Official Pac-Man's Amazing Full Colour Fan Club! - Pac-Man General Thread

[Deleted member]

People's likes and dislikes are generally subjective; however, it's the colmigation of those ideas that can get a characters in or not. Sakurai wants to add characters that will make people want to play the game. Pac-Man wont do that. A lot of people hate what Pac-Man has become and don't care for him as a character. The character only appeals to children who don't know any better. No surprise, most of the people in this thread are very young. The original games attempted to appeal to women. Since Mrs. Pac-Man, the series has gone down hill. Since then, Namco has used him as a cheap mascot and he's basically a weak substitute to Sonic and Mario. I expect Sonic Boom will give Pac-Man a run for it's money as children will find Sonic cooler.

I'll go into iconic later, but consider this: If he was so iconic, why did the most recent video game sell 30K units on the 3DS. Even in bad times. Megaman and Sonic easily beat those numbers.

I respect your opinion, but not your use of ad hominem. What proof do you have that users in this thread are "very young?" Not to mention the idea that Pac-Man wouldn't make people want to play the game, he's Pac-Man. You have zero proof for any of these claims, I could just as well say that everyone loves Pac-Man and that he's a huge success and yada yada yada. The only evidence you present is that his new 3DS game sold badly, which was a spin-off of the cartoon which had little development time put into it, meaning it had a very wide margin for profit. You realize that game was released on about 6 platforms, right? So 30K on one of them does not necessarily mean failure, nor does it in general have any effect on Pac-Man getting into Smash Bros. after the roster has been finalized.

I get the sense you just hate the character. If you don't want him in that's okay, but don't pretend that everyone who likes the character fits an insulting stereotype. It's just a difference of opinion, not worth being a douche about.

 

[CyberWolfBia]

I was prepared to add something to this (nonsense) debate, that, after all, is just about personal taste.. but I think that @Smash Daddy said everything I wanted to. great job, dude.

Here's my "like" =P.

 

[Dynamite]

I agree with everything you said, Smash Daddy.

Really Smashchu? Pacman only appeals to young children? And you say most supporters in this thread are very young? Dude, how do you know that? I grew up playing Mario, Sonic, and Pacman games and I like Pacman way more than the other two. You say Sakurai wants to add characters that make people want to play the game? Well for me and many others, Pacman is that character. I get hyped just thinking about playing as him in Smash 4!

 

[Yomi's Biggest Fan]

A typical Smashchu comment as always.

 

[FlareHabanero]

I do find it weird how people are so in denial that Pac-Man isn't trying to cater to a child demographic, when it's been doing just that for many years. Especially his most recent incarnation with Pac-Man And The Ghostly Adventures, which sports a simple naive narrative clearly meant for a young audience. Though I can easily say that catering to a child demographic only instead of a more broad one is probably why the series fails to hold onto a group of people for a long time. If it tried to cater to a more general audience instead like the Sonic the Hedgehog series, I think it would hold better footing.

Like I said previously, Pac-Man is at his best when he's not an insufferable wimp. Hence why I personally think the character is better handled in games like the Pac-Man World trilogy.

 

[Bowserlick]

Posted this in the character discussion thread. I will just set it down neatly here.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pac-Man should be based on movement, biting and obstacles/items in the game.

Someone mentioned this before. Pac-Man should be able to turn on a dime. Very good traction.

B Bite: Hold B, release. Pac-Man starts to continuously chomp. In this state you can move him in any of the four cardinal directions and change directions. The longer B is held before release, the more duration Pac-Man has in this state (and the more he can move around). Only goes into a helpless state if the Up direction is used.

Side B Power Pellet: Either uses a slingshot or shoots out of his mouth a Power Pellet. Bounces three times (hitting stage counts as one bounce, opponent counts as two) before losing momentum and stopping (even in the air). If Pac-Man comes in contact with it, he gains a boost of speed and power for a limited time. Opponents can smash the pellet when it is stationary. (Or instead of Pac-Man getting a buff, when he touches the pellet opponents could turn blue and take extra damage and knock-back for a certain time).

Option A) Down B Cherry: Places a Cherry. On press of Down B, Pac-Man will shoot toward the cherry with mouth open (as the crow flies). Hitting an opponent or cherry will cause his mouth to clamp for good K.O potential. Will go into helpless state if knocked out of his charge if performed in air.

Option B) Down B Ghost: A ghost appears behind Pac-Man. The ghost acts as a hit-box and will follow Pac-Man. Causes him to go faster. However, if he turns or rolls backwards, he will collide with the ghost and take damage and knock-back. Down B causes the ghost to disappear.

Up B Pinball Launcher: Pac-Man rolls into a yellow ball and spins, a launcher appears under him. The spring in the launcher pulls back before it hits Pac-Man, launching him. Very limited time to spin the launcher around Pac-Man (as the spring pulls back) to pick a direction to send him.

Aerial Down A Butt Bounce: Can bounce off parts of the stage and enemies.

 

[BridgesWithTurtles]

I do find it weird how people are so in denial that Pac-Man isn't trying to cater to a child demographic, when it's been doing just that for many years.

Everyone in this thread realizes this. Pacack, Cyber, others, and I have gone at length discussing how childish the show is and how most of us do not enjoy it for that reason. There is no denial to be had. Everyone recognizes that Pac-Man is being marketed at children, sort of like Nintendo's entire shtick itself. which is why he fits so well in Smash. Not really seeing what the big deal is, considering this is the entire focus behind already represented IPs such as Pokemon and Kirby, among many others. Oh, and Sonic has been drifting farther toward the "kiddie" aisle for years now. Sonic Lost World, and to a lesser extent, Sonic Boom, are confirmed attempts at reaching the younger audience of video game fans who are accustomed to the style of Mario.

I don't believe that Ghostly Adventures is to be taken seriously .. as I didn't take with Adventures of Super Mario Bros. 3, Donkey Kong Country, Sonic SatAM and such ... it's just simple entertainment and focused in small children who are just waiting for colorful characters on the screen. In one way or another is great for the younger generations know the figure of Pac-Man, a character 30 years old, and still manages to captivate children in other ways.

Just a recent expression of what we've been saying for literally months, at least since the show premiered. Nobody denies that Pac-Man's recent pandering is toward kids (though he also panders to old-school gamers through the Championship games, and arguably SFXT, since few kids would play that game in a dedicated manner). We all know that. Everybody and their mother know that. But we see no problem with it.

The only thing I think anyone is in denial about are Pac-Man's chances, which I believe are much more slim than has been expressed.

 

[SmashChu]

I respect your opinion, but not your use of ad hominem. What proof do you have that users in this thread are "very young?" Not to mention the idea that Pac-Man wouldn't make people want to play the game, he's Pac-Man. You have zero proof for any of these claims, I could just as well say that everyone loves Pac-Man and that he's a huge success and yada yada yada. The only evidence you present is that his new 3DS game sold badly, which was a spin-off of the cartoon which had little development time put into it, meaning it had a very wide margin for profit. You realize that game was released on about 6 platforms, right? So 30K on one of them does not necessarily mean failure, nor does it in general have any effect on Pac-Man getting into Smash Bros. after the roster has been finalized.

I get the sense you just hate the character. If you don't want him in that's okay, but don't pretend that everyone who likes the character fits an insulting stereotype. It's just a difference of opinion, not worth being a douche about.

First, you can tell people are very young by looking at their join dates. A lot of people (if not all) that have Pac-Man in their avatar joined 2009 and earlier.
Now, the fact is people don't like Pac-Man anymore. Look at the sales of his last game.
Wii U sales
3DS sales

In total between the two systems, the game sold 43,711 units. This equals total revenue of 2.1 million. That seems like a lot, but consider the fact that the normal game budget can be anywhere from 15 to 50 million, then you can see how bad this was. Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures likely did not break even. The game is also sold on the PS3 and 360, but those sales aren't much better. Total sales for both are 36,365. Out of 4 systems, the game can't even break 100,000. "But that's just a spin off game from the TV show." Compare that to Spongebob games which sell millions of copies. I'm not sure what the newest game is, but you can see that the series has no problem with both a TV show and games. But Pac-Man can't. Now let's compare the Pac-Man world series. Pac-Man world 2 was released on 5 systems and sold about 2.48 million copies. Sonic Adventure 2 (released around the same time) was on two systems and sold 2.68 million copies. Look pretty close right? Well, you have to consider the fact that Sonic Adventure 2 was sold on the Gamecube and the Dreamcast which was dying when the game was released. So, let's compare Gamecube sales. Sonic Adventure 2 sold 2.56 million units. Pac-Man World 2 sold 0.37 million. Pac-Man world 3 sold 0.67 million. Sonic on the PS3 sold more as did Sonic Riders, which was a spin off. You can see that the Pac-Man series has struggled and the reason the World games did OK is that they were put on every system possible and rode the waves of a good economy. Every other Pac-Man game that was not based on the original or Mrs. Pac-Man did awful and worse than what I mentioned her.

There is this silly notion among Pac-Man fans that he is very iconic but that isn't showing up on the sales charts. Even Sonic, who had arguably bad games throughout the mid to late 2000s, sold consistently better than Pac-Man. In order to understand the decline in the series, you have to understand the series. Pac-Man was originally designed for a female audience. The guy making it wanted to make a game that appealed to women, and he thought women liked eating, so Pac-Man as born. Afte Mrs. Pac-Man, the series declined. Namco tried to make him a character to compete with Mario and Sonic and make games like Pac-Man Land and Pac-Man 2. It's safe to say that none of these caught on and the series never did well. Sales for these games never broke 2 million sold. Again, if he was as iconic as people here try to make him out to be, where are the sales numbers. The series now appeals to kids as a substitute for Mario and Sonic. Also, consider the fact the the series goes dark for a while and then pops back up to go dark again. There wasn't much done with Pac-Man till Pac-Man Wrold. After the series went bust, it went dark until the cartoon. There may have been side projects, but nothing along the lines of a main entry. Pac-Man declined because Namco tried to make a character where there was none. Pac-Man was not a character like Mario. He was a circle who ate dots. When Mario Bros 3 and Wrold were released, they were still platformers. When they went to 3D, they were still platformers. Pac-Man was a maze game that the company tried to turn into platforms. Since people didn't buy Pac-Man for platformers, the series went to hell.

My argument is regarding the treatment of his character as nothing more than a Capitalization on an icon.

Rather than trying to devise a way for Namco to have treated the character, over time, as a real character, they abused his status on the idea they could capitalize on him and essentially created a character and games with no true original content. Furthermore, he has been modernized by appealing to trends and other nonsense over the years rather than developing any sort of art-style or personality for him.... He merely changes over iterations with glitter and such...
To the point he's now not just a yellow ball with arms and legs and red shoes, but a SHINY yellow ball with arms and legs coming out of weird 'sockets', with teeth, and in HD.

He is an abomination.

Maybe you've fallen for his new shiny teeth, but the rest of us remain skeptical and many of us who actually really grew up in the 80s no longer consider this thing he has become to be anything relevant to the original iconic character.

He has his places as a capitalization on the video game industry.... but he can stay there.
Many of us don't "hate" him for this reason, we merely just don't want to see this nonsense in Smash Bros.

It's not at all stupid. If you look at PacMan as an example, you'll see how bad such designs become when you merely try to capitalize on an icon's popularity rather than develop them as a real character, give them a backstory, and maintain what made them iconic.

Imagine Mario being well.... 'Mario'.... but instead of the Mario he is today and the icon we love him to be, instead he's that same brown-suited dude in red overalls we saw in SMB1.
Not just that, but he has never been given a backstory.
He looks really awkward, too. He looks out of place in in the 2010's, and he looks very strange in HD.

Can you picture that?
Now... Don't stop there. Imagine that instead of giving him a Tanooki suit, a power cape and other such things, no water-sprayer either... He's only got mushrooms and fire-flowers, because again he was never developed... Instead of new original stuff that made him more unique, more iconic.... Nintendo stole moves from other successful platform games.
Maybe he's got a mushroom-shooter where mushrooms shoot out of his hands for no apparent reason.

Furthermore, Maybe his games are entirely about stomping on turtles for no reason, and the big spiky turtle at the end, Bowser, also has no backstory.
In fact Bowser is not even a reoccuring enemy, because Nintendo decided to follow the SMB2 storyline. And remember, brown-suited Mario and Luigi. There overalls were never blue, because again they never progressed or developed. We used the original art.

DO YOU GET IT YET!?
This would not be the Mario we know and love today.
This would be some alternate reality Mario that no one would really like except maybe the kids his games are aimed at.

Nintendo BUILT on to the Mario character. They DEVELOPED him. They gave him personality. They gave him a persona. They made him into a true 'character'.
They also did this to Luigi, Bowser, Toad, and Peach.

If for some reason Nintendo went into a different direction and never developed these characters, they would not be the icons we know today.
Their iconic status never grew. The characters themselves never grew.

This is PacMan and his modern incarnation.... He has never grown as a character. He has no backstory. He has no personality. He's this weird yellow blob with arms and legs and shoes.
He has no distinct or unique features. His moves are stolen from other platform games. He has nothing unique to him or qualifying him but the re-hashing of his "ghost" enemies, and his nonsensical uses of his pellets.

This is what PacMan has become.... Something which is not iconic. Not even a character.
He is simply but a rehashing of the same old tired, boring, badly designed original artwork to capitalize on his popularity. He was never allowed to grow as a character. He is dead inside, as his overly-shiny large eyes now indicate, with a sad sense of nostalgia for any of us who might have actually grew up with him.

 

[Deleted member]

First, you can tell people are very young by looking at their join dates. A lot of people (if not all) that have Pac-Man in their avatar joined 2009 and earlier.
Now, the fact is people don't like Pac-Man anymore. Look at the sales of his last game.
Wii U sales
3DS sales

In total between the two systems, the game sold 43,711 units. This equals total revenue of 2.1 million. That seems like a lot, but consider the fact that the normal game budget can be anywhere from 15 to 50 million, then you can see how bad this was. Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures likely did not break even. The game is also sold on the PS3 and 360, but those sales aren't much better. Total sales for both are 36,365. Out of 4 systems, the game can't even break 100,000. "But that's just a spin off game from the TV show." Compare that to Spongebob games which sell millions of copies. I'm not sure what the newest game is, but you can see that the series has no problem with both a TV show and games. But Pac-Man can't. Now let's compare the Pac-Man world series. Pac-Man world 2 was released on 5 systems and sold about 2.48 million copies. Sonic Adventure 2 (released around the same time) was on two systems and sold 2.68 million copies. Look pretty close right? Well, you have to consider the fact that Sonic Adventure 2 was sold on the Gamecube and the Dreamcast which was dying when the game was released. So, let's compare Gamecube sales. Sonic Adventure 2 sold 2.56 million units. Pac-Man World 2 sold 0.37 million. Pac-Man world 3 sold 0.67 million. Sonic on the PS3 sold more as did Sonic Riders, which was a spin off. You can see that the Pac-Man series has struggled and the reason the World games did OK is that they were put on every system possible and rode the waves of a good economy. Every other Pac-Man game that was not based on the original or Mrs. Pac-Man did awful and worse than what I mentioned her.

There is this silly notion among Pac-Man fans that he is very iconic but that isn't showing up on the sales charts. Even Sonic, who had arguably bad games throughout the mid to late 2000s, sold consistently better than Pac-Man. In order to understand the decline in the series, you have to understand the series. Pac-Man was originally designed for a female audience. The guy making it wanted to make a game that appealed to women, and he thought women liked eating, so Pac-Man as born. Afte Mrs. Pac-Man, the series declined. Namco tried to make him a character to compete with Mario and Sonic and make games like Pac-Man Land and Pac-Man 2. It's safe to say that none of these caught on and the series never did well. Sales for these games never broke 2 million sold. Again, if he was as iconic as people here try to make him out to be, where are the sales numbers. The series now appeals to kids as a substitute for Mario and Sonic. Also, consider the fact the the series goes dark for a while and then pops back up to go dark again. There wasn't much done with Pac-Man till Pac-Man Wrold. After the series went bust, it went dark until the cartoon. There may have been side projects, but nothing along the lines of a main entry. Pac-Man declined because Namco tried to make a character where there was none. Pac-Man was not a character like Mario. He was a circle who ate dots. When Mario Bros 3 and Wrold were released, they were still platformers. When they went to 3D, they were still platformers. Pac-Man was a maze game that the company tried to turn into platforms. Since people didn't buy Pac-Man for platformers, the series went to hell.

Explain how signing up to this forum later means you are young.

The comparison to Spongebob... why? Spongebob began as a cartoon and was made into a video game within five years. Pac-Man began as an arcade game, was then twenty thirty thirty-five years later turned into a cartoon that inspired a video game, the two licenses are not comparable. You claim the Spongebob games sold over a million copies when the only ones that did came out five or more years ago. You contest how Pac-Man games compare to Spongebob games that came out ten years later on another platform and don't account for budget. That doesn't mean anything if you don't provide further context. You've proven exactly nothing for all the time you spent writing this post.

Pac-Man Championship DX holds a 93 on Metacritic and came out in 2010. That game was sensational when it came out, but lets just pretend it sold 0 copies because the all-knowing VGChartz doesn't have any numbers. The fact Pac-Man remains an active property and Namco tries to make something new out of the franchise is more than can be said for other Smash Bros. characters like MegaMan or Captain Falcon. Namco may fail to find huge success like on the original Arcade, but it doesn't make Pac-Man any less of an icon.

If you simply don't like the newer Pac-Man games, welcome to the club. Many Pac-Man fans agree with you. If you just went back a few pages ago you'd find us discussing the negatives of the new cartoon and no one is asking for it to be represented in Smash Bros.

 

[Staarih]

Being iconic doesn't necessarily come with game sales: recognizablity and legacy also contribute, and that is what Pac-Man has. Yes, he may be a "yellow blob with arms and legs with no personality", but he's still known all over the world - mostly BECAUSE of being the yellow blob he is. I would find it surprising if someone didn't know Pac-Man at all. So the whole icon-thing isn't just a thing Pac-Man fans have made up, it's always been there.

Like Smash Daddy said, at least they're trying to work with Pac-Man, unlike some other characters who get no focus whatsoever anymore. Sure, I can't say I'm a fan of the new games or the new design, but I feel like there's always room for development, which is bound to come. Sonic was brought up in the discussion: he had his low times and now he looks to be striving again. Pac-Man could achieve something similar, and a spot in Smash Bros would definitely help this. And even if he didn't get in, I feel like he'll slowly become more prominent in the gaming world again anyway.

Not all of the Pac-Man supporters are young, nor do they necessarily want the new style Pac-Man anyway. I don't consider myself young (yet only joined this forum late last year, just pointing out). And like I said before, I'm not a fan of the new design Pac-Man has, and would rather see something old-school get in Smash. But that's just me, one of the many Pac-Man supporters, who each have their own take to it. It feels like some people just hate the character, which is fine of course, but generalizing the yellow blob's fan base as young, novelty-seeking "casual gamers" seems unnecessary, especially if you just don't like the character.

 

[8-peacock-8]

Apparently i'm really young since i support Pac-Man and i joined after 09.

Wat?

 

[False Sense]

Apparently i'm really young since i support Pac-Man and i joined after 09.

Wat?

I suppose that makes you young to the forum itself, but your join date has little correlation to your actual age. There's no set age at which people join this forum, so a 10 year old could join in 2007 while a 30 year old could join this year. I guess people who join in more recent years might be younger overall than those who joined earlier, because of the gap of time in between, but the idea that all people who joined past a certain year are young is a pretty illogical concept.

 

[SmashChu]

Explain how signing up to this forum later means you are young.

The comparison to Spongebob... why? Spongebob began as a cartoon and was made into a video game within five years. Pac-Man began as an arcade game, was then twenty thirty thirty-five years later turned into a cartoon that inspired a video game, the two licenses are not comparable. You claim the Spongebob games sold over a million copies when the only ones that did came out five or more years ago. You contest how Pac-Man games compare to Spongebob games that came out ten years later on another platform and don't account for budget. That doesn't mean anything if you don't provide further context. You've proven exactly nothing for all the time you spent writing this post.

Pac-Man Championship DX holds a 93 on Metacritic and came out in 2010. That game was sensational when it came out, but lets just pretend it sold 0 copies because the all-knowing VGChartz doesn't have any numbers. The fact Pac-Man remains an active property and Namco tries to make something new out of the franchise is more than can be said for other Smash Bros. characters like MegaMan or Captain Falcon. Namco may fail to find huge success like on the original Arcade, but it doesn't make Pac-Man any less of an icon.

If you simply don't like the newer Pac-Man games, welcome to the club. Many Pac-Man fans agree with you. If you just went back a few pages ago you'd find us discussing the negatives of the new cartoon and no one is asking for it to be represented in Smash Bros.

I did prove it. Just you can't comprehend it.

If Pac-Man was as iconic as you said he was, then why are his games doing so poorly. Mickey Mouse is an icon and he makes millions and his things (you know how many of those Mickey Club House things parents buy). Mario is an icon and he sells a ton of video games. Pac-Man can't. The reason I am comparing it to SpongeBob is because, as you claimed, the game was just a spin off of the cartoon. That's all fine and good, bit how does it compare to other game. Here is Phineas and Ferb sales. The game released in 2011 did far better than than Pac-Man did despite the fact that Pac-Man's game was released on 4 systems. Note however that no one is claiming Phineas and Ferb are iconic characters. But Pac-Man fans are saying Pac-Man is iconic. If her was, why are his games doing so poorly? Why does the series keep going dark? Why is there dissension to the idea of Pac-Man being in Smash with other iconic characters? The answer is simple: Pac-Man isn't iconic anymore. He was in the 80s and 90s. But the arcade games were released over 20 years ago. No, Pac-Man hasn't done anything note worthy. Again, see the post from the other thread. Pac-man is not an iconic character anymore.

On age: Simple. If you have someone who joined in 2006 verse 2013, a 7 year difference, it's more likely that the person who joined in 2006 is older than the person who joined in 2007. You can see this because many of the new members talk about school. Also, consider what your suggesting. "I'm 19 and I really love Smash Brothers, enough to talk about it on a message board. It's 2013 and I'm busier now with college, a relationship and maybe a part time job. I'll make a account on Smash Bros now because I, for whatever reason, didn't do it when I was 13, probably cared about Smash Bros more, and have far more time to waste on a message board. It doesn't jive.

I agree with everything you said, Smash Daddy.

Really Smashchu? Pacman only appeals to young children? And you say most supporters in this thread are very young? Dude, how do you know that? I grew up playing Mario, Sonic, and Pacman games and I like Pacman way more than the other two. You say Sakurai wants to add characters that make people want to play the game? Well for me and many others, Pacman is that character. I get hyped just thinking about playing as him in Smash 4!

Yeah, because Sonic and Mario games have been coming out consistently since 1991. Kids play those games too.

 

[Deleted member]

I did prove it. Just you can't comprehend it.

If Pac-Man was as iconic as you said he was, then why are his games doing so poorly. Mickey Mouse is an icon and he makes millions and his things (you know how many of those Mickey Club House things parents buy). Mario is an icon and he sells a ton of video games. Pac-Man can't. The reason I am comparing it to SpongeBob is because, as you claimed, the game was just a spin off of the cartoon. That's all fine and good, bit how does it compare to other game. Here is Phineas and Ferb sales. The game released in 2011 did far better than than Pac-Man did despite the fact that Pac-Man's game was released on 4 systems. Note however that no one is claiming Phineas and Ferb are iconic characters. But Pac-Man fans are saying Pac-Man is iconic. If her was, why are his games doing so poorly? Why does the series keep going dark? Why is there dissension to the idea of Pac-Man being in Smash with other iconic characters? The answer is simple: Pac-Man isn't iconic anymore. He was in the 80s and 90s. But the arcade games were released over 20 years ago. No, Pac-Man hasn't done anything note worthy. Again, see the post from the other thread. Pac-man is not an iconic character anymore.

On age: Simple. If you have someone who joined in 2006 verse 2013, a 7 year difference, it's more likely that the person who joined in 2006 is older than the person who joined in 2007. You can see this because many of the new memebers talk about school..

No, you didn't prove anything. You clearly do not understand the economics of game development. Anyone with a basic comprehension of it can see that.

This is the inherent problem when you go and cherry pick games that have one tenuous connection to the recent Pac-Man game to draw comparisons. You've failed to illustrate the importance of these sales figures. Here's a hint: the numbers being bigger is not always important, depending on budget and price point. The fact a game is released on four platforms does not mean the budget is four times greater than a game released on one platform. The fact that an icon's game bombs does not mean his iconic status is taken away by the icon fairies. See: Sonic, Bomber Man, Solid Snake. You have provided no argument as to why objectively Pac-Man is no longer iconic, because you can't. If it worked the way you're suggesting, Arnold Schwarzenegger is no longer an icon because his 2013 movies bombed.

I can't believe you're sticking to your ad hominem. Not everyone who finds Smash Boards is a child. If they are, their opinions are no less valid, stop the pretence.

 

[Bowserlick]

Megaman had many different incarnations. Sakurai and his staff, fans of Megaman, chose the classical version and with their combined efforts made a very creative and fun fighter.

With Pac-Man Sakurai could go for a more classic feel by including staples like pellets, fruits, and ghosts in the moveset. Some moves could be borrowed from the newer games to fill his A slots if needed. But his specials could easily be inspired from his Arcade and Pinball games.

 

[CyberWolfBia]

Oh, this is continuing?... bla bla bla, Pac-Man is not iconic (lolz), bla bla, people don't like Pac-Man (the most funniest thing than anything said here, lolollol), bla bla.. just can be read in one way all those posts "I don't like Pac-Man and I don't want him in MY Smash Bros. >:T".... well, there's a lot of characters in Smash whose I don't wanted to...

my God, just stop to feed him,... let his poor soul talk alone. The last time I went in this thread, was for "Pac-Man Supporters", and nothing else.. for the rest, I just hope to see their faces on the day that Pac-Man be announced for Smash4; =D

 

[BluePikmin11]

Pac-Man is iconic, he's on my cell-phone app, at the arcade, on my iPad, he's everywhere. To say Pac-Man isn't iconic is completely wrong.

 

[CyberWolfBia]

the last time I checked, when people say "videogames", the first thing that comes in the head of a person, be a gamer or not, is Pac-Man... just like the word "cartoon" make people remind Mickey Mouse. So, I think that's "iconic" enough. =P.. Just let he falls in agony with this discussion; but when Smash4 be released, I'll want to battle with him ONline with some waka-waka. XD

 

[Erotic&Heretic]

Personally, the main problem I have with Pac-Man is the fact a lot of people want him because he his the Namco mascot, not because they like/want the character himself. In france at least, not sure how it is here.
By the way, I can clearly see him happen. For the same reason: he is Namco's mascot. Can't say he don't deserves it.

 

[Bauske]

First, you can tell people are very young by looking at their join dates. A lot of people (if not all) that have Pac-Man in their avatar joined 2009 and earlier.
Now, the fact is people don't like Pac-Man anymore. Look at the sales of his last game.
Wii U sales
3DS sales

In total between the two systems, the game sold 43,711 units. This equals total revenue of 2.1 million. That seems like a lot, but consider the fact that the normal game budget can be anywhere from 15 to 50 million, then you can see how bad this was. Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures likely did not break even. The game is also sold on the PS3 and 360, but those sales aren't much better. Total sales for both are 36,365. Out of 4 systems, the game can't even break 100,000. "But that's just a spin off game from the TV show." Compare that to Spongebob games which sell millions of copies. I'm not sure what the newest game is, but you can see that the series has no problem with both a TV show and games. But Pac-Man can't. Now let's compare the Pac-Man world series. Pac-Man world 2 was released on 5 systems and sold about 2.48 million copies. Sonic Adventure 2 (released around the same time) was on two systems and sold 2.68 million copies. Look pretty close right? Well, you have to consider the fact that Sonic Adventure 2 was sold on the Gamecube and the Dreamcast which was dying when the game was released. So, let's compare Gamecube sales. Sonic Adventure 2 sold 2.56 million units. Pac-Man World 2 sold 0.37 million. Pac-Man world 3 sold 0.67 million. Sonic on the PS3 sold more as did Sonic Riders, which was a spin off. You can see that the Pac-Man series has struggled and the reason the World games did OK is that they were put on every system possible and rode the waves of a good economy. Every other Pac-Man game that was not based on the original or Mrs. Pac-Man did awful and worse than what I mentioned her.

There is this silly notion among Pac-Man fans that he is very iconic but that isn't showing up on the sales charts. Even Sonic, who had arguably bad games throughout the mid to late 2000s, sold consistently better than Pac-Man. In order to understand the decline in the series, you have to understand the series. Pac-Man was originally designed for a female audience. The guy making it wanted to make a game that appealed to women, and he thought women liked eating, so Pac-Man as born. Afte Mrs. Pac-Man, the series declined. Namco tried to make him a character to compete with Mario and Sonic and make games like Pac-Man Land and Pac-Man 2. It's safe to say that none of these caught on and the series never did well. Sales for these games never broke 2 million sold. Again, if he was as iconic as people here try to make him out to be, where are the sales numbers. The series now appeals to kids as a substitute for Mario and Sonic. Also, consider the fact the the series goes dark for a while and then pops back up to go dark again. There wasn't much done with Pac-Man till Pac-Man Wrold. After the series went bust, it went dark until the cartoon. There may have been side projects, but nothing along the lines of a main entry. Pac-Man declined because Namco tried to make a character where there was none. Pac-Man was not a character like Mario. He was a circle who ate dots. When Mario Bros 3 and Wrold were released, they were still platformers. When they went to 3D, they were still platformers. Pac-Man was a maze game that the company tried to turn into platforms. Since people didn't buy Pac-Man for platformers, the series went to hell.

Some good points, and I won't fight with you too much here, but I do have a couple things I want to go over. You say that Namco hasn't tried to create a unique universe for Pac-Man. Therein lies the problem. They HAVE tried. They're trying right now. The Ghostly Adventures television show is unique, fun, and pretty inventive in its own right. The characters are new and differently designed with personality and backstory. Is it 100% original? No. Is it something new? Yes.

But here's where we get to the problem. People consider Pac-Man to be so iconic, even if they don't consciously know this, that they are actually against the idea of change. Namco is trying to rebrand the character with a new universe, one that has few ties to the maze games of old, but people still stick to the classic. You don't know how many people I've seen watch the new show or see the new games in action and go "why does Pac-Man have legs? Why is there a city? He's just a ball that eats dots in a maze! This is stupid!"

Ignorance and refusing to accept change are, unfortunately, a running theme with Pac-Man because of how incredibly iconic he is. He is the grandfather of video games, the game that spiced up the arcade scene far before Mario ever did, and it wasn't just because it appealed to women. That helped, but that's not the main reason. It was a fun, unique, amazing game that no one had ever seen before. Everything up to that point was alien shooters or tank shooters or plane games. It was all stuff we see in every day life or on television, but Pac-Man was something completely new and inventive. That stuck with people, which is why it's considered the most popular arcade game of all time, grossing $3.5 billion during its time. If you look a little further down, you'll see Pac-Man is rated the most popular arcade game of all time, easily beating out Street Fighter, Mario, and Mortal Kombat by itself, not including spinoffs. People loved it so much that Pac-Man has been around for more than 30 years and people STILL play the original game. Hell, I'm willing to bet you people still play the original Pac-Man far more than anyone plays the original Mario Bros. or even Super Mario Bros. nowadays. Combined.

I unfortunately can't find sales numbers to do it justice like you did for the Wii U and 3DS sales of the new Ghostly Adventures game, but looking at the iOS app store reviews for Pac-Man, it has over 17,500 reviews. That's a lot, and that's not including the amount of people who simply downloaded it and never reviewed it. Considering each of those people who reviewed it bought the game at it's current price of $2.99, that's over $50,000 in sales from a small app, and again is not including the amount of sales of people who never even reviewed the game, which, when it comes to app store stuff, is the greater majority of people.

Do you see what I'm getting at? Pac-Man may not be as popular now as he was then, but he still holds an incredibly important part of history and a special place in people's hearts. Pac-Man fans may not be as numerous as Mario or Sonic fans, but we're still here, and we still enjoy this character we've cared about for years because we recognize the importance of him to gaming culture rather than just looking at sales figures and numbers. You're looking at current Pac-Man. We, the fans, are looking at him as a whole, his history, his importance to gaming, and his legacy, be that what it will. Fanboyism speaks for a lot of things, as does antifanboyism. I personally don't understand why people like Gears of War, and I could go on and on about how I find it boring and dull, but I don't because I understand how its unique take on arena shooters paved the way for many solid games that followed it. It's not my favorite title, but I don't deny its impact. Iconic doesn't mean sales. It means memorable or remarkable, and Pac-Man has been that.

As a final note, I do find it slightly insulting that you'd consider Pac-Man fans to be children. I'm 33 and have been a fan of Pac-Man since I was a child, and have grown up enjoying his continued presence in gaming. I imagine Pac-Man fans to be a wide range of ages, from those who grew up with the original games to those who are just now being introduced to him, and the fact that newer kids are finding him entertaining enough on TV or in video games to go online to a forum and put in their support to get him into Smash Bros. speaks loudly about how he can still appeal to all ages.

And hey, I found my old account here on Smash Boards. Made back in 2002. Was a Pac-Man fan back then (obviously by the username) and still am today. :D

 

[CyberWolfBia]

Personally, the main problem I have with Pac-Man is the fact a lot of people want him because he his the Namco mascot, not because they like/want the character himself. In france at least, not sure how it is here.
By the way, I can clearly see him happen. For the same reason: he is Namco's mascot. Can't say he don't deserves it.

I want him in Smash, 'cause I like Pac-Man (or Pacster) as a character,... and then?...
and deserving?... sure, more than Snake, and some "others" requests, sure he is, this I have no doubt.

 

[Pacn99]

Hah, wow, my old password still works too. Looks like I have access to both accounts! But I'll continue posting under the account "Bauske" just to make things easier. :3

 

[Nu~]

I did prove it. Just you can't comprehend it.

If Pac-Man was as iconic as you said he was, then why are his games doing so poorly. Mickey Mouse is an icon and he makes millions and his things (you know how many of those Mickey Club House things parents buy). Mario is an icon and he sells a ton of video games. Pac-Man can't. The reason I am comparing it to SpongeBob is because, as you claimed, the game was just a spin off of the cartoon. That's all fine and good, bit how does it compare to other game. Here is Phineas and Ferb sales. The game released in 2011 did far better than than Pac-Man did despite the fact that Pac-Man's game was released on 4 systems. Note however that no one is claiming Phineas and Ferb are iconic characters. But Pac-Man fans are saying Pac-Man is iconic. If her was, why are his games doing so poorly? Why does the series keep going dark? Why is there dissension to the idea of Pac-Man being in Smash with other iconic characters? The answer is simple: Pac-Man isn't iconic anymore. He was in the 80s and 90s. But the arcade games were released over 20 years ago. No, Pac-Man hasn't done anything note worthy. Again, see the post from the other thread. Pac-man is not an iconic character anymore.

On age: Simple. If you have someone who joined in 2006 verse 2013, a 7 year difference, it's more likely that the person who joined in 2006 is older than the person who joined in 2007. You can see this because many of the new members talk about school. Also, consider what your suggesting. "I'm 19 and I really love Smash Brothers, enough to talk about it on a message board. It's 2013 and I'm busier now with college, a relationship and maybe a part time job. I'll make a account on Smash Bros now because I, for whatever reason, didn't do it when I was 13, probably cared about Smash Bros more, and have far more time to waste on a message board. It doesn't jive.


Yeah, because Sonic and Mario games have been coming out consistently since 1991. Kids play those games too.

Ha Ha, its hilarious how you compare Iconic stature to video game sales.

Here's the definition for you, you poor confused child.

Icon: a person or thing regarded as a representative symbol of something.

Now tell me, how is pacman suddenly "not iconic anymore" because his recent games haven't sold as much as his past ones.
Pacman still is an icon of video gaming because he is still amongst the major faces of gaming alongside mario and sonic. Megaman, Phineas and Ferb, and whatever other irrelevant character you used for a comparison are not iconic because they did not leave a major enough impact to represent their respective backgrounds (besides mickey mouse). Now, I ask what do you think iconic means? From what you posted, I get the sense that you think it means "X character sells Y amount of merchandise making them iconic"-this does NOT make a character iconic. Just because the ford mustang sells a lot of units doesn't make it iconic, it is iconic because it was the FIRST muscle car. Like how pacman was the first gaming mascot. Phineas and Ferb are not iconic characters because they have not made a great enough impact on televison history to make them iconic and did not start a new era in televison. Not even megaman is iconic enough to compare to pac-man. Go show every adult a picture of classic or the world version of pacman (that was on the side of the box I might add) and watch all of them say "Thats pac-man! I remember those days..." or show a young child who watches his show the pacman GA version and they'll say, "Pacman! I love the show and his new game is awesome." DO you see what I mean yet? Pacman is iconic because of the huge impact he has made on the history of video gaming in general. This is why he still survives today and why characters like megaman or Crash bandicoot went, or are slowly going out of business because no one even recognizes them since they made little to no impact on gaming which can keep them alive today. To be Iconic, you have to make a big impact, not big sales. You can't compare the laziness of namco to the iconicness of pacman. Now for your ridiculous and fallicious generalization of all pacman supporters.

The character only appeals to children who don't know any better. No surprise, most of the people in this thread are very young.

So not only do you call every pacman supporter young, you insult ALL of our intelligence by saying we don't know any better? Now you have gone to far. For someone who likes to point out people's lack of debate skills, you sure have a lot of work to do.

Take a look at this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg
I have attacked your central point of how pac-man is "not iconic" and revealed how much of a joke this is. You are still stuck at the bottom with your use of ad hominem and name-calling. It seems like the entire pac-man supporter community is more mature than you as a whole because we back up our arguments and don't insult you like you did to us. You can't even debate right or back up your claims with correct evidence that actually corresponds to the topic at hand. It's as if you forgot what iconic meant, and then cushioned your fallacies with a mattress of BS that basically says, "Well, since I can't come up with a decent objective argument (since no objective argument against his inclusion exists) I'm just going to say that none of their opinions matter anyway because they are all idiotic children". If you are going to keep up crap like this, I suggest for you to leave this thread because you are doing nothing but derailing the purpose for it as a whole. How dare you come into a pacman support thread and say garbage like pacman isn't iconic. No other thread gets this much hate. You miss the big picture. It's not about whether he deserves to be in smash or not anymore, its about the unjustified hate against him as a whole. It's insulting. Are all Pacman haters like this? Do you all really hate him enough to look down on all of his supporters. Megaman doesn't get this much hate and he's a washed up robot whose company abandoned him. Not even tingle and krystal get this much hate. Why can't most of you pac-haters respect our opinion like we do yours? Why do all of you people hate him to the point that it has to be this personal? Why? It just doesn't make sense to me. I'm sorry for my frustration and anger my fellow pac-supporters, but i'm just so tired of having to defend our beloved character.

 

[FlareHabanero]

Hmph, so much unnecessary strife.

With Pac-Man Sakurai could go for a more classic feel by including staples like pellets, fruits, and ghosts in the moveset. Some moves could be borrowed from the newer games to fill his A slots if needed. But his specials could easily be inspired from his Arcade and Pinball games.

The problem is that, while that is an option, you got to keep in mind you have to make a moveset out of it. Which is where things get complicated, because then you have to factor in balance and playstyles and have at you. For example, with the idea of incorporating fruit in the moveset, how would you go along doing that? Could just simply use it as a projectile, that's obvious. But maybe something else, like say eating the fruit to restore health, eating fruit to charge up some meter for a devastating attack, or use it as an melee weapon.

 

[Deleted member]

Ha Ha, its hilarious how you compare Iconic stature to video game sales.

Here's the definition for you, you poor confused child.

Icon: a person or thing regarded as a representative symbol of something.

Now tell me, how is pacman suddenly "not iconic anymore" because his recent games haven't sold as much as his past ones.
Pacman still is an icon of video gaming because he is still amongst the major faces of gaming alongside mario and sonic. Megaman, Phineas and Ferb, and whatever other irrelevant character you used for a comparison are not iconic because they did not leave a major enough impact to represent their respective backgrounds (besides mickey mouse). Now, I ask what do you think iconic means? From what you posted, I get the sense that you think it means "X character sells Y amount of merchandise making them iconic"-this does NOT make a character iconic. Just because the ford mustang sells a lot of units doesn't make it iconic, it is iconic because it was the FIRST muscle car. Like how pacman was the first gaming mascot. Phineas and Ferb are not iconic characters because they have not made a great enough impact on televison history to make them iconic and did not start a new era in televison. Not even megaman is iconic enough to compare to pac-man. Go show every adult a picture of classic or the world version of pacman (that was on the side of the box I might add) and watch all of them say "Thats pac-man! I remember those days..." or show a young child who watches his show the pacman GA version and they'll say, "Pacman! I love the show and his new game is awesome." DO you see what I mean yet? Pacman is iconic because of the huge impact he has made on the history of video gaming in general. This is why he still survives today and why characters like megaman or Crash bandicoot went, or are slowly going out of business because no one even recognizes them since they made little to no impact on gaming which can keep them alive today. To be Iconic, you have to make a big impact, not big sales. You can't compare the laziness of namco to the iconicness of pacman. Now for your ridiculous and fallicious generalization of all pacman supporters.


So not only do you call every pacman supporter young, you insult ALL of our intelligence by saying we don't know any better? Now you have gone to far. For someone who likes to point out people's lack of debate skills, you sure have a lot of work to do.

Take a look at this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg
I have attacked your central point of how pac-man is "not iconic" and revealed how much of a joke this is. You are still stuck at the bottom with your use of ad hominem and name-calling. It seems like the entire pac-man supporter community is more mature than you as a whole because we back up our arguments and don't insult you like you did to us. You can't even debate right or back up your claims with correct evidence that actually corresponds to the topic at hand. It's as if you forgot what iconic meant, and then cushioned your fallacies with a mattress of BS that basically says, "Well, since I can't come up with a decent objective argument (since no objective argument against his inclusion exists) I'm just going to say that none of their opinions matter anyway because they are all idiotic children". If you are going to keep up crap like this, I suggest for you to leave this thread because you are doing nothing but derailing the purpose for it as a whole. How dare you come into a pacman support thread and say garbage like pacman isn't iconic. No other thread gets this much hate. You miss the big picture. It's not about whether he deserves to be in smash or not anymore, its about the unjustified hate against him as a whole. It's insulting. Are all Pacman haters like this? Do you all really hate him enough to look down on all of his supporters. Megaman doesn't get this much hate and he's a washed up robot whose company abandoned him. Not even tingle and krystal get this much hate. Why can't most of you pac-haters respect our opinion like we do yours? Why do all of you people him to the point that it has to be this personal? Why? It just doesn't make sense to me. I'm sorry for my frustration and anger my fellow pac-supporters, but i'm just so tired of having to defend our beloved character.

No need to apologize, that user has come into this thread regularly since its inception and he can take what he dishes out. Most of the time I've found the Pac-Man thread is full of great discussion and support for the character, albeit I have at times not visited it as much as I'd like to, but this recent bout of negativity is the exception, not the rule. That is why I understand you're upset by it, because no one would want to be here if it was always like that. But soon it will be over and we'll return to our usual chill atmosphere.

Incorporating the fruit into the set wouldn't be easy, but the pellets, ghosts and attacks like the rev roll, chomping and Pac-Man's butt bounce would neither make the set hard.

 

[Nu~]

No need to apologize, that user has come into this thread regularly since its inception and he can take what he dishes out. Most of the time I've found the Pac-Man thread is full of great discussion and support for the character, albeit I have at times not visited it as much as I'd like to, but this recent bout of negativity is the exception, not the rule. That is why I understand you're upset by it, because no one would want to be here if it was always like that. But soon it will be over and we'll return to our usual chill atmosphere.

Incorporating the fruit into the set wouldn't be easy, but the pellets, ghosts and attacks like the rev roll, chomping and Pac-Man's butt bounce would neither make the set hard.

Thanks, i have never handled disharmony well, so I just couldn't take it anymore. But now on to new matters, Pacman could incorporate fruit as a power up for his abilities, or as an attack like a cherry bomb, see my moveset on the 47th page to see what im talking about. As long as it is incorporated while keeping pacman an interesting character, and fits in naturally with his moveset as a whole, its all good.

 

[FirstBlade]

I did prove it. Just you can't comprehend it.

If Pac-Man was as iconic as you said he was, then why are his games doing so poorly. Mickey Mouse is an icon and he makes millions and his things (you know how many of those Mickey Club House things parents buy). Mario is an icon and he sells a ton of video games. Pac-Man can't. The reason I am comparing it to SpongeBob is because, as you claimed, the game was just a spin off of the cartoon. That's all fine and good, bit how does it compare to other game. Here is Phineas and Ferb sales. The game released in 2011 did far better than than Pac-Man did despite the fact that Pac-Man's game was released on 4 systems. Note however that no one is claiming Phineas and Ferb are iconic characters. But Pac-Man fans are saying Pac-Man is iconic. If her was, why are his games doing so poorly? Why does the series keep going dark? Why is there dissension to the idea of Pac-Man being in Smash with other iconic characters? The answer is simple: Pac-Man isn't iconic anymore. He was in the 80s and 90s. But the arcade games were released over 20 years ago. No, Pac-Man hasn't done anything note worthy. Again, see the post from the other thread. Pac-man is not an iconic character anymore.

On age: Simple. If you have someone who joined in 2006 verse 2013, a 7 year difference, it's more likely that the person who joined in 2006 is older than the person who joined in 2007. You can see this because many of the new members talk about school. Also, consider what your suggesting. "I'm 19 and I really love Smash Brothers, enough to talk about it on a message board. It's 2013 and I'm busier now with college, a relationship and maybe a part time job. I'll make a account on Smash Bros now because I, for whatever reason, didn't do it when I was 13, probably cared about Smash Bros more, and have far more time to waste on a message board. It doesn't jive.


Yeah, because Sonic and Mario games have been coming out consistently since 1991. Kids play those games too.

As people have already said this is a pretty moot point about being iconic "sells the game". It contributes but it most certainly does not sell the entire game. I see you mentioned Mickey Mouse... you realize knick knacks are incredibly different from video games right? Should I bring up Epic Mickey 2's sales for you?

 

[BridgesWithTurtles]

Looking through Pac-Man videos on Youtube, I came across an upload of an old episode of Icons, one of the shows that G4 TV came out with back when it actually focused on video games. If anyone doesn't remember the show, it was a pretty interesting documentary series that covered a variety of historical gaming phenomena. They did an episode about Pac-Man, and it's pretty neat. Thought I'd share for anyone here who might want to watch it.

 

[8-peacock-8]

I miss Icons.

 

[BridgesWithTurtles]

I miss Icons.

I miss when G4 was actually worth watching. They used to have a handful of really entertaining game-related shows. But then they started becoming Spike's nerdy little brother who liked to watch reruns of Cheaters, Cops, and Star Trek. I don't even know what their subject matter is now. Corn?

 

[Freduardo]

Pac Man 2 convinced me Pac Man is a total must have character and if he doesn't ever put on his mask and cape to become super pac man I'll be sad.

Also, this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7oadchZMYA

 

[Bowserlick]

Hmph, so much unnecessary strife.


The problem is that, while that is an option, you got to keep in mind you have to make a moveset out of it. Which is where things get complicated, because then you have to factor in balance and playstyles and have at you. For example, with the idea of incorporating fruit in the moveset, how would you go along doing that? Could just simply use it as a projectile, that's obvious. But maybe something else, like say eating the fruit to restore health, eating fruit to charge up some meter for a devastating attack, or use it as an melee weapon.

You can make a moveset out of items and Pac-Man's movement. There are some ideas I posted on this very page. Scroll up a bit.

I also have a moveset somewhere in this thread.

 

[BridgesWithTurtles]

Pac Man 2 convinced me Pac Man is a total must have character and if he doesn't ever put on his mask and cape to become super pac man I'll be sad.

 

[Dropkick JD]

People's likes and dislikes are generally subjective; however, it's the colmigation of those ideas that can get a characters in or not. Sakurai wants to add characters that will make people want to play the game. Pac-Man wont do that. A lot of people hate what Pac-Man has become and don't care for him as a character. The character only appeals to children who don't know any better. No surprise, most of the people in this thread are very young. The original games attempted to appeal to women. Since Mrs. Pac-Man, the series has gone down hill. Since then, Namco has used him as a cheap mascot and he's basically a weak substitute to Sonic and Mario. I expect Sonic Boom will give Pac-Man a run for it's money as children will find Sonic cooler.

I'll go into iconic later, but consider this: If he was so iconic, why did the most recent video game sell 30K units on the 3DS. Even in bad times. Megaman and Sonic easily beat those numbers.

Like, I'm not trying to be rude. But this post is one of the most ignorant things I've ever read on here in some aspects, and it's nearly hypocritical in some aspects.

First off, sit down. There's no need to start throwing out "no surprise, most of the people in this thread are way young." Did you actually find that out, or are you assuming? I'm 19. I was never big on Pac-Man. But I understand the importance of Pac-Man. I understand the legacy behind the character. I also understand not many like what he's become.

They didn't really use him as a cheap mascot. They used him as a MASCOT. Maybe they used him poorly, but not cheap. It's their pride and glory. He's one of the biggest faces in ARCADE history.

The legacy arcade machines, at least to me, are Donkey Kong and Pac-Man. We already got DK. Pac-Man needs to be in there just because of that legacy alone. As for the "series going down hill" Yeah, besides Sonic Generations? What have we really got lately? Heroes. The racing game... Colors.. Oh, can't forget Werehog and Shadow The Maturehog.

Megaman is in the dictionary when you search for the term "irrelevant" now, with a fanbase who are gripping at straws. This is coming as one of those Megaman fans.
Mario is pretty much the last standing, and continuously good mascot left. So it's all about perspective. I'm 19, say what you will about that with the age limit thing, but I'm all for Pac-Man's inclusion because of the history he made in gaming. I don't give a damn how his games are now, I want the big four finished off. Mario, Megaman, Sonic, and Pac-Man. That's all I'd need from this game, and it's all Nintendo needs to prove how much of a powerhouse they truly are.

 

[YoshiandToad]

Pac-Man's fans are young?

That's genuinely a new one that I never expected to read.

I would of thought the older generation would have the most appreciation for him, having played his arcade game in their youth. The younger ones might enjoy the Ghostly Adventures cartoon(it's possible), but the older generation would of been the ones to appreciate how important he is to video game history.

Granted, I'll give SmashChu his points on how Pac has fallen from grace in sales. But being iconic has nothing to do with sales. Ask the average man in the street who Pac-Man is and he'll be able to tell you even if he's never even played the game.

 

[BridgesWithTurtles]

Pac-Man's fans are young?

That's genuinely a new one that I never expected to read.

I would of thought the older generation would have the most appreciation for him, having played his arcade game in their youth. The younger ones might enjoy the Ghostly Adventures cartoon(it's possible), but the older generation would of been the ones to appreciate how important he is to video game history.

Granted, I'll give SmashChu his points on how Pac has fallen from grace in sales. But being iconic has nothing to do with sales. Ask the average man in the street who Pac-Man is and he'll be able to tell you even if he's never even played the game.

I compare Pac-Man to other characters who've fallen in terms of market appeal but still retain an iconic status. When was the last time you saw someone buy Popeye merchandise? Probably a while ago. But when was the last time you met someone who didn't know who Popeye is?

 

[Pacack]

I'll be posting some Pac-Man stuff that I bought recently because I can. Expect it in 9 or so hours.

 

[CyberWolfBia]

I did a whole moveset for Pac-Man in my boredom time at work. =P... I'll scan it, and make more organized, with the references I took and all... but, I just need a suggestion for his Down-Smash; ... in general I chose to use only things based in Pac's own capacities and abilities, without Power-Ups and such... anyone has a good suggestion for an update before post here?

PS: I used Pac-Man World in the majority of the moves.

 

[Pacack]

I did a whole moveset for Pac-Man in my boredom time at work. =P... I'll scan it, and make more organized, with the references I took and all... but, I just need a suggestion for his Down-Smash; ... in general I chose to use only things based in Pac's own capacities and abilities, without Power-Ups and such... anyone has a good suggestion for an update before post here?

PS: I used Pac-Man World in the majority of the moves.

How about "Cherry Bomb"? It would act as a mine like it does in Pac-Man World Rally, while also serving as a reference to the original. You would be able to lay up to four down, just like in-game.

 

[Pacack]

I'll be posting some Pac-Man stuff that I bought recently because I can. Expect it in 9 or so hours.

Okay, I lied. My package didn't come today like I was expecting. Expect it relatively soon, though.