Feyer

Count me in as well!

I'd still enjoy listening to the interviews if they were recorded on wax cylinders!

I like Horse Racing as well. It was the best game of it's kind at the time up until Gallop Racer for PlayStation- IMHO. The issue with many Intellivision games is that if you come across a cart (or ROM) and you don't have either the instructions and/or the overlays to understand what buttons do what, a game can appear to be bad or frustrating to the point of exclaiming "this sucks!".

The design is curiously similar to the WICO Command Control joystick- just without the flight yoke style handle. And yes, it would have been a much different video game landscape if Mattel (and others) didn't get cold feet in 1983. Atari, Mattel & Coleco handed it all to Nintendo and Sega in the end!

I came across this image while reading through the Mattel 1983 press kit. Apparently it was designed (probably prototype only) by Mattel and not by third-party. I wonder if this was in response to the up and coming flight simulator programs that were all the rage in the early days of PC's. Thoughts?

A giant THANK YOU to the guys that produce the Intellivisionaries podcast! Each podcast is very well done and your enthusiasm for the Intellivision screams aloud. The programmer interviews are especially priceless. Great work!

Yeah, I understand the informal vote but I thought it may be more interesting to really think about it with some criteria. Because we already know which games we "hate" so to speak- Donkey Kong for INTV, E.T. for the 2600, and so on. But think about it- does Donkey Kong accomplish it's goal of bringing Donkey Kong to the Intellivision? Imagine if we didn't have the arcade and other versions to compare it to. Would it still be a "bad" game? My opinion, it's not a bad game, just a disappointing version of Donkey Kong when compared to the original (which is unfair for its sake). thegoldenband brings up some other great ideas as well with setting/achieving goals but I think that criteria is more for the programmers rather than for the users, though we do benefit from it in the end.

Isn't voting for what's the WORST game too subjective? Many people hate certain games that others simply adore only for personal reasons. I suggest, if you wish to do so, determining the definable aspects of what contributes to making a game either "good" or "bad", such as * Controllability - is it responsive to your movements or a fight all the way * Graphics - do the images convey what is being represented or do they require a lot of imagination (i.e. running man vs. a block) * Replay Value - do you want to continue playing it or play it once and you're done with it * Concept - does the situation of the game make any sense or is it just too obscure to understand readily (i.e. Astrosmash vs. Vectron) And remember, comparing the Intellivision versions to the arcade versions is not fair due to the system limitations. Sure, Donkey Kong for the INTV didn't achieve its potential and the motives behind it are debatable but is it a "bad" game? Use the aspects above as an exercise to help answer the question non-subjectively. You may be surprised!

DOTS! NO DASHES! And no BONK-BONK-BONK sounds!

So is there any truth to the story that Atari produced the game based on the unfinished prototype by Tod as explained on Wikipedia [Pac-Man(Atari 2600)] from the article by Jacobi, Scott (Issue #27 Retrogaming Times Monthly- August 2006)?

So what is the general opinion for why the 2600 version of Pac-Man was so poorly executed? Limited cart rom size? Limited programming time? Limited imagination of the programmer? Something else? All of the above??? As a kid, I was completely disappointed in Atari Pac-Man. The huge amount of hype that went along with it didn't help either and built up the expectation level to unreachable levels. The near-by shopping mall had a huge opening day celebration with contests and "live" mascots. It was a fever-pitch to get the game home and play it. Thankfully, Atari made up for it all with the great release of Ms. Pac-Man, even though it was programmed by another company.

Did anyone ever actually go through the trouble of carefully coiling up the cords so they could store the controllers into the storage area on the back of the 5200 unit? Interesting in design but poor in reality. Thought it was a great selling point to make to Mom since it would "help" to make your room neat! Yeah, right.

I got lucky one day and found a garage sale with an instant Lynx collection and I bought it all for $20! (I live for moments like that- though they're few and far between.....) The Lynx was one of the systems that I didn't buy when it was new. I was already too involved with the Sega Game Gear.

HINDSIGHT is 20/20 While most of the opinions here are interesting regarding the 5200 debacle, you have to remember the fundamental reasons for why the 5200 was doomed from the start: 1) Not compatible with the huge library of already consumer bought 2600 carts. By the time the adapter was available, we were already on our way to wanting the ColecoVision and its 2600 adapter! 2) There was nothing "WOW" about the new system. A new Breakout game was nothing to get excited about when compared to a near perfect version of Donkey Kong on the CV or even MLB licensed co-op baseball (game play-wise) on the Intellivision. The 5200 games just didn't look or play like a giant leap into the future. 3) Lack of great original and arcade-ported games. I remember seeing exciting ads for the CV with images of the actual arcade cabinets morphing into the CV games- a powerful (and smart) ad campaign. Atari games like Pac-Man and Defender were already considered "old" by this time as that we had already played the hell out of them in the arcades. Atari was already pretty complacent about their high position in the video gaming industry and it just didn't seem like they felt that they had to try very hard to remain on top. As it was later proven, things didn't sell off the shelves just because it had the "Atari" name printed on the box. It certainly was the beginning of the end.

Pac-Man was certainly a status symbol when it came out. My friends and I knew a kid that bragged about getting the cart all day at school and invited us over to play it and rub our noses in it to satisfy his own pride. After school, we all sat around his family room console TV wanting to finally see just how great this game was but when the bragger turned it on, we all laughed! His fleeting moment of fame ended right there amongst the "bonk-bonk-bonk" sounds and flickering pale ghosts. When the much improved Ms. Pac-Man came out, I invited him over to play it and just smiled quietly.