Getting back to the Pac
by Kyle Orland 
{ Aug 30th 2006 at 11:00AM }
There was a time in this country where everyone, and I mean everyone, was obsessed with a single video game. It may seem hard to believe in today's ultra-segmented entertainment market, but in the early '80s Pac-man was a true national phenomenon at a scale unmatched by the likes of Grand Theft Auto or even The Sims. Richard Poplak at the CBC uses the games re-release on Xbox Live Arcade as an occasion to look back at that singular moment in gaming history and speculate on why we can't recapture that feeling in today's industry.
We're all for appreciation of the past, but there's something a little rose-tinted about this retrospective remonstration of today's industry. Pac-man did capture the national consciousness in a way that will likely never be equaled, but that's as much because of the medium's relative novelty and narrowness as it is the game's simplicity and accessibility.
Despite ballooning production costs, endless licensing fiascoes, an over-emphasis of realistic graphics and all the other ills of today's gaming industry, we still enjoy a gaming market that's much more varied and potentially rewarding than the one that existed in the early '80s. It may seem at times that every other game released is another first-person shooter or beat-em-'up rehash, but any industry that can support the success of games as varied as Grand Theft Auto, The Sims and Guitar Hero is far more mass-market than it's sometimes given credit for. While this segmentation means that any one game is less likely to capture an entire nation, but it also means that the entire nation is much more likely to find at least one game it likes.
We're living in a golden age of gaming ... we may just be too close to it to appreciate it. Not to worry, though -- 25 years from now we'll look back on the simple, 3D games of today and wonder why we can't recapture that feeling in our immersive, holosuite simulations of ... Pac-man.
[Via Wonderland]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jeremy @ Aug 30th 2006 11:07AM
I just want to know if the Pac-Man picture posted is playable, looks sweet!
Petrie @ Aug 30th 2006 11:09AM
They act as if this trend has only found it's way to the gaming world. Video games have just followed the same road to becoming targeted media that almost every other media has.
You take a look at t.v. where shows used to pull in 60 million or more viewers, otherwise face cancellation. Now we have shows like Desperate Housewives where 20 million viewers is considered remarkable and a true accomplishment. Things have simply become more targetted.
I can not for the life of me understand why anyone would long for a time when they aren't given a choice. Why is it so troublesome that people want something that gives them maximum enjoyment, instead of simply riding on the exact same trend everyone else is.
The irony is that this writer works for a website that could not even exist if media hadn't become as specific as it has. In their ideal world everyone would be no room for a site like theirs, because obviously, the whole world isn't focused on them so how could they possibly be relevant?
AlloyNES @ Aug 30th 2006 11:17AM
This post reminded me of the goals of Nintendo and the Wii.
The Intangible Fact @ Aug 30th 2006 11:29AM
Gamimg will never be like it was back in the 80's & 90's because of big money and big business. Corporations have know found that they can capitalize off the game industy and make large amounts of money by commercialization. Knowing that the corporations have thier greedy fingers in our pockets, they won't stop until the market is dry & gone.
Jeff @ Aug 30th 2006 11:34AM
"I can not for the life of me understand why anyone would long for a time when they aren't given a choice."
Read the book "The Long Tail", which is specifically about this phenomenon.
One negative thing about it is that it leads to a breakdown in culture. We're all becoming a lot more individualized, whereas we used to share experiences on a national level. This has some pretty serious long-term repercussions, really pretty much globally. Obviously, it's not only games that are the culprit here, but games are following the same model as every other industry (as someone else pointed out) - that we're moving to a society where everything is available to everyone, all the time. That sounds great, and in many ways it is, but in other ways, it's not. And some of the ways it's not great are things that you would never have considered before; it's the law of unintended consequences in action.
There are good reasons why some of us consider the era of Pac-Man the golden age of gaming, though (don't co-opt that term, Joystiq!).
"Pac-man did capture the national consciousness in a way that will likely never be equaled, but that's as much because of the medium's relative novelty and narrowness as it is the game's simplicity and accessibility."
No. It's because back then, we were still capable as a society of shared experiences. And that is something that we are in the process of losing, and will likely never get back once it's gone. It's a way of life that goes way beyond Pac-Man; we remember Pac-Man so fondly because it is a reminder of the way we used to be.
It is a shame that some of the people here don't even remember what it was like to have a shared experience like Pac-Man or the original Star Wars or whatever.
Not to get all melodramatic or anything. But part of my job is to study the effects of new technologies (and specifically relating to the internet), so I'm basically getting paid to think about this stuff.
Jose @ Aug 30th 2006 12:16PM
Hey, Prince of Persia ushered in the era of 4D games.
ck @ Aug 30th 2006 1:46PM
I agree with you somewhat, Petrie. There's just no way that any form of pop culture can really captivate a national audience like it used to. I could say the last really big wave was that of Nirvana. Maybe it's just how it affected me and everyone around me, but it seemed like that was a band that captured and defined a generation of Americans. I don't think anything else - whether it be a tv show, book or movie - has done that since. And this is largely a result of technology and our drive as a society to be more individualistic.
It also has to do with the novelty of something that enters our culture. When the TV came out, it was just so new that everyone had to check it out. Same with the internet and video games (hence the piece for this article).
And yes, there's value in given a choice, but the thing about having a something so huge provides for great coversation and friendship and I think largely is helpful in a community. People bond over what they like and that's a good thing. It's not that they are blindly following the crowd because it's "trendy."
Petrie @ Aug 30th 2006 11:44AM
Whatever the negative consequences involved, I will accept them, because the idea of being forced into the same activities as everyone else, just to retain a sense of "culture", does not appeal to me. I enjoy being able to come to Joystiq and read about the things that interest me. I also love that a site like www.AskANinja.com is there to entertain me. I enjoy my specialized media (except G4), and I simply can't have them taken away for the sake of "culture".
Derbeste @ Aug 30th 2006 11:47AM
Jeff:
TV Evangalists get paid too. That doesn't mean the end of the world (or culture) is near.
Why is "change" so often perceived as "repercussion"?
The Intangible Fact @ Aug 30th 2006 11:46AM
Hey girl, you sound like a cool girl. I want my g/f to be more like you.
Balla360 @ Aug 30th 2006 3:59PM
Jeff, one problem with your melodrama is that you bemoan the loss of shared experiences, but never actually detail the supposed consequences except a vague reference to a breakdown of culture. "The Long Tail" theory you reference actually leads to a more rich and culturally diverse society, which you may call breakdown and I call progress.
It's possible that you believe that without old-fashioned shared experiences the common ground that people currently use as a base to form meaningful relationships will simply disappear.
It's been my experience technology provides more opportunities for meaningful shared experiences, and more experiences period. The information firehose of the internet provides an effectively infinite series of targeted shared experiences that can be had by nearly anyone with a computer. (I'll admit that a computer is a pretty serious threshold to overcome in terms of a global audience, but that's a discussion for another time.) You're more likely to build a very strong and rich link to a person in the form of a modern shared experience that you've chosen to seek out (like AskaNinja) as opposed to a more general, classic one (like the Superbowl).
As for me, I develop a deep bond with someone over niche games like Ikargua or Beyond Good and Evil much more quickly than I ever would from a shared appreciation for GTA: San Andreas.
cap-n-crunch @ Aug 30th 2006 10:10PM
hey #8 I want my gf to be more like a porn link too lol.