In case you missed it, Pac-Land is out on Nintendo Switch today courtesy of Arcade Archives and Hamster. Those who have been eager to play this 1984 arcade classic now have a chance, just a little bit ahead of the release of Pac-Man Museum+.
Fans have spotted something a little bit off, however. Pac-Man's wife appears to have left him! Okay, let us slow down a second. At the end of every "trip" (basically level) in Pac-Land, Pac-Man returns home to his wife, Ms. Pac-Man, and their daughter. Now, if you're a die-hard Pac-Man fan, then you'll know that Ms. Pac-Man has a fairly iconic look, with a red bow in her "hair" along with red lips and red boots. Their child sports a similar look (without the lippy, obviously).
But, as pointed out by Twitter user nickisonline, Ms. Pac-Man has been replaced with an imposter. Well, actually, it's Pac-Man's mother and some... other kid? Or is it Pac-Mom and Pac-Dad?
Many rushed to Twitter to disparage the lack of this iconic female video game character - you can't just replace Ms. Pac-Man! - and comment on the state of game preservation. After all, when was the last time we got a rerelease of the Ms. Pac-Man game?
And, well, legalities are involved. It's always about money and stuff, isn't it? Ms. Pac-Man has been part of a number of lengthy legal disputes. You see, Namco didn't actually create Ms. Pac-Man, the game or the character. The game is actually a modded version of a game called Crazy Otto, an enhanced version of Pac-Man that was created by the General Computer Corporation (GCC).
GCC had previously made an enhancement kit for Missile Command, which Atari took the group to court over. After that, GCC had to obtain permission from the manufacturer of each game before marketing any future kits. So, when it came to the biggest arcade game at the time, Pac-Man, the group had to approach Midway, who held the rights to Pac-Man in the west. Midway wanted Namco to produce a sequel for their yellow-coloured puck. When GCC pitched the enhancement kit to Midway, they instead bought the rights to Crazy Otto, and from this, Ms. Pac-Man was born.
Namco didn't authorise the release of Ms. Pac-Man, and this is reportedly what caused them to terminate their licensing deal with Midway in 1984. Namco now had the rights to Ms. Pac-Man, except GCC had agreed with Midway that they too would get royalties whenever Ms.Pac-Man was used.
It's already a pretty complicated maze at this point, and there are still some issues that remain between Bandai Namco and GCC (though a further deal was reached between the two parties in 2008). But then in comes AtGames, who created a mini arcade cabinet for - you guessed it - Ms. Pac-Man.
Bandai Namco sued the retro mini-console producer, while AtGames were also reaching a deal with GCC to acquire the royalties to Ms. Pac-Man. And, well, AtGames now indeed get royalties whenever the red-ribboned puck is used.
This explains why we haven't seen Ms. Pac-Man for a while, then, and why her game won't be appearing in next month's Pac-Man Museum+. Bandai Namco continues to scrub her presence out of their games, and changing her hair and shoes is apparently enough to get around that.
Polygon did a pretty thorough investigation on the 2019 case between Bandai Namco and AtGames back in 2019. So, until Bandai Namco gets the rights back, we'll have to get acquainted with Pac-Mom.
Have you ever played Ms. Pac-Man? How do you feel about this change in Pac-Land? Let us know.
[source twitter.com]
Comments (41)
I know that Namco has no intention to acknowledge the Ms. Pac Man game while it's licensing rights are held by someone else.
But to scorch the earth of any and all references to the fan-favorite character just feels mean-spirited.
I think you mean they terminated their license in 1984 or 1994? At least I hope so, I don't think they had video games that far back. ^^;
Honestly, I'm really getting frustrated at this whole Ms. Pac-Man nonsense. We're missing out on a lot of Pac games because of it and I'm blaming AtGames entirely on this.
Won't someone think of poor Baby Pac-Man? They need to make it work for the kid's sake!
Ms Pac-Man begged him not to join Smash. It's far too violent an environment to raise a child in and she didn't need him to prove anything to her. Such a shame.
(I'm not bothered over a cameo appearence to be fair.)
Heh, I've been talking about this in the Retro forum. https://www.nintendolife.com/forums/retro/rest_in_peace_ms_pacman
1884? Never realized that this has been an issue for so long!
Ms PacMan is still the pacman game I've played most. It was the only one my grandparents had, IIRC it had a bunch of unique stages whereas the OG pacman didn't have much.
I am not a history buff, but I am certain that Namco did not terminate their licensing deal with Midway in 1884. I suspect that happened 100 years later.
Seriously though, I didn't realize Ms Pac-Man had such a complex history. I do recall seeing "Midway" on the arcade machine in my younger days.
@Gamer_Griff Yup, that's because Namco gave Midway the rights to manufacture and publish Pacman in the US. It's just that things got a little more complicated when GCC came along and made a better Pacman clone.
There's a great youtube version about this here, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LTmUaxXA0c
I’m struggling to retcon Pac-Mom into the lore
Welp, that's deeply upsetting. I guess that means Ms. Pac-Man will never see the light of day on Switch, and maybe not even a Pac-Man World collection since she's present in at least the first one. I guess that also explains why she never got an Echo fighter in Smash, which would've been perfect. It's weird they didn't have to cut her from the Pac-Land stage though, but maybe it was Nintendo who went out of pocket for that one and not Namco, since Sakurai is such a stickler for accuracy. Do they appear in Smash's copyright information anywhere?
Pardon my French, but screw AtGames, man. If Namco doesn't make any new Ms. Pac-Man content, AtGames is literally just holding the property for ransom, no? I mean, what can they do with it? How does it benefit them?
Namco is still at fault too though. I don't blame them for being mad, but they have plenty of money to spare. It wouldn't hurt them to swallow their pride and antee up the licensing fee to make their fanbase happy. It's probably more about the principle than it is the expense, but it would be a great public relations move and make me value Namco as an ethical company much more. Ms. Pac-Man and the Pac-Man World games are beloved gems. Pac-Man World 2 is one of my favorite games of all time--I have a ton of nostalgia for it. And Ms. Pac-Man is superior to the original in every way. That version is incredibly boring by comparison. She was also like one of the first playable women in games. (Should've named her Pac-Woman, but whatever.) She's a big deal.
i feel like namco could literally eat half these entities at this point which makes it all the more sad we're losing the iconic pumps (and later fancy booties (and later again the pumps))
So pacman divorced and remarried
@Eel That or he's just been caught!
At this point, I wonder why atgames is still even around anymore. Not a single good game or "console" has ever been made by them. At this point I'd say Namco is doing the right thing in wating for atgames to go bankrupt so they can use Ms Pacman again without giving that scam developer a single penny
This video explains this whole case and creation of the new female Pac-Man pretty well, definitely recommend giving it a watch if you’re interested: https://youtu.be/0LTmUaxXA0c
Regardless, nice read. Sad to see Namco refuse to work with others just to use Ms. Pac-Man every now and then. But Atgames does suck.
Couldn’t they have just called her MRS. Pac-Man and called it a day?!
@PBandSmelly I'd say that's 90% true.
But according to some reviews, their new Video pinball machine is meant to be pretty good. Maybe AtGames should stick to pinball and only pinball?
@GrailUK scandalous!
"Namco didn't authorise the release of Ms. Pac-Man, and this is reportedly what caused them to terminate their licensing deal with Midway in 1884."
The image of outlaws in the Wild West playing Ms. Pac-Man in a grimy saloon is pretty amusing. Jokes aside, Bandai Namco's handling of this whole situation is understandable but frustrating regardless.
The Pac-Family is being torn apart over this royalty dispute and gamers on the losing end by having Ms. Pac-Man erased from Bandai Namco games while having subpar emulated re-releases from AtGames as the only official option.
At this point, I kinda wish B.N. would just buy out AtGames to settle this matter although I do understand that it simply isn't worth the hassle for them.
Funny then, if it's all such a big mess, you can buy it for PlayStation.
https://store.playstation.com/en-gb/product/EP0700-CUSA03864_00-MSPACMAN00000000
@AcridSkull That was released in 2016. AtGames bought the contract in 2019.
@CharlieGirl Well, better to piss off some fans than potentially face the legal consequences.
Okay, Pac-Mom. Sounds good. Now let’s get some Pac-Mom ports and new games. Oh, they still don’t care that much...
I remember playing Ms Pacman on the Atari 2600 when I was a kid. It was one of my favorite games.
They pulled similar BS with Konami’s Vendetta when it was released. This series was the biggest hope for game preservation for the longest time so seeing it stoop to this is immensely disappointing…
Oh well, there’s always MAME.
Just get some ROMS already. It is a non-issue, these companies are mega rich, let them sweat.
“It belongs in a museum!” (Namco’s)
Removed - flaming/arguing
@Willo567 No way, play the way you want to play, if you want authentic ROMS are the way to go. I never said don't support anyone but at the end of the day play it any way you can.
@SepticLemon it's still on sale.
Ms Pacman > Pacman.
There were video games back in 1884?? 🤣
Seriously so how did Namco manage to get Ms Pac-Man onto PS4 and Xbox One?? What was the loophole? Or did they pony up the dough to AT Games? In fact the games are still available to purchase right now! I don’t get it 🤔
C'mon guys if it's a licensing issue then it's a licensing issue. The thing is this is the only way to get Pac-Land out without getting trouble with the license owner or paying them for royalty. Like I mention in the Revenge of Shinobi situation, though we will never get Batman, Spider-Man, and Godzilla in that game ever again, at least that game would still be release without issue. I'm sure the TMNT Cowabunga collection and the Sonic Origins collection will face the same issue as well, MJ's music and the original cartoon TMNT theme music may likely not be in those games.
I accidentally got the collection containing the NES version of this game thinking it was the arcade original… not a big loss (couple fun games there if I recall…), but now I’m happy to finally have a crack at the “real” Pac-Land!
I thought the Arcade Archives games were supposed to be pure translations of the originals.
So, she's just Pac-Woman then...
I guess Pac-Man Jr. just got scrubbed from the whole family then lol.
Thinking about this - before she was Ms Pacman, an individual. Although she still had "man" in her name, that could be counted like Hermann as a surname
Now she is Pacmom and only exists in reference to her family
At least this explains why Pac-man did not get a Ms. Pac-man skin in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, an unfortunate missed opportunity.
I wonder why BandiNamco did not go after AtGames for tortious interference in 2019 as it was negotiating a final rights deal with GCC.
Ms Pac Man is on Namco Museum on GameCube, but it would be great to play on Switch.
Tap here to load 41 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...