The Official I-Hate-Video-Games-Books Column (1982)

[+Random Terrain]

Take a look at this two-page article from Video Games Magazine (October 1982) about video game books and how they could ruin a person's favorite video game:

archive.org/stream/Video_Games_Volume_1_Number_02_1982-10_Pumpkin_Press_US#page/n58/mode/1up

Below are a few excerpts:

You want to know what else I hate about them? They promote the idea that video games are no more than challenges to be WON! MASTERED!! BEATEN!!! Well, I'd like to BEAT, SMASH and DESTROY every one of these books. Who wants to play Pac-Man for two hours, anyway? That's not fun, that's work. To me, these books are nothing but HOMEWORK!

 

Instead of promoting creative problem solving or stressing methods to improve concentration and memory skills, what do we get? Pac-Man patterns. Those are the dumbest things I've ever seen. They're useless. Aside from the fact that the manufacturers change patterns BECAUSE of the books, or that once you blow your pattern you're screwed, you DON'T NEED PATTERNS to BEAT Pac-Man. The best players know the monsters well enough to avoid them forever and WIN just fine, so they can sell their patterns somewhere else.

 

Hey, I'm not immune to these books. Why, the other day I learned the patterns for my favorite game, Donkey Kong, reading the 32-page pamphlet How to Win at Donkey Kong. That may be the biggest mistake I've ever made in my life. Where once I felt a surge of ADVENTURE and EXCITEMENT every time I walked up to a Donkey Kong machine, now I'm SLUGGISH and BORED. Mechanically, I plod through the predictable patterns the book has laid out for me so I can WIN, but the thrill is gone. What's even worse, now I know what all the game's mysterious symbols and characters signify, I feel like I've learned everything I NEVER wanted to know about a lover and the romance just flew out the window.

[VectorGamer]

The article talks about Pac-Man and patterns. I'll never forget the first time I ever played Pac-Man was at the local rollerskating rink game room. I put a quarter on the monitor glass and a kid standing next to the machine said that there were patterns in Pac-Man that if you memorize them you can get a really high score. I was immediately turned off. I figured I spend all day in school memorizing stuff that I don't want to spend my free time memorizing patterns for video games. I was more into shooters like Galaxian and Asteroids at the time - games without patterns.

[Rex Dart]

I remember seeing a book at KB Toys (Circus World?) in the mid eighties, had turn-by-turn directions for playing Pac-Man. I thought it was weird as hell, and it also sort of turned me off of Pac-Man. I can see this article's author's point.

[Keatah]

Yep. These books give you an un-healthy amount of knowledge about the inner workings of a game. So much that it takes the fun and sense of discovery away. To me, now, these books seem like just a way to cash in on a cultural craze. But back then they even made me feel bad because it was difficult to memorize pages upon pages of precise exactly-timed movements. One stumble, one minor variation and delay, and the whole level is shot. I'm not autohotkey playing back macros!

 

Furthermore, it seemed like drudgery trying to memorize patterns and movements. Might was well just have waited 30 years and watch M.A.M.E. videos on YouTube. About the only thing these books were good for was learning some of the mechanics like when you get a free ship, or how many times you can use a zuper sapper, or get the lay of the land regarding limits of your guy. Maybe learn a small series of movements to improve efficiency allowing you to get into a certain area. That kind of stuff.

 

And even then it was more exciting to go to the arcade and look up to the bigger kids and try and see what they're doing and maybe, if I was worthy enough, they'd bestow some of their magic tips upon me. Most of the times I just got pushed out of they - being the shitfaced brat I was.

 

But while the VCS is still fun to play, I found it to be more enticing when I first got it and knew absolutely nothing about how it worked inside. Nothing at all. All I knew at the time was that something called "power" made electric things do stuff. The VCS was a black magic box.

 

And that's one of the sub-reasons I don't get into the technical and programming aspects of emulators and modern CPUs & PC circuitry. Nothing beyond their configuration, setu-up, and usage. The sense of mystery and magic is still somewhat alive that way.

 

Once one knows too much about a subject, it can become boring.

Edited January 10, 2015 by Keatah

[roryjr]

I have to disagree on the books. My buddy and I only had the limited money we could squeeze out of our dads. We had very limited quarters, so the patterns in the books made first Pac-Man and next Dig Dug last a long time on our limited quarters. And I would love to see someone "wing it" on the 9th key of Pac-Man. You know where the ghosts are no longer edible and only change direction when you eat a power pellet. Where they are moving at light speed while you are dragging through molasses.

[Cynicaster]

Yeah, patterns suck. I can't think of anything more dull/tedious than trying to memorize a bunch of dance steps from a book.

 

Patterns are slightly less dull if you're developing them yourself, because at least in that case there's still an aspect of "exploration" or "trial and error" to the exercise. But I can only take so much of doing the exact same thing over and over again before the game completely loses its appeal.

 

I don't agree with that statement about Donkey Kong, though. Yes, there are lots of well-known "guidelines" to the various screens in the game, but the game is pseudo-random, so there are no bulletproof patterns that you can follow and be guaranteed to survive. That's one of the main reasons why I like DK so much.