Context

Computer games have had a short but rapidly changing history. Videogame engines have not only evolved but expanded to a multitude of possibility. Consequently, the conservation and durability of the game itself depends heavily on the ease of adaptation it features. For instance, Pac-Man and Tetris have remain relevant names in the gaming community’s imaginary, yet they were created forty years ago. Both games were released in 1980 and 1985 respectively, and Pac-Man along with Q*bert they were on of the most popular games during the arcade “golden age”. In fact, they are very similar in theory. Firstly, both Pac-Man and Q*bert require the player to perform a task while escaping enemies that follow the character. Furthermore, while Tetris is solely a puzzle game, the other two share in this characteristic as the character’s movements require thoughtful action. In fact, the three games are won if the player adequately examines the screen and predicts the next movements based on the present information. Indeed, the need for fast and measured reaction made the games more demanding in the arcade setting.  It is important to note, that these games are coin operated, and that “and every game, every life, every mis-timed cornering manoeuvre, dents not only the ego but the wallet” (Newman, 7).  Therefore, when the conditions of gameplay migrated to at home consoles and personal devises the games become endangered due to the difference in its social aspect. The adaptations need to ensure a similar feel to the gameplay to make up for the lack of urgency in the dynamic of the player game interaction. However, while Pac-Man and Tetris easily survived the transition, Q*bert was not as successful.

Video games are very fragile artifacts, that are exposed to a series of obstacles of conservation since their release. Evidently, the change in technology is a considerable factor as this affects both the interaction, display, and accessibility of devised that are no longer produced. In particular, Q*bert experiences challenge because personal devises are not consistent with the diagonal movement provided by a joystick. For instance, Atari 2600 adapted the game in 1983, and had specific instructions for the game to be played with the console’s joystick instead of its “paddle controllers” to facilitate the diagonal movement (Hodges, 1594).  However, the different adaptations of Q*bert required the game to change the control interactions between player input into the control and the character’s output in the screen. Specifically, along the years the consoles stopped supporting or producing joysticks. The paddle style controls supported by the current generation of gaming engines do not facilitate the diagonal movement necessary to navigate along the pyramid. Even a touchscreen, where the user has more freedom of direction proposes a challenge. In my experience playing the mobile version of Q*bert the diagonal command is difficult to envision when one is accustomed to move in the x and y axis.