>singlehandedly destroy Atari
>responsible for the game crash
>near everyone who own it return it
>30 years later
>le buried treasure
>movies made
>hipsters pretend it's the best game eva!
>instant nerd cred
>copies now sell for idiotic amounts
>>2826476
It's literally a scapegoat that was at the wrong place at the wrong time.
>>2826482
This. Only someone who doesn't know anything at all about the history of Atari or why they went under would say anything like that.
I don't believe for a second that people were actually THAT disappointed by this game. Most 2600 games are nonsensical squares with bleeps and bloops, except for the simplest of games.
>>2826476
>hipsters pretend it's the best game eva!
Citation please.
>>2826495
Everyone hated the game, but not the year it came out... It took a while for it to settle in and for everyone to massively realize that they weren't alone in their shared hatred for this game. The game could have been a repackaged pac-man and it still would have sold. People are only talking about this because some money hungry fucks got way too ambitious for their own good and manufactured too many copies of the game. Anyone that pays over a dollar for this common game is a fucking idiot. They are a dime a dozen. End of story.
>>2826502
Who gives a shit what someone else wants to pay for something?
>>2826502
They made more copies of ET then there were Atari 2600's.
Let that fucking sink in.
They thought this game was going to sell so well they'd sell thousands of 2600's just so people could play it.
>>2826506
that's like me saying why do you give a shit what i just typed? fuck you and at least have a valid argument if you wanna argue.
>>2826506
Looks like someone is mad they overpaid for it on eBay for some hipster cred...
>>2826509
>thousands
Millions, in reality.
>>2826476
Nobody's claiming it's the best game ever, dumbass. Calm yourself.
>>2826554
Not OP, but let's admit that the game is getting an unnecessary amount of attention lately. I can kinda get his point although he is obviously exaggerating and more mad than anyone should be. So yes... Calm down, OP.
>>2826510
Well if you typed an opinion then it might be one I agree or disagree with. If you typed something that was either very insightful or factually incorrect there would be good reasons for replying to that as well.
But caring that someone you'll never even know wants to spend their own money on something? That makes no sense.
>>2826513
Opposite. I don't buy any used games, ever. I just think it's weird to care about what other people do.
>>2826558
Attention from who? Youtube celebs? Trickle down attention from the movie? So what?
>>2826495
ET stands out because there was a huge marketing push behind it. Spielberg thought is would be the next Star Wars action figures. They had shelves filled with the thing, and no one cared because paralysis of choice was hitting pretty hard and 5 years of the VCS had led everyone to stop giving a shit because the launch titles were still decent and any sort of arcade port like Pacman or Donkey Kong was both more appealing than a movie tie in while simultaneously demonstrating the limits of the VCS as a console.
>>2826578
>I don't buy any used games, ever.
>Got it. You're a reseller.
Nice reading comprehension there! I only ever sold off the stuff I'd collected up over the years and then got rid of when I wanted space. I'm all emulation these days.
I still don't understand why you or anyone would care in any way what someone wants to pay for a collector's item. Especially one you've said doesn't interest you.
>>2826694
so if there are 2 stores on your block and one charges 3 times as much for something than the other store, you aren't allowed to care or comment on that? nice logic there, ass for brains...
If you're aware it's not a good game, why the fuck would you wanna buy it in the first place? Have you considered that the problem isn't hipsters or avgn or the internet? Have you considered that the problem is you and other people like you who absolutely need to have this old game in their collection even though it's notoriously shit and you'll only ever play it once anyway?
This is not rational behaviour.
>>2826702
Are you so thick-headed that you really think that the people commenting on how ridiculous it is for ET to skyrocket in price are actually looking to buy a copy? Please let us know when you decide to unbox your brain.
>>2826698
I can't imagine caring, no. Obviously I wouldn't buy things at the store that was 3 times as expensive, I would think anyone who did was stupid. But I wouldn't care that they existed.
You're literally upset because some stranger is selling a collector's item you don't want for a price you think is too steep. You're an idiot and it's funny to me. Sorry?
>>2826704
>ridiculous it is for ET to skyrocket in price are actually looking to buy a copy?
Why would someone who doesn't want to buy a copy possibly care?
>>2826705
>You're literally upset because some stranger is mentioning a price is too steep. You're an idiot and it's funny to me. Sorry?
>>2826708
spoken like a true reseller.
>>2826705
>I would think anyone who did was stupid
But why would you care? You just contradicted your entire fucking point, you peehole.
>>2826709
I'm not upset about anything at all though. I'm mocking you because you're acting like a retard. You're the one who cares that some shitty old game has gone up in price. I just think it's funny that it upsets you and it makes no sense.
Do you get upset when the price of bulk lumber fluctuates as well? lol
>>2826704
Why would you complain about the price of something you're not interested in buying? Don't pretend this isn't some weird hoarder mentality and that people like OP aren't the kind to buy tons of shitty games that they never play just to fulfil their bizarre urges. Once again, it's not rational. It'd be fine if you guys acknowledged that from time to time, but you don't actually seem to be aware that you're the problem, so I thought I'd be a nice guy and enlighten you.
You're welcome.
>>2826715
Judging people for being stupid is distinctly different than actually caring about them.
>>2826712
Still not a reseller and you still haven't explained even a little why you care about the price of a game you don't even want. This gets better every time you post.
>>2826721
Looks like we've found the Ecco The dolphin autist in another thread here... lol
>>2826725
Which one? lol
>>2826493
Hell, there's a fixed version floating around that's actually fun.
>New retro game shop opens in town
>looking around and most everything is at least 5-15 dollars overpriced
>contra for 50
>Mario 3 for 30
>killer instinct for 20
>etc
>less actual games in the store than retro merch like plushies and those Mario energy drinks and shit
>not really surprised, place is obviously a product of the retro boom
>selling tons of retrons and the like
>look in their fancy "premium" glass case
>mega man x1 for 75
>loose game boy micro for 125
>copy of fucking ET with half the label missing
>little tent card next to it talking about the game
>"the notorious classic!"
>"unanimously rated as the worst game ever!"
>"millions of copies destroyed, only a few remain!"
>$199.99
>walk the fuck out
>singlehandedly destroy Atari
>responsible for the game crash
Both of these statements are objectively wrong.
>>2826476
>singlehandedly destroy Atari
Atari were TERRIBLE at doing business, they would have fucked up without ET
>responsible for the game crash
No, that would be the market itself and Atari being awful at doing business.
>near everyone who own it return it
Not actually true, it sold quite well, they just made way more than they could realistically sell.
They did the same thing with Pac-Man
>hipsters pretend it's the best game eva!
It is pretty funny to see fags claim "I-It was actually an amazing game!" as if they are some sort of elite and plebs like us can't understand the artistic genius of ET for the 2600
>>2826482
Well it's not blamess (Atari blew money they couldn't afford on getting the ET license), but you're right that it's been embellished.
>>2826495
It's pretty poor, but hardly the worst ever.
I like to say it's a 5/10 game brought down to 4/10 because it was rushed out and buggy.
I was more pissed at say, Duke Nukem Forever, partly because of high expectations, partly because there's so very obviously an oldschool shooter under there that was very lazily retrofitted in an attempt to make it modern (it was like playing Duke Nukem 3D with Cowwadoodie rules, shit don't fucking work).
>>2826498
I've seen people on here say that there's literally nothing wrong with the game and that it's just a meme to hate it/[insert youtube boogieman here]
Don't underestimate the mental gymnastics of pretentious contrarians.
>>2826495
I think people just looked back at a game that was kind BLEH and linked it with the crashing market.
>>2826502
>The game could have been a repackaged pac-man and it still would have sold.
They sold a rushed and inferior port of Pac-Man for the 2600, it was widely regarded as inferior and critically panned.
Pac-Man was the hottest seller for the 2600 there ever was. Probably because it was 'good enough', it's like comparing SNES Doom to PC Doom, it's not even close to as good and it's missing a lot of content, but it's ultimately still quite fun to play because it still plays the same (in most ways).
The 2600 port was the only (licensed) home console port of Pac-Man, so that probably inspired a lot of the sales, I mean, even your parents loved Pac-Man, so that was a selling point "You mean I don't have to go somewhere and feed quarters into a machine? I can sit in my couch at home and play Pac-Man? That's awesome, and my kids are gonna love this too!"
Yet, Atari made millions more cartridges of Pac-Man than they could sell. Even if ET would have turned out to be a cult classic, they would have fucked it up.
Why is it considered bad? Every Atari game is just as shitty.
>>2827498
I heard the Atari Pac-Man was an unfinished prototype the programmer made in a couple days as a proof of concept thing.
>>2826476
Only a relatively small percentage of what got buried in that landfill actually was actually E.T. cartridges. Anyone who actually researched it before the actual excavation took place even knew that, yet everyone keeps perpetuating the myth of it being nothing but buried E.T. carts. Also, even though you're mocking the whole "hipster" latching onto the E.T. thing, the game did not "singlehandedly" destroy Atari. They and third-party game developers were churning out other, equally shitty games and the 2600 game library had no quality control whatsoever. That is what served as a severe blow to their company, and the final death knell was the Jaguar with its various missteps and failures. Nintendo revived the market after the the video game crash by learning from Atari's mistakes and putting into effect policies to try to limit the flood of garbage and shovelware like requiring third-party developers to be properly licensed as well as limiting the amount of games that any company could put out in a given year, so that these developers would hopefully focus on quality over quantity.
>>2826476
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DTjLG3usQo
>>2827557
Well maybe "researched" is a stretch. How about "read a single statement from actual Atari employees about the landfill, rather than blindly trusting the assumptions and urban legend perpetuating of retro gaming e-celebs and opportunistic creators of shit documentaries"?
>>2827582
Why the fuck would I care about that? You must be the same kind of retard who gives a shit about vidya gayme history and journalism.
>>2827587
Why are you even in this tread then? To prove to anonymous neckbeards that you don't give a shit about E.T./Atari landfill by obviously giving a shit about an exponentially more inconsequential thread about said game/landfill?
>>2827587
IKR?!?
This fag is over here researching video games when he could be on facebook or out having sex with girls!
HAHAHA! What a fag!
I can't believe what a nerd he is reading about video game history. Probably lives in his mom's basement.
Everyone knows games are for babies.
I want /v/ to leave. Why aren't you fags doing your part?
>>2827620
>mfw I read the most recent posts on /vr/'s first page and there's either one asshole who is trolling each and every thread, or, we are being raided by /v/.
>>2827512
It's a mediocre game with some annoying bugs, it was overproduced and thus contributed (but was in no way solely responsible) for The Crash.
If a game is really only remembered for a bunch of bad things, well...
>>2827516
Yeah, it could have been a lot better, but they took the guy's first draft and published it as it was.
It could have been worked on longer, and it would probably have used an improved cartridge with more capabilities if such was the case.
>>2827542
This, that landfill held a large selection of current stock.
They ran the company like shit and couldn't afford to store stock they couldn't sell, so they cleared a whole storehouse. There were good games and hardware in that landfill too, kids were looting it, scoring perfectly good copies of Space Invaders and Yar's Revenge, consoles and computers in perfect working order
>>2827587
Eat shit and die.
>>2827542
>They and third-party game developers were churning out other, equally shitty games and the 2600 game library had no quality control whatsoever.
This if anything is what made the market keel over, ET was just sympomatic of what was wrong with the 2600 library, one of many bricks in a bad wall. For every good or decent game there were 50 really bland or terrible ones.
Market saturation.
