Author: TeknoRavr (ts014d04.dal-tx.concentric.net)
Date: 01-04-2000 18:39
Excellent point, Big Al. (A big hurrah to carmel, though a bit too long, for bringing
up issues any company needs to look at.) However, if you will notice, it seems that
consumers are also making hideous errors; neglecting the better, more advanced
technology. For instance, look at the Gameboy. Even when the putrid little unit
went to color, it still was far behind technological standards. The Lynx was and still
is far better than the Gameboy. Yet, due to Nintendo's clout (because of the NES)
and major advertising, the vomit-colored Gameboy sold.
Another instance is with the 5 major systems on the nex-gen market. The Jaguar,
3DO, Saturn, Playstation and N64 all were competing for a place in the consumer's
home. However, despite the Saturn and Jaguar's superior architecture, the PSX
and N64 won the market share. Why? Because of major expenditures on adver-
tising by Nintendo and Sony. The 3DO... well, that was a mistake in itself.
Anywaze, what might my point be? Advertising plays the biggest part in what
sells and does not in the video game market. Money spent on good advertising
tells the consumer, who for the most part wishes to be ignorant, what to buy.
Now, dont get me wrong. Atari, Sega, etc had great commercials, but for the most
part, they were not applied in the correct places for consumers to blindly follow.
However, back to the subject. Hasbro should not just bring back the games "updated"
but should make new games under the label, even if it means naming games with
a "2000". Whatever, the case, some of the games they now have claim to have really
awesome concepts and if made today like a new game would really be cool.
For instance, Star Raiders and Gravitar. Both excellent games and if re-made with
updated goals, graphic, etc. could be made into top sellers, like X-wing.
But anywaze, enough of my ranting and raving. Here's to hoping Hasbro can make the Atari name respectable, once again.
|
RE: why did hasbro bother 3