The Case for Adventure as the First Video Game Masterpiece

[Mr. Brow]

Despite being hailed as one of the best games of its time, I think Adventure is, if anything, underappreciated.  The cultural obsession with Ready Player One and Easter eggs has tended to obscure how brilliant the design is, and I've seen serious game reviewers claim that it's unplayable in the modern era of gaming, despite acknowledging its influence on other games.  I first played it in the 2010s and honestly, I think that's nonsense.

 

I did a full review on my blog.

 

What do others think?  Is Robinett's Adventure just good for its time, or is it a legitimate classic, worth playing for more than just nostalgia?

[Lord Thag]

On 10/26/2019 at 10:38 AM, Mr. Brow said:

Despite being hailed as one of the best games of its time, I think Adventure is, if anything, underappreciated.  The cultural obsession with Ready Player One and Easter eggs has tended to obscure how brilliant the design is, and I've seen serious game reviewers claim that it's unplayable in the modern era of gaming, despite acknowledging its influence on other games.  I first played it in the 2010s and honestly, I think that's nonsense.

 

I did a full review on my blog.

 

What do others think?  Is Robinett's Adventure just good for its time, or is it a legitimate classic, worth playing for more than just nostalgia?

Yeah, I agree. It's still fun. The community here has extended it as well with all the hacks, particularly the ones based on Nukey's 8k hack (Haunted Adventure II being my personal fav).

It's certainly playable today, but it does (as do most Atari era games) require you to step outside your modern gaming expectation. Atari games are, of course, very primitive in terms of graphics and gameplay. The problem is getting someone to devote the time to get used to the older style of game. Once you do, it's still very fun.

I experienced something similar on the Switch this last weekend. Picked up the Baldur's Gate two pack. Fired it up and was really underwhelmed. Muddy graphics, dated voice overs, clunky combat. Almost put it down, but I kept at it. Suddenly, that older way of playing the game 'clicked' and I spent the rest of the weekend playing it, and having a blast. The problem wasn't the game: it's that I expected it to look/feel like a modern RPG. Once I dropped that, and was willing to take the game on it's own merits... it was fantastic.

Same thing is true of Atari. If you are going to review a 40 year old game, take some time to acclimate past your modern expectations.

[edladdin]

I think its still great. I play Game 3 on a regular basis. 

[+save2600]

Never got into it, even BITD. Was fun watching my wife years later, whiz through it by wrote though. She could beat all three levels as if they were no challenge at all.

[Flojomojo]

I would say it's a smart use of the hardware's limitations, and clever for its time. I have a greater appreciation for it now than I did as a child when it was new. 

 

If it were a masterpiece, wouldn't there be more clones and imitators?

 

My pick for first video game masterpiece would be Space Invaders. 

[Mr. Brow]

51 minutes ago, Flojomojo said:

If it were a masterpiece, wouldn't there be more clones and imitators?

Cloning of games, especially in the early days, was driven more by commercial viability than game quality.  I think now that the medium is finally beginning to get some respect, video game criticism needs to start moving away from using popularity as a primary means of judging games.  So  I don't think clones should be a requirement for us to call something a classic or a masterpiece.

[Flojomojo]

Agree to disagree -- games are one place where iterative sequels and  derivatives that build on the originals can create things of beauty. 
 

Adventure is neat but in my opinion it's not fun enough to be a masterpiece of gaming. 

[Mr. Brow]

2 minutes ago, Flojomojo said:

Agree to disagree -- games are one place where iterative sequels and  derivatives that build on the originals can create things of beauty. 

I don’t know that I disagree with that idea.  But the question is whether a game must have clones to be great, which seems like a different matter to me.  Are you saying that you think iterative sequels are the only way to make a game great?

[Swami]

Not a fan of computer "dungeon crawler" type games, so not the first masterpiece for me. I'd go Space Invaders as well. I remember when I got my 2600 back around 1981, I wanted that and Asteroids.

[atarifan88]

12 hours ago, Flojomojo said:

I would say it's a smart use of the hardware's limitations, and clever for its time. I have a greater appreciation for it now than I did as a child when it was new. 

 

If it were a masterpiece, wouldn't there be more clones and imitators?

 

My pick for first video game masterpiece would be Space Invaders. 

Finally someone who doesn't refer to game as a killer app!  You must have grown up with an Atari. ?

Edited October 30, 2019 by atarifan88

[glazball]

I have to agree with Flojo here that Adventure, to me, doesn't quite rise to the level of "masterpiece."  Whatever the next step down from masterpiece is, that's where Adventure is.  Space Invaders as well as Pac-Man might be two of the very first to meet that high standard, though I'm also inclined to push it even further back (forward?) and say Super Mario Bros. is the first video game "masterpiece."

[Mr. Brow]

It’s interesting so many people are mentioning Space Invaders.  My view of that game is very different.  

[+-^CrossBow^-]

This is an interesting thread and I applaud @Mr. Brow for creating it.

 

I know for a fact that I played Adventure way more often and for much longer than I ever did Space Invaders on my 2600. My parents played Space Invaders and Defender until it was no challenge to them. I had more fun with Adventure and Haunted House not so much in how the game played, but because I think Adventure gave me better imagery in my head when playing it. Adventure was also a game I liked just messing around in to move objects off screen, use the flicker limitations to pass through walls, lock the bat and even dragons into the castles.

 

Honestly I think Adventure was the next logical evolution in games from text adventures and then became the foundation on which the later made graphical adventure games would come after on computers.

 

Is it a masterpiece? Well, in what time are we comparing it with to determine this? It was certainly unique and a masterful game on the 2600 when it was new.

[CapitanClassic]

15 hours ago, Mr. Brow said:

Cloning of games, especially in the early days, was driven more by commercial viability than game quality.  I think now that the medium is finally beginning to get some respect, video game criticism needs to start moving away from using popularity as a primary means of judging games.  So  I don't think clones should be a requirement for us to call something a classic or a masterpiece.

The game M.U.L.E. never had any clone games that were widely played (even MULE itself wasn’t highly sold), but I consider that game a masterpiece of multiplayer game design that is still fun to play to this day.

 

While popularity usually is an indicator that a game is a work of genius, it isn’t always so. I wonder how long the list of games is that many people would consider masterpieces that never sold 100,000 copies. (What would be a good number of copies sold for, not that popular?)

[Lord Thag]

1 hour ago, Mr. Brow said:

It’s interesting so many people are mentioning Space Invaders.  My view of that game is very different.  

Yeah, same.

I have no idea why everyone thinks that game was so great. Found it rather dull back in the day too (and my friends dad had the arcade in his living room). Historically significant? You bet. But fun? Not really. I never liked the concept until Galaxian came out, and never loved it until Galaga.

Adventure is more of a cult classic on the system. Fun, weird, but my no means a masterpiece like Berzerk, Pitfall or Solaris.

Edited October 30, 2019 by Lord Thag
Forgot to finish a line

[JBerel]

This is a question than can never be answered definitively for a variety of reasons. Most notably is the question of when does a "masterpiece" become possible vs cave paintings. There's so many ways to rank a video game and because the category is so versatile, to establish one or several as first masterpiece in a category equivalent to the Mona Lisa or Sistine Chapel is not really gonna happen. I'd think you'd just need a "best of" or "most notable accomplishment" list for several categories or something. I don't know how to crack it, but I'll just throw a few standouts that should be in the running.

 

Pong/breakout

Asteroids

Adventure 

Pitfall

Zaxxon

Tetris

Super Mario (One of the many versions that did new stuff first/best) 

Legend of Zelda Ocarina of time (I'm not a big Zelda fan, just based on what I read)

Star Wars Arcade (or maybe that should go to Red Baron)

Wolfenstein 3D

Myst

Goldeneye

Shadow of the Colossus

Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 (people keep mentioning it, I dunno, never played it)

E.T. (just kidding) 

Mass Effect 2

Knights of the old Republic (again, not my cup of tea, but whatever)

Trine (I dunno bout this one, but it's pretty damn gorgeous.)

 

[Lord Thag]

29 minutes ago, JBerel said:

This is a question than can never be answered definitively for a variety of reasons. Most notably is the question of when does a "masterpiece" become possible vs cave paintings. There's so many ways to rank a video game and because the category is so versatile, to establish one or several as first masterpiece in a category equivalent to the Mona Lisa or Sistine Chapel is not really gonna happen. I'd think you'd just need a "best of" or "most notable accomplishment" list for several categories or something. I don't know how to crack it, but I'll just throw a few standouts that should be in the running.

 

Pong/breakout

Asteroids

Adventure 

Pitfall

Zaxxon

Tetris

Super Mario (One of the many versions that did new stuff first/best) 

Legend of Zelda Ocarina of time (I'm not a big Zelda fan, just based on what I read)

Star Wars Arcade (or maybe that should go to Red Baron)

Wolfenstein 3D

Myst

Goldeneye

Shadow of the Colossus

Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 (people keep mentioning it, I dunno, never played it)

E.T. (just kidding) 

Mass Effect 2

Knights of the old Republic (again, not my cup of tea, but whatever)

Trine (I dunno bout this one, but it's pretty damn gorgeous.)

 

The problem is that 'masterpiece' is ALWAYS subjective. Take books. Lots of college professors and a few others say that James Joyce's 'Ulysses' is a masterpiece. The rest of the planet thinks it's an impenetrable, boring, unreadable nightmare only used by arrogant college professors to justify their tenure. Who is right? Depends which side you are on.

I think we can say that Adventure belongs on any 'games that were historically significant' list, but whether it's a masterpiece in terms of fun is always going to depend on taste. I love it and still play it. Others rarely touch it but love space invaders. It's all personal taste.

It was the first action-adventure game, and the first widely recognized easter egg (to be generally found/noticed, the Channel F had the first which remained undiscovered for decades). That makes it significant.

Fun is up to you.

[davyK]

I have played 4 masterpieces in my time.

 

Asteroids Deluxe in the arcade

Super Breakout on the 2600

Tetris

Super Monkey Ball on Gamecube

 

These games cannot be improved upon (they themselves in some instances are revisions of an original idea with minor flaws).

 

I still play these games regularly (yes - I own a Deluxe). I could go without playing another game the rest of my life.

 

Super Mario Bros. 1 comes damn close to being on that list, as does Pacman.

 

Adventure is a ground breaking game - specifically in that it was an action oriented version of text adventures with a graphical user interface. Its design is in many ways quite beautiful but its gameplay is probably too simplistic for the genre now to be considered a masterpiece.

Edited October 30, 2019 by davyK

[keithbk]

I think Adventure is brilliant because the Bat is working OFF SCREEN, flying through all the rooms/areas, picking up and dropping off, regardless of where you are or what you are doing. Pretty amazing for the Atari, if you think about it.

 

I liked Space Invaders as a kid until I played (fried with double shots) endlessly for hours on end, flipping the score, and realizing I was never going to lose. I finally shut the game off and went for years without playing. Space Invaders is okay, but there are no surprises in the game.

 

 

Edited October 30, 2019 by keithbk

[jhd]

 

I never actually owned Adventure BITD. I once rented it for a week from a local video store (ca. 1982), but I do not recall it being that much fun. I do not know that I ever played Level 3; I certainly never found (or was even aware of) the Easter Egg. It was not a game that my friends and I wanted to own (unlike the above-noted Space Invaders and Pac-Man). 

 

I now have the original cartridge, as well as the game as part of multiple different Atari compilations on my PS 2, PC, and even phone. Heck, I even have a copy of the DOS remake Indenture. I can confidently say that as an adult, I appreciate it significantly more than I did as a child.

 

Has anyone looked for contemporary magazine reviews or even advertising for this title? It does not seem to have attracted much attention when it was current, especially in comparison to the headline arcade conversions.  

[davyK]

Adventure's box art is a classic of that era. I adore classic Atari visuals - 2600 box art and classic cabinet artwork really hits my nostalgia spot.

[Swami]

11 minutes ago, davyK said:

Adventure's box art is a classic of that era. I adore classic Atari visuals - 2600 box art and classic cabinet artwork really hits my nostalgia spot.

Speaking of Space Invaders, it was one of my favorite box artworks, as well. Impressed to see the cities up in the the flying saucers. I guess that is where the the fire-wolfmen live with their be-feelered insect soldiers.

[keithbk]

43 minutes ago, Swami said:

Speaking of Space Invaders, it was one of my favorite box artworks, as well. Impressed to see the cities up in the the flying saucers. I guess that is where the the fire-wolfmen live with their be-feelered insect soldiers.

 

 

How there never was a lawsuit between Atari and the rock band Boston remains a mystery to this day.

 

Edited October 30, 2019 by keithbk

[Mr. Brow]

4 hours ago, Lord Thag said:

The problem is that 'masterpiece' is ALWAYS subjective. Take books. Lots of college professors and a few others say that James Joyce's 'Ulysses' is a masterpiece. The rest of the planet thinks it's an impenetrable, boring, unreadable nightmare only used by arrogant college professors to justify their tenure. Who is right? Depends which side you are on.

 

I think we can say that Adventure belongs on any 'games that were historically significant' list, but whether it's a masterpiece in terms of fun is always going to depend on taste. I love it and still play it. Others rarely touch it but love space invaders. It's all personal taste.

 

Thanks for your thoughtful comments so far.  I agree in one respect -- our judgement of art is necessarily subjective, and this should really be taken for granted in any discussion about it.  However, I don't think that's equivalent to saying that everything boils down to taste.  Our perception of a game or a book is a function of a complex set of factors, some of which involve taste, but many others of which involve experience, attention to detail, introspection, etc.  When college professors declare Ulysses a masterpiece, they're usually basing it on years of experience with literature, poring over the nuances and considering its implications for their perception of the world.  That doesn't mean you have to agree with them, but I don't think we should feel satisfied in judgements that come from inexperience and impatience.  The more I've learned to listen to dissenting views on the things I like or dislike, the more richness I've found in the world. 

[Mulletino]

Adventure was the game I played most as a kid on my Atari, it is still probably the one Atari game I play the most, on any platform, be it original, ROM, Flashback on Xbox or my handheld Atari Blaze thing.

 

It's a truly great game to me that holds many many happy memories, but i'm not sure about Masterpiece status though.