Atari Founder Likes Xbox360, Disses PS3

[Zeus]

The origianl Atari founder has expressed a fondness for the Xbox 360 over Sony's PS3. He says he fears Sony may have shot themselves in the foot, and claims a first party developer would be an idiot not to develop for the 360 first as it has a great set of development tools.


Q: What about Sony’s PlayStation 3 Strategy?

A: I think Sony shot themselves in the foot… there is a high probability [they] will fail. The price point is probably unsustainable. For years and years Sony has been a very difficult company to deal with from a developer standpoint. They could get away with their arrogance and capriciousness because they had an installed base. They have also historically had horrible software tools. You compare that to the Xbox 360 with really great authoring tools [and] additional revenue streams from Xbox live… a first party developer would be an idiot to develop for Sony first and not the 360. People don’t buy hardware, they buy software.


News Source: <A href="http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=19611&hed=Atari+Founder+Likes+Xbox360%2C+Disses+PS3&sector=Industries&subsector=EntertainmentAndMedia" target="_blank">Redherring</a>

[Mr Doctor]

"People don’t buy hardware, they buy software."

How bored are they?

[bavelb]

This thread promises entertainment.

*grabs popcorn*

[whackawookie]

now comes all the fanboys who come out of the woodworks with the "atari is a crap gaming company anyway, what good games have they made?".

[gonepostl]

"People don’t buy hardware, they buy software."

How bored are they?

I don't get it.

now comes all the fanboys who come out of the woodworks with the "atari is a crap gaming company anyway, what good games have they made?".

I wasn't even thinking it until you mentioned it. Have they come out with any good games?

[wigsplitta]

"People don’t buy hardware, they buy software."

How bored are they?
I think he is saying the games are what draw people to the systems in the first place. They would never go out and buy a console if it didn't have good games to play on it.

[bavelb]

I don't get it.
I wasn't even thinking it until you mentioned it. Have they come out with any good games?
Not really, but initially they were a hardware company. They made several succesfull consoles and systems (PONG, I owned a Atari 2600 and Atari ST in the early 90's).

This was before the Atari brand was sold of several times and eventually ended up as a software publisher (its part of infogrames I believe). Don't think they actually developed games themselves, but they did publish Unreal Tournament (not the original though).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari
(Actually that list on the bottom has several classics in it, but Im not sure what role they played with them being developed/produced/published)

[Havok154]

He was the founder of Atari back in the 80's and left before they went downhill to start Chuckie Cheese. So you can't ask about what good games they made recently since Atari is just a brand a company bought to put on their games, not a real company anymore.

[wigsplitta]

Chucky Cheese is still very popular. I'm not sure if they have had a decline but I know parents still take their kids there. Atari isn't a real company? Go visit their website http://www.atari.com/us/ They are only publishing some of the most popular games around. They aren't a console maker true, but they have repositioned themselves very well. I'm not bashing you dude but Atari is still around. I know what you're trying to say. The man clearly has a very good business sense. He knows what the public wants. I'm not saying he's 100% right but his opinion matters and makes way more sense than some of the people here.

[The Bat]

A first party developer is one that's owned by the company manufacturing the console, isn't it? First party game developers wholly owned by Sony would be equally idiotic to develop for the 360. :rolleyes:

In the end, developers like whichever console has the most marketshare. None of us will know for 2 or 3 years which of the three that will be, but there's only a few hundred thousand fanboys who'll insist that they know anyways.

[wigsplitta]

Good eye. I didn't even catch the first party statement. Like I said the guy isn't 100% right but I think from a business standpoint he has a worthy opinion.

[Trashcat]

Atari isn't a real company?
Im too lazy to type this myself so here is a quote from wikipedia:
The company that currently bears the Atari name was founded in 1993 under the name GT Interactive. GT Interactive was acquired by IESA in 1999,[1] and renamed Infogrames, Inc.[2] Infogrames acquired the Atari brand name from its purchase of Hasbro Interactive,[3] which in turn had acquired it from JTS Corporation[4], which the original Atari had merged with in 1996.[5] Initially Infogrames, Inc. intermittently used the Atari name as a brand name for selected titles before IESA officially changed the U.S. subsidiary's name to Atari, Inc. in 2003.[1],

[wigsplitta]

wow are you serious? That's like saying every company that Activision owns aren't real companies. " Activision acquired Raven (1997), Neversoft (1999), Z-Axis (2001), Treyarch (2001), Luxoflux (2002), Shaba (2002), Infinity Ward (2003) and Vicarious Visions (2005)." and those are still real names. Your post really has no point and Atari even if renamed, bought, whatever is still Atari. It's really a company. Nasdaq ticker ATAR. Go get you some.

[Havok154]

wow are you serious? That's like saying every company that Activision owns aren't real companies. " Activision acquired Raven (1997), Neversoft (1999), Z-Axis (2001), Treyarch (2001), Luxoflux (2002), Shaba (2002), Infinity Ward (2003) and Vicarious Visions (2005)." and those are still real names. Your post really has no point and Atari even if renamed, bought, whatever is still Atari. It's really a company. Nasdaq ticker ATAR. Go get you some.

It would be the same as EA putting "Origin" or "Maxis" on a box. Yea, they are a company, but it's more for branding and really doesn't reflect the original company bearing that name. Just like Atari of today doesn't bear any resemblance to the Atari that Nolan founded back in the day.

[wigsplitta]

I do see the point there and when one company acquires another they just don't destroy everything along with it. They try to take everything that is good from both companies and use it to their advantage. Remember nvidia bought 3DFX and who is using sli along with some bizarre card designs right now? I'm sure there is a lot more left from 3DFX that we don't know about. I do see the point though.