Is E.T. for the Atari 2600 really that bad?

When discussing Atari 2600 games let alone any type of games that have a reputation of being really bad there's one game that is almost always brought up. The game that was suppose to be a hit in 1982 Ended up being a factor in the crash of the video game market in 1983. The game that is famous or rather infamous for being so bad is none other than E.T. for the Atari 2600. This game was made by Howard Scott Warshaw, he seems to often get the blame for making a "horrible" game but that's not entirely fair to say. Warshaw was only given around 5 Weeks to make the entire game. He was given this deadline because Atari wanted it out for the holidays. On top of all that he was only one person working on this and there was no team of programmers helping.

Is the game really that bad though? When thinking about what makes a game bad we usually consider a few things, mainly graphics, story, the state of the game( are there bugs and glitches, is the game finished) and of course gameplay. There's always more to a game then just that alone but these are typically what people look at.

To say E.T.'s graphics were bad is debatable. The game looks like what you would expect from an atari 2600 game, maybe even a little better looking. There's no denying it looks primitive but that was the way graphics looked at the time it was made. Its sprites are simple but for the most part you can identify what each one represents. They Have some animation too.

The story of the game tries to be similar to the movie. E.T needs to get home, he needs to find parts to build an interplanetary telephone and phone home.

The game came out like all games in the 80s, on a cartridge. Without the ability of updating the game later on like we can today anything that was in the games code was stuck on all copies produced. Bugs and glitches are actually not an issue for the game but it was actually the gameplay that was the issue.

The gameplay was what many would say is the thing that ruined the game. You play as E.T. but you may mistake this game for "Pitfall" because falling into pits is what you're going to be doing a lot in it. The constant need to avoid these large holes in the ground get annoying quickly, sometimes the player will fall by just barely touching the edge of the hole. Once you fall down you have to float back up which feels like it takes forever and once you finally reach the top you'll most likely just fall down again. You are constantly being chased by an FBI agent who will take all the stuff you collected and a scientist who will drag you to certain places around the game world. The game world is only 6 different places that resemble places from the movie. Sometimes games are hard but its the challenge that makes it fun, this is not one of those games.

E.T. for the Atari 2600 has fun elements to it but the constant falling into pits and unfair gameplay really makes it hard to enjoy. Is it the worst game ever made? I wouldn't say so, it certainly isn't the best but it really does have some entertaining moments to it.