FB3...

[hookem]

..hmm....8bit Atari..smells like a bomb, sad to say!...I mean, those of us here will truly appreciate and buy such a product, but what's the mainstream going to think of it?

 

People buy the old Atari stuff cause it sold like wildfire and was a truly unique system of it's time. 

 

What everyday Joe at Walmart is going to say, Hey!...I LOVED the Atari 800!!...I'll buy this!!!

 

I can't see the higherups in any company ok'ing such a move.  I'm sure it could be a great product (done well, not like FB1), but it'll be niche.

 

Give it a side effect of FULL 2600 compatablility, and I'm interested.

915661[/snapback]

 

But it won't be market as a "Flashback 8 bit Atari computer"...

 

It would be the same "40 of your favorite arcade classics!!! Plugs right into your TV", but with more true-to-arcade graphics... probably won't even mention computer or Atari 800 or anything like that on the box. It'll just look like a mini 400/800 or something, maybe even with a fake keyboard... and people at the stores will just be like, "Cute, it looks just like one of those old '70s home computers!"

 

I think it would sell. No need to tell anyone it really is an 8-bit Atari computer...

[sidcrowe]

Well, after talking to Curt Vendel at the America's Game eXpo in Dallas, I know that the Flashback 2 is going to have a couple more versions coming out soon.

915375[/snapback]

 

What?

 

New versions?

 

Well...should I buy one at all then before Christmas

[Feralstorm]

But it won't be market as a "Flashback 8 bit Atari computer"...

 

It would be the same "40 of your favorite arcade classics!!!  Plugs right into your TV", but with more true-to-arcade graphics... probably won't even mention computer or Atari 800 or anything like that on the box.  It'll just look like a mini 400/800 or something, maybe even with a fake keyboard... and people at the stores will just be like, "Cute, it looks just like one of those old '70s home computers!"

 

I think it would sell.  No need to tell anyone it really is an 8-bit Atari computer...

915731[/snapback]

True, it's not like the FB1 really called itself an Atari 7800, even though it was (sorta) designed as such.

 

The biggest issue I see with an Atari 400/800/5200 is that many games make use of a keyboard or at least extra buttons, which has to be incorporated into a cheap Flashback console in some form.

 

Can't imagine ANY 5200/400/800 system without Star Raiders!

[Shaggy the Atarian]

But it won't be market as a "Flashback 8 bit Atari computer"...

 

It would be the same "40 of your favorite arcade classics!!!  Plugs right into your TV", but with more true-to-arcade graphics... probably won't even mention computer or Atari 800 or anything like that on the box.  It'll just look like a mini 400/800 or something, maybe even with a fake keyboard... and people at the stores will just be like, "Cute, it looks just like one of those old '70s home computers!"

 

I think it would sell.  No need to tell anyone it really is an 8-bit Atari computer...

915731[/snapback]

True, it's not like the FB1 really called itself an Atari 7800, even though it was (sorta) designed as such.

 

The biggest issue I see with an Atari 400/800/5200 is that many games make use of a keyboard or at least extra buttons, which has to be incorporated into a cheap Flashback console in some form.

 

Can't imagine ANY 5200/400/800 system without Star Raiders!

916045[/snapback]

 

Just pack it with an analog version of the Jag controller, that would take care of the button issue and be more comfortable than a 5200 stick

[Ferris]

I seriously doubt Atari would bank any nostalgia on the 800 as far as looks go. I think you guys are getting lost in the reverie of "they could make a mini 800 with this and that and even a tiny keyboard" ...I just dont see that happening.

 

What I have been advocating is the use of the system's technology, not the look of the system its self. Whatever Atari puts out is going to be kept simple and cost effective, and most importantly, recognizable as a classic Atari.

 

What we know for sure at this juncture is that...

 

- There is going to be a third (and possibly final) instalment of the Flashback series systems.

 

- The FB3 is going to be based off of "Pre-Lynx/Jag" legacy Atari hardware and software.

 

- The FB3 is going to feature interchangeable media in a new smaller form, although it will feature authentic roms on board. Most likely it will be a little card or soemthing along those lines.

 

- The FB3 hardware will be authentic and not emulated.

 

- The FB3 is essentially being created by Curt. We are all familiar with Curt and know he will make sure this is a very creative unit.

 

That being said, I just dont see why Atari WOULDNT want to capitalize on all of the software for the 8-Bit line. It's pretty much the same stuff. It's Asteroids, Centipede, Crystal Castles, etc. just like what they have put out on the earlier Flashback systems, except with better A8 style graphics. It's a no brainer. I'm sure they would package it as "40 of your favorite classics in one!" just like the last unit. FB3 could use the existing CX40A joystick or better yet Curt could find an excuse to pursuade Atari into creating a CX52A self-centering joystick, although it's very unlikley.

 

What would be best in my opinion would be a system that could play 2600, 5200/A8, and 7800 games, although I seriously do not see that happening. Short of that, what I think is more likely to happen, is a system that plays 2600 games as well as A8 games through an interchangable media format.

 

That is what I expect to see, although I could be wrong.

[jaybird3rd]

I seriously doubt Atari would bank any nostalgia on the 800 as far as looks go.  I think you guys are getting lost in the reverie of "they could make a mini 800 with this and that and even a tiny keyboard" ...I just dont see that happening.

 

What I have been advocating is the use of the system's technology, not the look of the system its self.  Whatever Atari puts out is going to be kept simple and cost effective, and most importantly, recognizable as a classic Atari.

 

 

What would be best in my opinion would be a system that could play 2600, 5200/A8, and 7800 games, although I seriously do not see that happening.  Short of that, what I think is more likely to happen, is a system that plays 2600 games as well as A8 games through an interchangable media format.

 

That is what I expect to see, although I could be wrong.

916234[/snapback]

I think you raise some good points. The real value of the A8 family to the current marketplace is the broad scope and nostalgic value of its incredible software library, and not necessarily the nostalgic value of the systems themselves. Atari itself changed the "look" and form factor of the A8 family many times in response to the market's changing emphasis: the Atari 800 was built when the market wanted an expandable home computer (as evidenced by its internal expansion cards), while the Atari XEGS offered little expansion and was optimized as a game platform (optional detachable keyboard, an SIO port that could be easily ignored, game control buttons enlarged and moved to the console, etc).

 

If Atari/Infogrames indeed builds the FB3 using the A8 architecture as a foundation, I imagine that it will be similar to the XEGS in that its design will emphasize its role as a game machine, with little or no recognition of its origins as a computer. This means no flash disks, USB ports, integrated hard drive controllers, or other extensions that aren't necessary for games. Exposing the SIO port as a pin header, or adding some other little "extras" that fall out of the original design, would be a nice and easy thing to do but is a secondary concern at best. I can't see Atari spending any money on significantly upgrading the architecture (beyond making large bankswitched cartridges in the smaller form factor Curt mentioned), and it probably won't look like any of the old machines, either; I think that would limit its appeal to the younger crowd.

 

I brought up the possibility of a low-cost keyboard earlier because you almost have to have one to properly play some of the most marketable games in the A8 library. The only alternative I can think of, making a controller with some extra buttons, would mean that Atari would have to design a whole new controller AND modify the old games to use the extra buttons. Adding a membrane/chicklet keyboard to the design seemed to me to be a cheaper and easier way to go, but of course we're all speculating here so I could be wrong. I like the idea of an A8/2600 hybrid, but since there's very little overlap in the components of both platforms, I can't see a system like that being cost-effective to build (it would essentially be two systems in one box).

[retrocon]

I seriously doubt Atari would bank any nostalgia on the 800 as far as looks go.  I think you guys are getting lost in the reverie of "they could make a mini 800 with this and that and even a tiny keyboard" ...I just dont see that happening.

 

What I have been advocating is the use of the system's technology, not the look of the system its self.  Whatever Atari puts out is going to be kept simple and cost effective, and most importantly, recognizable as a classic Atari.

 

<SNIP>

 

What would be best in my opinion would be a system that could play 2600, 5200/A8, and 7800 games, although I seriously do not see that happening.  Short of that, what I think is more likely to happen, is a system that plays 2600 games as well as A8 games through an interchangable media format.

 

That is what I expect to see, although I could be wrong.

916234[/snapback]

I think you raise some good points. The real value of the A8 family to the current marketplace is the broad scope and nostalgic value of its incredible software library, and not necessarily the nostalgic value of the systems themselves. Atari itself changed the "look" and form factor of the A8 family many times in response to the market's changing emphasis: the Atari 800 was built when the market wanted an expandable home computer (as evidenced by its internal expansion cards), while the Atari XEGS offered little expansion and was optimized as a game platform (optional detachable keyboard, an SIO port that could be easily ignored, game control buttons enlarged and moved to the console, etc).

 

If Atari/Infogrames indeed builds the FB3 using the A8 architecture as a foundation, I imagine that it will be similar to the XEGS in that its design will emphasize its role as a game machine, with little or no recognition of its origins as a computer. This means no flash disks, USB ports, integrated hard drive controllers, or other extensions that aren't necessary for games. Exposing the SIO port as a pin header, or adding some other little "extras" that fall out of the original design, would be a nice and easy thing to do but is a secondary concern at best. I can't see Atari spending any money on significantly upgrading the architecture (beyond making large bankswitched cartridges in the smaller form factor Curt mentioned), and it probably won't look like any of the old machines, either; I think that would limit its appeal to the younger crowd.

 

I brought up the possibility of a low-cost keyboard earlier because you almost have to have one to properly play some of the most marketable games in the A8 library. The only alternative I can think of, making a controller with some extra buttons, would mean that Atari would have to design a whole new controller AND modify the old games to use the extra buttons. Adding a membrane/chicklet keyboard to the design seemed to me to be a cheaper and easier way to go, but of course we're all speculating here so I could be wrong. I like the idea of an A8/2600 hybrid, but since there's very little overlap in the components of both platforms, I can't see a system like that being cost-effective to build (it would essentially be two systems in one box).

916277[/snapback]

 

Mini-5200 would be easier and would make more sense. They did a replica 7800 with replica 7800 joysticks. They did replica 2600 with replica 2600 joysticks. Why not a 5200 with mini-5200 joysticks? Maybe we are over-analyzing things a bit. No keyboard issues, no third-party licensing issues. This seems like the obvious next console doesn't it?

[ZylonBane]

If Atari/Infogrames indeed builds the FB3 using the A8 architecture as a foundation, I imagine that it will be similar to the XEGS in that its design will emphasize its role as a game machine, with little or no recognition of its origins as a computer.

Yeah, they certainly didn't do anything to tip people off that the XEGS was a repackaged XE, like calling it the "XEGS", or including a keyboard with it, or choosing a pack-in game (Flight Simulator II) that requires the aforementioned keyboard, or allowing you to boot into BASIC.

 

Anyway, the XEGS console would scale down to 2/3 size really well. The console actually looks oversized, with the giant Atari logo and big pastel buttons.

[kevin242]

WOW I just stumbled into this thread... This is the news I have been waiting

for!!! I have hoped for a new 8bit toy since I bought the Commodore 64DTV,

which is great but it's no 800xl!!! I just hope this system whether it is a

5200 or 800xl or whatever it is supposed to be will either come with a keybo

and SIO port or allow you to hack those things on!!!

[+davidcalgary29]

If Atari/Infogrames indeed builds the FB3 using the A8 architecture as a foundation, I imagine that it will be similar to the XEGS in that its design will emphasize its role as a game machine, with little or no recognition of its origins as a computer.

Yeah, they certainly didn't do anything to tip people off that the XEGS was a repackaged XE, like calling it the "XEGS", or including a keyboard with it, or choosing a pack-in game (Flight Simulator II) that requires the aforementioned keyboard, or allowing you to boot into BASIC.

 

Anyway, the XEGS console would scale down to 2/3 size really well. The console actually looks oversized, with the giant Atari logo and big pastel buttons.

916334[/snapback]

 

 

If true, I hope that they redesign its joystick ports. I've always had a difficult time using some third-party controllers with this console, as the angled ports will not accommodate very large plug thicknesses or widths.

[Lord Helmet]

If it is a 400/800/5200 on a chip, here's betting it looks like a mini-5200.

 

A redesigned 5200 stick would be killer. Surely given all of the hindsight that is availible to the developers, any 5200 stick redesign would be an improvement. Make 'em self centering, and lose the analog support (like the 400/800 versions of the software), and they would probably be pretty cheap to manufacture compared to the originals.

[Alexandre_Taito]

My 2 cents:

 

First of all, we all must think about marketability. Atari 2600 VCS was/is a HUGE PLANETARIAN SUCESS. You can find clones, spinoffs, legal-royalted-versions and like in any dirty place of the world. Ditto for cartridges and accessories. So the popularity of the Flashback 1/2 is immediate - it can sell by tons anywhere in the world. I know of at least 20 (!) people inside my (short) circle of friendship, that already ordered one OR MORE FB2 for them here from Brazil.

 

So we must think - How much known is for the common american and for the rest of the world, the 8 bit line and the 5200/7800?

 

In my humble opinion, I'd love to se an A8 computer or like as the FB3. But I must put my feed on the ground and think that if Atari does something, it must be sold at milions, Atari cannot fall back to the same error of the last-generation Atari - "if you have been thru hell, and came back, is because you loved it!"

 

Why create a product that will not have stellar sellings in USA and outside? There are easier options, all of them cheaper and more marketable. One of them being a REAL 2600 portable, with a cheap LCD (an integrated controller can do wonders) and all the bells and whistles a product like this must have. If people buy the GP32 for atari playing, why not the PortableFlashBack3?

 

But, IF I were Curt, I'd create a system like this:

- Nice case, remembering old atari products

- No keyboard, you can always use a PS/2 or USB one

- Mouse: Ditto.

- External connectors (or internal ones, to get cheaper) for everything you can imagine

- SD ROM/Flash media, to have some security and be CHEAP

- OPEN core, OPEN schematics, CLOSED legal license (not to create copies)

- Re-loadable emulation core to a special ASIC/FPGA, which can run almost anything

 

I'll explain better this part:

The FB2 is a redrawing of the original 2600 circuits into an FPGA, and later to an ASIC. Ok, but what about an ASIC that would have a kind of "unencrypting feature" or like, that would be needed to run the complete core.

 

Or better, it could hold inside "system modules" like the TIA and like, and accept external VHDL code to connect them and emulate other systems. So everything from Pong video board up to XEGS games could be run, and homebrew hardware/software development would be great.

 

Of course, the best ones on hardware development could be attracted to Atari, as Curt was, to develop the FB4.

 

This is a very interesting propositon, and I think that THIS is the right way to go - a completely reconfigurable videogame, that could run code from most Atari / arcades games from the past, could accept SD ROM cards with recorded games / reconfiguration code / vhdl code - so Atari could keep developing and keep cashing on selling games and reconfiguration code, and accept user changes thru a very specialized compiler or common VHDL code. Since most of the VHDL "fat" code is inside the ASIC chip, you couldn't create a copy of it in an FPGA and sell.

 

Curt, what about that? Feel free to take this propositon to Atari management

 

Greetings from Brazil,

Alexandre

www.tabajara-labs.com.br

[+kheller2]

 

Um.. Mule on an XL works just fine for four players.  yes, you have to share sticks.  I don't think Atari is going to release another 4 port game system.  The last was the 2800/SVAII wasn't it?

915401[/snapback]

 

 

 

how would the land auction work, What about when four people are all fighing for 6 foods. Whoever has the joystick at the time automaticly wins?

915608[/snapback]

 

 

paddles.

[atarilovesyou]

...the thing about FB1 being a 7800 (which it seems did a crappy job of), the public is eventually going say, "wow...another retro plug n play"...but then again, Jakks seems to be doing fine, so somebody is buying!!...and as long as the cost is right, then hey!...no problem!

 

But when they rerelease every game you've seen since the FB1 on the FB5..or what have you...after a while, you wonder what's the point!...

 

I have to admit I'm limited in what I really want: an actual newly designed product with full 2600 compatibility out of the box...that's it. And those holiday multi carts sound like a fantastic idea.

 

Not to say I would NOT buy a cool FB3 that includes the great games from the Atari 8bit line...absolutely!...especially if the price is right!

 

Anyway, that's my opinion...3 more days till Canadian release of FB2!

 

Woohoo!

[jlh2600]

I have to admit I'm limited in what I really want: an actual newly designed product with full 2600 compatibility out of the box...that's it.

917211[/snapback]

 

 

+1

factory fresh paddles would be nice. was under the impression they would be available for fb2.

[Retro Rogue]

...the thing about FB1 being a 7800 (which it seems did a crappy job of), the public is eventually going say, "wow...another retro plug n play"...but then again, Jakks seems to be doing fine, so somebody is buying!!...and as long as the cost is right, then hey!...no problem!

 

 

Well, that's not exactly the case here - because while the FB2 (and fb1) are techniclly "plug-and-play", they resemble more of a traditional console than the Jakks and Radica "joystick/controller" models.

[Flojomojo]

...the thing about FB1 being a 7800 (which it seems did a crappy job of), the public is eventually going say, "wow...another retro plug n play"...but then again, Jakks seems to be doing fine, so somebody is buying!!...and as long as the cost is right, then hey!...no problem!

 

 

Well, that's not exactly the case here - because while the FB2 (and fb1) are techniclly "plug-and-play", they resemble more of a traditional console than the Jakks and Radica "joystick/controller" models.

917890[/snapback]

Guh?

 

They're all "plug and play," standalone consoles. I'd think the market would have been saturated by now. Is Jakks really doing all that well? Maybe not. But better than Atari!

 

 

What is Radica thinking with this P.O.S.?

[Shannon]

What Jakks is doing sort burns me - they are selling limited release games on their sticks, then if you want the rest of the game you have to buy their cards to get the remaining level's and such, that's total BS...

 

FB3 Carts would have full games, not some lame (here's the rest of your game) upgrade like Jakks.

 

Curt

913750[/snapback]

 

Thanks for confirming what I suspected about the new ones. I find that annoying as well.

[Shannon]

What Jakks is doing sort burns me - they are selling limited release games on their sticks, then if you want the rest of the game you have to buy their cards to get the remaining level's and such, that's total BS...

 

FB3 Carts would have full games, not some lame (here's the rest of your game) upgrade like Jakks.

 

Curt

913750[/snapback]

 

Thanks for confirming what I suspected about the new ones. I find that annoying as well.

[Shannon]

Different platform? He sounds like he's throwing together a 8 bit system.

The 2600, 5200, and 7800 were ALL 8-bit systems.

913793[/snapback]

 

So was the commodore 64 and the NES and the SMS. They are not considered different platforms?

 

Sigh.

 

[Shannon]

Then your experience differs from mine. If you're posting on csa8 then you can get away with that, but at a gaming-heavy site like this "8-bit system" is uselessly vague.

913921[/snapback]

 

In my experience most people refer to the 2600 either as the 2600 or vcs.

The 7800 as the 7800.

Lynx as Lynx.

Jaguar as Jaguar.

Atari 8-bit computers as 8-bit atari's.

Atari ST as 16-bit atari or Atari ST.

 

So my guess would be your the only one confused by the terminology.

[Shannon]

I still don't think it will be based on the 5200.  Most of the 5200 game library consists of licensed arcade ports, many from other manufacturers, and I can't see the new Atari paying to relicense the 5200 version of Pac-Man.  It's the same reason, we'll never see a Colecovision plug and play or even a Colecovision collection for PS2 or XBox.

914105[/snapback]

 

I was thinking the same thing. But the atari 400/800 library is not as limited and has light gun games as well. Most XEG games were designed to use 3 buttons (start, select, option), plus the stick button obviously and have a far more versatile collection.

 

In fact if Atari wanted to, they could go as far as making the cartridge system in such a manner that other parties can buy a license to distribute their own products that they have the rights too. (Not sure how well something like that would pan out). But if done Atari would be making money off of the licensing.

[Shannon]

These were never ported to the A8 machines, either (with poss. exception of "SkyFox".) EA largely wrote off the A8 machines in 1985, and most of the games they released that year for our machines were...crap.

914561[/snapback]

 

Huh?

 

Archon, Archon II: Adept, M.U.L.E., Lords Of Conquest, Murder on the Zinderneuf,

One-On-One Basketball, Pinball Construction Set, Realm Of Impossibility, and

The Seven Cities Of Gold were crap?

 

[Shannon]

Um.. Mule on an XL works just fine for four players.  yes, you have to share sticks.  I don't think Atari is going to release another 4 port game system.  The last was the 2800/SVAII wasn't it?

915401[/snapback]

 

Not true. It used one stick and a set of paddles for a total of only.... drum roll please.

 

3 players!!!

[+davidcalgary29]

These were never ported to the A8 machines, either (with poss. exception of "SkyFox".) EA largely wrote off the A8 machines in 1985, and most of the games they released that year for our machines were...crap.

914561[/snapback]

 

Huh?

 

Archon, Archon II: Adept, M.U.L.E., Lords Of Conquest, Murder on the Zinderneuf,

One-On-One Basketball, Pinball Construction Set, Realm Of Impossibility, and

The Seven Cities Of Gold were crap?

 

918138[/snapback]

 

 

My original comment still stands. "M.U.L.E.", "Murder on the Zinderneuf", "One-on-One Basketball", "Pinball Construction Set", and "The Seven Cities of Gold" are all great games...and they were all released in 1983 or 1984.

 

"Realm of Impossibility" was a so-so sequel to "Zombies". "Archon II" was O.K., but didn't stretch anyone's imagination. And who even played "Lords of Conquest"?

 

It's hardly news that EA spent minimal resources developing XE products, and they certainly didn't port over any marquee titles after the end of '84.