Intellivision Amico - Tommy Tallarico introduction + Q&A

3 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

Interesting article that just came out in the UK about mobile gaming.  Something I've been talking about for ages.

What are your thoughts??

https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-56215030?catid=entertainment

The reason this is controversial is because the conversation around this topic and the amount of money spent don't seem to agree with each other. Are in-app purchases ruining gaming? I think most "gamers" would say of course it is. But then you look at how much money people spend on in-app purchases and that data would seem to indicate otherwise. People may complain about those micro transactions, but it isn't stopping them from spending a lot of money on them. 

A few examples come to mind:
I remember reading one year that EA's biggest money maker was The Simpsons Tapped Out. All because of micro transactions.

EA is also raking in a fortune each year because of the their FIFA Ultimate Team mode, and the same in Madden.

Nintendo decided to dip its toes into the mobile market. Super Mario Run approached it the "right" way. Play the first level for free, and then get the whole game for an additional $10. Fire Emblem was released as a micro-transaction firestorm.  Mario made only $56 million its first year, while Fire Emblem brought in over $300 million.

This brings up an interesting problem in that the conventional thinking is that in-app purchases are ruining everything... but if people keep buying them, then they're not going away. Personally, I don't use in-app purchases and just prefer to play games I've paid for. I do think that's the right approach, but the numbers may say differently.

3 hours ago, Silverbot said:

It does seem he is everywhere 😀👍

I edited your post.  I hope you don't mind.  There was a spelling error. 

4 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

Interesting article that just came out in the UK about mobile gaming.  Something I've been talking about for ages.

What are your thoughts??

https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-56215030?catid=entertainment

I have re-written a reply to this multiple times. But when it all boils down , I stopped buying mobile games for most of the reasons stated in the article. Along with a few others.  At most, I'll try them. Then stop playing after a bit because of controls or the pay wall. Then I promptly delete. The only current game on my phone is the Dark Tower game. (Yes the board/electronic game). -Insert another plea for Dark Tower on Amico- 

6 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

Interesting article that just came out in the UK about mobile gaming.  Something I've been talking about for ages.

What are your thoughts??

https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-56215030?catid=entertainment

I hate in app purchases. I have stopped playing a lot of games because the in app purchases and ads have made it completely unplayable and not enjoyable.

Even my son's math website monetizes the ability to level up. You can't unlock all aspects of the site unless you buy a membership 🙄

Also I love that Professor Layton series was shown in the article. I love all of those games. But a lot of mobile puzzle games are ruined by in app purchases. 

23 minutes ago, PeterPepper said:

I hate in app purchases. I have stopped playing a lot of games because the in app purchases and ads have made it completely unplayable and not enjoyable.

 

Even my son's math website monetizes the ability to level up. You can't unlock all aspects of the site unless you buy a membership 🙄

 

Also I love that Professor Layton series was shown in the article. I love all of those games. But a lot of mobile puzzle games are ruined by in app purchases. 

I agree ! I used to love Subway Surfers , Temple Run and many other pick up

and play games until they added in app purchases which made the high scores useless and meaningless .........

29 minutes ago, Cranker said:

I agree ! I used to love Subway Surfers , Temple Run and many other pick up

and play games until they added in app purchases which made the high scores useless and meaningless .........

Oh Subway surfers...I loved that game. Where's my water was a good one too that kind of got ruined by all that. I also loved playing Mafia Wars (guilty pleasure) with friends until they made in game purchases the only way to level up and get past bosses. Zynga was really bad about that stuff. 

5 hours ago, woobman said:

I have re-written a reply to this multiple times. But when it all boils down , I stopped buying mobile games for most of the reasons stated in the article. Along with a few others.  At most, I'll try them. Then stop playing after a bit because of controls or the pay wall. Then I promptly delete. The only current game on my phone is the Dark Tower game. (Yes the board/electronic game). -Insert another plea for Dark Tower on Amico- 

 

Yes I would like this game. 

Tommy,

When you turn the Amico off, is there anything special that happens?  Such as a cool shutdown animation on the TV screen?  Or perhaps a retro sound effect?  If you want, you can just say yes or no.  That way there's no spoilers.

If anyone is in doubt about amico delays, heres the consequence of ‘getting it out there’

11 hours ago, Intellivision Master said:

I edited your post.  I hope you don't mind.  There was a spelling error. 

Sorry, teacher, I must do better! 😂

3 hours ago, Silverbot said:

Sorry, teacher, I must do better! 😂

It's okay.  It happens to the best of us.  

16 hours ago, vongruetz said:

The reason this is controversial is because the conversation around this topic and the amount of money spent don't seem to agree with each other. Are in-app purchases ruining gaming? I think most "gamers" would say of course it is. But then you look at how much money people spend on in-app purchases and that data would seem to indicate otherwise. People may complain about those micro transactions, but it isn't stopping them from spending a lot of money on them. 

A few examples come to mind:
I remember reading one year that EA's biggest money maker was The Simpsons Tapped Out. All because of micro transactions.

EA is also raking in a fortune each year because of the their FIFA Ultimate Team mode, and the same in Madden.

Nintendo decided to dip its toes into the mobile market. Super Mario Run approached it the "right" way. Play the first level for free, and then get the whole game for an additional $10. Fire Emblem was released as a micro-transaction firestorm.  Mario made only $56 million its first year, while Fire Emblem brought in over $300 million.

 

This brings up an interesting problem in that the conventional thinking is that in-app purchases are ruining everything... but if people keep buying them, then they're not going away. Personally, I don't use in-app purchases and just prefer to play games I've paid for. I do think that's the right approach, but the numbers may say differently.

Unfortunately consumer behavior doesn't reflect consumer preferences.  You'd be hard-pressed to find consumers who supported Blockbuster's high late fees, while its competitors touted more forgiving prices (or forgiving late fees) without much threat to Blockbuster.  Those same late fees were a sizable part of Blockbuster's revenue and success.  They had no desire to get rid of them.  The data said they could (should?) keep them up, make no changes.  The number of people who approve airlines parceling various allowances and amenities as fees may be.. well, it's just Ted.  That's it.  Ted's the entirety of four national surveys looking for approval.  But consumer behavior forgoes slightly higher priced tickets and airlines see it's a race to the bottom to post the minimum for each ticket, and then make margins in selling seat assignments, baggage, boarding, snacks, drinks, entertainment, lounge access, upgraded space, cushions to people exhausted by the check-in process and re-thinking their budget decisions.  

Most people will state they hate micro transactions and in-game ads, paywalls, pay-to-play freemium games, the app stores they must navigate (or largely avoid)... and will still take their slings and arrows to play now and again.  Or play the free games, not spend a dime, but the companies still see THEIR profits because you've had to sit through 8,000 ads of Zombie Fortress Laser Pew Pew Pew Annihilator.. you opt NOT to pay, and they still win their profit model.  It's a game of attrition.  And they know they get enough reluctant takers in the end.  Our New Year's resolutions don't last long, our refusal not to pay doesn't always stand, and if they nickel and dime their way to profits, so be it.

The absence of more than a handful of viable alternatives is good for Intellivision, but ultimately, a viable alternative will at some point shake down the model.  Maybe Intellivision doesn't much do it, but we're hopeful.  Cable television, the record industry, just about every industry existed and heavily profits with archaic or anti-consumer models that maximize the fleecing of customers, and either government regulation or a viable competitive threat or sudden change in technology disrupts that model.  For mobile gaming, there just hasn't been a viable competitor to counter its model in a while - not since the Wii and DS wound down.

20 hours ago, IntelliMission said:

Hey Tommy, here's an interesting/difficult question:

 

- Are you 100% sure the problems that made the April launch impossible will not happen again in September? If so, could you give more details as to why the prices of the components/shipping will not be a problem this time?

We can't predict the future and the component scarcity is a difficult and challenging thing to predict at this point. 

Sorry, wish I could give you a more definitive answer, but in the spirit of being honest and transparent... I don't think anyone in the world can answer that question.

19 hours ago, GrudgeQ said:

Honestly this is huge for me. In app ads & pay to play really lower my enjoyment and I steer away from games I simply can't buy outright. Unfortunately as the article points out developers face an uphill battle in charging for their games on mobile so I am seeing less and less mobile games which I can even buy. Bottom line is if you bring an mobile game to the Amico - without any other changes except drop add & in game monetization - that is enough for me to buy the game on the Amico.

Yes.  I believe that consumers would rather pay a small fee and get something they own and never need to pay to keep playing.

I think what we're seeing is a bit of consumer remorse in my opinion.  Meaning... not many people wanted to pay $3.99 - $9.99 for games on their phone because most EVERYTHING else was "free".

And now that the "freemium" business model has taken over and games are now being designed around sucking as much money out of you as possible... I hear from consumers all the time that they wish they could just pay a small price for the game and be done with it.

Which of course plays into our hands and the big reason why I took this route with Amico.

We'll find out if it's a good idea or not. 

Our sources, research and focus group tests are positive.

Tommy , you mentioned friends leaderboards which may not be available at launch. I assume the online leaderboards you discussed and more importantly to me, those awesome LOCAL leaderboards will be available on launch ? It’s been back to my arcade days that someone has understood and cared about how important leaderboards are to some people and how it makes you want to play “just one more time” in score based games 😀

17 hours ago, vongruetz said:

The reason this is controversial is because the conversation around this topic and the amount of money spent don't seem to agree with each other. Are in-app purchases ruining gaming? I think most "gamers" would say of course it is. But then you look at how much money people spend on in-app purchases and that data would seem to indicate otherwise. People may complain about those micro transactions, but it isn't stopping them from spending a lot of money on them. 

A few examples come to mind:
I remember reading one year that EA's biggest money maker was The Simpsons Tapped Out. All because of micro transactions.

EA is also raking in a fortune each year because of the their FIFA Ultimate Team mode, and the same in Madden.

Nintendo decided to dip its toes into the mobile market. Super Mario Run approached it the "right" way. Play the first level for free, and then get the whole game for an additional $10. Fire Emblem was released as a micro-transaction firestorm.  Mario made only $56 million its first year, while Fire Emblem brought in over $300 million.

 

This brings up an interesting problem in that the conventional thinking is that in-app purchases are ruining everything... but if people keep buying them, then they're not going away. Personally, I don't use in-app purchases and just prefer to play games I've paid for. I do think that's the right approach, but the numbers may say differently.

You're 100% correct and I agree with everything you said.

It's the same argument as say a new Madden, FIFA or Call of Duty game.  Almost zero innovation... only a few new features and some new rosters (Hey? Wait a sec! Does that make that new game an exclusive version?  Should EA just be calling these.... Madden '93 ENHANCED!)  

Anyway...  it's a tough call from the publisher right?  Why should the game publishers change what they are doing if people are eating it up??

And that has been the video game industry for the past 10 years and why it is prime, ripe and ready for a bit of a DISRUPTION.

I see all of this as being very positive for Intellivision and what we are offering.

Time will tell if we made the right decisions. 

11 hours ago, Intellivision Master said:

Tommy,

 

When you turn the Amico off, is there anything special that happens?  Such as a cool shutdown animation on the TV screen?  Or perhaps a retro sound effect?  If you want, you can just say yes or no.  That way there's no spoilers.

Yes.

1 hour ago, RetroAdvisoryBoard said:

 

Unfortunately consumer behavior doesn't reflect consumer preferences.  You'd be hard-pressed to find consumers who supported Blockbuster's high late fees, while its competitors touted more forgiving prices (or forgiving late fees) without much threat to Blockbuster.  Those same late fees were a sizable part of Blockbuster's revenue and success.  They had no desire to get rid of them.  The data said they could (should?) keep them up, make no changes.  The number of people who approve airlines parceling various allowances and amenities as fees may be.. well, it's just Ted.  That's it.  Ted's the entirety of four national surveys looking for approval.  But consumer behavior forgoes slightly higher priced tickets and airlines see it's a race to the bottom to post the minimum for each ticket, and then make margins in selling seat assignments, baggage, boarding, snacks, drinks, entertainment, lounge access, upgraded space, cushions to people exhausted by the check-in process and re-thinking their budget decisions.  

 

Most people will state they hate micro transactions and in-game ads, paywalls, pay-to-play freemium games, the app stores they must navigate (or largely avoid)... and will still take their slings and arrows to play now and again.  Or play the free games, not spend a dime, but the companies still see THEIR profits because you've had to sit through 8,000 ads of Zombie Fortress Laser Pew Pew Pew Annihilator.. you opt NOT to pay, and they still win their profit model.  It's a game of attrition.  And they know they get enough reluctant takers in the end.  Our New Year's resolutions don't last long, our refusal not to pay doesn't always stand, and if they nickel and dime their way to profits, so be it.

 

 

The absence of more than a handful of viable alternatives is good for Intellivision, but ultimately, a viable alternative will at some point shake down the model.  Maybe Intellivision doesn't much do it, but we're hopeful.  Cable television, the record industry, just about every industry existed and heavily profits with archaic or anti-consumer models that maximize the fleecing of customers, and either government regulation or a viable competitive threat or sudden change in technology disrupts that model.  For mobile gaming, there just hasn't been a viable competitor to counter its model in a while - not since the Wii and DS wound down.

Amazing thoughts and post (like always!)

30 minutes ago, Cranker said:

Tommy , you mentioned friends leaderboards which may not be available at launch. I assume the online leaderboards you discussed and more importantly to me, those awesome LOCAL leaderboards will be available on launch ? It’s been back to my arcade days that someone has understood and cared about how important leaderboards are to some people in score based games 😀

The local leaderboard stuff is definitely already within the games!  So those will 100% be there.   

I don't want to promise anything else at this point in regards to launch but I can tell you that what you mentioned is DEFINITELY our plan and is currently on track.  We have a team of 4 - 5 incredible programmers who have been building and working on all our server stuff which includes leaderboards, store front, RFID, gift cards, etc.   Their absolute priority right now is getting the storefront and RFID working perfectly.  If not exactly on launch... would be shortly afterwards.

5 minutes ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

The local leaderboard stuff is definitely already within the games!  So those will 100% be there.   

I don't want to promise anything else at this point in regards to launch but I can tell you that what you mentioned is DEFINITELY our plan and is currently on track.  We have a team of 4 - 5 incredible programmers who have been building and working on all our server stuff which includes leaderboards, store front, RFID, gift cards, etc.   Their absolute priority right now is getting the storefront and RFID working perfectly.  If not exactly on launch... would be shortly afterwards.

 

 

Awesome !!!!! I really only care about having high quality local leaderboards. The rest is a bonus ! There were even some arcade games that had leaderboards with no place to enter your name 😠 ...makes no sense. I know you guys will do the job right and include everything to make the leaderboards awesome !  and I will be playing all night to beat my own scores and the scores of family and friends ! My name will be everywhere ! Lol 😂 

5 minutes ago, Cranker said:

My name will be everywhere ! Lol 😂 

On 5/3/2021 at 14:55, Tommy Tallarico said:

Corretta. E tutti si trovano in parti diverse del paese / del mondo, quindi individuare e definire una data esatta per tutti è quasi impossibile.

 

 

It would be interesting to make a ranking of how many units of the founders' edition have been sold, country by country.  I would be curious to know how many will arrive in Italy.

4 hours ago, RetroAdvisoryBoard said:

 

Unfortunately consumer behavior doesn't reflect consumer preferences.  You'd be hard-pressed to find consumers who supported Blockbuster's high late fees, while its competitors touted more forgiving prices (or forgiving late fees) without much threat to Blockbuster.  Those same late fees were a sizable part of Blockbuster's revenue and success.  They had no desire to get rid of them.  The data said they could (should?) keep them up, make no changes.  The number of people who approve airlines parceling various allowances and amenities as fees may be.. well, it's just Ted.  That's it.  Ted's the entirety of four national surveys looking for approval.  But consumer behavior forgoes slightly higher priced tickets and airlines see it's a race to the bottom to post the minimum for each ticket, and then make margins in selling seat assignments, baggage, boarding, snacks, drinks, entertainment, lounge access, upgraded space, cushions to people exhausted by the check-in process and re-thinking their budget decisions.  

 

Most people will state they hate micro transactions and in-game ads, paywalls, pay-to-play freemium games, the app stores they must navigate (or largely avoid)... and will still take their slings and arrows to play now and again.  Or play the free games, not spend a dime, but the companies still see THEIR profits because you've had to sit through 8,000 ads of Zombie Fortress Laser Pew Pew Pew Annihilator.. you opt NOT to pay, and they still win their profit model.  It's a game of attrition.  And they know they get enough reluctant takers in the end.  Our New Year's resolutions don't last long, our refusal not to pay doesn't always stand, and if they nickel and dime their way to profits, so be it.

 

 

The absence of more than a handful of viable alternatives is good for Intellivision, but ultimately, a viable alternative will at some point shake down the model.  Maybe Intellivision doesn't much do it, but we're hopeful.  Cable television, the record industry, just about every industry existed and heavily profits with archaic or anti-consumer models that maximize the fleecing of customers, and either government regulation or a viable competitive threat or sudden change in technology disrupts that model.  For mobile gaming, there just hasn't been a viable competitor to counter its model in a while - not since the Wii and DS wound down.

This is a good post. There are so many consumer surveys done in various industries where consumers say and prefer one thing but in reality at the point of purchase, their behavior says otherwise. A good example is the fitness industry, its like $10 billion/year and people say they want to be healthier and yet.....

Another example is cordcutting. It has been big for awhile, cable packages are increasingly unaffordable. However, now with companies taking their content off Netflix and Hulu and creating their own platform...its made it less of a deal for someone to pay for those services separately and on top of each other. I think I mentioned this previously, but this is exactly why I just buy physical media still, especially with movies and TV series. You never know when its going to be taken off Netflix or whatever. If Ninjago ever goes off Netflix, I am going to be dealing with a meltdown in my house lol. We don't have all of the series on DVD yet. 🤣

I miss the DS. My DS Lite is on its last leg (main screen is dying) but I still have a Gameboy Micro.

5 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

 

We can't predict the future and the component scarcity is a difficult and challenging thing to predict at this point. 

 

Sorry, wish I could give you a more definitive answer, but in the spirit of being honest and transparent... I don't think anyone in the world can answer that question.

 

 

 

 

Aye, that's disappointing to hear...but the honest truth.

I was hoping to hear if you folks were close to finished with the system software, or if you managed to secure enough components yet. Would you be able to share info on that, or no?