Legendary Atari 2600 E.T. Landfill Excavated

[RandyT]

Based on the photos so far, I'm getting the feeling that the myth has been debunked.  It's obviously a site with a bunch of Atari scrap, but E.T. seems to have received a bum rap.

[ChadTower]

And possibly during April vacation, too.

[pbj]

Anyone that thinks a 10 year old kid is going to take a casual trip to Alamogordo has clearly never been to Alamogordo.

 

[pbj]

Here are the pics my friend snapped.  He said there were Atari parts just laying out in the dirt at the site.







Apparently it was very dusty.



He got a pic with the gamemaker, too.


 

[yotsuya]

He got a pic with the gamemaker, too.


 

The dude on the left looks like someone who'd hang out with PBJ.

[eds1275]

I was thinking about this last night. Yeah, that's what especially bothers me, they're doing it just to make a film. An "exclusive" xbox one at that.

and 0.18 days after it is released, it will be all over the internet!

[shmokes]

I kept seeing headlines and pics about this. I don't get why it is newsworthy or mythworthy that a company would discard product that couldn't be sold rather than continuing to warehouse it.

[northerngames]

Other then some game geek thing I am lost on what the big deal here even is.

are we all supposed to be shocked if they find that a cd company's garbage is in the mix too while digging and also come across over a million copies of milli vinili or what ever in the hell they were called? 

plus unearthing a 100,000+ toxic laced whatevers is not going to increase the standard value of either E.T. or milli today 

[ChadTower]

I kept seeing headlines and pics about this. I don't get why it is newsworthy or mythworthy that a company would discard product that couldn't be sold rather than continuing to warehouse it.

I don't get why people love the Kardashians so much, either, but clearly they do.  If it's news in enough places then a lot of people must care.

[pbj]

Meh, it's a funny story that's plausible enough to be true.  ET was a weird game that most didn't like.  Not really anything else to it than that.

[SavannahLion]

I kept seeing headlines and pics about this. I don't get why it is newsworthy or mythworthy that a company would discard product that couldn't be sold rather than continuing to warehouse it.

I don't get why people love the Kardashians so much, either, but clearly they do.  If it's news in enough places then a lot of people must care.

Why are the Kardashians rich and famous again? While we're at it, why are Oprah and Martha Stewert so rich and famous too?

Seriously, I don't get it. What was it they did to get their wealth?  By doing crappy shows...?

[pbj]

You may not care for Martha Stewart or Oprah, but to doubt their business acumen is foolish.  I don't get the Kardashian thing either but people eat it up so whatever.  The sex tape was enjoyable enough.

[SavannahLion]

You're right. I don't care for them but I think you're missing my question. What is/was it they did when starting out? Where did they come from? Everyone knows where Paris Hilton got her money, Daddy Warbucks. Stewart as a model, yeah I get that. But she didn't seem to be that popular back when, there are practically no photos of her. Doesn't $50/hr for a college model seem a little excessive when there is virtually nothing notable from that time period? If she was that hot you would think her image would be archived everywhere.

[ark_ader]

I kept seeing headlines and pics about this. I don't get why it is newsworthy or mythworthy that a company would discard product that couldn't be sold rather than continuing to warehouse it.

I don't get why people love the Kardashians so much, either, but clearly they do.  If it's news in enough places then a lot of people must care.

Why are the Kardashians rich and famous again? While we're at it, why are Oprah and Martha Stewert so rich and famous too?

Seriously, I don't get it. What was it they did to get their wealth?  By doing crappy shows...?

Hard work and sacrifice.

[northerngames]

for the Kardashian's it was T&A I always thought 

personally I dont think any are all that.

for martha and oprah I leave no comment other then convict and panther

I kept seeing headlines and pics about this. I don't get why it is newsworthy or mythworthy that a company would discard product that couldn't be sold rather than continuing to warehouse it.

I don't get why people love the Kardashians so much, either, but clearly they do.  If it's news in enough places then a lot of people must care.

Why are the Kardashians rich and famous again? While we're at it, why are Oprah and Martha Stewert so rich and famous too?

Seriously, I don't get it. What was it they did to get their wealth?  By doing crappy shows...?

[SavannahLion]

I kept seeing headlines and pics about this. I don't get why it is newsworthy or mythworthy that a company would discard product that couldn't be sold rather than continuing to warehouse it.

I don't get why people love the Kardashians so much, either, but clearly they do.  If it's news in enough places then a lot of people must care.

Why are the Kardashians rich and famous again? While we're at it, why are Oprah and Martha Stewert so rich and famous too?

Seriously, I don't get it. What was it they did to get their wealth?  By doing crappy shows...?

Hard work and sacrifice.

For Oprah... maybe. For the Kardashians

[shmokes]

I understand Martha and Oprah fine. Gossip, advice, whatever. But this is just unsaleable inventory being thrown out. I mean, what else would Atari do with it? To me this is like if a myth sprung up about a clothing company stopping production of Hawaii print shirts when they went out of style. And then someone making a documentary film that shows that, yes, indeed, the clothing manufacturer really did stop producing Hawaii print shirts when they went out of style.

Am I missing something? Why is this story interesting (to anyone)?

[RandyT]

Am I missing something? Why is this story interesting (to anyone)?

The overproduction, and subsequent burial of huge numbers of E.T. cartridges was often held up as the prime example of poor business decisions which led to the crash.  In other words, a mediocre game which Atari thought they could foist on consumers in huge numbers, almost exclusively due to the licensing of the well-known movie franchise.  It was surmised that Atari's resources took a major hit from the massive over production, and caused it damage from which it never fully recovered.

The question of interest is how true any of the above really is.  Was it really a monumental mistake, or is it just urban legend?  They are looking for evidence to support a very popular story, which is often repeated, but has had only heresay to back it up.

[ark_ader]

Now I know where all those 99c carts that was offered in Kmart and Woolworths went to. 

I was going to include Gemco, but that is a little before your time. 

[DaveMMR]

Am I missing something? Why is this story interesting (to anyone)?

You know, the surrounding story of the rise and fall of Atari (and all the other "also-rans") actually is very interesting. The problem is, by itself, the whole landfill find isn't all that exciting without the whole back story behind it. Unfortunately, it's not something you can flesh out in a quick blog post or newspaper article.

[shmokes]

In other words, a mediocre game which Atari thought they could foist on consumers in huge numbers, almost exclusively due to the licensing of the well-known movie franchise.

This is . . . like . . . practically the definition of all licensed products, though. Especially with videogames. Surely this can't be the concept people are trying to prove.

I mean, there's no question about whether Atari thought they could just cash in on the E.T. license without actually making a worthy game. The game speaks for itself. Does anybody actually question that Atari produced huge numbers based on the extraordinarily popular E.T. license? We KNOW that it, in fact, did not sell well.

So . . . like . . . of course there was a ton of useless inventory. Of course, with no prospect of buyers, it was disposed rather than warehoused.

I'm talking like I know all this, though I'm surmising most of it. But, like, if I'm not right, maybe THAT would be a story. The story people seem to be trying to prove strikes me as the most obvious and uninteresting possible scenario.

[RandyT]

This is . . . like . . . practically the definition of all licensed products, though. Especially with videogames. Surely this can't be the concept people are trying to prove.

I mean, there's no question about whether Atari thought they could just cash in on the E.T. license without actually making a worthy game. The game speaks for itself. Does anybody actually question that Atari produced huge numbers based on the extraordinarily popular E.T. license? We KNOW that it, in fact, did not sell well.

So . . . like . . . of course there was a ton of useless inventory. Of course, with no prospect of buyers, it was disposed rather than warehoused.

I'm talking like I know all this, though I'm surmising most of it. But, like, if I'm not right, maybe THAT would be a story. The story people seem to be trying to prove strikes me as the most obvious and uninteresting possible scenario.

You (well, and scores of others who have "surmised" the same things) are exactly the reason why this is being done.  It is a controversy that has been going on for decades. 

I also reject your assertion that "practically all licensed products" are sub-par.  TRON was a movie license and most, if not all, of the games it spawned were very good.  The arcade game was iconic and ground breaking for it's time.  While the list of "great" licensed titles is short, very few adaptations were at the level of disregard for the consumer as E.T.  It was rushed, and put into production in a buggy and barely playable state.  A good chunk of the available (expensive for the time) memory, was used up by a title screen image, which added nothing to the game.  It was a lesson to all developers of how not to handle a popular license.  But I'll re-iterate:  it was blamed as a major contributor to the downfall of the biggest videogame company of the era.  The interest in the story is finding proof, in the way of "truckloads" of expensive to produce game carts having been landfilled.

If you haven't already, you should check out the wiki.  It paints a clearer picture of the significance than what I can post here from my personal memories of the time.  But in the end, if you don't find interesting, an "archaeological" dig which could possibly better define the history related to the great crash, then move along....nothing for you to see here.

[DaveMMR]

This is . . . like . . . practically the definition of all licensed products, though. Especially with videogames. Surely this can't be the concept people are trying to prove.

E.T. can be considered the quintessential example of problems with licensed products. But again, the reason for Atari's downfall has less to do with the game and more with a combination of inexperience and hubris. Basically, one Warner executive remarked that he could put ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- in a cartridge and sell it. With that mindset they spent WAY TOO MUCH money to get the E.T. with the actual game play a minor concern. And like they did with Pac-Man, they made way more than they could ever expect to sell (even if every single 2600 owner bought the game.)

Truth be told, even if E.T. was a great game, Atari would have still found themselves in financial problems. E.T. was a bestseller for the 82 Holiday Season but trends dictated that consumers were buying less video games overall (partially attributed to the falling prices of home computers and also the stigma of video gaming being a 'fad' that's run its course*.) Atari did not adjust expectations to match those tends. There was just nothing else to do with all those extra carts and, up until now, the whole landfill business was a strong rumor that's now been verified - the symbol of Atari's sharp downfall.

*Also, the quality of games overall, even prior to E.T., didn't help consumer confidence either, especially when shelf space was overcrowded with way too many fly-by-night publishers churning out hastily made titles to cash-in.

[ChadTower]

I understand Martha and Oprah fine. Gossip, advice, whatever. But this is just unsaleable inventory being thrown out. I mean, what else would Atari do with it? To me this is like if a myth sprung up about a clothing company stopping production of Hawaii print shirts when they went out of style. And then someone making a documentary film that shows that, yes, indeed, the clothing manufacturer really did stop producing Hawaii print shirts when they went out of style.

Am I missing something? Why is this story interesting (to anyone)?

It would be reasonable if, three decades later, people found those shirts to be highly collectible and still wore them.

[RandyT]

And like they did with Pac-Man, they made way more than they could ever expect to sell (even if every single 2600 owner bought the game.)

This sounds way dumber than it actually is.  In their aforementioned hubris, they expected system adoption to follow and surpass the numbers of the cartridges.  I.e. they expected the licensed titles to be "system sellers".  It was dumb for them to bank on these titles doing that, based on only the licenses, but that's apparently what they did.

[ChadTower]

That would be a killer marketing slogan.

Atari - Dumber Than It Actually Is

[DaveMMR]

And like they did with Pac-Man, they made way more than they could ever expect to sell (even if every single 2600 owner bought the game.)

This sounds way dumber than it actually is.  In their aforementioned hubris, they expected system adoption to follow and surpass the numbers of the cartridges.  I.e. they expected the licensed titles to be "system sellers".  It was dumb for them to bank on these titles doing that, based on only the licenses, but that's apparently what they did.

Yeah, that was the method to their madness (plus some executive saying that they figured some people may want a second copy of Pac-Man for their summer home, paraphrasing a quote I read in a book.) In all fairness, there was little precedence - the industry was quite young. But it was a very expensive mistake and I don't think any publisher since then has ever assumed a 100% (let alone 120%) sell-through.

[yotsuya]

And like they did with Pac-Man, they made way more than they could ever expect to sell (even if every single 2600 owner bought the game.)

This sounds way dumber than it actually is.  In their aforementioned hubris, they expected system adoption to follow and surpass the numbers of the cartridges.  I.e. they expected the licensed titles to be "system sellers".  It was dumb for them to bank on these titles doing that, based on only the licenses, but that's apparently what they did.

Yeah, that was the method to their madness (plus some executive saying that they figured some people may want a second copy of Pac-Man for their summer home, paraphrasing a quote I read in a book.) In all fairness, there was little precedence - the industry was quite young. But it was a very expensive mistake and I don't think any publisher since then has ever assumed a 100% (let alone 120%) sell-through.

Just out of curiousity, but I wonder if the Sears-branded carts counted towards cartridge figures. I remember my cousin's copy looked different than mine, and it was because his was a Sears Tele-Games copy.

[ChadTower]

Was there a Telegames branded E.T.?  I have owned thousands of 2600 games and have never seen one.

[yotsuya]

Don't think E.T. ever was, but I know Pac-Man was.

[ChadTower]

Yeah, I definitely have had many Telegames Pac-Mans.  Now that I think about it the silver labeled Atari games might not have been licensed to Sears.  I can't think of any off the top of my head I remember seeing as Tele-Games.

[yotsuya]

Yeah, I definitely have had many Telegames Pac-Mans.  Now that I think about it the silver labeled Atari games might not have been licensed to Sears.  I can't think of any off the top of my head I remember seeing as Tele-Games.

I think you are right there.

Hell, now that I look at the graphic, maybe I was the one with the Tele-Games version of Pac-Man. 

[pbj]

Fun fact, at one point Telegames was literally a man's garage down the street from my house.  I went to school with his daughter.     I discovered this only because there was an ad for them in GamePro that gave me a serious WTF moment and I hopped on my bike to investigate.

[ChadTower]

...and this is how pbj learned that it just might be awkward to have things in your garage that attract the neighborhood children.

[pbj]

 

Yeah, I moved out of that town around 1993 and half it was promptly leveled by a tornado.

Supposedly all the "Telegames Personal Arcades" were destroyed and I doubt one single ---fudgesicle--- has ever been given.

I didn't actually knock on his door or anything, but after I confirmed the house was down the street I was, of course, telling everyone at school that would listen about it.  That's when she chimed in, "that's my dad's company."  Our school district went to hell once some projects were built and EVERYONE I meet that ever lived there all fled around the same time, so by the time I was old and dorky enough to have it sink in that a neighbor had a garage literally stuffed with video games, we were all long gone.

 

[ark_ader]

Not much you can do in 4K in five weeks.  Design and coding in assembler was reflected in the development time allowed. I would like to see someone else's product under the same constraints.

And like they did with Pac-Man, they made way more than they could ever expect to sell (even if every single 2600 owner bought the game.)

This sounds way dumber than it actually is.  In their aforementioned hubris, they expected system adoption to follow and surpass the numbers of the cartridges.  I.e. they expected the licensed titles to be "system sellers".  It was dumb for them to bank on these titles doing that, based on only the licenses, but that's apparently what they did.

[RandyT]

Not much you can do in 4K in five weeks.  Design and coding in assembler was reflected in the development time allowed. I would like to see someone else's product under the same constraints.

No doubt.  I'm sure they were under the iron fist of decision makers.  I wouldn't be a bit surprised if those same decision makers dictated that the E.T. title screen show that graphic, further hampering their abilities. They did the best they could.

Fun fact, at one point Telegames was literally a man's garage down the street from my house.  I went to school with his daughter.     I discovered this only because there was an ad for them in GamePro that gave me a serious WTF moment and I hopped on my bike to investigate.

I think the Tele-games you are thinking about is this company, which has been around since 1986.  The Sears Tele-game was just a trademark owned by Sears and Roebuck, which was used to market Atari products.  No relation as far as I could ever find.  They may have had a hand in producing/marketing some 3rd party games though.

[DaveMMR]

I think I only have one Sears Tele-Games version of a 2600 game. They're not super rare but I don't see them as often as the Atari one.

That's what's fun about collecting 2600 carts: you can have five copies of the same game and they're all different label variations (number on spine, black with text, black with picture, silver, red, Sears, etc.) so they end up being kept. (Well maybe I'm the only one weird about that kind of thing.)

[pbj]

Ah.. looks like you're right, Randy.  Ah well.. it's all old Atari crap nobody wants anyway.

[RandyT]

I think I only have one Sears Tele-Games version of a 2600 game. They're not super rare but I don't see them as often as the Atari one.

I have fond memories of when I was a kid with no money, bargain shopping at the mall for games.  There was a Hills department store (which later became Ames, and then went away completely) and a Montgomery Wards (where I bought my Bally Astrocade) which always had systems set up for people to play, usually with the latest release loaded up.  I always went to Sears to check out the selection, and without fail, the same titles under the Tele-games name were more expensive.  Probably the reason why fewer were in circulation.