How powerful was the cancelled Atari Panther compared to the Atari ST/Amiga?

[Leeroy ST]

I wanted to ask some of the gearheads here (I'm old) about the specs between the cancelled Atari Panther project and the Atari ST/Amiga.

 

The reason why I asked is because originally Atari was planning on possibly releasing an ST based console and I'm wondering if that would have been a better idea in hindsight or if Atari was correct in scrapping that Idea. Since ,as you know, due to the delays of the Panther and the change to the Jaguar, Atari didn't really have a home console during the early 90's, though the LYNX was a pretty powerful portable system.

 

It seems that the ST could easily meet the 2D standards of the GEN and SNES at the time, while exceeding both in 3D. Same with its sound capabilities. 

 

So I'm really curious if it would have been a better idea in hindsight to release the ST consoles. It may have even been cheaper to produce since it would be made with ST off-shelf parts bringing the savings to the consumer, possibly. 

 

 

[carlsson]

Here is a discussion about the Panther history line as well as possible ST based consoles:

 

[Leeroy ST]

11 minutes ago, carlsson said:

Here is a discussion about the Panther history line as well as possible ST based consoles:

 

 

Well I don't really see a direct answer in the thread. Just a mention than Panther may have been weaker than an STE?

[zzip]

28 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

I wanted to ask some of the gearheads here (I'm old) about the specs between the cancelled Atari Panther project and the Atari ST/Amiga.

 

The reason why I asked is because originally Atari was planning on possibly releasing an ST based console and I'm wondering if that would have been a better idea in hindsight or if Atari was correct in scrapping that Idea. Since ,as you know, due to the delays of the Panther and the change to the Jaguar, Atari didn't really have a home console during the early 90's, though the LYNX was a pretty powerful portable system.

 

It seems that the ST could easily meet the 2D standards of the GEN and SNES at the time, while exceeding both in 3D. Same with its sound capabilities. 

 

So I'm really curious if it would have been a better idea in hindsight to release the ST consoles. It may have even been cheaper to produce since it would be made with ST off-shelf parts bringing the savings to the consumer, possibly. 

 

 

I was recently thinking about ST based console.   By 1987, the 520STfm was selling for $399 with no monitor.   A cart-based system without floppy/keyboard based on that might shave a hundred or so off that for $299.   But even better would be to base a game system of the STe which I think was selling for similar prices.

 

The problem is if an ST/e game system could be sold for $250-$299,  the Sega Genesis launched at $189.   Atari would have had to find ways to further cost reduce it.  They may have decided they couldn't.

[carlsson]

The quotes from Sam Tramiel in posts 137 and onwards hint that the Panther clearly was better than the ST (and probably the blitter enabled STE) but differently designed. In post 63 you have Jeff Minter's words on programming it, and it sounds just as complicated and not straightforward as every other Atari machine ever have been. Don't get me wrong, those usually have very good hardware specs but tend to be difficult to program, which also holds true for the Jaguar.

[+davidcalgary29]

1 hour ago, carlsson said:

The quotes from Sam Tramiel in posts 137 and onwards hint that the Panther clearly was better than the ST (and probably the blitter enabled STE) but differently designed. In post 63 you have Jeff Minter's words on programming it, and it sounds just as complicated and not straightforward as every other Atari machine ever have been. Don't get me wrong, those usually have very good hardware specs but tend to be difficult to program, which also holds true for the Jaguar.

To be fair, though, none of those machines were designed by Atari. They just picked up the tech after the hardware had been developed by other companies. And were the machines that Atari (in any form) did develop really "harder" to program than rival platforms?

[carlsson]

Well, to me neither the 2600 nor the 5200/8-bit seem very straightforward compared to others. I know that the 7800 and Lynx were developed externally, not sure about the Panther and Jaguar. Some claim that the ST was a poor man's blueprint of the Amiga, I don't know if that is slander or holds any truth.

 

For that matter, I think a cartridge based ST had been hard to put to the market. A floppy based one, essentially a 520ST minus the keyboard might have worked, but I don't know how much cheaper it could've been sold for. Perhaps if Atari instead of revamping the 65XE and 130XE into XEGS had made a ST floppy based console in 1987 there would have been room for it for a while but as noted in another thread earlier today, the ST just barely is a gaming system anyway though it got quite a number of games for it.

 

As for the Panther, from what I understand it was yet another of those "everything is sprites" architectures which at first might sound wonderful but quickly can be a pain depending on which games you want to make.

[Leeroy ST]

17 minutes ago, zzip said:

I was recently thinking about ST based console.   By 1987, the 520STfm was selling for $399 with no monitor.   A cart-based system without floppy/keyboard based on that might shave a hundred or so off that for $299.   But even better would be to base a game system of the STe which I think was selling for similar prices.

 

The problem is if an ST/e game system could be sold for $250-$299,  the Sega Genesis launched at $189.   Atari would have had to find ways to further cost reduce it.  They may have decided they couldn't.

Some say that the ST console was looked at not too long after launch. A 1988 launch date would allow traction and price drops against the genesis later by the 90's. 

 

They could use the same plastic the XEGS used to lower costs.

 

14 minutes ago, davidcalgary29 said:

To be fair, though, none of those machines were designed by Atari. They just picked up the tech after the hardware had been developed by other companies. And were the machines that Atari (in any form) did develop really "harder" to program that rival platforms?

Outside the XE this is true for the mid 80's onward. Although sometimes they commissioned the third-party to develop the system based on their specs.

[zzip]

2 minutes ago, carlsson said:

Some claim that the ST was a poor man's blueprint of the Amiga, I don't know if that is slander or holds any truth.

I don't think so,  I think the Mac was a bigger influence.  After he was fired from Commodore Jack wanted a 16-bit computer he could build cheaply and quickly and repeat the success of the C64.

[Leeroy ST]

1 minute ago, carlsson said:

Well, to me neither the 2600 nor the 5200/8-bit seem very straightforward compared to others. I know that the 7800 and Lynx were developed externally, not sure about the Panther and Jaguar. Some claim that the ST was a poor man's blueprint of the Amiga, I don't know if that is slander or holds any truth.

 

For that matter, I think a cartridge based ST had been hard to put to the market. A floppy based one, essentially a 520ST minus the keyboard might have worked, but I don't know how much cheaper it could've been sold for. Perhaps if Atari instead of revamping the 65XE and 130XE into XEGS had made a ST floppy based console in 1987 there would have been room for it for a while but as noted in another thread earlier today, the ST just barely is a gaming system anyway though it got quite a number of games for it.

 

As for the Panther, from what I understand it was yet another of those "everything is sprites" architectures which at first might sound wonderful but quickly can be a pain depending on which games you want to make.

 

IBM manufactured the Jaguar from what I gather., no clue about the Panther.

 

To be fair to the 2600 it was supposed to be a pong and combat machine so really anything more than that was never supposed to be straightforward lol. As for the ST being a poor mans Amiga, as far as I can see the ST came out a month or two before the Amiga but someone more familiar with the Amiga can chime in on that.

 

While your comments on an ST console are interesting I disagree, I honestly think they should have released a better build XEGS in 1986 instead of the 7800 touting a ton of games and adverting the newer more graphically impressive titles that were out in the mid 80's to show that it's a great long term investment. Since the 7800 didn't release as promised anyway with tons of features removed the 700 we have now could arguably be considered unfinished. 

 

 

[zetastrike]

I'm not sure you could get away with using the ST architecture for a console without heavily modifying it, which by that point is it even an ST anymore?  It was the entry level 16 bit computer of the late 80s so it received a lot of attention from game developers despite the lack of hardware under the hood.

[zzip]

5 minutes ago, zetastrike said:

I'm not sure you could get away with using the ST architecture for a console without heavily modifying it, which by that point is it even an ST anymore?  It was the entry level 16 bit computer of the late 80s so it received a lot of attention from game developers despite the lack of hardware under the hood.

I think it would really need to be an STe at minimum.   The blitter can make up for lack hardware sprites + scrolling,  plus the digital audio.

 

But, I believe the STe was still inferior to a Sega Genesis for gaming tasks

[carlsson]

By blueprint, I'm referring to that JT owned Atari lend money to Amiga whatever their name was at the time, and supposedly got access to the hardware so far. Some sources claim that Atari tried to copy it as much as they could, before Commodore invested in the Amiga shares and took over the hardware, so Atari could not continue their blueprinting work. This would've been in the summer of 1984. However it is true that the ST line got to the market ahead of the Commodore Amiga.

Edited September 3, 2020 by carlsson

[zzip]

8 minutes ago, carlsson said:

By blueprint, I'm referring to the Atari lend money to Amiga whatever their name was at the time, and supposedly got access to the hardware so far. Some sources claim that Atari tried to copy it as much as they could, before Commodore invested in the Amiga shares and took over the hardware, so Atari could not continue their blueprinting work. This would've been in the summer of 1984. However it is true that the ST line got to the market ahead of the Commodore Amiga

But don't forget, much of the ST design work was done before Jack bought Atari, so I'm not sure he and Shiraz (ST designer) were ever privy to the Amiga.    Jack was fired from Commodore Jan 1984, which is the same month the Macintosh was announced to the world with that infamous Superbowl Ad.    What the ST delivered was a Mac-like monochrome mode at a higher resolution and faster speed + color graphics.  The dual monitor solution was a strange design choice, but necessary to have Mac-like clarity.

 

It had almost none of the special multimedia features of the Amiga.   So I think Jack was trying to build a Mac-killer.  

Edited September 3, 2020 by zzip

[zetastrike]

4 minutes ago, zzip said:

I think it would really need to be an STe at minimum.   The blitter can make up for lack hardware sprites + scrolling,  plus the digital audio.

 

But, I believe the STe was still inferior to a Sega Genesis for gaming tasks

 

But it would need to be cheaper than buying a computer, or else it's hard for the consumer to justify.  Presumably there would be a controller rather than mouse/keyboard so that would make a lot of the popular computer centric game genres not as doable.  Console specific game development would need to be pushed and enforced by Atari.  I doubt they would get any help from Japanese devs.  

[carlsson]

I wonder if the infamous video game crash had not occurred, if the Warner owned Atari instead of trying to develop the next generation of computers (is that the 1850XLD or 1600XL that became the basis of the ST?) had put more efforts in the next generation video games, or perhaps they did both at the same time, and in parallel had the GCC provide them the design for the stepping stone 7800?

 

But yes, Jack might have been more interested in getting revenge at Commodore and challenging Apple than making video games, though it must be said that in the beginning of the VIC-20 generation, Commodore put quite a bit of resources in games development, both inhouse and outsourced to HAL, something that faded out when the C64 came.

 

(Btw, per trustworthy sources Jack wasn't fired, but left Commodore on his own decision after getting upset about how the board mismanaged the company)

[Leeroy ST]

18 minutes ago, zetastrike said:

 

But it would need to be cheaper than buying a computer, or else it's hard for the consumer to justify.  Presumably there would be a controller rather than mouse/keyboard so that would make a lot of the popular computer centric game genres not as doable.  Console specific game development would need to be pushed and enforced by Atari.  I doubt they would get any help from Japanese devs.  

 

They wouldn't need Japanese devs, they could just port the pile of games on the ST to the console, possibly force a few games to be console exclusive permanently and in some cases exclusive for a timeframe of half a year or a few months. Games like Hunter as an exclusive full or timed would have been a big deal.

 

Issue is how they would be able to cut the costs down enough so that over the years they could drop it alongside the average console price.

 

10 minutes ago, carlsson said:

I wonder if the infamous video game crash had not occurred, if the Warner owned Atari instead of trying to develop the next generation of computers (is that the 1850XLD or 1600XL that became the basis of the ST?) had put more efforts in the next generation video games, or perhaps they did both at the same time, and in parallel had the GCC provide them the design for the stepping stone 7800?

 

But yes, Jack might have been more interested in getting revenge at Commodore and challenging Apple than making video games, though it must be said that in the beginning of the VIC-20 generation, Commodore put quite a bit of resources in games development, both inhouse and outsourced to HAL, something that faded out when the C64 came.

 

(Btw, per trustworthy sources Jack wasn't fired, but left Commodore on his own decision after getting upset about how the board mismanaged the company)

I think that Warner wanted a computer consoles originally which is why the 5200 was made. But despite the sales for it showing it could be salvaged they didn't bother and instead kept the 2600 for another extension while eventually licensing the hardware for a successor to GCC, one reason being the ColecoVisions growing popularity.

 

I think Jack liked games but wanted to put effort into games for the ST, the ST actually had a good marketshare hrasp on games for some time and Atari Corp really did put effort in until bad decisions caused developers to become quite upset at Atari, and then later just kind of stopped trying to reach out to developers as Amiga took over.

 

 

 

 

 

[carlsson]

Actually I've also read that in the beginning, Commodore were very unwilling to lend Amiga 1000 to games developers, because to them it was a multimedia machine, not a games platform. At the same time, the JT controlled Atari were eager to lend Atari ST computers to the same developers which meant in the first few years, like 1986-87 the ST had a bigger games library before the Amiga catched up. Possibly devs eventually got fed up with Atari when they got equal access to Amigas.

 

That tidbit alone speaks for the opportunity to make an ST based console in 1987, before Commodore had changed their mind and the launch of the Amiga 500 that became affordable enough for game developers to buy instead of lend.

[+davidcalgary29]

5 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

 

 and then later just kind of stopped trying to reach out to developers as Amiga took over.

 

 

 

 

 

Well, to be fair, Amiga didn't exactly "take over" anything. Both the ST and Amiga lines ultimately failed for many of the same reasons and at basically the same time, at least in North America. And since both companies were North American and couldn't (or didn't want to) privot to hack out a niche place in Europe, that was that.

[carlsson]

From my horizon, the Amiga platform was a viable games machine well into 1993/94. With the AGA chipset, new games still were made in 1995 but it was starting to dry out in favor of consoles and PC gaming at that point. We must not forget the CD32 in 1993, which never would have come past the drawing board unless Commodore saw it had a market.

[zetastrike]

10 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

 

They wouldn't need Japanese devs, they could just port the pile of games on the ST to the console, possibly force a few games to be console exclusive permanently and in some cases exclusive for a timeframe of half a year or a few months. Games like Hunter as an exclusive full or timed would have been a big deal.

 

Issue is how they would be able to cut the costs down enough so that over the years they could drop it alongside the average console price.

 

I think that Warner wanted a computer consoles originally which is why the 5200 was made. But despite the sales for it showing it could be salvaged they didn't bother and instead kept the 2600 for another extension while eventually licensing the hardware for a successor to GCC, one reason being the ColecoVisions growing popularity.

 

I think Jack liked games but wanted to put effort into games for the ST, the ST actually had a good marketshare hrasp on games for some time and Atari Corp really did put effort in until bad decisions caused developers to become quite upset at Atari, and then later just kind of stopped trying to reach out to developers as Amiga took over.

 

 

 

 

 

That goes back to the question: why should anyone fork over for a console when they can just get the computer?  Bare bones ST ports wouldn't fly on a console.  You couldn't put a bunch of 12.5 fps action games and arcade ports next to a cheaper Master System or NES and expect people to be down with it.

[zzip]

10 minutes ago, carlsson said:

I wonder if the infamous video game crash had not occurred, if the Warner owned Atari instead of trying to develop the next generation of computers (is that the 1850XLD or 1600XL that became the basis of the ST?) had put more efforts in the next generation video games, or perhaps they did both at the same time, and in parallel had the GCC provide them the design for the stepping stone 7800?

Warner Atari was working on 16-bit designs, and I think the 1850XLD was intended to use the Amiga chips.   But neither became the basis of the ST.   The ST was designed by an ex-Commodore engineer using mostly tech developed outside of Atari.

 

My feeling is that had Warner not sold Atari to Jack,  they had a much better video-game marketing apparatus than Jack ever did.    They may have been able to better counter Nintendo.  Yes I know they were losing money, but eventually the turnaround would have happened..   Videogames were more an afterthought to Jack, until it was too late and Nintendo/Sega took a massive lead.

 

17 minutes ago, carlsson said:

But yes, Jack might have been more interested in getting revenge at Commodore and challenging Apple than making video games, though it must be said that in the beginning of the VIC-20 generation, Commodore put quite a bit of resources in games development, both inhouse and outsourced to HAL, something that faded out when the C64 came.

He wanted to run a serious computer company.   Selling workstations, PC clones, Unix servers, etc.     They bought Atari because the name was much more recognizable than "Tramiel Computer Corporation" which is what they were going by then,  but unfortunately the Atari=games association was too strong to overcome

[carlsson]

But yes, we've come a bit away from the Panther topic. If Sam Tramiel claimed it was better than SNES and better than Mega Drive, but not quite knocking your socks off, it should be better than the STE too. I don't know the Falcon gaming capacities are like, except for it has a DSP. Sam said in the summer of 1991 that the upcoming Jaguar had incredible specs with sound and graphics miles ahead the current competition, which was one of the reasons they shifted focus.

[Leeroy ST]

10 minutes ago, zetastrike said:

That goes back to the question: why should anyone fork over for a console when they can just get the computer?  

You are confusing the arguments made by PC nerd in 2020 with the 80's.

 

People would buy an affordable ST consoles than an expensive ST computer, especially later on as the market penetration outside of Europe was declining, as with the Amiga. If people wanted a computer they were buy PC clones.

 

11 minutes ago, zzip said:

Warner Atari was working on 16-bit designs, and I think the 1850XLD was intended to use the Amiga chips.   But neither became the basis of the ST.   The ST was designed by an ex-Commodore engineer using mostly tech developed outside of Atari.

 

My feeling is that had Warner not sold Atari to Jack,  they had a much better video-game marketing apparatus than Jack ever did.    They may have been able to better counter Nintendo.  

 

 

 

It's more likely if there wasn't a crash ColecoVision would have continued its domination regardless of what Atari had planned, which would have meant more money which may have made the Adam less likely to drag Coleco out of electronics and we would have gotten some form of SGM and another successor console which already had a games issue even during the time of its test launch due to Warners obsession to hold up the VCS/2600.

 

14 minutes ago, zzip said:

Videogames were more an afterthought to Jack, until it was too late and Nintendo/Sega took a massive lead.

 

 

This is not true and the ST and the aggressive developer strategy proves it. Jack had limited money until the ST started coming through.

 

7 minutes ago, carlsson said:

But yes, we've come a bit away from the Panther topic. If Sam Tramiel claimed it was better than SNES and better than Mega Drive, but not quite knocking your socks off, it should be better than the STE too. I don't know the Falcon gaming capacities are like, except for it has a DSP. Sam said in the summer of 1991 that the upcoming Jaguar had incredible specs with sound and graphics miles ahead the current competition, which was one of the reasons they shifted focus.

Eh, it explores a potential ST consoles so I wouldn't say it deviates that much. But the question is, is "slightly" better than an STE in 1992? That would be 3 years of Genesis and 1 year of Super Nintendo and 3 years of TG16.

 

Really the Panther would have to be released no later than 1991 with a competing price to the SNES, or preferably, 1990. 

 

The release date issue is one that makes people believe the ST consoles may have been a good idea since it could have been made in the 80's. Even the Jaugar launched way too late it was released in 1994 with a market test in 1993, it should have released in mid 1993 or late 1992, which based on them rushing the dev kits and still not having games ready was actually possible to do. 

 

 

[+davidcalgary29]

Okay, here's a fair question: if Atari had released the Panther in 1991, would anyone here have actually bothered to buy one? After I bought my Lynx in 1990, I didn't buy another Atari product until well after the Corp. went under. Let's say that cash was a problem for Atari, and they could only develop and release one product. Given the fludity of computing and gaming at the time, would you choose:

 

a) Panther

b) Falcon

c) ST MicroBox

 

?