Games that Atari sued over

[rheffera]

Yeah. Activision was founded by Disgrunteld atari employees ( david crane is but one) and atari didnt like it....not just because they were relesing games for the 2600 but atari felt effectivley back stabbed as the programmers took the coding techinches for themselves which cause the venetian blinds suit if i recall correctly

[supercat]

Since the 2600 contains no coyrightable software or proprietary hardware, it was open season for clones.

 

The TIA does contain a lot of interesting trickery and timing issues. I've asked before and not really seen answered: how accurately did back-in-the-day clones mimic such things, given that even today's efforts aren't perfect?

[supercat]

So, as with the Universal lawsuit, Coleco was apparently a chump.

 

Not sure about the analogy. Microsoft knew full well it had no need to pay Universal Music. On the other hand, it figured that if it did pay, that would likely encourage Universal Music to attack Microsoft's competitors. The value to Microsoft of such attacks would exceed the value of its payments (especially since it would have "clean hands") so Microsoft was hardly a "chump".

[Urchlay]

Every home version of Tetris sucked. It never played like the arcade game with higher levels having some blocks already in the playfield to start. It just got faster and faster.

 

Tengen Tetris for the NES is a port of the arcade game, which is why it was the only one that didn't suck...

[Student Driver]

So, as with the Universal lawsuit, Coleco was apparently a chump.

 

Not sure about the analogy. Microsoft knew full well it had no need to pay Universal Music. On the other hand, it figured that if it did pay, that would likely encourage Universal Music to attack Microsoft's competitors. The value to Microsoft of such attacks would exceed the value of its payments (especially since it would have "clean hands") so Microsoft was hardly a "chump".

 

Nova is referring to the Universal Studios vs. Coleco suit-- which he mentioned earlier in the thread-- analogizing about the fact that Coleco settled and paid out on an issue they legally could have won.

[godzillajoe]

Every home version of Tetris sucked. It never played like the arcade game with higher levels having some blocks already in the playfield to start. It just got faster and faster.

 

Tengen Tetris for the NES is a port of the arcade game, which is why it was the only one that didn't suck...

 

Not to get too far off topic, but to me it sucked.

 

30 lines to complete level 1? Then level 2 starts off with your left over crap already clogging up the playfield instead of a clean board so if you just manage to clear a level, your game is essentially over at the start of the next one.

 

The arcade game is so much different and more fun.

 

And since it's an arcade game, aren't they ALL ports?

Edited November 30, 2006 by godzillajoe

[R.Cade]

GCC stirred up a lot of fun. They released a Missile Command mod which angered Atari but resulted in GCC becoming an outside producer for products such as Food Fight and the 7800. GCC also made a Pac bootleg called Crazy Otto which was so good they sold it to Midway and it became Ms. Pac-Man. After GCC and Midway sued each other over royalties, they realized that Namco was the actual damaged party and both gave up the rights to the game.

 

Namco actually started out as Atari Japan. Atari wouldn't or couldn't produce enough Breakout machines to supply demand, so they were getting killed with clones. So Namco (Atari Japan) started cloning it themselves. Eventually, Atari just sold the division to the guy who was running it, which then became NAMCO.

 

[PressureCooker2600]

i love the whole Intellivision-Atari "corporate espionage" thing....hilarious

 

Atari programmer: How do you produce such high-quality games?

Intellivision programmer: We program games for the Intellivision...ya'll program games for the VCS.

Atari programmer: oh.....yea....well how do you come up with your hit ideas?

Intellivision programmer: Well, the other day Dave saw a frog and said...."Wouldn't it be fun to have a game where you're a frog and you eat flies?"

Atari programmer: GENIUS!!!!!!! PURE GENIUS!!!!!!

[supercat]

And since it's an arcade game, aren't they ALL ports?

 

The original game was written in Turbo Pascal, using 40x25 text mode on the CGA graphics card. It allowed the player to start at IIRC any level 0-9, and also had a key to immediately advance a level. Otherwise the player would be forced to advance a level after completing (nextlevel)*100 rows. Scoring was influenced by level number, and also by how far one let a piece drop. On most PC's, optimal strategy for getting a good score was to start at level 7 or 8. Level 9 was often too fast to be playable (and was more dependent upon CPU speed than the others); level 7 would often allow one to drop pieces further than level 8.

[Dan Iacovelli]

didn't atari sue Sega over something and atari was supposed to be getting some Sega games ported before Atari was closed.

[PressureCooker2600]

maybe they sued over columns.....

i prefer columns over tetris

so much damn fun with colors

[Shawn]

didn't atari sue Sega over something and atari was supposed to be getting some Sega games ported before Atari was closed.

 

Atari sued Sega and settled out of court for using DB9 conectors on their controllers, Thats where Atari got the money to finace the Jag. What a great way to spend your last dollar Tremil

[supercat]

i prefer columns over tetris

so much damn fun with colors

 

Tried Strat-O-Gems? :D

[NovaXpress]

Namco actually started out as Atari Japan. Atari wouldn't or couldn't produce enough Breakout machines to supply demand, so they were getting killed with clones. So Namco (Atari Japan) started cloning it themselves. Eventually, Atari just sold the division to the guy who was running it, which then became NAMCO.

Not true. The company that became Namco was formed in 1955 to produce children's arcade rides. The name "Namco" was adopted in 1971. In 1974, they purchased Atari's Japansese distributor and entered the video game market. In 1978 they began to make their own games.

 

This is why stuff needs to be written down at some point in one place, too many bullshit stories are getting passed around by classic gamers. A kernel of truth usually gets misinterpreted then spread and becomes accepted as canon.

[PressureCooker2600]

i prefer columns over tetris

so much damn fun with colors

 

Tried Strat-O-Gems? :D

 

nope but if its anything like columns or super puzzle-fighter....i'll like it

[supercat]

nope but if its anything like columns or super puzzle-fighter....i'll like it

 

http://www.atariage.com/store/index.php?ma...products_id=337

[PressureCooker2600]

: drools over pictures of Strat-O-Gems :

[Bakasama]

Not true. The company that became Namco was formed in 1955 to produce children's arcade rides. The name "Namco" was adopted in 1971. In 1974, they purchased Atari's Japansese distributor and entered the video game market. In 1978 they began to make their own games.

 

 

Wasn't NAMCO's original name "Nihon Amusement Machine COmpany"?

Edited December 1, 2006 by Bakasama

[supercat]

: drools over pictures of Strat-O-Gems :

 

The database page http://www.atariage.com/software_page.html...areLabelID=2736 inclues a copy of the ROM. I'd recomment playing the game on a real system with a saveKey or AtariVox for the best experience, but the ROM will let you see how it plays.

[NovaXpress]

Not true. The company that became Namco was formed in 1955 to produce children's arcade rides. The name "Namco" was adopted in 1971. In 1974, they purchased Atari's Japansese distributor and entered the video game market. In 1978 they began to make their own games.

 

 

Wasn't NAMCO's original name "Nihon Amusement Machine COmpany"?

 

The original name was Nakamura Manufacturing Ltd

 

Man, I love investigations into classic gaming history.

[bohoki]

didn't atari sue Sega over something and atari was supposed to be getting some Sega games ported before Atari was closed.

 

Atari sued Sega and settled out of court for using DB9 conectors on their controllers, Thats where Atari got the money to finace the Jag. What a great way to spend your last dollar Tremil

 

this sounds like baloney to me the commodore 64 used the 9 pin without legal ramifications at at the time (with the tremendious sucess of the amiga) commodore would have been dead meat

 

gee i wonder if atari could have sued ibm for the 15 pin port that was a rip off of the 5200

i mean come on its analog 2 fire buttons sue sue sue

 

mirrorsoft was responsible they sold rights they didnt truly have with tetris to tengen

they were allowed to have tetris on systems with keyboards but not dedicated game systems

although i play tetris on the commodore 64 it is a bit of a pain as there are no borders

 

the head of mirrorsoft vanished mysteriously leaving the company in debt so if you see that fatheaded olddude running around with a old beat up briefcase call the dog oh it was his sons fault it is so convoulted of a story it is incomprehensible

 

does anybody see the irony of the sony betamax lawsuit if sony knew then what they did then boy we would be in deep doo doo

 

damn digital rights

[NovaXpress]

Indeed, the Atari/Sega suit wasn't over the connector. It was over certain programming tricks that Atari had a claim on. Not sure if it was all software-related or hardware as well.

 

What I found:

 

This lawsuit, over Atari's claims that Sega infringes its patents, was

settled out of court on 9/28/94. Sega got to use Atari's patents. Sega

had to pay Atari, immediately, a total of $50 million covering the remaining 7

years of patents. Sega also had to buy 4.7 million shares of Atari stock for

$40 million. Sega and Atari get to cross-license 5 games a year, excluding

Sonic games.

[A.J. Franzman]

Since the 2600 contains no coyrightable software or proprietary hardware, it was open season for clones.

The TIA does contain a lot of interesting trickery and timing issues. I've asked before and not really seen answered: how accurately did back-in-the-day clones mimic such things, given that even today's efforts aren't perfect?

I may be wrong, but couldn't Atari have patented the TIA, or at least some of the "tricks" they built into it? If they did so, would that have made it "proprietary hardware" and given them legal ammunition against the clone machines and unauthorized adapter modules? Also, if the darned thing was never proprietary, why are they so hard to find outside of assembled hardware?

Edited December 1, 2006 by A.J. Franzman

[Uzumaki]

TIA is a custom chip with no generic equivalent like ECG or NS so Atari could have patented and copyrighted it. I guess Atari missed something and both Mattel and Coleco took advantage of it.

[R.Cade]

Namco actually started out as Atari Japan. Atari wouldn't or couldn't produce enough Breakout machines to supply demand, so they were getting killed with clones. So Namco (Atari Japan) started cloning it themselves. Eventually, Atari just sold the division to the guy who was running it, which then became NAMCO.

Not true. The company that became Namco was formed in 1955 to produce children's arcade rides. The name "Namco" was adopted in 1971. In 1974, they purchased Atari's Japansese distributor and entered the video game market. In 1978 they began to make their own games.

 

This is why stuff needs to be written down at some point in one place, too many bullshit stories are getting passed around by classic gamers. A kernel of truth usually gets misinterpreted then spread and becomes accepted as canon.

 

It's not bullshit- you just went into more detail.

 

So NAMCO existed before and came in and bought the division on behalf of the guy running it, making it NAMCO in the process. Same outcome. The source is the "Ultimate History of Video Games" which I just began reading. It seems to be researched and footnoted well with all sources.

Edited December 1, 2006 by R.Cade