Talk:Intellivision
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| High | This article is on a subject of High priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
This article needs work.
"PRE-CRASH systems"?!? WHAT THE HELL IS THAT? What a lame term to describe the original game consoles that began what exists today as a healthy gaming industry...These are generation 1 or 2 systems depending on who you ask, and quite honestly I'd have to believe they are generation 1 systems ...(The pre-generation 1 systems can be lumped together as Generation 0 or pre-one) not "pre-crash" systems which include Generation 2 and the beginning of Gen 3 systems (The Atari 7800 was made during the crash but wasn't really released until the NES brought gaming back to life.)
This is a terrible insult to the Atari 2600 & 5200, Mattel Intellivision, and Coleco Colecovision specifically. Sure they are "pre-crash" but they are better known as GENERATION 1 & 2. Pathetic. I don't even care to change this...perhaps another day when I have the time.
- "I don't even care to change this". Neither do I. - Diceman 12:03, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Ahh, this brings back memories, wasted a good many hours on this back in the day. Had completely forgotten what they where called though, and had given up on ever finding out, then I stumble across this article quite by accident. Funny that it works. Wonder if I remember enough to imrove on this in any way though... --Sherool (talk) 03:40, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
As is obvious in that above discussion on "generations," dividing the continuum of video games into arbitrary generations or eras is problematic. Thus the use of "video game crash" as a dividing line; it's common shorthand for the quite real market contraction that occurred in the video game industry in 1983. It doesn't denigrate the systems that came before this event, so I'm not sure what the problem is. Even the official Intellivision website refers to the "crash" (though erroneously claiming to be the only system to survive the crash-- what about the 2600?). Anyway... my problem with the article is this bit of ambiguity:
- By 1982 sales were soaring. Over two million Intellivision consoles had been sold by the end of the year, earning Mattel a $100,000,000 profit. This was a big year for Mattel. Third party Atari developers Activision, and Imagic began releasing games for the Intellivision, as did hardware rivals Atari and Colecovision. Mattel created M Network branded games for Atari and Coleco's systems. The most popular titles sold over a million units each.
What are the "most popular titles?" The titles released for the Intellivision systems? The titles by M Network for other systems? The total of a title across multiple systems? Student Driver 16:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
THEY WERE THE FIRST. THEREFORE THEY WERE 1. 0 ISNT A BAD TERM I DONT KNOW IF WE CAN TAKE A VOTE OR ANYTHING. EITHER WAY, THERE WAS A SMALLER VIDEOGAME CRASH IN 1977 WHERE ESSENTIALLY A MARKET FLOODED WITH PONG CLONES CRASHED AND WERE KILLED BY 2ND GENERATION SYSTEMS AND A TOTAL KILLING AND CRASHING AS OPPOSED TO A GRADUAL REPLACING LIKE THAT HAS NEVER BEEN SEEN IN THE CONSOLE UNIVERSE AGAIN. ALTHOUGH I BET IF NINTENDO ENTERTAINMENTSYSTEM CAME OUT IN 1983 THE SECOND GENERATION WOULDNT GET SERIOUSLY INJURED. ITD BE THE GENOCIDE OF THE GENERATION 2 CONSOLES —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.17.249 (talk) 04:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] No Article For Odyssey 2 Video Game System?
I couldn't find an article on Wikipedia for the Oddessy 2 video game system. I thought it was a step-up from Intellivision, we had both. KC Munchkin was an Oddessy game, a rip off of Pacman, but actually pretty cool. The Oddessy system had a alphabetic keyboard on the top of it. Anyone remember it?
As for Intellivision, right before they went out of business or whatever they did, they were selling games dirt cheap. Games that previously cost $30 - $50 were being sold for $0.99. Yes, less than a buck. I bought a whole bunch of those Intellivision games at that cheap price. Monkeybreath 10:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- See Magnavox Odyssey². Nandesuka 11:41, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Suggestions for improving "tone" in TV section
Any ideas on improving encyclopedic "tone"? I changed "kids" to "children", other thoughts? JubalHarshaw 17:15, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- I took a shot at it. I think it should read ok now so I removed the tag.Michael Dorosh 17:40, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
WHAT DO YOU MEAN 'TONE'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.17.249 (talk) 04:33, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] MATTEL ATARI COLECO BFF
VERY INTERESTING HOW THE 3 WORKED TOGETHER, I GUESS TO MAKE A PROFIT FOR THEMSELVES IN THEIR TECHNICALLY-RIVALED-BUT-NOT=NECESSARILY-VIEWED-AS-SUCH-IN-THE-MARKET WHILE NOWADAYS EVERYTHING IS ABOUT CONSOLE EXCLUSIVES AND WED NEVER SEE NINTENDO SONY MICROSOFT BFF UNLESS THEY WENT INSANE OR THE APOCALYPSE WAS COMING OR SOME SHIT. I DONT KNOW. MAYBE INTERESTING TO POINT OUT HOW THESE SIMPLE TIMES OF GENERAL OPENNESS AND CONSOLE PEACE WAS NEVER SEEN IN THE REBIRTH AFTER THE INFAMOUS VIDEOGAME CRASH OF 1983 VIDEOGAME CONSOLE WARS AGAIN
Dude, this isn't 1972 -- computers have been able to do lower-case letters for about 30 years now. Turn the frickin' caps-lock key off, OK?
As for the rest of your comment... I'm not even sure what the heck you mean by any of that. Those three companies certainly were *not* "best friends" in any meaningful sense; the only reason any of them ever released games for their rivals' systems is because they figured there was money to be made doing it, and because their rivals couldn't really do anything to *stop* it. (Although Mattel certainly *tried*; when the Intellivision-II rolled out, it had a trap in the BIOS that tried to detect 3rd-party cartridges and would refuse to run them. Atari, Coleco, *et al* managed to get around it, but Mattel certainly wasn't *happy* abouut it.)
The mcp (talk) 23:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sales figure change
I changed the sales figure from 3 million to 6 million due to the fact that the source that was provided actually says that. Yes, early in the article it says that Mattel sold 3 million Intellivisions but then it continues and mentions that INTV was able to sell another 3 million units between 1985 and 1990 resulting in a total of 6 million. 72.196.107.38 (talk) 08:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)Matt Goode May 29, 2008
