Slashdot Mirror


Atari CEO Confirms the Company Is Working On a New Game Console (venturebeat.com)

Dean Takahashi, reporting for VentureBeat: Atari CEO Fred Chesnais told GamesBeat in an exclusive interview that his fabled video game company is working on a new game console. In doing so, the New York company might be cashing in on the popularity of retro games and Nintendo's NES Classic Edition, which turned out to be surprisingly popular for providing a method to easily play old games like Super Mario Bros. and The Legend of Zelda in HD on a TV. Last week, Atari began teasing a new product called the Ataribox. The video released on a non-Atari web site showed a picture of some kind of hardware product, but many people wondered if the teaser was fake. Others had no idea what the video was showing about a "brand new Atari product years in the making."

91 comments

  1. Sigh by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

    $20 says this is vaporware. Any takers?

    --
    Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    1. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If it's just another Emulator with pre-loaded ROMs, not interesting.

      If they made a fully programmable console with ports for removable media - even if it was just emulating the 2600 - that's a little more interesting

      A catchy tune more about the ZX Spectrum, but still: https://youtu.be/Ts96J7HhO28

      Imagine a modern console platform anybody could cut software for without all the fuckery. Spicy

    2. Re:Sigh by Joce640k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nintendo's NES Classic Edition, which turned out to be surprisingly popular

      Big difference: NES games were an order of magnitude better than Atari 2600 games.

      Launching a 2600 emulator in a box will be a huge flop. Most of the games were shovelware if we're honest.

      --
      No sig today...
    3. Re:Sigh by TWX · · Score: 2

      Based on your username I expect that you're of the same generation I am, and that the original Nintendo Entertainment System came out right about the time you were old enough to pay attention to video games.

      For this generation an Atari 2600 would feel like a step backward, but for those who are only a few years older it might be just what they want, as it was the mainstream system when they were old enough to get into video games. In short, if it emulates the 2600 and even the 5200 or 7800 it would be aimed at children of the seventies more than children of the eighties.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    4. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much all but 10 of them, and even those are only playable for 5 minutes before the novelty wears off.

      You can only go back so far, there is a time when video games were more experimental than anything, and that was the Atari. I only have so much freetime, not going to spend it playing Pong for hours on end; a game where you've seen all there is to see in just 5 seconds.

    5. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. The 2600 games - even the good ones - were too basic to be interesting today.

    6. Re:Sigh by pr0fessor · · Score: 2

      Wasn't Pacman, Donkey Kong, Donkey Kong jr, Mario bros., and galaga all on atari also.The atari came out in the 70s and the nes in the 80s so the games look much better on nes but they were still a lot of the same games.

    7. Re:Sigh by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      But that was what the switches were for! If you got tired of playing Combat with tanks 1-on-1, you could play Combat with 3 tanks versus 3 tanks! Or 3 tanks versus 1 fat tank! Not good enough? How about Combat with planes!

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    8. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were often, if not always, terrible ports of the arcade versions at the time.

    9. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For this generation an Atari 2600 would feel like a step backward, but for those who are only a few years older it might be just what they want, as it was the mainstream system when they were old enough to get into video games.

      Hah! Just goes to show what you kids know. (shakes cane impotently)

      The Atari VCS (it didn't have a number when it first came out) and Intellivision were the cat's pyjamas when I was of the age you describe yourself as being with the NES. I spent more than I should have on game cartridges for mine.

      I have zero interest in anything like the NES Classic that would come preloaded with the crude games of an Atari or Intellivision. You could preload every single game ever released for either console and I would have no interest. The games were lame then; they wouldn't survive beyond a five minute "OMG, I can't believe I once played this" session today.

      I never owned a ColecoVision, but I would consider dropping $20 or so on something NES-Classic-like if it came preloaded with a pile of decent ColecoVision games. Not much more than $20, though, as I doubt I would plug it in and turn it on more than twice.

      Now get off my lawn!

    10. Re:Sigh by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      For this generation an Atari 2600 would feel like a step backward, but for those who are only a few years older it might be just what they want, as it was the mainstream system when they were old enough to get into video games.

      My opinion is worth no more than anyone else's, but - I did "get into video games" way back in the Atari 2600 era, but I have little interest in an Atari 2600 throwback. The games were just too primitive, even though at the time they were fun.

      The next generation - Amiga, Intellivision, etc. - is about as far back as I'd ever want to go... and, even then, I have to be in a particular mood to play those. I do actually own - somewhere - a bunch of "classic" re-releases of those games, ported to the PS3. They're fun to play, binge style, maybe once a year (or two).

      NES games are probably the first where the gameplay was involved enough to hold one's interest without the graphics being so bad that your brain starts rebelling after a while.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    11. Re:Sigh by Jhon · · Score: 1

      " but for those who are only a few years older it might be just what they want,"

      I am of that generation and it's not really what I want. It would be a nice ADD ON to something that could play 8bit games and had 4 joystick ports. Hell... I'd be there if it could only play M.U.L.E.

    12. Re:Sigh by slack_justyb · · Score: 1

      Imagine a modern console platform anybody could cut software for without all the fuckery. Spicy

      Wasn't that supposed to be Ouya? I think the idea of having anyone cut software is great and all, but I don't think that model fits with consoles enough to be the sole model. I think that was Ouya's biggest fault, they just expected everyone to come to them. All of the really successful cut as you like games by indies usually go after PC first and let consoles come to them. Ouya thought that indies would want to target them because of licensing issues with the big three, but it doesn't seem like indies have massive problems with the big three's indie programs. Additionally, sans issues outright with licensing, I'm pretty sure indies look to get more eyes on their brand via the console more than anything else.

      I'm all about championing Atari's rise from the ashes, but I'm three degrees past hyper-skeptical this will amount to anything that doesn't collapse shortly after take off. But I will say this, I'll be pleased as peaches if I'm insanely wrong about Atari.

    13. Re:Sigh by JackieBrown · · Score: 2

      For me, the game has to be one I played when growing up. Then the nostalgia can overcome any shortcomings or unfair comparisons to today's games.

    14. Re:Sigh by darkain · · Score: 1

      OUYA kickstarter person here, have two in my house. The reason OUYA failed is because the dashboard interface is a slow clunky piece of shit UI. The other reason is because of all the issues with the controller. Having it separate literally right at the analog sticks for the battery compartments was great in theory, but caused the analog sticks to have issues. Also, the four main face buttons would get stuck under the removable battery compartment doors, too. OUYA was ambitions, but failed miserably in the UX/UI department all around. This honestly makes me sad too, even to this day, because the concept was such an amazing one, but absolute shit execution beyond the main hardware of the console itself.

    15. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Nintendo Classic Edition was s flop! Or else why are they not being made any more? Basically it was an emulator with a very limited number of NES games included and no way to buy or install more NES games.

      Plus the Nintendo Classic Edition was never really available for the advertised ~$60.00 price. A few unscrupulous people were allowed to buy the limited number available, and then "scalped" them for $300.00 or more.

      For less than $100, I can get a kit that includes a Raspberry PI 3b with everything I need, including a preprogrammed MicroSD card and USB controllers, to put together a retro gaming system that already has emulators for a number of early gaming consoles. All that I need are the ROM images for the games I want. Nintendo, Atari, Sega, etc... all need to sell copies of their complete collections of ROM images for like $15.00 each. I have heard that there are web sites where unscrupulous persons can download pretty much any game ROM for any retro console system for free. Not that I condone copyright infringement, just saying that people might pay a few $ for a complete collection of ROM images.

    16. Re:Sigh by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      The games were lame then; they wouldn't survive beyond a five minute "OMG, I can't believe I once played this" session today.

      Pretty much this. Nostalgia is one thing, reality will be another.

      --
      No sig today...
    17. Re:Sigh by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Based on your username I expect that you're of the same generation I am, and that the original Nintendo Entertainment System came out right about the time you were old enough to pay attention to video games.

      What do they say about assuming?

      I was in my 20s when the NES came out, been playing games a long time by then.

      --
      No sig today...
    18. Re:Sigh by Joce640k · · Score: 2

      Wasn't Pacman, Donkey Kong, Donkey Kong jr, Mario bros., and galaga all on atari also.The atari came out in the 70s and the nes in the 80s so the games look much better on nes but they were still a lot of the same games.

      They had the same names on the boxes but they weren't comparable on screen. Not even close.

      --
      No sig today...
    19. Re:Sigh by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      The 2600 was a joke. The fact that is all most people remember of Atari is really really sad. The 5200 was great with third party joysticks. The Atari 400/800/XL/XE were f**king awesome. The ST was a pretty cool machine and was decent competition for the early Mac and Amiga. Aside from the 5200 (basically a 400 w/ terrible analog sticks) and later Lynx handheld I have little interest in their game systems. Their computers were INCREDIBLY underrated.

      I would rather see another attempt at a home computer than a lame nostalgia game console. Something in a smaller 800XL style case, decent keyboard, 4 or 8-core 64-bit ARM with a cheap, well-documented GPU..... maybe a real SSD instead of slow-ass SD, HDMI and a bunch of USB ports. Maybe a PCIe "cartridge" slot for expansion and break out some buffered GPIO pins. And maybe take a stab at a nice lightweight *NIX desktop OS and include development tools with LOTS of docs aimed at beginning programmers and hardware hackers. Maybe throw in some emulators for running old TOS/GEM or 8-bit stuff. I would buy that.

      I want a nice hackable, open and fun machine again with usable performance, no Intel ME-style BS, no DRM and fewer levels of abstraction and blobs between me and the hardware.

    20. Re:Sigh by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      NES games are probably the first where the gameplay was involved enough to hold one's interest without the graphics being so bad that your brain starts rebelling after a while.

      The Atari 5200 wasn't bad but the game library was much smaller and the stock joysticks were crap. Other than that it was basically an Atari 400 computer with analog sticks. The 2600 was a turd and I'm not sure why that's all people remember of Atari. They had much better game systems and computers that were alive into the 90's. The 7800 sucked too as it was kinda a 2600 on steroids. I was more a fan of their computer lines.

    21. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Ms. Pac-Man port was surprisingly good. But yeah, most ports of arcade games were pretty terrible.

    22. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ZX Spectrum was a complete mess. It's limited color palette and sound capabilities made for an awful gaming experience. The Famicom came out in Japan a year later had better sound and colors and was about the same price.

      It wasn't as good as the Commodore 64 either, which was more expensive, but fell in price quickly.

    23. Re:Sigh by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      I'd buy something like that. I miss my old ST. I used a desktop publishing program on it called Pagestream and designed a lot of forms, including one my company still uses today. ST + Pagestream = awesome.

    24. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's kind of like Tiger Electronics games. Even at the time, I think we all recognized them as cheap toys that ended up as stocking stuffers or gadgets to distract kids on road trips. No one wants to really revisit them.

      Thing is that a lot of Atari 2600 and other early console games were ports from arcades and you might as well just load up MAME and play them that way. Arcade machines had far better graphics at the time.

      I also don't get the way whenever talks about ZX Spectrum games nostalgically. I just don't understand it. It didn't even have proper sound. Contrast that to the Commodore 64 which looked decent and had sound (To see an evolution in graphics, see this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fj5cAdVo2A4).

      SNES/Genesis-eras are probably the "sweet spot" in terms of 2D graphics since they look good enough to most people. Plus, the style continued into the GBA and NDS eras, as well as today's indie games.

    25. Re:Sigh by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      ...and it was part of the problem.

      People (bosses) insisted on porting arcade games just to get recognizable names on the cartridge boxes. Programmers hated doing it so the result was mostly crapware.

      --
      No sig today...
    26. Re:Sigh by Koen+Lefever · · Score: 1

      The Atari 400/800/XL/XE were f**king awesome. The ST was a pretty cool machine and was decent competition for the early Mac and Amiga.

      Agreed.

      Dont forget Atari also did the first MS-DOS palmtop PC and the ATW/Abaq in the late 1980s.

      I was used to a Mandelbrot taking about half an hour on 8 bit machines, to a couple of minutes on a 80x86 PC. I was very pleased my Archimedes could do it in about 20 seconds, until I saw the Atari Transputer Workstation in action which was moving through and zooming in & out of the Mandelbrot set in real time.

      --
      /. refugees on Usenet: news:comp.misc
    27. Re:Sigh by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --2600 Space Invaders, Combat, Defender, Berzerk, Pitfall, Missile Command, Bump-n-Jump, Centipede, and Asteroids were playable for hours. Yars Revenge, Ms Pac-Man, Q-Bert, Frogger, Pole Position, Dig Dug, Adventure, Super Breakout and Vanguard were memorable.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --The Pac-man port to the 2600 was pretty blah compared to the arcade, but still playable. Thousands of ET cartridges literally ended up in a landfill, however. That game was a little buggy...

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  2. Ew. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Atari was a fun novelty in the 80s, but no.

  3. Don't waste your time on the article by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's a couple paragraphs speculating a 22 second video clip of nothing. Do a google image search for the Atari Logo and you will be just as well informed.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:Don't waste your time on the article by aliquis · · Score: 1

      22 second video clip of nothing

      google image search for the Atari Logo and you will be just as well informed

      So which one is it?! ;D

  4. Yawn by Tempest_2084 · · Score: 1

    Why bother? Obviously it's not going to be a current gen console, so it either has to be a '2600 Mini' or something of that nature, or some sort of emulation box. They already have the Flashback series for the 'mini' crowd, and who wants to buy a crappy emulation box these days?

    1. Re:Yawn by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      Eh, it's a viable product for lazy consumers or those afraid of doing to intellectual property tango. It's bringing to the masses the capabilities that were previously held exclusively by geek or those who gave a damn and weren't idiots.

      I'm surprised there's still a company called Atari and that it has a CEO!

      Does it say something about our society when everything is a remake, reboot, or a retro throwback?

    2. Re: Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2600 minis have been on sale for like a decade. A bunch of built in games in a plug n play Atari joystick.

    3. Re: Yawn by arth1 · · Score: 1

      It's not an Atari joystick unless it squeaks.

  5. Don't need another console ecosystem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even if it ends up being a modern console like PS4 Pro or XBox One X, I don't need another console to lock in exclusives to its ecosystem. I prefer the PS exclusives over the XBox exclusives, so I have a PS2, PS3, PS4. I did recently get an XBox 360 for really cheap, I think $60, to play the few exclusives I was really interested in. Maybe I will get an XBox One when I can get one for $60, but it only has 2 games I want to try, and those are on Windows 10 also.

  6. Yes, but does it ... by davidwr · · Score: 1

    ... play Pong?

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  7. Atari recycling old ideas again... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can always get the Atari Flashback 7 Classic Game Console. I would be much interested in an Atari 5200/7800 retro console, two generations I skipped because I had a Commodore 64.

  8. Just a name, several times over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Atari (home console company) died when they were reverse-taken over by JTStorage, a hard drive manufacturer, after the Jaguar failed. A whole three Atari employees joined the company (I think one of them did Jaguar technical support for a few more years). Even that tenuous link was broken when JTStorage when out of business and sold the Atari name to someone else. It's been passed around every since, and anyone claiming to be them now just bought the name from someone who bought it from someone, etc.

    The arcade games half of Atari split off and followed it's own path to being a slightly-valuable trademark.

    1. Re:Just a name, several times over by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's been passed around every since, and anyone claiming to be them now just bought the name from someone who bought it from someone, etc.

      I worked at Accolade when Infogrames went on a buying spree prior to the dot com bust. After they bought Accolade, they bought Hasbro Interactive that also owned the Atari intellectual property rights. It wasn't a coincidence that headquarters got moved from San Jose to Sunnyvale, home for the original Atari, and the company renamed itself to Atari. I believe that Accolade/Infogrames/Atari (same company, different owners, multiple personality disorders) is still behind the current Atari after the most recent bankruptcy. Whenever I wear an Atari t-shirt out in public, I still run into people who worked at the original Atari.

    2. Re:Just a name, several times over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whenever I wear an Atari t-shirt out in public, I still run into people who worked at the original Atari.

      That's easily explained: the logo on that shirt can be seen for miles and miles.

    3. Re:Just a name, several times over by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      The fact that they killed their computer line to focus on the Jaguar was awful. The Falcon060 was a neat machine. Their 68030 machines weren't too bad either but they failed to market them in the US and delay after delay made the ST users feel like they were being sold vaporware.

      And the Jaguar had some horrid defects from the get-go that made taking full advantage of the hardware nearly impossible. It was a neat game system but gambling the company on it was dumb. The 8-bit line and ST's were good machines with a rabidly loyal community built around them and Tramiel's Atari pissed it away.

  9. Jaguar Mark II? by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 1

    Talk about skimping on the info. FTA: "But he said it is based on PC technology. He said Atari is still working on the design and will reveal it at a later date." That kinda points to a higher end system, but I'm with others on the thread. WTH is the point? Consoles only really made sense when PC gaming was laughable. Now it's cheaper overall to build a Mid-Level Gaming PC to handle your light browsing and heavy gaming better than anything a current Gen console can put out. I can't justify a PS4 or XBone purchase, regardless of the exclusives... what in Atari's plans that makes them think that I (and others) will justify them?

    1. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Tailhook · · Score: 1

      Consoles only really made sense when PC gaming was laughable.

      ??

      My last console was a ColecoVision in 1983; all the subsequent gaming that I've done has been on a PC of some sort. Yet I can see that consoles have "made sense" for a vast number of people, and indeed have succeeded in the market concurrently with powerful gaming PC equipment being widely available since at least the late 90's, conservatively.

      I don't know what your definition of 'making sense' is, but it bears no relationship to the marketplace of paying customers that have been buying generations of consoles in the millions despite the wonders of gaming PCs.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    2. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's already a new Jaguar. It managed to confuse me when I heard someone say he tested out a profiling technique "on the Jaguar processor" and I was wondering if he meant Tom or Jerry, or the Motorola 68000.

    3. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you had to put down $5,000 - $6,000 for a PC that could play the games available at the time as opposed to $200-300 on a console that had a larger library and arguably better graphics until EGA/VGA started becoming a thing... PC gaming didn't make sense. It was when Doom came out that the landscape really started to change towards PC's favor.

    4. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Tailhook · · Score: 1

      $5,000 - $6,000

      That's a huge exaggeration. I built machines with dual 3dfx, dual coppermines, adaptec SCSI gear and all manner or other crazy stuff and I have never spent more than about $1600. I could have saved at least 40% easily with slightly more modest gear a still have played every title on the market, and I built such machines for family members. There has never, EVER been a time when $5000 was needed to game on a PC. That's fable. Pure fiction. You either don't know what you're talking about or you're making stuff up.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    5. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

      He's talking about the era before graphic accelerators like the 3dfx.

      Look at games before VGA, before sound cards. At best, you had EGA graphics and Tandy/PCjr audio running on 12~20MHz CPUs that had to do all the graphics one pixel at a time. But those games also had to support 8MHz CPUs, 4-colours CGA graphics and a PC speaker only capable of generating one programmable square wave frequency without any volume control.

      That's what he's talking about.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    6. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      [...] I was wondering if he meant Tom or Jerry [...]

      A Cyrix processor? The founders' names were... drumroll, please... Tom (Brightman) and Jerry (Rogers).

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrix

    7. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the parent was talking about the 80s and then EGA, color monitor, hard drive, even just the keyboard all cost a fuck ton.

      Going back to around 1995 it's much better but if you want to pile good things like a Pentium, L2 cache, fast 2D graphics, even SCSI then it quickly adds up (sure, SCSI was not needed. you had to be rich or a professional or a macintosh user to have SCSI)

    8. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically it can be based on low end PC hardware. Can even be yet another Android box, with an Atari game store bundled.

    9. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Tailhook · · Score: 1

      He's talking about the era before graphic accelerators like the 3dfx.

      If so then my original point stands; gaming PCs have been kicking it since the mid to late 90's and there has been a continuum of very popular consoles that have "made sense" in the marketplace concurrently with those gaming PCs from then till now.

      Consoles are about surviving kids/pets and their slobber. Consoles are about optimizing for very specific hardware and getting highly consistent results with no effort on the part of the end user. Consoles are about zero hassle plug-and-play. None of these prerogatives are going away regardless of how cheap one can cobble together a low end, fragile, complex, malware ridden gaming PC.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    10. Re: Jaguar Mark II? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dropped about 4k on a 486dx50 with (if I recall correctly) 16MB of ram and a voodoo graphics card

    11. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you even know what VGA means? Heard of Doom?

      That was a long time before 3dfx was a thing.

    12. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "until EGA/VGA started becoming a thing"

      How the fuck did you misunderstand this so badly?

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    13. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Z80a · · Score: 1

      I bet this time it will be at least as powerful as the original playstation and not have weird hardware bugs that lock down the system.

    14. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Even with VGA, consoles still had some advantages over the PC hardware.
      The ISA bus heavily limited the fill rate of the video cards, making going over 40 FPS on a PC pretty much impossible, thus not as good as consoles for 2D platformers or fighting games.
      But when the pentium (and it's PCI bus) came, PC surpassed consoles in everything and never actually got surpassed again.

    15. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      You are aware VGA came out in the late eighties, and EGA mid eighties?

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    16. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A machine that could play EGA games did not cost "$5000-$6000". Sure you could pay that much if you really wanted to, but as a minimum to play the games nowhere near.

    17. Re:Jaguar Mark II? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you must be a very young person and not know your PC history at all!

      He's talking about a time before 3Dfx existed, before Windows could even run games, when DOS was the OS of choice!

      Back then, computers were still pretty new; Heck, the PC was called a 'micro computer' because it was considered incredibly small compared to the filing-cabinet sized 'mini-computers'.

      5-6k was considered quite reasonable for such miracles of miniaturization!

      But these were serious business machines and not supposed to be for games, although then as is now, games were the things that pushed the limits of their performance! (Well, until things like the C64 and Amiga started eating their lunch)

  10. "Atari Mini" already exists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sort of.

    Some company is selling retro 2600's, Genesis, etc. systems and they show up at places like Bed Bath and Beyond usually around Christmas. I assume these are licensed systems if they're being sold out in the open in mainstream department stores.

  11. I don't think so by Kohath · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's no reason for people to buy your game console.

    Sony and Nintendo can sell consoles because they have a library of 1st party IPs, first class game publishing operations, and an extensive number of highly talented game creators. Microsoft is struggling because they haven't maintained this part of their business very well and they had a bad console launch.

    Atari has none of this. No one will make games for your console. You can't write the billions of dollars of checks Microsoft wrote to get into the business. It's not going to happen. (Unless it's a tiny, cheap emulator box with games included, like the NES Classic.)

    1. Re:I don't think so by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      No one will make games for your console.

      False.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    2. Re:I don't think so by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Sony and Nintendo can sell consoles because they have a library of 1st party IPs, first class game publishing operations

      Speaking of which, have you seen the latest trailer of Super Mario Odyssey?
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      Say what you want about their re-usage of characters in other games, yet another version of their popular titles, the genre, whatever.. But could you see anyone else making it? With that polish and difference while still being true to the brand / similar enough for it to be exactly what people expect? Taking "the same" game and releasing it once again but still manage to make it different (the polish helps too, looks nice.)

      Wonder how Metroid Prime 4 will look. Sure it would be even better if it could do nice graphics in 4K HDR too.

  12. Sweet, Atari! I look forward to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...you releasing E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial 2 as your first game.

  13. Nothing to stand on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Atari never had a killer title or killer console, and the mind-boggling mystery of the appeal of the unbelievable crap that their earliest 70's and 80's consoles and games were, is nothing they can rehash and cash in on today. What will be the appeal of a new Atari console today?

    1. Re:Nothing to stand on by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      What are you smoking? Their 8-bit computers, the ST and the Lynx were cool machines. I enjoyed my 5200 as a kid too.

      If they can release a competitive console with comparable (or better) performance than Sony or MS at a similar price point I'd buy it.

      For me it's about a cool machine, not a 3 way circle-jerk between MS, Sony and Nintendo. I'd buy a new Sega console too, I liked the Dreamcast.

    2. Re:Nothing to stand on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They had no killer titles for any of their machines, so a reboot in the style of the NES Mini can never happen, and neither can they compete with Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft in the next-gen race, or about developers willing to commit.

      The only thing they can do is put out an Atari-branded Steambox and hope people will buy that instead of the Alienware.

  14. My Atari console by crow · · Score: 1

    Perhaps they're just looking at the retro market, but my idea would be to create a real console, or even partner with one of the existing companies, and create an add-on or special Atari edition of their console.

    For classic games, create a USB cartridge reader (with the various game select toggle switches). The whole thing could be shipped with a built-in flash programmed with a selection of classic games and the emulator. Just plug in to the partner console, and it's a 2600 (or 5200, or 7800).

    Extra bonus if the system is compatible with the USB Stelladaptor so that you could play with the real joysticks (which hopefully they would re-release for this system).

    For example, if Microsoft bought Atari or partnered with them, they could put out the Atari edition X-Box, or offer it as an add-on for the X-Box.

  15. www.ataribox.com by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    All they have is a freakin' blank, empty page?

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  16. Comes bundled with Space Invaders by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

    Right right right right down left left left down ... pew pew pew

  17. Hate the splash page. Loved the Jaguar. by wjcofkc · · Score: 1

    It drives me nuts when companies put up the most possible bare naked splash page for a product they want to me to be interested in. It is meaningless, and makes me suspicious. They could at least be open on where they are at... something... anything. I did like the Jaguar CD, mostly for Battlemorph. On the cartridge side, AvP was alright. I mostly liked playing the games they never finished. Something with a hover tank comes to mind. They also had the best rendered version of Rayman. Needless to say, I am not a serious gamer.

    --
    Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
  18. are there any good pay Emulators? that do more the by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    are there any good pay Emulators? that do more then the free ones that per date them?

    What about away to just buy the roms? so I can use the better Emulators that do way more then the pay ones that are warped with the roms? Some even have the DLC bs as well.

  19. I hope they remake 2600 pacman by Revek · · Score: 1

    And ET.

    1. Re:I hope they remake 2600 pacman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually thought ET was one of the best games for the 2600 and had no idea about all the criticism until I got an internet connection.

      Part of the problem with the game, it was't your typical space-shooter and you actually had to read the instructions in order to understand what was going on. It was *very* different from anything on that platform by far. No it wasn't perfect, but it was a much better game than people give it credit for.

      Alot of the hate for ET seems like internet bandwagon jumping by people that probably never played that game and are just parroting back a meme or whatever.

    2. Re:I hope they remake 2600 pacman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect a lot of people have actually tried it out. But as you say, it makes no sense at all without reading the manual. Who does that anymore?

    3. Re:I hope they remake 2600 pacman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the "worst games/systems" are just misunderstood. From the CDI nintendo games to the Virtualboy. It's easy to see why any of them weren't appreciated or understood at the time of release. But it's a little annoying how few people are willing to try them today before dismissing them. More often than not the games were just trying to push things in new directions.

  20. Too late go home. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    If atari thinks they can compete with PS4 and Xbone they are smoking some high grade drugs.
    Look at Nintendo, the 900 pound gorilla that DESTROYED Atari... They are circling the drain themselves.

    Unless ATARI comes out with full immersive VR and gets well known AAA titles for it out of the gate they might as well give up right now.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  21. If you want the 5200 by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    get an Atari 8-bit computer. They're the same computer (with a few tweaks to the registers so Atari could try and control who released cartridges). Or an XEGS, which is a consolized Atari 800.

    The 7800's a weird beast. You have to be careful you don't break the cartridge prongs off in it like I did when I was a kid (there's two prongs that it uses to connect a 7800 cart to the extra pins that let it be a 7800 cart). Otherwise you've just turned it into a 2600 until you pull it apart. The controllers suck, but IIRC you can use Genesis controllers. The games are kinda strange. Mostly arcade ports. The NES arcade ports are generally better though. But Pole Position II is superb and since it was the pack in cheap. Then there's Ball Blazer & Ninja Golf.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:If you want the 5200 by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      The XEGS has a really mushy keyboard and is more like a repackaged 65XE. It'll run most software written for the 800 and what didn't run has probably been patched by now. The 800 only had 48K vs 64K and some minor OS differences. It was also built like a Sherman tank. Personally, I prefer a modded 800XL. With a cheap $10 FTDI FT232RL breakout board plus an SIO cable you can build an SIO2PC adapter with no additional parts and have the entire library at your fingertips. You can emulate up to 15 Atari floppy drives, printers, etc using a PC or Mac. The SIO2SD device is cheap too.

      I'd skip the 5200 unless you really enjoy rebuilding analog joysticks. All the good exclusive 5200 titles were ported to the 400/800 anyway. And most of the games are ports from the computers. The only game I thought benefited from the analog stick was Star Raiders.

  22. There is no Atari by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    it's just a holding company for the Brand name. They're not really releasing a games console. It'll either be another X games in One or an Android console. Or both. But hey, maybe they'll make some nice hardware.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  23. $$$ We've made retro-gaming easy for masses.. $$$ by WolfgangVL · · Score: 1

    And now the masses are going to fuck it up for us, just like everything else we've made easy enough for the knuckle-draggers and technophobe crowd to figure out.

    See:

    OPEN AND FREE INTERNET. --------> Consolidated, abused, wholly surveiled, and walled.
    HOME AUTOMATION. --------------->Consolidated, abused, wholly surveiled, and walled.
    EMAIL. -----------------> Consolidated, abused, wholly surveiled, and walled.
    etc...

    Right now, I can run retro games on pretty much any hardware I like, it never calls home, it never tries to sell me some useless crap, it never forces commercials or ads, there is no DRM, no datamining, no surveillance, and I have a huge host of open and free softwares to choose from.

    Dear masses,
    Please stay TF away from my old games. They are far to difficult for you anyway. You already have plenty of candy to crush, cubes to endlessly click, and pokemon to collect.

    --
    You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
  24. Oh, so they can now go bankrupt a sixth time? by bodog · · Score: 1

    Such a low barrier to entry on this market, what could go wrong for Atari? Again.

  25. Jag... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Atari did some things right. For example, my Jag (from college) is now with my daughter (at college!), working well, and is incredibly popular among her dorm-mates. We even invested in rotary controller for T2K. Sometimes a company just "nails it", and Atari can do that, occasionally. That said, Atari isn't really Atari anymore, so who knows what is really going on. Could they revive the brand? Absolutely, but they've got to be brave and do it right. Hmmmm. Imagine a truly CHEAP VR rig that plays Jag games and older Atari titles in stereoscopic play. Price the entire rig, including headset, at like $149 and let people have fun playing a host of retro games in VR space...

  26. They already did it in Brazil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They already did it in Brazil

    http://www.tectoy.com.br/atari-flashback-7-tectoy-com-101-jogos-na-memoria/p/995170011820

    (TecToy is a company that makes officially licensed consoles. It's the one that always represented Sega in Brazil too etc.)

  27. Atari Jaguar II by tezbobobo · · Score: 1

    Wasn't the original Jaguar a pretty high spec machine?

  28. Steam Machine? by Zobeid · · Score: 2

    If they had any sense, they'd just make an Atari-branded Steam Machine.

    Sometimes I think Valve today is the closest thing that exists to the old Atari in its heyday, since they are bridging the gap between consoles and "home computers". Rather than try to compete with that, Atari should partner with them.

    1. Re:Steam Machine? by GNious · · Score: 1

      If they had any sense, they'd just make an Atari-branded Steam Machine.

      This is precisely what I'm expecting - a PC with something like Steam, nicely packaged up, and with a pile of old games in an emulator.

  29. This is probably not a NES Classic style system by jeepies · · Score: 1

    They've been selling various versions of the Atari Flashback since 2004. There've been more than a dozen different versions of it and they've been releasing like clockwork before the holidays every year. We already know the Atari Flashback 8 Gold is out in September. I seriously doubt they have 2 retro consoles coming simultaneously. I also doubt they have a "mysterious" marketing campaign going for a console that's already been announced.

    http://www.ign.com/articles/20...

  30. They did launch a 2600 emulator in a box by AC-x · · Score: 1