Could the 5200 have succeeded?

[NoBloodyXLOrE]

The Atari 5200 was an unfortunate system for Atari, not selling nearly as well as the 2600 or the competitor system ColecoVision. But I've often wondered if it could've succeeded if it had shipped with better controllers (i.e. a centering joystick), a better pack-in game (Pac Man - to compete with Coleco's Donkey Kong), and either an optional computer keyboard and BASIC cartridge, or full-on Atari 400 capability. A full 16K game console with such impressive graphics and the ability to be upgraded into a home computer definitely wasn't shabby, but could it have succeeded in a world where prices on the Atari 400/800 were careening down (along with all other computers, such as the VIC-20 and TI-99/4A), and the Commodore 64 and Atari 600/800XL were on the way?

[+DamonicFury]

I think the success of the ColecoVision shows that Atari certainly could have had a hit with the 5200, the underlying 400/800 architecture was certainly worthy… but yeah, they did almost everything wrong with it.  It was enormously expensive, came with one of the blandest pack-in titles of all time, had a seriously deficient launch lineup, (especially compared to the Colecovision), and was bundled with those less-than-arcade quality controllers.  But in an alternate universe, where it beat the ColecoVision to launch, with a solid launch lineup of new, non-rehashed games and decent controllers, of course, it could have been a big hit.  
 

And the ability to expand it into a computer would have been very desirable indeed to consumers and would have been super-easy to do.  But apparently internal Atari politics kept the 5200 from being compatible with the 400/800.  What a shame. (But, you’re right, that may have seemed less interesting given 1983’s big computer price drops.)

[TwoShedsWilson]

I absolutely think it could have been a success, but as noted above Atari couldn't have made worse decisions with it if they had tried. Probably the worst possible pack-in and controllers so bad that there was an internal petition to not release the system with them (which was ignored) were probably the easiest things they could have changed to make the biggest difference. Even as it was they dumped it too fast. Dropping it after not even two years really put a bad taste into the mouths of the brand loyal. Sticking it out, completely redesigning the controllers, and a new retail package with the 5100 and a different pack-in or even two would have given the impression of "yes, we made mistakes, but we're going to stick with it and give our customers the support they deserve." I really think that taking a bigger short-term hit by supporting and fixing the 5200 would have paid off in the long-run. 

[+-^CrossBow^-]

50 minutes ago, TwoShedsWilson said:

I absolutely think it could have been a success, but as noted above Atari couldn't have made worse decisions with it if they had tried. Probably the worst possible pack-in and controllers so bad that there was an internal petition to not release the system with them (which was ignored) were probably the easiest things they could have changed to make the biggest difference. Even as it was they dumped it too fast. Dropping it after not even two years really put a bad taste into the mouths of the brand loyal. Sticking it out, completely redesigning the controllers, and a new retail package with the 5100 and a different pack-in or even two would have given the impression of "yes, we made mistakes, but we're going to stick with it and give our customers the support they deserve." I really think that taking a bigger short-term hit by supporting and fixing the 5200 would have paid off in the long-run. 

Or held out and not released it at all and just released the 7800? I believe the 7800 designs started not long after the 5200 was released. Atari likely never saw the 5200 as more than a quick compete against Coleco until we can design and release something better console. So I'm not sure that Atari ever had long term plans for the 5200 did they?

 

[zzip]

I think they could have done a lot to right the ship even if it was released in that state.   

1. release a new slimmer (cheaper) model with improved controllers.   One thing that helped Colecovision was that it was cheaper.

2. Sell new units with Pac Man or Ms Pac Man as the pack-in

3. replace broken controllers from the original system under warranty with the improved ones.

4. GAMES!   What was really needed was more innovation, the old formulas were getting stale.  Atari was on the right track with the Lucasfilm partnership, unfortunately that fell apart.

5. Don't go down the 7800 route!!   Cancelling the 5200 less than two years in created a lot of pissed off 5200 buyers and was not a good move for brand loyalty.  Maybe send the GCC guys back to the drawing board to create a better console to eventually replace 5200 by 86 or 87.   1984 was way too soon.

 

As for making it 400 compatible-   while that would be nice,  I think game licensing was a concern.   Games like Donkey Kong were licensed separately for console and computer.   So a 5200 that could play the 400 DK would have created a problem.  Remember Atari lost their shit when they saw DK running on a Coleco Adam.    I also don't think the market really wanted an XEGS-style console.   Every console announced a keyboard add-on around 83 or so that would have done just that.  Not one of them succeeded.  The people who wanted computers bought actual computers

[zzip]

5 minutes ago, -^CrossBow^- said:

Or held out and not released it at all and just released the 7800? I believe the 7800 designs started not long after the 5200 was released. Atari likely never saw the 5200 as more than a quick compete against Coleco until we can design and release something better console. So I'm not sure that Atari ever had long term plans for the 5200 did they?

7800 was conceived outside of Atari and wasn't started until 83,  so it wasn't even on Atari's radar when they were planning the 5200.   But the 8-bit architecture was always designed to be the 2600 replacement.   So it's on Atari that they took so long to turn it into a console, and then rushed it out when they did.

[TwoShedsWilson]

1 hour ago, zzip said:

7800 was conceived outside of Atari and wasn't started until 83,  so it wasn't even on Atari's radar when they were planning the 5200.   But the 8-bit architecture was always designed to be the 2600 replacement.   So it's on Atari that they took so long to turn it into a console, and then rushed it out when they did.

Yeah the 7800 wasn't a thing when the 5200 was released. The 5200 was more than capable enough to hold the line until a better engineered 7800 or whatever was ready. Had GCC had another year or so I think the machine we'd gotten would be very different. I also think that the plug should have been pulled on the 2600 in '84. Discontinue the 2600, announce/release a re-designed 5200 at a lower pricepoint and '84 & '85 play out very differently for Atari, but now you're wandering way off into the what ifs.

[zzip]

16 minutes ago, TwoShedsWilson said:

Yeah the 7800 wasn't a thing when the 5200 was released. The 5200 was more than capable enough to hold the line until a better engineered 7800 or whatever was ready. Had GCC had another year or so I think the machine we'd gotten would be very different. I also think that the plug should have been pulled on the 2600 in '84. Discontinue the 2600, announce/release a re-designed 5200 at a lower pricepoint and '84 & '85 play out very differently for Atari, but now you're wandering way off into the what ifs.

Yeah I think at minimum the final 7800 needed better sound and a 320 mode that was less restrictive-  that would have been a system that would have been much more competitive in the latter part of the 80s

 

I don't think they realistically could have discontinued the 2600 in 84 though,  that still sold heavily for many years, especially in the developing world.  To the extent that backward compatibility was a hurdle, they could have done some kind of promotion where you get a free or heavily discounted 2600 adapter with some kind or proof of purchase (or trade-in program)

Edited September 29, 2021 by zzip

[SoundGammon]

Better pack-in game for sure! At least Galaxian, it could have been billed as exclusive to the 5200!

 

Also, if they released hot arcade titles BEFORE the 2600 version would have made big difference!

 

Pac-Man during the original launch would have helped it immensely!

 

If players saw the games first on the 5200 and had to wait maybe 3 months for the 2600, they also see that Atari was moving away from the 2600!

[TwoShedsWilson]

  

2 hours ago, zzip said:

Yeah I think at minimum the final 7800 needed better sound and a 320 mode that was less restrictive-  that would have been a system that would have been much more competitive in the latter part of the 80s

 

I don't think they realistically could have discontinued the 2600 in 84 though,  that still sold heavily for many years, especially in the developing world.  To the extent that backward compatibility was a hurdle, they could have done some kind of promotion where you get a free or heavily discounted 2600 adapter with some kind or proof of purchase (or trade-in program)

I understand nobody wanted to kill the golden goose, but they were creating their own competition by trying to keep too many platforms alive at the same time not to mention stretching themselves thin and allowing infighting between the service lines. As for developing markets nothing says they had to kill it globally look at how long the Master System survived in Brazil long after the rest of the world had moved on.

 

1 hour ago, SoundGammon said:

Also, if they released hot arcade titles BEFORE the 2600 version would have made big difference!

 

Pac-Man during the original launch would have helped it immensely!zz

 

If players saw the games first on the 5200 and had to wait maybe 3 months for the 2600, they also see that Atari was moving away from the 2600!

This approach would have worked too. Play it FIRST on the 5200! Atari didn't do anything to drive people to the 5200. All the same games were on the 2600, which was cheaper, maybe they didn't look as pretty but who cares?

[high voltage]

Yes

[sn8k]

No.

 

Because better things have died.

[zzip]

32 minutes ago, TwoShedsWilson said:

I understand nobody wanted to kill the golden goose, but they were creating their own competition by trying to keep too many platforms alive at the same time not to mention stretching themselves thin and allowing infighting between the service lines. As for developing markets nothing says they had to kill it globally look at how long the Master System survived in Brazil long after the rest of the world had moved on.

There's always overlap between generations.   People don't all jump to the new platform in the same year, it happens over several years, and only once compelling games have been released on the new platform.   You can still buy a brand new PS4 even though the PS5 has been around for a year now for instance.  Everyone knew at the time that the 2600 was stretched beyond its capability, so convincing them to upgrade wouldn't be hard once you provided the right set of games to make them want to take the plunge.

 

But games were a problem area for the 5200.   What Atari needed was innovative games that couldn't be done on the 2600, not just 2600 games with better graphics.   Instead nearly every game they released in 83 was also on the 2600!   So at Christmas 83, there still wasn't a compelling reason to upgrade for many and worse computers were coming down in price--  you could buy a 600XL for less than the price of a 5200, and it was more versatile!

 

Computers also opened up whole new genres pf gaming,  in the meantime consoles were stuck in the arcade -> home paradigm.   But people quickly tired of that formula once the big games like Pac Man and Donkey Kong came home.   But every game Atari released in 83 was either an arcade conversion or sports game.   There wasn't really anything that hadn't been seen before on console.

 

The Lucasfilm/Atari partnership that produced games like Ballblazer and Rescue on Fractalus was a step in the right direction, Atari needed more games like that, but unfortunately that deal fell apart and the 5200 got cancelled before it could bear fruit.

[NoBloodyXLOrE]

I didn't expect this thread to blow up in the way that it did. Also while I do agree that a big part of the 5200's library was better versions of 2600 games, I still think that they were better enough in some cases that the console still could've banked on them, with Pac Man in particular, or maybe even Centipede, which was a big Atari property, well designed for the 5200's graphics and controller, and also appealed to female gamers as well. Of course, Centipede was far closer to the arcade even on the 2600 than Pac Man was, but the analog control would've helped more.

Atari definitely would've had to keep the 5200 below the 600XL in terms of price (something the 5100 - which is what the 5200 always should've been, was posied to do), and I pretty much agree with everyone and everything here. Also, it is true that a 5200 computer addon would've likely been a niche item, but with such a big player as Atari announcing a new game console that not only has arcade-perfect ports, but also the ability to be upgraded into a home computer, it would've made good marketing for the parents, even if few people bought the keyboard in the end.

The 5200 games library is actually pretty awesome, they just picked a pretty bad pack-in, though I'm saying that as someone whose entire 8-bit gaming centers around arcade games. Also, I'm of the opinion that the 7800 never should've existed, and the 5200 followup should've been based on the Lorraine.

[BIGHMW]

5 hours ago, TwoShedsWilson said:

 Atari didn't do anything to drive people to the 5200.

They drew me, from the get-go, mainly with the (then-) 5200 exclusive Trak-Ball controller, when it was put out for Big Sexy, Coleco couldn't do much about it, but rather than capitalize on the CX53's massive capabilities like onboard keypads, start/pause/reset controls and dual fire buttons on each side, with more than just Missile Command and Centipede (and to some extent, Super Breakout) to use with her, they decided to try and double-down on the stock CX52 controllers and try and create more games that took advantage of the analog capbilities it had, games like Pole Position (and later Kaboom! by Activision) did well with it despite Coleco having a driving module for Turbo, but, it was too little too late, the 5200 got scrapped despite massive TV ad campaigns (like the two "Atari Presents" ads they aired in the fall of 1983, for games like Tempest (in which is available now through the AA store) and Battlezone which never got released or even finished for that matter, but the others sure were a draw albeit late.

 

.....and even though there were only 69 official carts made for her from 1982-87 but now that total has swollen up to almost 400 titles both on cart and on ROM files through an Atarimax so if you stuck loyal to Big Sexy you're in luck!!!  Plus, there are numerous digital and analog control options from RetroGameBoyz.com, Best Electronics, Wico, Edladdin, Competition Pro, and many more, and even here on AA @Albert did come up with Redemption 5200 many years ago, that allowed 5200 owners to use 2600, Sega, 7800, and PC controllers as well (different models for each).

 

Big Sexy could still hold her own even to this day, she may not have thousands of titles like the XEGS has but she still has THE BEST lineup of titles of any 8-bit gaming machine. Period. She's worth a dive into, I highly recommend you get the 2-port unit for its conventional switchbox rather than the 4-port in which you have to deal with the auto-switching box, the VCS adapter in which does not work with 4-port units, was a factor in me getting a 2-port unit, but make sure that if it doesn't have one already that you make sure to get a 4-port BIOS installed in her for total compatibility with all titles, as units with the later-2-port BIOS do not work with Pitfall!, K-Razy Shoot-out, or Mountain King.

[NoBloodyXLOrE]

12 minutes ago, BIGHMW said:

They drew me, from the get-go, mainly with the (then-) 5200 exclusive Trak-Ball controller, when it was put out for Big Sexy, Coleco couldn't do much about it, but rather than capitalize on the CX53's massive capabilities like onboard keypads, start/pause/reset controls and dual fire buttons on each side, with more than just Missile Command and Centipede (and to some extent, Super Breakout) to use with her, they decided to try and double-down on the stock CX52 controllers and try and create more games that took advantage of the analog capbilities it had, games like Pole Position (and later Kaboom! by Activision) did well with it despite Coleco having a driving module for Turbo, but, it was too little too late, the 5200 got scrapped despite massive TV ad campaigns (like the two "Atari Presents" ads they aired in the fall of 1983, for games like Tempest (in which is available now through the AA store) and Battlezone which never got released or even finished for that matter, but the others sure were a draw albeit late.

 

.....and even though there were only 69 official carts made for her from 1982-87 but now that total has swollen up to almost 400 titles both on cart and on ROM files through an Atarimax so if you stuck loyal to Big Sexy you're in luck!!!  Plus, there are numerous digital and analog control options from RetroGameBoyz.com, Best Electronics, Wico, Edladdin, Competition Pro, and many more, and even here on AA @Albert did come up with Redemption 5200 many years ago, that allowed 5200 owners to use 2600, Sega, 7800, and PC controllers as well (different models for each).

 

Big Sexy could still hold her own even to this day, she may not have thousands of titles like the XEGS has but she still has THE BEST lineup of titles of any 8-bit gaming machine. Period. She's worth a dive into, I highly recommend you get the 2-port unit for its conventional switchbox rather than the 4-port in which you have to deal with the auto-switching box, the VCS adapter in which does not work with 4-port units, was a factor in me getting a 2-port unit, but make sure that if it doesn't have one already that you make sure to get a 4-port BIOS installed in her for total compatibility with all titles, as units with the later-2-port BIOS do not work with Pitfall!, K-Razy Shoot-out, or Mountain King.

Yeah, I can definitely see the Trak Ball being a selling point (I love my Pro Line 2600 trackball that I use on my 800XL), and I honestly pretty much agree that the 5200 does have the best library of any 8-bit system - it has pretty much all of the best games from the Atari 400/800 (most of the arcade ports, with the only missing one I can think of being Donkey Kong, though Mario Bros is better in the '88 XE version than the '83 5200 version in my opinion) and a couple to call it's own, such as an improved Centipede, Berserk, and Jr. Pac Man. The NES, Atari 2600, and Atari 8-bit computer line do rival the 5200 in my opinion, but the 5200 probably has the best concentration of quality too.

[EmuDan]

I think Pac-Man or Blaster as a pack-in game would've helped immensely. Also, redesigned controllers and maybe a LaserDisc expansion later on could've kept the 5200 going well into the late 80's.

[NoBloodyXLOrE]

1 hour ago, EmuDan said:

I think Pac-Man or Blaster as a pack-in game would've helped immensely. Also, redesigned controllers and maybe a LaserDisc expansion later on could've kept the 5200 going well into the late 80's.

I have to disagree completely on one of your points - a LaserDisc expansion would've been a complete dud on the 5200. As we know  from the 1990's, FMV games were shallow fads with poor gameplay, paling in comparison to real games. Besides, such an expansion would've been far too expensive for general use, needing to integrate a LaserDisc mechanism and electronics for audio/video playback, along with a video mixing / genlocking circuit to combine GTIA/ANTIC graphics and the live motion video. If Atari was ever to release a genlock for the 5200 or Atari 8-bit computers, it'd be much better served with a standard video input for use as a titler (or even to overlay/superimpose graphics) and early video effects graphics workstation (a home video editing box in 1983 might sound crazy but it would've been pretty awesome, the TMS9918 had the functionality built in).

[TwoShedsWilson]

17 hours ago, zzip said:

There's always overlap between generations.   People don't all jump to the new platform in the same year, it happens over several years, and only once compelling games have been released on the new platform.   You can still buy a brand new PS4 even though the PS5 has been around for a year now for instance.  Everyone knew at the time that the 2600 was stretched beyond its capability, so convincing them to upgrade wouldn't be hard once you provided the right set of games to make them want to take the plunge.

That's why I said '84, give it a good year-and-a-half two-year overlap and then the old platform needed to go. That still would have given the 2600 roughly 7 years of shelf-life and told consumers the 5200 is the platform moving forward. It's pretty much how console generations are handled now.

[Goochman]

I seem to recall so much hype for "System X" that once the 5200 came out and so underwhelmed that there was no saving it.  I dont remember the packin being such a big deal - the 2600 came with Combat and later crappy Pac Man.  Atari had such a bad name with Pac Man that putting that in the 5200 prob wouldnt be a good idea either.

 

Once people found out many of the games were computer rehashes and the joysticks were terrible no one I knew had an interest in the 5200.  Within 1 year it went from super hype to super non-interest.

[zzip]

17 minutes ago, Goochman said:

I seem to recall so much hype for "System X" that once the 5200 came out and so underwhelmed that there was no saving it.  I dont remember the packin being such a big deal - the 2600 came with Combat and later crappy Pac Man.  Atari had such a bad name with Pac Man that putting that in the 5200 prob wouldnt be a good idea either.

No problem, Atari would just find a way to pin the crappy Pac-man on Coleco and show everyone the real Pacman is on Atari ?

 

 

19 minutes ago, Goochman said:

Once people found out many of the games were computer rehashes and the joysticks were terrible no one I knew had an interest in the 5200.  Within 1 year it went from super hype to super non-interest.

I don't think the "computer rehashes" were a big deal unless you already owned a 400/800.   Most people didn't.  What they saw was greatly improved graphics over the 2600

[RangerG]

I remember reading that the 5200 was catching up to the Colecovision right before the crash. It was not the failure that people now consider it. Colecovision and the 5200 were both top-of-the-line consoles, when there were  several popular consoles out there with noticeably lesser graphics. I believe the answer to this question is yes, if they hadn't panicked. The 5200 was amazingly impressive when it came out. Pac-man should have been the pack-in game and they should have introduced digital, centering, joysticks. The original sticks could have been promoted as a feature (analog sticks for 5200 exclusives). Don't acknowledge your mistakes, just double-down and tout your system. I grew up with the 5200 and I remember kids loving it. The games were bright and fast and they looked like the arcade. You were the cool kid that could play games just like the arcade, if you had a 5200. 

[BIGHMW]

8 hours ago, zzip said:

No problem, Atari would just find a way to pin the crappy Pac-man on Coleco and show everyone the real Pacman is on Atari ?

 

 

I don't think the "computer rehashes" were a big deal unless you already owned a 400/800.   Most people didn't.  What they saw was greatly improved graphics over the 2600

 

Well while many who were uneducated on the 5200, and sadly at that, many of the 5200 games WERE NOT rehashes of the original 400/800 games, not by any means, there were significant differences between the 5200 editions and their original sources from the 8-bit computers, many were vastly improved versions, like Centipede, Qix and Dig Dug, for instance. Other 5200 games were also modified/improved versions of 8-bit games and I am glad that many of them were ported back to the 400/800/XL/XE/XEGS even though not all of the 5200 titles have been yet ported, mainly homebrews like Tempest, for instance as well as the entire Mean Hamster lineup among others, here is my post which brings up this issue:

 

 

Edited October 1, 2021 by BIGHMW

[phuzaxeman]

On 9/28/2021 at 10:26 PM, DamonicFury said:

I think the success of the ColecoVision shows that Atari certainly could have had a hit with the 5200, the underlying 400/800 architecture was certainly worthy… but yeah, they did almost everything wrong with it.  It was enormously expensive, came with one of the blandest pack-in titles of all time, had a seriously deficient launch lineup, (especially compared to the Colecovision), and was bundled with those less-than-arcade quality controllers.  But in an alternate universe, where it beat the ColecoVision to launch, with a solid launch lineup of new, non-rehashed games and decent controllers, of course, it could have been a big hit.  
 

And the ability to expand it into a computer would have been very desirable indeed to consumers and would have been super-easy to do.  But apparently internal Atari politics kept the 5200 from being compatible with the 400/800.  What a shame. (But, you’re right, that may have seemed less interesting given 1983’s big computer price drops.)

Colecovision was discontinued a year after the 5200.  Compared to many consoles, it really didn't last that long nor did it sell well after 83. 

 

 

[adamchevy]

Having owned a 400, 800, and 5200 the answer was simple.

 

Just put the same controller ports on the front as the 400/800. The newer cartridges were fine.

 

Have some kind of port like the 800 for better video output.

 

Then leave that shit alone and produce games for it.