Atari on it's way out...again! (58% less value)

[kevin242]

Wow, as if to repeat history, or maybe this is part of the "Atari curse"

a couple years ago the company was flying high and now they

are sinking fast!!! They lost 58% of their market share when compared to

last year. On a bright note Nintendo gained 15%!! Despite the cube

basically being a non-player now, which proves it only takes one great

product (Nintendo DS(and alot of great games)) to be a winner. Atari has niether (ok,

except the FB 2 but that is not enough).

 

I hope I can see a rebirth of the 8bit tech in the flashback 3 before

the "new" Atari becomes a another chapter in the old Atari historybook.

 

Read this interesting article for details:

 

http://www.dfcint.com/game_article/dec05article.html

[classicgamingguy]

Ouch. Poor Atari. I mean, I really love my FB 2, but alas, as you said, that's not enough to sustain it. On the flip side, I'm glad Nintendo is doing good, as I'm really enjoying my DS and the games I got for Christmas.

 

Steve

[Mindfield]

Atari's present problem is that they have no key product on the market. Flashback 2 is the only piece of hardware they have out there, and it's still fairly niche market -- a momentary nod to nostalgia and retrogaming at a time when such is still popular, though whose plug-and-play peak was realized by Jakks Pacific before Atari tried their hand.

 

I had always said that Atari should try and get into the handheld market. If they had a good machine backed by strong developer support and solid marketing they could have at least started to make inroads on what for the longest time was a one-man show. Now the PSP has entered the scene and made a strong presence for itself, and any chance of Atari getting into that market is all but gone. (The console market has enough trouble supporting three distinct platforms; the handheld market is typically strongest with only two -- three if they are all major players, which Atari is not.)

 

To be frank, and retro consoles aside, I can't see Atari amounting to anything more than the same game publisher they've been for the last few years -- at least not for the forseeable future. They might have a chance at the brink of the next generation of consoles/handhelds, but as the present gen in both markets is still very new, that won't happen for a few more years yet, if it is to happen at all.

[+-^CrossBow^-]

From a business standpoint...it would probably be smater if Atari just stopped with any hardware development for the time being. They should stick with just software and do a Sega/Sammy tactic for the time being. During that time, would be a good time to get the marketing info out there to find out who their real target audience should be.

 

It isn't the kind of suggestion that us diehards like to think about. But if we want Atari to stay this time, it is likely their best shot. They would save lots of money if they didn't have hardware to develop, produce, market, and ship out. Not saying it would be enough to save them such losses. But it would help them out.

 

I don't know honestly, it is sad to see this. But the fact is that many of todays newer gamers don't even really know who Atari really is, or why they are so important. They see a logo, they see a name, they hear it, and they see it associated with a bunch of older arcade type titles. But unless they really lived these evolutionary years of home gaming as many of us have, they simply won't feel for Atari what we feel.

 

Atari will probably have to change that line of thinking. It wouldn't hurt if they can really make excellent use of the other licesenses they have recently gotten and really do something with them.

[liveinabin]

I don't think the Atari name was a wise buy for Infogrames. With the possible exception of the Nintendo faithful and the EA zombie, kids just don't buy games based on the label anymore. A license or a sequel seems to be the only thing that attracts now. I bet the large majority of under 15s wouldn't be able to tell you that Sonic was a Sega thing.

[Atarinvader]

That's a shame because Fahrenheit was awesome.

[shadow460]

I see Atari and Sega in the same light now, and it ain't lime.

If either produces a new console, I will buy it for one: nostalgia value, and two: to support the underdog.

Nintendo will share the not so lime light with them in about five years (that is, as long as the viewer closes whichever eye is looking at the portable market).

 

I argee that Atari should remain a publisher for a while. When there are enough hit arcade games, like Rush the Rock, which bear the Fuji on them, that will be the time for Atari to begin making more consoles in earnest. Those consles should not be deisgned to run their hit games, though. That should be left to the PS3, via licensing. I'm not sure where the Atari consoles would be aimed, but I'm thinking maybe that would be the time for a retail cartridge based version of all three Flashback consoles, preferably something that can handle anything up to 7800 or even Jaguar style titles.

Sure, the Flashback 3 will help to promote Atari's name, but it may be in the same market as FB2, which will not propel Atari back into first place.

 

As for the others, I'm all for Sega and the Big N. Microshaft, however (and Coleco, for that matter) can rot.

As long as we have Hot Wheels, then Mattel will be okay.

I don't care one way or the other about the rest of the manufacturers, including Sony's PlayStation division.

[Atariboy]

-^Cro§Bow^- , their hardware was one of their biggest successes of 2004/2005, and your saying their best bet is to leave it behind?

 

I disagree, bring on the Flashback 3.

[kevin242]

I think Atari is smart to capitalize on their heritage with the Atari flashbacks, esp the

Flashback v2.0 Like I said I hope we see the FB 3! It is their one success (at the

moment). I dont see Atari having a chance in hell of ever competing with a modern

console or handheld (hell Microsoft loses money on the XBOX then Atari even has!) they could never penetrate the market, but they sure seem to have all the other plug and plays beat (hardware wise at least) that is one area where the Atari name and legacy

games and hardware really give's them the advantage.

 

The main problem with Atari and why they are losing so much money is simple: GAMES!

Their big games this Christmas were some stupid grafitti game,aging Matrix

franchise and poorly rated Dragonball Z... they dont real have any new products

people want. Atari need's to get some good games out there fast

if they want to survive. I dont think the current Atari would still be with us if it

wasnt for it's parent company that is helping it stay afloat.

 

I know alot of you are like this isnt the real Atari, but when Warner bought

Atari was when the real old school died. The Tramiels were Commodore people

for gosh sakes and that was Atari? To me if it says Atari and they are selling

software and hardware it's Atari. Maybe the next owners will have better luck

Edited January 3, 2006 by kevin242

[Gregory DG]

If Atarigrames would stop releasing crap software, maybe they'd be in a better position. Enter the Matrix anyone?

 

Right or wrong, I've always felt Atari's direction should be to get back to it's roots and create innovative games that are "easy to learn but difficult to master." They should avoid all the rehashed genres that other game companies have been milking dry for far too long.

 

Maybe if they tried thinking outside the box, they'd be in a better position. As it is, they just get lost in the shuffle along with dozens of "me-too" software houses with nothing truly memorable to offer.

[shadow460]

The last Atari title I purchased was RCT2. It is always fun when I play it, which is not often.

Most current Atari stuff does not get my attention for long. FB2 was an exception, as it is the 2600 pure and simple. I'm always after classic Atari stuff, and spend quite a bit of time on it as a hobby.

 

Ask me what Atari titles I liked from pre 1990, and my list would fill Albert's server up.

Ask me what post 1990 Atari titles I've liked...

RCT 1 and 2, Area 51, and Rush the Rock. That was simple. those games aren't the "just barely fun" games, either, they're flat addictive. Almost as addictive as a 2600.

[NovaXpress]

Inforgrames owns the Atari Corporation, which is in fact doomed. Even after the comapny dies, the parent corporation can use the trademarks so it's impossible to tell what they will do with them.

 

Just remember that there's really been several different Ataris with completely dissimilar goals and performance. Infogrames hoped to use the Atari logo as a marketing gimmick. Like buying the Pets.com dog puppet. But indeed, young gamers don't give a damn about the Fuji logo and older gamers quickly decided that their games generally suck. It's the same thing we would expect if Acclaim had purchased the Atari logo. So bad games equal bad sales equals bad stock. The only thing they've even attempted to do correctly with the brand are the Flashbacks.

 

Also remember that people who play the market rarely know their ass from a hole in the ground. Its all an educated gamble at best. Atari sales were down this year, so the day traders dump the stock. Plus the quick resignation of their CEO and a large scale management shakeup in the summer freaked out investors. If they had so much as one big hit before they go broke (very soon), the stock would fly. Few investors really seem to be looking at the long-term prospects for game companies. Take Two was overinflated for an astounding amount of time because traders were impressed by all the GTA hype.

 

If the new Driver game isn't a smash hit, say goodbye to the Atari corporation. You should be as sad as you were about Jack Tramiel losing the company.

 

Enter the Matrix is the E.T. of today's Atari. Think about it.

[Cybergoth]

Hi there!

 

Enter the Matrix is the E.T. of today's Atari. Think about it.

 

Which I find still amazing, for the fact that it was developed by Shiny.

 

They had such an impressive backcatalogue with classics like Earthworm Jim, MDK and Sacrifice, how could they ever fall so deep?

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[Jess Ragan]

The only thing they've [infogrames has] even attempted to do correctly with the brand are the Flashbacks.

993114[/snapback]

 

That's totally unfair. Infogrames may not have had the greatest success with the Atari brand name, but they've done a hell of a lot better than its previous owner Hasbro (or as I like to call them, Has-Does-And-Always-Will-Blow). Infogrames created a variety of games under the Atari label with high production values and a greater relevance to today's game players. What did Hasbro give us? A half dozen awful classic remakes, designed solely in the hopes of cashing in on peoples' fond memories of the past. And oh yeah, some stupid 3D platformer starring an animated glove, which few people remembered and absolutely nobody liked.

 

I have infinitely more respect for Infogrames than I do Has-Does-And-Always-Will-Blow, because they tried to bring the Atari name into the future, rather than trying to rewrite the past with horrible remakes like Frogger, Galaga, and Q*Bert. Before you start blaming Infogrames for destroying a brand name that's been synonymous with antiquity for the past fifteen years, maybe you should stop and consider that maybe, just maybe, there's no way anyone can make Atari relevant in this day and age.

 

JR

[Artlover]

And oh yeah, some stupid 3D platformer starring an animated glove, which few people remembered and absolutely nobody liked.

993154[/snapback]

Ok, you got me. What game are you talking about?

[Jess Ragan]

http://psx.ign.com/articles/153/153903p1.html

 

This one. Don't worry, you weren't missing anything.

 

JR

[NovaXpress]

Yes, Infogrames is a better steward than Hasbro. And eating a pile of dirt is better than eating a pile of dog crap, but I still wouldn't recommend it.

 

Let's face it, the word Atari hasn't really been relevant to mainstream gamers since 1983. But Infogrames' dropping of the ball with all the Atari hype then releasing a shit game has killed the brand for good.

 

And does it mean anything whatsoever to slap the Atari name on a game like Driver or Matrix? It's nothing but a classic logo needlesly placed on a non-classic product. "Supporting" a company because they call themselves Atari is just like buying products just because they have the Nike swoosh logo.

[Artlover]

http://psx.ign.com/articles/153/153903p1.html

 

This one.  Don't worry, you weren't missing anything.

993157[/snapback]

Ah, Glover. Guess you were right about few remembering. Even with your saying glove, I couldn't remember this.

[ninjarabbit]

Hi there!

 

Enter the Matrix is the E.T. of today's Atari. Think about it.

 

Which I find still amazing, for the fact that it was developed by Shiny.

 

They had such an impressive backcatalogue with classics like Earthworm Jim, MDK and Sacrifice, how could they ever fall so deep?

 

Greetings,

Manuel

993122[/snapback]

 

Shiny had a lot of problems while they were making ETM. They got evicted from their offices, it had a very fast development cycle since Atari wanted it out by the 2nd Matrix movie (kinda like ET in a way) though being out by the third Matrix movie would have been a more realistic goal, they ran out of funding with 2 months to go and had to do a lot of the funding out-of-pocket, and quite frankly we weren't playing as Neo, Morphis, etc and were playing as 2 no-names instead.

[Flojomojo]

I frankly have no idea what Atari is publishing other than the Unreal games, the Matrix games, and the Atari Flashback hardware. I suppose that having no real public identity is a problem -- but not so much as the fact that not enough people are buying their stufff.

 

I'd hate to see Atari disappear again. Maybe Microsoft could rescue them from obscurity -- it would be nice to see the classic licenses in the care of a stable megacorporation.

 

At least I can say I've done my part. I've bought just about every classic-related thing that they've put out lately....

[kevin242]

The coolest thing about Inf. taking over Atari from Hasbro was that they made a

seperate company called Atari. Atari is back on the stock exchange and it really

exists as it's own entity. For a while Atari was turning out alot of games (with tons

of commercials around Christmas) looked like they might actually be successful

but the games dryed up and while the Flashback 2 is great (hardware wise) Im afraid

we will see Atari become like Commodore. A name some company owns and slaps

on various products or liscensed out to other companies to slap on their retro

hardware...

[doctorclu]

I wouldn't toll the death toll on the current Atari just yet.

 

To me, no one can do worst than JTS as a owner of the Atari name (they were the ones after Trammell and before Hasbro BTW. They liquidated Atari's material assetts and sold the name years later for $5 million.. that is not really that much for a name.)

 

Hasbro got the name back out there again, and made the Jaguar public domain, so I love them.

 

As for Atari (Infogrammes renamed theirselves Atari after buying Atari, which is what I would do if I bought Atari, so I call them "Atari") They have done the most amazing work with that fuji since the days of Warner and Atarisoft.

 

They have games out there that people are enjoying (Unreal, Dragonball Z, Driver, Matrix, etc). I have heard a LOT of good things about that from people who are not Atari fans. And you have Atari games on every major system out there.

 

They have new and old fans buying the Flashbacks. I think the Flashback 2 is fairly amazing all and all.

 

And this just occurred to me... the Flashback 2 is only about $30, probably $40 when it first came out.

 

The Atari 2600 was probably $150 to $100 when it came out, plus you sell joysticks, paddles, games games and more games, peripherals...

 

... as you can see, the Flashback as a stand alone system (with no additional sales) has done an amazing job in sales if we are comparing it to sales of yesteryear. The fact is doing anything at all in sales is amazing.

 

I will say the joysticks with the Flashback 2 are fairly good, and I have been using on my more classic systems. Honestly the closest thing to support of the Atari classic 2600, 7800, and 8-bits since 1991(?)

 

All and all, why the down turn? Not sure, I think what Atari is doing is amazing honestly with both old and new stuff.

 

Best thing WE can do is ...

 

1) Quit complaining that this is not your father's Atari.

2) Realize this is about as Atari as it's going to get, Warner and Trammell are not picking this back up.

3) Atari will not be reselling 20 year old merchandise, at least directly though the Flashback 2 controllers do work on the older systems. Things will have to be repackaged, remarketed, etc.

 

And if you want Atari to succeed, support them. Quit complaining that they are selling games for other systems aside from your precious Atari Jaguar or ST, because there is not enough CURRENT market for that.

 

That said, they might find a way to create something that WE can port back to classic systems. Who knows? We won't find out if we continue to bitch now will we?

[Cheese007]

did you look at the review for the n64 version of glover

ps1=2.6

n64=8.3

bad business decisions killed atari the first time

now its killing them again?

i guess the world really has gone retro

at least i have my 2600 and lynx

Edited January 3, 2006 by Cheese007

[jeepnut24]

Driver and Enter the Matrix sum up Atari games as of late...

 

TONS of BUDGET and HYPE but ultimately lacking in quality and depth. You would think that a game with the budget of ETM would at least look like a current generation game rather than a PS1 title...

[birdie3]

Who will buy Atari this time when they go under?