Jump to content
Tommy Tallarico

Intellivision Amico - Tommy Tallarico introduction + Q&A

Recommended Posts

So I just got done watching a video on YouTube about how games on google stadia will be the same price as on other platforms but in it they mentioned the fact that these days every game released isn’t really complete when it heads out the door. Because there is patches for bugs that pop up and things after release maybe new content for the game to some error is found and a patch is needed to fix it.

 

I think the fact that Intellivision’s games being complete when heading out the door will be a huge plus for the system.  I mean imagine buying a complete game from day one..what a crazy concept.

 

this may not be true but I kind of feel like the advancement of the internet has bred lazy development practices where games are not tested enough because they know they can patch a game once a error or issue has been brought to their attention.  I for one am very excited about a company having enough passion and professionalism to actually release a game when the bugs have been worked out and it’s ready to go.  I mean imagine only releasing a completed project and not some half finished thing that requires 2 hours of patch downloading the first time you hit play 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

I wanted to clear up some information about pricing, exclusives/ports and current developers, quality of games and customer vibe so far.  There has been a little confusion in this thread and a LOT in others.  ;)
 

 

1.  Although our trailer said $2.99 - $7.99, we decided that DIGITAL DOWNLOAD games will launch between $2.99 - $9.99.  Most games will probably be in the $5.99 - $9.99 spectrum.  Does this mean we will never have a game over $9.99?  We're not sure yet.  We are open to the idea, but it would need to be a pretty epic experience and idea to get us off the $9.99 or less digital download price range.  For folks who don't see how a developer would EVER do something like that (especially when it's an exclusive) doesn't understand how game development and budgets work (or the current state of the industry).  If Intellivision spends $200,000 to create a game that sells for $9.99 that means that we only need to sell 20,000 units before a royalty or percentage can start being paid to a developer.  20,000 units is very obtainable.  :)  Also keep in mind that the $9.99 or lower price are ONLY the DIGITAL versions.  That's all I'm going to say about that for now.  :)  

2.  Exclusives/Ports -  I want to clarify this again.  We will NOT be accepting DIRECT ports for our machine.  Everything must be exclusive in some way shape or form.  This was very common practice in the early and mid 90's (and sometimes still today).  If it's going to be a port of something... we need it to have an added mode of play, a different way to control the game, another world/levels, or a unique "family friendly" version of a well known franchise.  This is already happening for us with BIG name developers and publishers.  Mostly, it's adding a co-op or adding screen information to the experience.  Basically... if it's some kind of port... it means the Intellivision version is DEFINITELY the best version and most fun to play (because of the added co-op/versus or screens on every controller).  May not "look" the best... but it will be the most fun to play.  :)  Hope that helps to clear things up.  Again... I can't understand why certain naysayers can't wrap their head around this and they see this as a NEGATIVE and a limiting thing.  I guess it's because they think no one will do it with/for us.  But they are VERY wrong.  Everyone we're working with in this capacity is super excited to be doing exclusive versions of their games with us.

3.  Developers - Lots of folks are interested to know who our developers are.  We have very specific plans to reveal and we're thinking about showing a partial list in our next trailer.  It cracks me up when people are saying that we aren't going to attract any good developers.  People completely misjudge the fact that I've been in the industry for 30 years and have made a lot of talented friends who also believe in what we're doing.  And that's just me.  How about all of the other 570 years of experience on our main executive & creative team?  Do you think maybe they've met some folks and friends along the way that they trust and know the type of quality they create?  People are very much underestimating the ability of the company to bring in and recognize great talent.  People like to try and classify us with things like Ouya or the Chameleon.  Really?  Did those companies have the level of experience that our folks do?  The answer is a resounding NO. 

4.  The vibe so far. 
It's funny... there are always going to be certain folks who always want to find the negative in things.  I get it.  Some people feel good and find joy when they can rip others down or they just want to feel like they are the smartest person in the room because they called a failure before anyone else.  Again... I get it.  But what I also find interesting is that those people (who can only see inside their own bubbles) just flat out refuse to acknowledge data that doesn't represent their own thoughts.  They are trapped in that world of "whatever I think MUST be right... because that is how I feel and everyone else must feel the same."  We see this happen each and every day in politics don't we!!  :)

If anyone is interested in seeing a little unbiased slice of what's to come and how people outside this forum "really" feel so far.  Just have a look and read all of the comments on our initial Reveal Trailer from last year. 
 



Make sure to read the comments on the YouTube version (not the Facebook one as those folks are probably biased).  Hundreds of thousands of views on a YouTube video we did NOT in any way shape or form advertise and try to boost.  Because we wanted the data to be pure.  Look at the LIKE and DISLIKE ratio on the video.  Read the thousand + comments.  SURE you can find super negative stuff in places like Resetera.  Because that is what those places breed... negativity.  The comments on a Kotaku article are going to be different than GameDaily.biz, etc.  So just look at pure data from folks who heard about us one way or another... went to YouTube to see the video and either clicked LIKE or left a comment.  Now compare that to Atari, Ouya and Google Stadia.  :)  And this demographic slice ARE gamers... not even our core audience (we haven't even started any kind of marketing yet).  There are thousands of positive comments from gamers about the system already... and they don't even know HALF of the information or have seen ANY of the games.  So before anyone writes us off as "we don't know who are market is, no one is gonna buy this thing", etc.  Why not take a look at what people are already saying?  ;)  Also...   in regards to Facebook... the numbers are even bigger.  Over 650,000 views over there... and again... not even targeting or spending money to get to the folks we're going to be focused on.  Facebook folks are going to be our real crowd and focus (older people, parents with young kids, etc.).  Wait til people who don't follow the game industry start finding out about it!  And how do we know?  Because of massive market research and focus testing.  Does anyone think that Venture Capital firms are going to just give tens of millions of dollars on a hunch?  Sadly mistaken and grossly underestimating us.  :)   You'll find some YouTube & Facebook quotes below.

5.  Quality of games.  Again I will invoke the 600 years of experience on our core executive & creative team.  Our team has been involved in the greatest game franchises and products of all time.  And not just design, but production, graphics, marketing, business, audio, etc.  Literally every aspect of game making.  In one of our initial investor documents we showed a slide of all the video game products our team has worked on.  I'd like to share this slide.  If you think that the people who made those products don't recognize what makes a good game... well... I guess I have nothing else to say.  :)  And again... if you don't think we have money to create good games... you are sadly mistaken.  I'm not stupid.  Almost 30% of our entire launch budget is for game development. 

And finally... I'd like for everyone here to look at this list of the most played video games in the world (by player count) and tell me HONESTLY how many of the Top 10 you have personally played (not watched someone play... but personally played).  Here is the list: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-played_video_games_by_player_count

I'm guessing there aren't many.  You'll see games like Solitaire in there with 400 million users and Crossfire with over 600 million!  Folks can "Zelda and Halo" me all they want, but you won't even find those games on the list.  Bottom line... don't underestimate something you don't understand.  Country music & NASCAR are the biggest forms of music & sport in the U.S. but if you don't listen and watch... then you probably think they are dumb and can't understand why anyone else would like it.

:D

Please feel free to share as much of this information as you'd like going forward. 

Thanks!

 




 

Games.jpg

Facebook Intellivision Quote Collage.jpg

YouTube Intellivision Quote Collage.jpg

 

8 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:


Both Activision & EA aren't known to be the kind of folks who jump in first before anyone else.  They freely admit it.  Instead, they watch the trends and then duplicate and start pouring money onto it.  It's always been their way over the past 15 years... and again... they admit it.  They aren't innovators (anymore)... but they watch what others do and then do it better.

I have had very high level meetings with both companies and I've known them for many many years.  As typical with everything they do, they are having a "wait and see" attitude.  They want to see how many units we're going to sell first.  I get it!  Makes sense.  They will come in strong during Round 2 of the software probably.  They will see what is selling the best on the platform so far and then spend twice as much money as anyone else to make the same style of game... but take it to the next level. 

Either way... I'm fine with that.  For the type of console we're doing, we don't either of them to be successful. 

That being said... I'm still on Activision constantly to give us the Pitfall & River Raid licenses.  :) They get more and more interested each time they see where the console and games are headed.  I'll get them.

 

isn't Imagic owned by Activision now? hopefully you won't have a problem getting those games..was never really a fan of Activision games but Imagic games are a must! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Alpha82 said:

So I just got done watching a video on YouTube about how games on google stadia will be the same price as on other platforms but in it they mentioned the fact that these days every game released isn’t really complete when it heads out the door. Because there is patches for bugs that pop up and things after release maybe new content for the game to some error is found and a patch is needed to fix it.

 

I think the fact that Intellivision’s games being complete when heading out the door will be a huge plus for the system.  I mean imagine buying a complete game from day one..what a crazy concept.

 

this may not be true but I kind of feel like the advancement of the internet has bred lazy development practices where games are not tested enough because they know they can patch a game once a error or issue has been brought to their attention.  I for one am very excited about a company having enough passion and professionalism to actually release a game when the bugs have been worked out and it’s ready to go.  I mean imagine only releasing a completed project and not some half finished thing that requires 2 hours of patch downloading the first time you hit play 

In defense of those games needing patches it's not always laziness. The complexity of modern games can't be compared to games that you see the entire gameplay in about 5 seconds of playtime. The crux of what you say is bang on though I mean that's where the casual market (and therefore the Amico) shines: the games aren't uber complex therefore the dev cycle and team size are manageable.  Some are gonna view that as a negative but man, that's sure as heck can be a strength too! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, hoserama99 said:

I don't know if I fall into the "DOOMED!1!" category, but I have a kid. She loves playing the LEGO co-op games and making everything explode.

 

Do you also have a kid? I had the distinct impression you did not.


I don't yet.  But help raise my 5 year nephew. 

But I also don't think Amico is going to fail.

My point was that people who aren't getting the "E for Everyone" rating or something targeted to families that they can enjoy together probably don't have kids.

I look forward to hearing great Co-Op stories about you & your daughter playing Amico!

 

Edited by Tommy Tallarico
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, hoserama99 said:

Candy Crush Saga is my go-to game on the toilet

 

I'll file this in the TMI category.  :)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Loafer said:

In defense of those games needing patches it's not always laziness. The complexity of modern games can't be compared to games that you see the entire gameplay in about 5 seconds of playtime. The crux of what you say is bang on though I mean that's where the casual market (and therefore the Amico) shines: the games aren't uber complex therefore the dev cycle and team size are manageable.  Some are gonna view that as a negative but man, that's sure as heck can be a strength too! 

Yeah I know there are legitimate reasons and patches are a good tool to have i think it’s just sad that the industry has so much focus on quantity that it’s very hard to do proper quality control anymore for example when Fallout 76 launched knowing online multiplayer was the focus and yet it being terribly broken on release I realize problems will pop up on release unseen but I just feel like too much of the current focus is on getting as much out as fast as possible and as a result the quality of the experience suffers 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JeffVav said:

Good luck with that. :) I don't strictly know what dark magic AtGames had to engage in to get those games but that aside, Activision just doesn't seem motivated to licence, revive, or even re-publish these properties. 

 

As I wrote some time ago in another thread, for reasons I can't fully disclose, I believe they will never licence for a platform they could see themselves publishing on. I suspect AtGames got through because Activision saw the platform as a consumer toy licence not a software publishing licence. i.e. They wouldn't do a Flashback device themselves, so they would be ok licensing in that context. 

 

If I'm right, the more you try to persuade them Amico is a viable future platform and not some sort of consumer device that could never be in their wheelhouse, the less likely they'll hand over the licence. 


There is a HUGE difference between going to Activision and paying them a few bucks to license their already finished version from 37 years ago as opposed to creating a brand new experience with new graphics, audio, levels, etc... ALL with David Crane!  ;) They would need to put more internal resources onto a project like that as opposed to one that is already finished.  They want to do it... they just want to see the console numbers first.  Again... we'll get them.  Just a matter of time.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alpha82 said:

So I just got done watching a video on YouTube about how games on google stadia will be the same price as on other platforms but in it they mentioned the fact that these days every game released isn’t really complete when it heads out the door. Because there is patches for bugs that pop up and things after release maybe new content for the game to some error is found and a patch is needed to fix it.

 

I think the fact that Intellivision’s games being complete when heading out the door will be a huge plus for the system.  I mean imagine buying a complete game from day one..what a crazy concept.

 

this may not be true but I kind of feel like the advancement of the internet has bred lazy development practices where games are not tested enough because they know they can patch a game once a error or issue has been brought to their attention.  I for one am very excited about a company having enough passion and professionalism to actually release a game when the bugs have been worked out and it’s ready to go.  I mean imagine only releasing a completed project and not some half finished thing that requires 2 hours of patch downloading the first time you hit play 


You are 100% correct and I agree with you on all your points.  Yes... paying for a game that's complete from the beginning... what a concept eh?   :)

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ASalvaro said:

 

isn't Imagic owned by Activision now? hopefully you won't have a problem getting those games..was never really a fan of Activision games but Imagic games are a must! 


No.  100% untrue.  There was a rumor going around that Activision owned Imagic.  Not the case at all.  We have already started working on multiple Imagic reimagined games an we have all of the licenses.  One of the executives who ran Imagic went from Imagic to Activision in the early days and licensed Imagic titles to Activision.  But Activision doesn't own anything Imagic related.  I am not at liberty to discuss the specifics of the how & why of our deal, but we were able to pull off what others could not over the years.  Including Activision themselves.  :)

 

 

Edited by Tommy Tallarico
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Pitfall and River Raid might have more name recognition but the one I'd be looking for is the Dreadnaught Factor.

 

I'm assuming the Imagic IP stayed with the original shareholders.  Nice that the effort was made to get  it done.

 

-----------

Regarding games with bugs.   I agree that I wouldn't call it lazy programming and the size of these projects make them impossible to be bug free.  But it seems like it's been accepted to fix critical bugs after release in order to budget more resources to meet an earlier release date and start collecting revenue sooner.

Edited by mr_me
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Tommy Tallarico said:


No.  100% untrue.  There was a rumor going around that Activision owned Imagic.  Not the case at all.  We have already started working on multiple Imagic reimagined games an we have all of the licenses.  One of the executives who ran Imagic went from Imagic to Activision in the early days and licensed Imagic titles to Activision.  But Activision doesn't own anything Imagic related.  I am not at liberty to discuss the specifics of the how & why of our deal, but we were able to pull off what others could not over the years.  Including Activision themselves.  :)

 

 

 

Who is the true owner of Imagic and it's IP then? A big high five to you on getting all that sorted for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Shawn said:

 

Who is the true owner of Imagic and it's IP then? A big high five to you on getting all that sorted for sure.


At the request of the owner, we are not at liberty to discuss.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:


No.  100% untrue.  There was a rumor going around that Activision owned Imagic.  Not the case at all.  We have already started working on multiple Imagic reimagined games an we have all of the licenses.  One of the executives who ran Imagic went from Imagic to Activision in the early days and licensed Imagic titles to Activision.  But Activision doesn't own anything Imagic related.  I am not at liberty to discuss the specifics of the how & why of our deal, but we were able to pull off what others could not over the years.  Including Activision themselves.  :)

 

 

Awesome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:


At the request of the owner, we are not at liberty to discuss.

 

Understood. I figured that would be public knowledge who owns a company. I guess not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:


No.  100% untrue.  There was a rumor going around that Activision owned Imagic.  Not the case at all.  We have already started working on multiple Imagic reimagined games an we have all of the licenses.  One of the executives who ran Imagic went from Imagic to Activision in the early days and licensed Imagic titles to Activision.  But Activision doesn't own anything Imagic related.  I am not at liberty to discuss the specifics of the how & why of our deal, but we were able to pull off what others could not over the years.  Including Activision themselves.  :)

 

 

thanks for clarifing this point once for all, it has been debated for years in this forum!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:


We have already started working on multiple Imagic reimagined games an we have all of the licenses.

 

 

 

Tommy, if Swords & Serpents is one of the reimagined games, please make sure there is a dragon to fight at the end as the original left it out unfortunately.  Thanks!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:


At the request of the owner, we are not at liberty to discuss.

 

Not your fault, but bizzare. If this is common, than often one could want a license for something and possibly having no way to find out who to ask. I suppose you have to ask around and find some mutual friend/associate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Shawn said:

Understood. I figured that would be public knowledge who owns a company. I guess not.


In this instance it is not a company... but a private individual.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, atarifan88 said:

 

Tommy, if Swords & Serpents is one of the reimagined games, please make sure there is a dragon to fight at the end as the original left it out unfortunately.  Thanks!


HAHAHA!  For sure!

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Swami said:

Not your fault, but bizzare. If this is common, than often one could want a license for something and possibly having no way to find out who to ask. I suppose you have to ask around and find some mutual friend/associate.


Yeah... it took awhile to figure everything out, but there is history with the individual in this case and it's a very complex situation that needed to be navigated in order to get new reimagined games back on Intellivision.  They aren't interested in doing small licensing deals to retro type boxes (i.e. porting the originals).  It was only after I built trust and explain our concept in detail that they were willing to come to the table.  One of the biggest things though was that the person LOVED the concept of Amico and what we were creating.  The positive message, the family/friend co-op, no violent games, great price-point, etc.  

It's a powerful message that no other hardware company has.... and they LOVED it.

 

:)

 

Edited by Tommy Tallarico
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That implies that they did not give permission for imagic games to be on the colecovision flashback and atari flashbacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, mr_me said:

That implies that they did not give permission for imagic games to be on the colecovision flashback and atari flashbacks.


That is 100% correct!  But given the history of those "hardware" companies and products... it doesn't surprise me. 

Someday I'll write a book or do a video of everything I know "behind the scenes" and how and why the new Intellivision Entertainment helped come to be.  It's a helluva story and one that is going to really be amazing to a lot of retro folks.  :)

 

Edited by Tommy Tallarico
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Tommy Tallarico said:


That is 100% correct!  But given the history of those "hardware" companies and products... it doesn't surprise me. 

Someday I'll write a book or do a video of everything I know "behind the scenes" and how and why the new Intellivision Entertainment helped come to be.  It's a helluva story and one that is going to really be amazing to a lot of retro folks.  :)

 

That sucks about the Flashbacks but I am excited to see which ones get reimagined!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am cross posting this from that "other" thread, but . . .

 

Talk about a killer 80's tie-in.

 

Anyone remember this?

gi-joe_-_turn_the_disk.gif.d1113e434212855c361701788e96097d.gif

 

Intellivision had He Man, but why not GI Joe?

  • Like 1

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...

×
×
  • Create New...