Emily Sidler Game Journal

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game
Game author (If known)
Game Studio

Original Platform & control mechanism

Control mechanism you used
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?

Describe game Play and mechanics
~ 150 words

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
~ 150 words

what made it fun?
~ 300 words

Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
~ 300 words

How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Four Up, Four Down
Game author: Unknown (Could not find more information about it, will be chatting with my Dad later today about where he learned it.)

Platform/Control mechanism: Deck of Cards

Control mechanism you used: Deck of Cards

Would the experience have been different using the original? How? N/A

Describe Gameplay and mechanics:
Every person starts with four cards down and four cards up in front of them. You put the up cards over the down cards. You can change the number of cards down andang up if you want to make things more interesting or challenging (usually the person who won the previous game gets to decide”. Then the rest of the remaining cards are dealt among the players. The goal of the game is to be the first player to get rid of all of the cards in their hand and in front of them. The dealer can then play first, putting down whatever number of card they want (ex. Four of Hearts). Suits of the cards are not important in this game. You can play multiples of the same number, so most players will use their turn to play multiples of the same number in their hand. They can also use their turn to play a card with the same number from the ‘up’ pile. They cannot play cards from the down pile until the up card on top of it is played. You can also not see the down cards until you play it, adding an element of chance to the game. Once the dealer plays, the rest of the players can take a turn putting down a card/cards. You always have to play a card lower than the previous play. If you do not have a lower card, you have to take the pile of cards played and add it to your hand. There are two cards that do not follow these same rules; the 10 card and the King card. The 10 card can be played at any moment during a player’s turn, and can allow the player to play an additional number card/cards. The King card can be played at any time during a player’s turn and allows the next player to play whatever card they want. (Great for if you are playing with younger players or want to give the person next to you an advantage!) Some people take out the Jacks and Queens from the deck beforehand just to make the game more simple.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
The strengths of the game comes from being fairly easy to learn and play with repetition. I’ve been even able to play this game with my younger nieces and even the six year old has learned to play it. She even has an ongoing rivalry with my husband over the game. It can be played with a simple deck of cards and allows for just enough complexity to feel more complex that Uno or Go Fish but less complex than other typical card games like Solitaire and Poker. It caters to most age groups and allows for the game to be new and exciting with every new round, where players can either change the number of up/down cards or add even more decks of cards if they want to make the game take longer. Since the deck is shuffled every round, there is always a chance of ending up with a great hand (multiple 10s or kings/multiples of cards) or a terrible one. It is also a game of strategy, since you have to decide when you want to take a chance and play the down cards. The weaknesses of the game come from trying to explain it the first time, as I found that multiple rules are sometimes hard to remember in the moment. I could not find very much information about it online, so it’s up to mainly the player who knows the game to introduce it.


what made it fun?
I really enjoy that once it’s played once or twice, Four Up Four Down is a great game to play with others who may be a little intimidated by more complex rules and card games (like me!) It’s a game that my family loves to play on trips and to outings, knowing that even if we haven’t seen each other for months, we can easily pick up the game and play. Since it only requires a deck of cards, it is easy to play at many types of events without a lot of set up or cleanup. It’s also not a game that requires a lot of concentration/math, so it is easy to play while having a conversation or enjoying something on TV. There is an element of competition to the game of course as everyone wants to get rid of their cards first, but there’s also the slight fun element of having the King card where you can benefit not only yourself but the next player if you happen to like them. If you see that the next player has a certain number in their up pile as well, you can either help them or sabotage them with your next play. When it is your turn to decide the number of up/down cards, if you pick a big number of up cards it allows you to see a good amount of what your competitors have, but they also can see your cards. If you pick a big number of down cards, it often ends in a yelling/laughing match of everyone not being able to control what they play next like a big game of chance. Either way I enjoy getting to have a game I know I can play with even my young nieces/new players and they will enjoy it just as much as people who have been playing it for years.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I think this game can be considered influential because I know family members and friends from different age groups that enjoy it and hopefully are passing it around as I am! As compared to games like Uno or Go Fish that can have an initial negative outlook to older players because of its implication to be for younger audiences, Four Up Four Down is not very well known and therefore is often received well because it is played with a normal deck of cards. It is complex enough for older players to enjoy, but simple enough for younger players to learn and feel part of the group. I believe like all games, it is sort of a niche card game that is starting small in its popularity, was taught to my dad who taught it to me and now I can teach others how to play it. I think it fits into the evolution of games because not only is it simple in design and easy to play, but it plays into that idea that some people like complexity in games, some people like simplicity, and some people like a little bit of both! There is also the level of chance that comes into play that a lot of games use to make the game more exciting. Because of it’s simple design, it can be easily shared at any get together and hopefully over time more people will come to know the rules and want to share it with their friends/families. It also ties into the idea that games can bring people together, and while it may start some rivalries, for the most part it opens up conversation and friendly competition between the players. It can be played once or over multiple rounds, allowing the players to decide when they want to start/stop and still feeling as if they have accomplished something in the end.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
I would give this a 4.9 out of 5! It was a little hard to explain because of the amount of rules, but I thoroughly enjoy playing it with people of all age groups and hope it will continue to be taught!

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Manchala
Game author: Unknown
Game Studio: N/A

Original Platform & control mechanism: Stones, beans, or seeds and rows of holes, a board or other playing surface

Control mechanism you used: Online version using stones and a board
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
There are many ways to play the game which is why it was such an easy game to play and one of the oldest games known to still be played today.

Describe GamePlay and mechanics:
Mancala is played by two players who can use either a board with holes or any surface that they can make holes in(ex. Dirt) Each person has their own row of holes to start with. They use stones, pebbles, beans or seeds to place a random amount in each hole. (Or they can plan out how many they want in each hole to start to try and win.) Each player takes a turn and distributes the stones from one hole around the board, one in each hole and one in their winning hole if there are enough. There are also certain ways to capture your opponents stones as well and add them to your winning hole. The goal of the game is to end up with the most stones in your winning hole, and this can be done through strategizing which stones you want to move and potentially stealing stones from the other player.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
Some of the strengths in Mancala are really in it’s simple design and gameplay. Because it only requires holes to put rock into, you can even play it in the sand or dirt. The boards for it are also not complex which makes the game less daunting when going to try it for the first time. The rules are simple enough that even if you don’t know math very well you can follow along easily, but if you do know math you can strategize. I’d say the only weakness in the design is sometimes the rules can get a little lost when you’re looking to potentially steal another person’s rocks. With the online version, they gave me a guide or stole for me which allowed me to play the game with more ease. Had I been playing it by hand, I might not have known when to steal until after a few rounds.


what made it fun?
I really enjoyed this game! Even as a person who isn’t very fond of math and needs to be in a certain mood to strategize, I found myself enjoying just trying to click on certain holes and seeing if I would end up with some points. At first it sounded like it would be a little more complex and hard to learn, but it was actually fairly easy to pick up on. It’s really a game that you could play with a level of relaxation, either chatting with people or watching something while playing. I also found it more enjoyable because despite my resistance to doing math, I found it easy enough that after a try or two I was starting to strategize and count how many stones I had to work with in each hole and playing accordingly. It’s a game I feel would entertain many different types of age groups and it’s simple enough to learn/teach that you wouldn’t be spending an hour just trying to figure out the rules. I think a lot of people could actually pick up on the game simply by playing it over and over. I’m usually the first person to cringe a little inside when a pamphlet is brought out for a board game because it means learning rules/gameplay, but this game was fairly easy to pick up even just by playing it. Since you can pick the amount of stones started with in each hole each time, it would be a game that could be changed and made interesting for every round. I can also see how this would be a great game for any occasion since you can play it even just using some dirt or sand and some rocks. It would be a great game for both strategists and casual players.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I think this game is obviously very influential given how long it has lasted and has been played throughout history, but also in that it is so easy to play in different circumstances. It is in general a game that has spread across different cultures and countries and yet still holds true to its original design. I think it opened a world of possibilities for games that were simple enough in design to be able to be played in many places and it still engaged both critical thinkers and casual players. Looking at games like Checkers now, that seems to me to be a little more complicated but still has the same idea of wanting to combine strategy and casual playing. I think it’s very interesting to think of how back then people didn’t have the same tools and devices that we do to play games, but they still found ways to create them. It was a great way to be sociable but also engage the mind which we talked about is kind of a fundamental part of the gameplay experience-feeling accomplished in a certain way without having to be forced to work. I think this helped lead the way to a lot of cultures trying to create games that were simple in design but gave that same sense of accomplishment if won.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
4.9! It was easy enough to play for me to enjoy it right off the bat but I enjoyed also getting to learn how to strategize more as I played!

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Pong
Game author (If known):Allan Alcorn
Game Studio:Atari corporations

Original Platform & control mechanism: Arcade game/ Joystick

Control mechanism you used
Computer/Mouse

Would the experience have been different using the original? How?/
I believe the experience would have been slightly different in the original considering a mouse is fairly easy/sensitive to movement and a joystick might have a slightly different or delayed reaction time.

Describe Gameplay and mechanics
Pong is a simple game similar to table tennis where two players use in-game paddles to bounce a ball back and forth. Rectangles and a square are used to depict the two paddles and a ball with a dotted line down the center indicating the two sides of the playing field. Players can only move the paddles up and down on the screen. Depending on where you hit the ball with your paddle can influence direction that the ball goes. The goal of the game is to bounce the ball past your character’s paddle to get a point. The player who gets ten points first wins. Players can either play against a computer or choose to play with another player. The version that I played online included multiple levels of difficulty and allowed for the player to choose between using a mouse or using the keyboard to control their paddle.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
I think the biggest strength of the design of this game is it is simple but competitive, able to cater towards multiple audiences and be understood easily. The general idea of hitting the ball back and forth and trying to get it past your opponent’s paddle is similar to the idea of playing catch or a sport, so I feel many people naturally will catch on just by seeing the game. But the point system, which is shown as big numbers over each side of the screen would definitely let the player know that hitting the ball past their opponent’s paddle would result in getting them a point. So even without a guide, players would be able to catch on quickly and enjoy the game. Some people could argue that it could be updated and have more detail, but I like the simplicity and easy concept of it. It allows players to really focus on the experience of the game as compared to paying attention to pretty art or details.


what made it fun?
For one, I enjoy the simplicity of it and the idea that anyone can play it regardless of their experience playing games. It is easy to pick up without instruction and only has one general goal which makes it a great arcade game. The game doesn’t need any detailed art or storytelling to be successful. The concept is adaptable and caters towards the competitive nature of sports and games, putting the players against each other in a race to see who can get more points. One of my uncles has the original arcade game at his house and I remember spending hours playing it against my little cousins and other family members at family events. The hand/eye coordination aspect of it makes it challenging and as you play you start to learn how to strategize to be able to hit the ball at a certain angle to get the desired path or speed you want. It also helps to build focus as over time, you might find that trying to hold a conversation or let your thoughts drift might prove to lose you a point or two. I believe the closest thing we see today that is similar to this game is Air Hockey which follows the same format and rules, but it played using a physical paddle and an air puck. While it might be physically different from playing Pong, I find a lot of people still gravitate towards the game with a competitive nature, automatically knowing the rules based on the setup. I personally enjoy competition and challenges that are easy to play and grasp right off the bat. Games like Pong allow me to get to know people without having to focus on trying to get the game.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
Upon reading the history of this game, I realized just how influential it really is in the gaming world. The prototype was given to a bar called Andy Capp’s Tavern and people came to the bar solely to play the game. Following the release, the game earned consistently four times more revenue than other coin-operated games. It is sometimes considered to be the game that started the video games industry, providing that video games could produce significant revenues. Even though arcade games now are more developed and artistically detailed, a lot of them follow the same format of competition by getting points before the other players. There are also games like Air Hockey that use the same system of hitting a puck back and forth with a paddle, trying to get it past the other player to get a point. So I believe this is a game concept that will be continued to be used throughout time, even if the games change and grow in artistic detail or concept. The simplicity of the game and it’s competitive nature is what made it successful and what continues to make it successful and inspirational to other games today.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
5 stars, great game!

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Space Invaders
Game author (If known): Tomohiro Nishikado
Game Studio: Taito

Original Platform & control mechanism: Upright Arcade Cabinet and "Cocktail-table" Cabinet featuring a screen on a horizontal surface.

Control mechanism you used: Laptop, Mouse and keyboard
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
The experience would have definitely been different since the arcade cabinet would have a joystick and buttons, and the 'cocktail-table' cabinet would require the person to stand and look down as they played, giving them a completely different engagement.
Describe Gameplay and mechanics
Space Invaders is a shooting game where the player can move the controller only horizontally against the bottom of the screen and shoot upwards in a straight vertical direction. The controller is partially protected by four bunkers or shields that are spread out in front of the controller and can be harmed by both controller and enemy fire. Above them, five rows of eleven aliens slowly descend towards the controller, occasionally firing in a straight line. They move left and right as a group and move downward when reaching the edge of the screen. The goal of the game is to eliminate all of the aliens especially before they reach the end of the screen or it is game over. As time goes on and aliens are defeated, the music and the speed of the aliens speeds up making it harder to beat. Defeating all of the aliens starts the round over with the aliens slightly lower on screen to increase difficulty.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
Some of the strengths of Space Invaders is that it is a relatively simple game that can be picked up easily especially at an arcade, and the point system and increasing difficulty would make it a great game for players that want to constantly reach and beat their high score. The simple game mechanics and setup allow the player to understand what they need to do quickly to beat the game. The music design also helps to create more pressure when both the tempo of the game and the movement of the aliens go faster over time. As far as weaknesses go, I found it to be slow compared to some of the other games that we were asked to play, and despite that there was an element of danger to when the aliens shot at you, it was often easy to avoid because of the speed or because of the shields being available to dodge behind.


what made it fun?
There’s a satisfying element to getting to break down the invading walls of aliens, similar to Breakout where you get to gradually eliminate blocks and feel a sense of gradual accomplishment. I also enjoyed that there was a spacecraft that flew across the screen occasionally and in order to be able to shoot at that spacecraft, I had to eliminate a row of aliens or time my shots just right to be able to hit it. There was also an element of stress that allowed me to feel more pressure as the game went on and the aliens slowly started to move faster. I enjoyed Space Invaders but found myself quickly getting bored of it simply because of the slow pace and limited movement of the aliens. At least in the online version that I played, the aliens moved very slow to start and even when they increased their pace, they were still very slow. My opinion differs greatly from others as proven because it became very successful after it’s release. I also acknowledge that in terms of game development at that time, it included elements that had not been in previous games such as an enemies ability to be able to fire back at the player in reaction to their movement. Instead of using a time, the gradual descent of the aliens acts as a similar element and allows the player to feel a bit more pressure as the danger looms closer the farther along they get in the game. I also think I would enjoy Space Invaders more in it’s original format or even in the ‘cocktail-table’ version as that would an experience that would be more interactive and include an element of getting to play while others watch in a more social settle.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?

This game would be considered highly influential because it explored new elements of player interaction with enemies and incorporated music as part of what affected how the player felt as the game went on. As compared to using a timer, there is an element of pressure added to the gameplay as the aliens get closer to the player. The music also helps to drive the narrative and pressure the player feels, as it gets faster the closer that the aliens get to you. It’s interesting to think about because with as many games as we see nowadays, it’s interesting to think how games used to be limited to using a timer to control how long a game lasted, as compared to enemies becoming increasingly difficult and ultimately ending the game if not defeated.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
3.5 stars. I did not enjoy it for very long but I can see how it really catered to people who enjoy competitive games and trying to beat their high scores!

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Galaga
Game author (If known): Shigeru Yokoyama
Game Studio: Namco

Original Platform & control mechanism: Upright Arcade Cabinet, later converted to be able to work on home consoles like the SG-1000, MSX, Nintendo Entertainment System and Atari 7800.

Control mechanism you used: Laptop and keyboard controls

Would the experience have been different using the original? How? I believe all the experiences would have been slightly different depending on how controls were set up for each console. There is also just a different experience playing at an arcade vs playing at home on a computer.
Describe Gameplay and mechanics:
In Galaga, you play as a starship or jet that is tasked with shooting bug (Galaga) forces. The player can only move left and right and must tap a button to fire shots. The enemy characters can fly around and either shoot the player or run into them to cause them to lose a life. The enemies start in a stacked linear formation that moves towards the sides of the screen and then shifts down, similar to Space Invaders. Depending on the enemy character, they can also zig zag and break out of the formation to shoot or try to hit the player. There are four large enemies at the top of the formations that can shoot out beams to capture a ship and take it to the top of the formation, resulting in the player losing a life. These enemy characters take two shots to destroy. The goal of the game is to defeat all of the enemies and go into as many rounds of the game as possible.



Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
I think the interesting thing about this game is it follows a similar format of Space Invaders (which I wrote about in my previous journal) yet there are some key differences that up the level of difficulty and interaction with the player. For one, the enemy characters move more quickly and the differences in color make them visually appealing and distracting at the same time. There are also no barriers keeping enemy fire from hitting the player so there is an added sense of risk and concentration needed to avoid getting shot. There is also the element of enemies being able to fly and zigzag around towards the player, which I think helps to show the development of games to have more player interaction. It reminds me of recent games like Cuphead that ask players to focus on several different types of enemies and strategies at once verses just one enemy or one type of attack.


what made it fun?
I thoroughly enjoy games where unexpected things happen and Galaga easily fits into that category of games that throw twists at you. It is clear based on design that the enemies are different, but you can also see from playing that they have different attack styles as well. The play style is very similar to Cuphead where as you play, you learn how certain enemies attack and can adapt how you move/attack to navigate through the round. But even then, if you progress through the rounds the enemies get even more aggressive and can even morph into new enemy types with different attack patterns so the game feels new and challenging with each round. I really enjoy the bee-like pattern that some of the enemies take while others make a direct line to try and hit the player, as it keeps my attention on the game longer and keeps it more entertaining. This is also similar to why I have enjoyed games like Joust where as the game progresses, there are new elements and tactics that are used to make the difficulty increase with each round. While I haven’t gotten to that point yet, I have read that eventually after a ship has been captured by a boss, you can shoot it down to release the ship and create a ‘Dual-Fighter’ ship to shoot with, allowing you to fire two bullets at once. I can see easily how over time people would play this game over and over again to see what new enemies could be revealed and to see how many times they could accomplish getting the Dual-Fighter.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
Progressing through these games and writing these journals has really opened my eyes to how games (particularly space games with fighter ships) have sort of developed both in design and gameplay over time. I think this game is very influential because it does something that a lot of arcade games still play into nowadays; taking a concept that works and adding onto it. It is very similar to Space Invaders which was wildly popular and still is, but it adds elements that make it new and exciting, in some ways a completely different type of experience for the player. After reading the articles about the death of the Arcade, I can see how games like this would be the most successful for developers to create because they are taking something that is already successful and playing around with what they can add on and create within it. While this might have not been as common back when Arcades were more prominent and successful, it is definitely a thing we see more often of now. When one game is very successful (ex. Mario Kart), you’re sure to see three or four other racing arcade games appear because they know it has been successful as compared to trying to introduce something new. I still visit Arcades regularly (Round One in particular) and see that usually the games that are the most frequented are the games where players have to come back again and again to get better at the game and reveal new challenges (or the games with prizes). In that sense, Galaga could be considered very influential as it played into that idea that the farther you got along, the more interesting and different challenges appeared.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
4.8 stars!

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Tapper
Game author (If known):N/A
Game Studio: Marvin Glass and Associates

Original Platform & control mechanism: Upright Arcade Cabinet, Four-Position Joystick and tap handle

Control mechanism you used: Mouse/Keyboard
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
Definitely! The original arcade game was designed with an actual beer tap holder to help simulate the idea of getting beer (or Root Beer as it was later changed to) from a key.

Describe Gameplay and mechanics
The player controls the soda jerk (or in earlier versions a bartender) who has to serve root beer to customers that enter and slowly approach the kegs. There are four bars (or tables) and there is a door for each that each set of customers enters. The player must move the soda jerk up and down or left and right to serve customers, but in order to pour root beer they must go to one of the kegs at the end of the rows. Once a mug is filled, the player can slide the mug down along the bar to the customers. If customers are close enough to the door, they will leave, but if they are farther along they may stop to drink and then slide the empty mug back. They can also leave tips, and collecting a tip can cause dancers to appear that will distract the customers. In the end, you can win the game by clearing all of the customers or lose by either dropping a mug or letting a customer get to the end of the bar towards the keg.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
I think one the things about this game that really caught my eye as a kid (and that I think helped more people swarm to games like Pac-Man when it came out) is the idea of creating characters. While older games had some cool designs for space ships and non-character elements, games like Pac-Man and Tapper really dove into creating simple but memorable characters that helped more players feel connected to the game. The other big thing that is nostalgic for me about this game is the sounds effects which seem very different from other games that came out at around that time period and are memorable. I think where this game lacked in some areas is the original Budweiser theme (which was changed to cater towards younger audiences as well), but it could have deterred people who did not drink Budweiser or people who didn’t care to drink or support it. The giant Budweiser on the back wall of the original could be seen as distracting, and the new logo fit the overall aesthetic of the game much more.


what made it fun?
I remember playing this game a lot as a kid and even still really enjoyed playing now! Just like I mentioned with Galaga, I enjoy games where it progressively gets harder but the more you play the game, the more you fall into a rhythm with it. But there are also some unexpected turns and tactics that the game uses to keep the game interesting. I also remember as a kid the sheer panic that was caused every time an empty mug was slid towards the edge of the counter or every time I slid a full mug across the counter and realized I had sent it to an empty row with no customers to catch it. I think partially that is because we’ve all felt the panic of seeing a glass fall and knowing the mess and heartache that will come when it shatters. But there was also some really clever sound effects added into this game (like the shattering glass) that allowed players to really feel that defeat and dread when a mug crashed to the floor. Tapper was also a game that introduced new levels and settings including a western saloon, a sports bar, a punk rock bar and an outer-space bar. I thought this was really clever because it catered to all kinds of players’ interests and gave them something to look forward to (Example: I loved the Punk Rock part because the character designs always reminded me of characters from Nickelodeon shows back in the 90’s. But looking at it nowadays, I think the design for ‘Punk Rock’ customers would be very different.) There was also the thrill of always trying to do better and get extra achievements like grabbing a tip and watching the customers get distracted by dancers.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I think this game would be considered influential because it was a different style of game in it’s time. Just like Donkey Kong being praised for being new and holding a new concept that steered away from the typical space game or driving game, Tapper was praised for being challenging, new and graphically entertaining. I think this also came from a time period where artists were limited with their 8-bit characters but really wanted to push designing characters that people recognized and felt more of a connection to. In terms of design, they also steered away from just a typical arcade cabinet with a sign to making the game feel like you had created a sort of bar with it’s stained glass title design and the idea that you used beer tap holders for some of the actual controls allowed you to feel more immersed in the world and in character. I thought it was interesting that this game was originally developed to help promote Budweiser and in that case was highly promoted to bars. But after it got construed as advertising alcohol to minors, it changed it’s branding to Root Beer and ultimately found that it had a big market especially with younger players. I think this plays well into the idea that if a game isn’t doing well or is criticized, with so much money put into it that it might be sometimes worth looking at the target audience and who is actually playing the game.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
5 stars! I loved the characters and found the gameplay to be different and refreshing from most video games at that time.

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Pitfall!
Game author (If known): David Crane
Game Studio:Activision (1982)

Original Platform & control mechanism: Atari 2600, joystick

Control mechanism you used: Laptop Keyboard
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
There definitely would be a different experience given that holding a joystick and pressing a button has a different reaction time and feels different from using just a keyboard.

Describe Gameplay and mechanics
In Pitfall, you control a character who has to run through a jungle, getting as many points as possible in twenty minutes. In my case, I had to use the arrow keys on the keyboard to move the character left and right, up and down and the spacebar to jump. The character can only run left to right unless there is a ladder to climb in which case he can then move up and down. The goal is to collect as many treasure chests as possible to rack up points. As they move from left to right, they will enter different scenes with obstacles such as different animals and areas that they have to cross either using a ladder or a swinging from a vine. Getting hit by rolling logs or falling down into a hole will result in losing points, but falling into certain holes like pits, quicksand or swamps or running into the animals will end up costing them one of their three lives. If you lose all three lives, you have to start from the beginning.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
I think two of the biggest strengths of this game is the pace is engaging and the design is pretty clear compared to the other Atari 2600 games I played for today’s journal. There’s definitely an element of each level or scene getting more difficult the further you go through the jungle, and the introduction of new animals and obstacles makes the game exciting and challenging. For design, even with 8-bit characters most of the elements were readable (ex. Logs, crocodiles, ponds vs pits, ladders). I also enjoyed the small animation aspects of it like the pose of the player character in the walk and run and the pendulum swing timing to the vines that you swing across. I think where the biggest weaknesses are is that the game at least to me was difficult to play. There were some areas where you had to jump across a distance in a certain level of time before falling into a pit and I often found that even pressing the spacebar as fast as I could, I couldn’t make it across in time before falling. The other thing that is slightly a negative for me is having to go back to the beginning after you lose three lives. With the chance of losing three lives easily in just one level, it makes it more disheartening to try again if you are forced back to the starting point.


what made it fun?
I used to love the 1994 Disney Nintendo games and the 1999 Tarzan Playstation game so Pitfall in some ways felt very nostalgic to me, especially with the vine swinging, jumping and platform style aspects to it. As compared to the other Atari games we played (Asteroids and E.T.) I thought that Pitfall had more clear controls and objectives from the very start of the game. It was clear that you needed to move forward across the screen, and getting to see new obstacles after going all the way across made it exciting and challenging to try and get across. It also reminded me of Cuphead in that you learn mostly through repetition and simply trying to get through the obstacles, but as you go through the scenes or levels you end up with more and more obstacles that you have to be aware of and counter. I did find that some of the controls/concepts were not clear just from playing the game, such as how to get off the vine and the point of the timer at the top. But I also got stuck at one level losing all three lives multiple times, so I never got the opportunity to play for the full twenty minutes. I can see though how this would be a really fun game to play for people just starting to play games at home, considering with the 20 minute timer that you could easily spend hours trying to get as far as you could in the twenty minutes and then trying to push even further. Some of the obstacles were also unclear (for example whether you would die or just lose points falling into a certain pit) but I think that is also the beauty of these games where with levels with new obstacles, part of the fun is trying it and learning as you go.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I think this game is very influential because of it’s development and difference from other games created for the Atari 2600 system. I noticed playing the other games that even though some of them had fairly simpler concepts like Asteroids, the controls were still tricky. But some other games like E.T. were hard to play because it had a more complex story and goal system, and some people would not be able to understand how to play the game without some sort of guide. Pitfall has a great combination of being progressively more complex, but allowing the player to control more easily and learn through trial and error. One thing I also read about is that the side scrolling genre would end up dominating 8-bit and 16-bit systems. It also helped set up the idea of using the abilities to travel up and down and using multiple levels of play. I also just personally enjoyed and think it opened more of the gaming genres that don’t rely on the player having to be able to shoot the enemies or drive a car, but rather using trial and error to get through obstacles. One thing that I read that is also really insightful is that both Pitfall and it’s sequel have been included as playable easter eggs in Call of Duty titles.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
3.5 stars. I found the game to be fun! But having to start over after losing three lives with so many levels made it difficult to want to play over and over.

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Oregon Trail
Game author (If known) : Don Rawitsch, Bill Heinemann, and Paul Dillenberger in 1971
Game Studio: Minnesota Educational Computing Consortium

Original Platform & control mechanism: HP 2100 Mini-computers

Control mechanism you used: Laptop and keyboard
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
I don't think the experience would have been much different considering this game was played using number and some letter keys on both platforms.

Describe Gameplay and mechanics
In Oregon Trail, you start off as either a banker, carpenter or farmer. Each profession has it’s own advantages and disadvantages in getting through the game. You can travel on your own or you can create up to four additional travelers to go with you. You start off needing to purchase supplies and deciding when you want your wagon to set out. The goal is to get from Independence, Missouri to Oregon’s Willamette Valley. There are sixteen individual segments of the trail, each one with a stop with obstacles or opportunities like crossing a river or going into a fort. At these stops you can chat with travelers, gather supplies or change how your party is traveling (ex. Food rations, traveling pace). Along your travels you will run into obstacles such as loosing food, having a party member get sick or injured, or weather taking a toll on your travels.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
I think one of the biggest strengths of this game is in the amount of choices you can make and the many different ways the story can go. Everything from your chosen profession to how many people in your party, to what supplies you choose and the pace you travel at can affect how the game goes. The art is simple but readable and reflects a western style which is fitting for a game about traveling in a wagon. The gameplay is also simple, as you use simply numbers and simple phrases like ‘yes’ and ‘no’ to answer prompts about choices. One of the weaknesses of design in my opinion though is that it is a very hard game to finish, as often your whole party dies before you get to the end destination. But this may be based off of the reality of the Oregon trail and it’s history.

what made it fun?
I remember playing this game every chance I got as a kid! I would look forward to visiting my best friend when I was nine years old just to get to play the game with her on her computer at home. I never won the game, but I loved the idea of the story changing every time I played. Getting to name your party members, even though you never got to see them allowed you to feel a connection with them if you liked. I often named my party after friends or family members and it made it that much more joyful when they survived or tragic when something happened to them. There were also great moments where during get-togethers, friends or family would gather around the computer and we could name the travelers after the party members, and it would end up in people yelling or laughing if something happened to the traveler named after them. I think what drew me to this game despite it’s difficulty was the idea that the story could change. Now when I play it, it reminds me of D&D, Baldur’s Gate, Dragon Age, The Walking Dead or other games where there is a role-playing aspect and your decisions can affect your party members and how the story plays out. There are definitely some other elements to the game that include more educational aspects like learning to budget your money and making choices of how to cross a river based on the length and depth of it. During my search online to find out more about the history of the game, I came across several Forum sites where people were sharing tips of trading, traveling and keeping party members alive. I think it’s fun to know even today that there are people playing the game and trying to beat it.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
There are many reasons why I consider this game influential, but the number one reason is how it took a part of history and allowed students to connect to it in a way. It was one of the first educational video games of it’s time, and found ways to be both educational and entertaining. The original game was created to teach 8^th graders about the hardships and realities of 19^th-century pioneer life on the Oregon Trail. Not only was the game wildly popular with the students, it was also able to be played on a home computer. I think this game was rather groundbreaking in that it didn’t need to be a first person shooter or a fighting-based game to be liked, and played to the idea that gamers love to make choices and see how the game/story responds in unexpected ways. This was also a game that I think catered to multiple audiences as it entertains both older and younger generations even to this day. Just like Pac-Man and Mario, the Oregon Trail is a game that has been revamped several times over time. I think the fact that they have kept most of the original gameplay and concepts is a testament to how effective the original game was. This fits into the evolution of games because not only were we looking into how to play more games at home, but we were also looking at different genres of games. Despite it’s popularity, I haven’t seen another game exactly like the Oregon Trail or trying to copy the concept, and I think that is because the original is so effective and has an educational purpose that people respect.



How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
5 stars! Every couple of years I still have to try again!

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Microsoft Decathlon
Game author (If known) : Timothy W. Smith
Game Studio: Microsoft

Original Platform & control mechanism: Personal computers with MS-DOS (Microsoft Disk Operating System)

Control mechanism you used: Laptop and Keyboard
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
There might have been small differences but for the most part the gameplay would be the same.

Describe Gameplay and mechanics:
The game is composed of ten events that mirror different track and field competitions. The first is a distance race where you alternate pressing the 1 and 2 key repeatedly to try and get to the finish faster than your opponents. The second challenge is a long jump where you decide the speed you want to approach the jump at. Once you decide your speed, there are different keys you use to start running, plant your feet and jump. Depending on when you hit keys will determine the degree angle and distance that you jump. The third game is a shot put where you have to throw a ball and see how far of a distance you can get across the field. You use the E and L keys to extend and lift your arm in order to throw the ball. The High Jump event is similar to the long jump except you have to clear a bar to land safely in a foam pit. The last type of event is the 110-Meter hurdles where you must use the [ and ] keys for running and hurdling.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
The design though simple has some really fun elements to the animation. The run has more detail than some other games that we played (ex. Pitfall). It includes some breakdowns particularly when the character falls in the long jump and the jump in the High Jump. The 110 Meter hurdles have a run animation that includes more of the main poses and weight shifts that we talk about when learning how to animate a run cycle. I do think certain other animations lack in comparison, for example the landing on hurdles and the run on the Long Jump. I think the game would feel more developed if all of the animations had the same level of breakdowns. I also think it would be more fun/follow more of the general design if there was a way to show the distance races from the same side perspective as the other events/have a combination of the two views.


what made it fun?
I enjoyed that this game had a bunch of little mini games that rely mostly on repetition to get right. My personal favorites were the distance races, but I’m partial to games where you press buttons quickly in a race. It reminds me of old carnival games where the better you aim or the faster you press buttons, the faster your character moves. I also love competitive games that you can play with others where there’s the thrill of having to challenge each other at the same time as compared to taking turns. The other mini games were slightly more difficult to control and figure out, so I found myself having to take a break and try them again to actually understand how to get points. I think this game is great for people who are a little more mathematical and/or analytical because it measures speed and distance. I think it would have been more fun personally if some of the other games combined aspects/game mechanics. For example, I think the hurdles would have been more fun if they incorporated having to tap two keys quickly to make the character run faster, similar to the distance runs. I did find myself laughing a lot at trying the different challenges and at first failing miserably. Especially with the ball toss, the animation was so smooth that you would look forward to raising the arm up and then being either pleasantly or disappointing surprised depending on if the ball flew forward or simple flew back and landed on the ground behind you.



Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I can see how this game would be considered influential especially because it had several mini games that contributed to points as compared to the same gameplay progressively getting harder. It reminds me of games like Mario Party or the new Princess Peach game where there are mini games that help you to build points, and each one has different gameplay and themes. It also allows for multiple multiplayers and was considered a fun party game. It was praised as a long-lasting, quality game and I read several comments of people reflecting on the game fondly. It was considered one of the first sport-related programs to mix simulation and game. While there are other games that focused on sports, I thought it was interesting and cool to see a game focused around Olympic events. I’m not usually a sports person but I’m always very interested in the Olympics and think this game is a fun way to tie into it.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
2.5

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Super Mario Bros.
Game author (If known): Shigeru Miyamoto and Takashi Tezuka
Game Studio: Nintendo

Original Platform & control mechanism: Nintendo Entertainment System/ controller

Control mechanism you used: Keyboard
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
The experience would have definitely been different and in my opinion easier with the controller since the buttons are farther apart and easier to distinguish than keyboard keys.

Describe Gameplay and mechanics:
Super Mario Bros. is a side scroller platform game where you play as Mario and move the character from left to right to get to the flagpole to beat each level. The main way to attack is by jumping on top of enemies. Enemies will respond differently, for example Goombas will be flattened and defeated, but Koopas go into their shells and can then be thrown. Then main things to look for are coins which give points, or boxes with questions marks that release coins or special items. Mario can hit these boxes by jumping at them from underneath. Certain items like the mushrooms or the Fire Flower can give Mario an advantage. There are eight worlds, each with four levels. At the end of the each world, you have to face Bowser. But in the first seven worlds, the Bowsers turn out to be minions in disguise. After you complete the game, you can go back and replay with increased difficulty.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
One thing I love about this game’s design is the simplicity, but clear storytelling. Colors are used to help immerse the player more in the world with stark contrasts between the different elements. (For example, the brown bricks against the blue sky.) I think in this first version, Mario does get washed out a little bit because his brown and white colors are very neutral compared to the bricks and sky. I am happy that they made the choice to change his outfit to red and blue considering it matches the high contrast of the game’s colors and helps him to stand out. The other thing I really like about this game is the simplicity to play it. The only real mechanics you have to use are running and jumping, which makes it a simple game to learn and get the hang of. I also like that there are options to save your work and retry from a certain point verses having to go all the way back to the beginning.


what made it fun?
I personally really enjoy games that are more simple in design and rely on repetition to get better at. Super Mario Bros. has the simple controls of running and jumping, and the general idea is to get through each level collecting as many coins as possible and defeating enemies by jumping on top of them. This is more simple than some of the other games I’ve played where you have multiple buttons you have to press to get certain attacks or even attack combos. With this game, there are still different enemies to fight and different environments to explore which keeps it interesting and fun. I love how a lot of the characters that they developed in this game have been included and even developed further in the later games. I particularly like how they developed the worlds with even aquatic levels and even a fiery underground castle where you have to defeat Bowser and his decoys. I have always been a big fan of the Super Mario Bros. series and love that a lot of the newer games have built on the fundamental principles of the first game. One thing I will say I wish that they established more at the beginning of the game is the sense of storytelling/objective. Unlike The Legend of Zelda Game, the Super Mario Bros game drops you into the world without giving a sense of who Mario is or what he is traveling through the levels looking for. Still, the game proves to be rather fun depending on what your goal is, whether that is trying to get every point possible or just trying to speedrun to get all the way to the Bowser levels.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I think this game along with games that came out during this time like The Legend of Zelda are very influential because there is a narrative and a story that came along with playing the game. It resulted in gamers investing not just in simply playing the game, but wanting to dive further into the story. I especially love that in the later games and even in the movie, they still refer to the ‘Princess is in another castle’ quote that came from the first game. In the later games, you can also defeat Bowser by throwing him into the lava just as you did with the first game. The development of this game is an early example of specialization in the industry where the developers not only thought of simply gameplay, but developing the world, characters, music and sound effects to bring it all to life in storytelling. I think the music in particular of this game along with The Legend of Zelda is highly influential because you can see now how people get a feeling of nostalgia and wanting to play the game simply from hearing the theme music. Even the sound effects like the jump and coin sounds are nostalgic and kind of branded to the Super Mario franchise. Games like Super Mario Bros and The Legend of Zelda also opened up games to the idea of expanding worlds with different elements and designs to keep the world and levels interesting for the players. Unlike some older games that felt confusing or lost when presenting an open world concept, games like the Super Mario Bros. and The Legend of Zelda created worlds that seemed to have purpose and a driving storyline.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
5 stars! Just kept getting better! Waahoo!

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Gunstar Heroes
Game author (If known) : Treasure
Game Studio: Sega

Original Platform & control mechanism: Sega Genesis /Sega Controller

Control mechanism you used: Laptop/ Keyboard
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
I think working with the controller would have definitely been a more fun and engaging experience since the controls are more formatted for gaming.

Describe Gameplay and mechanics
Gunstar Heroes is a run and gun game that is also considered a side scroller. The objective is to take gems from an evil empire. You can play as a single player or multiplayer and can choose the order of how you would like to complete the first four stages. Which some are in a left to right format, some require you to jump up to be able to fight a helicopter, ride a mine cart or even play a board came. It also allows for two different methods of fighting-one where you can have a fixed stance while shooting or one that allows you to move in the direction of your fire. You also start out with a choice of your weapons and can even switch them or combine them later on in the game. That along with being able to jump, slide, grab, throw allows for the player to navigate through the multiple environments and scenarios.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
I really enjoyed the art of this game as it was a good middle ground between the games we played of Sonic (cartoony) and Fatal Fury/Comix Zone (More realistic). The character proportions and designs were distinguishable and appealing, making you want to root for the main characters. There were also side characters rooting for the main characters that helped to develop the story and world further. I was only able to play by myself, but the multiplayer aspect and design of the levels made me think of Cuphead where most of the mechanics are the same in each level, but there are scenarios (like the mine cart) that allow for the player to have to try new tactics and bring a refreshing twist to the game. The gameplay was simple, but allowed for multiple options for how to attack and move around the screen. I also really liked that all of the level designs/character designs felt like they belonged to the same world.


what made it fun?
I was really torn on which game to write about this week! But overall I found this game to be the most entertaining and also dived into design elements that I was hoping to see more of as game development progressed in the Industry. Like I mentioned in my previous answer, the game reminded me a lot of Cuphead with it’s storytelling aspect, multiplayer interaction as well as the run and gun kind of gameplay. I like these kind of games where you don’t have to rely on a partner/can play on your own but there is something fun about defeating a boss/looking out for your game partner. This was also the first game that we’ve played that allows for the player to choose which character, which weapon and which level they want to work with first. I ended up wanting to play it longer simply because the beginning cinematics reminded me of games like Stardew Valley or Kingdom Hearts where you are introduced to new characters, want to get to interact with them more but have to progress further in the game to do so. I really enjoyed the different scenarios that the game put your character in, especially the mine cart and helicopter levels. With the mine cart level, there was a multi-limbed boss that almost acted like it had a spring attached to it with how it moved and the movement was so fluid, I found myself easily distracted by how advanced and cool it looked. The setting with the lights and the descent into the mine was also really engaging and took background design to a new level that I had not seen before in earlier games. With the helicopter level, it reminded me of another 8-bit game called The Expendabros where you have to try to keep up with a helicopter and I think levels where you are forced to keep up with the main enemy always make the level more fun and exciting.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
Upon reading more about these individual games, one thing that particularly drew me towards Gunstar Heroes was that the team who wanted to develop it actually left Konami in 1992 and founded Treasure in order to develop the game idea after it was rejected. The team was frustrated with the Industry’s reliance of sequels and reuse of arcade games/concepts which I think sometimes mirrors today’s industry. I think this game is great because later on in the Industry, even nowadays there are many small studios started by artists who wanted to work on their own projects and ended up being very successful because of it and might have taken inspiration from the Treasure team. The team also approached the concept with an “anything goes” mindset, which led to new discoveries and trying more complex systems in the game like different weapons and styles to the levels. I think this game became highly influential because not only did it encourage more games with co-op and choices, it showed the Industry that gamers liked the new ideas and concepts. In the end, it was a big risk to leave a big name studio and develop their own idea, but it ended being successful and hopefully inspiring many other artists to pursue their own projects even if just on the side.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
5 stars!!

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Super Mario Kart (SNES)
Game author (If known): Shigeru Miyamoto
Game Studio: Nintendo

Original Platform & control mechanism: Super Nintendo Entertainment System/ Game Controller

Control mechanism you used: Laptop/Keyboard
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
I think it would be an easier and more fun experience playing with the controller since I know with racing games, I tend to lean in the direction I'm trying to move and the buttons on the controller are more geared specifically towards the game.

Describe Gameplay and mechanics
In this game, you can play as one of either characters from the Mario Franchise. The game is a kart racing game, and each character has a different kart with different levels of top speed, acceleration and handling. Each character also has different abilities that can give them advantages and items as well. There are four cups or competitions you can enter, and each cup has five different tracks based on locations in the Super Mario World. There are a mix of advantages and obstacles along the tracks. Coins on the ground can help your cart increase speed, and boxes with question marks allow you to pick up a random object that can give you an advantage or objects that can sabotage your opponents. It also has three multiplayer modes that support two players. Those modes allow you to play the same as in the one player, only against each other, or in a battle mode where you have to try to pop each others’ balloons.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
I was really thrown off by the title screen of this game because it looked very 2D with just the side view of the characters driving across a flat plane. But when I started to play the game, I realized just how 3D they made these 2-D characters and space seem using a combination of perspective and scale. I thought the animation was beautifully done, pushing the 8-bit look with multiple perspectives of the characters to make them seem more 3-D when turning or spinning around. The track uses perspective similar in the way that Night Driver did, using a one point perspective to make it seem like you were looking into and driving on a 3-D space. They also used scale so that the closer you get to other racers, the bigger they become. Although I did not play all of the tracks, I thought the artwork used fit the style of the Mario Games and the world without being distracting from the Gameplay.


what made it fun?
I was not sure what to expect when playing this game-playing older versions of some other games like Mario felt underwhelming (as expected) compared to the more current versions. But with this game I found myself pleasantly surprised at how quickly I fell into competitive mode and enjoyed the courses. I think it feels very similar to the current versions of Mario Kart and the multiplayer modes are something I’ve seen continuing even in the newer versions. I found the art style to be very cool compared to current versions because it felt very 3-dimensional despite being made of 2-D characters. While it did not have some of the effects that the current versions have, there were still small 2-D animations that accompanied using the items. I thought compared to some of the games we previously had, there were some game mechanics that I had not seen before such as using an item that could find another racer, certain terrains making a character slow down and feel resistance, and having the ability to see multiple camera views. This is also personally a favorite game of mine that I’ve played with friends and family over time and going back to this version felt very nostalgic. I’m glad that over time they added the ability for more players to join in. This game has been a favorite in the theatre community and I have very fond memories of sitting backstage with friends playing it between scenes of shows.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
The real question I suppose is how can this game be considered NOT influential considering it’s many remakes and timeless gameplay? I think one of the great things about this game is regardless of your level of gaming experience, it’s an easy game to pick up and is a quick favorite for a lot of people. I really enjoy how they kept all of the main elements and gameplay, but just adapted it over time to stay up to date with latest trends and styles. They also evolved from just starting out with the ability for 2 players to play to developing it to let more people play multiplayer. It even was made into an arcade game where players could play multiplayer and choose their own cars, wheels and parachutes.



How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
5 stars!

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Disney's 102 Dalmations: Puppies to the Rescue
Game author (If known):
Game Studio: Toys for Bob

Original Platform & control mechanism: Playstation 1 controller

Control mechanism you used: Laptop keyboard and Mouse
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
Definitely! I feel the gameplay would have been a lot smoother and easier by using the PS1 controller.

Describe Gameplay and mechanics:
In the game, you can choose to play as two Dalmatian puppies-either Oddball or Domino. You can run around different areas of London including Regent’s Park, Piccadilly, Big Ben and Stonehenge. Your goal is to collect bones, find and rescue other puppies and find hidden collectibles and missions. A symbol pops up in the lower right hand corner that shows you what button to press when you are close to certain char symbol pops up in the lower right hand corner that shows you what button to press when you are close to certain characters to interact with them. You also have enemies to fight and run from, as Cruella has reprogrammed toys from her toy factory to try and hurt you. You can either tumble into them or bark at them in order to short circuit them. There are also Cruella’s henchman like Horace and Jasper that will try to capture the puppies, and will need a specific task to be able to defeat.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
I think one of the biggest strengths of this game is the art and the animation. The puppies have realistic run and jump cycles, and follow through and overlap are used believably on their ears and tails. The characters are recognizable despite being slightly blocky when compared to how they look in the movie. The different areas you can explore are vastly different in design and have different tasks and personal challenges that make them engaging. My personal favorite world was the Toy shop where you could control and ride a toy train as well as slide around a ‘pinball’ sort of area where you can bounce off colored objects that light up when you hit them, and if you hit all of them it opens up a secret area where you can find another puppy. Some of the toy designs are really clever as well, such as a punching bag that looks like Horace that bounces around and rocks back and forth. Overall I think the biggest weakness was just missing more to the story.

what made it fun?
I remember LOVING this game as a kid because it was one of the first games where I got to interact with an open world concept and getting to run around as a cute Dalmatian puppy just added to the fun! Now I look at it and wish there was more story involved, but I remember as a kid that the different worlds and their specific tasks/challenges was enough for me to want to come back and play the game again and again. Now it reminds me a lot of the Legend of Zelda games where you have different worlds to explore, and each one has different puzzles. The puzzles also seem very unique and dedicated to their worlds, for example in the museum you can hide in Egyptian tombs to hide from henchmen and sneak around. The ways you can beat the main villains too also add a fun element to the game, for example in one street area where you find Horace, you have to bark at a manhole cover to knock it off and then lead Horace to fall into the manhole. The worlds are all unique and interactable, with moving elements and props like telephone booths where you can go in and bark at the caller. In the museum, you can interact in the different exhibits and do unique things like ride a dinosaur prop to get certain bones. There are several levels to play in, more than I could play in even an hour, and it felt so different compared to other games I had played because of the amount of worlds you could explore. This is also one of the first games I played as a kid where you could actually move the camera around to see all views of the game.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
When I looked up this game, I was slightly sad to see it had not sold as well as I thought it would have. I still think it’s considered influential, considering it not only tackles quadruped animation but also dives into designing more worlds and creating characters. It had average reviews and selling, generating $400,000 in revenue. In the realm of games that came out during this time, I thought it did a great job of combining 3D elements of the characters with 2D elements such as the background textures and the textures on the characters. There were also elements added to the animation, especially with timing and spacing as well as follow through and overlap that allowed the characters to not feel stiff, despite their slightly more blocky forms. There were also elements in each level of the game that pushed the 3D feeling of the world, such as the buses moving around the city areas and the way they laid out the levels.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
4.5, wish there was more story!

[Professor Sidler]

Name of Game: Super Mario 64
Game author (If known): Shigeru Miyamoto
Game Studio: Nintendo

Original Platform & control mechanism: Nintendo 64 Console, Controller

Control mechanism you used: Laptop & Keyboard
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
The experience would have been much more different and fun using the controller, I think the controls would have been much easier to figure out.

Describe Gameplay and mechanics
The game is a 3-D platformer where you control Mario and help him collect stars in order to infiltrate Bowser’s hiding place and save Princess Peach. As Mario you can run, walk, jump, crouch, crawl, swim, climb, kick, grab items and punch enemies/objects. You have to run around Princess Peach’s castle, gathering stars by jumping into paintings and finding the stars located in the world of each painting. In the castle there are fifteen paints which lead to different worlds where you can collect stars. Some worlds or rooms require multiple stars to open. There are multiple objects you can use to your advantage such as hats that give you certain abilities such as being able to fly or immunity. You can also pull certain moves such as running and then jumping to be able to do things like jump a farther distance. Just like the original game, you can additionally aim to gather coins and smash boxes by jump up into them to collect objects or coins.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
I think the biggest touch of the art style that I enjoyed in this game was that they made soft character shapes and recognizable characters even with more angular geometry. I think in addition to building upon the color palette of the world, throughout time they’ve been able to build upon the original character design and still keep the same round, classic personality that we all know and love true to the character. The game has a lot of classic characters from the original Mario game such as the Chain Chomp and the Piranha Plant, and in addition they continue to do an amazing job taking those characters and keeping them true to their original designs while adding animations and tweaks to the character designs that just make them more lovable. I especially love the animations and sounds they do for the Chain Chomp with his little bounces and attacks that make him seem like a rascally dog tethered by a chain waiting for innocent bystanders to walk by.


what made it fun?
I remember this being a timeless game for me growing up because none of the gameplay truly felt repetitive. My sister has a Nintendo 64 and when I go to visit her we often find ourselves revisiting this game. There are a lot of things that are nostalgic and memorable about it over time. For example, I love the painting where you end up in an arctic winter area and have to help a mother Penguin get her baby penguin back. There’s a section in there where you have to slide down the mountain holding the baby penguin, and you cannot punch anything without having to let go of the baby penguin. When you are not holding it, the baby penguin tends to wander and it was hilarious when you tried to fight off enemies and then had to scurry around to find the baby. I have a lot of fun and infuriating memories of having to slide down the mountain with the baby and ending up falling off the side of the slope into the abyss. In addition to having new gameplay moves and abilities, Mario also have new voice lines such as a class “Waaaooo” when he falls that makes people both laugh and feel for the poor plumber. In addition to the more classic levels and worlds, this game allows you to be able to fly or swim and get more immersed in different types of worlds. The soundtracks of the game also add to the nostalgia and fit the same sort of 8-bit style of music that was used in the original game as well.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I think any game that is recreated or has a sequel that is successful is considered influential because it shows how despite age, a lot of people will come back to games and storylines that they know and love. While this storyline is very simple, the side character missions such as saving a baby Penguin make you feel for even the side characters and adds to the endearing qualities of Mario. While I have loved a lot of the Mario games that have come out since this one, I find myself going back to it just to replay certain levels that are nostalgic and just as entertaining as they were the first time. There is even a lot of gameplay that is nostalgic because it has gotten passed through the different games such as the way you hit boxes to get coins or spin Bowser into the lava to beat him. I also love that, like the Legend of Zelda games, the primary objective of the game is always the same, but with slight twists to it every time. For example, the primary objective in all of the Mario games continues to be defeating Bowser and saving Princess Peach. While some people may think the storyline is old or needs additions, I think it’s fun to have a classic objective to go back with side storylines that just change around it.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
5 stars! Now I want to go save that baby Penguin again!