Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th Sep 2017 10:16 UTC
Games

Ars Technica:

The spec sheet, as announced, is still pretty vague, but Atari has confirmed a few notable things, starting with a price point between $250 and $300. In exchange for costing roughly as much as a Nintendo Switch, Xbox One S, or PlayStation 4, the Ataribox will come packed with an "AMD customized processor with Radeon graphics technology." Additionally, this will not be an Android system. Instead, the Ataribox will run Linux "with a customized, easy-to-use user interface."

Open, hackable Linux-based consoles don't exactly have a great track record, so colour me skeptical.

Wouldn't be the first time my skepticism turns out to be spot-on. I don't think the Ataribox is the next Commodore USA, but I'm afraid its fate will be the same, regardless.

Thread beginning with comment 649350
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Fri 29th Sep 2017 04:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer
Member since:
2011-08-08

They're also nowhere near $250-$300. If they were, they would've been DOA. I'm not sure what you consider selling well but those Flashbacks are a cheap (and cheaply produced) novelty item with the most popular one selling 800k and some change.

There's no question that at one time Atari was on top. But, Nintendo took it to the next level. They had a much bigger impact on home gaming, had/has wildly popular game franchises/IP, sold far more units total, etc. You could buy the wildly popular NES & SNES Classic's and still be around half the cost of an Ataribox.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer
by leech on Sat 30th Sep 2017 00:18 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

You and all the other Nintendo fans smoke crack. Atari pretty much invented the home video game market.

They made some TERRIBLE decisions, one of which was to not sell the NES when Nintendo asked them to be the distributors. Instead they stated they were going to make the 7800, which was released 2 years later than it was supposed to be. If it wasn't for this, the landscape probably would be significantly different these days.

Though to be fair, there was also E.T....

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Sat 30th Sep 2017 07:17 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

Atari had a huge hit with the 2600. Coleco was on their heels with a better system, better games, and the benefit of good arcade ports. Atari's answer, the 5200, didn't measure up. Coleco in it's first year sold 2 million units. The 5200 only sold half that in twice the time. In addition, Intellivision also stomped on Atari, doing even better than Coleco. This happened *before* the NES and the 7800.

Fantasizing about an alternate history doesn't change the reality of the real one. In this case being the first to break into a market on a large scale doesn't mean you were the best. It means you were the first. Acknowledging that fact doesn't mean you're a fan, it means you're aware of the truth. I lived through this era, I owned all of these systems, and remember exactly what it was like.

Reply Parent Score: 3