Slashdot Mirror


The Story Behind the Worst Computer Game In History (bbc.com)

An anonymous reader writes with this story at the BBC about the famously bad video game based on Steven Spielberg's ET, a game "considered to be one of the worst of all time," and on which some have blamed the collapse of then-powerhouse Atari. The game's sole programmer, Howard Scott Warshaw, explains how it was that what must have sounded at the time like a sure thing turned into a disaster.

4 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. Atari: Game Over by Guillermito · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is a documentary on the subject that is worth watching. Atari: Game Over http://www.imdb.com/title/tt37... It's available on Netflix

    1. Re:Atari: Game Over by tommeke100 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Also, they clearly say in the Documentary that it really wasn't ET that killed the 2600. It was just the arrival of better consoles and computers.

  2. Play the hack instead by Stormwatch · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is a hacked version of ET that fixes most of the annoying design issues, check here -- or even play online.

    Another major issue is, you really need to RTFM. It's not a very intuitive game.

  3. Re:Not even the worst game on the platform... by silentcoder · · Score: 5, Informative

    The big piece of evidence is that when the cartridges were dug up - there were very few E.T. games among them. The great ET coverup never happened, this was just a bankrupt company that trashed it's worthless left-over stock supply in a dump. There were all sorts of different ATARI games there, ET was just one among many. It was never as bad a seller as it was made out to be.

    ATARI, as executives from the time will tell you now - had been dying for ages before ET came out, at most it was the last straw, ATARI's death was the result of a long chain of bad decisions that left the company unable to adapt to a changing market, bad decisions made over a period of several years.

    And most of the blame belongs with Warner, this is the classic problem with having some big megacorp own your company - when what it does stops being profitable - they shut it down, the fact that it was the fastest growing company in history 2 years earlier and that there's somewhere on the upside of 4 billion dollars in your bank account because of it doesn't matter.
    ATARI made at least 4 billion in nett profit for warner before it's demise, and once showed a loss of 350 million. That's not bankrupt, that's just one bad year. Surely 4 billion should have been worth saying "Lets take half of that and invest it in inventing the next game-changer - even if we fail we're still 2 billion up".

    --
    Unicode killed the ASCII-art *