44 replies to this topic

[Indiana Quack]

I'm fuzzy on this whole issue of people getting upset. Gameinformer is a current gen console/ handheld magazine. This is what they are good at. The people who are reporting on this article probably weren't born yet or even know what an Atari is. I don't get upset over what they reported. They just don't have a clue. AA is where I get all of my Atari knowledge because this site and the people on it are in the know of these classic systems. What Gameinformer did in my opinion, is not something to be upset about, but just something to laugh at. People who try to put something in their magazine just to try to get the attention of classic gamers, and bring more people in to their magazine, is laughable. Hope my opinion is shared.

[Retro Rogue]

Indiana Quack, on Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:35 PM, said:

I'm fuzzy on this whole issue of people getting upset. Gameinformer is a current gen console/ handheld magazine. This is what they are good at. The people who are reporting on this article probably weren't born yet or even know what an Atari is.

That's exactly the point. They have kids who don't know about the subject material reporting on it. Which only further exasterbates the problem, because you have the readers (other kids who don't know about the material) getting their knowledge from it and so on.

These are the same types that refer to the 2600 as "an Atari" because they're often clueless that what they really mean is the 2600 think that's all Atari had. Or that regurgitate the usual incorrect material they heard 14th hand. Or think the current Atari is the same one from back then.

Quote

I don't get upset over what they reported. They just don't have a clue. AA is where I get all of my Atari knowledge because this site and the people on it are in the know of these classic systems.

That's you, the general populace gets it from these magazines and on TV shows that further spread this type of missinformation.

Quote

What Gameinformer did in my opinion, is not something to be upset about, but just something to laugh at. People who try to put something in their magazine just to try to get the attention of classic gamers, and bring more people in to their magazine, is laughable. Hope my opinion is shared.

I think there's a difference between being pissed off/disgusted/upset and just upset as in "you got your facts wrong again writing on something you're not familiar with". Most people here are the latter.

[Agent X]

Indiana Quack, on Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:35 PM, said:

I'm fuzzy on this whole issue of people getting upset. Gameinformer is a current gen console/ handheld magazine. This is what they are good at. The people who are reporting on this article probably weren't born yet or even know what an Atari is. I don't get upset over what they reported. They just don't have a clue.

I am in agreement with what Retro Rogue said above.

Although I don't think Game Informer's article was written with a deliberately malicious slant, it certainly comes off as though the writers really didn't care that much about Atari to even begin to take the time to properly research it. They are currently the highest circulating video game magazine in the US, and have somewhat of a reputation as an authority on the subject. If they did not witness the system launches first-hand, then they needed to speak with people who did and/or invest much more comprehensive research on the subject, instead of pretending and "playing the part" of being disappointed about the releases. If they weren't experienced with systems like the 5200 and 7800, then they would have been better off ignoring them in the article altogether.

[The Usotsuki]

[Indiana Quack]

Agent X, I agree with you that Gameinformer is the #1 video game mag in the U.S. and people believe what they say about topics. The general public who reads what they write would go with what they say. The true Atari fan base know the fun and enjoyment of playing all of the Atari systems. Gameinformer or anyone else for that matter who truly doesn't appreciate the wonderfulness these systems provide are the ones missing out. Just like the laughing or snickers you see from most people when I tell them I have these systems and play them on a regular basis. Most people just don't get it. But for the people here on AA who do, we are the ones who care about Atari.

[Curious Sofa]

And you could argue that maybe they didn't want to consult a 7800 expert on the subject because of the slant that would create; there are lots of people who would defend their favorite console's launch to the death just because they personally love it so much (IMO a bit like Volkswagen afficianados like my Dad). But even with that taken under consideration, the perspective of the article and what they've got to say are not only factually incorrect in places as has been pointed out, but simply not reasonable given how the 7800 launch games are viewed by the general populace of classic gamers (big fans of the 7800 or not). This article's complete and utter failure to caputre what they're purporting to capture with the article is a real blemish on their reputation.

[DrThielegood]

Quote

There's a note on the bottom of the first page -- it's rather hard to see -- but it says where they got their info from:

"Data was drawn from Phoenix: Fall and Rise of Videogames, Wikipedia, and other Internet sources"

Kudos to them for using Phoenix -- one of the best video game books ever written -- but there are problems with using net sources.

"The problem with internet resources is that they are hard to verify."
-Abraham Lincoln

Edited by DrThielegood, Sun Jan 15, 2012 4:28 PM.

[Sonic R]

DrThielegood, on Sun Jan 15, 2012 4:27 PM, said:

Quote

There's a note on the bottom of the first page -- it's rather hard to see -- but it says where they got their info from:

"Data was drawn from Phoenix: Fall and Rise of Videogames, Wikipedia, and other Internet sources"

Kudos to them for using Phoenix -- one of the best video game books ever written -- but there are problems with using net sources.

"The problem with internet resources is that they are hard to verify."
-Abraham Lincoln

"information on the internet may sometimes be incorrect, or misleading"
-Craig Kerchival

"basing research on soley on material derived form internet resources, can lead to falsificare!"
-Karen Elkton

[Rex Dart]

Fine, fine, it gets a D+. You happy now?

[Retro Rogue]

Curious Sofa, on Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:12 AM, said:

And you could argue that maybe they didn't want to consult a 7800 expert on the subject because of the slant that would create; there are lots of people who would defend their favorite console's launch to the death just because they personally love it so much (IMO a bit like Volkswagen afficianados like my Dad).

That honestly shouldn't make a difference. Research is research. When I was employed by IGN/GameSpy and running Classicgaming.Com, it was actually written in to my contract that I had to be current on all subject matter (retro gaming and video game history) and be as accurate and timely as possible. Even without that, normal editorial standards (where you try and cross-reference and vet all material for accuracy) shouldn't produce something like we saw in this piece. You expect a few minor inaccuracies no matter how well you try and do an article, but not to that degree.

[Austin]

Retro Rogue, on Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:09 PM, said:

Almost all their facts are wrong.

To go along with this, the information they wrote regarding the 3DO was incorrect as well. Actually, the three games they listed weren't even available at the launch, and they forgot to mention the game that actually came packed with the system. Terrible, terrible article.

[Underball]

I just read this whole thread again.

I'm still trying to find the part where anyone here got "upset".

[ninjarabbit]

To be honest the 7800's launch line-up was pretty dated, ports of those games (or similar games) were widely available on other systems, and the market was transitioning from the 'bringing home the arcade' experience to more of a 'extended home adventure' experience at that time.

Yes the article wasn't researched as well as it could have been but honestly it was a filler article at the end of the magazine so you couldn't expect too much. The only reason GI has the number of readers that is has is because of its relationship with Gamestop, not because it's a good magazine so take everything they say with a grain of salt.

[Retro Rogue]

ninjarabbit, on Tue Jan 24, 2012 11:41 AM, said:

To be honest the 7800's launch line-up was pretty dated, ports of those games (or similar games) were widely available on other systems, and the market was transitioning from the 'bringing home the arcade' experience to more of a 'extended home adventure' experience at that time.

That actually didn't start happening until after 7800 and NES started going national. At the point of the NES's test marketing in New York (Oct-Dec '86) and LA (Feb '86 and the 7800's relaunch (Jan '86), arcade game ports were still king on the US market. The NES and it's domination of the market after the national launch for the Fall/Christmas '86 season completed is really what trumpeted the transition towards original home titles. Even a decent portion of the NES's launch titles were ports or inspired by coin titles.

[Zonie]

The 5200 Pack-in should have been Pac-Man. It would have made all the difference.
The 7800 Pack-in should have been Galaga. Galaga was what put it on MY radar. Look at what is still in pizza joints and arcades today: Pac-Man/Galaga machines.
DK would also have been a good one, it is what sold the Colecovision, CV DK was the killer app to follow 2600's Space Invaders, IMHO.

[Retro Rogue]

Zonie, on Tue Jan 24, 2012 10:29 PM, said:

The 5200 Pack-in should have been Pac-Man. It would have made all the difference.

It was for the 2 port version. It didn't make any difference and in fact internally they were looking at pulling pac-man from all the consoles as a pack-in.

Quote

The 7800 Pack-in should have been Galaga. Galaga was what put it on MY radar. Look at what is still in pizza joints and arcades today: Pac-Man/Galaga machines.
DK would also have been a good one, it is what sold the Colecovision, CV DK was the killer app to follow 2600's Space Invaders, IMHO.

Yes, however the Pole Position series was the hotter title at the time of development and reproducing a driving game like that shows off the capabilities more at the time of a launch than a standard 2D shooter. As for why Galaga is still in arcades, a) Ms. Pac-Man and Galaga had large production numbers and are easy to find and still operate. b) That's usually the 20th anniversary machine you're talking about, which is still offered actively by vendors, c) Older 2d maze and shooter games have more of a lure for casual gamers on location than old driving games do. The driving/racing genre is something that has continued to develop to this day, through 3D. People expect more from that than they do of simple shooter and maze games. I've been to locations that still had a Turbo or Outrun, and they're simply dead compared to even the Rush series or Fast And Furious that are also routinely on location.

As for Donkey Kong, they could not have included that as one of the 10 launch titles. Coleco still owned the license for console use. It wasn't until after Coleco was gone from the market that Atari was able to license it beyond the home computer license it already had.

[FujiSkunk]

Retro Rogue, on Wed Jan 25, 2012 12:15 PM, said:

[As for Donkey Kong, that could not have included that as one of the 10 launch titles. Coleco still owned the license for console use. It wasn't until after Coleco was gone from the market that Atari was able to license it beyond the home computer license it already had.

Atari pretty much bought out Coleco's rights to a lot of games, didn't they? I remember thinking at the time Nintendo wouldn't have been too keen on granting new licenses to a now-competitor.

[Retro Rogue]

FujiSkunk, on Wed Jan 25, 2012 12:19 PM, said:

Retro Rogue, on Wed Jan 25, 2012 12:15 PM, said:

[As for Donkey Kong, that could not have included that as one of the 10 launch titles. Coleco still owned the license for console use. It wasn't until after Coleco was gone from the market that Atari was able to license it beyond the home computer license it already had.

Atari pretty much bought out Coleco's rights to a lot of games, didn't they? I remember thinking at the time Nintendo wouldn't have been too keen on granting new licenses to a now-competitor.

Well remember, by the time the 7800's version had come out in '88 the NES version (which was a national launch title in '86) had already been out for a good 2 years in the US. Not to mention when it did come out it was under the "Arcade Classics" banner denoting its lower and specialized niche class in the offerings. By '88 the older early 80's arcade titles were far from being the important titles in the NES's lineup.

[FujiSkunk]

Retro Rogue, on Wed Jan 25, 2012 12:41 PM, said:

Well remember, by the time the 7800's version had come out in '88 the NES version (which was a national launch title in '86) had already been out for a good 2 years in the US. Not to mention when it did come out it was under the "Arcade Classics" banner denoting its lower and specialized niche class in the offerings. By '88 the older early 80's arcade titles were far from being the important titles in the NES's lineup.

I can see that, but it still seems funny Nintendo would grant such a license to Atari, even for an older, less important game, or that Atari would even ask for such a license, given that they were getting ready to sue Nintendo at the time.

"You're stifling competition and ruining our chances in the marketplace!! By the way, can we have a license to this old game of yours?"

Being able to publish the 7800 version by buying the existing cartridge license from Coleco seemed more plausible to me. But then I suppose stranger things have happened in the corporate world.

[Zonie]

Retro Rogue, on Wed Jan 25, 2012 12:15 PM, said:

Zonie, on Tue Jan 24, 2012 10:29 PM, said:

The 5200 Pack-in should have been Pac-Man. It would have made all the difference.

It was for the 2 port version. It didn't make any difference and in fact internally they were looking at pulling pac-man from all the consoles as a pack-in.

Quote

The 7800 Pack-in should have been Galaga. Galaga was what put it on MY radar. Look at what is still in pizza joints and arcades today: Pac-Man/Galaga machines.
DK would also have been a good one, it is what sold the Colecovision, CV DK was the killer app to follow 2600's Space Invaders, IMHO.

Yes, however the Pole Position series was the hotter title at the time of development and reproducing a driving game like that shows off the capabilities more at the time of a launch than a standard 2D shooter. As for why Galaga is still in arcades, a) Ms. Pac-Man and Galaga had large production numbers and are easy to find and still operate. b) That's usually the 20th anniversary machine you're talking about, which is still offered actively by vendors, c) Older 2d maze and shooter games have more of a lure for casual gamers on location than old driving games do. The driving/racing genre is something that has continued to develop to this day, through 3D. People expect more from that than they do of simple shooter and maze games. I've been to locations that still had a Turbo or Outrun, and they're simply dead compared to even the Rush series or Fast And Furious that are also routinely on location.

As for Donkey Kong, they could not have included that as one of the 10 launch titles. Coleco still owned the license for console use. It wasn't until after Coleco was gone from the market that Atari was able to license it beyond the home computer license it already had.

It IS the anniversary machine I am talking about. they are still popular.