Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Videogame Remake of 1986's World Series Game 6

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the have-to-love-the-dedication dept.

Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "Even non-baseball fans must concede that the re-creation of the bottom half of the 10th inning of Game Six of the 1986 World Series, using the original broadcast audio and a replay with Nintendo's RBI Baseball, took enormous dedication. 'Something like the Keith Hernandez at-bat, where he flies out to center, took like 200 attempts,' Creator Conor Lastowka told WSJ.com. Though it wasn't quite as hard as it looks: 'Thanks to the emulator software, each time Mr. Hernandez's at-bat strayed from history's script, Mr. Lastowka was able to replay from the previous at-bat. Using a computer rather than an actual game console like a PlayStation allowed Mr. Lastowka to save his progress along the way. He built his precise Game-Six replica bit by bit -- not in one flawless, improbable take.' Before he made the viral video, Lastowka was jobless; three days after its release, he had a job with a classic-films company."

7 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. ObSeinRef by mstra · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who does this guy think he is?

    --
    Photography, technology, and my dog Scout - http://mattstratton.com
  2. Piracy? DMCA? No problem. by 1u3hr · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From TFA: "Emulators, which are widely available free online, allow any computer to run the programming of older consoles like the Nintendo Entertainment System. Combined with a pirated online version of the game called a ROM, a normal PC can duplicate the Nintendo experience. Mr. Lastowka spent about six hours recreating the bottom of the 10th..."

    And nothing but praise in TFA for his ingenuity. Fine, so why are other people being threatened with enormous fines for doing exactly the same thing? Interesting to see if there is any fallout from that detail.

    1. Re:Piracy? DMCA? No problem. by CerebusUS · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to mention the use of audio from the broadcast without (I'm assuming) the express written consent of Major League Baseball (I always like that line best when it was spoken by Al Michaels)

      There's a ton of copyright violations going on here, but anyone who sues over it will look like a major douchebag.

  3. Re:Ball doesn't go through Buckner's legs by TheCage · · Score: 2, Insightful

    huh? The guy got a job out of it, so it was hardly a waste of time.

    I was entertained as well, so your argument fails on that count as well. There is more to that inning than the ball through Buckner's legs. I doubt that animation existed in the game anyway.

  4. Re:Buckner by climbon321 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ya man, I'm all with you on being judemental about those sports fanatics. I mean it's a good thing you didn't post that on a website full of people who obssess over details about things that would be seen by other people as weird.

  5. Re:Let me be the first to ask... by bladesjester · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because he wanted to? Why do so many people write different versions of basically the same program on their own time?

    Besides, it got him a job, didn't it?

    --
    Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
  6. Re:Buckner by saltydogdesign · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Buckner got a bad rap. The game was shot when Stanley threw the wild pitch. The Sox squandered a two-run lead in extra innings at field where they didn't have home-field advantage -- always a good recipe for a loss. Buckner, after all, didn't give up the three hits and two runs that got the Sox in that situation to begin with.

    Moreover, most people don't remember how much Buckner did to help the Sox make the postseason in the first place.

    --
    // This is not a sig.