Haha! I just watched Gaming Historian episode about how even the programmers didn't want their names attached to it. They cranked this game out (from concept to marketing) in six weeks!
NintendoNerd since 1986. Dream Address: 4900-2590-0032 Town: DeNile My Sadloggery
With all the garbage coming out during the 2600 and NES days, E.T. is kinda just another crappy game.
ET is still far more enjoyable than Call of Duty 99. I recently played the new Battlefield on my cousins PS4, and it sunk this little wavester in a boring + depressive state, i ended up turning it off and switched over to Contra on the NES. .....I instantly awoke from that BroShooter coma with a big fat juicy 8-bit smile on my face.
You can't play Battlefield 4 anyway with all the crashes so the reset button has become the main part of the gameplay... I suppose these Pure Xbox and Push Square users don't have much new stuff to play these holidays except the NL forum hero game
@DarkwingLz: Yes they did. Apparently they thought it would move several millions systems... which it didn't...
And, let me put it this way: I'd rather play any Atari 2600 game other than this one.
You got E.T. confused with Pac-Man for the Atari 2600.
Pac-Man sold 7 million copies on the Atari 2600, but 12 million copies of Pac-Man were made. Atari made more copies of Pac-Man made than Atari 2600 systems at the time. To make things worse, A good amount of the Atari 2600 copies of Pac-Man was returned to the stores.
E.T. only had 5 million copies made of the game. When E.T. was made, The Atari 2600 had multiple one million game sellers for the Atari 2600 starting with Space Invaders. Pac-Man already was a big time seller for the Atari 2600 when E.T. came out, but the 2600 version got a bad reputation by than.
Forums
Topic: E.T. (Atari) : is it really THAT bad?
Posts 41 to 43 of 43
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.