Posted on 04/06/2005 7:13:26 AM PDT by grundle
http://www.ataritimes.com/features/ataritop20_6.html
Why Atari 2600 Adventure is such a fun game
by Warren Robinett
First of all, let's not forget the game that directly inspired me -- the original text adventure game (also named "Adventure") which was created by Don Woods and Willie Crowther. They invented the idea of moving from room to room, carrying objects that you could use to get past obstacles, and creatures that moved around and did things in the game world. Their game was pure text -- the user typed text commands and then received text descriptions of the room he or she was in, and the objects being carried.
My main breakthrough, I think, was figuring out how to do this kind of game -- rooms, objects and creatures -- in the video game medium -- with animation, color, sounds, and joystick controllers. There are 3 powerful ideas in this that were, at the time, different from how most video games were done.
1. Exploring a large space (in this case, the network of rooms).
2. Objects that the player could pick up and move around, and which functioned as tools to do things in the game world.
3. Creatures which moved around on their own, initiating actions. ("AI's", in modern terminology) Putting these elements together in a video game produced what we now call an action-adventure game, which has shown, over the last few decades, that it is a very fertile genre.
At the time, game designers were trying to figure out what you could do that was cool with this new medium of interactive computer graphics, so I think you could now say that I discovered one of the "sweet spots" in the medium.
Of course, all the details were important -- what the objects and creatures did, and what they looked like, how the game world was laid out, how the controls worked. I dug out a list I made once for myself of why I thought Adventure worked well. Here it is.
1. Game world good size (30 rooms, 8 regions). Closed -- can explore it all. Having regions (eg castle interior or catacombs). Regions can be (temporarily) inaccessible.
2. Object permanence -- objects and creatures are never created or destroyed. Each one is always somewhere in the game world.
3. No randomness during game-play. Algorithmically- generated complex behavior is more interesting and understandable than just generating a new monster every so often based on a random number generator.
4. Fairly consistent fantasy (Dungeons and Dragons).
5. Creatures (objects that moved around on their own, initiating actions). The creatures in the game were similar to animals in real life -- they move around, they do things, they have motivations which can be inferred from their behavior. Each creature had a subroutine that controlled what it did, which was executed 20 times per second. I came up with a data structure to represent a creature's goals -- a prioritized list of objects and whether to go toward or away from that object. The creature went down its priority list until it found an object on the list in the same room with it. Then it went towards the object, or away from. (I called this chasing and fleeing.) Each creature had its own priority list, and so had different behaviors. There were 4 creatures altogether -- three dragons and one bat. This was a pretty good scheme, because it modeled limited perception (couldn't "see" across room boundaries), and allowed a creature to "change its mind" when a new object came into the room.
6. Objects as tools to get past obstacles. Problem-solving. I chose not to have a timer in the game to emphasize exploration and problem-solving, which I felt would not be enhanced by arbitrary time limits.
7. You can win the game. In many video games at the time, you just kept playing until you finally got killed.
8. Mazes. The multi-screen, non-planar mazes were interesting. Having isolated parts that you needed the bridge to get to added further interest to the mazes.
9. Progressive difficulty levels. Level 1 was designed for beginners, and Levels 2 and 3 were harder. Flipping the difficulty switches made the dragons significantly more challenging.
10. Variety. Random object placement at the start of Level 3 (similar to shuffling the cards before a hand of bridge) gave it much more variety. The bat, which moved around objects, kept the game from being *too* predictable. It had enough variety to not be a pure puzzle, which can be solved the same way every time.
11. Grabbing objects. There was something simple and satisfying about grabbing objects and carrying them around. Allowing only one object to be carried at a time was a good decision. It simplified the user-interface. It meant the game could stay always in real-time (never going to an inventory screen). It created strategic choices (carry the weapon or the treasure?).
12. Simple, understandable story, theme, and goal. Good manual. Nice-looking box which conveys theme. (Well, the theme was a quest for the Holy Grail. But the Atari marketing department renamed the Holy Grail to be the Enchanted Chalice.)
13. Controls intuitive. I used the joystick for what it is best at -- moving an icon in 2D on the screen. The user interface for grabbing and dropping objects was very easy to learn and remember.
14. Object-object interaction was easy to understand. (example: sword killing dragon). These were triggered by overlap of object shapes (which were called "collisions"). This is like in the real world when two objects touch each other, they affect one another.
15. Restarting (re-incarnating) when killed. Simple and understandable. Leaving all the objects where they were was a good decision. This meant getting killed did not cause you to start over. But it did penalize you. Bringing all dead dragons back to life when the player re-incarnated was analogous to being vulnerable in the game of bridge. You have more to lose in some situations.
16. Sounds. The sounds were fairly good, given the hardware. They changed over time, which not all 2600 sound effects did. Tying short sound effects to game events was effective.
17. Square cursor and walls. Most games since Adventure have used a character as the user's avatar. An advantage to the square cursor is that it is easy to see when the cursor will run into a wall, and where the paths are. The visual feedback (jiggling cursor) when running into a wall was valuable. You could also slide along a wall when the joystick was attempting a diagonal movement. Since you spent most of your time moving through mazes, it was important to have this interaction smooth, intuitive, and glitch-free.
18. Some objects could not be picked up. (eg dragon carcass).
19. Jokes. Bat steals your sword. Bat carries dragon. (This always got a laugh the first time someone saw it.)
20. Bat and dragons could go through walls, but you have to follow the maze paths. Good balance since the player is actually smarter than the simple AI routines of the bat and dragons.
21. The secret room. Having a really hard-to-find secret place in the game, that was so secret it was secret even from Atari was kind of cool. It fueled a good rumor buzz. Maybe the kids could appreciate the programmer (little guy -- me) getting away with something (putting my signature in the game).
Some other games I remember fondly:
Commodore 64:
Ultima III and IV
Legacy of the Ancients
Maniac Mansion
Alternate Reality the Dungeon
The Lurking Horror
Might and Magic II
Phantasie III
Atari 2600:
Adventure
Haunted House
Pitfall
River Raid
Starmaster
I have my 2600 in a closet somewhere. I literally played it till I wore out the joysticks. I remember "rolling over" Missile Command (rolling the score counter past 999,999 to zero.)
there was a great non true myth when you played arcade Battle Zone. The myth was you could drive the tank off to the volcano and into the creater.
I should have, I played Laser Blast until my fingers bled (I enjoyed it then but now I realize how terrible & Monotonous the game really is) but the pictures I took of my TV would never come out, So I never got one of those damm patches.
laser blast was the first patch i won i never did win a meglamania patch the closest i could ever get was 200 points away from the score i needed then the cartridge got broke and i never could get a replacement so i never won that patch
You needed to score 3,000 on Kaboom! to get the patch. I scored 12,000. But I never took a picture of it.
thats another one i got but cant find now kaboom. I got something like 7000 if i rember right. I waslooking on ebay a few days ago to see about getting patches that i cant find or never won but those darn thing s are going for 150 -200 dollars EACH thats way to rich fro my blood at this time i just sank a big chunk of my tax check on a couple of team autograghed football helmets so im pretty much broke or i would probably buy a patch for pitfall that was the coolest looking patch they made that i cant find in my house.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.