• Light/Dark

Should the Great Crash be renamed to something else?

BossDumDrum

BossDumDrum

Member
Jan 3, 2020
1,313
Just a thought.

History makes the Crash out to be a general disappearance of video games from the consumer market, when that could be further from the truth. Games were still coming out during that period, and still had presence in stores, even if they were at bargain bin prices that stores were trying to get rid of. Not only that, you still had many former console developers and publishers pivoting towards the PC market. It's more like a contraction than an actual crash.

It also makes comparison really obnoxious. There was a similar experience going on during the end of the 16 bit era, where console sales had entirely collapsed in the United States and many US branches had to be shuttered (infamously Enix). Or how about when the Famicom market petered out after 1986 only for consoles to be saved by the PC-Engine and Megadrive.

And currently look at the situation affecting the console market. The mass layoffs, the petering out of consoles, etc.

But because games didn't "disappear" according to popular view of the Crash, nothing can ever be a Crash or even be compared to said Crash. So maybe the Crash should be called something else that can provide better comparison.
 

KoolAid

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,712
The AAApocalypse.
Edit: never mind thought this was about the current situation.
 
Dyle

Dyle

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
30,309
Does anyone call it that? It's just the 1983 crash.
 
Two Peppers

Two Peppers

Member
May 29, 2022
168
Do people call it the Great Crash? I've definitely heard it referred to as a crash, but haven't heard much of that particular phrasing.

Anyway, from wiki:
Home video game revenue peaked at around $3.2 billion in 1983 ($9.79 billion in 2023), then fell to around $100 million by 1985 ($283 million in 2023) (a drop of almost 97 percent).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah that sounds like a crash.
 
1-D_FE

1-D_FE

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,318
It's definitely overhyped in the sense that personal computers finally became affordable and there were a ton of people that went from 2600/Intellivision to things like Apple II and C64. It's not like those kids quit playing games. They simply went to something that was a lot more appealing at the moment.
 
OP
OP
BossDumDrum

BossDumDrum

Member
Jan 3, 2020
1,313
Two Peppers said:
Do people call it the Great Crash? I've definitely heard it referred to as a crash, but haven't heard much of that particular phrasing.

Anyway, from wiki:

Yeah that sounds like a crash.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Do you know why that revenue petered? Because the games were literally being sold at bargain bin prices to get rid of them because the manufacturers could not take all the stock back, the stock they took back ate into profits. But the public was still buying video games, just that no one was making money off them.

Such a circumstance can't happen again. The closest that happened was in 1995-1996, but the Playstation saved the day.

But the effects similar to it can be felt in our modern experiences, hence why comparison is important.
 
Kaiser Swayze

Kaiser Swayze

Member
Oct 30, 2017
1,648
The word "crash" is fine. Arcades were past their peak and all those popular Atari consoles from a few years back were collecting dust. It was a significant turning point where PCs and Japanese consoles made their entry.
 
1-D_FE

1-D_FE

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,318
Silvergun-Blue said:
This, it was a US thing. Video games were doing fine in Japan and Europe.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Video games or computer games in Europe? Because computer games were doing great in the US, too. Everyone shifted to that when computers became a mainstream thing. Then they shifted back to videogames when NES hit and you could get it for like 79.99. During this "crash", Kmart and Target literally had playable PC kiosks (C64 and the like). It's not like games were dead.
 
Nairume

Nairume

SaGa Sage
Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,087
Kaiser Swayze said:
The word "crash" is fine. Arcades were past their peak and all those popular Atari consoles from a few years back were collecting dust. It was a significant turning point where PCs and Japanese consoles made their entry.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Also, while it is true that computer gaming was doing fine, it was still pretty out of reach for the vast majority of people who would have otherwise been playing on consoles. There's a reason it's historically been talked about the way it is. You wouldn't see Nintendo changing course on how they handled third parties in Japan if they weren't spooked at the idea of the crash happening there, nor would you see one of the most notable micro computer game developers famously jumping ship to console development at the first opportunity if microcomputers had healthily been filling that void like some people want to make it seem.

Saying Nintendo "saved" gaming after the crash was always going too far, sure, but people are now quick to try and take it too far in the opposite direction.
 
Uzzy

Uzzy

Gabe’s little helper
Member
Oct 25, 2017
27,897
Hull, UK
The US Video Game Crash.

Just name it whatever that emphasises it was a predominantly US phenomena and games were doing great elsewhere in the world.
 
Two Peppers

Two Peppers

Member
May 29, 2022
168
BossDumDrum said:
Do you know why that revenue petered? Because the games were literally being sold at bargain bin prices to get rid of them because the manufacturers could not take all the stock back, the stock they took back ate into profits. But the public was still buying video games, just that no one was making money off them.

Such a circumstance can't happen again. The closest that happened was in 1995-1996, but the Playstation saved the day.

But the effects similar to it can be felt in our modern experiences, hence why comparison is important.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yes, games sold in bargain bins or even dumped in landfill are the standard stories we hear about the period. I'm not sure why that would make it not a crash though? And I'd agree that a 97% crash is wildly unlikely today, but I'm not sure why that matters here.

Maybe there's something I'm missing about what you're trying to say.
 
senj

senj

Member
Nov 6, 2017
4,578
I don't think I've ever heard anyone even call it that specifically.

Usually it's just "the 1983 video game crash" type descriptors.
 
OP
OP
BossDumDrum

BossDumDrum

Member
Jan 3, 2020
1,313
Two Peppers said:
Yes, games sold in bargain bins or even dumped in landfill are the standard stories we hear about the period. I'm not sure why that would make it not a crash though? And I'd agree that a 97% crash is wildly unlikely today, but I'm not sure why that matters here.

Maybe there's something I'm missing about what you're trying to say.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The point is that it's annoying that the Crash is the only thing that seems to be deserving of the name and no one can ever say when a current situation is that bad because it isn't the Crash.

The thing is, the Crash may have encompassed all of US consoles at the time. But Crashes seem to be all over the industry. The Japanese Famicom market crashed after 1986's big boom for similar reasons, but you can't call it "a crash" because the Famicom wasn't the entirety of the console market, and Nintendo also had the US market going through a golden age so they were able to still turn a profit then. You can't call the 16-bit Crash a crash for arbitrary reasons because the 16-bit crash didn't sink their major companies or something.

You can't call the current layoffs a Crash because video games are making money hands over fist. But the question is "What games are making money?" Like, if the US console crash was centered around consoles, then maybe it makes sense that Crashes don't have to be all centered around the entire industry, but rather specific facets of said industry. And maybe the name Crash is more appropriate when specified to the current market being collapsed.
 
Two Peppers

Two Peppers

Member
May 29, 2022
168
BossDumDrum said:
The point is that it's annoying that the Crash is the only thing that seems to be deserving of the name and no one can ever say when a current situation is that bad because it isn't the Crash.

The thing is, the Crash may have encompassed all of US consoles at the time. But Crashes seem to be all over the industry. The Japanese Famicom market crashed after 1986's big boom for similar reasons, but you can't call it "a crash" because the Famicom wasn't the entirety of the console market, and Nintendo also had the US market going through a golden age so they were able to still turn a profit then. You can't call the 16-bit Crash a crash for arbitrary reasons because the 16-bit crash didn't sink their major companies or something.

You can't call the current layoffs a Crash because video games are making money hands over fist. But the question is "What games are making money?" Like, if the US console crash was centered around consoles, then maybe it makes sense that Crashes don't have to be all centered around the entire industry, but rather specific facets of said industry. And maybe the name Crash is more appropriate when specified to the current market being collapsed.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ok, it sounds like what you're saying is that the US video game industry crash of the 1980s takes up so much of the popular imagination in the history of video games that it makes it harder to talk about other crashes. Maybe not surprising since the US industry's bubble bursting was apparently a 97% decline. I think the solution here is not to say that what happened in the 1980s was not a crash (what would we call it instead?), but rather to push back on claims that other crashes were not crashes.

Generally if you're discussing this topic with someone and they won't agree that something is a crash, I'd suggest citing numbers rather than looking back to and arguing about the 1980s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.