#018 - esreveR

Release Date: May 1973

Platform: Mainframe

Genre: Puzzle

Developer(s): Peter Sessions, Bob Albrecht

Publisher(s): People's Computer Company

This is likely to be a quick one, in contrast to the last handful of games. I find it interesting now that I'm starting to identify and distinguish between a sort of "old breed" and "new breed" of computer game. Games like Star Trek and Hunt the Wumpus are of the "new breed" of more original and complex games. Today's subject, Reverse, is one of the "old breed."

That being said, the concept of Reverse is, in fact, original. It appears to not have been based on any prior game or mathematical lesson from what I can tell. It simply involves a string of numbers, typically 1 - 9, which must be put in order by reversing a certain amount of the string at a time.

Mind-bending stuff, apparently.

Authorship is slightly unclear, as it's attributed to different people in different publications. Reverse's original appearance was in the May 1973 edition of the People's Computer Company newsletter, where it has no author listed. When it was included in 101 BASIC Computer Games in July the same year, it was attributed to Bob Albrecht, founder of PCC. However, when the microcomputer edition of the book was published in 1978, the author was changed to Peter Sessions, also of PCC.

During my research, I found a document concerning Reverse that might help to clear up the confusion. In 2004, it seems that Albrecht wrote something of a guide for Reverse with a George Firedrake. In this document, the invention of Reverse is credited to Peter Sessions. If it's coming directly from Albrecht, that would seem to settle the case, and therefore Albrecht is incorrectly attributed in the original BASIC Computer Games.

Reverse spread like wildfire, with versions popping up on all sorts of computer and even console systems. I've played the rendition on the RCA Studio II before, so I'm familiar with the game concept. The thing that makes Reverse a little tricky is that you can't just pick whichever numbers you like to reverse - you have to select the amount, starting from the leftmost number always.

The game explains it better than I ever could.

Mind you, it's been a minute since I last played Reverse, so I was quite rusty coming into it. I had to fumble around a bit before my brain kicked into gear and remembered the winning algorithm. Reverse is a game that's basically impossible to lose, it's more of a matter of when than if. It took 17 moves for me to get the sequence in order, which I think is quite a shameful effort. I'm pretty sure I did it in less than 10 on the Studio II. The PCC newsletter says it should always be doable in 15 moves.

Par is 15. Shameful.

The newsletter also explains the two approaches to strategy in Reverse, "algorithmic" and "heuristic." Algorithmic is what I did on my first playthrough, and really boils down to getting the highest number in the leftmost position, then reversing the sequence equal to that number. If I needed to move 5 next, I'd reverse to get 5 in the leftmost position, then my next move would be to reverse 5 numbers, placing 5 exactly where it needs to be.

"Heuristic" is basically taking advantage of the randomised patterns in the sequence, allowing the player to get ahead a move or two. This one is harder to explain, as it's more opportunistic and luck-of-the-draw oriented. My next run was a blend of the two strategies, resulting in a 12-move win. A blended strategy is the most likely way the game will be played, due to the sequence being randomised at the start of the game. There will always be opportunities to skip the queue.

Considering that I don't have anything more to say, I'll now take this opportunity to do the scores.

Time Played: 6 minutes

Difficulty: 2/10 (Very Easy)

Seeing as it's impossible to lose, I can't give this a very high rating. A little bit of thought is required, so it's not completely brain-dead, either.

Gameplay: 5

There's really not a whole lot to talk about with Reverse. For how simple it is, it's executed well. Strategic depth is very limited, and once the basic strategy is understood, there's not much else to it.

Controls: 5

As standard as it gets.

Visual: 4

I will say that I find the presentation very plain. The gameplay itself is a little too cluttered for my liking; I would've liked a bit more space between each move.

Functionality: 5

No issues here.

Accessibility: 4

Reverse gets points for not needing much reading to comprehend. It's also everywhere, so finding it isn't much of a problem, either. Still, it's a text-based game, and these aren't the easiest of games to get into.

Fun Factor: 4

There's slight draw in wanting to lower the turn count, but it gets to a point where it's mostly luck It becomes fairly tedious at that point, thanks also in part to the limited strategic depth.

Reverse ends with a score of 27, which gives it the top place in the E-tier, and fourteenth overall. It's not necessarily a bad game, it's just another very simple, small game that doesn't offer a whole lot by today's standards.

Just a short one for today. I think it's always nice to have shorter articles in between the more substantial games to help break up the pacing. Mind you, it's just the way it pans out with the way my master list is. There's likely a few more short ones incoming.

Don't forget - if you enjoy my blog, be sure to leave a comment and follow so you don't miss any updates!