• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Question about Atari Games

W

WSmith4

Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
14
So my question is, with the old Atari games such as Frogger, PacMan, Q*Bert, and Pitfall... is there an actual ending to the game? Is there a way to beat them? What happens when you beat them? I never had the patience to keep playing and playing them so I never found out. I'm sure they don't have elaborate endings like games that followed, but surely there must be some point where you just can't go any further, right?
 
craziness

craziness

That's crazy! Didn't anybody think, when they were inventing these games, that there would have to be an ending to them? Or were they just designed to be played until you didn't feel like playing anymore?
 
Not crazy considering _when_ I'm from...

Not crazy considering _when_ I'm from...

Once upon a time, it was intended that attaining a high score or reaching a particular wave or level was the goal, not "beating" or completing a game. Keep in mind that replay value goes up if you have your own (or someone else's) previous high score to beat.

Note, too, that in some cases, a harder level meant decreasing a countdown timer start value so that your character or enemies moved faster. Eventually, the game is going so fast that you simply cannot react quickly enough.

To be honest, growing up with an Atari 2600, I had no concept of "beating" a game with no intent to replay (even Star Raiders gave you a rating you could beat next time you played) until the NES and games such as the Legend of Zelda, in which there was no score or time to beat.

In this way, the arcade and computer games I started with are games of skill, much like pinball.
 
The other day, I came across one of those Pac-Man strategy guides. There is one how to score one million points on the arcade, and supposedly the game has an ending of some sort when you achieve this. I don't know if any home versions work in the same way.
 
Brendan said:
Once upon a time, it was intended that attaining a high score or reaching a particular wave or level was the goal, not "beating" or completing a game. Keep in mind that replay value goes up if you have your own (or someone else's) previous high score to beat.

Note, too, that in some cases, a harder level meant decreasing a countdown timer start value so that your character or enemies moved faster. Eventually, the game is going so fast that you simply cannot react quickly enough.

To be honest, growing up with an Atari 2600, I had no concept of "beating" a game with no intent to replay (even Star Raiders gave you a rating you could beat next time you played) until the NES and games such as the Legend of Zelda, in which there was no score or time to beat.

In this way, the arcade and computer games I started with are games of skill, much like pinball.
Click to expand...

Don't forget, though, that WHERE games designed at the time period w/ the intent to be beaten. Dragon's Lair, & Adventure, for example. Basically every text & graphical adventure game would fall into the category...
 
carlsson said:
The other day, I came across one of those Pac-Man strategy guides. There is one how to score one million points on the arcade, and supposedly the game has an ending of some sort when you achieve this. I don't know if any home versions work in the same way.
Click to expand...

Pac-Man, like most arcade games, has no ending in the traditional sense. The screen turns to half garbage after a while. Billy Mitchell is the only player to ever get a perfect score on Pac-Man, and that's by playing half the garbled screen. I think it was over 3 million points.
 
I'd be relieved I finally can stop playing. If you have followed a strategy to maximize your points for 255 consecutive levels, you probably are quite bored when you get to the 256th. Perhaps Billy was planning to go wild and crazy and improvise a bit when he found the next level was broken.
 
carlsson said:
I'd be relieved I finally can stop playing. If you have followed a strategy to maximize your points for 255 consecutive levels, you probably are quite bored when you get to the 256th. Perhaps Billy was planning to go wild and crazy and improvise a bit when he found the next level was broken.
Click to expand...

yeah, I guess you're right... it's just so anti-climactic though...
 
Anti-climax is what you got everytime:

1) The box art on your newly acquired computer game promised much more than the game was about.
2) The screen shots pictured were from an arcade version or a much more powerful system than the one you had.

I guess to some degree (1) is still valid for today's gamers, but to a lesser point. (2) should not be an issue, at least not so you spot it immediately.

By the way, I wonder if anyone ever has cross pollinated Pacman with Donkey Kong? How about this scenario:

Ms. Pacman has been kidnapped by the evil ghost leader, disguised as Pacman himself. It is now the real Pacman's task to rescue her, by climbing a set of platforms and eating all the dots in his way. Watch out for the counterfeit power points thrown by the ghosts; they will make Pacman weak. On every second level, you play Mario hunting for a ghost smashing hammer hidden in a maze. He is chased by a half dozen members of the Kong family. Find the hammer quickly, so Pacman can hit the evil, fake Pacman ghost in the head and win back Ms. Pacman. :hammer:
 
Last edited:
carlsson said:
By the way, I wonder if anyone ever has cross pollinated Pacman with Donkey Kong? How about this scenario:

Ms. Pacman has been kidnapped by the evil ghost leader, disguised as Pacman himself. It is now the real Pacman's task to rescue her, by climbing a set of platforms and eating all the dots in his way. Watch out for the counterfeit power points thrown by the ghosts; they will make Pacman weak. On every second level, you play Mario hunting for a ghost smashing hammer hidden in a maze. He is chased by a half dozen members of the Kong family. Find the hammer quickly, so Pacman can hit the evil, fake Pacman ghost in the head and win back Ms. Pacman. :hammer:
Click to expand...


sounds like fun to me!!
 
That's pretty funny with the level 256 thing. Basically a buffer overflow (it wasn't designed to go above level 255 and when it does it corrupts a bit of memory resulting in overwriting some of the maze or graphic data).

I always commented that regarding classic games, they just play faster and faster until you can't actually play it vs coming up with a real way to win (yes there were lots that had endings however this was the bad design path that quite a few games took).

I remember an old chess game on my 8088 which refused to lose so by the time you really got it into a corner it would take longer and longer to figure out it's next move (until you got bored of waiting for it and quit (I'm not waiting 30minutes for it to possibly make a move)).

On the point about current games, you need to take the screen caps on the box with a HUGE grain of salt (salt lick sized), same with commercials for the games which are usually showing you prerendered animation instead of realtime game play. Although that did crack me up on the old gaming system boxes with awesome pictures of airplanes and tanks, etc and I start the game and I seem to be an ASCII block character instead.

I guess they have better imaginations than I did ;o)

- John
 
barythrin said:
Although that did crack me up on the old gaming system boxes with awesome pictures of airplanes and tanks, etc and I start the game and I seem to be an ASCII block character instead.

I guess they have better imaginations than I did ;o)
Click to expand...

Case in point: Asteroids.. But this game was *fun* gosh darn it! I can't remember how many times I rolled the score playing it back in the day.. *sigh* Good times

Cheers,

80sFreak

P.S. These images are from AtariAge - Asteroids.
 

Attachments

  • b_Asteroids_Color_front.jpg
    b_Asteroids_Color_front.jpg
    88.5 KB · Views: 1
  • s_Asteroids_1.jpg
    s_Asteroids_1.jpg
    6.4 KB · Views: 1
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top