Retro Game Review: Pit-Fighter

What fighting games looked like before steroid testing.

Platform: Arcade

Released: 1990

Developer: Atari Games

Background: "Pit-Fighter" was, well, I don't know what exactly to call it - strange, risque, a cross between professional wrestling and a Jean-Claude Van Damme movie - I really don't know. Strangely, though, this pre-"Street Fighter II" 2D fighting game was actually revolutionary - it featured digitized characters modeled after real-life actors. In fact, "Pit-Fighter" (gasp!) looks better than some of the latest fighters do. I remember first playing this game in a convenience store near the house I grew up in, and even then that guy in the leather mask seemed a bit odd to me.

Graphics: 5/5

I know, I know. But you have to understand I'm comparing this game to others that came out around the same time, so then it looks great. But the digitized character modeling, along with a crowd that actually looks like people, was the closest thing you got to realistic in 1990.

Sound: 2.5/5

There are a lot of generic sounds in this game. Otherwise, nothing much to write home about. While the graphics were top-notch, the sound was anything but.

Controls: 3.5/5

The arcade configuration was a joystick and three buttons (punch, kick, jump). Pressing all three face buttons at the same time resulted in your character performing a "super move."

Gameplay: 3/5

You can pick from three fighters - Buzz, Ty and Kato (or Larry, Curly and Moe if you want them to be) - and each has its own fighting style. Then you have to fight eight opponents, capping off with a final match against the "Masked Warrior." Meanwhile, people with knives or sticks would sometimes interfere with your match. And in a multiplayer game, all playable characters had to beat the tar out of each other to decide who fights the "Masked Warrior," since only one person has the unfortunate opportunity - er, ultimate chance - to face the final match. By the way, don't stay in the crowd too long - they'll throw you back in!

Overall: 3.5/5

Using the composite of all the scores above to get this score can be misleading. Why? Because this game really isn't that good. While looking back at how great it was for 1990, I still can't defend this one today. I mean come on, have you actually played this?