IGN's VCS Review

[zzip]

9 minutes ago, Djmicklovin said:

See that’s the thing I don’t understand here. Then why would you need a PS5, Xbox, or Switch if a PC can play many of those same games on steam? Why not have one device that can do everything? Doesn’t make any sense to spend more money on additional devices. And $399 doesn’t get you much as far as a PC goes, you’d get maybe a basic desktop PC or laptop for that price.

It's $299 since PCs don't usually come with controllers.   

 

But the idea that people only "need" one device isn't realistic.   Sure maybe technically they don't "NEED" more than that,  but just look around most people's houses and see what they actually own.    In my house, there's a switches, a PS5,  a full PC plus smartphones.    So technically I wouldn't need a VCS, but it would make a nice console to play retro and Steam games in the living room, since most other consoles tend to be closed and you can't easily do that with them.

[justclaws]

If you didn't already see this review, you might like to compare to the IGN one.
It's rather more detailed, and the reviewer clearly had the unit for some time...
https://www.makeuseof.com/atari-vcs-review/
 

 

[justclaws]

Well, my observations about the IGN review are blown away by this one from Forbes.
Why bother actually researching your subject, when you can guess from somebody else's (IGN) half-baked review?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2021/06/27/the-atari-vcs-console-actually-came-out-and-surprise-its-bad/
There is no opportunity on the web-site for feedback...

Such quality journalism; NOT.

To quote:

"It should not surprise you that the Atari VCS is as bad as it initially sounded, once people understood what it was actually meant to be.

Do I have one? Absolutely not. I’m not going to waste money on that. I’m not even going to waste kilobits of data sending an email to Atari to request a review unit. Thankfully, some poor soul at IGN (Seth Macy) was given that task, and man, does this thing sound bad.
...
A new-era relic for collectors perhaps, but if you do more than an hour of actual gaming on this thing after owning one, I’d be amazed."

[Mockduck]

17 minutes ago, justclaws said:

Well, my observations about the IGN review are blown away by this one from Forbes.
Why bother actually researching your subject, when you can guess from somebody else's (IGN) half-baked review?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2021/06/27/the-atari-vcs-console-actually-came-out-and-surprise-its-bad/
There is no opportunity on the web-site for feedback...

Such quality journalism; NOT.

To quote:

"It should not surprise you that the Atari VCS is as bad as it initially sounded, once people understood what it was actually meant to be.

Do I have one? Absolutely not. I’m not going to waste money on that. I’m not even going to waste kilobits of data sending an email to Atari to request a review unit. Thankfully, some poor soul at IGN (Seth Macy) was given that task, and man, does this thing sound bad.
...
A new-era relic for collectors perhaps, but if you do more than an hour of actual gaming on this thing after owning one, I’d be amazed."

I've seen some low quality online journalism from surprisingly large outlets before, but having your console review be a simple agreement with another outlet despite never having played one, seen one, or tried one is something else. Clearly the IGN reviewer spent maybe an hour with the thing (seems like he had access to Peer Schneider's backer unit), but at least he spent an hour with it.

[justclaws]

14 minutes ago, Mockduck said:

I've seen some low quality online journalism from surprisingly large outlets before, but having your console review be a simple agreement with another outlet despite never having played one, seen one, or tried one is something else. Clearly the IGN reviewer spent maybe an hour with the thing (seems like he had access to Peer Schneider's backer unit), but at least he spent an hour with it.

Well, he writes 5 articles a day on average, just for Forbes, so he can't be spending time doing research!
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/archive/2021/06/

[Matt_B]

4 hours ago, Djmicklovin said:

See that’s the thing I don’t understand here. Then why would you need a PS5, Xbox, or Switch if a PC can play many of those same games on steam? Why not have one device that can do everything? Doesn’t make any sense to spend more money on additional devices. And $399 doesn’t get you much as far as a PC goes, you’d get maybe a basic desktop PC or laptop for that price.

Obviously, you don't need a console to play games; a PC will do just fine. They just offer a streamlined experience, better hardware for your money (in the case of the PS5 and Series X you'd do well to spec an equivalent PC for under $1000) and some exclusive titles. Oh, and in the case of the Switch, you get to pick it up and take it with you when you go out.

 

The VCS lacks exclusive games, has nowhere near the same level of hardware, and isn't portable. So the only thing it scores on is the streamlined experience, and even that seems somewhat debatable given that most of the streaming services just point you to the web browser.
 

And yes, $399 is probably below the bottom end for a decent games PC, especially with today's graphics card prices. Mind you, an old 4th gen i5/i7 office PC with a GT 1030 in it would still probably outperform the VCS by some margin and you could easily cobble that together for under $300. I wouldn't recommend it, but it'd still make for a better games machine than the VCS.

 

4 hours ago, justclaws said:

If you didn't already see this review, you might like to compare to the IGN one.
It's rather more detailed, and the reviewer clearly had the unit for some time...
https://www.makeuseof.com/atari-vcs-review/

It's worth noting that he also had the same problem with Ubuntu, so maybe that IGN guy isn't completely useless? It being IGN, I'd still give you the balance of probabilities though. ?

 

Otherwise, a lot of the same issues crop up in the review: The excessive fan noise, the lack of exclusive games, the need to add a keyboard and mouse to browse the web and use media apps, etc.

 

It's just a case of whether you want the glass half-full or half-empty version.

[Matt_B]

Tim Biggs of the Sydney Morning Herald manages to restore some pride for tech journalism by getting the PC mode working:

 

https://www.smh.com.au/technology/video-games/atari-s-return-to-game-consoles-is-charming-but-confusing-20210603-p57xu5.html

 

Overall, it's a very positive take. He's just not that happy about the price, which seems fair enough.

[jerseystyle]

4 hours ago, Matt_B said:

Tim Biggs of the Sydney Morning Herald manages to restore some pride for tech journalism by getting the PC mode working:

 

https://www.smh.com.au/technology/video-games/atari-s-return-to-game-consoles-is-charming-but-confusing-20210603-p57xu5.html

 

Overall, it's a very positive take. He's just not that happy about the price, which seems fair enough.

Well, I don't know if I'd call it positive . . .

 

"If you dismantle the VCS up you’ll find you can actually upgrade it to that exact spec, or higher, but at that point you’re paying more than $1000 for the complete system. If you’re someone who loves Atari, digs the aesthetic of this system, wants a small curated store for classic-style games, doesn’t already have a console, doesn’t mind busting out the screwdriver to modify machines and knows how to make a boot disk, this console could work for you. But that has to be a small market.

It’s entirely possible the VCS could become a better proposition over time — either due to price drops, value-adding updates or a significantly expanded library — but as it currently stands you’ll almost certainly find better value elsewhere."

[Djmicklovin]

6 hours ago, Matt_B said:

Obviously, you don't need a console to play games; a PC will do just fine. They just offer a streamlined experience, better hardware for your money (in the case of the PS5 and Series X you'd do well to spec an equivalent PC for under $1000) and some exclusive titles. Oh, and in the case of the Switch, you get to pick it up and take it with you when you go out.

 

The VCS lacks exclusive games, has nowhere near the same level of hardware, and isn't portable. So the only thing it scores on is the streamlined experience, and even that seems somewhat debatable given that most of the streaming services just point you to the web browser.
 

And yes, $399 is probably below the bottom end for a decent games PC, especially with today's graphics card prices. Mind you, an old 4th gen i5/i7 office PC with a GT 1030 in it would still probably outperform the VCS by some margin and you could easily cobble that together for under $300. I wouldn't recommend it, but it'd still make for a better games machine than the VCS.

 

It's worth noting that he also had the same problem with Ubuntu, so maybe that IGN guy isn't completely useless? It being IGN, I'd still give you the balance of probabilities though. ?

 

Otherwise, a lot of the same issues crop up in the review: The excessive fan noise, the lack of exclusive games, the need to add a keyboard and mouse to browse the web and use media apps, etc.

 

It's just a case of whether you want the glass half-full or half-empty version.

Maybe better hardware for the money but you still have to pay to play online with crappy services such as PSN and Xbox Live and paying 50,60,70 bucks per game. That’s where they get you. Classic bait and switch tactic. 
 

“Oh, and in The case of the Switch, you get to pick it up and take it with you.” I can do that with my phone dude! That’s the lamest thing i’ve ever heard. I guess you never heard of an iPhone lol. 
 

And to your point about spending $399 on an ancient PC. You can also find used Atari VCS’ on ebay so that doesn’t make any sense. Why would want used crap when they can get something new?

[Matt_B]

1 minute ago, Djmicklovin said:

Maybe better hardware for the money but you still have to pay to play online with crappy services such as PSN and Xbox Live and paying 50,60,70 bucks per game. That’s where they get you. Classic bait and switch tactic.

That's Atari's model too in case you've not noticed it. They're taking a cut from every game sold on the store and the subscription services like Antstream on top of whatever profit they're making on the console hardware. They're just not likely to rake in that much overall because they've not got the volume.

 

1 minute ago, Djmicklovin said:

“Oh, and in The case of the Switch, you get to pick it up and take it with you.” I can do that with my phone dude! That’s the lamest thing i’ve ever heard. I guess you never heard of an iPhone lol.

May I remind you that you had asked for reasons why anyone might want a Switch when you can get many of the same games on Steam? You cannot play Steam (or Switch) games on an iPhone, which also costs about four times the price of a Switch and lacks proper gaming controls, so what on Earth has that got to do with the argument?

 

There are handheld PCs that would allow you to play some Steam games on the go. However, they're very expensive, quite fiddly to set up and still very limited in performance compared to a gaming desktop or laptop. I'd recommend the GPD Win if you're prepared to put the effort in though. It's something I'd see as complementary to a games PC rather than a replacement for it.

 

1 minute ago, Djmicklovin said:

And to your point about spending $399 on an ancient PC. You can also find used Atari VCS’ on ebay so that doesn’t make any sense. Why would want used crap when they can get something new?

Your reading comprehension appears to have deserted you again, as at what point did I suggest spending $399 on an ancient PC? For what it's worth, you can pick up old office PCs for next to nothing (literally nothing for me in a couple of cases) and save the bulk of your money for a graphics card that'll make it outperform the VCS by a factor of three. If we were in normal times and you could get a GTX 1650 for around its retail price you could make that a factor of six.

 

When your 'something new' is that much weaker, to the extent that it's below the minimum spec for most of the recent AAA releases on Steam, the case for buying it isn't exactly compelling.

[Djmicklovin]

28 minutes ago, Matt_B said:

That's Atari's model too in case you've not noticed it. They're taking a cut from every game sold on the store and the subscription services like Antstream on top of whatever profit they're making on the console hardware. They're just not likely to rake in that much overall because they've not got the volume.

 

May I remind you that you had asked for reasons why anyone might want a Switch when you can get many of the same games on Steam? You cannot play Steam (or Switch) games on an iPhone, which also costs about four times the price of a Switch and lacks proper gaming controls, so what on Earth has that got to do with the argument?

 

There are handheld PCs that would allow you to play some Steam games on the go. However, they're very expensive, quite fiddly to set up and still very limited in performance compared to a gaming desktop or laptop. I'd recommend the GPD Win if you're prepared to put the effort in though. It's something I'd see as complementary to a games PC rather than a replacement for it.

 

Your reading comprehension appears to have deserted you again, as at what point did I suggest spending $399 on an ancient PC? For what it's worth, you can pick up old office PCs for next to nothing (literally nothing for me in a couple of cases) and save the bulk of your money for a graphics card that'll make it outperform the VCS by a factor of three. If we were in normal times and you could get a GTX 1650 for around its retail price you could make that a factor of six.

 

When your 'something new' is that much weaker, to the extent that it's below the minimum spec for most of the recent AAA releases on Steam, the case for buying it isn't exactly compelling.

Oh yeah i’m sure Atari is really taking a cut of those $5 indie games lol… Most of the AAA games on your four year old $300 Nintendo Switch are running below the minimum specs as well. But I guess that doesn’t matter to you? If people are fans of Atari and enjoy it for what it is then what’s it to you? You’re not going to convince me otherwise. What are you really going on about?
 

Do you think the average user really cares about specs? Or graphics capabilities? They just want a product they can easily hookup to their TV and play. Majority of people work for a living, maybe you don’t. We just don’t have time to worry about stuff like that and putting hours into very complex and expensive AAA games. So those cheap, indie VCS games work for them but yet it still gives us something a little extra with PC mode when we want it.

[Matt_B]

3 hours ago, Djmicklovin said:

Oh yeah i’m sure Atari is really taking a cut of those $5 indie games lol… Most of the AAA games on your four year old $300 Nintendo Switch are running below the minimum specs as well. But I guess that doesn’t matter to you? If people are fans of Atari and enjoy it for what it is then what’s it to you? You’re not going to convince me otherwise. What are you really going on about?
 

Do you think the average user really cares about specs? Or graphics capabilities? They just want a product they can easily hookup to their TV and play. Majority of people work for a living, maybe you don’t. We just don’t have time to worry about stuff like that and putting hours into very complex and expensive AAA games. So those cheap, indie VCS games work for them but yet it still gives us something a little extra with PC mode when we want it.

Yes, Atari are taking a 12% cut of all the games on the store and they've been quite open about this from the beginning. That's pretty much what all the major players, from Valve to the Big 3 do, although the percentage varies. The online infrastructure obviously doesn't run itself and they'll need to keep selling both games and consoles for quite some time to ever turn much of a profit from it, but they're certainly not in the position where the only way they can make money is by selling the hardware.

As for the rest, let's just agree to disagree before things get too ugly. There's room for different opinions on all these things and if you think the VCS is just fine as it is, that's great. Have fun with it. ?

[zzip]

7 hours ago, Matt_B said:

That's Atari's model too in case you've not noticed it. They're taking a cut from every game sold on the store and the subscription services like Antstream on top of whatever profit they're making on the console hardware. They're just not likely to rake in that much overall because they've not got the volume.

Yes they get a cut, but they are not charging $70 for new games or $60/year to play online.   The other consoles follow the Gillette model-  sell the initial unit at a loss and make a killing on "blades" -- or games and services in their case.

 

9 hours ago, jerseystyle said:

"If you dismantle the VCS up you’ll find you can actually upgrade it to that exact spec, or higher, but at that point you’re paying more than $1000 for the complete system. If you’re someone who loves Atari, digs the aesthetic of this system, wants a small curated store for classic-style games, doesn’t already have a console, doesn’t mind busting out the screwdriver to modify machines and knows how to make a boot disk, this console could work for you. But that has to be a small market.

Is there anything to indicate that Atari is aiming for a big market with this thing?   It's been pointed out again and again that this is not going to serve the same market as Playstation/Xbox/Switch.  It's more aimed at fans of the brand, people who want a PC console on TV, Linux fans,  and kids who play minecraft-- with mods, unlike some of the other consoles.   No that's not enough to give them sales comparable to other consoles, but anyone know how many Atari hopes to sell?

[leech]

On 6/27/2021 at 12:07 AM, themadpeterson said:

I'll give him that the fan is loud and runs more often than I'd like. Has anyone replaced the thermal tape with decent thermal paste noticed any noticeable difference? I don't want to crack it back open again if it's pointless, but when I checked my temps on Windows it was pretty hot.

 

I had Windows 10 up and running in no time, so no idea what his issue is. That's primarily where my use with the VCS will be. I've got Steam installed, along with a number of emulators. Now, I just need to move some of my ROM files over and then start figuring out which Steam games will actually run on it. Once that's done, I'll be pretty happy with the setup. It's actually decently priced for a Mini PC, although the cooling issue is kinda worrying me a bit.

Windows 10 runs things pretty hot as it is, with Debian I barely hear the fan kick in unless I am playing a game that you would think would need the fan on.

[pacman000]

IGN updated their article; the reviewer got Linux to work. 

 

Even if Atari isn't aiming for the average consumer, IGN is, so I guess the article's ok.

 

Read the Make Use Of Article too. Seemed to cover the same points as the IGN article, but the reviewer came away with a more positive opinion of the system. Makes sense; IGN was looking for a gaming device, & the VCS was too expensive for a retro device, but too underwhelming for a modern game system. Make Use Of reviewed it as a productivity device that can play games. So, what you think of the new VCS probably depends on your needs.

 

Not sure if the living room productivity system market is big enough to support a system, but that shouldn't matter to me; I don't own Atari.  And at this point, the press they get from releasing anything at all might be enough to satisfy them.

Edited June 29, 2021 by pacman000

[Matt_B]

4 hours ago, pacman000 said:

Not sure if the living room productivity system market is big enough to support a system, but that shouldn't matter to me; I don't own Atari.  And at this point, the press they get from releasing anything at all might be enough to satisfy them.

Yeah, I don't buy the living room productivity angle either. While most games and media apps have a pretty good ten-foot interface these days, there's not a lot of office software that's very usable from sofa distance. Stick it in an office on a monitor and you can do that with it, but you're not playing games on your TV with it that way. Maybe they're hoping people will buy two? ?

 

10 hours ago, zzip said:

Yes they get a cut, but they are not charging $70 for new games or $60/year to play online.   The other consoles follow the Gillette model-  sell the initial unit at a loss and make a killing on "blades" -- or games and services in their case.

 

Is there anything to indicate that Atari is aiming for a big market with this thing?   It's been pointed out again and again that this is not going to serve the same market as Playstation/Xbox/Switch.  It's more aimed at fans of the brand, people who want a PC console on TV, Linux fans,  and kids who play minecraft-- with mods, unlike some of the other consoles.   No that's not enough to give them sales comparable to other consoles, but anyone know how many Atari hopes to sell?

They're not charging $70 for new games because nobody charges that for indie games. Compare the price of D/Generation across platforms, for instance, and it's about ten bucks or so whether you get it on the VCS, Steam or a console. If they ever got AAA games on the store, which I suppose is unlikely for a variety of reasons, I'd expect them to charge $50-70 because that's what people are prepared to pay.

 

As for subscription services, what do you think Antstream is? That's $96 a year and I'm pretty sure Atari will be getting a cut from any VCS signups. If they had an online game that could get more than double digits playing at the same time they probably would start charging for that too.

 

I've always presumed that at least some degree of mass market success was required because that's what you need to make money from the online store and subscriptions model. They'd just seem like sure fire ways to lose money if the plan is merely to sell a few tens of thousands of units and give up on it, because you'll never get the volume that way and it'll annoy the people who bought games if they just shut up shop after a year or two.

[Mockduck]

Ok, typing this from Windows 10 on my VCS. I'd not messed with PC Mode yet as I just hadn't had interest or a reason to until now, but that IGN review motivated me. Hard to believe the person couldn't figure it out; took me 20 minutes from start to finish and was no more difficult than pressing the enter key several times and following an easy to follow document guide from Atari. 

 

Download Windows 10 using the Media Creation Tool. Make an ISO.

 

Download WintoUSB

 

Use WintoUSB to get Windows 10 on your portable SSD or whatever you are using.

 

Plug USB device into VCS.

 

Turn on VCS.

 

Done! No issues at all, and everything seems to be working well. 

 

I mean, I did it even for free, so if IGN didn't want to spring for a license they didn't even have to. Goes to show the review was not just a quick hit piece but also written by someone who simply didn't even try. 

[zzip]

13 hours ago, Matt_B said:

They're not charging $70 for new games because nobody charges that for indie games. Compare the price of D/Generation across platforms, for instance, and it's about ten bucks or so whether you get it on the VCS, Steam or a console. If they ever got AAA games on the store, which I suppose is unlikely for a variety of reasons, I'd expect them to charge $50-70 because that's what people are prepared to pay.

of course, I'm just pointing out where the big 3 make their money

 

13 hours ago, Matt_B said:

As for subscription services, what do you think Antstream is? That's $96 a year and I'm pretty sure Atari will be getting a cut from any VCS signups. If they had an online game that could get more than double digits playing at the same time they probably would start charging for that too.

Antstream is optional.   Sony, Microsoft and now Nintendo are charging you just to play online,   so it's a mandatory subscription for many gamers,  on top of that the big 3 offer optional subscription services too like Gamepass, PS Now, EA Access, etc.   Some people would rather subscribe to something and get games, others would rather own the games and not pay a monthly or annual fee to access them.

 

13 hours ago, Matt_B said:

I've always presumed that at least some degree of mass market success was required because that's what you need to make money from the online store and subscriptions model. They'd just seem like sure fire ways to lose money if the plan is merely to sell a few tens of thousands of units and give up on it, because you'll never get the volume that way and it'll annoy the people who bought games if they just shut up shop after a year or two.

Of course they need to sell a certain amount to break even,  but I don't know what that number is.   I would hope they have a realistic plan for how many they can sell.   If I remember correctly,  they are a fairly small company with a few dozen employees.  So they don't have a lot of overhead.    That means they could sell in volumes too small for Nintendo, Sony and MS to even think about and still do ok for themselves.

 

 

[+swlovinist]

Also there is a free version of Antstream with ads but the price is right.  I have to say that if you have a strong internet connection the service is pretty good.    

[Djmicklovin]

20 hours ago, Matt_B said:

 

As for subscription services, what do you think Antstream is? That's $96 a year and I'm pretty sure Atari will be getting a cut from any VCS signups. If they had an online game that could get more than double digits playing at the same time they probably would start charging for that too.

Anstream is optional dude, come on… Atari doesn’t force you into an ecosystem like Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo do. 

[justclaws]

6 hours ago, zzip said:

Of course they need to sell a certain amount to break even,  but I don't know what that number is.   I would hope they have a realistic plan for how many they can sell.   If I remember correctly,  they are a fairly small company with a few dozen employees.  So they don't have a lot of overhead.    That means they could sell in volumes too small for Nintendo, Sony and MS to even think about and still do ok for themselves.

Atari is a really small company, these days, like a startup, I heard. On Discord, one of the team said they're 25, mostly in New York HQ.
Beyond the AtariOS development team, the rest of the VCS project people are in partners like AMD, SurfaceInk, AtariOS partners, and
the Atari guy said the Atari team is growing slowly, but I guess nobody can estimate people working in partners, and sub-contractors.

[justclaws]

As a general point, on this thread, it's about the recent written reviews of the VCS, IGN in particular.
I think what's relevant, IMHO, is opinions on the review, and the journalistic approach/ethics of it too.

It's not a reason to start again the whole discussion about Atari, if the VCS is a worth buying or not,
it's been done to death in dozens of discussions in other threads. It's boring as hell, and not useful...

Some people hate Atari, some people hate the VCS, some people love their VCS. Very few will change.
Let's leave it at that, and have more time for the systems we enjoy. If necessary, I could lock or block.

[tripled79]

17 hours ago, Mockduck said:

Ok, typing this from Windows 10 on my VCS. I'd not messed with PC Mode yet as I just hadn't had interest or a reason to until now, but that IGN review motivated me. Hard to believe the person couldn't figure it out; took me 20 minutes from start to finish and was no more difficult than pressing the enter key several times and following an easy to follow document guide from Atari. 

 

Download Windows 10 using the Media Creation Tool. Make an ISO.

 

Download WintoUSB

 

Use WintoUSB to get Windows 10 on your portable SSD or whatever you are using.

 

Plug USB device into VCS.

 

Turn on VCS.

 

Done! No issues at all, and everything seems to be working well. 

 

I mean, I did it even for free, so if IGN didn't want to spring for a license they didn't even have to. Goes to show the review was not just a quick hit piece but also written by someone who simply didn't even try. 

I've been trying to do this for months, and I can't get it to work on my VCS either so this isn't just one person not trying. My VCS just won't take it.

[Matt_B]

6 hours ago, justclaws said:

As a general point, on this thread, it's about the recent written reviews of the VCS, IGN in particular.
I think what's relevant, IMHO, is opinions on the review, and the journalistic approach/ethics of it too.

It's not a reason to start again the whole discussion about Atari, if the VCS is a worth buying or not,
it's been done to death in dozens of discussions in other threads. It's boring as hell, and not useful...

Some people hate Atari, some people hate the VCS, some people love their VCS. Very few will change.
Let's leave it at that, and have more time for the systems we enjoy. If necessary, I could lock or block.

Yeah, point taken.

 

I'm not a fan of IGN and you can certainly take their review with a pinch of salt. Still, there are good points made in it that get echoed in the more positive takes from other outlets and Atari would do well to take heed of them.

 

As critical as I've been of the VCS project, there's still a part of me that thinks it's got some potential - in the looks department if nothing else - so I'd like to see them make something of it.

[Pipercub]

On 6/28/2021 at 12:27 PM, jerseystyle said:

I guess that's part of my issue as well is the need to "tweak", or upgrade, etc.  Now that it's on stores, where is the appeal for someone who is gonna randomly pick it up from a store.

This whole thing has been a giant "meh" and remarkable only in its ability to be of absolutely zero interest to so many beyond the neat case. If you care enough to play 2600 games you almost certainly have a half dozen ways to do that already, along with every other retro system. If you need a gaming pc this design would never be it. With streaming media being available on so many devices who would seek out this obscure $400 option to a $35 Firestick? The wonder of how this drama resulted in an actual box on a shelf is superseded only by how they managed to create such a soulless dud of no interest. 

 

The missed mark here is that the software environment is clearly a few hours of afterthought tacked on, the average Retropi image config is a leap beyond in effort and result. The thing that would have made this box a must have is a fully fleshed out ecosystem that had the same WOW factor as the case did, something that was like an alternative universe where Atari never died, remained a leader, and they had a competitive product on the shelf in 2021.