Could the 5200 have succeeded?

[BIGHMW]

26 minutes ago, adamchevy said:

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.

They finally did it right, in 1987, when they released the XEGS. It had what you wanted in your posts, a composite a/v output, 9-pin controller ports, and yes, it even had that now-famous detachable keyboard that many of us use along with a Neo-Geo 15-pin extension cord for more versatility. Then along came Glenn The 5200 Man and others to convert (almost) all the improved 5200 ports back to the 8-bit.

Edited October 1, 2021 by BIGHMW

[Jetboot Jack]

It never came to the UK so never had a chance to buy one back in the day (did buy one in 2003, sold it in 2003) - but from watching across the pond it looked like a total disaster - unloved controllers, uninspiring software line up, no outta the box 2600 compatibility, technology we had already seen in the 400/800 - sadly hard to see why a consumer would choose the system over the others on the market...

 

sTeVE

[zzip]

13 hours ago, BIGHMW said:

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.

This is true, but Atari also immediately ported some of those games back to the 8-bit.   Like at the time I couldn't understand why my friend's 8-bit Dig Dug cart looked so different from the one shown in the catalog.   Now I know it's because his was an updated cart with the 5200 version and the one in the catalog was the original 8-bit cart.

 

So if the intention was to make the 5200 stand out by improving the games, they weren't doing a great job of it ?

[BIGHMW]

6 hours ago, zzip said:

This is true, but Atari also immediately ported some of those games back to the 8-bit.   Like at the time I couldn't understand why my friend's 8-bit Dig Dug cart looked so different from the one shown in the catalog.   Now I know it's because his was an updated cart with the 5200 version and the one in the catalog was the original 8-bit cart.

 

So if the intention was to make the 5200 stand out by improving the games, they weren't doing a great job of it ?

As an XEGS AND a 5200 owner and connoisseur I happen to agree. That, was a dumb mistake of Atari's part. The two were completely different and if Atari really wanted to sell more 5200 units they should've left them separate. The really shot themselves in the foot by re-porting them later on.

 

But yes, while Atari did port Dig Dug and Qix back to the 8-bit lineup, the same cannot be said for Centipede, that was the doing of the legendary Glenn The 5200 Man, who ported not only it but also a handful of other 5200 titles back to the 8-bit. I can't really recall which ones he did but he did a number of them, and most of them heavy hitters.

 

 

[+DamonicFury]

15 hours ago, phuzaxeman said:

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. 

 

 

True, the ColecoVision didn’t have much more long-term success than the 5200.  The Great Video Game Crash and Coleco’s own business blunders saw to that. 
 

But Coleco did sell twice as many ColecoVisions as Atari did 5200s.  And it isn’t controversial to say that ColecoVision had a much more successful launch, is it?  
 

Your point that both consoles didn’t have much longevity is a good one though.  Even a far better designed and marketed 5200 may not have survived the market forces that wiped out the American video game market. 

[BIGHMW]

I myself witnessed the infamous video game crash on 1984. Too many consoles/systems were the main cause of the crash, just look at the many consoles/systems that were available for sale when it did finally happen.

 

Emerson Arcadia 2001

Odyssey 2

Bally Astrocade

Fairchild Channel F

Intellivision/Intellivision II

ColecoVision

Coleco ADAM

Coleco Gemini

Vectrex

Atari 2600/VCS

Atari 5200

 

....and plans for more units that were either recalled (Atari 7800, it resurfaced in 1986) or never released at all (Odyssey 3)

 

Too much competition, too many shitty ports and too much bickering on which system to get especially with Atari, Coleco and Intellivision crowds all claiming their systems were THE BEST. THOSE were the key reasons why the crash happened.

[NoBloodyXLOrE]

12 hours ago, Jetboot Jack said:

It never came to the UK so never had a chance to buy one back in the day (did buy one in 2003, sold it in 2003) - but from watching across the pond it looked like a total disaster - unloved controllers, uninspiring software line up, no outta the box 2600 compatibility, technology we had already seen in the 400/800 - sadly hard to see why a consumer would choose the system over the others on the market...

 

sTeVE

I don't see how it was an "uninspired" software library, with all of its near-arcade-perfect ports of awesome games like Galaxian, Centipede, and others, the best Star Wars port on an 8-bit machine, along with original games like Fractalus, Ballblazer, and Star Raiders. When I see some of the games on machines like the Spectrum (the early 80s arcade ports on almost all British computers pale in comparison to high-end Japanese and especially American machines), they generally look and sound like junk by comparison.

[Leeroy ST]

The issue with the 5200 speculation and theories is people forget it was successful, and winning.

 

With consumers.

 

Warner however, who never made money on the computers, was taking deeper than expected losses not just on the computers the 5200 was based on by slight the 5200 itself. Instead of holding firm and allowing the consumer base to grow they started winding down the console than cut it off.

 

Originally despite some set backs, the 5200 was starting to climb more and more, and was ahead of the CV despite the press coverage 

 

5200 would have been a bigger deal if Warner kept the system going.

 

17 hours ago, phuzaxeman said:

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. 

 

 

1.5 years,

 

CV sold well in 84 so that's weird. It also did decent in 85 by colecos own words words.

 

On 9/30/2021 at 11:25 AM, RangerG said:

I remember reading that the 5200 was catching up to the Colecovision right before the crash. 

The 5200 was ahead of CV before the wind down by warner, which started before the crash. It's hard for 5200 to catch up when distribution was cut and it was absent in 84.

 

5200 hit 1 million first before CV, but that's when things changed and it didn't move much more after that.

 

On 9/30/2021 at 8:40 AM, TwoShedsWilson said:

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.

Modern consoles only started with ~7 year cycles with the 360.

 

On 9/29/2021 at 11:05 PM, NoBloodyXLOrE said:

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. 

FMV was huge in the 90's, and FMV adventure games were crazy in sales and production. FMV at home in the 80's would have been had people waiting in lines for the console. 

 

Assuming they use a plain featureless cheaper LD player addon to keep the price low.

 

 

 

 

[NoBloodyXLOrE]

2 hours ago, Leeroy ST said:

FMV was huge in the 90's, and FMV adventure games were crazy in sales and production. FMV at home in the 80's would have been had people waiting in lines for the console.

 

Assuming they use a plain featureless cheaper LD player addon to keep the price low.

FMV games may have been huge, but they were still just a fleeting fad, and for a reason - they were terrible. Besides, even if they went for the cheapest LD player they could muster, it still probably would've been more expensive than the 5200 itself; it just wouldn't be a mass market item that would have "people waiting in lines".

[Leeroy ST]

4 hours ago, NoBloodyXLOrE said:

FMV games may have been huge, but they were still just a fleeting fad, and for a reason - they were terrible. Besides, even if they went for the cheapest LD player they could muster, it still probably would've been more expensive than the 5200 itself; it just wouldn't be a mass market item that would have "people waiting in lines".

It would probably cost the same. But the novelty would have been attractive in the 80's having those games at home, and may lead to more software.

 

As for FMV, 10-15 years is a bit long for a fad, I know it feels like it was a shorter flash in the pan, especially with add-ons like Sega CD and games like Mad Dogg being common but there were several styles of FMV for a very long time being produced. They didn't really die off until 97.

[mr_me]

9 hours ago, Leeroy ST said:

The issue with the 5200 speculation and theories is people forget it was successful, and winning.

 

With consumers.

 

Warner however, who never made money on the computers, was taking deeper than expected losses not just on the computers the 5200 was based on by slight the 5200 itself. Instead of holding firm and allowing the consumer base to grow they started winding down the console than cut it off.

 

Originally despite some set backs, the 5200 was starting to climb more and more, and was ahead of the CV despite the press coverage 

 

5200 would have been a bigger deal if Warner kept the system going.

 

 

1.5 years,

 

CV sold well in 84 so that's weird. It also did decent in 85 by colecos own words words.

 

The 5200 was ahead of CV before the wind down by warner, which started before the crash. It's hard for 5200 to catch up when distribution was cut and it was absent in 84.

 

5200 hit 1 million first before CV, but that's when things changed and it didn't move much more after that.

 

Modern consoles only started with ~7 year cycles with the 360.

 

FMV was huge in the 90's, and FMV adventure games were crazy in sales and production. FMV at home in the 80's would have been had people waiting in lines for the console. 

 

Assuming they use a plain featureless cheaper LD player addon to keep the price low.

 

 

 

 

What numbers do you have for Atari 5200 sales in 1982?  According to a New York Times article and Coleco's annual reports, Colecovision sold 550k units in 1982 and was at 1.4M through 1983Q2.  While according to a Washington Post article the 5200 was still around 1M in 1984. For the 5200 to reach 1M before Colecovision they would have to had done it early 1983 and then sell next to nothing the rest of the year.

https://www.nytimes.com/1983/08/01/business/coleco-strong-in-marketing.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/1984/05/22/atari-introduces-game-in-attempt-for-survival/f4cc0a87-e30a-4d64-a105-49b73cdee36e/

 

We don't know how many Colecovisions sold in 1984, only that it was considerably less than 1983 according to quarterly and annual reports.

Edited October 2, 2021 by mr_me

[hwrd]

16 hours ago, NoBloodyXLOrE said:

I don't see how it was an "uninspired" software library, with all of its near-arcade-perfect ports of awesome games like Galaxian, Centipede, and others, the best Star Wars port on an 8-bit machine, along with original games like Fractalus, Ballblazer, and Star Raiders. When I see some of the games on machines like the Spectrum (the early 80s arcade ports on almost all British computers pale in comparison to high-end Japanese and especially American machines), they generally look and sound like junk by comparison.

Back in the early 80's I had a Colecovision (Irwin never released the 5200 in Canada, as far as I know).

I was very pleased with the Colecovision.

 

Reading about titles like Robotron, Space Dungeon, and Star Raiders made me envious of the 5200 library.

I am not of the opinion the library was uninspired.

[NoBloodyXLOrE]

2 hours ago, hwrd said:

Back in the early 80's I had a Colecovision (Irwin never released the 5200 in Canada, as far as I know).

I was very pleased with the Colecovision.

 

Reading about titles like Robotron, Space Dungeon, and Star Raiders made me envious of the 5200 library.

I am not of the opinion the library was uninspired.

Yeah the ColecoVision definitely had some good ports like Galaxian and Donkey Kong, it's probably the closest to the 5200 in terms of graphical prowess.

[Leeroy ST]

9 hours ago, mr_me said:

We don't know how many Colecovisions sold in 1984,

Coleco sold over two million by late 84.

 

9 hours ago, mr_me said:

For the 5200 to reach 1M before Colecovision they would have to had done it early 1983 

Mid, but yes this is exactly what happened and this has been discussed here before iirc. 

 

But the 5200 was being winded down in 83 and was heading toward discontinuation outside left over stock at select retailers around the start of 1984. Some months in from then the 7809 rumors started and shortly after that, they were confirmed.

 

So you can barely bring up 5200 sales in 1984 because there was barely any. There was already few 5200s by Q4 1983, for many the console was already unofficially discontinued in many places by then. Just VCS and CVs were plentiful comparatively.

 

 

People were writing questions to papers asking why they couldn't find 5200 stuff late 83 and early 84. When the 5200 discontinuation was announced some articles grilled them for it because they already were upset at lack of releases and distribution before the 7800 was confirmed.

 

Atari sold around a million 5200's at around the same time they were starting to kill it. Giving CV the ball until early summer or so 1985 (and the CV was still marginally profitable even in 85 according to Coleco.,)

 

If warner just rode the console they would have been in a good position. But Warner was of course mismanaged and disconnected from the consumer market all the way until the end.

 

 

 

 

 

[Leeroy ST]

35 minutes ago, NoBloodyXLOrE said:

Yeah the ColecoVision definitely had some good ports like Galaxian and Donkey Kong, it's probably the closest to the 5200 in terms of graphical prowess.

The implication here is the CV is weaker than the 5200.

 

CV and a basic Famicom are within the realm of each other outside multi color sprites, so if the 5200 was stronger it would make it virtually a basic famicom and be more comparable than the CV.

 

But looking at both consoles best games (graphically) and shared games with NES the CV seems to be closer to a base famicom than the 5200.

 

Granted, the 7800, stronger than the Famicom in several areas, especially the base, showed differing strengths can lead to different goals based on the machine (free sprites vs. tiles etc )

 

But the 5200 and CV seem to be aiming for similar objectives so if the 5200 was stronger surely it would be closer to a base famicom than the CV in execution?

 

Both machines got some big software to show off capabilities despite the up-ports and nothing on the 5200 outside one game seems to shows it's closer to the famicom than the CV.

 

 

Edited October 2, 2021 by Leeroy ST

[Keatah]

20 hours ago, NoBloodyXLOrE said:

I don't see how it was an "uninspired" software library, with all of its near-arcade-perfect ports of awesome games like Galaxian, Centipede, and others, the best Star Wars port on an 8-bit machine, along with original games like Fractalus, Ballblazer, and Star Raiders.

More often than not.. The Atari material ranging from the VCS through the end of the 8-bit computer line had playability like no other console of the time. We knew it as kids. We know it as grups.

 

Allow me to interject that Apple II, with its comparatively sucky graphics and sound also had good playability and game mechanics in many titles. Respectable speed, too, if done by a "pro" developer. Almost an Atari flavor..considering limitations. I'm immediately thinking of Br0derbund and Sirius, among a few others. Those were the go-to companies for action games for the platform.

 

20 hours ago, NoBloodyXLOrE said:

When I see some of the games on machines like the Spectrum (the early 80s arcade ports on almost all British computers pale in comparison to high-end Japanese and especially American machines), they generally look and sound like junk by comparison.

That seems true enough. I tended to notice more monochromatic sprites. And mushy action, with "low-res" boundrier & blockier vs. Atari's more detailed and pixilated collision detection.

 

1 hour ago, NoBloodyXLOrE said:

Yeah the ColecoVision definitely had some good ports like Galaxian and Donkey Kong, it's probably the closest to the 5200 in terms of graphical prowess.

I didn't like the blocky tile rendering on the CV. Nor did I like its jerky movements and scrolling. But we all saw the CV as new arcade-like platform. Most likely because of marketing and more "K" in the cartridges. And the picture of arcade cabs on the box even if some were second-rate obscure games.

 

54 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

The implication here is the CV is weaker than the 5200.

I think there's more tricks to be found in Atari's 8-bit stuff. Back then and now.

[phuzaxeman]

On 10/1/2021 at 3:12 PM, DamonicFury said:

True, the ColecoVision didn’t have much more long-term success than the 5200.  The Great Video Game Crash and Coleco’s own business blunders saw to that. 
 

But Coleco did sell twice as many ColecoVisions as Atari did 5200s.  And it isn’t controversial to say that ColecoVision had a much more successful launch, is it?  
 

Your point that both consoles didn’t have much longevity is a good one though.  Even a far better designed and marketed 5200 may not have survived the market forces that wiped out the American video game market. 

In hindsight, I've had a new console in each generation starting with PONG.  If you look back at Coleco, the Colecovision really wasn't that successful in that era.  Sure it was more successful than the 5200.  But that era was in a small time frame (82-85). 

 

Had atari launched Pacman with the 5200 system and atari marketed the console, (no 2600 and 5200 ads) plus launched world wide, we would have seen higher numbers.  Atari should have killed the 2600 in 82 imo.  But the crash and atari's demise was a matter of time.  NES revolutionized the console market.  

[mr_me]

13 hours ago, mr_me said:

According to a New York Times article and Coleco's annual reports, Colecovision sold 550k units in 1982 and was at 1.4M through 1983Q2.  While according to a Washington Post article the 5200 was still around 1M in 1984.For the 5200 to reach 1M before Colecovision they would have to had done it early 1983 and then sell next to nothing the rest of the year.

4 hours ago, Leeroy ST said:

Mid, but yes this is exactly what happened and this has been discussed here before iirc. 

If the 5200 was at 1M by mid 1983 then they were still behind the Colecovision which was at 1.4M in mid 1983.  It's hard to believe that Atari sold no 5200 consoles after that, nothing for Christmas.  It was listed in the Sears, Mongomery Wards, and JC Penney, 1983 Christmas books.

 

5 hours ago, Leeroy ST said:

The implication here is the CV is weaker than the 5200.

 

CV and a basic Famicom are within the realm of each other outside multi color sprites, so if the 5200 was stronger it would make it virtually a basic famicom and be more comparable than the CV.

 

But looking at both consoles best games (graphically) and shared games with NES the CV seems to be closer to a base famicom than the 5200.

 

Granted, the 7800, stronger than the Famicom in several areas, especially the base, showed differing strengths can lead to different goals based on the machine (free sprites vs. tiles etc )

 

But the 5200 and CV seem to be aiming for similar objectives so if the 5200 was stronger surely it would be closer to a base famicom than the CV in execution?

 

Both machines got some big software to show off capabilities despite the up-ports and nothing on the 5200 outside one game seems to shows it's closer to the famicom than the CV.

 

 

The 5200 has a huge colour palette, larger than the NES, compared to fifteen colours on Colecovision.  The 5200 has hardware scrolling and can put eight sprites on a line without flicker.  The only thing Colecovision had was a higher resolution which made screenshots look good.  There's certainly a technical argument for the 5200 over colecovision.  The Commodore64 would be much closer to the NES than either of these two.

[Leeroy ST]

25 minutes ago, mr_me said:

If the 5200 was at 1M by mid 1983 then they were still behind the Colecovision which was at 1.4M in mid 1983.  It's hard to believe that Atari sold no 5200 consoles after that, nothing for Christmas.  It was listed in the Sears, Mongomery Wards, and JC Penney, 1983 Christmas books.

I consider q2 and q3 mid year like some businesses do, not literally June ify course.

 

But in any case it's not hard to believe at all. I have no idea why you think the 5200 was widespread after the first few months of the year, or 4. It was being winded down by Atari and THEN discontinued.

 

Remember they were losing money on every product they put out at the time (Atari) and hesitated to drop the price of the 5200 much during the price wars, they were barely producing new consoles because they were slowly cutting the production.

 

Also remember the 7800 was on the board in 83, the rumors and finishing negotiations were in early 84, and the release was a few months after that. 

 

If they had as much out there as you implied surely they would have had a surge of stock in the holidays of 83 plus stock from before, so why was there little presence in 1984? It doesn't make sense.

 

That means EITHER, that many 5200s were sitting on shelves and no one was buying them, OR there weren't many 5200's in the first place. There's no other way to cut it.

 

It's clear by the lack of stock and slow sales pace late 83 onward it wasn't the former. Atari had been working with GCC on negotiations at that point, before it was discontinued. They aren't pushing big shipments, and as mentioned before there was already frustration with the game releases.

 

Look at this grilling example when the 7800 was announced:

 

 

 

 

These were common sentiments. The 5200 stuff was already getting hard to find along with software and this discontinuation happens just as it seems things were looking more promising to owners. It was already lacking a stable flow of new exciting games, any chance of that dried up, although that dry up unknown to the consumer happened a bit over half a year earlier.

 

So yes, it makes complete sense the 5200 production being cut in 83 with no high shipment by the holidays and barely having presence in all of 84, would indicate Atari barely sold many more consoles after they hit 1 million. With CV selling 3x as much in the same time frame until discontinuation. 

 

 

 

 

 

[mr_me]

If it's Q3 rather than Q2 than they were even further behind Colecovision sales.

 

I'm not saying the 5200 was widespread.  I didn't see it in Canada, not even in 1982.  I'm just saying I don't see any evidence of any sales figures other than a total in May 1984 of about one million.  Definitely no evidence that it outsold Colecovision in 1982.

 

The 7800 introduction and the 5200 being no longer produced was announced on May 21, 1984.  I haven't seen any evidence of no 5200s being available for Christmas 1983.  My experience with 1983 was that videogames disappeared from a lot of stores, not just any one system.  They all got harder to find.

Edited October 2, 2021 by mr_me

[Leeroy ST]

43 minutes ago, mr_me said:

The 5200 has a huge colour palette, larger than the NES, compared to fifteen colours on Colecovision.  The 5200 has hardware scrolling and can put eight sprites on a line without flicker.  The only thing Colecovision had was a higher resolution which made screenshots look good.  There's certainly a technical argument for the 5200 over colecovision.  The Commodore64 would be much closer to the NES than either of these two.

 

 

The issue as I said, is execution.

 

There's generally a more common point of comparison between a CV and a base famicom than a 5200 and a base famicom due to this. Even though on paper the 5200 should be obviously closer.

 

The C64 has nothing to do with the subject 

 

4 hours ago, Keatah said:

I think there's more tricks to be found in Atari's 8-bit stuff. Back then and now.

There are, but reading on here apparently not all of those apply to the 5200. 

 

 

 

 

[Leeroy ST]

4 minutes ago, mr_me said:

If it's Q3 rather than Q2 than they were even further behind Colecovision sales.

I didn't say this at all.

 

4 minutes ago, mr_me said:

IDefinitely no evidence that it outsold Colecovision in 1982.

1983.

 

5 minutes ago, mr_me said:

I haven't seen any evidence of no 5200s being available for Christmas 1983.  My experience with 1983 was that videogames disappeared from a lot of stores, not just any one system.  They all got harder to find.

Didn't say no 5200's, you're implying low sales and stock didn't make sense for the rest of 1983 after the 5200 hit 1 million earlier in the year. Yet are ignoring there was basically no presence of the 5200 in 84 in general. The wind down happened in the second half of 83 along with GCC negotiations for the 5200s replacement.

 

I'm not sure how much more you think Atari would have sold. CV was ahead during the wind down and the press was eating them up, I doubt there was more than 300k 5200s sold, IF that, between post selling 1 million in early 83 and the discontinuation in April 84. So it makes perfect sense that 5200 had the lead and basically gave it to CV because Atari bit off their own arm. 

 

You can also see this with the CV sales you posted, 1.4 million q2,1983, I assume closing of the quarter, so June? To reach two million by late 84 from that point would require sales of 600k+ units, and that includes a bunch of months AFTER the 5200 was discontinued.

 

So how much did the 5200 from early 83 until mid 84 cancellation when CV was the major seller? Remember no increase in sales was big enough to stop reports from reusing the 1 million sold, so it had to be at best 300k or less.

 

There's no way Atari sold anything more than table scraps (comparatively) after they hit 1 million. They reached that number first and then died off.

 

But even in the other case, it still would have been close either way, so no matter which scenario you believe Atari still was competitive and gave the win to CV for free.

 

I believe they would have been in a better position just supporting and keeping the console alive. I think killing the 5200 was a mistake since it had good performance despite losing money, which eventually would have reversed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mr_me]

I don't see any evidence that the Atari 5200 got to a million console sales before Colecovision.

 

I don't think Atari sold much more than 1M consoles total by May 1984, based on what Atari said, but you're saying its 1.3M? Based on what?

Edited October 3, 2021 by mr_me

[Leeroy ST]

12 hours ago, mr_me said:

but you're saying its 1.3M? Based on what?

I didn't say this at all.

 

15 hours ago, mr_me said:

 then they were still behind the Colecovision which was at 1.4M in mid 1983.  

 

It's likely looking at Coleco sales data here and elsewhere that 1.4 millon was probably shipments. This would explain why only 600k would sell from mid 83 to fall 84 with a two million article for CV. A bunch of that stock was likely in preperation for the adam, and you have already said yourself that CV was harder to find in late 83. Granted it was probably worse in Canada then the US.

 

But in either case this is from March 83 latimes found on my drive:

 

 

So it definitely seems like to me the 5200 was ahead for a bit. At worst dead even, but as I said above that's unlikely. By the time the CV sold or shipped the 1.4 million, Atari was already winding things down, and the negotiations for the GCC deal started a few months after that.

 

Heck, the negotiating could have been even earlier for all we know. It's just clear Atari was ready to replace the thing.

 

But as I said, I believe they could have done well keeping the machine alive but Warner will Warner.

 

 

 

 

 

[mr_me]

All manufacturers report sales based on shipments to distributors and retailers.  That's what their sales are, same goes for Atari.  Christmas 1983 was not a good one for the industry.

 

1 hour ago, Leeroy ST said:

 

But in either case this is from March 83 latimes found on my drive:

Are you sure that article is from March 1983.  A lot of the stuff it mentions came out in summer or fall of 1983.