Talk:Pac-Man (Atari 2600 video game)

message: :Image:Pac-man.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Pac-man.png

message: :Image:Pac-man.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:37, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Pac-man.png

message: :Image:PacManCrt260007052004.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:PacManCrt260007052004.jpg

message: :Image:PacMan2600box.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:PacMan2600box.jpg

message: I seem to recall that the sound effects from this game were used in Superman 3.  Would someone please check this, and if accurate, provide a cross link? 141.199.102.25 (talk) 15:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I too have read the IMDB's trivia page on Superman III. It doesn't have to be checked; the IMDB's trivia pages can be used as Wikipedia sources. I would add it myself but I was annoyed at the "I seem to recall" wording; it's so effete. Also, you went to the trouble of writing a talk page entry, but you couldn't search Google for "superman 3"+"pac man", which brings up the IMDB's trivia page as the first result? That makes me suspicious. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 14:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, IMDB's trivia pages are not considered reliable sources.  Its basic database listings are, however.--Father Goose (talk) 01:04, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm always amused when someone adds to a conversation from years ago.Asher196 (talk) 03:33, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

text: This user would also like to say he remembers hearing the audio for this game being used as a generic sound effect for video games throughout the 90's. In fact, I always thought of it as "that video game noise" growing up, and always wondered what game, if any, it came from. Commercials for electronics stores from the 90's and early 2000's were big users of this sound effect. 98.237.179.8 (talk) 16:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

text: Sound samples from Atari 2600 Pac Man and also 2600 Donkey Kong are industry standard sound effects and continue to be used in many modern TV shows and films. It would be correct and expected to see this mentioned in the article. I find these things not worth the effort to even try any more, as there is probably someone who does not want this added, and has the power to keep it from being added. - Artificial Silence (talk) 18:17, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: 2600 Pac-Man in popular culture

message: How exactly would a popular selling game destroy people's faith in a system?  Every game console since then has produced crappy games, and they didn't get destroyed.  The crash was from the massive flood of cheap crappy games, and the rise of competition from other sources.  I played Pacman on my Atari 2600 all the time as a kid, and enjoyed it greatly.  Who cares if the screen wasn't exactly like the arcade?  The game play was still exactly the same.  And it was a great game.  Are there any citations from legitimate sources, not just one writer somewhere stating their own personal opinions, but something backed up with facts?  Or any creditable references at all?  I find the concept of someone buying one game they didn't like, and giving up on gaming system entirely, to be just plain ridiculous. Dream Focus (talk) 10:58, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My point was, I do not believe most people who played the game were dissatisfied with it as the article suggest.  And the fact that they overproduced it, isn't really relevant, unless that somehow drove down the price.  According to G4TV's Icons the video game crash was when people stopped buying the games, because the market was so flooded with garbage from third party producers, and store owners had so much unsold merchandise they didn't order any new games that might be worth playing.  And the newer garbage games were very cheap, while the quality ones still were sold for $40 each, and thus prices and profits had to be reduced to compete.  And please assume good faith.  I wasn't being sarcastic and negative with my comment, only sincerity and concern are there.  There is no way possible people could loose faith because of one or two games, and then stop buying any game they produced. Dream Focus (talk) 15:06, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, over-production is highly significant.  In the toy industry that Atari was involved in, if a product does not sell, it is not just the retailer that takes a loss, it is the manufacturer, who ultimately has to compensate the retailer in a variety of ways such as mark down money and who also does not see a single cent from a toy retailer until after the holiday shopping season is over, which means that if a product does not sell through, the manufacturer does not collect the full cost of its manufacturing run.  The reason retailers had so many bargain basement games in 1983 was in large part because the fly-by-night third-parties all went bankrupt so that toy stores had to heavily discount these companies' games at a loss rather than recoup some of their investment directly from the manufacturers.  Atari's major losses on Pac-Man and E.T. played a significant role in the lower earnings that drove the company out of the video game business and were therefore a factor in the crash.  Particularly since these two failures (yeah its odd calling Pac-Man a failure when it was the system's best-seller, but you still take a hit when you fail to move nearly half your inventory no matter how well your product sells) resulted in a downward spiral as Atari spent ridiculous sums of money to secure the hottest arcade properties to compensate and then took even heavier losses when interest in video games subsided.  I toned down the statement you removed because I agree it was excessive, but your argument appears to be that you liked the game, other people must have also liked the game, ergo, the game was not universally disliked and had no impact on the crash.  Every significant monograph written on video game history disagrees with you both in terms of its popularity and impact.  Just because an episode of a television show does not have the time to deal with every last nuance of the crash does not mean that a fact is not important. Indrian (talk) 15:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You added back in the statement "and even those who bought and kept the game were often dissatisfied".  So, these popular writer/historians of the video game industry, claim that a considerate number of people were so dissatisfied, that it made them less likely to buy new games?  Or perhaps that would prevent people from getting games for the system that were popular in the arcades.  And judging by the cost of production, and how much they sold Pac-Man for, I think that game still turned a profit, no matter what.  Was it ET that they produced more copies of than they had systems made, because they expected sales of their system to go up dramatically, and for everyone to own a copy?  That game lost them money perhaps, not Pac Man.  Also, the statement that some customers were dissastified could apply to every single game ever made.  Are there any game magazines at the time that let people vote on the most disappointing games ever, or some other reference?Dream Focus (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: First off, Pac-Man was the game Atari over-manufactured based on total systems in the marketplace.  Second, I have no idea whether Pac-Man turned a profit or not, but there is more than one way to be a failure.  The game may not have lost money, but it was part of that glut of poor quality games that you mention above which did destroy consumer confidence in the video game industry so it was certainly an artistic failure and a failure at building brand loyalty.  Finally, I will leave you with two quotes from Steven Kent's Ultimate History of Video Games, a well-researched and generally reliable source for video game history.  On page 236, Kent states: "Whether it was bad programming or a weakness in hardware, Frye's version of Pac-Man had slow, jerky animation and the ghosts flickered so badly they kept disappearing from the screen.  Atari sold seven million copies of Pac-Man; many people were so disappointed with the game that they asked for a refund."  The same page also contains an excerpt from an interview with well-respected founder of Electronic Games magazine Arnie Katz: "The first real chink in the armor, though, was Atari's edition of Pac-Man, which was a terrible job.  It was amazing that they produced such a flickery, unresponsive game.  And although they sold many copies, paradoxically the more copies they sold, the more people they turned off." Indrian (talk) 18:18, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm just adding in something I asked around after reading this discussion page. Many gamers of the times don't ever recall a video game crash or hate towards this version of Pac-Man. I talked to a good number of people (at a pizza parlor in Las Vegas) and few people in Los Angeles (not at a pizza parlor) and at the Game Crazy store (Vegas, again) and most 30-to-55 year old people seemed to actually like the version, questioned why it wasn't like the arcade, and left it be afterwards. As far as a video game crash goes, these common gamers didn't ever know that it happening or happened. Simply put, they thought the prices came down and they liked it. Then the NES came out, some when to computers like C-64, Atari 8-bit, Apple whatever, etc. and so to them, there never was a video game crash in 1984 (never happened in 1983, but Wikipedia likes to report bad information many times, especially on Right-wing celebs and historical facts anyways). So that's just my own discovery from people, which I find to be ten times more accurate than the reporting here of just a little outlet of manufactured-to-a-supposedly-neutral-viewpoint "fact". Coffee5binky (talk) 03:44, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What you just described is completely unreliable and nonfactual WP:OR.  Contemporary sources of the time say otherwise, as shown. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 04:03, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Right, no video game crash.  Then why, pray tell, did video game sales in the United States fall from $3 billion in 1983 to $100 million in 1985, hmm?  I hope you are trolling, becuase if not, this post displays a shocking amount of ignorance for one who claimes to be interested in this topic. Of course, your apparent disregard for academic research and proper sourcing in the face of the "truth" you found from a small sample size that is not an accurate cross-section of American society or individuals using video game consoles in 1982-84 and had no idea what was going on within the video game companies themselves at the time tells me everything I need to know about your idea of good research.  I know you will probably call me some vile names and make reference to my nerdish closemindedness and then move on without learning anything at all about this subject, but what the hey, feeding trolls is amusing sometimes. Indrian (talk) 00:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

text:  they do not.  The only "contemporary source" even lsited for that refers to a "spring" issue of a magazine published monthly, as existing on "Page 122" when the magazine never had more than 90 pages.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.160.4.5 (talk) 02:26, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You're mistaken.  1) Everything, right down to the effects it had on Atari's reported sales the trouble it got in to over it is laid out above.  2)  It was not a monthly magazine, you're confusing it with Creative Computing.  This was Creative Computing Video & Arcade Games, which was a special mag published quarterly and the article in question is indeed on page 122. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 02:51, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  I liked the game on the Atari 2600.  Do you have proof of any mass spread disgruntleness? 

message: Was the Pacman really first released in 1981 on the Atari 2600, I'm sure it was first releaced in early 1982, if someone could have a investgation about that, that would be great. Give us a bell asap if anyone gets any info on this. Cheers, mcjakeqcool. Mcjakeqcool (talk) 21:37, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It was released before Christmas.  I remember reading an article the guy who created it, telling them that only he could do it in time, and forcing them to give him a cut of the profits if they wanted it done.  I found that quite amusing.  Tod_Frye  Does the Christmas season go past December 25th?  Perhaps it wasn't shipped everywhere in time. Dream Focus (talk) 22:38, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Umm, did you guys not see the super huge discussion two topics up from this one where research proved the game was releasd in early 1982? Indrian (talk) 02:45, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Pacman release date

message: Loaded.vg is a Argentine video game magazine and one of its Top 10 "Top 10: The worst of all", this version of Pacman was ranked in the position 10. In spanish  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.110.242.14 (talk) 02:01, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Loaded.vg recepcion 

message: This piece of hearsay can apparently be traced to Chris Crawford, who has repeated this story in several interviews and testimonials such as the one at http://www.erasmatazz.com/TheLibrary/GameDesign/OnceUponAtari/OnceUponAtari.html.  In his new book All Your Base Are Belong To Us, author Harold Goldberg actually talks to Tod Frye, who denies ever making these threats, while in the link posted above, Howard Scott Warshaw also refutes Crawford's story.  I am taking this material out. Indrian (talk) 21:46, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Frye never threatened to quit

message: What evidence do we have that the IGN article is based on the Wikipedia list? I do see the similarities, but that isn't proof of copying. (Guyinblack25 talk 04:14, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  IGN Atari list 

message: I revised this quite a lot because much of it was incorrect and based on misunderstanding of how the 2600 works, especially when trying to identify what was a "sprite" vs. what was created with the 2600's "Playfield" (walls), what was a Missile object, etc.  I also cited Tod Frye's 2016 PRGE talk on Pacman as regards some of the design choices, notably how his decision to support a 2-player game literally ate up about 20% of the available memory registers to store two game states and scores.MrNeutronSF (talk) 08:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Development 

message: I did a re-write on the gameplay section that has been tagged for needing sources for a few years now. Feel free to make some changes or edits here if need-be and ping me if anything needs to be clarified. Andrzejbanas (talk) 07:01, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-write on gameplay