Support NeoGAF

[Belfast]

I'm trying to think back and all I really come to are Japanese games. Early stuff like Pong or Space Wars, of course, were simple game of competition. Most of the Atari games I can think of repeated the same basic map or screen over and over again, sometimes with the gameplay having different colors or a harder challenge. Essentially, though, it stayed the same.

Can anyone think back to what might've been the first video game with levels as we know them today? Different courses with different objectives, or at least, different means of completing those objectives? Would it be safe to assume that, even if they weren't the first, was Japan the driving force behind this kind of game structure?

I'm really curious, but I'd like to see if any of you historians out there can help me out a little.

 

[Desperado]

Games? what are those?

 

[Belfast]

Games? what are those?

Yeah, yeah, I'm movin' it. I just got to caught up in trying to research something to realize I posted in the wrong forum.

 

[monchi-kun]

pitfall?

 

[MightyHedgehog]

I dunno about the first ones, but there were a lot of early console games that featured multiple inconnected screens, if that's what you mean. Pitfall! (A2600), Pitfall II (A2600), Smurfs (Colecovision), Raiders of the lost Ark (A2600), Riddle of the Sphinx (A2600), Adventure (A2600), Haunted House (A2600), Swordquest series (A2600), etc. As for new levels, games like Keystone Kapers (A2600), Lode Runner (8-bit computers), Spelunker (8-bit computer), Bagman (arcade), Boulderdash (8-bit computers), etc.

 

[bjork]

gyruss?

I have no idea.

 

[Belfast]

I dunno about the first ones, but there were a lot of early console games that featured multiple inconnected screens, if that's what you mean. Pitfall! (A2600), Pitfall II (A2600), Smurfs (Colecovision), Raiders of the lost Ark (A2600), Riddle of the Sphinx (A2600), Adventure (A2600), Haunted House (A2600), Swordquest series (A2600), etc. As for new levels, games like Keystone Kapers (A2600), Lode Runner (8-bit computers), Spelunker (8-bit computer), Bagman (arcade), Boulderdash (8-bit computers), etc.

No, I don't really mean things like Pitfall or Adventure where the screens were interconnected. That was only a technical limitation of being able to display so much on the screen. You can't sit there and say "I beat the last level on Pitfall, woohoo!" It just doesn't work for that type of game.

Some of the other ones you cited seem to apply, but were they the first? I'm thinking of things more along the line of Donkey Kong or Galaga or something, where you have a distinctive break in-between sections, usually indicated by an on-screen notification. What I'm trying to ascertain is whether or not this method of game progression began in the West or in Japan.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

OK. That would be very hard to figure for the western side since there were so many platforms at the time (late Seventies, early Eighties). But finding out when the Japanese did it first should be easier since the vast majority of those games were released as arcade titles. Still, not that easy I suppose.

I think Donkey Kong would be the first, with games like Lode Runner and Boulder Dash following in its wake.

 

[bjork]

Probably the only way to tell this would be with a goodset of old arcade roms, no?

note: the above is in no way endorsing or recommending anything kthx

 

[Belfast]

OK. That would be very hard to figure for the western side since there were so many platforms at the time (late Seventies, early Eighties). But finding out when the Japanese did it first should be easier since the vast majority of those games were released as arcade titles. Still, not that easy I suppose.

I'm personally leading towards the Japanese, due to the very nature of those early arcade titles. Games as early as Pac-Man were divided into "Acts," for instance. I agree that's the best way to assess the Japanese side of things. Perhaps there were a few Western games that incorporated such elements at the time, but the fact that they no longer remain part of the gaming consciousness renders their potential contributions obselete.

As a trend, I'm pretty sure the Japanese were the major force behind levels.

 

[HyperZone<3]

dunno, but I'm pretty sure that Kung-Fu , aka Kung-Fu Master pioneered end-level bosses. If I'm wrong somebody please let me know.

 

[Of All Trades]

You really need to lock down your criteria. That said, Asteroids probably wins as later levels introduced more rocks and those flying saucers and the game still remains a part of the " gaming consciousness". Released 1979.

 

[Callo Merlose]

It also pioneered bad guys lauging at your death and an awesome boing sound.

 

[Of All Trades]

dunno, but I'm pretty sure that Kung-Fu , aka Kung-Fu Master pioneered end-level bosses. If I'm wrong somebody please let me know.

I'd be inclined to say Gorf or Satan's Hollow beat Kung-Fu, just two name a couple.

Also on the "levels" front, Pleiades had 4 different levels, each with fairly different requirements. It's predecessor, Phoenix, had an "end-boss" as a mothership, too (after beating it you started over again).

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Sinistar

Jungle Hunt/King

Damn, forgot about those old shooters (Gorf, Pleiades)...

Space Duel expanded on Asteroids by adding more visual and challenge variety to each successive level.

 

[Belfast]

You really need to lock down your criteria. That said, Asteroids probably wins as later levels introduced more rocks and those flying saucers and the game still remains a part of the " gaming consciousness". Released 1979.

I've already said that games that simply increase the difficulty/number of enemies does not fit the criteria. BTW, Pac-Man predates Gorf. Honestly, though, even the arcade games can be hard to parse, because many of them were released in the US via Western Arcade manufacturers. Pac-Man is a Namco creation, but many of the cabinets sport the "Midway" logo.

 

[DeadTrees]

...Colossal Caves ?

Hey, it fulfills the "different objectives, or at least, different means of completing those objectives" part.

Would it be safe to assume that, even if they weren't the first, was Japan the driving force behind this kind of game structure?

On their own? Nah. The Wizardry/Ultima games, and their imitators, had dungeon level 1, level 2, etc.

RAM and CPUs suitable for arcade games weren't exactly commodity items back then, so it took a while before separate environments became feasible.

 

[Of All Trades]

I've already said that games that simply increase the difficulty/number of enemies does not fit the criteria. BTW, Pac-Man predates Gorf. Honestly, though, even the arcade games can be hard to parse, because many of them were released in the US via Western Arcade manufacturers. Pac-Man is a Namco creation, but many of the cabinets sport the "Midway" logo.

Gorf was an example of endbosses predating Kung-Fu Master.

As for Asteroids, I'm pretty sure the saucer doesn't show up until the 2nd level or so, so it's more than just a difficulty increase, especially if you're going to say that Pac-Man's "acts" count as anything. If that doesn't do it for you, then Battlezone definately added different enemies as you went through levels.

Of course, if my suspicions are correct, your latent japanophilia will result in you inventing some arbitrary reason for those not counting, too.

Frankly, I just want to say Tempest wins because Tempest is fucking awesome.

 

[Belfast]

Gorf was an example of endbosses predating Kung-Fu Master.

As for Asteroids, I'm pretty sure the saucer doesn't show up until the 2nd level or so, so it's more than just a difficulty increase, especially if you're going to say that Pac-Man's "acts" count as anything. If that doesn't do it for you, then Battlezone definately added different enemies as you went through levels.

Of course, if my suspicions are correct, your latent japanophilia will result in you inventing some arbitrary reason for those not counting, too.

Frankly, I just want to say Tempest wins because Tempest is fucking awesome.

The idea of "levels," in my opinion, is as much an aesthetic indicator as it is an actual change in game content. Sure, all games have a general increase in difficulty as progression is made, but there must be something more than that there to constitute level *structure.* If there is no change in structure, I assert that there is no change in level. The playing field in Asteroids is always the same, only the number and frequency of asteroids on-screen changes. The UFO is introduced in "level 2," but the levels are meaningless without a completion goal. There is no justification for the UFO showing up other than giving you an extra challenge.

Pac-Man has interstitials between each Act which serves the purpose of a crude narrative, as well as the introduction of a new maze structure. Granted, there really is no end-state to Pac-Man. You can play near endlessly, but the rudimentary functions of a "level structure" are there.

Tempest, however, is a good example of Western level design, especially since it appeared around the same time as Pac-Man did. Each level has its own, distinctive shape with its own distinctive set of enemies.

 

[Cosmozone]

I'd say Phoenix. Two Galaxian like stages first, then those birds. Battleship at the end.
From my mind. For better information, there are good web sites around like classic arcade gaming, etc.

 

[DDayton]

How about Space Invaders, or Breakout? Both games game you a screen of things to eliminate... doing so ended that screen/wave/level and began a new one.

 

[Laguna X]

Wasn't there a Breakout game on the old Magnavox Odyssey? That would pre-date all of what's been suggested.

 

[FlyinJ]

I'm going with Phoenix as well. Not only did it have distinctive "levels", it also had the mothership endboss... which was a distinctly different level itself.

 

[Starfire]

The earliest game I've played that didn't feature Atari 2600 style pallete swaps, but changing levels with different objectives was Vanguard for the 2600, every level had a different facade (although some were merely pallete swaps). Every few levels the game would switch to a vertical-shooter where dodging obstacles was an integral key to the level, after every so many levels and a crude "cinematic" ending, it cycled back to the beginning(IIRC it displayed level numbers like 1-2, 1-3, 1-4, etc.. too, but I might be wrong, I haevn't played it for awhile). Also one of the first games I can remember with a pause function and in-game pause menu. Probably by no means the first game to feature multiple levels, but it was the only game I can remember playing on the 2600 that had multiple environments(I don't know when the game was developed, and I wasn't even alive when the 2600 had it's heyday so I'm not much of a historian.)

There was another Sh'mup that changed enemy sprites and the enemies changed their tactics every level too (kill a certain number, move on, kill even more, move on, kill even more, move on) but the name escapes me and it looked like it was developed later in the 2600s life span.