Conference rusure::nintendo

    Re .0:
    
    They said nothing.
    
    Most of the story was just fluff about Nintendo, how much time kids and
    parents spend with it, how some parents don't like that (but no
    supporting research or professional opinions were reported), and so on.
    
    Observing that games were in more demand than supply, the reporter said
    that makes them wonder if the supplier is deliberately holding back.
    (There was no evidence reported, just the reporter's baseless opinion.)
    To answer the question, they showed a few seconds of a Nintendo person
    saying chips were hard to get.  No news there.
    
    
    				-- edp 

    There are claims by Atari Games (who is suing Nintendo for 100 million
    or so) that Nintendo intentionally holds back on cartridge production.
    See related newspaper articles.  (at least in the San Jose Mercury
    News! (Atari Games is located in Milpitas (I think)))
    
    Ed
    

    I hear the Atari lawsuit is because of Nintendo's "monopoly" on
    the home video game systems.  Nintendo's owns a whopping 78% of
    that market.
    
    Can you imagine if DEC had a 78% market share in systems? WOW!
    
    Mike

    
    I guess I don't understand Atari's problem...beside not having a
    product that sell's real well.  I mean, if you make a product that
    the public likes, wants and is in demand, why should you be sued
    by the # 2 man or anyone else because their product doesn't have
    mass appeal.  Can anyone explain Atari's actions to me?
    
    Rob

    
    
    		...sour grapes....
    
    	Atari had their chance years ago and didn't make a product as
    nice as Nintendo. Nintendo (and the Japanese industry) makes what
    the consumers want.
    
    	Several years ago I saw an interview of the owner of SONY (I
    forgot his name, I should know it...) and all he had to say is that
    SONY makes what people want. If they want a portable CD, they'll
    make it, if they want a portable cassette player, tey'll make it,
    if they want a wrist watch TV, they'll make. This is contrary to
    a lot of American industry that decides what the consumer wants.
    
    	If Nintendo could do it, so could Atari, if they really wanted
    to. Just have to have the vision and the commitment to make the
    best possible, for a price people can afford.
    
    Chuck (my $.02 worth anyway....)

    Chuck,
    
    Couldn't agree more.  Atari had a great opportunity back then to
    make a killing, but I guess they didn't have the insight like Nintendo
    did.  Now were playing with power, and Atari is crying about it...
    
    Don

    Remember, this is Atari Games, not Atari who has fell on hard times.
    There are two different Atari companies.  Atari Games only makes
    cartridges (from what I understand).
    
    Ed
    

Why Are Game Prices Showing No Signs Of Competition?

Additional info on the lawsuit. Atari games (Spinoff of Atari) complaint
is that they were locked out from making catridges for the nintendo.
Info from EE Times, page 4 12-19-88

Atari Games has filed suit against Nintendo for violations of the Sherman
antitrust act and unfair competition.

Nintendo uses a slave chip on the cartridge to transfer data to the master
in a highly protected proprietary method. Nintendo allows no manufacturing
of cartridges outside its own factory and sets the whosale prices. In this
manner, they have reaped over a billon dollars of revenue this year.

Atari claims they have decifered the system which I assume means we will
soon see compatible catridges and at some point, price wars.

John
    

    Re: .8
    
         There are all kinds of companies making cartridges for Nintendo.
    To what are you referring when you say they (Nintendo) don't allow
    manufacturing outside of their own facilities????
    
    Bob

    Re .8:
    
    > Why Are Game Prices Showing No Signs Of Competition?

    The game prices are showing plenty of signs of competition.  Everybody
    is competing to get them, so they go for big bucks.  Prices were fine
    two and a half years ago.
    
    If you're looking for competition on the other side, Lechmere often
    sells games for less than Kay-Bee.  But how fast do you expect Nintendo
    of America to be able to grow?  There were NO Nintendo games in the
    United States three years ago; do you really expect a company to be
    able to build all the facilities and come up with all the capital for
    manufacturing equipment to service the ENTIRE UNITED STATES in just
    three years?
    
    I'm really heartbroken about Atari not being able to make Nintendo
    games.  I was just crying my eyes out because I couldn't get any games
    of the garbage quality we saw from Atari the first time around.
    
    If you were running a company and wanted to make quality games, would
    you want to let in somebody who was known to make products that would
    make you ashamed?
    
    Let's all hear it for government and laws:  They're going to uphold the
    right to lousy quality.
    
    
    				-- edp

    re .10:
    
    Your comments about Atari's poor quality are really unfair. While
    I am sure Nintendo is proud of their 6502 based game system, which
    is really about as low end in modern times as anyone gets, Atari
    has a line of 16 bit 68000 based home computers that will blow Nintendo
    forthright completely out of the water. You gets what you pay for.
    8 years ago maybe you could pick up dedicatd PONG for $50.
    
    Just give me a break, OK?
    						Thanks,
    							John.

    Re .11:
    
    Sorry, but hardware capability is not very important.  I've seen what's
    on the market.  (Besides being a software engineer with over 100 games
    for Nintendo, Sega, and Commodore 64 systems, I work part-time in
    Electronics Boutique.)  Anybody can get good graphics and a fast
    processor just by throwing money at their machine.  But graphics and
    speed don't add strategy, subtlety, or novelty to a game.
    
    And graphics and speed don't add much challenge or depth.  Some might
    say that you could get games requiring faster reflexes or with more
    screens, but the fact is that games for the Nintendo or the Commodore
    can already explore human limits if they are designed properly.
    
    The best game I have is Head Over Heels for the Commodore 64.  It
    resides entirely in 64 Kb of memory (no disk access) yet has hundreds
    of different three-dimensional rooms.  The player controls two
    characters which can move, carry, jump, push, and shoot.  The game
    presents numerous challenges:  Figure out what to stack and push where
    to get through a door that is barely reachable.  Figure out how a
    device works to move objects in a room to set them in a pattern
    enabling you to jump across a deadly floor.  In only 64 Kb, this game
    is as deep and thought-provoking as any fulfilling game needs to be.
    
    Another game I have is Psi-5 Trading Company.  This game is notable for
    its speed.  I can type 120 words per minute and this game exercises
    that -- you've got to give commands to your crew fast and furiously.
    (Commands are entered via menus, one letter per menu item.  E.g.,
    telling the Weapons Officer to fire three blaster shots at target ship
    N with priority 2 would be "WF3BN2".)
    
    My point?  Small machines have sufficient speed and memory for
    excellent games.  The Nintendo system could handle Head Over Heels
    although Psi-5 would be a bit poorer without a keyboard.  Fine, so
    Atari makes more powerful hardware.  But power is not quality.
    
    Atari can make powerful hardware by spending more money.  Hardware
    designs are standard.  But games require creativity, ingenuity, and
    flexibility.  When the Atari 2600 was popular, there was a noticeable
    difference between Atari games and Activision games for the 2600.
    Activision demonstrated a clear ability to make better use of the 2600
    than Atari did, even as simple as it was.  Atari could not even make
    good games for its own hardware!
    
    Nintendo has demonstrated creativity and quality.  Atari's computers
    don't represent creativity or quality.  If Atari starts producing games
    for the Nintendo system, watch out.  If they are using a new division
    to make the games, maybe they have a chance of having hired some
    creative people and provided a corporate environment that will foster
    creativity instead of killing it.  But if it is the same old company,
    then forget it.
    
    
    				-- edp

    RE: Note 171.9
    
    There are a lot of third party companies that write games for Nintendo
    however, these companies are licensed by Nintendo, and Nintendo
    actually manurfactures the cartridge. The third party just writes
    the games. What Atari plans to do , I assume, is make their own
    cartridges that will work on the Nintendo system, and undercut
    Nintendo on the price. Better for the consumer!!!!!!!!! It will
    force Nintendo the be more competitive on their prices.
    
    mike

    Re .13:
    
    Are you sure that's better?  Or could this happen:
    
    Atari floods the market with cheap games in flashy boxes with great
    advertising.
    
    Nintendo reduces prices to compete with Atari.  Nintendo rushes games
    to market, does not invest as heavily in game design. 
    
    Nintendo quality drops.
    
    We get poorer games.
    
    
    				-- edp

    Your point is well taken, however, Nintendo started out with high
    quality, and they know that this has made them the most popular
    video game on the markey today, so I don't think they will change
    their quality at this point. They take too much pride in their work.
    What I am afraid of is that Atari will cut into Nintendos profits
    so that it will hurt them causing less new games to be made, and
    harder to get. I'm really curious to see what the outcome of this
    one will be.

    That is why renting has become so popular so you don't get stuck
    with a bad game, furthermore all the big companies realize that
    renting is a way for people to try out the game, if it's good then
    then public will purchase it.
    
    Chris
    

    READ. I have a few magazines from third parties rating different
    games. This is a pretty good way to keep from wasting your time and
    money on poor quality.
    
    re .-a few:
    
    About hardware and resultant quality, you can't fool me. You are
    actually trying to tell me that the quality of the hardware is not
    important. I don't believe it. I know how much software engineers
    want a standard machine, but I don't think it's going to happen.
    Some hardware person will think of improvements.
    
    The hardware is just as important. I could show you some games for
    the Atari ST that make the nintendo look silly. The ST has at least
    512K, a 68000 based processor, and shows it.
    
    						John.

    Re .17:
    
    > You are actually trying to tell me that the quality of the hardware
    > is not important.
    
    Not quite.  First, it is not hardware quality I am talking about -- the
    Atari ST is not notable for its quality.  The Nintendo is probably
    better quality than the Atari ST, since it would have to be designed to
    be durable in the hands of children.  It is hardware power I am
    discussing. 
    
    What I say is that hardware power is important up to a point and then
    it becomes less important.  Obviously, you need more than a certain
    amount before you can have good games.  The Commodore 64 is about at
    that threshold; the Atari 2600 is below it; the Nintendo and Atari ST
    are above it.
    
    > I could show you some games for the Atari ST that make the nintendo
    > look silly.
    
    I could show you some games for the Commodore 64 that make Atari ST
    software look silly.  That's because, if you look, you can find games
    where a creative and ingenious person has done a good job.  Software
    and game designers do NOT get more creative or more ingenious when
    writing for a more powerful computer; their creativity and ingenuity
    comes from other places.
    
    Yes, more powerful equipment can do more powerful jobs, but once you
    have the equipment you need to do the job you want done, then spending
    any more money for more powerful equipment is a waste. 
    
    > The ST has at least 512K, a 68000 based processor, and shows it. 
    
    Please respond to the points I made in my previous note.  What do you
    get with that processor?  Sure, the software gets flashier, but does it
    get more creative?  Do you have Head Over Heels or Psi-5 Trading
    Company on the Atari ST?  How about Fix It?
    
                 
    				-- edp 

    I don't want to get into these sorts of disputes. I've programmed
    both the Atari ST and the Atari XE. The nintendo is closer to the
    XE, in fact, I believe it has the same processor. The advantage
    the nintendo has over the XE is easy: More colors. Very nice.
    However, I can't write programs for the nintendo. The ST is an
    absolutely beautiful machine, and there is no comparison. It's most
    popular over in Europe, where the market wasn't already flooded
    with expensive PC clones.
    
    BTW, you haven't heard the last from SEGA. It really is the better
    machine, and it's beginning to get the games to go with it.
    
    You are right, creativity doesn't begin or end with the machine.
    However, somewhere in the middle, it gets translated into the machine.
    It is then that creativity meets its limits.
    
    Nintendo has quite a few good games available for it.
    
    						John.

  Re : atari's suit


   Atari is upset with Nintendo because Nintendo won't let them make 
compatable cartridges that will not only fit the Atari games but also
be able to play in the Nintendo system .
    What atari wants to do is get in on the gravy train that Nintendo created.
The game cartridges probably cost Nintendo about $6.00 to make,market and
distribute. As they are currrently selling for and avg. cost of $30.00, there
is a hell of a lot of profit to be made. 
   For those of you who may have purchased the atari 5200 game and cartridges,
you'll recall that at first it was a pretty good system (much better than their
first system- the 2800 or whatever it was called). The problem was that when      
Atari started to mass produce the games, they ran into a heck of a quality 
control problem. I know I purchase they games and all of them had bugs that
made trying to play very frustrating. Now they want to mass produce games
that can be played in both systems. Obviously, this would bring the prices
of the games to around $15.00 each but with Atari making the games you can
be sure they would be the same crap they put out before.
    A word to the wise, if Atari is successful, don"t purchase any Atari
games that say compatable with the Nintendo system and you will be saving
yourself a lot of frustration and money-regardless of the costs ! 
   
                                           chip 
                                        

    re .20: I have a better idea.
    
    Before you blast Atari to shit, why not give them an honest shot
    at it? After all, you have this notefile and several review magazines
    you can read to see if you're right.
    
    BTW, I've owned three atari systems, and I have been satisifed with
    all three of them.
    
    1) 5200 sold when I got an
    2) 800XL gave away when I got a
    3) 520ST liked it so much I also got a 1040.
    
    						John.
    
    

    Re .21:
    
    Atari's had an honest shot at video games.  Several honest shots.  Why
    should I give them another? 
    
    
    				-- edp

    I believe that Atari would be producing games which are versions
    of Arcade games which they have developed.  I too have owned serveral
    Atari products (2600,5200, and the Atari 800 PC).  Yes some of the
    software was crap.  But there was some excellent software as well.
   
    One game, which I enjoy still today, was Star Raiders.  This game
    was developed in 1979 or 1980 for the 400 and 800 line of computers.
    It was awesome at the time.  It was a three dimensional game where
    you pilot a starship and seek and destroy the enemy.  If you were
    involved in computers or video games at the time and were exposed
    to this product your first impulse was to buy on of these computers
    just for the game.  It was quality use of hardware and software
    that was available at that time.
    
    Atari has several arcade games that are fun to play.  Maybe not
    involved like Zelda or other titles but still fun.  I have noticed
    recently that many of the titles are starting to appear like Gauntlet,
    Paperboy, Xevious.  I believe if quality reproductions of Atari
    arcade games can be done by Atari then great.  It isn't that they
    are not capable of producing them.  They can.  
    
    The ultimate sucess or failure of a product is determined by the
    customer.  If Atari products are poorer than Nintendo then they will 
    not sell.  Atari has had that happen before to them and it may happen 
    again if they are given the chance to hang themselves.  I not saying
    Atari is the greatest games vendor or anything.  I'm pxxxxx off
    at them for just suddenly abandoning the video market in 84.  But
    they could do some good things.
    
    Nintendo isn't exactly bending over backwards for the American consumer
    either.  Japan has access to the State-of-the-Art game systems and
    software.  We do not.  What happens to the millions of NES owners
    when Nintendo decides that we are finally ready for their latest
    and greatest.  Do we junk the NES and software to go to the new
    box  (this scenario sounds familiar 2600-5200-7800!).
    
    Craig

    
    
    
    

    RE:22
    
    	You also have to remember in Atari's past venture's it was the
    time of the 'VIDEO GAME' revolution and they were trying to get
    in on both ends of it (Arcade & home).   Now that I'm thinking of
    I can't remember the last arcade video game the manufactured (maybe
    Rolling Thunder), also they have alot more to compete with these
    days in a home market as opposed to the 2600 days, everyone was
    piping out crap until around the end of the era.
    
    IMO
    
    Chris
    

    Re .23:
    
    > One game, which I enjoy still today, was Star Raiders.
    
    Was Star Raiders actually made by Atari?  Or was it somebody like
    Activision? 
    
    > The ultimate sucess or failure of a product is determined by the
    > customer.  If Atari products are poorer than Nintendo then they will 
    > not sell.
    
    Unfortunately Atari products could dampen the Nintendo market.  A
    number of customers don't know that different companies produce
    different games for the Nintendo system.  Granted these aren't the most
    intelligent people in the world, but their money contributes to market
    decisions.  So if they start getting poorer games for the Nintendo,
    they'll start spending less for new games.  And even those people who
    do know that there are different companies will have to learn what
    companies are good and which are bad, so they'll be tighter with a
    dollar.
    
    > I'm pxxxxx off at them for just suddenly abandoning the video market
    > in 84.
    
    Atari didn't just abandon the market!  The market had been declining
    steadily, since the games available weren't up to snuff.  Customers
    left Atari just as much as Atari left customers.  The underlying cause
    was simply that the games being produced weren't good enough, didn't
    involve people enough, and didn't last long enough.
    
    > Nintendo isn't exactly bending over backwards for the American consumer
    > either.  Japan has access to the State-of-the-Art game systems and
    > software.  We do not.
    
    Look, if you want to put up all the capital to fund production of the
    more powerful game systems for the United States, then go right ahead.
    But most people would prefer to build up a market with a cheaper
    alternative before taking a big risk with their money. 
    
    > What happens to the millions of NES owners when Nintendo decides that
    > we are finally ready for their latest and greatest.  Do we junk the NES
    > and software to go to the new box  (this scenario sounds familiar
    > 2600-5200-7800!). 
    
    I don't see what the problem is.  The NES won't stop working when new
    systems come out.  All the games you have now will continue working.
    Most of those games will be entertaining for some time.  The basic unit
    didn't come with a promise to make games forever, and most people have
    probably already gotten their 80 dollars' worth out of it. 
    
    
    				-- edp 

    Oh, never mind. We're beating a dead horse senseless. The prime
    factor is that there are alot of people who are afraid of computers,
    personal or otherwise, because they can't stand the thought of wasting
    a keyboard. I don't have to tell you how ironic this is.
    
    						John.

Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st,rec.games.video
Path: decwrl!ucbvax!ucsd!orion.cf.uci.edu!oberon!nunki.usc.edu!castor.usc.edu!rjung
Subject: Re: Atari suing Nintendo?
Posted: 9 Jan 89 04:06:57 GMT
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Xref: decwrl comp.sys.atari.st:14176 rec.games.video:2097
 
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Marty Saletta) writes:
>   On the PBS (?) show Computer Chronicals,they reported that Atari is suing
>Nintendo.  Is this correct?
 
  Sorta. First, this is Atari _GAMES_, the arcade division owned by Warner.
No relation to the Jack Tramiel/Mega ST Atari CORP. group. We've got enough
problems with these Amiga smugheads and the "Atari == games" image, so
let's clear that off the bat.
 
>  The reporter said that since Nintendo is
>dominating the video game market,Atari was suing them,saying that it was
>a monopoly.
 
  Sort of. See, when someone makes a game for the Nintendo, they have to
get the "certification seal" from Nintendo. This is no mere rubber-stamp;
Nintendo uses a customized chip in these cartridges, and they are the ONLY
ones who make these chips. When someone like Konami makes a Nintendo game,
they _order copies of their own games_ from Nintedo's factories, and then
box them in their own boxes.
 
  Atari Games is suing on the grounds that Nintendo is _deliberately_
making less games than requested (under their "Tengen" label: The games are
Gauntlet, RBI, and Pac-Man), and thus has a monopoly on the Nintendo
cartridge market. Therein the lawsuit, in an effort to force Nintendo to
speed up production and stop this riffraff.
 
  Also, Atari Games is claiming that they have managed to duplicate the
customized chip Nintendo uses. Theoretically, this means Tengen games can
now come out without the "Approved by Nintendo" seal. As a result, Nintendo is
countersuing Atari Games... (Aren't lawyers fun?)
 
  That brings us up to three days ago (Nintendo announces countersuit).
 
>  I also remember something about the cartridge port of the
>Nintendo being involved.
 
  Not the cartridge port, but the cartridges themselves.
 
>  Disclaimer:please don't think I'm starting rumours if Atari is not suing
>them.  The reception on my television was going in and out,since the channel
>it was on is not offered from my cable system.  I'm sorry if I am mistaken,
>but I'd like more info if I'm right.
 
  You're right, if a little outdated. This first popped up about a month
ago. But you know how it is, the "respectable" news services don't care to
report on computer/video game news (anybody remember the Apple "look & feel"
lawsuit against Microsoft? No news in a while, huh?)
 
						--R.J.
						B-)
 
P.S. Anybody care to correct me if I'm wrong on any of this?
 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Disclaimer: These are my views, and mine alone.
                                                             # ## #
  Mailing address: Beats me, just reply to this message      # ## #
                    ([email protected]?)                  ## ## ##
                                                         ####  ##  ####

    re: .27
    
    Thanks, That's partially what I tried to say a long time back :-)
    
    Ed

Re .27:

>   Atari Games is suing on the grounds that Nintendo is _deliberately_
> making less games than requested (under their "Tengen" label: The games are
> Gauntlet, RBI, and Pac-Man), and thus has a monopoly on the Nintendo
> cartridge market. Therein the lawsuit, in an effort to force Nintendo to
> speed up production and stop this riffraff.

	Ahha!  Now the suit makes sense.  Atari Games thinks they could sell
    more games if they could get higher production rates.  Nintendo has a limit
    on the production rate and has to divide that rate between the game makers.
    Atari is screaming that Nintendo's division is unfair.  A division between
    Nintendo the game maker (% of game market unknown) and Nintendo the 
    cartridge manufacturer (% of cartridge market large) would make sense.
 
>   Also, Atari Games is claiming that they have managed to duplicate the
> customized chip Nintendo uses. Theoretically, this means Tengen games can
> now come out without the "Approved by Nintendo" seal. As a result, Nintendo is
> countersuing Atari Games... (Aren't lawyers fun?)

	Here, Atari is probably off base if they actually produce cartridges
    using the reverse engineered chip.  At best (for them, not for consumers), 
    Atari might be able to force Nintendo to license Atari as a producer of 
    cartridges with some royalty paid to Nintendo for each one produced.  Better
    for consumers would be for Atari to produce chips that Nintendo can check
    and certify in some fashion with royalties and fees to Nintendo.