Slashdot Mirror


A Playable PAC-MAN On Google Doodle

Kilrah_il and several other readers made sure we noted Google's tribute to PAC-MAN on its 30th anniversary — a playable game implemented in JavaScript. "'To play the game, go to google.com during the next 48 hours (because it's too cool to keep for just one day) and either press the "Insert Coin" button or just wait for a few seconds.' There is also an Easter egg for those who want to recall one of the first multi-player games, but you'll have to RTFA to find it." This doodle may overshadow the Official PAC-MAN 30th Anniversary Destination.

50 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. Re:So... by TheKidWho · · Score: 4, Informative

    Insert coin twice to enable multiplayer.

    One player is controlled via arrow keys, the other by wasd.

  2. Multiplayer Google Doodle by AntiDragon · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you have a friend on hand (or some serious ambidextrous skills....) click "Inser Coin" twice and use the WASD keys to control MsPacman!

    --
    "...So I hung back and lurked. For 18 months. Can't beat a good old-fashioned lurking."
    1. Re:Multiplayer Google Doodle by tempest69 · · Score: 2, Funny

      This isnt too bad until you cross the two, then my brain gets all wonky. when left controls left, and right controls right I'm kinda capable not good.. but cross them and they start moving all spastic,, sure it's all in my head.

    2. Re:Multiplayer Google Doodle by AntiDragon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't cross the stre^H^H^H^H pacmen!

      --
      "...So I hung back and lurked. For 18 months. Can't beat a good old-fashioned lurking."
    3. Re:Multiplayer Google Doodle by fulldecent · · Score: 2, Funny

      Aaah, I was wondering why the "," "a", ";", and "h" keys were causing her to move!

      --

      -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

  3. Meh by swanzilla · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm holding out for Q-Bert.

    1. Re:Meh by TheKidWho · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't worry, in 7 years we'll be playing Crysis in the google doodle.

    2. Re:Meh by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 5, Funny

      And in 7 years, you still won't be able to get more than 24 FPS out of the cinematics.

    3. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      The ghosts don't stay blue forever. They work just fine.

      Sure, they had to compromise on the map to make it spell "Google". Oh well.

      The ghost logic is supposedly the same as in the original game. It's possible that it doesn't work as well on this map, though.

      Excuse me? Are you too much of a not-hardcore classic gamer to have the mental capacity understand the GP's very simple statement? If it's not clock-cycle-perfectly-identical to the original arcade box, it's COMPLETELY AND WHOLLY WORTHLESS and a waste of our precious, precious time.

      Time which could be better spent tweaking MAME so that it renders Pac-Man down to the nearest billionth of a second in timing accuracy. Or time which could be better spent scouring the internet for more replacement parts for our pristine arcade Pac-Man games. Geez. Don't you understand ANYTHING about how pedantic classic gamers work?

  4. Productivity by iPhr0stByt3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I saw this earlier this morning. Obviously, productivity around the globe dropped 30% today.

    1. Re:Productivity by djdavetrouble · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, how can you NOT play once you see it?

      --
      music lover since 1969
    2. Re:Productivity by inerlogic · · Score: 2, Informative

      Now imagine the not-too-distant day when there are products/services that can combine the appeal(s) of WoW, Facebook and T.V./movies/music into one gigantic escapist experience.



      i call that "Saturday"
  5. Productivity by FalconZero · · Score: 5, Informative

    Google handled approx 88 billion searches in Dec-2009. (88b/31)*2=5.67billion searches in two days. If (conservativly) one tenth of those are work related, that's 567m. If one in ten work related users plays this once for 60 seconds, that's 3.4 billion seconds. 3.4 billion seconds is approximatly 108 person-years worth of productivity. (Which at US federal minimum wage is about 1.6 million dollars). That's a low figure as those who need google to work probably don't earn minimum wage. Now that's power! I personally played for more than 60s....

    --
    Windows in 6 Bytes (IA-32) : 90 90 90 90 CD 19
  6. Re:How is this impressive in any way? by Pojut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The point is the celebration of a load bearing pillar in gaming history, not the fact that JavaScript was used to do it.

  7. Re:So... by sunderland56 · · Score: 5, Funny

    It isn't a banner ad - it isn't advertising a thing.

    I bet that most people will say this is the most awesome thing Google has done all year.

  8. Re:So... by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What is it advertising? Nothing, other than perhaps Google. It does, however, let people who have games blocked on a school/corporate network play a game or two of Pac Man.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  9. Re:How is this impressive in any way? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Exactly. How many people knew Pacman was 30 years old today? Probably not a lot. How many people know about Pacman? Quite a few. It's a fun gesture to educate people how much things have changed, bringing back the nostalgic feeling of playing the game while showing how far we've come, with web searches and the internet in general. I think it spurs some reflection on the subject matter, but thats just my experience.

  10. Re:So... by IICV · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know, I thought that at first - I had a frantic co-worker at my desk asking "why is my computer making pac-man noises!" this morning (it had loaded up and started playing in the background).

    Then I went over to her desk, looked around for a little bit, figured out it was the Google banner, ate a couple of ghosts, and it was fine.

    Seriously, we all need to learn to laugh a bit more. You can't be all srs bizness all the time, a silly little temporary Google banner will not kill you.

  11. FYI iPhone by peacefinder · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes, it works on iPhone. Not very well, mind you, but it is controllable with swipes.

    Have a Nice Day, Adobe!

    --
    With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
    1. Re:FYI iPhone by QUILz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Have a nice day indeed, since it still uses a Flash object for sounds.

  12. NSFW by DarthVain · · Score: 2, Informative

    Noticed it at work this morning.

    Told a few people.

    Poster should note that there is SOUND!

    Sporadically every now and then I hear Pac-Man going on a few cubes away. lol.

    Mute your sound before going to Google if your in an Office setting... Unless they are cool enough to let you play video games at work. My bosses are a bit sticky about that.

  13. Re:So... by celibate+for+life · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And this is why you should keep Javascript disabled, if not at all times, at least at work.

  14. Re:So... by CaseM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    +1 Anal Retentive.

    In all seriousness, you have the sound enabled on your PC in a professional environment?

  15. Re:So... by aliddell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You know you can configure your search bar to use Google in *whatever* browser you're using, right? So you don't have to go to Google's home page? I can't remember the last time I typed "www.google.com" into my url bar (before today, when I heard there was something strange in the neighborhood).

    --
    What do you think, sirs?
  16. Very cool. by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's not entirely done in JavaScript - they have an off-screen Flash applet that handles the sound.

  17. This triggers too many "Alarm sound" helpdesks by MrJones · · Score: 3, Funny

    Having an "alarm sound" in google home page is not that wise decision, I got reports about people calling helpdesk tech support in order to report an "alarm sound", "its a virus?", "hijacked google home page, please run anti-spyware", etc, etc

    Is PacMan that important to the general public? I agree is /. material, but for non-tech people I dont think it matters...

    --
    Get my e-mail after a captcha test in: http://tinymailt
    1. Re:This triggers too many "Alarm sound" helpdesks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      no one gives a fuck about people who are that stupid.

      Seriously, watch them abandon google

      oh wait, they won't.

      Google should do this more often.

  18. Re:So... by guyminuslife · · Score: 5, Informative

    They have a bug in the Pacman game.

    If you try to do a Google search in the search bar after you're done playing the game, the WASD keys don't work. Even after you do the search from the first page, and the first page of results shows up, you still can't use those keys.

    I'm betting that "pcmn" is going to be one of today's hottest Google trends.

    --
    I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
  19. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is the most awesome thing Google has done all year!

  20. Re:So... by 2obvious4u · · Score: 3, Funny

    Where are my mod points when I need them...

  21. Re:How is this impressive in any way? by inKubus · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's also the 30th anniversary of The Empire Strikes Back today.

    --
    Cool! Amazing Toys.
  22. Re:Productive Friday? Not! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    You can hear your staff playing video games while you post on Slashdot? But I thought 3DRealms folded?

  23. Javascript is evil by bradbury · · Score: 5, Funny

    And I want to run a game programmed in Javascript on my computer WHY? I helped write a simulator for a PDP-10 that ran on a PDP-11 (36 bit machine on a 16 bit machine) 30+ years ago. And there was a concrete corporate need for it (we were modifying the Bliss-11 compiler which was written in Bliss-10). And even though I like PacMan (lord knows how many quarters I plugged into it at the local video game parlors in the 80's) I would still pause before I open my machine(s) up to running Javascript games.

    If only from the simple perspective that an interpreted, garbage collected language (such as Javascript) is inherently less efficient than a compiled language (C, Pascal, whatever) -- and it therefore is going to burn more CPU cycles than are required to perform the functionality the game provides. AND IT IS THEREFORE NOT GREEN!

    The goal of programmers (world-wide) should not be on "how do I implement something clever and cool". It should instead be on how do I reduce the CO2 footprint of my program? It is a sad state when one is promoting programs which may increase wasteful expenditure of energy (via Javascript). If /. is a "good" forum, should they not be promoting good directions?

    1. Re:Javascript is evil by guyminuslife · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think that C is not green either, since it's really more efficient to code the game in assembly code that can be inlined in the web page.

      But assembly still consumes those excess cycles. You know what's really green? Not playing Pac-Man.

      Certainly, playing Pac-Man as it was originally---as an arcade game with a dedicated CRT monitor---is out of the question.

      Actually, I'm a little concerned with your comment up there, because it seems like there may have been some CPU cycles that were wasted in your comment. And why are you posting this on Slashdot? They use Perl to handle HTTP traffic! You really need to use a website developed in C. It's the green thing to do.

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    2. Re:Javascript is evil by ledow · · Score: 2, Informative

      Newsflash: your laptop probably pulls about 20W no matter what you're doing on it (and most of that is lost to conversion costs) and even running at 100% CPU would probably only have a handful of watts more. However you lose about 30W constantly every time the battery needs to charge. So technically, if you were *THAT* worried about being green, you'd be unplugging your battery whenever you use your laptop and the battery is already fully charged. Desktop systems are more power-hungry too. Hell, your display probably does anywhere from 10 to 30W depending on your brightness setting and how many white pixels are on screen.

      At 100% CPU (incredibly unlikely, but if you have a single rogue Windows service, you're probably pulling more CPU than any Javascript game+ interpreter would ever use) you're probably adding something in the region of 10W, say. The cost of an energy saving lightbulb. Additionally if would take you 10 DAYS of you doing that 24/7 for it to compensate for someone who left their heating / aircon on for an extra hour or so while they went shopping.

      So please, stop talking crap about being green. You saved nothing. The average US house is pulling an average of about 1000KWh every month, over 1KWh every hour. You saved, with the over-exaggerated calculation that I just did, less than 1% of the electricity used in your home at any one time. And if you did it for, say, a 5-minute game of Pacman, that's about 0.003% of a day, so by not playing you decreased your average consumption that day by approximatley 0.00003%. Lowering the temperature on your heating / raising the temperature on your aircon by 1/2th a degree would make something like ten thousand times more difference.

      If you want to be green, stop using artificial heating / cooling, not worrying about your lightbulbs, laptop or painting your house an energy-saving colour. If being green is affecting your life to the extent that you want to say 0.00003% of your consumption for a day, then I assume you've cut out ALL non-essential electrical appliances that contribute more than that to your electricity bill?

      However, I agree with your point in principle (you shouldn't need Javascript to run Pacman) but if you were worried about cycles on that level, you wouldn't be using any modern OS whatsoever.

  24. Re:So... by DeadboltX · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have already received a technical support call regarding this.
    "Help my computer is making alarm sounds I think something broke! Here listen to this! *holds phone to computer speaker*"

    *facepalm*

  25. Re:So... by DarrenBaker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I simply can't believe we've come this far and we STILL don't have a mute button as a standard item on web browsers. By Lucifer's beard!

  26. Re:So... by Wovel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is the 30th anniversary of a game that was huge during the most formative years of the average google employee (and most likely the average /. users). I think we can all let it slide for 2 days.

  27. Question for the lawyers.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One lingering questions about this: Did Google have to get permission from copyright holders to make this game? I'm assuming that it would be a no-brainer to let google create this game, because anyone with a financial interest in the game would certainly welcome a free ad of this magnitude, but what are the rights of Namco, et. al. regarding this now 30 year old game? Do they still "own" the game-proper? What about the soundtrack?

  28. This is awesome! by Dorkmaster+Flek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The kicker is there's even a kill screen after stage 255. That's some serious dedication right there.

    --
    I like to think of online DRM as something akin to a college -- you pay for lessons until you learn something.
    1. Re:This is awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
    2. Re:This is awesome! by DeadJesusRodeo · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is so subtle I doubt anyone else will catch it without looking for it. There's a bug in the original ROMs collision detection with the monsters. The way it works is this - each monster is polled one at a time instead of all at once. That's (part of) the reason you can be partially consumed by the monster instead of merely touching the outside (the collision detection is in the middle) - here's the bug - since it rotates through all the monsters, it's possible to (on very rare occasions) to pass through a monster without harm. I've done this in both Mame and in my home-arcade (full-size stand-up).

      The google-doodle - ALSO has this emulated. Now THAT is attention to detail.
      ---
      (you don't have a home arcade with full-size arcade games taking up part of the house? Dude - ask the wife - I'm sure she'll understand)

  29. Headphones++ by Kozz · · Score: 2, Funny

    No kidding. I have headphones plugged in always, even when I'm not using them. That way when I click on a troll link, I'm the only one that will hear, "Hey, everybody! I'm looking at gay porno!"

    --
    I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
  30. HTML5 audio deficiencies by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In that case, it is a shame they did not do the sounds using HTML5. It would be nice to a reworked version using HTML Audio.

    I've been told HTML5's <audio> has five deficiencies:

    • Waveform files only; no decompression or synthesis on the client side. (XNA has the same problem.)
    • No single audio codec works in all browsers due to the various browsers' different patent policies. Some support only MP3 and/or AAC while others support only Vorbis.
    • No way to play the same sound on top of itself, such as two car engines using the same sample.
    • Some browsers don't even support playing two different sounds on top of each other.
    • No way to play any sound in released versions of Internet Explorer.

    I could be wrong; feel free to post links to web sites demonstrating how to overcome these deficiencies.

  31. time for a new monitor by flahwho · · Score: 3, Funny

    DAMN GOOGLE! now I have a quarter crammed into my LCD.

  32. Re:So... by IICV · · Score: 4, Funny

    If you can't be silly while posting to Slashdot from work, when can you be silly?

  33. Thanks for crushing my self-esteem, Google by Call+Me+Black+Cloud · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've been a programmer for a few years but within the last 8 months have been working on a project using Javascript.

    I've been struggling with forms and trees and autocompletes and getting the css to look the same across all browsers and then I see that.

    I'm amazed at what they were able to do in Javascript...if I had 1/10th of that skill I'd be done with my project by now.

    Clearly it's time for me to put in an application at McDonald's...

  34. How long before somebody bundles it in a download? by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Save Complete Page in Firefox doesn't get even close to all the pieces. This must be preserved, to be played every year on May 21st. Is there a save Addon that can get it all automatically or do I have to spelunk in my cache?

  35. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    While playing pacman at work

  36. ...And yet it's still cooler by KingSkippus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're not missing much. This is a poor clone of the game. It LOOKS good but plays horrible (compared to the arcade original). The ghosts are stupid (run in circles instead of after you), the maze has tunnels that don't match up creating dead ends, and the ghosts stay blue forever. I didn't think it possible but it appears somebody programmed a worse game than Atari Pac-Man (which looks crap but is fun to play)

    ...And yet it's still very likely cooler than anything you've ever accomplished.

    Seriously, I'm sure that the engineers at Google had about 2,741,288 more productive things they could have been doing than this, but they did it anyway because it was fun. It was probably some guy that that churned it out in his spare time. It sure is easy to cast stones at other people's endeavors from your comfortable armchair, isn't it? Tell you what, get off your butt and do something you think is neat in your spare time, let us pick it apart for being "meh" compared to professionally developed products, and then we'll see if you are so quick to criticize again.