Poll: How good are you at classic arcade games?

[toptenmaterial]

We all love 'em, but can we survive to the next screen? Tell AtariAge the truth!

Edited January 12, 2018 by toptenmaterial

[NE146]

I'm not crazy skilled like some out there.. but I'm ok. My personal non-verified claim to fame is I'm pretty sure I've possibly beaten or at least scored close to the world record in Taito Space Invaders in another life as a child in the late 70's in Guam where I would flip the score at will, play for a couple hours on one quarter, and quit out of boredom.

 

I'm pretty ok at Galaga and at my best can at least get past the last challenging stage. Robotron I've scored a million a couple times (I can't do it consistently). In a Defender arcade cab I can at least get an extra man at 10k most games. I'm also "ok" at Crazy Climber. When I was good at Moon Cresta I could often win a free game. I'm also ok at Mr. Do since I would do the 255 lives trick which afforded me a lot of practice on high / difficult stages.

 

However the one game I can NEVER get any good at is Asteroids. That gameplay has eluded me all my life and I think I can count on one hand the times I scored the piddly amount to get a single extra life. Man!

 

 

[toptenmaterial]

I checked off "lousy". As an NES kid, I didn't have too much experience with arcade type games. My introduction was Namco Museum on the N64. The arcade game (real and at home) that I am least lousy at is Galaga and sometimes I can stay alive for a long time.

 

I don't know how many of you have played GTA Chinatown Wars, but there is a Robotron minigame in there.

[Keatah]

I suck at most all arcade games with the exception of:

 

Blasteroids

Tac/Scan

Gyruss

Assault

Missile Command

 

..and those I'm very good at. Especially Missile Command. I can roll the counters indefinitely or play to the very end. All other games my playtime is measured in single-digit minutes.

[davyK]

Better than average but consistency is my problem. I wouldn't worry any high score tables out there!

 

With a bit of practice I can get the rainbow bonus on Space Invaders Deluxe almost every time on the first two waves at least.

 

Pretty good at bullet dodging so can chalk up decent scores on Galaxian and Galaga.

 

Am very close to completing both Moon Patrol courses on 1 credit. I can also get to the final boss of Wardner on 1 credit - I know the safe spot to defeat him so with a bit more practice could beat that I reckon.

 

I wasn't bad at Tempest but a lack of availability meant I never got to practice enough.

 

Better than average at Frogger. Decent at Tapper. Modern day gaming - I'm better than average at bullet hell - working on a 1CC with Gigawing - can get to the true last boss of that at the minute.

 

Was never any good at Pacman or Donkey Kong though. Defender and Robotron will always be a mystery to me. Missile command was also a tough one for me.

Edited January 13, 2018 by davyK

[RJ]

It's "eludes", not "alludes".

[roots.genoa]

I checked off "lousy". As an NES kid

As a Master System kid, I found NES games too hard! Because when you lost a life, you would often have to restart from the beginning of the level... Most of my Master System games were arcade ports though, and even if some of them were tough, at least you would respawn where you were...

I mostly suck at video games because I have bad reflex, but I am quite patient though. Therefore I am not that bad at games I'm quite familiar with, such as Metal Slug - I usually lose my first life at the second boss.

[Jumpman1981]

It's kinda pot luck for me, sometimes I'll do great and play a decent game, but most of the time, I usually don't see past the second board.

The only game I'm consistently good at is Donkey Kong.

Edited January 14, 2018 by Jumpman1981

[spacecadet]

I voted "very good". Most of the very early games, I can play until I just get bored and start messing up because I've lost concentration. Some games are easier than others, obviously.

 

Once fighting games like Street Fighter started becoming popular, that's when I lost it. I can't play any 2D fighting games, or really many games from that era in general, and do very well. I think when some people talk about classic games being more challenging, this must be the era they're talking about. What I consider classic games - stuff from the mid 70's up through about the mid 80's, was comparatively easy. At least for me.

[Tanooki]

I just put good, would be higher if this was 15 years ago as I used to bother putting an effort into it with real machines or emulation.

[+wongojack]

I thought about voting "Ok" but let's face it, the "average" player in this day and age probably doesn't even understand some of the basics of repetitive coin-op gameplay. I voted "Good" and I probably have rare moments of "Very Good."

[Cynicaster]

I put "good" for myself. I can get 350k on Donkey Kong, 50k on Asteroids, 70k on Missile Command, 100k on Popeye to name a few PB's off the top of my head... nothing remotely newsworthy on the serious competitive scene, but far better than most Joe Blow casual players out there. I remember I tied for first place in a full season of the MAME HSC here at Atariage about 5-6 years ago, back when that club had pretty solid participation and organization. Although, I think that had less to do with any superior ability on my part and everything to do with the fact that I was single and childless at the time and was able to put a LOT of effort into it every week.

 

There are definitely some "savants" out there who are crazy good at a crazy number of games, but honestly, I think the vast majority of us are probably pretty close to being on the same level when it comes to innate ability. The observed differences in "ability" are probably more accurately characterized as observed differences in "will to improve." Bottom line is you need to have at least some trace of a competitive streak in you to consistently do "better than the crowd" at classic arcade games. As soon as you decide that you actually care about improving your score rather than just playing mindlessly, then you start to see improvements -- it's that simple.

 

Sometimes in the friendly online competitions and the like, I'll see people posting scores on classic games with comments like "I suck! I've been playing this game since the 80s and I think I've only ever made it to the second screen one time!" I just can't believe for a second that anybody inherently sucks that badly... they're just not trying and/or simply don't care enough to buckle down and improve.

[The Mr. Video]

I'd say I'm good at arcade games. Though I'm pretty good at Food Fight.

[xybot67]

In general, pretty average I would say. Although I sometimes have a good run on Mario Bros. (at least definitely better than I did in 1983)

[Dauber]

Depends on the game. Get me on the turbo version of Ms. Pac-Man or Jr. Pac-Man, the game will be going for a couple of hours. Spy Hunter? My game's over in a few seconds. Centipede and Donkey Kong? Good but not great.

[Cynicaster]

Depends on the game. Get me on the turbo version of Ms. Pac-Man or Jr. Pac-Man, the game will be going for a couple of hours. Spy Hunter? My game's over in a few seconds. Centipede and Donkey Kong? Good but not great.

 

I heard you say on a recent podcast that you can score over 200k on Centipede. That sounds pretty dang good to me... I couldn't score above 60k if my life depended on it.

[Dauber]

I heard you say on a recent podcast that you can score over 200k on Centipede. That sounds pretty dang good to me... I couldn't score above 60k if my life depended on it.

Exactly: pretty dang *good*, not great. Lemme put it to you this way...when you're being tutored by someone who currently scores in the 800k range in Centipede, it feels kinda mediocre.

[SoundGammon]

If you use the number of quarters you put in as a measurement, then the more quarters you use, the worse you are!

[mbd30]

I voted "very good". Most of the very early games, I can play until I just get bored and start messing up because I've lost concentration. Some games are easier than others, obviously.

 

Once fighting games like Street Fighter started becoming popular, that's when I lost it. I can't play any 2D fighting games, or really many games from that era in general, and do very well. I think when some people talk about classic games being more challenging, this must be the era they're talking about. What I consider classic games - stuff from the mid 70's up through about the mid 80's, was comparatively easy. At least for me.

 

They're usually talking about the era of games like Donkey Kong Jr. and Defender. Most people can't last for more than a few minutes at these kinds of games. I'm not very good at them.

Edited January 25, 2018 by mbd30

[ClassicGMR]

Lousy. I'll admit it, arcade games are fun but I suck.

 

Might as well have my name up there this is so perfect!

 

Love them - suck at everything except Mania Challenge.

[[d2f]Iggy*SJB]

I put "Very Good", but there's an "*" next to that.

 

BitD, I was quite good at Gauntlet(the newest game I got good at), the rest were from my glory days in the pool hall across from my house: Stargate, Dig Dug, Super Pac-Man, Pole Position, Kangaroo, Joust, and Lunar Lander. I ended up getting the Lunar Lander cabinet after the place burned down, and a couple of years ago, grabbed the sole survivor of that fire; Pole Position.

 

My most recent high scores are Super Pac-Man 305,710...145,090 on Dig Dug... and 59,850 on Pole Position(I screwed up the qualifying lap, or I'd have over 60k). Of course, I own these 3 games, so I can play whenever I want without quarters. =D

[Nebulon]

Depends on the game.

 

460,000 on TRON at default settings. Other game elude me (like Sinistar).

 

Then there's watching my brother wrap the scoreboard on Star Trek the Strategic Operations Simulator 15 times (with his alleged highest score of 22 million). After watching him get to 15 million, I believe him. At that level, it's all about keeping focus.

[vaxick]

Good at best, but I mostly play pinball these days. Gallaga is one of the machines I seem to last a bit longer on.