Found it very entertaining. I will vote YES!

I was entertained by this; given how hard the game is to finish unassisted (I have some painful memories of it), and given how other Atari games compare, I can vote nothing but yes on this.

What an incomprehensible game. I never played this one growing up. Yes vote because I was entertained, and because I want to see the 2600 section populated. It's likely that only people that owned or played an Atari will be interested in watching movies in that section, but that's a risk I'm willing to take. :p

Yech, awful system, boring run. No vote.

What is this?.. I..no.. just no!

Yes vote because I was entertained, and because I want to see the 2600 section populated. It's likely that only people that owned or played an Atari will be interested in watching movies in that section

That's always true, imo. I have yet to find a movie that sparked an emotional interest that wasn't on a system I played myself.

I vote meh. Too much standing in one place. Someone do Pitfall II!

I suffered as a child to play this. Spent hours on it. Never once beat it.

Same goes for me. Except not only did I never beat it, I never had the faintest idea wth I was supposed to do! Now King Tutankhamun on the other hand, was one HELLUVA game for Atari. Voting meh since I'm now more aware of the goals of the game and I know about it, but I can also see how someone might think it's the most boring run of all time.

I had an Atari when I was really little. Don't remember any games in particular. I think it got put in the closet and never came out again once we got the NES. I like to think that video games are art. But Atari 2600 games are just flashing lights moving around the screen with random blips from the speakers. There is a reason why the American games industry collapsed! Meh for this and for the whole console.

I voted yes, as per the hopefully soon to be new rule about game choice.

I voted yes, as per the hopefully soon to be new rule about game choice.

There'a a new rule? Anyway, I think Atari games should be judged differently since most of them in my opinion either look awful or puts people to sleep.

I voted yes, as per the hopefully soon to be new rule about game choice.

There'a a new rule? Anyway, I think Atari games should be judged differently since most of them in my opinion either look awful or puts people to sleep.

There was discussion in irc about plans to remove bad game choice as a reason to reject a run.

There was discussion in irc about plans to remove bad game choice as a reason to reject a run.

If bad game choice was removed as a reason, I think the voters and judges will simply replace it with "Lack of entertainment" or something along those lines. :P

Hello. I have been a lurker of TASVideos for an extremely long time now (About 5 years I think) and this discussion of this system catches my eye enough that I wanted to register so I could speak my mind. I have always enjoyed watching TAS videos of games I have played, regardless of how poor the game is or how it lacked entertainment value. I have perused the Gruefood Delight section to watch games that are listed in it because they appealed to me. I can certainly understand that the purpose of this site is to post only cream of the crop, quality entertainment TAS runs that the lay-person can enjoy and as such you have a voting process that determines both the entertainment value and the technical quality of what the person has pulled off. However it seems like everyone who votes on these things are either gamers or TASers and in a way that probably makes some of you less qualified to actually judge the true entertainment value of these games. I have tried to show some non-gamer friends from work the Super Mario 64 BLJ videos and they just kind of stare for a bit and nod and say "Oh, neat." and do something else. Super Mario 64, considered one of the star videos of this site and I can call upon at minimum three non-gamer friends who found it boring and at least two gamer friends who never played the game and quit watching before long. It is difficult to determine exactly what is entertaining about a run. Most of the runs with high entertainment value are the games that are popular, varied in execution but also very well played by many people. I find that the more niche games that some people may enjoy to do and watch would be voted down on entertainment value by sheer fact that it may very well BE boring to watch yet to anyone who has ever played it they may find it the most entertaining thing they've seen. When a person is introduced to TASing and wants to come to this site to watch TASes of games, are they here to only watch what the TASVideo Voting Staff has deemed to be "acceptably entertaining" or do you think they'll come here and look for games that they personally know, love and want to see? I can tell you that I found this run very entertaining as it is a game I have played and suffered at. I also found ET very entertaining and I have played it. I understand what Gruefood Delight is and I know if a game isn't in one of the sections I can always go there to see if maybe the game is hiding in this unknown section of the site that most people would have to stumble upon and wouldn't understand what's there and why, so I have to ask everyone who votes and runs the process on the site this simple question. When you vote a game as not entertaining and don't publish it, do you think a person who has played the game and wants to see a TAS of it understands why the game he wants to see isn't and will never show up? He likely doesn't read submissions or forums or rules. He comes in, looks up videos for games he wants to see and that is that. I am sorry that I used this spot for such a long post but this is one of two games for a new system to TAS that I would LOVE to see be TASed. Yet the best of the system is being voted as boring, uninteresting and not worth the time. I say that to me, anything I want to watch is worth my time, regardless what anyone else votes it as. Thank you if you read it all. -Tinari

Well, we can't have a TAS of every game; after all: -Some games are neverending -Some games (like Myst DS or whatever) are made so that there would hardly be any "TAS"-like elements other than superfast menu navigation (which means incredibly easy to perfect) -Some games are just too boring and slow paced.

meh DO MORE DURING THE LONG WHATE!

This game can be understood and even have and END?? O___o for that alone it's a Yes to me >_>

this is one of two games for a new system to TAS that I would LOVE to see be TASed. Yet the best of the system is being voted as boring, uninteresting and not worth the time.

I think there's only one person who suggested that Atari games are all boring. Other people have been suggesting Atari games like Custer's Revenge, Pitfall and Pitfall II that would make good games for entertaining runs. This game and E.T. definitely do not represent the best games for the system.

Voted yes, and I'd be delighted if "Bad Game Choice" were removed as a rejection criterion. This run illustrates why perfectly. To those who have no interest in Atari games, this just looks like an incomprehensible mess. To those who played it or otherwise find the system to be of historical and technical interest, it's a really excellent run. Context is everything.

Yes vote. I'm a bit surprised to see so many 'no' votes, especially since the game seems so much better than E.T. which was submitted about the same time. I'm sure there are plenty of bad Atari games and all the bad graphics will draw plenty of 'no' votes, which is a bit sad. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there that played a bunch of these Atari games when they were younger and would love to see them destroyed as a TAS.

this is one of two games for a new system to TAS that I would LOVE to see be TASed. Yet the best of the system is being voted as boring, uninteresting and not worth the time.

I think there's only one person who suggested that Atari games are all boring. Other people have been suggesting Atari games like Custer's Revenge, Pitfall and Pitfall II that would make good games for entertaining runs. This game and E.T. definitely do not represent the best games for the system.

I understand what you mean and I did use an overly large blanket. I have seen a lot of videos in my years lurking go to the wayside on the fact they were boring. The site needs to determine if they want to be a site dedicated to "Tool-assisted superplay movies" or if they're going to try to show only TAS videos that are interesting to a wider-base of non-TAS viewers. As far as the Atari 2600, Pitfall 2 has it's own sound chip in the cartridge which allowed to to have the catchy music that was in it and it is possibly ripe for TAS. Pitfall 1 has a timer that cannot be sped up to my knowledge. Without a good case of game-breaking glitch, I can't see how it would be a good TAS. Custer's Revenge is a pornography Atari game where you have sex with a bound indian. As far as other games that Atari may have that would TAS really well would be perhaps the ever-famous Adventure. There aren't a good number of games though that have solid roots. Could we determine that maxing out the score is qualification for ending a TAS, as there have been plays of Tetris with "maxes out the score" as qualifications. Vanguard may be interesting to see or the Swordquest series if they're breakable. Centipede or Milipede if we put a score they're trying to reach or just trying to get to a certain level I suppose. Pole Position, just clear a race and call that good? Haunted house was mentioned and I do think that is good. We could also see Dig Dug or Gaunted House. Mr. Do, Smurfs, Burgetime? Fact is, there are lots of games and I am sure I can't even remember all the games that would make great games to see TASd when you get right down to it. Boxing would be interesting though it's time limited. It was great in it's day yet it's another I do have to admit would be less than stellar without breaking the game in some way. Another thing to think about, and I am not a TAS person so keep me honest, wouldn't these games with tiny bits of code be less prone to full out game-breaking as it feels like TAS has evolved into compared to before? With small code-base, they're usually more tightly knit due to the fact they had to conserve space down to the level of characters saved here and there. Maybe that opens up new possibilities? Regardless, I am sure that the people who have put their blood, sweat, and tears into TASVideos and making such are the ones who need to answer what they want best for the site. A site dedicated to displaying in some way any TAS that has technical merits for the game, regardless of how boring it is due to the game itself, or a site about the art of TASing where one can subjectively decide if something should stay or go. Cheers, -Tinari

As far as the Atari 2600, Pitfall 2 has it's own sound chip in the cartridge which allowed to to have the catchy music that was in it and it is possibly ripe for TAS. Pitfall 1 has a timer that cannot be sped up to my knowledge. Without a good case of game-breaking glitch, I can't see how it would be a good TAS.

Same as this game:

This game has a global clock, by which many things depend. For instance, to see the map, you have to wait for the "sun" to light up the map room. This can take several minutes. In fact, this is about 50% of the time of the best unassisted runs (which run about 7 minutes). Since I have the power of tool-assistance, I don't need a map, I know where the ark is, so I can avoid this 3+ minute frame rule, whew!

I haven't played most Atari games. Pole Position might be interesting to see TASed, if it's not too similar to the Rad Racer TAS (one of the most boring on the site, as evidenced by the rating). Multiple TASes of the NES version of Dig Dug have been rejected, so I wouldn't suggest that one. I've only played the arcade version of Pitfall II on MAME, and it was pretty hard, but it would be interesting to see it TASed.

Custer's Revenge is a pornography Atari game where you have sex with a bound indian.

O.o I should have looked that game up before repeating that person's suggestion. I like your suggestion of having a score to shoot for. I hope that becomes a new rule for Atari games, since a lot of them apparently don't have endings.

No, not at all. The timer is Pitfall is how long you have to play the game and collect points. Imagine if Super Mario BRos. was a large single level with no end, with a timer that started at 999 and counted down, and you were supposed to explore the level and get as many points as possible while doing it.

Except in Super Mario Bros, the level ends when you reach the goal. In Pitfall, does the game end after you collect all the treasure, or do you have to wait for the timer to run out?