Talk:Computer Space/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Indrian (talk · contribs) 03:33, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We've come a long way together, and I am glad to be with PresN here at the end of all things (or at least of this topic). Comments to follow. Indrian (talk) 03:33, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've much appreciated your in depth reviews of this topic, and I look forward to this last one! --Pres N 03:34, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, after far too long a delay, let's knock this one out.

Background

Done"In the late 1960s, Nolan Bushnell saw Spacewar running on a PDP-6/10 at the University of Utah where he was a student" - A little mix up here. Spacewar ran on a PDP6/10 setup at SAIL. Bushnell has variously claimed he saw the game running on an IBM or Univac mainframe at Utah. Marty Goldberg lays out these claims here.

That note just keeps getting longer... fixed. --Pres N 14:53, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DoneThe flow is strange between sections. The second paragraph of Background flows more naturally into the first paragraph of Development, so the Gameplay section almost feels like a digression.

Yeah, it's a bit editorial. Moved that second paragraph down to development. --Pres N 15:01, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Development

Done"This, in turn, meant that the game would not need four monitors in order to be profitable, but could be a single game" - Awkwardly worded. Does not properly convey that they could go to one instance of the game running on a single piece of hardware.

Reworded. --Pres N 14:53, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done" Dave Ralstin, a sales associate for Nutting Associates in Mountain View, California" - I believe he was the sales manager.

Yes, I think Replay had him as an associate when they told that anecdote, and I didn't go back nad fix it. --Pres N 14:53, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done"while Bushnell claims credit for everything but the cabinet, power supply, and monitor" - Both parties agree that Dabney did the sound.

Fixed. --Pres N 14:53, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DoneThe development section is much larger than all the others. I would not cut anything, but I think they final three paragraphs could be their own section.

Made the last 4 a section, so that it could cover both the MOA show and the test locations. --Pres N 15:01, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done"an initial version was designed by Bushnell and built by Steve Bristow, but the final version was created by a different team" - Again I think this is mixing two things. Bushnell was contracted to do a two-player version, but never did. The version that entered production was the Bristow version.

Atari Inc. was pretty clear on this one- Nutting contracted with Syzygy to make a 2-player version, Bushnell designed one (though it seems like he just dashed something off, the timeline was way too short for real quality given everything else he was doing at the same time), and Bristow made a prototype. Nutting then chucked it after contracting it out to another engineering team as well. Atari pg. 76: "Steve Bristow and his wife had been there for Nutting, showing off the 2-player version of Computer Space - only it wasn't Nolan's design. Apparently Bill Nutting had simultaneously contracted an engineer to design and build a competing version to the Nolan designed one that Steve and his wife had prototyped, and decided to go with the former." The original mention was on pg. 61: "...what is curious was that Nolan, AFTER signing that document, spent time over June and July designing a 2-player Computer Space for Nutting, which Steve Bristow (now working at Nutting Associates as an engineer) and his wife spent time building for Nutting." Atari Inc. sometimes gets a little enthusiastic with its anecdotes, but I haven't seen any other sources that contradict that Nolan designed a 2-player Computer Space, but the design wasn't used. --Pres N 14:53, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@PresN:While I generally trust Curt and Marty's research, this one appears to be contradicted by Bristow himself in Retro Gamer 75: "I got married that July and my wife constructed the prototype wire-wrap for a two-player version of Computer Space. She and I took the train to Chicago for the AMOA show that year where Nutting exhibited it. I thought it was pretty neat, but who knew how big videogames would be?" It's not the Bushnell part that's wrong in the article, it's the part about Bristow building the Bushnell version, which did not happen. Indrian (talk) 15:33, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Indrian:Well, I'd trust a statement by Bristow over one by Bushnell that makes himself out to be an aggrieved party; it's exactly the kind of thing he'd exaggerate. I was also surprised that he dashed off a working design that fast while busy with Atari. Changed the sentence to say that Bristow made it, but that Bushnell was supposed to design it and either didn't or his design wasn't used- don't think I can clear up which one happened, or if the whole design contract thing was apocryphal. --Pres N 15:41, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And that's it. Overall this is a wonderful article that does a good job of navigating some of the controversies around this game's development. I will place this On hold while these minor changes are made. Indrian (talk) 20:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Indrian: responded to all points. --Pres N 15:01, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@PresN:Now that the second paragraph of background has moved, there needs to be some transitional statement at the end of the background section that links Spacewar to Galaxy Game for flow. Indrian (talk) 18:01, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Indrian: Added one. --Pres N 19:01, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to take a few days to get back to this. After another round of copyedits, I am ready to promote. Well done! Indrian (talk) 19:37, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]