Curt Vendel, on Sun Apr 25, 2010 10:31 PM, said:
I would agree - work environment wise, it would be much more fun and interesting under Nolan, then under the strictness and fear of the Tramiels.
The question though at the end of the day would be - who would produce more profittable and innovative products of the two?
I think its possible to say both - profits under the Tramiels, faster turnaround, but I think products would be more innovative under Bushnell...
Again its tough to tell, the Tramiels caught on to being more creative at the end of Atari's days and Bushnell I think lost a lot of his innovative spark by witness of the "Wallruss Debacle" and the "blip" but not a sustained "wow" of the uWink concept...
Pong and especially home pong were improvements over the Odyssey for certain, Home Pong in particular coming out of the gate with incredible color display, excellent audio and on-screen scoring.
OS/2 was ALWAYS and still is - superior to Windows. MS Killed off a far better OS and we all got stuck with Windows :-/
Curt, I can agree with just about all of that. BTW, I liked your parts in the BBS Documentary from a few years back quite a bit. Of course, you did have home field advantage since you were one of the people representing the Atari computer user experience...
I'm not sure I can agree with the part about the Tramiel "fast turn around" part. The ST was finished pretty fast if counting only from the point TTL bought up the Atari Consumer assets but if counting Shivji's (sic) prior work at Commodore, not so much...
NolanB, on Sun Apr 25, 2010 10:50 PM, said:
Atari is such a different company now than when it was just a silly portion of Infogramms. Look at Jef Lapins success. He is a very smart guy and is in my opinion making all the right moves to create a videogame company of the future. Remember, It is not what we have done historically that counts but what we do in the future. The problem that anyone that does something we are subject to the criticism of those who have never done anything. I love my involvement with Atari, Chuck E. Cheese and most of my 20 founded companies of which all except 4 were sold at a profit. Happy to take criticism from anyone that has a better track record. Other wise shut the fuck up.
Mr. Bushnell, if that's really you, thanks for posting.
I am curious about what you were going to post in response to my comments earlier. I'll explain mine. A few months back on a different thread on this board, I predicted that Time Warner would ultimately purchase "Atari"/Infogrames based upon the fact that they can't seem to keep their hands off "Atari" [based upon how often what was once the Atari Games Corporation had bounced back and forth between them and other companies, and all that IP is now back with them following their acquisition of the remnants of Midway in December 2009]. If Time Warner were to acquire "Atari"/Infogrames, then they could rename their "Warner Bros. Interactive" division with the more cherished corporate name.
And if that's really you, I would like to ask a question about the film in development. While DiCaprio is a major star and box office draw, don't you think the actor Ed Quinn [formerly of SyFy's
Eureka] would be a better match to portray you on-screen? Perhaps DiCaprio would be better as Al Alcorn....