Game vs Game

Is That Just Some Game? No, It’s a Cultural Artifact (New York Times)

The difference in taste between Japanese versus non-Japanese gamers rears its head again. Check out the 2ch response to this New York Times article about Henry Lowood's proposed list of the top most historically influential games, which included Spacewar! (1962), Star Raiders (1979), Zork (1980), Tetris (1985), SimCity (1989), Super Mario Bros. 3 (1990), Civilization I/II (1991), Doom (1993), Warcraft series (beginning 1994) and Sensible World of Soccer (1994). 

That there are differences between the two countries' proposed best-of lists isn't particularly shocking, but it is interesting to see the same titles consistently appearing across many Japanese fans' lists: Super Mario Brothers, the Dragonquest series, and Biohazard (a.k.a. Resident Evil in the USA), none of which appear on the American list at all. In fact, the only real overlap seems to be Tetris. (And Super Mario 3, though color me confused as to why that particular title ranks higher than the original on a list like this -- unless I'm missing a spate of tanuki-themed games that have appeared since then.)

Some selected comments, translated from the Japanese:

"What about City Connection?"

"Why Super Mario 3? And while it may be good, Civ isn't THAT important."

"Here's my list: Super Mario Brothers; Mario Kart; Dragonquest (anything but 6); Puyo Puyo; Romancing Saga 2; Gradius; Fire Emblem; Biohazard; Winning Eleven; Fruits Cup."

"Doom!? NO WAY QUAKE'S WAY MORE IMPORTANT!!!"

"If you're Japanese, these are the most influential games: Super Mario Brothers; Mario 64; Pokemon; Dragonquest 3; Final Fantasy 7; Tetris; Brain Training; Biohazard."

"Good list, but you're forgetting Xevious and R-Type."

"Look, if you're talking most influential it hast to be: Gradius, Tetris, Super Mario Brothers, Dragonquest, Kamaitachi no Yoru, Biohazard, Wizardry, Street Fighter 2, Virtual Fighter, Tsuki-Hime"

"Space Invaders, Super Mario Brothers, Legend of Zelda, Raiden, Gradius, Nectaris, Daisenryaku, Princess Maker, Dragonquest, Wizardry, Portopia Murder Mystery, Street Fighter, Virtua Fighter."

And the winning comment is...

"Hey, what about strip Mah Jongg games!?"

Comments

[M-Bone]

It is indeed an America-centric list, but I don't think that it does that game enviornment well either - playing these games when they were released I immediately recognized Doom as a pumped up Wolfenstein 3D, Warcraft to be a successor of the Dune and Command and Conquer RTS classics, etc. And where the heck is Wizardry? In addition, while Civ was brilliant, I don't see anything close to the lasting influence of a GTAIII.

For Japanese games, I think that you can draw a straight line from Metroid and Zelda to God of War. Even if there can be only 10 - Pokemon is a natural inclusion.

[wah]

/What about/ strip mahjong games, indeed!

[MattAlt]

There isn't really much point in picking apart a list like this because everyone has their own take on what constitutes "influential," but "Star Raiders" over "Space Invaders"? Come on.

It's interesting you bring up Wizardry, though, because it comes up several times on Japanese posters' lists. (And if I recall correctly, the co-creator of Wizardry also founded AnimEigo, a claim to fame if ever there was one.)

[The CronoLink]

I think is not that unfair to say that most Japanese gamers do not understand the Atari days or even the NES days in America. Video games were born in America after all (though myself am more inclined to SMB, Pacman, Tetris and such as more influential).

[M-Bone]

"everyone has their own take on what constitutes "influential"

They do, however, list the major criteria as - "the beginning of a genre still vital in the video game industry".

Wizardry is unplayable now, but did inspire Dragonquest, etc. Also note that Animeigo never licensed the Wizardry anime....

[MattAlt]

Here's a 2004 treatise by Lowood on the preserving games, which touches on some of the titles above ("Doom" makes it in and "Wolfenstein 3D" doesn't because of the level-editing and multiplayer aspects of the former were arguably more groundbreaking.)

http://cool.conservation-us.org/coolaic/sg/emg/library/pdf/lowood/Lowood-EMG2004.pdf

And here's another interesting one on the topic of video game scholarship as a discipline:

http://www.dukemagazine.duke.edu/dukemag/cgi-bin/printout.pl?date=111207&article=game

[M-Bone]

Interesting how fast the standards for historical judgment can change, however - one of the most important developments that he highlights is modding / customization which looks increasingly archaic as we creep closer to the death of PC gaming (at least as a platform for the big budget FPS games, etc.).

I haven't done any extended academic work on games, but I'm happy to be tangentially involved with a game study group that has several hundred thousand dollars in funding. At least I can use their lab to fool around with next Gen systems and $10,000 gaming PCs....

[Vulpine]

Yes! Kingdom Hearts is not on the list (so glad it's not an important game because it's overrated and I hate it).

[M-Bone]

http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2010/05/pac-man-30-years/#more-24120

Excellent piece on Wired with great reasons to include Pacman on a theoretical list - first video game to cross media character, a "game aesthetic" different from the racing and scifi riffs popular at the same time, targeting people other than nerdy guys, etc. Won me over.