Pac-Man Perfectly Recreated In LBP2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thegide

Bingo. However I've noticed that you can also drop a solid level in their lap and they won't even blink at it. I did manage to get Tom to play my version of Missile Command, but couldn't even get a Yay rating out of him over 3 plays. Go figure.

---

Yeah, seriously. Go figure is right. Missile Command is a better recreation of it's source material than this is... they probably just dig Pac-Man, kinda like they dig goofy, oddball stuff from time to time.

I think if they're told to play your level, they go into it begrudgingly with a "this better be amazing" or they feel like they wasted their valuable time and time is money. Maybe it's a disadvantage to be recommended, unless you're so far beyond perfect, that there's literally no way to not impress.

No wonder I can't make sense of how this all works and am totally fed up with Picks and Cool Levels, ranting in every other thread :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCubbage

If I had tried to build Asteroids, I wouldn't have liked it as much

---

I like that mindstate. It's why I don't want to rebuild the entirety of Symphony of the Night... I simply won't enjoy doing it, but I did enjoy making a *gasp* "zombie" survival out of the idea.

Lots of wise words have been said, still...where are my fun 8-16 bit stuff on LBP? :p
Seriously, I loved Vectroids, L1ghtmare's level (can't remember the name), Alucard level, (not played missile command yet) because they had a twist, they were not a simple rendition of a classic.
I was amazed by Contra, CCubbage's stuff and most of all the calculator in LBP1 because that stuff was mindblowing IN LBP1 and everyone was "WTF", but, well, a PacMan rendition is almost a "given" in LBP2, anyone with a bit of patience can do it, maybe I would need a year, so...what's the deal?
Where's the creativity, the art, the creator spirit beyond the simple skills and patience?
Still, I continue to think that simple stuff, or stuff that just appears simple, in the end are the most fun.
It's not PacMan or the copies that I blame, I blame the lack of will to create something personal, and the MM pick, that I perceive as an encouragement to copy.

Yeah, I would prefer if MM picked original levels over remakes.
I assume it's because remakes attracts more new consumers?

It looks nice, but the cornering is terrible (every time you turn a corner you stop and accelerate in the new direction) and there's no tunnel. How can anyone call that a "perfect" recreation of Pac Man?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin

It looks nice, but the cornering is terrible (every time you turn a corner you stop and accelerate in the new direction) and there's no tunnel. How can anyone call that a "perfect" recreation of Pac Man?

---

It looks like it :p

Agreed, this is technically incredibly impressive. I'm sure it took forever to make and I would believe that this is as close as you can get to a perfect Pac-Man remake in LBP. But is it as fun as the original it's trying to emulate 1:1? No. All it does is invite you to think about how the control isn't quite perfect and the AI ghost routines are too easy.

Like someone else said, I played it once and that's enough. Same with the Donkey Kong one and Zelda labyrinth one. Not trying to be a hater, I definitely appreciate the skill and time investment involved. I still rated them all "yay" for that reason.

I far prefer the levels that are inspired by retro games, but have a unique twist. Vectroids was cool and I found Moon Lander very fun (never played Lunar Lander but it sounds like Moon Lander has enough differences that made it work really well in LBP). The controls on both were perfect and I didn't feel like the game was "compromised" for LBP.

I also really enjoyed Bunchy's Adventure, an original game done in a retro style that has perfect d-pad controls. The Sonic Adventure 3 ones were pretty fun, too. They recreated Sonic's moves in a manner which works in LBP and made original levels using the game's basic mechanics and characters.

I do think Mm is going a bit nuts with the picks for retro remakes. I know they are pushing different styles of games and trying to show what's technically possible with the game engine, but when's the last time a platformer of any kind was even featured? Aside from Hansel and Gretelbot, which was a semi-sponsored project if I recall correctly, I think you have to go all the way back to Rogue Panda Rescue, which I think was there at launch.

Oh well, to each his own, I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tetsujin

the cornering is terrible (every time you turn a corner you stop and accelerate in the new direction)

---

the tunnel is a yeah... probably something he'll work on, but was happy with in the meantime.

...but that issue is 'cause gadgets in LBP require some deceleration time (and therefore, acceleration time) for this kind of movement. Since he's got the 'keep going' mechanic, it needs that, otherwise you'd be trying to get inbetween two walls and align yourself with the space that lets you go another direction, and just keep going back and forth at junctions too quickly to ever get into the gap in the wall so you can start going in a different direction.

Just like there's always a minute frame of delay when you want a NOT to kick on dampening for a fast object.

It's LBP... it is what it is. It's good enough until he designs an entirely different system that will have some other problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OmegaSlayer

Where's the creativity, the art, the creator spirit beyond the simple skills and patience?
Still, I continue to think that simple stuff, or stuff that just appears simple, in the end are the most fun.
It's not PacMan or the copies that I blame, I blame the lack of will to create something personal, and the MM pick, that I perceive as an encouragement to copy.

---

I think that's an overly cynical judgment - to assume that because someone recreated a classic game that they're lacking in creativity or the drive to build something for themselves?

I can't speak for the Pac Man level, but for me, building Donkey Kong was a great way take the new tools out for a spin for a week (and frankly because there were so many bad remakes of it in the first game I figured someone had to step up and do it better) plus I really wanted the challenge of creating something with tools that were not built for that purpose. I can only imagine that that is why mm is picking them; because they push the engine in ways that they perhaps hadn't intended and while not necessarily original or artistic, they're very much technical accomplishments. I still have several original ideas that I'm working on as we speak, and now I have a much better idea of how to go about building them.

I do agree that the retro games are getting a little old, and that perhaps them getting mmpick'd might be encouraging rampant copycats, but you have to imagine that it's inspiring some of these creators to at least try harder. I have no doubt that it won't be too long before people start pushing the envelope in other areas and the retro fad dies off (I personally have no plans for doing another retro level) :)

Most people on here seem to be saying "where's the creativity" but do any of you remember how it was when LBP1 released? It was a sea of crap for a while. This is a whole new game and with the differences, it appeals to a wider audience, one that hasn't played the first one. So, of course there will be the uncreative/"noob" time for a while, then, once the toold get understood better, we will be blown away. There are a few levels / games out there that already, to those of us that can see through them to the logic and inner workings (I personally can't wrap my head around logic yet, but still get how hard it would be to do some stuff) are really impressed with. And about this getting picked and missle command not? Have you seen the complexity of the rules that govern the ghosts in that game versus the nonexistant AI in missle command? Case closed. I do agree it needs a tunnel to the other side, but other than that, it is perfect, which is hard to do.
I've said my peace. Farewell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Super_Dork_42

Have you seen the complexity of the rules that govern the ghosts in that game versus the nonexistant AI in missile command? Case closed.

---

What's your point...two completely different retro games...no need to disparage Missile Command, all that matters is if it's fun, not how difficult it was to create in LBP2. I'm totally fine with people wanting to remake retro games if that's what makes them happy (there's also clearly an audience for it) but getting the game play right is of paramount importance...not just a superficial similarity in appearance.

I don't care how complicated the logic is for the ghosts in this Pac-man remake...they basically didn't care that I was there. If you're talking specifically about thegide's Missile Command...there's a huge difference...it actually plays correctly, has a discernable difficulty progression, correctly tallies score based on remaining cities/ammo...awards bonus cities, etc. Let's face it, the visuals for these retro games is super easy to achieve now...without getting the game play right you have nothing to write home about. This Pac-man is LBP2 good only...if this had been the version released in the arcades 20 years ago it would have tanked and no-one would be recreating it today.

Vectroids is a great example of how to do retro right...what makes it great is how it plays...everything is rock solid and just feels right. You really can create fun arcade style games in LBP2, we should applaud the ones that play great and not just the ones that look great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Super_Dork_42

(I personally can't wrap my head around logic yet, but still get how hard it would be to do some stuff) are really impressed with. And about this getting picked and missle command not? Have you seen the complexity of the rules that govern the ghosts in that game versus the nonexistant AI in missle command? Case closed.

---

False.

The Ghosts don't detect Pac-Man and start following him. They don't scatter to 4 corners. They meander around mindlessly. The AI in the Pac-Man level = a sequencer playing through followers with a skinny radius, one for each direction, and follow whatever tag that happens to be in the the line of sight of the current sequencer position's active follower. If it's not that, then it's overcomplicated for the actions they perform... or don't perform in this case.

There is none of the strategic path finding and player tracking that you seem to think there is. They don't spot Pac-Man, detect their environment, and understand the fastest route to get to him. It's like you're not even there, and they just go around and around in different directions. There is, in fact, no AI whatsoever. It's cycling through UP, DOWN, LEFT, RIGHT in an unwavering sequence. It's the equivalent of setting a sackbot to follow green tags, and turning them on and off with a randomizer.

I gave gurichan his props for coming up with the simple movement system and a nice presentation, but what's happening in Missile Command is far more complex than that and requires much, much more variable tracking for scoring, memory (remaining units as stored values to be reemitted each round) & controlled randomization. Thegide's randomization for missile seeding, that scales in difficulty every round, by itself is actual AI, much more advanced than cycling between quasi-directional tag followers. You VS an opponent who is completely unpredictable and will eliminate you sooner or later.

This Pac-Man level is an endurance challenge with little to no scaling in challenge. It's an endless cycle of stage 1.

I think these kinds of misconceptions about what goes into a creation, or the process of complex creation in general, is why many creators and many immense endeavors never get the respect they really deserve as logistical wizardry, while many get relatively undue praise as magic tricks.

Well, I can't speak for Gurichan's stuff, but I can say from firsthand experience that it was no walk in the park to program the scalable difficulty I used in my level. For a project that was incredibly simple on the graphics front, it took an incredibly long time to hammer out a game that felt like it was progressing.

As for AI, I could have upped the difficulty and programmed my missiles to be a bit more intelligent and strategically target remaining bases/cities, but the game gets hard enough quickly enough that that would have been unfair. If you want to discuss the difference between sequenced "random" behaviour and AI, then consider the difference between the regular missiles and the smartbombs or MIRVs. My regular missiles are fired off from random points at randomly chosen target points. What gets fired off and when is sequenced, but because the source and targets are randomized, the game plays differently every time. But this is not AI. The MIRVs I designed are essentially regular missiles that have a chance to split apart at some point during their fall. If and when they split apart is random, but I designed the system so that these events occur more frequently, and earlier, as the game progresses. This is not sequenced. The smartbombs I designed are probably the most akin to true AI. These are regular missiles that detect and evade detonations in their path. They actively deviate from their chosen paths to avoid being hit. The player must use better targeting and fire missiles from the center base (faster missiles) in order to hit them effectively. This also, is not sequenced.

If I were to go the pac man route (and I almost did), I would probably have implemented things differently than Gurichan. You can still get strategic path finding using nodes, but a logic system that chooses which node to go to next would need to take into account where pac-man is. I'm not saying this is an easy feat, but nodes could be weighed by a combination of the ghosts' AI tendencies and proximity to pacman. You can do wonderful things with direction combiners, and logic gates with partial strength batteries and tags, which effectively lets you make choices based on proximity.

At the end of the day, though, all the technical wizardry in the world doesn't matter to most of the LBP community, and this is pretty disheartening. Regurgitations of recognizable content will always trump artistic quality, intelligent design, and technical complexity. If you want your 500k plays pin, I suggest you forget being innovative or original and go with simple and recognizable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NinjaMicWZ

the tunnel is a yeah... probably something he'll work on, but was happy with in the meantime.

...but that issue is 'cause gadgets in LBP require some deceleration time (and therefore, acceleration time) for this kind of movement. Since he's got the 'keep going' mechanic, it needs that, otherwise you'd be trying to get inbetween two walls and align yourself with the space that lets you go another direction, and just keep going back and forth at junctions too quickly to ever get into the gap in the wall so you can start going in a different direction.

---

I think all these problems are perfectly solvable. If gurichan fixes that stuff, then we can maybe start talking about the level as something approaching a "perfect" clone of pac man...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thegide

At the end of the day, though, all the technical wizardry in the world doesn't matter to most of the LBP community, and this is pretty disheartening.

---

I don't think that's disheartening...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thegide

Regurgitations of recognizable content will always trump artistic quality, intelligent design, and technical complexity.

---

...But that is. I mean, all the complex logic in the world doesn't (and shouldn't) mean anything if the level isn't fun. But I agree, it sucks that people will flock to games that they've already played in an environment that's better suited to play them. I can also understand the frustration in seeing MM do the same when there's so much deserving content out there that is either completely original or a remake that pays tribute without being a complete rehash.

I have to admit, though, that having the Zelda and Pac-Man levels did serve a purpose to me when I was demonstrating the game to someone who asked exactly what was possible in the LBP2. It really does show the open type of environment for creating games that LBP2 delivers. However, after showing them those levels, I remember saying, "So, if they can do this stuff now, imagine what's possible." I think MM may be thinking the same way. Perhaps it's not so much that those levels have been made, it's that those levels can be made...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nextlevel88

I mean, all the complex logic in the world doesn't (and shouldn't) mean anything if the level isn't fun.

---

I can't speak for anybody else, but that's never the polarized examples I mean. I'm talking about stuff that was fun, looks amazing, and obviously has wayyyyy more going on behind the scenes to make it work than the next level that is fun and looks amazing. I can't, personally, be amazed by something I could make in my sleep but that's only because I'm a creator and a player. I feel the same way about the logistics of a creation, as I do about the aesthetics & the gameplay. Those logistics often power the most memorable moments and elements of a deceptively simple game: like a run & jump platformer's ingenious obstacle behavior. There are many levels of what's good and what's not, and it can just vary from instance to instance, or a few things can be so outstanding in a level, that other flaws are forgivable.

For the rest of what you said... you're right. MM likes to pander to the lowest common denominator in alot of ways, and it almost is the nature of the game they designed, and of being game designers. Find something in the community that can convey the sales pitch, and LBP2 as a fun hobby will sell itself. I'm sure they're not too keen to show anything that's too mindbogglingly complex, though, or people will just assume that making anything good or successful in LBP is too hard so "why bother" : that was already a stigma that comes with the notion that building a decent level in LBP1 takes more than an hour and "I don't have the time for this" being a big deterrent.

We are, and always will be, a very, very small minority with no diplomacy and no place in the financial scheme. However, they want people to form teams and be amazing with professional marketing, because it will sell LBP2's image as "a platform for games" anytime something becomes an internet phenomenon... but, I don't see how they can expect people to feel motivated to fail as a group, rather than as individuals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NinjaMicWZ

I'm a creator and a player.

---

This really is the biggest part of it, I think. I may have mis-spoke earlier when I said "...all the logic in the world doesn't mean anything..." because I didn't add "to the average player". I'm the same way you are, when I see a piece of technical wizardry going on behind the scenes of a level, or come across a part that makes me go "How did they do that?!", I recognize it just as quickly as the pretty artwork or clever platforming. It reminds me a lot of progressive rock music. To the average listener, they don't get it, which is displayed by the sales of that type of music compared to others. They just think of it as ****ery-sounding guitars and keyboards and out of beat drums. But among musicians, that type of music is revered for it's unmatched level of technicality.

I also think it may be a bit early to get discouraged. Most people who play games have a form of undiagnosed ADD, which is common knowledge among developers. The ones that don't have it play Call of Duty online from the day it's released until the day the sequel is released. Most of the rest of us play a game until we tire of it and move on to the next one. It's imperative that that doesn't happen with this game because if people move onto something else, there's no players left, then there's no one to create for, then there's no one to buy DLC. If MM can get the idea out early that you absolutely must keep coming back to this game, it's good for everyone in the community. I think creations like these do just that. However, you're exactly right, they need to start praising some of the more original and complete concepts. They try to convince their player-base to keep coming back to LBP in-between the 300 other AAA-quality PS3-exclusives coming out this year. But there's no sense in it if you don't keep some of the talented people here creating something for them to come back to.

EDIT: Wow, that was some ugly sentence structure at the end there. Hope you understood everything. Also, wan.ker.y is an informal musical term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nextlevel88

EDIT: Wow, that was some ugly sentence structure at the end there. Hope you understood everything. Also, wan.ker.y is an informal musical term.

---

Down with censorship!

how can it perfect if it reproduces just the first stage, and not perfectly at that.
I mean sure, okay, you can call it a faithful recreation of pacman, but why use the word perfect? Irks me.


oih and regarding AI in pacman:

Quote:

---

Instead, it’s only Blinky, the red ghost, who doggedly pursues you throughout the game. Pinky, the pink ghost, simply wants to position itself at a point that’s 32 pixels in front of Pac-Man’s mouth. The blue ghost, Inky, is seeking to position itself at a similar fixed spot. And Clyde, the orange ghost, moves completely at random.

---

it doesn't get more advanced than that.

He should add the Google stage as an easter egg!

I must admit I was a little disappointed in the ghost behaviour (or lack of), but the tunnel being closed off actually surprised me as it's pretty easy to do.
That said, I appreciate the AI is an enormous hassle to make. I started out making a pac-man level myself - the maze prototyping tools I made developed into a level editor for the racing game in my sig, but more relevantly I decided to start developing the AI for CPU Controlled cars in this game first, on the grounds I thought it would be easier to get the basics right on a track.

All that had to do was figure out how to navigate player-made tracks - andI still tore my hair out for hours until I cracked it;)