Y'all talking about keyboards and whatnot...whatever. You need at least two buttons to play games from 85 and later, so why it wasn't done for the Amiga or C-64, who knows. They're computers, not consoles, and that's the point: why bother bringing up computers when you talk about video game CONSOLES?
Of course people didn't just stop playing games during the crash. I played more computer games during that time (well, throughout it all in fact) than I ever did afterwards. The Commodore was loved for what it was, but it was nothing in terms of popularity when the new wave of consoles ushered in by Nintendo.
How people get this idea that there wasn't a crash...Crash Deniers, I say It did in fact happen. It spelled the doom for every major player in the console game in NA! Sure you could play computer games during the drought before the NES brought everything back out in to the open, but the fact is that you were stuck playing whatever system you had before it all went down.
Let it be clear, nobody actually stopped playing video games: arcades were still king, and of course computers (really only the C64 offered what we were looking for in my neck of the woods, although plenty of Apple II stuff was going on. Atari didn't seem to make much of an impact in my town, and after the VCS died off nobody was willing to put money into that company they associated with the game machine). But everyone was just waiting for the 'next big thing'...and that was the NES.
I actually played a SMS before I ever touched an NES. I thought it was great, and I always thought it was fun until I had a chance to play them both at length to compare in the late 80s. Then it was clear. No wonder the Brits liked the SMS, it was much more of a computer experience overall. But much like the VHS vs BETA wars, you couldn't compete with the NES scope of games. What that was doesn't matter, it was what it was. It wouldn't have been any different had Nintendo marketed their 3rd party support differently, IMO, because Sega had a head start in the NA market by like a year. It just didn't catch on, and Alex Kidd certainly wasn't going to do it. Sega meant arcade games, and that's what most people associated the Master System with. And while I loved arcade games, folks out there wanted something different: Super Mario Bros and Zelda and Metroid and Castlevania and the list goes on and on...
This retarded video implies that the reason the NES 'failed' in the UK was due to the NES not being good enough. What a load of bollocks, as they say. "It was too expensive!" What? So the reason why the NES failed was because the pirating of video games was so great in the UK that people weren't willing to pay for their entertainment? Pirating was rampant over here as well, so I guess it didn't matter to North Americans...I don't think I ever saw ONE 'real' C64 game bar a couple cartridges (Blue Print, I believe it was). To me, it sounds like sour grapes. You can't afford it, so of course it was shit. Listen, I'm sure the Master System was expensive too in the UK, so how that factors into it, I don't see it.
The crash happened, it was real and it sucked ass. It meant was that we couldn't buy new cartridges for our game systems, but we all still played and traded our old games. That was the ONLY way. Which is why it was such a relief and fun time when the NES came out and became a force much like the VCS did. Arcades weren't places to take your kids back then in my town unless you wanted them to start drugs or maybe join a gang, so again, Nintendo made it possible for us to have a lot of fun just like we did with the Coleco and Atari, just with a lot more advanced games. It was a great time to be gaming, and I wouldn't trade that experience for anything. Nothing for me has been more fun than that period of time...well, other than those awesome few years before the crash itself. I'd say for me it was 81 to 84. And again from 87 to 91, around the time arcades were dying a second death.