Those are interesting points, Matt. Certainly some of the earliest computer games made during the initial personal computer era (mid 1970's through early 1980's), besides the usual "Star Trek" and "Adventure" knock-offs and games like "Checkers", "Chess" and "Blackjack", you saw a predominance of number-crunching strategy games. Many of these strategy games featured no graphics and relied on the entering of coordinates or other relatively arcane commands to interact with the program. This was often off-set by the inclusion of a real-world map or some other physical material the user would interact with to complete the experience and render the game more playable. In no way did the designers of these games have anyone in mind as a player except the early computer adopters, the "geeks" and "nerds" for lack of better wording who would appreciate such contests, such hardcore battles of wits. They were extending activities that were normally played with hardcore paper games to the computer. However great some of those games may have been, however, and even in successfully targeting their intended audiences, it would be impossible to call them "greatest" because of their arcane interfaces and required commitment just to make them even reasonably playable. In other words, design and accessibility do factor into it. I have several of those games as part of my collection and while I anticipate playing them in my quest for continuing my historical education, I'm not exactly looking forward to the learning curves.

My point is, perhaps we DO have to look at the degree by which a game is playable by the maximum number of people. In the case of Elite, perhaps a space setting is as unappealing to someone as anime' sometimes is to me? Perhaps someone doesn't like all that flying about in Elite (I know I am VERY particularly about my flying games)? Perhaps there are too many possible commands in Elite for someone to wrap their mind around? Is that the flaw of the potential gamer or the game? In other words, perhaps a definition of "greatest" is the fact that 98% of the population can play the game and can get enjoyment out of it, rather than 20%. Certainly something like a Tetris embodies action, movement, strategy and abstraction, all to varying degrees. Yet the proverbial 80-year-old grandmother can probably enjoy it. "Tetris" is pure game, while "Elite" is an epic achievment. Entirely different experiences.

PC Gamer had something in their ratings system year ago when I still read the magazine along the lines of (extreme paraphrasing) "it may be the greatest Civil War simulation of the second regiment at Appotomatix, but not everyone will be able to get into such a game, therefore it's difficult to award it a final score above a certain threshold". While such a philosophy is debatable - it's almost like a penalty for being a niche product - there's something to be said for "generic appeal". It may not be the perfect game for YOU since you may only like games based around the Civil War or something rather than puzzle games, let's say, but the fact that 90% of people would rather play the puzzle game than the civil war game has to account for something. It has to mean "success" by some definition. Certainly the design of something like a Tetris was a once-in-a-lifetime type of thing. Pac-Man probably qualifies for that as well, as does Super Mario Bros. There's just something about certain games that get it "all right". Just like with popular music or popular books or popular movies. There's that certain something that's appealing to the most number of people. That has to count. At the same time, though, there are often BETTER works that do get overlooked. The "Elite's" of the other media. They get critical acclaim, they get success, they become cult classics, but it's not something that transcends to popular culture, capturing the popular imagination. I think perhaps that's the best distinction we can make.

With all that in mind, perhaps there really are two "best of" lists. One list with "Tetris", "Pac-Man" and "Super Mario Bros." for games that appeal to EVERYONE, and one list with "Elite", "Ultima IV" and "Tecmo Cup Soccer" for games that are high points of their genres. Who knows? It's good food for thought in any case...

=================================
Bill Loguidice, Managing Director
Armchair Arcade, Inc.
[ My collection ]
[ http://www.MythCore.com ]