Release Date: 1952
Platform: Whirlwind 1
Genre: Puzzle, Simulation
Developer(s): Charles Adams, Oliver Aberth
Publisher(s):
PSA: The structure of the blog has changed. Please read the most recent update for details.
I first became aware of the Bouncing Ball simulation when I first watched Stuart Brown's "The First Video Game." However, what he covered wasn't a game - it was just a physics simulation. What I didn't know until recently was that that simulation was converted into a game. That revelation came courtesy of Ethan Johnson's response blog to Stuart's video, which goes into great detail regarding the existence of the Bouncing Ball game variant.
That being said, the Bouncing Ball game was kind of staring me in the face this whole time. Because, there's a playable version out there that comes from a familiar place.
RetroGame Deconstruction Zone, which has the Cathode-Ray Tube Amusement Device simulator, also has a Bouncing Ball simulator. I knew it was there, but brushed it off under the assumption that it wasn't a game. Naturally, Ethan's blog caused me to revise my assumption, and it turns out that RDZ's Bouncing Ball is, in fact, the game version of the program!
 |
| Here we are again, old friend. |
Bouncing Ball has probably the most simple premise of any game I've played across this reboot series: get the ball in the hole. You do this by adjusting the speed, bounce and gravity parameters, until the desired result is achieved. Basically, this is a physics puzzle - and the first of its kind at that. Physics-based puzzlers are a dime-a-dozen now, the most famous of all likely being Portal. Yet, here we are in 1952, seeing the very first one!
I'm so very glad that I don't have to write a doctoral dissertation to describe how to play Bouncing Ball as I did with Draughts. Adjusting the physics parameters couldn't be simpler - each of the three parameters can be adjusted with a dial. On the simulator, you click the right of the dial (clockwise) to increase the strength of the parameters, and left (anti-clockwise) to do the opposite. Clicking allows for a good level of precision for a game based on trial-and-error like this. There is also a little silver button that toggles a visual indicator for where the hole is.
 |
| Going for a hole in one. |
As I say in my video, the gameplay here very much reminds me of Jim Storer's Lunar Lander. You want to make small adjustments to one parameter at a time, judging if the ball over or undershoots the hole. Keep making small adjustments until you get the ball in the hole. Very much trial and error, like making miniscule adjustments to fuel consumption each second in Lunar Lander. Of course, I think Lunar Lander is a more technical game, in the sense that there are more points of error, and more precision required in figuring out fuel consumption.
For Bouncing Ball, it didn't take me very long to get success. From eyeballing the time on my video, it took me about 2-and-a-half minutes to get the ball in the hole. That was easy. Too easy. The solution was incredibly simple, which took me by surprise. From what I read, several college students were failed in the course this game was used in back in 1951/2. Maybe we're just smarter than they were back then? Ha.
 |
| Well, that was easy. |
I wasn't overly satisfied with beating the game so quickly. It seemed likely that there could be multiple solutions, so I had another go to see if I could find another solution. Along the way, I had some funny interactions with the simulator. I had one successful solution, only for it to not work on the next cycle.
 |
| How does this not count? |
The ball went in - I didn't touch anything - and then the next time around, it didn't go in. How terribly rude of the game. Now, I don't know if this was a quirk of the simulator, or if this sort of thing could happen in the original game. I haven't got my Tardis working yet, so I can't test that, unfortunately.
Needless to say, I was able to quickly rectify that situation after recovering from the shock of the game changing its mind. All of this madness took place over the course of a mere seven minutes, from when I began first playing.
 |
| A second victory. |
It's like scoring a first date, thinking "gee, that went well," organising the second one, only to be stood up last minute courtesy of a text saying "I've decided I'm not ready for a relationship yet." Only for her to change her mind, and you end up scoring the second date the day after. Did I just compare video games to women? Yes. Yes I did.
Anyway, here's the scores. Best get on with it before I say something offensive.
Scores
Time Played: 7 minutes
Difficulty: 2 (Very Easy)
A rather simple game of trial and error. Success is inevitable with these sorts of games - it just depends on how long. I was successful in about 5 minutes.
Gameplay: 2
Bouncing Ball is pure trial-and-error gameplay. While that does it make it more interesting than, say, a game of Tic-Tac-Toe, it's not by much. Bouncing Ball probably gets a little bit of a boost in that there's multiple ways to win, which can allow for creative solutions.
Controls: 6
What I played on the simulator was quite easy and intuitive to control, and it made sense for the type of game this is. The adjustable dials compliment the real-time gameplay, not disturbing the flow of the game.
Sound: N/A
Visual: 2
While it's only a black-and-white game with extremely minimal graphics, they are real-time graphics, which is a significant jump from the static graphics of Draughts, and thus boosts the score up from a 1 to a 2.
Story: N/A
Functionality: 5
I mean, I question the hitbox of the hole... but that could be a simulator thing. In terms of the game actually working properly, I have no complaints.
Accessibility: 4
This is a simple game to comprehend and pick up and play.=
Fun Factor: 2
I did have more fun with this than with Draughts. Again, the fact that there are multiple solutions available gives Bouncing Ball an edge in replayability for me. Also a bonus that it doesn't take several years to complete a game.
Overall: 21/80 (Weighted 26.25)
A much better game than Draughts, that's for sure. That's not to say it's a good game, but it's at least recommendable to sample, which I cannot say about the former game. It's the first puzzle game, and a quick little one at that.
As always, here's the video if you'd like to see the game in action:
Next up: OXO
No comments:
Post a Comment