WI:No ET,and Those Screwed Up Atari Games

Mid 1980's,the Videogame Crash happened.
Most of the sources blame ET,Pac Man Atari Edition,and such.

What If..those games who is commonly blamed for the crash,NEVER Existed at all? Will The Crash prevented? And what is the impact of No VG Crash?
 

Dirk_Pitt

Banned
I watched a documentary on the early gaming era and Atari was mentioned.

Avoid the owner selling Atari. That sale was the beginning of the end for Atari.
 
Mid 1980's,the Videogame Crash happened.
Most of the sources blame ET,Pac Man Atari Edition,and such.

What If..those games who is commonly blamed for the crash,NEVER Existed at all? Will The Crash prevented? And what is the impact of No VG Crash?

There's only one way you can avoid it, and I've put a LOT of thought into this subject, and here's your POD to avoid (or at least blunt) The Crash:

In November of 1979, Atari finally released it's two entries into the home computer market; the Atari 800 and the Atari 400.

Now, while the 800 was a decent enough computer, the 400 was nothing but a dressed up (and over-priced) game console.

Stands to reason though, as two of the chips used in the 400 and 800 computers (ANTIC and CTIA, the graphics and display chips) were actually being developed specifically for the 'perfected' Atari video game console, scheduled for a 1980 release. POKEY, the third new chip, was put together on the fly and handled both potentiometers and sound.

Now, while ANTIC (AlphaNumeric Television Interface Circuit), CTIA (Color Television Interface Adapter) and POKEY (POt KEYboard Integrated Circuit) weren't quite perfected (CTIA had some flaws to it and would, eventually, be replaced by an improved version GTIA and POKEY's wave table was quite limited, and ANTIC suffered from one flaw that's really only a flaw if it's a purpose built computer display chip in that it lacked 80 column capability) they WERE a fairly formidable package, capable of some remarkable feats for their time.

So much so that Warner Communications (Atari's parent company at the time) would have been MUCH better served to do this in 1979:

1. Design a dual purpose motherboard that would satisfy the requirements of both the computer guys AND the console guys.

2. Build the 800 as designed.

3. Rather than building 400s, make a console out of the 400 configured boards. (Complete with 6502 CPU, ANTIC, CTIA and POKEY, with 4-8 K of RAM, depending on how much they can put in a machine priced to sell at $200 dollars and four controller ports.)

4. Release both the 800 and...whatever they end up calling the new console in November of '79 (OTL when they released the 400/800) but with a little twist...

You see, Atari had acquired exclusive rights to produce a home version of the blockbuster arcade game of 1978: Taito's Space Invaders.

OTL, what few people realize, is that Space Invaders was the title that moved more 2600s than ANY title ever produced for the system. In fact, it helped move so many 2600s, it shackled Atari to a weak system for long past it's expiration date.

So, for your second POD, have Warner (in order to promote the new system) release Space Invaders as an exclusive title to the new console.

Basically, have Warner eat the loss on those final 250,000 or so unsold 2600s and go all in on the new system in 1979 and completely shift development and production to 800/New System in '78 and '79 for a fall of '79 launch.

Hell, if they abandon the 2600 by mid-'78, they might actually come out with even better hardware and a better overall system.

For one thing, if they use a dual purposed board for the 800 AND the new console, they can maintain compatibility between the two systems, meaning, they can give themselves a brilliant two pronged push into both the home computer market AND the console market, as total compatibility (uniform cartridge size and format) between the two systems give the consumer more flexibility at the point of purchase: The consumer who wants a computer but also wants to play video games has the option of buying an 800 that can run all Atari console games. The consumer who just wants a console gets a damn good console (light years better than the 2600 OR Intellivision).

So how does that impact The Crash?

While I don't know if it can kill ET, it puts a KILLER Pac Man in people's homes in time for Christmas 1981.

See, the 2600 just couldn't handle Pac Man. They TRIED to make a 'good' Pac Man for the 2600...and came to the realization that it simply couldn't be done. MEANWHILE, porting Pac Man for the Atari 8 bit computers and 5200 Super System, in OTL, was not only a cinch, the version ported for 8 bit/ 5200 stood as the undisputed BEST home port of the game until Tengen released a version for the NES in 1989.

So, at the very least, Pac Man's going to satisfy the throngs and make LOTS of dough for Atari in FY 1982. (Assuming that Atari begins working on a home port released for new system/800 in early to mid 1981 for either a Christmas 1981 release or spring 1982 release.)

THAT could possibly offset the ET flop. Think of it this way: Say Pac Man is driving sales of the 1979 Atari console, along with other Atari Games blockbusters like Tempest, Centipede, Defender, Space Invaders, Asteroids, Missile Command, etc... PLUS, a really slick looking (and playing) Raiders of The Lost Ark and other licensed games.

Further, sales are booming to satisfy the hunger for Pitfall! (released in 1982) and, a game that could have gone straight to console (had the console in question been a stripped down 400) called Miner 2049er.

Miner 2049er, by Big Five Software, was released for Atari 8 bit computers in 1982. (They would eventually release a crap version for the consoles of the day, but none of them could stack up to the original Atari 8 bit computer release.) If you're not familiar with the game, look it up, because it really was (for the time it was released) a magnificent game. 10 unique levels (that's 6 more than Donkey Kong) and a magnificent platformer that could have redefined the platformer in a manner similar to what Pitfall! would do...if had been available (in it's entirety and in it's 8 bit glory) for a home video game console.

Big bonus here is that Swordquest could yield four really good games and a franchise all it's own on a much more sophisticated platform, further offsetting the losses that ET would generate.

See, if Atari just goes with '400 as a console, rather than a cut rate computer in 1979' then that butterflys away at least TWO of The Four Great Failures That Doomed Atari in 1982:

1. The Atari 5200 Super System was a bust.
2. The Atari 1200XL home computer was a MEGA bust.
3. 2600 Pac Man was just putrid and left consumers feeling cheated.
4. ET was a rushed atrocity.

(The excess of Swordquest didn't help matters, but if the games are good, Atari could actually break even there.)

If Atari only has to recall the 1200XLs and swallow the losses of ET, it's dinged and FY 1983 ain't pretty, BUT, she's not killed by those two failures.

Just those two alone can't kill Atari and, frankly, I think the sophistication of games for a fully 8 bit Atari console that's been around since 1979 could nullify the glut of shitware that caused the other component of The Crash.

If the games being published by 'The Big Boys' (Atari Games, Activision, Imagic, Parker Bros.) and some of the better 'Up and Comers' (Epyx, Broderbund, Big Five, CBS Games) are setting the bar high (and sales on fire) the fly-by-nights and 'no business being in the damn industry' game developers don't even bother, because demand for the good product won't leave an inch of shelf space for the fly-by-nights and fad developers, thus, no over-saturation of the market and 'shelf-crowding' and thus, no Crash.

But that's just my opinion.:)
 
There's only one way you can avoid it, and I've put a LOT of thought into this subject, and here's your POD to avoid (or at least blunt) The Crash:

In November of 1979, Atari finally released it's two entries into the home computer market; the Atari 800 and the Atari 400.

Now, while the 800 was a decent enough computer, the 400 was nothing but a dressed up (and over-priced) game console.

Stands to reason though, as two of the chips used in the 400 and 800 computers (ANTIC and CTIA, the graphics and display chips) were actually being developed specifically for the 'perfected' Atari video game console, scheduled for a 1980 release. POKEY, the third new chip, was put together on the fly and handled both potentiometers and sound.

Now, while ANTIC (AlphaNumeric Television Interface Circuit), CTIA (Color Television Interface Adapter) and POKEY (POt KEYboard Integrated Circuit) weren't quite perfected (CTIA had some flaws to it and would, eventually, be replaced by an improved version GTIA and POKEY's wave table was quite limited, and ANTIC suffered from one flaw that's really only a flaw if it's a purpose built computer display chip in that it lacked 80 column capability) they WERE a fairly formidable package, capable of some remarkable feats for their time.

So much so that Warner Communications (Atari's parent company at the time) would have been MUCH better served to do this in 1979:

1. Design a dual purpose motherboard that would satisfy the requirements of both the computer guys AND the console guys.

2. Build the 800 as designed.

3. Rather than building 400s, make a console out of the 400 configured boards. (Complete with 6502 CPU, ANTIC, CTIA and POKEY, with 4-8 K of RAM, depending on how much they can put in a machine priced to sell at $200 dollars and four controller ports.)

4. Release both the 800 and...whatever they end up calling the new console in November of '79 (OTL when they released the 400/800) but with a little twist...

You see, Atari had acquired exclusive rights to produce a home version of the blockbuster arcade game of 1978: Taito's Space Invaders.

OTL, what few people realize, is that Space Invaders was the title that moved more 2600s than ANY title ever produced for the system. In fact, it helped move so many 2600s, it shackled Atari to a weak system for long past it's expiration date.

So, for your second POD, have Warner (in order to promote the new system) release Space Invaders as an exclusive title to the new console.

Basically, have Warner eat the loss on those final 250,000 or so unsold 2600s and go all in on the new system in 1979 and completely shift development and production to 800/New System in '78 and '79 for a fall of '79 launch.

Hell, if they abandon the 2600 by mid-'78, they might actually come out with even better hardware and a better overall system.

For one thing, if they use a dual purposed board for the 800 AND the new console, they can maintain compatibility between the two systems, meaning, they can give themselves a brilliant two pronged push into both the home computer market AND the console market, as total compatibility (uniform cartridge size and format) between the two systems give the consumer more flexibility at the point of purchase: The consumer who wants a computer but also wants to play video games has the option of buying an 800 that can run all Atari console games. The consumer who just wants a console gets a damn good console (light years better than the 2600 OR Intellivision).

So how does that impact The Crash?

While I don't know if it can kill ET, it puts a KILLER Pac Man in people's homes in time for Christmas 1981.

See, the 2600 just couldn't handle Pac Man. They TRIED to make a 'good' Pac Man for the 2600...and came to the realization that it simply couldn't be done. MEANWHILE, porting Pac Man for the Atari 8 bit computers and 5200 Super System, in OTL, was not only a cinch, the version ported for 8 bit/ 5200 stood as the undisputed BEST home port of the game until Tengen released a version for the NES in 1989.

So, at the very least, Pac Man's going to satisfy the throngs and make LOTS of dough for Atari in FY 1982. (Assuming that Atari begins working on a home port released for new system/800 in early to mid 1981 for either a Christmas 1981 release or spring 1982 release.)

THAT could possibly offset the ET flop. Think of it this way: Say Pac Man is driving sales of the 1979 Atari console, along with other Atari Games blockbusters like Tempest, Centipede, Defender, Space Invaders, Asteroids, Missile Command, etc... PLUS, a really slick looking (and playing) Raiders of The Lost Ark and other licensed games.

Further, sales are booming to satisfy the hunger for Pitfall! (released in 1982) and, a game that could have gone straight to console (had the console in question been a stripped down 400) called Miner 2049er.

Miner 2049er, by Big Five Software, was released for Atari 8 bit computers in 1982. (They would eventually release a crap version for the consoles of the day, but none of them could stack up to the original Atari 8 bit computer release.) If you're not familiar with the game, look it up, because it really was (for the time it was released) a magnificent game. 10 unique levels (that's 6 more than Donkey Kong) and a magnificent platformer that could have redefined the platformer in a manner similar to what Pitfall! would do...if had been available (in it's entirety and in it's 8 bit glory) for a home video game console.

Big bonus here is that Swordquest could yield four really good games and a franchise all it's own on a much more sophisticated platform, further offsetting the losses that ET would generate.

See, if Atari just goes with '400 as a console, rather than a cut rate computer in 1979' then that butterflys away at least TWO of The Four Great Failures That Doomed Atari in 1982:

1. The Atari 5200 Super System was a bust.
2. The Atari 1200XL home computer was a MEGA bust.
3. 2600 Pac Man was just putrid and left consumers feeling cheated.
4. ET was a rushed atrocity.

(The excess of Swordquest didn't help matters, but if the games are good, Atari could actually break even there.)

If Atari only has to recall the 1200XLs and swallow the losses of ET, it's dinged and FY 1983 ain't pretty, BUT, she's not killed by those two failures.

Just those two alone can't kill Atari and, frankly, I think the sophistication of games for a fully 8 bit Atari console that's been around since 1979 could nullify the glut of shitware that caused the other component of The Crash.

If the games being published by 'The Big Boys' (Atari Games, Activision, Imagic, Parker Bros.) and some of the better 'Up and Comers' (Epyx, Broderbund, Big Five, CBS Games) are setting the bar high (and sales on fire) the fly-by-nights and 'no business being in the damn industry' game developers don't even bother, because demand for the good product won't leave an inch of shelf space for the fly-by-nights and fad developers, thus, no over-saturation of the market and 'shelf-crowding' and thus, no Crash.

But that's just my opinion.:)
I Agree.

BUT.

The creation of NES Is Inevitable,and It have been proven that NES Is more Superior.
HOW Atari can beat that?
 
The only things superior about the NES are the tilemodes and the fact that management actually understands gameplay. Everything else was add-on chips. The Atari Player/Missle system is more versatile than most people's general sprites, and POKEY is exactly on par with the NES's sound channels. Actually, it's even better than them because they are general purpose, while the NES's each have specific ranges. Plus, both C/GTIA and MARIA had far larger color pallettes and colors on screen.

Tilemodes make scrolling and platformer games much easier to code for, (the original Super Mario Bros only took up 32KB) but more system RAM, say, 64 K or so, would give more wiggle room in that regard.

And the NES won't be coming to America before 1986 at the earliest. Plenty of time to design and implement the generation after that "Atari 400 Console."
 
The only things superior about the NES are the tilemodes and the fact that management actually understands gameplay. Everything else was add-on chips. The Atari Player/Missle system is more versatile than most people's general sprites, and POKEY is exactly on par with the NES's sound channels. Actually, it's even better than them because they are general purpose, while the NES's each have specific ranges. Plus, both C/GTIA and MARIA had far larger color pallettes and colors on screen.

Tilemodes make scrolling and platformer games much easier to code for, (the original Super Mario Bros only took up 32KB) but more system RAM, say, 64 K or so, would give more wiggle room in that regard.

And the NES won't be coming to America before 1986 at the earliest. Plenty of time to design and implement the generation after that "Atari 400 Console."
Remember The Famicom.
And those Intellivision family.
 
Forgive the shameless plug, TheTimeRanger, but perhaps you'd enjoy my TL, Dirty Laundry, which has preventing the Video Game Crash of 1983 as a major story element.

Anyway, the short and direct answer to your question is that Atari had negotiated the exclusive worldwide rights (outside of Japan, that is) to distribute Nintendo's Famicom in early 1984! IOTL, Atari was busy self-destructing and was then sold to Jack Tramiel in the summer of '84 to serve as a vehicle for Tramiel's planned Mac-killer (which became OTL's Atari 520ST).

Nudge Atari back on the right course, and the Atari-Nintendo deal stays in place....
 
Forgive the shameless plug, TheTimeRanger, but perhaps you'd enjoy my TL, Dirty Laundry, which has preventing the Video Game Crash of 1983 as a major story element.

Anyway, the short and direct answer to your question is that Atari had negotiated the exclusive worldwide rights (outside of Japan, that is) to distribute Nintendo's Famicom in early 1984! IOTL, Atari was busy self-destructing and was then sold to Jack Tramiel in the summer of '84 to serve as a vehicle for Tramiel's planned Mac-killer (which became OTL's Atari 520ST).

Nudge Atari back on the right course, and the Atari-Nintendo deal stays in place....
Easy,Bro.

Isnt a Game/Console caused the Deal's Cancellation?
 
The only things superior about the NES are the tilemodes and the fact that management actually understands gameplay. Everything else was add-on chips. The Atari Player/Missle system is more versatile than most people's general sprites, and POKEY is exactly on par with the NES's sound channels. Actually, it's even better than them because they are general purpose, while the NES's each have specific ranges. Plus, both C/GTIA and MARIA had far larger color pallettes and colors on screen.

Tilemodes make scrolling and platformer games much easier to code for, (the original Super Mario Bros only took up 32KB) but more system RAM, say, 64 K or so, would give more wiggle room in that regard.

Indeed.

Sadly, the full potential of the Atari 8 bit hardware wasn't fully realized until long after it became obsolete.

If they go with the Atari 8 bit hardware in BOTH directions in 1979, they can drop the inferior 2600 line and start developers working with the 8 bit chipset, in earnest, about three years sooner than OTL. Full compatibility between 800 and Console '79 actually turns the 800 into a must have for aspiring game developers, as it's THE tool for developing games for Console '79.

If Atari 800's become THE 'in-demand' home computer of 1979-1981, you'd see a LOT more innovation and programming tricks and 'discoveries' utilizing that hardware THEN, as game developers keep pushing the envelope to see just what their bread and butter machine is capable of.

In turn, this could very well influence further refinement of the 8 bit chipset (GTIA really did need to be implemented as CTIA had some flaws that were never fully worked out) in the form of enhanced versions of ANTIC, CTIA/GTIA and POKEY being developed for a successor system that should be ready for market (if they time it right AND avoid a market meltdown like OTL) by fall of 1984. (Spring/Summer 1985 if FY 1983 causes a reshuffle at the top over a busted 1200XL and ET catastrophe; heads would HAVE to roll for bungles of those proportions.)

That's the key though: More users, more exploration, more pushing the envelope, the full potential of the chips is really starting to show by late '81, at the latest.

So that's how you throw a wrench at the NES: Have the original ANTIC-C/GTIA-POKEY chips show what they're capable of to devs and then follow it up with enhanced versions of those chips for a next generation system and corresponding computer (gotta have that game development machine out there on the consumer market and priced for aspiring devs to own ASAP, absolutely critical) that launches 4-5 years after the first full powered 8 bit systems (800 and Console '79).

If Coleco still blows itself up with The Adam Bomb and Mattel still can't get it's act together on a means to reduce the manufacturing cost of Intellivision (which they could have done if they'd consolidated the graphic generating processes into a single chip or a dual chip package like Atari had) Atari's going to be alone in the North American and European markets and PROBABLY turning it's attention to the Pacific Rim, ESPECIALLY if the superiority of their system is evident to anybody who takes a passing look at an Atari 8 bit system with fully realized potential against the Famicom.

There's a good chance Nintendo and Sega build better systems to fight off Atari Console '84/'85 and then attempt to bring the war to Atari in NA and Europe by 1986/'87.

It could get VERY interesting.

And the NES won't be coming to America before 1986 at the earliest. Plenty of time to design and implement the generation after that "Atari 400 Console."

And that's where Atari has to focus (something they really had trouble doing OTL by 1982-83 with lots of R&D money being dumped into all sorts of different projects with lots of plans, but only in the loosest sense.

Atari would have to break their development teams down into two groups for the 1980s:

Group 8: 8 bit console and computer development. These guys are developing the successor to Console '79; Console '84/'85 and the successor to the 800. (Preferably, they build an open box hybrid of the best features of the 1200XL and 800XL with the enhanced versions of ANTIC, C/GTIA and POKEY and more on board memory at purchase; 64K at least, 128K even better.)

Group 16: The guys working towards the 16 bit system that will succeed system '84/'85 and computer to support it and also keep their competitive edge in the home computer market.

For Group 16, I like the idea of sticking with Jay Miner and Co. and High Toro to develop 'Amiga'/Atari 16. It would require an additional chip for the Atari 16 (a 6502 co-processor to enable the A16 to run Console '79 and Console '84/'85 games) and the sound and graphics hardware might need to be descendents of ANTIC, C/GTIA and POKEY, but it's the smart business model. You want the customer to be able to still use their existing game library with your new console, even as you're putting it behind you and moving ahead and developing software solely for the new console.
 
Top