Pac-Man Review from 1982

[Retro Rogue]

Take Alien for example. It manages to do the pills almost right, has overall smooth and clean gfx, good sound effects and even manages to squezze in "bonus levels" into the same 4k.

Actually it doesn't. It's a single player game. Tod had to his as a two player game in 4K, which means using even more resources for keeping track of two distinct mazes, etc. That's again what also lead to the constraints in the finished game. All the Pac-Man 4K home brews are also single player. It's not just the 4K it's what he had to accomplish in that 4K. And every other programmer at Atari we interviewed had immense respect for Tod and what he was able to accomplish.

Edited January 8, 2015 by Retro Rogue

[Mef]

I stand corrected. It's so much worth it to have a not-really-two-player-at-all at the cost of lowest quality sound and gfx with otherwise miserable gameplay.

I guess they just had to make people take turns in that torture, not to expose them for too long at a time.

[Retro Rogue]

I stand corrected. It's so much worth it to have a not-really-two-player-at-all at the cost of lowest quality sound and gfx with otherwise miserable gameplay.

I guess they just had to make people take turns in that torture, not to expose them for too long at a time.

Never said it was worth it, however the game was unfortunately started towards the end of 4K game allotments (larger ROM space was cost prohibitive, that's why we have generations of certain K games as prices dropped). If it had been started later it would have hit a larger ROM size or if marketing hadn't decided it needed to be 2 player he would have had more resources to work with as well. The point being that regardless of whether you personally like the game, people (not just you) throwing up other later games in comparison without taking the full facts into account isn't an accurate comparison. Saying you like these later games better? Certainly, no prob. Saying these later games are better so then obviously Pac-Man was just a rushed cheap cash in? Not so much and completely nonfactual.

Edited January 8, 2015 by Retro Rogue

[Mef]

The point being that regardless of whether you personally like the game, people (not just you) throwing up other later games in comparison without taking the full facts into account isn't an accurate comparison

 

This is exactly why I've carefully taken another 1982' 4k game based on the same basic gameplay formula for this comparison.

I have also explicitly stated that the game is unbearable shit thanks to the excessive flicker, completely disregarding the cash-in on the name, etc.

 

I acknowledge the argument about technical difference (vs Alien) caused by additional constraint (reserved resources for 2nd player), but it doesn't change the fact that the game has miserably failed to deliver. Whether it was bad timing (ROM-size wise), bad marketing/design decision to push for 2-player mode at too high a cost, none of those matter to the end consumer. A handfull of specialists who can apprecieate the coding is just a drop in the bitter sea of 7 millions of more-or-less dissapointed people who bought this back in the days.

 

Summing up, in my humble opinion: the game is shit, personally unplayable, and also deserves to be called shit by anyone, without extra reasoning - just looking at it blink is enough. You are free to agree or not, but I'm pretty confident I've given you a solid backing to my evaluation.

Edited January 8, 2015 by Mef

[Retro Rogue]

This is exactly why I've carefully taken another 1982' 4k game based on the same basic gameplay formula for this comparison.

But it's not the same or apt for comparison as we already established. Just as the later 4K homebrew versions of Pac-Man are not. If you're not going to compare on the actual parameters that affect the final game and make up your own rules of comparison then what's the point? All those others are better in the graphics department because of the corners they cut. I also stated I wasn't commenting on your opinion of the game itself, or anyone else's. Just on some of the comparison claims being given. I realize being where you're located these contexts of what I said might be misunderstood by you since English is probably a second language.

 

 

I have also explicitly stated that the game is unbearable shit thanks to the excessive flicker, completely disregarding the cash-in on the name, etc.

Never said you said about cashing in. I was addressing everyone at once.

 

And the flickering of the ghosts was done on purpose. Tod felt it was more ghost like. It had nothing to do with limitations.

 

 

Edited January 8, 2015 by Retro Rogue

[Mef]

The way your putting this sounds as if no comparison would be within proper context. And this is something "we" haven't established. If that suits you, we can settle to simply differ in opinion on what the correct point of reference is, but there's no need to patronize my viewpoint.

 

If the flicker was really introduced purposely, then all the worse for me and all the reviewers throughout those 30+ years, who've been touching on the "flickerfest" as one of the points to rate this game low. I for one, don't care that much for imperfect porting of sprites, palette, sound effects or level design. It's the eye-straining flicker that kills the game for me, completely.

Edited January 8, 2015 by Mef

[+Random Terrain]

The way your putting this sounds as if no comparison would be within proper context. And this is something "we" haven't established. If that suits you, we can settle to simply differ in opinion on what the correct point of reference is, but there's no need to patronize my viewpoint.

I'm surprised that you didn't focus on this part:

 

"And the flickering of the ghosts was done on purpose. Tod felt it was more ghost like. It had nothing to do with limitations."

 

That invalidates all of the "Blame the Atari suits for the flicker. The programmer did the best he could with the limitations Atari gave him." type of statements that we've heard and read all over the internet. It's like the programmer stuck his foot a bucket, shot himself in the foot, waited for the bucket to fill up, then threw the bucket of blood at us.

[SoulBlazer]

If Atari had wanted to give us a GOOD home version of Pac-Man, they would have paid the extra money to have it developed on 8k and charged more for the game at retail to make up for it. And it would have sold just as well (if not better) due to the huge popularity of Pac-Man at the time. There was no risk in doing so. Instead Atari knew the game would sell well, was in a rush to get it out, and didn't care, and ignored Todd's requests to be given 8k. I admire Todd for what he was able to do on 4k, but Pac-Man was the, at least to me, the first serious sign of problems with Atari (I'm aware other problems were around before the game's release, but they weren't public knowledge). Gaming magazines and books would later point to the Pac-Man 2600 version of the game and say something like 'here's the first serious sign of problems with the video game market'. No, Pac-Man is not the worst game for the 2600 -- there are many more worse games. It's nothing like the arcade game, though. Even at the tender age of 6 I knew it was crap.

[jetset]

.

 

The thing was the landfill was not a burial of bad games.

.

 

I thought it was "ET" buried there...Did I hear wrong? Was it some other game they buried tons of copies of?

[+Random Terrain]

. . . and ignored Todd's requests to be given 8k.

If he was allowed to use 8k, he probably still would have included the horrible flicker so the "ghosts" would be more ghost-like and the colors would probably still be screwed up since he thought the arcade colors were bland. The sound effects probably wouldn't have improved any since he probably thought the grating opening "tune" and the rest of the sound effects actually sounded better than the boring sound effects and music from the arcade version.

[Retro Rogue]

I thought it was "ET" buried there...Did I hear wrong? Was it some other game they buried tons of copies of?

Yes, you heard wrong. No, it was not tons of ET. The dump consists of about 758,000 games of over 60 titles of games across the 2600 and 5200. They were all returns from stores for credit (some still had the price tags on them) and E.T. just happened to be one of the many games in the mix (and in the minority at that). It was not a mass dumping of ET, that legend was disproven. The problem is people (before seeing the documentary) latched on to the fact that there were any ETs there as being representative of the "legend" being true (and the documentary company counted on that publicity leading up to the release).

Edited January 9, 2015 by Retro Rogue

[Retro Rogue]

That invalidates all of the "Blame the Atari suits for the flicker. The programmer did the best he could with the limitations Atari gave him." type of statements that we've heard and read all over the internet. It's like the programmer stuck his foot a bucket, shot himself in the foot, waited for the bucket to fill up, then threw the bucket of blood at us.

I think it was done more like, "This is all I was able to do graphically given the specs, let me add some coloring and effects that don't cost a lot of resources to try and dress it up a bit."

[jetset]

Yes, you heard wrong. No, it was not tons of ET. The dump consists of about 758,000 games of over 60 titles of games across the 2600 and 5200. They were all returns from stores for credit (some still had the price tags on them) and E.T. just happened to be one of the many games in the mix (and in the minority at that). It was not a mass dumping of ET, that legend was disproven. The problem is people (before seeing the documentary) latched on to the fact that there were any ETs there as being representative of the "legend" being true (and the documentary company counted on that publicity leading up to the release).

 

Interesting. Where can I find more info on the approximate count? (And please don't link to a wikipedia page...too many trolls there spreading false info on Atari/videogame related stuff).

[Gregory DG]

If 2600 Pac-Man was called something else, "Munch 'n' Dash" or something, people would say it was a good game. But for the simple reason that it's not similar enough to the arcade Pac-Man, it's automatically labeled as "bad."

 

I've never understood this logic... The game is good or bad no matter what it's called.

 

Frankly, 2600 Pac-Man is a pretty decent game. It's definitely in the top 50% (or better) of 2600 games.

[akator]

I've never understood this logic... The game is good or bad no matter what it's called.

 

"A rose by any other name is still a rose."

 

Except if you call it an apple. Because an apple already exists, and it is defined, there are expectations that something called an apple will have the defined properties of an apple. We expect it to look, feel, taste, and smell like an apple.

 

2600 Pac-Man is a an acceptable maze game, but it is a lousy Pac-Man. The same way a rose is a lousy apple.

 

I owned 2600 Pac-Man when it came out, and like others played the hell out of it because my family didn't get many new games. 2600 Pac-Man was what I had to play whether I liked it or not. I was disappointed but couldn't admit that to my parents because of the months I had begged and nagged them for that game. I had to pretend I liked it so that one day another game would enter our house.

 

2600 Pac-Man audio was so bad my parents insisted I have the volume muted when I played it. They didn't have a problem with Space Invaders, Defender, or any number of other games. As a kid I didn't fully recognize what a discordant and grating mess of sounds that game made, but it's pretty bad.

 

Is 2600 Pac-Man as bad aa popular myth makes it out to be? No.

Was 2600 Pac-Man responsible for the North American Home Video Game Console Crash as told in modern legend? No.

 

It isn't the baby-eating, serial-killing, armageddon-inducing game of urban legend. But it isn't a good game, either. It's not a zero/sum, 0/1, pass/fail, light/dark, existance/nothingness, all or nothing thing. It falls somewhere in the gray area between awesome and suck.

 

I rank it as a C-/D+ depending on what mood I'm in.

[7800Lover]

I used to play the Atari 2600 Pacman. On its own, I don't think it was that bad. Compared to the arcade Pacman though...that's another story.

 

Lucky for me, Jr. Pacman on the Atari 2600 definitely gave me my (vastly superior) Pacman fix.

[forrestsmith]

I still ask how hard it would have been to make it at least the right colors? Black back ground with a Blue maze? not hard at all, they just didnt want to! Atari was so giant at the time they thought it was easier to sue about K.C. Munckin then make a good Pac Man. Was the Bally Astrocade, Intellivision, or Odyssey 2 really that much better than the 2600?

[Dauber]

IIRC from reading other posts on this forum, Atari developers had to follow a strict "no black background unless it's a space game" rule. That meant they'd need to use a blue background. Which meant that the maze wall couldn't be too close to that shade of blue.

[+LS650]

Has anyone ever hacked Pac man just so the colours match the arcade, leaving the other flaws such flickering alone..?

[+Random Terrain]

Has anyone ever hacked Pac man just so the colours match the arcade, leaving the other flaws such flickering alone..?

 

There is a simple hack with a black background:

 

randomterrain.com/atari-2600-memories-harmony-cartridge.html#hacks

 

Check out the hack list on the right side of the page.

[VectorGamer]

Has anyone ever hacked Pac man just so the colours match the arcade, leaving the other flaws such flickering alone..?

 

Why bother when there's Pac-Man Arcade?

[BrianC]

Has anyone ever hacked Pac man just so the colours match the arcade, leaving the other flaws such flickering alone..?

 

Yes. Nukey Shay did Pac-Man 8k.

[+Random Terrain]

Yes. Nukey Shay did Pac-Man 8k.

 

That's more than just a color change.

[Saneless]

I personally didn't mind the game. It represented the arcade game fairly well in the sense that it was a mindless, shallow, thing muncher through a maze. The original Pac man was better than staring at walls but it's not exactly a fantastic experience for very long.

 

I still played it often though. Still do occasionally on my MAME machine. It definitely has personality but doesn't keep me interested longer than a few boards

[Mr SQL]

I wonder what the reaction would be if this was released in the US back in the day. 2600 version is actually closer in some ways.

Wow interesting looking game - what system is that? Wizards of Wor is a closer port in some ways!