Independent Amico Discussion Thread

[mr_me]

4 hours ago, Steven Pendleton said:

Anyway, my sample size is only 2 people. In scientific experiments, you typically need to do your experiment about 4000 times to get good, accurate test results. Or maybe it was 40000. I forgot, but it's one of those two numbers. If we can get a sample size of either 4000 or 40000 Europeans that play video games, we might get something closer to the truth.

Yeah, personal anecdotes are interesting but don't mean anything statistically.

 

Just like the intellivision name, Amico might do more for the Dynablaster name than that name does for Amico.  That's if they name their game Dynablaster.

 

How hard would it be to license the name bomberman from konami anyway.  There's an article that says Amico has Frogger.

[SoloZolo]

Given the word count of my posts, I guess I'm making up for time spent as a lurker.

2 hours ago, Michael Garvey said:

I get a little curious when people bring up examples 

 

Bomberman R sold over a million copies being on P4 (install base of over 108 million), Switch (install base of over 52 million) and Xbox One (install base of just under 47 million). [...]

Those were two different statements, neither of which are related or even controversial. I said Super Bomberman R sold a million copies, which according to the publisher, it did. I then used that to state the IP, cutesy anime visuals and all, "[c]learly has fans." I never said it was some mainstream blockbuster everyone's heard of. Just that it had an enduring audience. Whatever Astrobot has sold is irrelevant to that. I didn't say one was more popular than the other. 

 

Obviously, I do not believe literally "[n]o one bought [Astrobot]." If I did, I wouldn't be able to name the game myself. I was being hyperbolic to emphasize that it wasn't well known, so it was no surprise it wasn't brought up in the conversation. I made a guess that it hasn't sold significant numbers. It's a family-friendly platformer exclusive to PSVR with no link to a well established brand. Unless it's tied to nostalgia (Crash, Ratchet & Clank), PS4 isn't known to be a platform that moves tonnes of family software. Simultaneously released LEGO games, for example, have sold better on Switch despite the smaller userbase. I don't know if (or how heavily) Sony's been bundling Astrobot with PSVR hardware. If they have, the numbers are probably better than I expect. Could mirror the Knack situation, though. Sony stuffed the original with PS4 hardware when it was supply constrained, so a tonne of people who otherwise wouldn't have bought it got access. Very few returned for the sequel (Wiki article, though it uses reliable sources) ... but Astrobot is a much better game.

 

I'm going to argue the argument soon, but I have to address the figures you're citing. You didn't link to anything, but all of it appears to be sourced from VGChartz. That website is notorious for sharing inaccurate information. The article I linked is over 10 years old but the situation hasn't changed. If anything, it's probably worse with the ever increasing prominence of digital storefronts and flash sales. That's my speculation. The console install base numbers likely aren't too off, as Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony publicly share that data. However, there is no known official information regarding the sales of Astrobot (VGChartz has it at the 700k you quoted). That in and of itself is probably a sign it hasn't sold a tonne. The industry loves to brag about sales milestones.

 

The attach rate argument you've made is something I disagree with. Unless it's a pack-in included with all hardware, no game hits 100% of users. It's not a valueless stat, but it removes the context of what makes something a success to chase the impossible. Super Bomberman R isn't a AAA game Konami invested hundreds of millions in. It selling 1 million copies is successful relative to whatever was spent to make it. If a mainline Grand Theft Auto game sold 2 million units in total (it wouldn't), Take 2 would consider it a disaster. Different investments, different expectations. If PSVR sold 1000 units and 900 of those buyers picked up Astrobot (just for the sake of the argument - both have obviously sold a lot more), that would be a 90% attach rate (extremely high). However, at the end of the day, the game still only sold 900 units, so if the budget wasn't tiny ... Expanding on that idea and things start to fall apart. If an established franchise like Bomberman could only push a million units on the well known platforms with big userbases, how is Dynablaster going to perform on Amico? According to Google, there were over 2 billion active daily Android users as of 2017. Dynablaster's 2016 mobile game is sitting at fewer than 10,000 installs on Google Play despite being a free game. Even assuming best case scenario with those download milestones (say it's at 9999) and using worst case for those old Android stats, the game reached just 0.0000049995% of users! (Before anyone replies, I know that is silly to point out. I do not expect Dynablaster to do that poorly compared to the amount of Amico players, or for the performance on mobile to really determine much beyond basic interest. I only did it to show how that's a questionable way to assess things.)

 

All of that over a quip... I should've not made that statement because my post wouldn't have changed in any big way. 

3 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

Never said it was a competitor.  Just said that it's a well known franchise over in Europe.  

I mean ...

Fine, you were just agreeing with a description I wrote. I felt that was fair to say because previously you stated Dynablaster was "NOT a discarded regional name" and in that same breath asked if I believed only one property should exist in any genre ("should only be one 2D shooter game?"). To me, that sounds like you're presenting Dynablaster as a competitor to Bomberman. Prior to 2016, Dynablaster wasn't a competitor to Bomberman. It was what literal Bomberman games were called in Europe for a brief period of time. If Dynablaster isn't a discarded regional name nor a competitor to Bomberman, then what is it? It's not a new IP, because as you've just said, "it's a well known franchise" in Europe. 

 

My view of Dynablaster hasn't changed. It's a discarded regional name that was used for a handful of literal Bomberman games in the early '90s. Over 20 years later, an enterprising German software company acquired the U.S. and European trademarks to that title. Hudson (now part of Konami) let those expire because the Bomberman games were released in Europe under their original brand shortly after. Exploiting nostalgia for those Hudson titles, said German business releases a mobile game under the Dynablaster brand in 2016 while having no official ties to the earlier releases. It didn't make much of a splash. Despite insisting otherwise, you haven't actually shown me anything to the contrary. We've seen a few other companies do similar things with retro trademarks without owning any of the underlying IP or having any strong ties to it.

2 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

So what you're saying is that people can have dissenting thoughts and opinions about me and Amico... but no one should be able to "dissent" from that. 

Are you saying only negative opinions should count?  Anyone giving a different thought than yours is not an independent one? [...]

I'm not staff on Atari Age. I'm not even a known member. It's not my place to say what should or shouldn't be posted. That decision is up to the individual and those in charge. I think it's clear I can handle people who disagree with things I've said. I take issue with the fact that I was labeled a troll for simply having mild criticism.

 

Since you asked: With all due respect, it's difficult to have an independent discussion on a product when the person spearheading it is on this thread like a hawk. What is this conversation independent to? How is this any different than the Q&A thread where you do the same thing? It's great that you've been so open about the process and are willing to chat with everyone. I wish more companies were. Your passion shines through. It's helped build a community and deliver a lot more confidence in the Amico compared to the circuses surrounding other hardware. However, I think you get carried away (looking at the length of my posts, so do I) and pick battles you shouldn't fight. By all means, if I were in your shoes, I'd correct people who claimed Amico requires a subscription, is just a plug-&-play retro console, has no physical releases, etc. Genuine misinformation. I'm not sure I'd argue over a matter of opinion. I definitely wouldn't continue to say Dynablaster is something it isn't. 

 

Like I said, I'm a nobody on this site. What I think isn't worth much. Do what you see fit.

[+Tommy Tallarico]

40 minutes ago, SoloZolo said:

 

All of that over a quip... I should've not made that statement because my post wouldn't have changed in any big way. 

 

I mean ...

Fine, you were just agreeing with a description I wrote. I felt that was fair to say because previously you stated Dynablaster was "NOT a discarded regional name" and in that same breath asked if I believed only one property should exist in any genre ("should only be one 2D shooter game?"). To me, that sounds like you're presenting Dynablaster as a competitor to Bomberman. Prior to 2016, Dynablaster wasn't a competitor to Bomberman. It was what literal Bomberman games were called in Europe for a brief period of time. If Dynablaster isn't a discarded regional name nor a competitor to Bomberman, then what is it? It's not a new IP, because as you've just said, "it's a well known franchise" in Europe. 

 

No.  I wasn't saying that at all.  See... here's where people will try to read into what they want.

When you said. "I'm even less impressed that Tommy claimed it's some well known European competitor when it's not."

 

My "Yes it is" was referring to your words...   "well known European".

It IS well known in Europe and especially Germany.   It's a fact.  You can accept it or not.

I'm interested in knowing what the meaning behind your declaration and statement was.  Can you please say what you were trying to imply?

Thanks.

 

 

40 minutes ago, SoloZolo said:

 

My view of Dynablaster hasn't changed. It's a discarded regional name that was used for a handful of literal Bomberman games in the early '90s.

 

Over 20 years later, an enterprising German software company acquired the U.S. and European trademarks to that title. Hudson (now part of Konami) let those expire because the Bomberman games were released in Europe under their original brand shortly after. Exploiting nostalgia for those Hudson titles, said German business releases a mobile game under the Dynablaster brand in 2016 while having no official ties to the earlier releases. It didn't make much of a splash. Despite insisting otherwise, you haven't actually shown me anything to the contrary. We've seen a few other companies do similar things with retro trademarks without owning any of the underlying IP or having any strong ties to it.

 

You seem to attach a lot of sales figures to your arguments.  As I will once again say... people in Germany know the game.  I don't need to prove anything to you. 

Don't believe me... I don't care. 

 

It still doesn't make you right.

 

40 minutes ago, SoloZolo said:

I'm not staff on Atari Age. I'm not even a known member. It's not my place to say what should or shouldn't be posted. That decision is up to the individual and those in charge. I think it's clear I can handle people who disagree with things I've said. I take issue with the fact that I was labeled a troll for simply having mild criticism.

I'm labeled a troll and shill everyday in these parts.

 

 

40 minutes ago, SoloZolo said:

 

Since you asked: With all due respect, it's difficult to have an independent discussion on a product when the person spearheading it is on this thread like a hawk.

 

 

So is what your saying that folks should be able to just shit all over me & Amico with misinformation and I shouldn't be allowed to give the proper information or counter opinion?

 

40 minutes ago, SoloZolo said:

How is this any different than the Q&A thread where you do the same thing? 

Less passive aggressive folks in the Q&A thread.  People are generally more happy and excited and it's more of a community in the Q&A.  Mostly happy and positive people there. 

 

More nit-picky argumentative folks here.

 

 

40 minutes ago, SoloZolo said:

It's great that you've been so open about the process and are willing to chat with everyone. I wish more companies were. Your passion shines through. It's helped build a community and deliver a lot more confidence in the Amico compared to the circuses surrounding other hardware. However, I think you get carried away (looking at the length of my posts, so do I) and pick battles you shouldn't fight.

 

I appreciate the kind words.  But when someone comes in and seems to disparage me and the rest of my team over a Bomberman type game...  I'm entitled to respond.

 

 

40 minutes ago, SoloZolo said:

 

By all means, if I were in your shoes, I'd correct people who claimed Amico requires a subscription, is just a plug-&-play retro console, has no physical releases, etc. Genuine misinformation. I'm not sure I'd argue over a matter of opinion. I definitely wouldn't continue to say Dynablaster is something it isn't. 

So why do you continue to argue over a matter of your own opinion?  Dynablaster is a well known franchise in Germany among hardcore gamers.  Deal with it.  Not a big deal.  Sorry if you didn't grow up in Germany.  But to claim otherwise by never speaking to anyone in Germany (where our home office in Europe is located) and only searching Google in English... doesn't mean you're right.

 

 

40 minutes ago, SoloZolo said:

 

Like I said, I'm a nobody on this site. What I think isn't worth much. Do what you see fit.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "Do what you see fit".  I have zero control over anything that goes on in here.  I'm a poster just like you and have been given ZERO special treatment.  I can't help it when ding dongs break the rules set forth by AA and the mods.  I have not seen you do that at all so I would imagine you don't have anything to worry about.

If I was an anonymous person here you would have no problem going back and forth with me (like you are with Steven)... but because I am who I am you want me to be held at a higher standard.  I'm not here representing Intellivision.  I'm here as a person and fan.  I'm a fan of AA and love talking about Intellivision.  I get into heated debates and conversations with folks about the original Intellvision as well.  

[Michael Garvey]

This is the last time I'll post on this forum.

 

Reason = I just cant be bothered with long posts.

 

Life is too short and I'm too bored to read pages of complaining. 

 

If you're offended by the term troll look up the definition and then look up the definition of shill.

 

One is definitely worse but the "shills" laugh while the trolls harrumph.

[jaybird3rd]

10 hours ago, SoloZolo said:

With all due respect, it's difficult to have an independent discussion on a product when the person spearheading it is on this thread like a hawk. What is this conversation independent to? How is this any different than the Q&A thread where you do the same thing?

There's an inherent tension in the idea of an "independent" discussion thread like this one.  In principle, there's nothing wrong with having a place to discuss the Amico other than Tommy's official Q&A thread—which, as its name indicates, is intended specifically for addressing questions to him.  But at the same time, we can't have a thread which says, in effect, "You're allowed to say anything you want here about Tommy and/or the Amico, but Tommy isn't allowed to come here and say anything in response, even in self-defense."  Nobody else on the forums is treated that way, because it would be blatantly unfair and contrary to the spirit of a discussion forum.

 

What I tried to do in the beginning was to bracket the discussion in a way which strikes a balance between Tommy's right to address his critics and the critics' right to speak their opinions; that is why the rules were written in the way that they were.  One of the problems we've had since is that certain of those critics have, to put it politely, acted in bad faith: they continue to read these threads every single day, sometimes multiple times a day, cherry-picking comments and blowing them out of proportion and posting disparaging messages in other venues about Tommy, about AtariAge, and even about me specifically.  All this over a video game console!

 

It is one thing to have doubts about the Amico's viability as a business venture, to be uninterested in the games, or to disagree about some design decision or other; those opinions can be (and have been!) discussed here dispassionately and objectively.  But the deranged behavior of these "critics" is something else entirely, and it doesn't even have very much to do with the Amico anymore; they're simply stewing in their own juices, nursing a grudge against Tommy, and they won't let it go.  Unfortunately, even some of the regulars here have at times used this thread to play petty games of "gotcha," trying to nail Tommy over "contradictions" about persnickety or irrelevant details, or hounding him with the kinds of questions that he may not be in a position to be able to answer, and that he isn't even under any obligation to answer.

 

All of this has effectively made it impossible to maintain that balance, so if anyone is unhappy or dissatisfied with the way the conversation has unfolded, these are the people you need to blame.  The freedom to speak one's opinion is not the freedom from having that opinion challenged, or called out for being stupid; this is the nature of the free exchange of ideas.  Too many of these "critics" wouldn't understand that and refused to act like grownups, and consequently had to be shown the door—their fault, not mine, no matter how loudly they might try to play the innocent victim—and they share part of the blame, too.

 

One might wonder, "Why doesn't Tommy just ignore it?" or "Why does he have to be so mean?"  I can't speak for him, but like any of you, I can try to put myself in his shoes.  What would you do if you were launching a business venture and going out of your way to engage with the user community, only to have some obsessed lunatic—who's probably just butthurt over something or other that you said to them once on a discussion forum—go completely crazy, spreading lies and disinformation, threatening to frame the narrative about you and about your venture before you've even had the chance to spend your first marketing dollar?  I know I'd want to respond, and not always in the most genteel ways, and it wouldn't be wrong or inappropriate for me to do so.

 

At this point, I have to wonder why these "critics" can't just drop it and find something better to do.

[SoloZolo]

1 hour ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

No.  I wasn't saying that at all.  See... here's where people will try to read into what they want.

When you said. "I'm even less impressed that Tommy claimed it's some well known European competitor when it's not."

 

My "Yes it is" was referring to your words...   "well known European".

It IS well known in Europe and especially Germany.   It's a fact.  You can accept it or not.

You should bold or edit down statements if you're only responding to part of it. That way it would be easier for people to understand what you're referring to.

1 hour ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

So why do you continue to argue over a matter of your own opinion?  Dynablaster is a well known franchise in Germany among hardcore gamers.  Deal with it.  Not a big deal.  Sorry if you didn't grow up in Germany.  But to claim otherwise by never speaking to anyone in Germany (where our home office in Europe is located) and only searching Google in English... doesn't mean you're right. 

If Dynablaster is a well known franchise in Germany, it's because of the goodwill established by official Bomberman games released under that name. The sole documented case of anyone using that title independently of Hudson for commercial purposes was a free-to-play mobile game that hasn't hit 10k downloads on Android. Again, you've provided nothing to suggest otherwise. You're not making an official Bomberman game and releasing it under a different name. It's not a dead brand with the people behind it being MIA either. You're making a clone and by using that name, it comes across as if you're trying to pass it off as something official. I imagine that wasn't your intention, but that is how it looks to me. The company behind the phone game was undoubtedly trying to do that by calling out the Euro PC ports. Making a clone game disappointed me, but the branding is why I'm still arguing.

 

Since you brought it up. I did a search on Google.de in German. Dynablaster gets 14,000 results. Bomberman? 594,000. (Hit the depressed "Tools" button to see those numbers) That's probably because outside of that brief period in the early '90s and the recent mobile game, Dynablaster was a nothing brand. Bomberman games have been sold under the original name since. 

2 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "Do what you see fit".  I have zero control over anything that goes on in here.  I'm a poster just like you and have been given ZERO special treatment.  I can't help it when ding dongs break the rules set forth by AA and the mods.  I have not seen you do that at all so I would imagine you don't have anything to worry about.

If I was an anonymous person here you would have no problem going back and forth with me (like you are with Steven)... but because I am who I am you want me to be held at a higher standard.  I'm not here representing Intellivision.  I'm here as a person and fan.  I'm a fan of AA and love talking about Intellivision.  I get into heated debates and conversations with folks about the original Intellvision as well.  

I believe you've mixed up Steven with Michael. I haven't spoken with the former. Since you mentioned him, Michael said I was "biased" because I admitted to being a fan of the Bomberman (full disclosure, I'm also a fan of Astrobot) games. Imagine how much more biased I'd be if I was involved with the creation of the series? What if I owned it? I've never worked for Konami or its affiliates and obviously don't own the franchise, but if I did I'd probably behave differently. It's unlikely that I'd be willing to publicly say that Super Bomberman R looked unimpressive. I might even talk down any well established competitors, perhaps by criticizing their visual style and choice of name. 😉

 

It's great that you're upfront about who you are. If you weren't, you'd probably be violating some FTC regulation, which would give your YouTube BFFs a lot to talk about for a few days. However, it's impossible to separate "Tommy, the game fan" from "Tommy, the sales man" when Amico is the topic of discussion. Your account is branded, "Tommy Tallarico, CEO/President - Intellivision." You are representing Intellivision, whether you like it or not. You have a dedicated Q&A thread. You break out into unsolicited sales pitches. Your immediate response to criticism of a clone game is to say that person is "just here to cause problems." You're not just one of us when it comes to these thread. You're someone with a vested interest.

[MrBeefy]

Updated a few small things in first post.

[+Tommy Tallarico]

35 minutes ago, SoloZolo said:

You should bold or edit down statements if you're only responding to part of it. That way it would be easier for people to understand what you're referring to.

 

OK, But I'm gonna talk in pictures for this one.

 

 

 

 

Quote

If Dynablaster is a well known franchise in Germany, it's because of the goodwill established by official Bomberman games released under that name. The sole documented case of anyone using that title independently of Hudson for commercial purposes was a free-to-play mobile game that hasn't hit 10k downloads on Android.

 

You again are equating name recognition with sales.  I can easily show you literally thousands of mobile games with HUGE brands owned by Disney, Sesame Street, Mattel, Hasbro, etc. as well.  Doesn't mean people don't know the product names.

 

Quote

 

You're not making an official Bomberman game and releasing it under a different name. It's not a dead brand with the people behind it being MIA either. You're making a clone and by using that name, it comes across as if you're trying to pass it off as something official.

 

 

No... because you are a super huge fanboy of Bomberman... you think we're trying to pass it off as something official.   It's like saying I'm trying to pass off Astrosmash as Space Invaders.

You are somehow offended that we have a game on Amico that is in the same genre as Bomberman.  This is literally one of the weirdest conversations I've had about Amico.  So congrats on that.

 

 

Quote

 

I imagine that wasn't your intention, but that is how it looks to me. The company behind the phone game was undoubtedly trying to do that by calling out the Euro PC ports. Making a clone game disappointed me, but the branding is why I'm still arguing.

Well ya certainly got your opinions... that's for sure.

 

 

Quote

 

Since you brought it up. I did a search on Google.de in German. Dynablaster gets 14,000 results. Bomberman? 594,000. (Hit the depressed "Tools" button to see those numbers) That's probably because outside of that brief period in the early '90s and the recent mobile game, Dynablaster was a nothing brand. Bomberman games have been sold under the original name since. 

 

Number of articles on the internet doesn't equate to brand recognition.  I hear this same excuse all the time about the brand Intellivision.  "No one knows what Intellivision is because only 4 million units sold".  But what people forget is that almost NO ONE had multiple machines back then... not like these spoiled kids who grew up in the 90's!     So although it didn't sell as much as Atari... almost everyone back then knew the name Intellivision.  
 

 

Quote

I believe you've mixed up Steven with Michael. I haven't spoken with the former. Since you mentioned him, Michael said I was "biased" because I admitted to being a fan of the Bomberman (full disclosure, I'm also a fan of Astrobot) games. Imagine how much more biased I'd be if I was involved with the creation of the series? What if I owned it? I've never worked for Konami or its affiliates and obviously don't own the franchise, but if I did I'd probably behave differently. It's unlikely that I'd be willing to publicly say that Super Bomberman R looked unimpressive. I might even talk down any well established competitors, perhaps by criticizing their visual style and choice of name. 

Clearly we have different styles.  That's cool.

 

 

 

Quote

 

It's great that you're upfront about who you are. If you weren't, you'd probably be violating some FTC regulation, which would give your YouTube BFFs a lot to talk about for a few days.

However, it's impossible to separate "Tommy, the game fan" from "Tommy, the sales man" when Amico is the topic of discussion. Your account is branded, "Tommy Tallarico, CEO/President - Intellivision." You are representing Intellivision, whether you like it or not. You have a dedicated Q&A thread. You break out into unsolicited sales pitches. Your immediate response to criticism of a clone game is to say that person is "just here to cause problems." You're not just one of us when it comes to these thread. You're someone with a vested interest.

Thank you for giving me advice on how I should act or be in forums.  I will take it into consideration.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ok... I took it into consideration.

I disagree.

 

 

 

 

[Juice]

@Tommy Tallarico

I say this with complete sincerity get some sleep. I saw your recent interview on YouTube and those dark circles around your eyes man, it's worrying. 

 

[+Tommy Tallarico]

1 hour ago, Juice said:

@Tommy Tallarico

I say this with complete sincerity get some sleep. I saw your recent interview on YouTube and those dark circles around your eyes man, it's worrying. 

 

 

Yep. Pulled an all nighter that day because of the VIP Pre-Order.   Back to normal now.  Just did 2 interviews. No dark circles. 

 

 

[+cmart604]

50 minutes ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

Yep. Pulled an all nighter that day because of the VIP Pre-Order.   Back to normal now.  Just did 2 interviews. No dark circles. 

 

 

Interviews with whom? 

[+Swami]

5 hours ago, SoloZolo said:

You should bold or edit down statements if you're only responding to part of it. That way it would be easier for people to understand what you're referring to.

If Dynablaster is a well known franchise in Germany, it's because of the goodwill established by official Bomberman games released under that name. The sole documented case of anyone using that title independently of Hudson for commercial purposes was a free-to-play mobile game that hasn't hit 10k downloads on Android. Again, you've provided nothing to suggest otherwise. You're not making an official Bomberman game and releasing it under a different name. It's not a dead brand with the people behind it being MIA either. You're making a clone and by using that name, it comes across as if you're trying to pass it off as something official. I imagine that wasn't your intention, but that is how it looks to me. The company behind the phone game was undoubtedly trying to do that by calling out the Euro PC ports. Making a clone game disappointed me, but the branding is why I'm still arguing.

 

Since you brought it up. I did a search on Google.de in German. Dynablaster gets 14,000 results. Bomberman? 594,000. (Hit the depressed "Tools" button to see those numbers) That's probably because outside of that brief period in the early '90s and the recent mobile game, Dynablaster was a nothing brand. Bomberman games have been sold under the original name since. 

I believe you've mixed up Steven with Michael. I haven't spoken with the former. Since you mentioned him, Michael said I was "biased" because I admitted to being a fan of the Bomberman (full disclosure, I'm also a fan of Astrobot) games. Imagine how much more biased I'd be if I was involved with the creation of the series? What if I owned it? I've never worked for Konami or its affiliates and obviously don't own the franchise, but if I did I'd probably behave differently. It's unlikely that I'd be willing to publicly say that Super Bomberman R looked unimpressive. I might even talk down any well established competitors, perhaps by criticizing their visual style and choice of name. 😉

 

It's great that you're upfront about who you are. If you weren't, you'd probably be violating some FTC regulation, which would give your YouTube BFFs a lot to talk about for a few days. However, it's impossible to separate "Tommy, the game fan" from "Tommy, the sales man" when Amico is the topic of discussion. Your account is branded, "Tommy Tallarico, CEO/President - Intellivision." You are representing Intellivision, whether you like it or not. You have a dedicated Q&A thread. You break out into unsolicited sales pitches. Your immediate response to criticism of a clone game is to say that person is "just here to cause problems." You're not just one of us when it comes to these thread. You're someone with a vested interest.

You do realize that most of what goes on on the AA forum is people making and selling clones of other games, right? That's about 80% of the homebrew scene?

[ColdCoffee]

1 hour ago, cmart604 said:

Interviews with whom? 

TurboJoe has been prompting a interview in the Youtube comments and spilling Amico news all over the place. Tommy was just on Next Level Gaming channel.

Edited April 3, 2020 by ColdCoffee
Words.

[N0mi]

9 hours ago, SoloZolo said:

You should bold or edit down statements if you're only responding to part of it. That way it would be easier for people to understand what you're referring to.

If Dynablaster is a well known franchise in Germany, it's because of the goodwill established by official Bomberman games released under that name. The sole documented case of anyone using that title independently of Hudson for commercial purposes was a free-to-play mobile game that hasn't hit 10k downloads on Android. Again, you've provided nothing to suggest otherwise. You're not making an official Bomberman game and releasing it under a different name. It's not a dead brand with the people behind it being MIA either. You're making a clone and by using that name, it comes across as if you're trying to pass it off as something official. I imagine that wasn't your intention, but that is how it looks to me. The company behind the phone game was undoubtedly trying to do that by calling out the Euro PC ports. Making a clone game disappointed me, but the branding is why I'm still arguing.

 

Since you brought it up. I did a search on Google.de in German. Dynablaster gets 14,000 results. Bomberman? 594,000. (Hit the depressed "Tools" button to see those numbers) That's probably because outside of that brief period in the early '90s and the recent mobile game, Dynablaster was a nothing brand. Bomberman games have been sold under the original name since. 

I believe you've mixed up Steven with Michael. I haven't spoken with the former. Since you mentioned him, Michael said I was "biased" because I admitted to being a fan of the Bomberman (full disclosure, I'm also a fan of Astrobot) games. Imagine how much more biased I'd be if I was involved with the creation of the series? What if I owned it? I've never worked for Konami or its affiliates and obviously don't own the franchise, but if I did I'd probably behave differently. It's unlikely that I'd be willing to publicly say that Super Bomberman R looked unimpressive. I might even talk down any well established competitors, perhaps by criticizing their visual style and choice of name. 😉

 

It's great that you're upfront about who you are. If you weren't, you'd probably be violating some FTC regulation, which would give your YouTube BFFs a lot to talk about for a few days. However, it's impossible to separate "Tommy, the game fan" from "Tommy, the sales man" when Amico is the topic of discussion. Your account is branded, "Tommy Tallarico, CEO/President - Intellivision." You are representing Intellivision, whether you like it or not. You have a dedicated Q&A thread. You break out into unsolicited sales pitches. Your immediate response to criticism of a clone game is to say that person is "just here to cause problems." You're not just one of us when it comes to these thread. You're someone with a vested interest.

I would like to see this argument settled. You and Tommy made your opinions clear in a couple of lengthy posts and I think there's no need to repeat it over and over again to no avail. 

[SoloZolo]

10 hours ago, Swami said:

You do realize that most of what goes on on the AA forum is people making and selling clones of other games, right? That's about 80% of the homebrew scene?

Limited releases on hardware discontinued decades ago is significantly different than this situation. Those are fan games and not commercial projects (even if they are sold) because the volume is so low.

Edited April 3, 2020 by SoloZolo

[+Swami]

47 minutes ago, SoloZolo said:

Limited releases on hardware discontinued decades ago is significantly different than this situation. Those are fan games and not commercial projects (even if they are sold) because the volume is so low.

Says you. Then you have all the arcade clones: Scramble, Super Cobra, Cosmic Avenger, Jawbreaker on the Apple II, Alien on the 2600, made by Fox no less. Anyway, I'm pretty sure your opinion is held by an extremely, extremely small number of people. If it keeps you from considering the Amico, that's too bad.

[SoloZolo]

1 hour ago, Swami said:

Says you. Then you have all the arcade clones: Scramble, Super Cobra, Cosmic Avenger, Jawbreaker on the Apple II, Alien on the 2600, made by Fox no less. Anyway, I'm pretty sure your opinion is held by an extremely, extremely small number of people. If it keeps you from considering the Amico, that's too bad.

I'm very aware that the advent of the industry was the wild west, with clones flooding the market. Outside of app stores, that behaviour is far less common in the commercial space now (though you will occasionally see indies get them onto digital console storefronts). At no point have I suggested this was something only Amico has done. In fact, I've literally said the opposite ("This is not specific to [Intellivison]") in this thread. I've even named far more recent examples.

 

I never said this was a deal breaker, just that it was disappointing to see. This spiraled because I found out that it was more than just Amico's Great Value Bomberman.

Edited April 3, 2020 by SoloZolo

[mr_me]

So far they've secured the rights to over fifty retro titles.  Some they own through Intellivision Productions others are licensed.  Some like the Imagic titles have long thought to be abandoned but they found the owner.  All Amico versions are described ro be reimagined with unique gameplay added.  Only the bomberman/dynablaster game hasn't been named.  We can see the graphics are different, gone are the chibi characters the other games have, and I expect the sound to be very different as well.  I don't know if anyone's rights have been infringed but that will sort itself out.  Also keep in mind retro titles are only expected to make out about 20% of their library.

[MrBeefy]

24 minutes ago, mr_me said:

So far they've secured the rights to over fifty retro titles.  Some they own through Intellivision Productions others are licensed.  Some like the Imagic titles have long thought to be abandoned but they found the owner.  All Amico versions are described ro be reimagined with unique gameplay added.  Only the bomberman/dynablaster game hasn't been named.  We can see the graphics are different, gone are the chibi characters the other games have, and I expect the sound to be very different as well.  I don't know if anyone's rights have been infringed but that will sort itself out.  Also keep in mind retro titles are only expected to make out about 20% of their library.

It was referred to as Dynablasters in a press release.

[+Swami]

Could be it's actual Bomberman sequel under a different name, but it's hush hush due to negotiations and what not, so, probably much ado about stuffing.

[MrBeefy]

This is just great... 

 

 

Does that make her hardcore or casual? 🤣

[mr_me]

Hardcore.  She plays everyday.

But she's not elitist hardcore.

Edited April 3, 2020 by mr_me

[fiudr]

On 4/2/2020 at 5:14 PM, jaybird3rd said:

There's an inherent tension in the idea of an "independent" discussion thread like this one.  In principle, there's nothing wrong with having a place to discuss the Amico other than Tommy's official Q&A thread—which, as its name indicates, is intended specifically for addressing questions to him.  But at the same time, we can't have a thread which says, in effect, "You're allowed to say anything you want here about Tommy and/or the Amico, but Tommy isn't allowed to come here and say anything in response, even in self-defense."  Nobody else on the forums is treated that way, because it would be blatantly unfair and contrary to the spirit of a discussion forum.

 

What I tried to do in the beginning was to bracket the discussion in a way which strikes a balance between Tommy's right to address his critics and the critics' right to speak their opinions; that is why the rules were written in the way that they were.  One of the problems we've had since is that certain of those critics have, to put it politely, acted in bad faith: they continue to read these threads every single day, sometimes multiple times a day, cherry-picking comments and blowing them out of proportion and posting disparaging messages in other venues about Tommy, about AtariAge, and even about me specifically.  All this over a video game console!

 

It is one thing to have doubts about the Amico's viability as a business venture, to be uninterested in the games, or to disagree about some design decision or other; those opinions can be (and have been!) discussed here dispassionately and objectively.  But the deranged behavior of these "critics" is something else entirely, and it doesn't even have very much to do with the Amico anymore; they're simply stewing in their own juices, nursing a grudge against Tommy, and they won't let it go.  Unfortunately, even some of the regulars here have at times used this thread to play petty games of "gotcha," trying to nail Tommy over "contradictions" about persnickety or irrelevant details, or hounding him with the kinds of questions that he may not be in a position to be able to answer, and that he isn't even under any obligation to answer.

 

All of this has effectively made it impossible to maintain that balance, so if anyone is unhappy or dissatisfied with the way the conversation has unfolded, these are the people you need to blame.  The freedom to speak one's opinion is not the freedom from having that opinion challenged, or called out for being stupid; this is the nature of the free exchange of ideas.  Too many of these "critics" wouldn't understand that and refused to act like grownups, and consequently had to be shown the door—their fault, not mine, no matter how loudly they might try to play the innocent victim—and they share part of the blame, too.

 

One might wonder, "Why doesn't Tommy just ignore it?" or "Why does he have to be so mean?"  I can't speak for him, but like any of you, I can try to put myself in his shoes.  What would you do if you were launching a business venture and going out of your way to engage with the user community, only to have some obsessed lunatic—who's probably just butthurt over something or other that you said to them once on a discussion forum—go completely crazy, spreading lies and disinformation, threatening to frame the narrative about you and about your venture before you've even had the chance to spend your first marketing dollar?  I know I'd want to respond, and not always in the most genteel ways, and it wouldn't be wrong or inappropriate for me to do so.

 

At this point, I have to wonder why these "critics" can't just drop it and find something better to do.

The problem with this though is that Tommy is dominating this thread. It's fine that he's dominating the Q&A thread since it's purpose is to be able to ask him questions about the system. However, this thread was created to get away from some of that - to be able to discuss the system, good and bad, without him dominating it. The idea being he has his own dedicated thread where he can post to his heart's content.

 

Yet he dominates this thread too. As we all can easily see, he feels the need to defend the system every single time somebody posts something even slightly suggesting some hesitation or concern. The result is Tommy dominating 2 different threads, still leaving us without an "independent" thread to share our thoughts. If he wasn't so defensive, this wouldn't be an issue. But every post that appears in any way negative or just doubtful or concerned, and he posts a half-page response, that then gets quoted two more times in full by other posters.

 

It would be nice if out of courtesy he would allow posters in here to share their thoughts, good, bad or indifferent, without needing to respond every single time.

 

Because what happens once the system is launched? I guarantee there will be some negative professional reviews out there, and he will not be able to respond to each and every one of them. At some point, he has to let people discuss the system without his interference.

 

[fiudr]

Personally, I've lost a lot of my excitement over this system between the video footage that didn't interest me, and the aggressive/overly-defensive way Tommy handles himself. I understand wanting to clear up misconceptions about the system, but imo he takes it way too far, getting into petty online squabbles that look very unprofessional imo. And finances are also not looking good currently, plus a lot of fear and uncertainty out there, all of which adds up to me probably stepping back from this system. I'll keep an eye on it when it releases, to see how the final product ends up, and follow some reviews/watch some footage, but right now, I've pretty much lost my interest in this system sadly.

 

I also think since I'm nearsighted and wear glasses to see my TV, that constantly looking back-and-forth between the controller and the TV screen would be very annoying if not impossible for me. I have difficulty even when I'm playing board games, as cards right in front of me are hard to read if I'm wearing my glasses for distance, but without them, I can't see the other side of the table/board. I think those that wear glasses will find this a thing of concern.

 

 

 

[digdugnate]

I agree with @fiudr.  I was excited about this before, but, what about if/when it releases?

 

The fact of the matter in my eyes is that this console/concept is really no different than the Atari VCS- a pretty-ish box to play new-ish versions of games we saw 35 years ago.

 

Frankly the Amico's Evangelist will be what turns people away from purchasing on release, not the console itself.  Who wants the drama instead of *good* games?