Is Pac-Man objectively a bad game due to being entirely deterministic and relatively easy to solve compared to other more complex deterministic games?
>>12852827
>>12852827 99.9% of people playing it under normal conditions would not be able to "solve" it, especially not to the point of being able to reliably play it to a kill screen. People will pick up on patterns and strategies and such simply by paying attention, but hardly anybody would be able to do much more than that while just playing it at an arcade, or even on a home port. Sure it seems easy now when you can just go on YouTube and search for PacMan ghost pattern analysis videos and follow along with whatever one of them says to do, but those resources didn't always exist.
>>12852827this template was already pretty unfunny the first time.
>>12852842?
The primary objective of games is to entertain.Pac-Man at some point in my life did entertain me (though not much). Not objectively bad.
>>12852827No. Only the most autistic of people would be willing to put the time and effort in for even trying to get to the kill screen.
>>12852827>itt a child tries to use they/thems world of the daylike deterministic
>>12852827>was this game that grew to be a cultural phenomenon and icon of early '80s gaming actually bad?you need to kill yourself at your earliest convenience.
