Was killing the 5200 early one of the most fatal mistakes Atari ever made?

[Noah98]

I don't agree with this statement at all:

 

"The controller had its issues with a lot of games, but there were also games that played better with it, I think it was a simple as working with developers to make their game compatible with the 5200 sticks. Sadly, Atari never did that because Atari hated working with developers."

 

Even if we ignore the fact that the most popular games at the time were arcade style and gameplay was better with digital, not analog input, or even the fact that the joysticks didn't center, which was only serviceable for trackball/paddle style games, durability cannot be understated. Back then, people expected things to work when they took them home, or they went right back to the store. Because of the economy and other factors, products couldn't get away with being disposable like nowadays. Sears even had a lifetime warranty on Craftsman tools. If something broke, you had it repaired, not replaced.

 

The Atari 5200 joysticks are straight up garbage, even if developers designed games around them. They stop working even when you don't use them. And after "fixing" them, it's only a matter of time before they fail again. Just a terrible design. Back then, people weren't going to open them up and glue foil dots on them. And, they didn't have replacement parts readily available like we do now from Best Electronics. So, ignoring how they actually play, they are still prone to constant failure. The 5200 was a cool system once they ditched the power/video combo switchbox nonsense and if you had a Masterplay controller converter, but otherwise not worth it. Maybe if Atari completely replaced the controllers and relaunched the system, it might have had a chance. But then again, the original owners would still be stuck with the garbage controllers. That stigma would have probably been too much to overcome. The only solution would have been a controller recall, but that might not have been economically feasible.

 

It's a shame because the system had potential. We can see it clearly now in hindsight.

 

Edited September 9, 2018 by Noah98

[Flojomojo]

Another perspective: a sarcastic and mostly sort of accurate retrospective of 5200's place in history: https://www.anchorofgold.com/2015/4/17/5794428/schadenfreude-fridays-atari-5200-video-game-failures-coleco-intellivision

[adamchevy]

Another perspective: a sarcastic and mostly sort of accurate retrospective of 5200's place in history: https://www.anchorofgold.com/2015/4/17/5794428/schadenfreude-fridays-atari-5200-video-game-failures-coleco-intellivision

I thought this was a great article. Pretty long and sarcastic, but well thought out and accurate.

[mr_me]

The 5200 controller did play a big part of me just not owning one early one. I remember playing at a kiosk of the 5200 at a Sears in our local mall, and even as a kid, must have been underwhelmed - it definitely would've been a requested a Christmas gift that years or bday the following.

 

Doing a little research on the 5200, it appears the Nov. launch games were Galaxian, Pac-Man, Space Invaders and (pack-in) Super Breakout . I *think* I can say the majority of us agree having Super Breakout sans a paddle controller, as a pack-in title is laughable. Anybody know when Pac-Man replace Super Breakout as the pack-in?

 

Here is what I found for the Colecovision launch in August of '82 (someone correct me if I'm wrong): Cosmic Avenger (decent Defender clone), Smurf (exclusive), Donkey Kong (pack-in), Carnival, Mousetrap and Venture.

 

What looks more enticing here?

I found that Atari 5200 launch titles were Super Breakout, Galaxian, Missile Command, Space Invaders, and Star Raiders. By Christmas 1982 [Atari] added Pac-man, Soccer, Defender, Football. Cosmic Avenger is more like Scramble than Defender, and didn't Colecovision have zaxxon in 1982. I'd say the 5200 had the better lineup but Donkey Kong might trump them all. At January 1983 CES, Atari announced that Pac-man would be the pack in for new 5200 production. Technically the 5200 had more colours and multi-coloured sprites, better sound but the coleco vision had slightly higher resolution [and working controllers]. I think the Atari 5200 was considerably more expensive and I heard it had production/supply problems in addition to joystick problems. For whatever reason the coleco vision was outselling the atari 5200 2:1 but in 1983/84 I think the commodore 64 was outselling both of them.

 

Maybe cancelling the atari 5200 and replacing it with the 7800 was a mistake; but they were clearly losing to their competition. In the end Atari cancelled everything, closing their consumer division completely and selling its inventory and all IP assets to Tramiel. The 7800 was also rushed and never had a proper launch or proper development support other than the hacks at GCC.

 

Atari/Warner made a lot of mistakes and there's a lot of what ifs. What if Atari didn't rush the Atari 2600 version of pac-man and instead promoted the 5200 system and pac-man cartridge. What if Atari kept the amiga technology in house instead of pushing away their top engineers. Ideally they would have launched the 5200 in 1980/81 and then an amiga based console around 1986/87. The ultimate mistake was getting out of the business entirely in 1984.

Edited September 9, 2018 by mr_me

[Flojomojo]

If ifs and buts were candies and nuts, we'd all be playing Atari

[digdugnate]

If ifs and buts were candies and nuts, we'd all be playing Atari

lolol, my dad was kind of like Hank from King of the Hill (I grew up in North Texas so the cartoon is practically a documentary, ) - i can remember him saying the 'if its and buts were candies and nuts we'd all have a merry christmas' all the time to us.

 

my wife is still hearing new sayings like that and we've been married eleven years.

 

to the point of the actual thread, i have no flippin' idea to be honest because i never really researched much on it- growing up during the time of the 5200 our house was much more a home computer household rather than a console household.

 

from what i've read (and take that with a HUGE grain of salt), maybe if Atari had done differently with the 5200 or released it earlier, or done a dozen different things may it'd be different. it just feels like navel-gazing, tho.

Edited September 9, 2018 by digdugnate

[JaguarVision]

 

Atari starting developing a successor console almost immediately after the Video Computer System launched in '77, figuring that the system had maybe a three-year shelf life. 1980-81 would have been exactly when they would have wanted to launch their next platform. As fate would have it, of course, that system went on to become the 400 and 800 computer systems instead, which forced Atari to lean on the VCS in the console arena longer than they planned to, and then scramble to come up with something when stuff like the Intellivision started popping up (and when the Coleco wasn't far away).

 

The Intellivision test marketed in Fresno in '79. It didn't actually launch until '80.

 

You are correct, but the implication of the poster is the 5200 itself could have been earlier, I'm not so sure about that.

 

 

I'm with him on this. You pose a question, then you slap down everyone else's observations on the subject. If you want to have an open discussion on these topics, let others have their say. If you only want to offer your opinion, do that, but don't present your posts as questions open to discussion by the community.

Before your post there were barely any observations just vague answers about Coleco or something about the 5200 that wasn't true. Example: saying Coleco would hurt th 5200 during the crash if Atari kept marketing it when Coleco themselves were not pushing the Coleco and put all their muscle on the ADAM, and then later, saving the ADAM. That's me clarifying misinformation, if that's "striking down observations" to you , then you may be misinformed on the definition of that word.

 

 

Rushed to market, I guess?

In the middle of "does it twist or not?" questions about the controller, I dug up this old article with early impressions of the 5200. Seems it landed with a resounding meh.

https://atariage.com/forums/topic/278810-the-new-atari-vcs-faq-and-info-thread/page-14?do=findComment&comment=4052410

 

I only had a few real-life encounters with the 5200, and none of them were as exciting as poring over the Sears Wishbook, wondering what it would be like to have these arcade-quality, high resolution games at home. The reality was a lot less interesting, unfortunately.

 

At least the rushed controllers weren't as bad as what we would get years later, no RROD or YLOD.

Edit: Ok wait I forgot the Bally console, that thing broke down more than a early 360.

 

 

 

Fortunately the Atari 2600 has surprisingly flexible hardware which allowed it to be competitive for longer. It's amazing how much a system that was designed to play Pong and Combat was pushed.

 

Those late 80's early 90's 2600 games still surprise me. Mattel was never able to get any kind of mileage like that, even though they spend tons of money trying to.

 

 

I don't agree with this statement at all:

 

"The controller had its issues with a lot of games, but there were also games that played better with it, I think it was a simple as working with developers to make their game compatible with the 5200 sticks. Sadly, Atari never did that because Atari hated working with developers."

 

Even if we ignore the fact that the most popular games at the time were arcade style and gameplay was better with digital, not analog input, or even the fact that the joysticks didn't center, which was only serviceable for trackball/paddle style games, durability cannot be understated. Back then, people expected things to work when they took them home, or they went right back to the store. Because of the economy and other factors, products couldn't get away with being disposable like nowadays. Sears even had a lifetime warranty on Craftsman tools. If something broke, you had it repaired, not replaced.

 

The Atari 5200 joysticks are straight up garbage, even if developers designed games around them. They stop working even when you don't use them. And after "fixing" them, it's only a matter of time before they fail again. Just a terrible design. Back then, people weren't going to open them up and glue foil dots on them. And, they didn't have replacement parts readily available like we do now from Best Electronics. So, ignoring how they actually play, they are still prone to constant failure. The 5200 was a cool system once they ditched the power/video combo switchbox nonsense and if you had a Masterplay controller converter, but otherwise not worth it. Maybe if Atari completely replaced the controllers and relaunched the system, it might have had a chance. But then again, the original owners would still be stuck with the garbage controllers. That stigma would have probably been too much to overcome. The only solution would have been a controller recall, but that might not have been economically feasible.

 

It's a shame because the system had potential. We can see it clearly now in hindsight.

 

 

I never said the sticks were durable. I said that they could have tried remedying the situation by working with developers to make games that worked well with the controller, which is what they were starting to do. Because the people that did keep their 5200's Atari had to find someway to keep them in. Atari was already in no position to piss off customers and retailers at the time, so in hindsight doing what they did is likely the reason why they lacked retailer presence in the mid-80's and customers were cautious.

 

 

I found that Atari 5200 launch titles were Super Breakout, Galaxian, Missile Command, Space Invaders, and Star Raiders. By Christmas 1982 [Atari] added Pac-man, Soccer, Defender, Football. Cosmic Avenger is more like Scramble than Defender, and didn't Colecovision have zaxxon in 1982. I'd say the 5200 had the better lineup but Donkey Kong might trump them all. At January 1983 CES, Atari announced that Pac-man would be the pack in for new 5200 production. Technically the 5200 had more colours and multi-coloured sprites, better sound but the coleco vision had slightly higher resolution [and working controllers]. I think the Atari 5200 was considerably more expensive and I heard it had production/supply problems in addition to joystick problems. For whatever reason the coleco vision was outselling the atari 5200 2:1 but in 1983/84 I think the commodore 64 was outselling both of them.

 

Maybe cancelling the atari 5200 and replacing it with the 7800 was a mistake; but they were clearly losing to their competition. In the end Atari cancelled everything, closing their consumer division completely and selling its inventory and all IP assets to Tramiel. The 7800 was also rushed and never had a proper launch or proper development support other than the hacks at GCC.

 

Atari/Warner made a lot of mistakes and there's a lot of what ifs. What if Atari didn't rush the Atari 2600 version of pac-man and instead promoted the 5200 system and pac-man cartridge. What if Atari kept the amiga technology in house instead of pushing away their top engineers. Ideally they would have launched the 5200 in 1980/81 and then an amiga based console around 1986/87. The ultimate mistake was getting out of the business entirely in 1984.

 

I don't know why people keep thinking a 2600 successor would have been viable before 82. The 2600 was just reaching take off in 79 and was ranking money before 82. I don't think there was any safe way to bring in the 5200 or whatever early.

 

 

I don't agree with this statement at all:

 

"The controller had its issues with a lot of games, but there were also games that played better with it, I think it was a simple as working with developers to make their game compatible with the 5200 sticks. Sadly, Atari never did that because Atari hated working with developers."

 

Even if we ignore the fact that the most popular games at the time were arcade style and gameplay was better with digital, not analog input, or even the fact that the joysticks didn't center, which was only serviceable for trackball/paddle style games, durability cannot be understated. Back then, people expected things to work when they took them home, or they went right back to the store. Because of the economy and other factors, products couldn't get away with being disposable like nowadays. Sears even had a lifetime warranty on Craftsman tools. If something broke, you had it repaired, not replaced.

 

The Atari 5200 joysticks are straight up garbage, even if developers designed games around them. They stop working even when you don't use them. And after "fixing" them, it's only a matter of time before they fail again. Just a terrible design. Back then, people weren't going to open them up and glue foil dots on them. And, they didn't have replacement parts readily available like we do now from Best Electronics. So, ignoring how they actually play, they are still prone to constant failure. The 5200 was a cool system once they ditched the power/video combo switchbox nonsense and if you had a Masterplay controller converter, but otherwise not worth it. Maybe if Atari completely replaced the controllers and relaunched the system, it might have had a chance. But then again, the original owners would still be stuck with the garbage controllers. That stigma would have probably been too much to overcome. The only solution would have been a controller recall, but that might not have been economically feasible.

 

It's a shame because the system had potential. We can see it clearly now in hindsight.

 

 

I never said the sticks were durable. I said that they could have tried remedying the situation by working with developers to make games that worked well with the controller, which is what they were starting to do. Because the people that did keep their 5200's Atari had to find someway to keep them in. Atari was already in no position to piss off customers and retailers at the time, so in hindsight doing what they did is likely the reason why they lacked retailer presence in the mid-80's and customers were cautious.

 

 

I found that Atari 5200 launch titles were Super Breakout, Galaxian, Missile Command, Space Invaders, and Star Raiders. By Christmas 1982 [Atari] added Pac-man, Soccer, Defender, Football. Cosmic Avenger is more like Scramble than Defender, and didn't Colecovision have zaxxon in 1982. I'd say the 5200 had the better lineup but Donkey Kong might trump them all. At January 1983 CES, Atari announced that Pac-man would be the pack in for new 5200 production. Technically the 5200 had more colours and multi-coloured sprites, better sound but the coleco vision had slightly higher resolution [and working controllers]. I think the Atari 5200 was considerably more expensive and I heard it had production/supply problems in addition to joystick problems. For whatever reason the coleco vision was outselling the atari 5200 2:1 but in 1983/84 I think the commodore 64 was outselling both of them.

 

Maybe cancelling the atari 5200 and replacing it with the 7800 was a mistake; but they were clearly losing to their competition. In the end Atari cancelled everything, closing their consumer division completely and selling its inventory and all IP assets to Tramiel. The 7800 was also rushed and never had a proper launch or proper development support other than the hacks at GCC.

 

Atari/Warner made a lot of mistakes and there's a lot of what ifs. What if Atari didn't rush the Atari 2600 version of pac-man and instead promoted the 5200 system and pac-man cartridge. What if Atari kept the amiga technology in house instead of pushing away their top engineers. Ideally they would have launched the 5200 in 1980/81 and then an amiga based console around 1986/87. The ultimate mistake was getting out of the business entirely in 1984.

 

I don't know why people keep thinking a 2600 successor would have been viable before 82. The 2600 was just reaching take off in 79 and was ranking money before 82. I don't think there was any safe way to bring in the 5200 or whatever early.

[JaguarVision]

lolol, my dad was kind of like Hank from King of the Hill (I grew up in North Texas so the cartoon is practically a documentary, ) - i can remember him saying the 'if its and buts were candies and nuts we'd all have a merry christmas' all the time to us.

 

my wife is still hearing new sayings like that and we've been married eleven years.

 

to the point of the actual thread, i have no flippin' idea to be honest because i never really researched much on it- growing up during the time of the 5200 our house was much more a home computer household rather than a console household.

 

from what i've read (and take that with a HUGE grain of salt), maybe if Atari had done differently with the 5200 or released it earlier, or done a dozen different things may it'd be different. it just feels like navel-gazing, tho.

 

More people likely heard of the 7800 than the 5200 to be honest. I'm not surprised many people did not hear of it till forums.

[+Cafeman]

More people likely heard of the 7800 than the 5200 to be honest. I'm not surprised many people did not hear of it till forums.

I don't know why you believe this, because it seemed the reverse was true from my perspective. There were prime time commercials about the 5200 and articles and re views in the gaming mags before the crash of 84. 7800 release was after the crash and seemed like a momentary blip compared to the NES and Super Mario.

 

At least it seemed that way in PA.

[00010000]

 

 

Neither the NESor PC ENGINE were relevant in Europe.

 

 

I wouldn't say the NES wasn't relevant in Europe (don't know much about PC-Engine there to say otherwise, but if it were anything like TG-16 in America.....yeah.....); there were some select countries where it did pretty well. But from most sources I'm aware of MS more or less had Europe overall on lock similar to how NES had the U.S market at the time.

 

Even so, dominating the European home console market that gen wasn't exactly to the same degree as dominating the NA home console market, which was quite larger. Things definitely expanded for home consoles in Europe w/ the MegaDrive and SNES however, and we all know PlayStation essentially built off of that and finally pushed consoles into the dominant gaming platform over there.

[JaguarVision]

I don't know why you believe this, because it seemed the reverse was true from my perspective. There were prime time commercials about the 5200 and articles and re views in the gaming mags before the crash of 84. 7800 release was after the crash and seemed like a momentary blip compared to the NES and Super Mario.

 

At least it seemed that way in PA.

 

Maybe anecdotally but papers nationwide were talking about the 7800 much more than the 5200, and the 7800 had blips in papers about actually selling out. It also kind of helps (and hurts) that the 2600 Jr. was designed like the 7800.

[Flojomojo]

I don't know why you believe this, because it seemed the reverse was true from my perspective. There were prime time commercials about the 5200 and articles and re views in the gaming mags before the crash of 84. 7800 release was after the crash and seemed like a momentary blip compared to the NES and Super Mario.

 

At least it seemed that way in PA.

Same. 5200 was talk of the schoolyard, 7800 invisible and unavailable on the shadow of the NES and to a much lesser extent, SMS.

[+x=usr(1536)]

So. Have we dissected this to death yet?

[Atari Pogostick]

I actually believe they should have went for broke and released the promised 7800 in 1984. They could have took out a corporate loan if they really needed to. The original 7800 was a beast of a machine that was upgradable. Would have sailed through the crash with ease.

 

I'd agree with op if the 5200 was alone, but the ColecoVision was huge and more powerful. It's was also the reason we got the NES, 7800, and SMS in the first place.

 

Also the ColecoVision got the licenses like B.C., Flintstones, and Dukes of Hazzard.

 

I would also like to stress that the 5200 also made the CV controllers seem "good" by comparison, which is quite the feat given how bad the CV controllers are.

[Flojomojo]

I actually believe they should have went for broke and released the promised 7800 in 1984. They could have took out a corporate loan if they really needed to. The original 7800 was a beast of a machine that was upgradable. Would have sailed through the crash with ease.

 

The editorials and headlines write themselves (even as video game magazines were failing too)

 

ATARI 7800: Strike three for Atari?

Not even two years after subjecting fans to the floppy-sticked black whale known as the Atari 5200, the company is back -- and this time they mean it. The 7800 looks a sleeker version of the 2600, but with no woodgrain. The main difference this time around is that it plays a few games that the 2600 never could, such as Robotron, Xevious, and Donkey Kong, and it also plays 2600 games too. Remind us why we need this again? Fool me twice, shame on me. C-

[JaguarVision]

So looking at some old articles it does seem like I downplayed the ColecoVisions popularity and support during the crash. Yeah Coleco did put more marketing muscle on Adam but the ColecoVision got much more marketing support than I remembered.

 

So yeah, the 5200 would have had some trouble even during the crash.

 

Damn shame really. I guess the only way it could have survived is if it was able to be converted into a home computer.

 

The reason why i never mentioned the controllers as an issue in this thread like others is because Atari never officially released new controllers similar to the 2600's after the 5200 was released. So I figured they were always going to keep the analog sticks and never introduce another option. Yeah they were bad, but Atari seemed locked on trying to market them. I'm guessing the controllers costed a lot more than expected despite their rushed production.

 

Despite half the games not working well with the 5200 controllers we did still get some great games on it so there's something I guess.

[adamchevy]

This is one of the longest 5200 thread topics I’ve come across. It’s nice to see it getting the love it truly deserves! I am a new owner of the 5200 so I am pretty unbiased I think . Ofcourse, I guess I’m still in the Honeymoon phase as well.

[+wongojack]

Was killing the 5200 early one of the most fatal mistakes Atari ever made?

 

There's no way that killing the 5200 was one of Atari's biggest mistakes. There are probably 5-10 other mistakes that happened earlier. Maybe some we will never know. I'd say that compromising the design of the 5200 was a much bigger mistake. After a bunch of design flops, perhaps RELEASING the 5200 at all was a bigger mistake. In hindsight, while selling to Warner in '76 enabled them to produce products, it changed the company culture irrevocably and was probably their biggest mistake.

 

The successor to the 2600 should have been a success, but alas it was not. I can hardly blame Atari. At the time, they were the fastest growing company of all time (that's of any company ever), and they were the first ones to deal with the problem of needing to invent your next consumer tech product to make your last one obsolete. Amazingly, they seemed aware of the need to innovate, but pushed things in a bunch of different directions that ended up being a pile of failure. I've heard there were bonuses to employees who could design products with the highest number of patents. Good intentions, but it means you end up with sh!++y analog controllers that everyone hates and a stupid switch box power combo thingy - stupid.

 

Perhaps a bigger mistake was not figuring out a way to produce their computer line more affordably. Commodore came along and price cut them on computers while encouraging customers to trade their consoles for a full functioning computer - brilliant move. Commodore also bet on the right components. I don't think they were truly any smarter, but they bought a company or two and created a design they were sure would be cheaper to produce in the near future - then priced their competition out of the market. There were likely multiple mistakes by Atari that allowed Commodore to pass them.

[TemplarXB]

"Perhaps a bigger mistake was not figuring out a way to produce their computer line more affordably. Commodore came along and price cut them on computers while encouraging customers to trade their consoles for a full functioning computer - brilliant move. Commodore also bet on the right components. I don't think they were truly any smarter, but they bought a company or two and created a design they were sure would be cheaper to produce in the near future - then priced their competition out of the market. There were likely multiple mistakes by Atari that allowed Commodore to pass them."

 

I think that was the real issue. The 8-bit computers were in direct competition with the game consoles of the time especially as the Commodore price wars drove them to console price parity. A few years back I bought both a Coleco and 5200. I have an AtariMax and a Masterplay Clone for the 5200 and it’s a pretty solid system. I then got an 800XL to play around with and since then, both the Coleco and 5200 are back in storage. The 8-bit computers of the time were better game machines than the dedicated consoles.

[mbd30]

Was killing the 5200 early one of the most fatal mistakes Atari ever made?

 

There's no way that killing the 5200 was one of Atari's biggest mistakes. There are probably 5-10 other mistakes that happened earlier. Maybe some we will never know. I'd say that compromising the design of the 5200 was a much bigger mistake. After a bunch of design flops, perhaps RELEASING the 5200 at all was a bigger mistake. In hindsight, while selling to Warner in '76 enabled them to produce products, it changed the company culture irrevocably and was probably their biggest mistake.

 

The successor to the 2600 should have been a success, but alas it was not. I can hardly blame Atari. At the time, they were the fastest growing company of all time (that's of any company ever), and they were the first ones to deal with the problem of needing to invent your next consumer tech product to make your last one obsolete. Amazingly, they seemed aware of the need to innovate, but pushed things in a bunch of different directions that ended up being a pile of failure. I've heard there were bonuses to employees who could design products with the highest number of patents. Good intentions, but it means you end up with sh!++y analog controllers that everyone hates and a stupid switch box power combo thingy - stupid.

 

Perhaps a bigger mistake was not figuring out a way to produce their computer line more affordably. Commodore came along and price cut them on computers while encouraging customers to trade their consoles for a full functioning computer - brilliant move. Commodore also bet on the right components. I don't think they were truly any smarter, but they bought a company or two and created a design they were sure would be cheaper to produce in the near future - then priced their competition out of the market. There were likely multiple mistakes by Atari that allowed Commodore to pass them.

 

 

Yep. The Atari 2600 was a success and remained popular for longer because it was compact, simple and playable. That was all that the 5200 needed to be. They could have made it somewhat more sophisticated than the 2600 such as having controllers with more buttons, but they went way overboard.

[BassGuitari]

Yeah, by 82 super breakout was old news, and a lot of their more current/popular arcade ports on the 5200 were also available on the 2600 and the 8 bit computer line. Like, you had options for Atari's games, and the 5200 version might be better, but is it that big an improvement? For something like Galaxian or Space Invaders or Super Breakout? Probably not. They did right by games like Defender or Robotron, sure... but history has shown that those weren't enough to really push units. Coleco had access to a number of B-list arcade games and Donkey Kong, and you gotta give em credit, they made those ports shine on their platform.

 

I will agree that has the 5200 come out around in 80-81, it would have probably been able to get more established, and probably could have gotten away without 2600 compatibility.

 

If Super Breakout was old news by 1982, it sure didn't bother 2600 fans who bought it in droves when it was released that year. That game was/is one of the most popular 2600 games.

 

People seem to have this idea that Atari had all these 2600 games (and 400/800 games) out sitting around in the early '80s, and then just ported them to the 5200 after it came out. This isn't really the case, at least not to the extent most people seem to think. Many of the "updated 2600" games on the 5200 were released--or were in development--more or less concurrently with the 2600 versions, within months of each other.

 

Look at Pac-Man, Star Raiders, Super Breakout, Defender, or Realsports Baseball--all released in 1982 on both systems, with the bulk of the 2600 versions coming out 6-8 months prior to the 5200's launch in November (and most of those coming in summer and autumn months). Sure, 6-8 months isn't nothing, but it's not like we're talking about years-old 2600 games that Atari decided to port. The 1983 releases, like Centipede, Ms. Pac-Man, Jungle Hunt, Kangaroo, Pole Position, and Galaxian were even closer--and a few of the 5200 games may have actually been released first (judging by label formats).

 

Likewise for the 400/800 versions. For the most part (except for, like, Star Raiders and Space Invaders, which had been out on the 400/800 for a couple years), the 5200 and 400/800 versions came out pretty close to the same time.

 

The problem with the 5200 was that Atari pitched it as a deluxe, hi-fidelity, upscale complement or alternative to the VCS, rather than treating it as a true successor or replacement. Sort of like Blu-Rays compared to DVDs, or CDs to tapes/vinyl, and how everything came out on both formats for years. Atari seemed to have that kind of "audio" mindset, in which multiple formats can coexist; turns out, that doesn't really work with video games.

 

(And yes, Galaxian for the 5200 is WAY better than the 2600 version. )

 

You are correct, but the implication of the poster is the 5200 itself could have been earlier, I'm not so sure about that.

 

The poster was me, and I said:

 

The bigger mistake was probably not releasing the 5200 (or whatever form the VCS's successor would take) a year or two earlier.

 

So...not sure what "implication" you're talking about here.

Edited September 11, 2018 by BassGuitari

[JaguarVision]

 

If Super Breakout was old news by 1982, it sure didn't bother 2600 fans who bought it in droves when it was released that year. That game was/is one of the most popular 2600 games.

 

People seem to have this idea that Atari had all these 2600 games (and 400/800 games) out sitting around in the early '80s, and then just ported them to the 5200 after it came out. This isn't really the case, at least not to the extent most people seem to think. Many of the "updated 2600" games on the 5200 were released--or were in development--more or less concurrently with the 2600 versions, within months of each other.

 

Look at Pac-Man, Star Raiders, Super Breakout, Defender, or Realsports Baseball--all released in 1982 on both systems, with the bulk of the 2600 versions coming out 6-8 months prior to the 5200's launch in November (and most of those coming in summer and autumn months). Sure, 6-8 months isn't nothing, but it's not like we're talking about years-old 2600 games that Atari decided to port. The 1983 releases, like Centipede, Ms. Pac-Man, Jungle Hunt, Kangaroo, Pole Position, and Galaxian were even closer--and a few of the 5200 games may have actually been released first (judging by label formats).

 

Likewise for the 400/800 versions. For the most part (except for, like, Star Raiders and Space Invaders, which had been out on the 400/800 for a couple years), the 5200 and 400/800 versions came out pretty close to the same time.

 

The problem with the 5200 was that Atari pitched it as a deluxe, hi-fidelity, upscale complement or alternative to the VCS, rather than treating it as a true successor or replacement. Sort of like Blu-Rays compared to DVDs, or CDs to tapes/vinyl, and how everything came out on both formats for years. Atari seemed to have that kind of "audio" mindset, in which multiple formats can coexist; turns out, that doesn't really work with video games.

 

(And yes, Galaxian for the 5200 is WAY better than the 2600 version. )

 

 

The poster was me, and I said:

 

 

So...not sure what "implication" you're talking about here.

 

Touche.

 

 

 

"Perhaps a bigger mistake was not figuring out a way to produce their computer line more affordably. Commodore came along and price cut them on computers while encouraging customers to trade their consoles for a full functioning computer - brilliant move. Commodore also bet on the right components. I don't think they were truly any smarter, but they bought a company or two and created a design they were sure would be cheaper to produce in the near future - then priced their competition out of the market. There were likely multiple mistakes by Atari that allowed Commodore to pass them."

 

I think that was the real issue. The 8-bit computers were in direct competition with the game consoles of the time especially as the Commodore price wars drove them to console price parity. A few years back I bought both a Coleco and 5200. I have an AtariMax and a Masterplay Clone for the 5200 and it’s a pretty solid system. I then got an 800XL to play around with and since then, both the Coleco and 5200 are back in storage. The 8-bit computers of the time were better game machines than the dedicated consoles.

 

 

Didn't Commodore lose money doing that though and raised the C64's price back up after the crash? Well that's according to Compute! magazine, not sure how reliable they are to people here.

[Video]

Wasn't the 7800 ready in like 83? They should have skipped the 5200 and tweaked the 7800 and just released that instead. Unfortunately they killed it by letting it sit for years before releasing it to the general public.

 

If really sticking to the 5200, they should have kept the 400 mapping system so it could have a more seamless translation of those games. Instant library!

[mr_me]

The 7800 was not quite ready but planned for release in fall 1984. It also was rushed, not having time to include a proper sound processor. Putting sound chips on the cartridges was not a solution.

 

Regarding the c64 losing money; Tramiel was definitely in a price war to defeat texas instruments. My understanding is that it's illegal to produce and sell something at a loss. Perhaps they can argue predicted drop in costs of technology means it's not selling at a loss over the products life.

Edited September 12, 2018 by mr_me

[JBerel]

You guys do realize you're having debates with a bunch of Biff's sock puppet accounts don't you? He's having you all on for another narcissistic thrill with his underdog topics, pointless comparisons, oh-so-controversial opinions, self appointed expertise in all things, and pointless contradictions to stoke the conversations and raise the post count on several of his bogus accounts. If he's not doxing people on Reddit, or calling for a shut down of this site, he's trying to feed his feeble ego.

 

Yo Biffster, you're right:

"it's just not a good time for it right now. Bad time to have posted, bad image needs to calm down. Maybe in a week or two things be better."

Except, I don't think you're going to live down your new reputation in a week or two, especially with your ongoing Muppet Show.