Without ET, who would have been the fall guy?

[pocketmego]

I am of the camp that believes that ET actually gets a bum rap for "causing" the crash and killing Atari. As has been stated many times ET is NOT a great game, but it is far from the worst Atari game.

 

So, if ET had never been made, what game would have gotten to be the fall guy instead?

 

It would have had to be a game, because no corporate suits or game designers would ever admit to their own mistakes and short comings to admit that the industry had become a leaky boat and NOBODY was hadneling the buckets to bail the water out.

 

I'm thinking Pac-Man would have taken the bullet that ET got. People would have claimed that if they had made a better and more accurate version etc etc...

 

Anyone else care to speculate?

 

-Ray

Edited August 14, 2006 by pocketmego

[NovaXpress]

No, because we have the answers. The crash was caused by Atari's business policy of forcing large number of games onto retailers and not taking returns. They glutted the market in Xmas 82 and the whole system collapsed.

 

Pac-Man would not have been a contender because it was the best-selling 2600 game of all time. ET was a catastophic failure in the marketplace, resulting in countless unsold carts and damaged retailers, which is why it serves as the poster child for Atari's screw-up.

[godzillajoe]

I think the home computer market killed the console market more than Pac-Man or E.T. themselves. Everyone I know who had a 2600 or Coleco or Intellivision moved on to a C= 64, Atari 800XL or Apple for their gaming needs. And you could con your parents because it was "educational." That's how I got my C= 64.

 

"I can do my homework on it"

 

"homework" being a code word for collecting games.

[NovaXpress]

No, if computers were the reason then video games wouldn't have made the big comeback.

 

Retailers lost money on games from Xmas 82 to Xmas 83. People still bought them, but Atari shoved so many non-returnable games into the pipe that video game retailing became a money-losing effort. So the retailers called it a "fad like the hula hoop" and pulled out. Fortunately, Nintendo pulled some slick moves to get on the shelves and video games have never left us since. Even though PCs get better and better.

[NovaXpress]

Remember that in the "crash" years, people bought more games than ever before. But there was just too much product on the shelf. Retailers screwed up by accepting bad deals and by giving up too soon.

[Retro Rogue]

Re what caused the industry wide crash:

 

It wasn't any one thing but rather a number of things. With regards to Atari, as Nova mentioned the stock order policy was a large factor. Ray put a lot of eggs in the 2600 basket when he took over (even at the expense of other later systems like the 5200). It paid off initially, but it was a double edged sword - consequently a great deal of the Consumer Division sales figures relied on those 2600 game sales. These sales figures were reported higher than what they were because of Ray's move to make all dealers/vendors order for the following year in advance. However, the way the industry was run at the time, dealers also had the option to return unused stock for credit. Likewise, "newer" third party games were also competing for shelf space against Atari games. Besides eating in to Atari's sales figures, they also canibalized the 2600 game market overall simply by creating a glut of (often terrible) games. There simply was to much competition, and no realy way for consumers to tell what was good or what wasn't without buying the games (at $40 or so a pop). So they didn't. Consequently when the dealers went to cancel orders or return stock, suddenly Atari's sales figures were deflated and put the company in trouble. If they had diversified more early on, instead of later (as they were just starting to do) a hit to the 2600 market might not have hurt the company that bad. But unfortunately it did.

 

However, you must remember - this was an industry wide crash. While Atari was a major part of the industry, the industry itself did not crash simply because of Atari's troubles. Basicly the industry reflected the same problems on a greater scale. By 1984 you had a glut of consoles as well on the US market: Atari 2600, Atari 5200, Intellivision, Odyssey2, Bally Astrocade, Fairchild Channel F, Emerson Arcadia, Vectrex, and Colecovision. Most with a slew of third party games, extra peripherals, etc. etc. that also flooded the market. It was just to much to sustain and it imploded leaving a void of discount bins and something else to pick up in the meantime -

 

The computer gaming market. godzillajoe is actually incorrect, though I could see where he might think that in hindsite or when not aware of the actual situation. Much of the console game publishing industry (which had already flirted with the computer gaming platform on a small scale) was starting to make the switch to the computer platforms during 1983-'84 when the console market troubles started. As most of the newspapers and periodicals were reporting at the time, that was considered to be the next big market after the crash. This was also reflected by a number of the video game magazines that switched over to a computer entertainment format (though this was short lived as well as many soon folded). The computer game industry grew to fill the void, not cause it. There were actually far more consoles in the home at the time of the crash than computers (which were still considered a novelty by many), so that would hardly be reflective of a market killer. If anything, the crash prompted more people to move towards computers because of the view that the "toy" fad was over and that if their kid still wanted to play games then they (the parents) wanted to get their money's worth - homework (as godzillajoe mentioned), finances, word processing, etc. The appearance of the 16 bit gui computers in '84 and '85 also helped make them (and the home computer market) more accessible, further increasing sales and driving the move to computer based gaming.

 

Then the NES was nationally marketed in '86 (as was the Sega Master System and Atari 7800) which prompted some of the game publishers to return to consoles (or in some cases, license out properties to other development companies for those consoles). And its been back to a 2 "platform" publishing market (consoles and computers) ever since.

[Retro Rogue]

but Atari shoved so many non-returnable games into the pipe that video game retailing became a money-losing effort.

 

Actually, many vendors had a return policy implemented with the manufacturers. There was a just a limit to what ammount of credit you could get. This was also a problem Nintendo faced when they moved exclusively through the toy industry, which had a similar policy. You have to remember, consoles and their games were sold both in electronics and toy chains. So there was a multitude of sales policies, not just one.

 

 

So the retailers called it a "fad like the hula hoop" and pulled out.

 

That comment had nothing to do with the crash, that was being thrown around by the media as a soundbyte for a number of years - late 70's onward. Sounds to me like someone's quoting a lot from certain books.

[accousticguitar]

Maybe people didn't buy ET carts BECAUSE of Pac-man. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. I pretty much didn't buy ANYTHING after Pac-man.

[Lord Thag]

I think it's naieve to blame any one game as the reason for the downfall. Games like E.T. contributed, sure, but it was by no means the only reason the market crashed. There was nowhere near the demand for games back then that there is now (todays market eclipses the movie industry). Combine that with the fact that there were a glut of systems (2600, 5200, the just-released first run 7800, Intellivision, Colecovision, Odyssey2, Arcadia 2001, Bally Astrocade, Vectrex etc) not to mention even more computers. Sure, some of these systems were obsolete or defunct by '83, but their games still lined the shelves. Add the tons of knockoff/copy-cat games flooding the market from all these different vendors, and there was far more supply than there was demand. Atari, of course, was a contributor to the flood, but it was also due to the tons of crappy third party games by companies like Froggo and Mythicon that hurt buyer confidence.

 

It's a lot more complicated than 'just E.T.'

[pocketmego]

Everything you guys are saying about the crash is pretty much on the money and I certainly don't dispute any of it. But, one of the MYTHS that grew from the crash has always been that ET was a collosal failure and brought Atari crashing down with it. Atari being the biggest fish in the sea caused a dominoe effect that tore the industry apart.

 

Few people tend to mention Ray "the great Satan" Kassar as the real cause of Atari's troubles from day one of his tenure. The slimeball even cashed out his own stock in the company before announcing the companies weak spots on the stock exchange. I don't know if its possible to hate a historical figure but every time i read something about kassar, I really hate that bastard.

 

In any event, i still say the one game that sank an industry myth nwould have been born with or without ET. If not Pac-Man then some other game would certainly have eventually been branded as "Worst Atari game of all time" or "Industry Killer."

 

I'm just wondering what that game might of been had it not been ET?

 

-Ray

[Atari-Jess]

No, because we have the answers. The crash was caused by Atari's business policy of forcing large number of games onto retailers and not taking returns. They glutted the market in Xmas 82 and the whole system collapsed.

 

Pac-Man would not have been a contender because it was the best-selling 2600 game of all time. ET was a catastophic failure in the marketplace, resulting in countless unsold carts and damaged retailers, which is why it serves as the poster child for Atari's screw-up.

 

The objectified icon of 80s decadence!

[NovaXpress]

I don't need to read any books on the subject because I lived through it. The "fad" slur was prevalent at the time. When retailers ran into the red in 83, they figured that it was a fad and they pulled out. Why else would they get rid of ALL videogames?

 

Looking outside of Atari, retailers screwed up by trying to sell too many systems. Notice that Sears did really well when all they sold was the 2600. They did well when they added the Intellivision. But after droppng their re-branding requirement, they were suddenly selling five systems and confusing the market.

 

Don't forget that Ray Kassar also presided over Atari when they were the biggest hit in the country. He approved the Space Invaders license, which sold more 2600s than any other game. Yes, he bailed out at the end and was a pain in the ass, but I;d take him over Tramiel (and expecially Bruno) any day.

 

If any one game really screwed the 2600, it was probably Swordquest:Earthworld. I really looked forward to it, but after playing that piece of shit I became a Colecovision owner and didn't buy another 2600 cart until they were liquidated after the crash.

[pocketmego]

I don't need to read any books on the subject because I lived through it. The "fad" slur was prevalent at the time. When retailers ran into the red in 83, they figured that it was a fad and they pulled out. Why else would they get rid of ALL videogames?

 

Looking outside of Atari, retailers screwed up by trying to sell too many systems. Notice that Sears did really well when all they sold was the 2600. They did well when they added the Intellivision. But after droppng their re-branding requirement, they were suddenly selling five systems and confusing the market.

 

Don't forget that Ray Kassar also presided over Atari when they were the biggest hit in the country. He approved the Space Invaders license, which sold more 2600s than any other game. Yes, he bailed out at the end and was a pain in the ass, but I;d take him over Tramiel (and expecially Bruno) any day.

 

If any one game really screwed the 2600, it was probably Swordquest:Earthworld. I really looked forward to it, but after playing that piece of shit I became a Colecovision owner and didn't buy another 2600 cart until they were liquidated after the crash.

 

Good choice and I can certainly see it. The Sword Quest games were HYPED like MAD, with all the comica and full spread D&D style artwork. Ironically had they designed Swordquest to play more like the later Secret Quest it probably would have been a massive hit.

 

-Ray

[JacobZu7zu7]

This is the way I see it,

 

In the 80's things progressed FAST.

Fasions changed, toys, music etc..

and Atari is/was kinda primitive to begin with.

It started with almost everyone enjoying it. (cause it was pioneer)

Then, after some odd years, I assume

people were craving or given a change in gaming.

At that time, 1982' -ish there was no old systems.

This was the New Wave.

People were at awe with ''new'', and then came C-64, + more advanced technology.

Home PC's, ment more options. Around this time,

some fans blame E.T. for Atari's crashing.

When in fact maybe Atari wasn't as intersting anymore.

There were limits to this system.. even if the '82 games

were so much better then the older years.

So maybe E.T. was one of the cracks in the wall.

and soon after it flooded Atari land. But it was just one crack. IMO.

Its not like everyone ran over their Atari's cause of this E.T. game.

LOL.

If I was to pick a game to blame, I'd pick 'none' cause I am a fan

-------

When I was a kid, I was much more impressed by Nintendo / C-64.

I only had a few Atari 2600 games back then... one was Laser Blast,

and I thought it was such an empty game, that I wasn't sure

if Atari was even worth playing, LOL. This game is S***!

I tried Pac-man one of the first games I got to play as a 12 yrd old and not 4

watching my oldest brother play Pitfall!.

But I didn't give up.. I still thought there was hope,

and some really nice games i bought 8? years later on eBay.

LESS IS MORE! I must say

[JacobZu7zu7]

Oh yes about E.T. I played this at my cousins around 1988?

I thought it was cool, but confusing. Then my cousion moved

and gave me this game to sell at a garage sale, this E.T. game

was by itself in her basement, lol. ALONE!

This was around 1996?? I had not played Atari in mid 90's.

But I did re-hook it up... and played E.T. I just laughed and

eventually had no idea what to do. Sooo a couple years passed,

internet had eBay, and I printed some instructions played it

and liked it.. EVERYTHING MADE SENSE!! YAY!

Ya know, I had the game Kaboom! I was not impressed.

I was used to NES - LEVELS. not the quick action. Even today

Kaboom! is just average to me. Its sooo fast

I am not so good my top score was like 8,000?

I lost my high score notebook a year or so back , DAMN!

It dissapered. My 2006 one is new, and I 'll be doing that again.

I had a really HIGH Demon Attack score, dunno what it is now.

PS, E.T. is a cool game.. always was.

Just think simple... and learn how to play it.

I also like Spikes Peak now, given time to learn how to.

[NovaXpress]

Was that supposed to be a poem?

[JacobZu7zu7]

Was that supposed to be a poem?

 

Me?

I dunno, maybe. Maybe not.

[NovaXpress]

It's not exactly "Howl" but it has a certain rhythm.

[shadow460]

Nova, you missed the game target by an inch. Fireworld makes Earthworld look like Halo in terms of popularity. Everything irritating about Earthworld is magnified by ten in Fireworld. The mini games are next to impossible (I've only finished a couple of them). You get hung up on the barriers, and there's no easy way to describe the rooms to someone else.

At least the mini games make Earthworld playable. Nothing at all about Fireworld justifies the cost involved in molding a cart and printing a label. It's a worthless hunk of plastic and solder.

Airworld is the best of the series, IMO. It's right where it belongs, unfinished by Atari, and, eventually it will be in the hands of a programmer with skill and passion (read: homebrewer).

 

IMO, the only good thing about this craptacular series is that whoever owns that chalice had the foresight to put in their safety deposit box.

 

As for third parties, there are any number of shovelware titles. Maybe Telesys didn't have any shovelware, but their games didn't really stand out.

Let me think...what game could have been ET's replacement...(besides SSShovelQuest)...Quadrun, Killer Satellites, Oink!, Sssnake, Miner 2049er, Tempest (I'm sure someone would have been dumb enough to release this if ET hadn't bombed), Space War, Atlantis (I know that's stretching it some, but that game is boring), let's see which company I haven't ripped on...oh yeah, some of Mattel's sports games were less than stellar.

Oh, let's not forget Atari Football and Championship Soccer.

 

I forgot to mention something. ET should not have bombed like that. With Fireworld out there, who can deny that ET wasn't a halfway decent game?

Edited August 14, 2006 by shadow460

[Crazy Climber]

Thers nothing wrong with ET it was a decent game. The crash was caused because the 2600 was old and the hype was over. That's what happens to everything if you don't update it. The games starting to suck didn't help either. Plain and simple answer.

BTW - Off the topic but wasn't there suppossed to be a "Fall Guy" game for the 2600, I used to love that show as a kid....I don't know why but I did.

[jsoper]

No, if computers were the reason then video games wouldn't have made the big comeback.

I disagree, back in the early 80s, people were eager to get their first computer. But after a few years the thrill wore off and they saw the advantages of a dedicated console which freed up computer hardware and kept it safe from the kiddies.

 

Great games and marketing by Nintendo also had a huge effect.

[Foxsolo2000]

In the UK the vast majority of games mentioned on here never surfaced. The Swordquest series in particular stands out for being US exclusive titles for they were never released here and despite how bad they were I could name at least a dozen people (myself included) who would have sold their mother to get their hands on them. Over here we only had the main titles for the big four consoles, Atari 2600, Intellivision, Colecovision and Vectrex. I didn't even here of Data Age until a guy in our local market began sellling them in 1985 for £10 each amongst his computer stuff. I do remember computers suddenly replacing the consoles and being the only way to play games although through mail order and market stalls the 2600 games still managed to get through. I believe that it was a combination of over inflated prices (up to £30 for a 2600 cart in the UK), bad management at Atari, the general public making the natural progression to computers and the general glut of cheap, pathetic pirates that were flooding the market. No one game was responsible for Atari's demise no matter what certain conspiracy theorists wantto believe

[Inky]

Lee Majors would stull be the Fall Guy.

[8th lutz]

There is no true "fall guy", although people would've blamed pac-man and the sword quest games. It was series of events. The only difference would've been atari releasing the 7800 in an attempt to revive the game market with chance of that happening wouldn't of been great though with the other screw ups they made and still would be loosing money due to their past mistakes.

 

It was a number of factors. Even without, ET Atari management was making one blunder to another blunder. Atari made a series of blunders starting with 2600 programers going to activision and causing my third parties show up then the market allowed at the time with activision won the lawsuit atari filed. After that was atari's problem's having a system to follow up to the 2600 and wasted money on a system that didn't come out. After that happened atari released pac-man. Without ET next Swordquest series would be the next blunder along with giving fell game support to the 2600 and the 5200 at the same time along with the mind link.

 

There too many game systems on the market in 82-83 and having too many 3rd developers. Atari giving full support to the 2600 and the 5200 at the same time was a huge mistake. With the system market besides the atari systems, had intellivision 2 replacing Intellivision 1, Celcovision, vectrex and the Odeyssey 2. Out the systems I mentioned that were on the market in 1982 and 1983, 3 of the systems were on the market in 82 were released in that year.

 

The fact is that in 1982 was supposed to be a down year with companies releasing systems. 1995 was a down year for game companies, so it is common to happen when there is new systems released in the same year. In 95 Enix left the states and Absolute went Bankrupt to name a couple companies in that year. The only difference was 3rd party companies fully supported the older games with them being the 2600 and Intellivision along with the new systems in 82 and 83 with same game being on several game systems in some cases. I think a 3d party would be loosing money in profits in that case with each version of the game having different graphics with some of the systems being older along with the fact the 2600 game market was in decline.

 

Outside atari, there were screw ups like coleco with the Adam Computer. Without the adam Computer, Colecovision might have been able to servive into 1985 and Coleco wouldn't have declared bankrupcy in 1988.

 

Mattel had their own problems with releasing the Mattel Aquarius and the intellivsion 2 at a time when Mattel should've been looking at developing a new system by coming out by the end of 1983 not announcing it at the ces in 1983.

 

The problem with the odeyessy 2 was it was outdate in 1982 and should've been replaced along with the fact, how did this system made past 1982?

 

Vectrex was a victim of timing it was released along with no 3rd part support.

 

Without ET, everything I mentioned Still would've happened. Would of Atari lost as much money? No, but atari still would be loosing money with problems like money Putting into R&D into items that never came out, the amount of 2600 pac-man games not being sold. the sword quest series contest, and the controller problems of the 5200 along with fact the 5200 had some the same games the 2600 had prior and having booth system having the same game didn't help. All Atari would've saved in money was ET related. It might of enough money saved to release the 7800 but the consumers would've been burned by 2600 Pac-man. and the Sword Quest series.

[+else]

Lee Majors would stull be the Fall Guy.

 

There's a name I haven't heard in a while. I checked the "Dead or Alive" web site and is says he's still alive and is 65 years old. Whatever became of Heather Thomas, by the way?