Purposely POOR PAC MAN 2600

[SoundGammon]

I was reading the original 5200 catalog the other day and it dawned on me that Atari PURPOSELY made a poor Pac-Man for the 2600! The catalog states about Pac-Man: PLAYS LIKE THE ARCADE VERSION,LOOKS LIKE THE ARCADE VERSION and it even has INTERMISSIONS LIKE THE ARCADE VERSION! Think about it, Atari has a new system and they want to push it VERY hard to the gaming public. They use Pac-Man to do it. They know the 2600 is outdated and they need to stay at the top. Players will look at both versions and (hopefully) agree with Atari and buy their new system! Didn't Todd Frye, the programmer, say he had a better version? Makes sense to me, you? But again, on a PLUS side, this game saved me money by making me take a second look at all the games out there before I bought them!

Edited June 17, 2006 by SoundGammon

[NovaXpress]

Long answer: Yes, with an if.

Short answer: No, with a but.

[SteveW]

It makes sense that Tod Frye slapped together a game in something like six or eight weeks to claim a $1,000,000 check from Atari. He apparently had never played the original arcade game before then. I don't doubt that story. We're talking about Atari in the early '80s here. One of the managers told the guys who eventually left to form Activision that he could crap into a box and sell 50,000 units. Atari didn't care about quality, they just wanted to pump out garbage to make a quick profit.

[godzillajoe]

I don't understand the whole 'he never played it' thing

 

Even if that is true, it was the most popular game of all time.

 

Take a walk down to the pizza joint or mall and take 5 minutes to watch some kid play it or drop a quarter in yourself.

 

That's a pretty lame excuse.

 

And I can't see Atari purposely doing a bad Pac-Man. The 2600 had the largest user base of any system and why would you wanna screw them over?

 

I'm guessing it was more arrogance and 'they'll buy anything' mentality

[Atarifever]

I'm just going to say it:

Until well after we had an NES in the house I thought 2600 Pac-Man WAS Pac-Man. We got one of those 31 in 1 carts for the NES and Pac-Man was on it (called "Gobble" on the lable) and me and my brother and sister thought it was an update of the old 2600 game we had. I don't remember when exactly I realized Pac-Man wasn't originally a 2600 game. I guess when you live in a small town with no arcades and your parents bought your games for you based on the box art, there really wasn't any way of knowing the difference.

 

Also, I thought this thread was going to be about a hack competition to see who could make the most terrible version of Pac-Man or who could make the most different levels fit onto the 2600 Pacman game (which would be named "poor pacman").

Edited June 16, 2006 by Atarifever

[else]

It does seem like Tod Frye *didn't even try* to make a decent Pac Man. I mean how long would it have taken Tod to change the colors so they were correct -- like two seconds of his time? And I can't believe it would have taken all that much longer to make the maze at least resemble the arcade one. A few simple changes like this would have greatly improved the game.....

Edited June 16, 2006 by else

[Room 34]

Well, they deliberately made the background blue instead of black to reduce the contrast and thereby make the flicker less noticeable.

 

As for how badly designed the maze was, how ridiculously off the sounds were, and the fact that there were no varied fruits as bonuses... well, that was just 50% rush to get it out the door and 50% laziness on Tod Frye's part. (So what... he laughed all the way to the bank. And I loved the game since I'd never played the original.)

[Vic George 2K3]

And all the time back then, I was wondering if Atari was going to make Ms.Pac-Man for the 2600 with the same kind of lackluster maze patterns as the one for Pac-Man. I even drew those kind of maze patterns just to get an idea of whether we'd be inflicted with that kind of game design level for the sequel game's translation.

[Albert]

Interesting theory, although I would not subscribe to it. When was the 2600 version of Pac-Man released in relation to the 5200?

 

..Al

[else]

Well, they deliberately made the background blue instead of black to reduce the contrast and thereby make the flicker less noticeable.

 

Wasn't aware of that. I don't think it helped -- the flicker is still pretty darn noticeable to me. I guess I still think it would have been better to go with the correct colors, but that's just my opinion....

[Albert]

Well, they deliberately made the background blue instead of black to reduce the contrast and thereby make the flicker less noticeable.

 

Wasn't aware of that. I don't think it helped -- the flicker is still pretty darn noticeable to me. I guess I still think it would have been better to go with the correct colors, but that's just my opinion....

I dunno, I think the blue background makes the flicker *WORSE* since it's even harder to see the ghosts than it would be against a black background.

 

..Al

[Room 34]

What about the hacks people have done here to change the colors in 2600 Pac-Man? I seem to recall a very basic hack that made the background black and the ghosts seemed to be right up there with Mary Hart's voice in seizure-inducing potential.

[Albert]

What about the hacks people have done here to change the colors in 2600 Pac-Man? I seem to recall a very basic hack that made the background black and the ghosts seemed to be right up there with Mary Hart's voice in seizure-inducing potential.

Probably not too bad in emulators if you use the "Phosphor Glow" effect. And flickering generally doesn't look as bad on a real television as it does in emulation.

 

..Al

[Room 34]

True, I think I only played said hack(s) in an earlier version of Stella that didn't have the phosphor effect. But I did compare it to the original in the same emulator and the flicker was noticeably worse.

[NovaXpress]

When was the 2600 version of Pac-Man released in relation to the 5200?

2600 in March 82, 5200 in November 82.

 

We've theorized over this issue many times. There was no plot to make any game bad, Atari just didn't care. Since the programmer didn't care either, we end up with a blue-background horror.

[Albert]

We've theorized over this issue many times. There was no plot to make any game bad, Atari just didn't care. Since the programmer didn't care either, we end up with a blue-background horror.

I agree, but conspiracy theories are fun!

 

..Al

[NE146]

We'll friggin never know. Although of course, the pure badness core of the 2600 Pacman maze is precisely what I love about Nukeys update.

 

Edited June 16, 2006 by NE146

[Philflound]

Maybe I'm alone on this, but I loved the Atari 2600 Pac-Man. I remember seeing it in TV Guide advertised for like $55. Crazy price! I knew it wasn't like the arcade, but I was never any good at the arcade. I got ahold of the 2600 version and I could beat it. I played and played and played. Same pattern over and over. I liked eating a multi-vitamin. Made me feel stronger. Bah, fruit! I can't remember the pattern for the life of me now, but being 12 vs being 36 can do wonders on the brain.

 

Phil

[NovaXpress]

$55 is crazy indeed, considering that Pac-Man retailed for thirty bucks.

[BrianC]

Despite what I said before, I actually like the 2600 Pac-Man. I don't know what it is with it, but I have had a love hate relationship with it. Sometimes I like it, sometimes I hate it, and now I like it again. No, it's not just becuase it's different from the arcade. It's more like the flicker and the oddness of the maze getting to me. Now that I like it again, I find it to be challenging and fun. I actually like how it's different from the original. That said, I definatly like the original better, though.

 

Also, I grew up playing the Atari 400/800 Pac-Man on the 800 XL. I have always liked it a great deal better than the 2600 one, but for some strange reason, I still kept playing the 2600 one. Oddly enough, there weren't many Pac-Man arcade games around in my youth and the ones that were around were usually hacks like Hangly-Man. There were plenty of Ms. Pac-Man machines, though. I also had the Atari 800 version of Ms. Pac-Man (and I still have it). I like that port better than the 400/800 Pac-Man, despite how it starts out slower than the arcade.

Edited June 16, 2006 by BrianC

[NovaXpress]

I respect the Pac-Man effort because there was nothing else quite like it at the time. Games made in 1981 can't be expected to be as good as the games which came afterwards.

 

I don't buy the "blue reduces flicker" theory. It's not like Atari was trying to hide the flicker. I think that the programmer was making some sort of statement. We know that he held Atari up for more money (which is bullshit, if he agreed upon a price for his services then he should have stuck with it) so maybe he decided to fuck with the game for his own amusement. It was still the biggest-selling game of the first generation.

 

As far as the sound goes, we have to stop comparing early 2600 games to the later ones. Pac-Man was a contemporary of games like Yars' Revenge and Defender, whch weren't exactly bonanzas of quality sound work. So maybe they just didn't know how to do better (and didn't take the time to figure it out) back then. The era of quality 2600 sound began with Ed English's Frogger (which was released a couple months after Pac-Man). Until then, we didn't expect much.

[Albert]

$55 is crazy indeed, considering that Pac-Man retailed for thirty bucks.

Was it really only $30? I don't remember, that's too long ago.

 

..Al

[moycon]

$55 is crazy indeed, considering that Pac-Man retailed for thirty bucks.

Was it really only $30? I don't remember, that's too long ago.

 

..Al

 

Atari Age magazine Vol 1 #2

Has it listed for $37.99

I have no clue what my folks paid.

Probably could find it a bit cheaper in stores.

[NovaXpress]

Atari listed all of their 82 games for $37.99, but the price in stores ran from thirty to thirty-five for a new game at the time. The cheapest spots were department stores like Sears, the most expensive were electronics stores.

[Albert]

Atari listed all of their 82 games for $37.99, but the price in stores ran from thirty to thirty-five for a new game at the time. The cheapest spots were department stores like Sears, the most expensive were electronics stores.

Cool, thanks for the clarification. What does that translate to in today's dollars?

 

..Al