...or just an exercise in how many times one can put "enlarge brain cells" in a single paragraph?
$15 million is enough to combat EA and Zynga?
It was a US crash, had nothing to do with the UK.
That is correct, as far as in regards to them being different industries. That's a myth though as far as them being the major reason for the market crash. Atari was 80% of the market when the crash first started, so when Atari imploded over a year and a half period, investor confidence in the market as a whole also declined - especially when there had been constant calls by some in the financial market that video games had just been a fad and a bubble waiting to burst. Atari's implosion had more to do with it's dual management with Warner, caring more about it's own stock prices vs. Atari's long term viability.
As someone who was there as well, and has actually taken the time to research market figures and reports, I can say hogwash. The c64 had very little impact on the 2600, what it had an impact on was Atari's 8-bit computer line. Two completely different markets. Likewise the 2600 was never killed, Atari Inc. and Atari Corp. continued to have and rely on strong 2600 sales. In fact when Atari Corp. found the magic price point of $50 in the Christmas season of '85 (the same time the NES was being test marketed) it came to dominate the low end console market during the NES/7800/SMS's lifetime. And likewise, none of the consoles had "floppy drives". A few had simplistic keyboard/computer "expansions" if you could call it that. Coleco's Adam was a standalone computer that was also sold in a CV "attachment" model that simply used the CV for it's A/V out As for the Intellivision never really catching on, sales during it's lifetime would say otherwise. It was the number 2 player behind Atari. Atari's issue was simply it's dual management with Warner. Warner management often superseded Atari's own management, and made decisions to ignore warehouses full of stock and the overcrowded console market and 3rd party games market to falsely create higher stock earnings for itself. It was a bubble that burst. This first signs of what had been going on appeared to the public in early December of '82, foreshadowing the market wide crash that was to come when most of the video game industry also suffered big market value dips after Atari's announcement Interestingly, it was a problem Morgan could have rectified with NATCO if given a chance.
Little off on that. February was first the LA test release, it was not available in LA before that - just the NY area test launch. Interestingly according to some of the press covering the Winter CES, word from retailers in the NY area was that the NY test market was a failure. The LA one obviously did better. The actual official national launch of of the NES was in Sept. of '86, though they slowly started spreading it to other major cities over Spring and Summer.
"Officially unofficially" means this guy jadoon88 stole the source code material from Curt Vendel's atarimuseum.com site, and presented it as his own - including posting said announcement here. Curt, who has a working relationship with the current Atari, has the original mainframe tapes these were archived off of and put them up as an educational resource for 7800 homebrewers. They have not been released to the public domain in any capacity.
Too bad people still can't figure out that its a different Atari than the one 25 years ago. Or that that ET and Pac-Man (among other things) did distroy the company - it was split up and sold off back in '84. I guess after all these years, people still haven't learned to do a little research before making comments like that in public forums. But then, what would slashdot be if every single person put thought in to their comments here - you'd have nobody posting.
Gamasutra is running an extensive article today on the long history of Electronic Arts. Starting all the way back with the days of Trip Hawkins, they move through the days of Madden, Nintendo, small studio purchases and, of course, the Sims. There's also an a whole series of images associated with the article, letting you look back and chuckle about the cover art of games from the past. The article concludes: "Art and commerce have always been uneasy bedfellows, and nowhere is that tension more evident than in the world of video games. Perhaps after looking at the history of Electronic Arts we may have some insight into that hot point of ignition where business and inspiration combine to create cutting edge games. As Trip Hawkins explained, 'Entrepreneurship is a creative art form. Like other creative people, we do it because we have to do it. We have no choice but to express ourselves in this way. But of course like all artists we are optimists, so we believe good things will come ... It is not about making money, it is about making a difference.'"