't think too much about it, but the latter were seen as "serious" machines, i.e. bought for SOHO and commercial use, while the former were used by hobbyists and teenagers).

 

The Apple II series never quite caught on here (it was too expensive and PAL versions were too late - less market share than Sinclair and Atari), the TRS-80 is and was a rare beast in all versions (the "Dragon 32" CoCo clone being most likely to be found), TI died quickly, but Sinclair's ZX81 and ZX Spectrum gained much attention early in the 1980s (market share 7.8% vs. 7.5% for Atari in 1986) while from 1985 on the Schneider CPC line (rebadged Amstrad CPCs in less colourful cases) became a major player. Of course the C64 was the most popular machine, but the A8 always had significant market share (I guess that's why Ariolasoft and Kingsoft published A8 games).

 

Most interesting is the monthly sales curve displaying the 520STs immediate success over here.

 

[Jetboot Jack]

It wasn't base memory size, it wasn't legacy hardware - it was pure and simple "smaller install base" than the other popular platforms (C64, Apple II, ZX Spectrum etc).

 

I worked in both retail and games development during the mid 80's - the sole reason developers (both US and UK) did not develop for the A8 was the install base size - heard it all the time from the publishers & the developers.

 

Any given game needs sell to X% of the user base of a piece of hardware, the base number of units of software you aim to sell so you can at least break even, if you shift more then it's gravy!

 

Many of the companies in the later 80's could sell enough units of games to do that on the other platforms, and get into profit quickly (most games have a hot sales window of around 6 weeks, so you gotta do the business quickly) - whether it was original or ports - but struggled to do that on the A8.

 

sTeVE

[Tezz]

It wasn't base memory size, it wasn't legacy hardware - it was pure and simple "smaller install base" than the other popular platforms (C64, Apple II, ZX Spectrum etc).

 

I worked in both retail and games development during the mid 80's - the sole reason developers (both US and UK) did not develop for the A8 was the install base size - heard it all the time from the publishers & the developers.

 

Any given game needs sell to X% of the user base of a piece of hardware, the base number of units of software you aim to sell so you can at least break even, if you shift more then it's gravy!

 

Many of the companies in the later 80's could sell enough units of games to do that on the other platforms, and get into profit quickly (most games have a hot sales window of around 6 weeks, so you gotta do the business quickly) - whether it was original or ports - but struggled to do that on the A8.

 

sTeVE

 

With reference to my previous post (#24), it's a sad fact that there were many developers that appreciated the A8 and would have produced some great titles had the market been there. I remember reading somewhere that Andrew Braybrook for example had written an A8 version of Gribbly's Day out which was shelved. Talking to Shahid Ahmad about Chimera he mentioned that he had to push Firebird to go ahead with publishing the A8 version of his game. Software houses that did support the A8 later down the line struggled, Brian Jobling of Zeppelin once commented in an interview that they sold something like 5 copies of one of their releases. One guy I knew working at Ocean Software on c64 titles was a big A8 fan, he said they had an 800XL and 1050 just stored away unused.

Edited November 7, 2013 by Tezz

[Rybags]

TRS-80 sales can't necessarily be taken as an indication of the worth of producing games for it - there were clones of that machine through it's life, probably selling significantly more as a percentage than the Apple 2 clones so the market would have been bigger than you might think.

[José Pereira]

Tezz that now famous 800XL at the Ocean Software offices!... Was is it a True or a Legend?

As I was so angry with all those Software Houses that I didn't take their adresses with me on my more than a week across England trying to find A8 games.

Although I don't see I 'knock on Manchester Ocean's house door' saying I was an outside U.K. A8 user they would ever let me in. But it also was too late, even for C64, in 1992 .