10 Atari Games that caused the Crash of 1984.

[Tanegashima]

Without a doubt one of the more controversial threads here on Sega 16. How funny.

[j_factor]

If people are arguing "Yes, there was a video gaming crash in the US from 1983-1985, but arcades were more resilient and the growing computer market offset some of the damage", then sure, I can agree with that. Of course not everything croaked.

But if people are arguing "No, there was no real video gaming crash -- it only affected consoles but computers gained more than enough business to compensate", I don't see how that can possibly be true. It doesn't reflect my experience, and it doesn't reflect all the lost jobs and terror of the period. If you read trade publications from the era, everyone was scared shitless and talking about how much the market had shrunk, including the computer market.

There was a decline, not a real crash. People act like everything was selling well, and then suddenly nothing was selling. That's not how it happened. There was no "Black Thursday".

[goldenband]

There was a decline, not a real crash. People act like everything was selling well, and then suddenly nothing was selling. That's not how it happened. There was no "Black Thursday".

I know it's LOLWikipedia, but:

North American video game crash of 1983

"The North American video game crash was a massive recession of the video game industry that occurred from 1983 to 1985. Revenues that had peaked at around $3.2 billion in 1983, fell to around $100 million by 1985 (a drop of almost 97 percent)."

I have no idea if those revenue numbers are accurate, but even if the 1985 number is off by an order of magnitude -- i.e. let's imagine it's $1 billion, instead of $100 million -- it'd still be a drop too massive to call it a "decline".

I don't think it's reasonable to say that there has to be a single Black Thursday to call it a "crash". But if you prefer, call it a collapse, a bubble -- whatever you like, really, as long as it's a word that accurately describes what from all reports was a cascading, accelerating effect.

Either way, any consumer product where the market contracts by 50% or more in under a year, and where items that once sold for $30+ are now in the bargain bin at $1.99 or less? That's a collapse. Loads and loads of people lost their jobs very quickly; companies went under by the dozens, if not hundreds; loans became impossible to repay, and people at every stage of the process were stuck with debts their assets couldn't cover. The shit was hitting the fan, across the board.

[j_factor]

That article is kind of all over the place and full of unsupported or out of context statements. For example, this is really misleading:

A massive industry shakeout resulted. Magnavox and Coleco abandoned the video game business entirely.

In fact, there are very different circumstances between the two.

[NeoZeedeater]

"The North American video game crash was a massive recession of the video game industry that occurred from 1983 to 1985. Revenues that had peaked at around $3.2 billion in 1983, fell to around $100 million by 1985 (a drop of almost 97 percent)."

I highly doubt those numbers are including computer games or arcade games. There's no way there was a 97% drop among gaming when including all formats. That's the point many of us are making. There was a decline in sales, certainly a major impact on the market, but by only including console games, it makes it sound like gaming was wiped off the continent. That's the major crash myth that bothers me.

[gamevet]

I know it's LOLWikipedia, but:

North American video game crash of 1983

"The North American video game crash was a massive recession of the video game industry that occurred from 1983 to 1985. Revenues that had peaked at around $3.2 billion in 1983, fell to around $100 million by 1985 (a drop of almost 97 percent)."

I have no idea if those revenue numbers are accurate, but even if the 1985 number is off by an order of magnitude -- i.e. let's imagine it's $1 billion, instead of $100 million -- it'd still be a drop too massive to call it a "decline".

I don't think it's reasonable to say that there has to be a single Black Thursday to call it a "crash". But if you prefer, call it a collapse, a bubble -- whatever you like, really, as long as it's a word that accurately describes what from all reports was a cascading, accelerating effect.

Either way, any consumer product where the market contracts by 50% or more in under a year, and where items that once sold for $30+ are now in the bargain bin at $1.99 or less? That's a collapse. Loads and loads of people lost their jobs very quickly; companies went under by the dozens, if not hundreds; loans became impossible to repay, and people at every stage of the process were stuck with debts their assets couldn't cover. The shit was hitting the fan, across the board.

Yes, but did you read the lines below that?

Until the late 1970s, microcomputers had primarily been sold in specialty computer stores at a cost of more than $1,000 USD. However, by the early 1980s, many companies released a new class of computer, the home computer that could connect to a TV set and offered color graphics and improved sound. The first of these systems[citation needed] were the Atari 400 and 800, but many competing models vied for consumer attention. By 1982, the TI 99/4A and the Atari 400 were both at $349, Radio Shack's Color Computer sold at $379, and Commodore had just reduced the price of the Commodore VIC-20 to $199 and the Commodore 64 to $499.[8][9][10]

Because these and other home computers generally had more memory available, and better graphic and sound capabilities than a console, they permitted more sophisticated games and could also be used for tasks such as word processing and home accounting. Also, their games were often much easier to copy, since they came on floppy disks or cassette tapes instead of ROM modules (though many of them continued to use ROM modules extensively). The use of a writable storage medium also allowed players to save games in progress, a feature useful for the increased complexity of computer games, and one not available on the consoles of the era.

In a strategy that directly affected its home computer arch-rival Atari,[citation needed] Commodore explicitly targeted video game players in its advertising by offering trade-ins toward the purchase of a Commodore 64 and suggesting that college-bound children would need to own computers, not videogames.

You've got an aging group of 2600 users dating back to 1977. It's replacement (5200) is around $300 and based on 1979 computer hardware from the Atari 400. Coleco and Mattel's consoles are also around $300 and while they are better than the 2600, they are being outshined by affordable computers that can do much more than just play videogames. Interest in the old 2600 hardware is fading fast, since the new computers look miles better and the game selection for the console is a big mess of medicre games, including those from Atari. Atari produces more 2600 consoles than they can sell, after producing more copies on E.T. than the current userbase for the console. Boom! Console sales fall flat and the consumers they thought were going to buy their systems, opted for affordable computers, and quit buying carts for their current consoles.

The $300 people (middle-class) would have spent on a console, is now being spent towards the purchase of a new computer, including the affordable TRS-80 CoCo, Atari 400, Vic-20 and C-64. And the more high-end users purchase either an Apple II, or the more expensive lineup of computers from Atari. Their kids didn't need videogames, they needed computers for education and their future. Little did they know that their newly purchased computers were now their kids video game outlet.

What gets lost in all of these numbers is the profits and earnings from the sales of computers and software. None of this is considered video games, even by retail, so the losses posted are for unsold hardware and software for the less attractice console offerings that are being dumped in the bargain bins, or being wrote off by the manufacturers.

[zetastrike]

Is it true that console gaming was on the upswing by 85? I've heard more than once that sales of Atari and Intellivision games and consoles were picking up again, but Nintendo swooped in and pulled the rug out from under them and then smothered them out.

[gamevet]

Atari released the 2600 Jr. for $50 and started an ad campaign for it around 85 or 86, but I don't recall the Intellevision ever returning. There was an Intellevision III in the works.

[NeoZeedeater]

The Intellivision never technically left. Mattel abandoned it in 1984 but the much smaller INTV Corp took over. http://www.intellivisiongames.com/history.php
According to this site run by people that made Intellivision games back in the day, INTV actually re-issued some older Intellivision games in 1985 as the old stock had been sold already for some titles. A few new games were made in 1986. And in Genesis related news, if INTV didn't die in the early '90s, they would have localized the Japanese shooter Curse.

[A Black Falcon]

What's your definition of shovelware? The MD has plenty of poor games but little of it would align with most people's definition of shovelware apart from the sports genre. Sure it's fair to count the sports shovelware titles but I doubt you could tell me firsthand which are mediocre efforts and which are shovelware; not that I could tell you a whole lot more about them, I'm just saying don't lot them all together. I'd say the most patently shovelware games on MD have an excuse, they're children's titles: Barney, Crystal's Pony Tales, Bearenstein Bears etc. The SFC has a more notable selection of shovelware albeit perhaps the percentage isn't much higher.

By shovelware I mostly meant the mountains of mediocre to bad licensed platformers that make up a huge portion of the SNES and Genesis libraries. A lot of that stuff is shovelware if there's ever been any, and it was the primary shovelware of the generation too. And Sega published that stuff itself that gen, too; Nintendo didn't, but Sega did. I at least would say that stuff like Home Alone is shovelware, and games like Taz-Mania are close to being that too... Barney is too, probably, (and those ones are also published by Sega) but you're forgetting the most important shovelware category of the generation, licensed platformers.

The SFC has some straight gutter trash puzzle games, those were the shovelware of the day; nothing was cheaper to make and the MD has no answer to that cheapness. I'm excluding Sega Channel games along with Nintendo Satellites as I know next to nothing about either.

I have no idea what SNES games you're bashing here, but the Genesis has more than its share of super low budget puzzle games too... that was a genre easy to do on the cheap, certainly. I've always thought of the Genesis as the platform with the higher number of super-cheap games, myself, though both have so much that I don't think I could say anything certain about that either way, for sure; both were successful platforms, so both have lots of low-effort cashins.

As for Meganet Modem/Satellaview/Nintendo Power cartridge (not the American magazine, the Japanese buy-to-rewritable-carts system for SNES and GB) games, most of those were very cheap, low budget games, because the whole point of releasing them only as downloads was that you could then release games that were much lower in budget, like low-price download games are now compared to major retail titles on consoles. The Sega Channel didn't really have that stuff though, it was mostly retail titles, and the Satellaview does have a lot more releases than the Genesis modem, though some of the most popular Satellaview or Nintendo Power games did get retail releases eventually.

[j_factor]

Is it true that console gaming was on the upswing by 85? I've heard more than once that sales of Atari and Intellivision games and consoles were picking up again, but Nintendo swooped in and pulled the rug out from under them and then smothered them out.

The Atari 2600 jr. was introduced in 1985. I can certainly believe that its sales were improved compared to the previous year's 2600 sales. Intellivision, I'm not sure but I don't think so. The Intellivision "III" didn't come out until 1986, so all that was being sold in '85 was liquidated stock. Maybe the price was low enough, that sales improved. But I doubt it.

Keep in mind that no other consoles were available in 1985. Colecovision was gone, 5200 was gone, 7800 was in limbo (none were sold in '85, only '84 and '86+), and everything else was very much gone. The Atari XE computers came out that year, but the XE Game System did not, stupidly enough.

[A Black Falcon]

The Atari 2600 jr. was introduced in 1985. I can certainly believe that its sales were improved compared to the previous year's 2600 sales. Intellivision, I'm not sure but I don't think so. The Intellivision "III" didn't come out until 1986, so all that was being sold in '85 was liquidated stock. Maybe the price was low enough, that sales improved. But I doubt it.

Keep in mind that no other consoles were available in 1985. Colecovision was gone, 5200 was gone, 7800 was in limbo (none were sold in '85, only '84 and '86+), and everything else was very much gone. The Atari XE computers came out that year, but the XE Game System did not, stupidly enough.

I thought the usual story was that the 2600 Jr. was released in response to the NES's launch... is that not true?

[gamevet]

I thought the usual story was that the 2600 Jr. was released in response to the NES's launch... is that not true?

I thought it was just Atari looking at an easy buck. The thing came out with a few cheap titles like Beach Volleyball. I remember my friend's little brother getting one in 86, before we had heard of the NES.

Atari released the XEGS in 1987, as a response to the NES.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_XEGS


I did find this near little BBS message to Atari 8-bit computer fans, from Atari's marketing department.

https://groups.google.com/group/comp...e=source&hl=en

We come again to that perpetual question: is Atari intent on killing the
8-bits?

One way to answer that would be to give you a tour of our warehouse. If you
could see the number of 8-bit computers and software in inventory, you'd
know we are highly motivated to keep the line going.

Regarding the new XE Game System, which on the first glance is a slap in
the face to those who know how powerful the 8-bitters are -- this system is
purely a strategic move on our part. In order to keep the 8-bit line going,
we must do two things:

1. Get the computers available in more stores, and
2. Get new software developed for them.

Software is not being developed by and large because of problem #1. So
which stores do we go to? The mass merchants, who sold the bulk of the
hundreds of thousands (not, unfortunately, millions) of Atari 8-bit
computers out there, are currently retreating from the computer business.
K-Mart carries NO computers. Ditto for Montgomery Wards. And for J.C.
Penney's.

On the other hand, these same stores are doing a fabulous business in game
systems like Nintendo, Sega, and, of course, Atari.

The solution, from a business point of view, was to develop a product that
would be appealing to the mass merchants (and also to the public which buys
there), one that also accomplishes the corporate objective of revitalizing
the 8-bit line.

So what we have with the XE Game System is essentially a 65XE in disguise.
Internally it contains 64K of RAM, the standard OS and BASIC in ROM, two
joystick ports, SIO port, etc. It is completely compatible with the current
8-bit line, including software.

Physically it is more appealing to those who don't want a computer but who
do want to play games. The main console simply has the 4 console keys from
the XE (Start, Select, Option, and Reset), plus the cartridge port and
connectors. The keyboard is a separate unit which plugs into the console.

When someone buys the XE Game System, they get the complete package --
console, keyboard, light gun, and 3 programs (including a new version of
Sublogic's Flight Simulator including scenery, all on a single cartridge).

We expect stores to do a great business in these. We'll make available the
current library of cartridge software, plus we're converting some disk
programs into cartridge format for this system. As time goes by, we expect
to see dramatic increases in sales for 8-bit software -- hopefully, this
will also include practical applications as well as games. This should in
turn encourage developers to create new titles for the 8-bits.

Once things get moving again in the mass merchants, the current supply of
8-bit computers should also get moving through the dealers -- after all,
they make a better value than the game systems, and take up less space.

So, those few of you out there who are looking at Atari management as the
evil group who are plotting to quash the 8-bit line, you have it all wrong.
We're trying hard to keep things moving forward. Without the distribution
and the software, no amount of advertising and new hardware development
could work. The XE Game System is our best hope to keep things moving.
--
--->Neil Harris, Director of Marketing Communications, Atari Corporation
UUCP: ...{hoptoad, lll-lcc, pyramid, imagen, sun}!atari!neil
GEnie: NHARRIS/ WELL: neil / BIX: neilharris / Delphi: NEILHARRIS
CIS: 70007,1135 / Atari BBS 408-745-5308 / Usually the OFFICIAL Atari opinion

[MrSega]

I thought the usual story was that the 2600 Jr. was released in response to the NES's launch... is that not true?

From every source I've read and checked, Atari postponed the 7800(which was originally going to be launch in September 1984) because of the Crash. Atari launched the 2600 Jr during the Winter '85 CES around the same time Nintendo was approaching Atari for distribution of the NAVS "Nintendo Advance Video System" which Nintendo planned on launching in May of 1985. So Atari had already launched 2600Jr about 10 months before "NES fever" begin to infect America in the Autumn of 1985

99624974_be079bb13e.jpg


Throughout late 1985, when Nintendo begin a limited release of the "Nintendo Entertainment System" in Select regions across the US, Atari heard and saw "word-of-mouth" after NES' impressive Mid Atlantic debut reporting 10,000 units sold the first Week of October 18-25, Atari also learned that newspapers,TVs,and telephone surveys by consumers having tested out and played it were causing alot of hoopla over this "Japanese contender"'s cutting edge new "Computer Game System". The word-of-mouth and By the time the NES reached West Coast shores(which was Atari's territory) by the mid fall of '85, Atari FINALLY realized that its aging and limping CPU line had some SERIOUS new competition. (several sources I've found including a NES history book published in 1990 confirm the youtube user's claims that NES had a limited North American release in populated "select cities and select test markets during the fall of 1985" before hitting ALL retailers nationwide in early '86 as indeed accurate).


By its first month, 90,000 units had been sold in its availability, when SEGA heard this, they realized that the North America home game market still had life left in it and set out to give their BRAND NEW 8-bit powerhouse the SEGA "SG-1000 Mark III" or "Sega Mark III" a face life and preparation for its very own US test market set for the mid-late Summer of 1986. By Christmas 1985, the "Nintendo Entertainment System" was the most talked about Electronic of the season ahead of "Compact Disc" Players and "High Quality 4 Head VHS players". Atari also learned that consumers were learning about the NES through word-of-mouth and that retailers in major cities were getting phone calls and letters from people asking about the system which in turn had retailers calling Nintendo's Seattle office ordering more units shipped.

To those who had begin to learn of the "Nintendo", most consumers did not refer to it as a "video game" even those who played it knew that it was. The media called it a "Computer Game System" or "Computer Machine with a Strange brand name". To those who had lost interest in video games, they reasoned "As long as it has nothing to do with Atari, I have no problem with it." This shows that Atari was universally HATED during this time. People were also fascinated and intrigued with the name brand, the idea and overall technical superiority over Atari and the concept.

The name and marketing execution worked perfectly. People saw this new "Nintendo" thing as the future of computer gaming just as the TV commercials which starting airing nationwide during the '85 holiday season suggested. By the end of '85, word got around that NES' limited release was a SMASH hit. Atari was xenophobic at the time and didn't think a foreign game company had even a chance in hell of reviving the damaged NA market. Atari was also oblivious to their growing reputation and over rapidly dwindling consumer base. When Atari tried to revive its aging line with 7800 in the summer of 1986, they were met with another surprise: Another Japanese contender and STRONGER Arcade brand named Service Games "SE-GA", who Atari saw jump start Japan's home game market was preparing its own new technically superior cutting edge 8-bit system the newly dubbed "Sega Master System". By the Summer of 1986, Atari was completely stymied and its brand name was in shambles.

@zetastrike. The 2600 was limping and in a zombie state during '85, Mattel Electronics was already defunct, a private investor brought out the assets and remaining brand name in April of '84 and renamed the line "INTV" which to their surprise fared very well before Nintendo hit the big time suddenly after a stunning and impressive test run in late 1985.

[j_factor]

I thought the usual story was that the 2600 Jr. was released in response to the NES's launch... is that not true?

Not true. The 2600 jr was designed prior to Tramiel's purchase of Atari, and released in 1985 after a delay. The only thing that could possibly be a response to the NES is the XEGS.