The Strong Announces 2016 World Video Game Hall of Fame Inductees

[Politrukk]

I'm confused by GTA III if we're taking different points in the lifecycle then San Andreas is by far the most Iconic one and Vice City and 5 can vie for a second place in different regards?

I mean that's the entire point about 5 they built around the nostalgia for San Andreas to create a smashing hit.

 

[Politrukk]

I know they only want to let a certain amount in each year, but how is Pokemon not on this list yet? The Sims could easily be saved for another year.

I suppose it is because we have to divorce the Game from the series and the iconic status of Pokemon is absolutely grounded in the series and not the other way around.

Sure it has personal merit but it's not as revolutionairy as others.

 

[hentropy]

I know they only want to let a certain amount in each year, but how is Pokemon not on this list yet? The Sims could easily be saved for another year.

I suppose it is because we have to divorce the Game from the series and the iconic status of Pokemon is absolutely grounded in the series and not the other way around.

Sure it has personal merit but it's not as revolutionairy as others.

Again, I guess I just disagree. You could level the same charge at Zelda. Sure, the original LoZ was fairly revolutionary for its day, first with a save option, but it wouldn't be "legendary" if the series stopped there. Hell, you could say the same for many of the games on this list so far.

Really when I stop to think about it more, Pokemon seems much more deserving. I may be a bit biased because like many I grew up during the original craze, but Pokemon cemented the legacy of the Game Boy, becoming the most iconic game on handheld in every further generation of handhelds, and sparked a franchise which has seen more reach than most games on the list. Mario and Zelda didn't spark massively popular tabletop games and neither had a successful anime that has been running for 19 years. None of that would have happened with Red/Blue/Green. That's not to mention that Pokemon is perhaps one of the only games which has mass appeal worldwide wherever it has touched.

The Sims, on the other hand, was a self-contained phenomenon. The people who loved it, loved it with a passion, it was an innovative idea for a game and a money maker, but it was also a game that was easy to ignore and forget about. No one could ignore Pokemon, and few titles on this list so far has gotten close to its cultural reach.

 

[JCAll]

Would have put in Sonic 2 over the original.

 

[hentropy]

I was a fan of Pokemon in my teens as well, growing up with the first generations of it, but even back then it was obvious that it was a giant effort at making a franchise, preying on kids to buy as much as possible.
Keep in mind that this is an academic site and thus they probably have a certain self-imposed "standard", in which Pokemon is probably some of the lowest of low kind of "art" in the medium.
I wouldn't count on the cartoons, TCG or other toys as a benefit (in this discussion) by the way, if anything they were all, including the games, designed to support one another to get kids to buy something, whether they were inspired by the game to buy a DVD or inspired by a plushie to buy the game, it didn't matter. This is probably the biggest detractor for Pokemon being the game that evolved into a cultural megasuccess rather than just a brand that might as well have been a line of clothes or shoes.

Until I could get most of my Gameboy games through the 3DS market, I still regularly picked up the old beige (yellow now) handheld to play Link's Awakening, but I've always ignored replaying the Pokemon games. They're just not that good.
Grinding through a pokedex, which is the only end goal, is anything but appealing to me, especially since I'd have to get another Gameboy and one of the other versions, in order to do it. The story and gameplay honestly doesn't do much to lift the original game(s) either. The best thing the game had going for it, were the unforgiving and downright unfair cave areas that mercilessly ground you to a pulp until you learned about using Repel. That was (and still is) a true gaming moment for a lot of people.

I would rate Pokemon as an undeniably gigantic financial success, but not a contender for the hall of fame for games.

At the same time, I'm just fine with the original Sims being in there.
Even though it became just as sleazy a franchise (although far less cutesy and original than Pokemon), it differed in the way that it wasn't just a digital toy collection, but a simulation that led to emergent gameplay and was a window into how "normal" people would do some pretty crazy and abhorrent things. Besides that, it was also one of the first sandbox games, that let people turn the idyllic initial neighborhood into something completely unrecognizable (also, mods!). It's kind of an unintentional "win" and it has led to some really crappy and abusive "casual" games that do everything they can to fleece you, but you could do a lifetime of studies into this one game.

Anyway, I get the feeling that I won't necessarily convince you with my arguments and I don't think you're wrong. This is so mired in subjective opinions (and probably a bit of east vs west politics) that we'll never find a truly objective answer. I also agree with you that the reach Pokemon had was a hell of a lot larger, so if that was the sole criteria, there'd be no contest between Pokemon and almost any other game out there (probably with the exception of World of Warcraft or League of Legends, for the sheer number of players).

My best guess, and I'm repeating myself here, is really just that it's a question of academic prefference. At the very least, it's a tangible argument you can stick to and be annoyed at them for not picking what you'd prefer

Well I don't think the "academic" argument holds up so much, because why is GTA on the list if it's just a bunch of snooty intellectuals? I don't really love Doom or WoW, but I can totally see how they should be on the list.

No, I'm afraid the explanation is much more simple than that. They simply don't want to put more than one Nintendo game on there per year, because they're afraid of being considered biased or something. Realistically, Mario, Zelda, Metroid, and Pokemon are all first-year inductee worthy, but if you confine yourself to five per year it doesn't leave much room for others. Pokemon was never actually made by Nintendo directly, but I guess being in SSB is too close proximity.

I can understand the impulse, but a max of two per year would have been better. At this rate a game like Metroid or Pokemon is going to have to wait until years 3-4 to get in. I think it undermines the credibility of The Strong, if only in the short term. I'd rather not visit the museum myself if their "Video Game Hall of Fame" section leaves off obvious selections because of politics that have nothing to do with their stated criteria.

 

[Jhereg42]

I strongly disagree. The Sims was originally a PC game, unavailable for the more "casual" consoles and long before the mobile market. The Sims is also not a "casual" game by an measure, it's reasonably complex, even if there's no great difficulty or competition in it. The Sims did help grow the gaming market with women, if that's what your alluding to.

But even by that standard, Pokemon has probably done more grow gaming among girls, women, younger and more casual fans years before The Sims did. The Sims certainly deserves to be in there, but the second year?

I didn't say it was a casual game in a derogatory sense. I said that it was the birth of the casual gamer.

You forget that consoles were not the gateway to casual gamers at the time (That started with the Wii). They were pricy and computers were in almost every home by 2000. Since computers were common it was easily accessible without a console and available with tons of plug and play expansions at every Superstore for years. It's design was easily accessible. People who were not drawn to the PC gaming market (which at the time was very hard core) were drawn to it in droves. It sold more copies than Starcraft. I am not disparaging the game itself at all, but it is the first game I can recall that people's 40 year old moms played. Pokemon will be a headliner when it hits, but it was the crack that lead to hobbyists, not casual gamers.