Top 100 Most Influential Video Games of All Time

[Darran@Retro Gamer]

Wow the mindless trolling on this foruim is pathetic. Time to start getting the ban hammer out...

[The Laird]

You opinion may be valid but there is no doubt it will be anything other than negative when it comes to Nintendo and their products so what is the point?

This old chestnut eh? Yes I am not a fan of Nintendo, neither do I hide the fact but dosn't mean I am always negative about them.

Been having a great discussion about Wii U and the NES for that matter over at my own forum that contains plenty of positive stuff, I suppose the difference is that I don't have to put up with the dellusional fanboy idiots over there.

[nakamura]

You opinion may be valid but there is no doubt it will be anything other than negative when it comes to Nintendo and their products so what is the point?

This old chestnut eh? Yes I am not a fan of Nintendo, neither do I hide the fact but dosn't mean I am always negative about them.

Been having a great discussion about Wii U and the NES for that matter over at my own forum that contains plenty of positive stuff, I suppose the difference is that I don't have to put up with the dellusional fanboy idiots over there.

Probably right to be fair. Does work both ways though.

[The Laird]

Wow the mindless trolling on this foruim is pathetic. Time to start getting the ban hammer out...

To be honest Darran there really isn't any trolling in this thread, except for one comment, just lots of VERY lively debate.

There are threads FAR worse than this one here

[SJ_Sathanas]

Wow the mindless trolling on this foruim is pathetic. Time to start getting the ban hammer out...

To be honest Darran there really isn't any trolling in this thread, except for one comment, just lots of VERY lively debate.

There are threads FAR worse than this one here

My trolling was an irreverant attempt to point out the futility of YET ANOTHER thread with yourself and DCRIP complaining about Nitendo's inflated importance in computer and video gaming history.

Seriously, why do you guys let it bother you so much ?

[DreamcastRIP]

My trolling was an irreverant attempt to point out the futility of YET ANOTHER thread with yourself and DCRIP complaining about Nitendo's inflated importance in computer and video gaming history.

Seriously, why do you guys let it bother you so much ?

Yep, that's right, single out myself and another person of a similar viewpoint but COMPLETELY negate mentioning the frankly ridiculous words voiced by the other 'side' of the debate, as highlighted by me in this post,

Mario and his games are influencial, I would say that's about as inescapable a fact as you can get in the videogame world.

... which is one hell of a lot different to your original statement of,

Just about anyone anywhere in the world with an interest in games - including the vast majority of devs - has played SMB at some point, which makes it about as influential as you can get.

I never denied Super Mario Bros. hasn't been influential. I merely flagged up the gross exaggeration and flawed reasoning of your initial statement.

Please do continue your own personal crusade to defend Ninty though... while maintaining,

... that's not me being a Nintendo fanboy

Seems as if you're letting your bias affect who you see as having the problem.

[killbot]

I only comment in a Nintendo thread if I have something I want to say about the product in question - i.e. MY OPINION (which is allowed)

In fairness, of course that's allowed. But since your opinion on anything Nintendo related is almost always 'That looks rubbish as usual - GUFFAW!'... well, that does get people's backs up. Which as I've said before is a shame, because I actually find you a knowledgable guy who's fun to talk to - as long as we stay away from the N word!

OR if my name is for some reason brought into the thread, like Killbot keeps doing.

Okay, that happened once. And I apologised at the time.

[killbot]

Yep, that's right, single out myself and another person of a similar viewpoint but COMPLETELY negate mentioning the frankly ridiculous words voiced by the other 'side' of the debate, as highlighted by me in this post,

I don't get it. Why do you think the idea that a game which has sold tens of millions of copies, and which many developers have expressly mentioned as an influence, is 'about as influential [in videogame terms] as it gets' is so risible? You can argue over whether the game is merely 'very, very influential' rather than 'the most influential ever' but that's pretty much semantics. I don't even think it's controversial to say that SMB is near the top of the pile, if it isn't at the very summit.

Sometimes I think your obvious distaste for Nintendo - at least, the current incarnation of Nintendo with all its casual games and wavy controls and playing cards and toys - doesn't cloud your judgement just as much as you claim my love of them does. Whenever anyone makes any claims regarding a notable success or achievement the company can lay claim to, you seem determined to 'prove' it isn't true. I don't get it, but hey, it's fun debating with you.

[DreamcastRIP]

... Whenever anyone makes any claims regarding a notable success or achievement the company can lay claim to, you seem determined to 'prove' it isn't true. I don't get it, but hey, it's fun debating with you.

That's both unfair and untrue. I've only, to the best of my recollection, commented in that regard when it's clear said claims of Nintendo's 'innovations' are misguided or at the very least dubious. It's not "anyone" either as it's usually been yourself and, prior to that, C=Style too. Other times I recall commenting in that regard have been in response to the glaring factual inaccuracies, wild exaggeration and/or statements of revisionist history made in issue 101's NES 'Collector's Guide', NES-bit magazine (iirc) and the notorious case of an official Ninty magazine's UK website. I've been far from alone when having voiced such issues I might add.

It hasn't been solely about Ninty's "successes or achievement" either. Many issues have been raised by myself and others on the forum, e.g. the botched 3DS post-launch period up until the price cut and Mario games were released, the disastrous initial unveiling of Wii U, the lack of much new IP, hardware issues of 3DS, the need for Circle Pad Pro, the company's declining finances... and so on.

I appreciate you "don't get it" but, as you say, we sure have some fun debates from time to time.

[killbot]

... Whenever anyone makes any claims regarding a notable success or achievement the company can lay claim to, you seem determined to 'prove' it isn't true. I don't get it, but hey, it's fun debating with you.

That's both unfair and untrue. I've only, to the best of my recollection, commented in that regard when it's clear said claims of Nintendo's 'innovations' are misguided or at the very least dubious. It's not "anyone" either as it's usually been yourself and, prior to that, C=Style too. Other times I recall commenting in that regard have been in response to the glaring factual inaccuracies, wild exaggeration and/or statements of revisionist history made in issue 101's NES 'Collector's Guide', NES-bit magazine (iirc) and the notorious case of an official Ninty magazine's UK website. I've been far from alone when having voiced such issues I might add.

It hasn't been solely about Ninty's "successes or achievement" either. Many issues have been raised by myself and others on the forum, e.g. the botched 3DS post-launch period up until the price cut and Mario games were released, the disastrous initial unveiling of Wii U, the lack of much new IP, hardware issues of 3DS, the need for Circle Pad Pro, the company's declining finances... and so on.

I appreciate you "don't get it" but, as you say, we sure have some fun debates from time to time.

In fairness, I do agree with you about some of those - the Wii U unveiling could have been handled better and the 3DS launch wasn't the company's finest hour either.

[Misery]

... Whenever anyone makes any claims regarding a notable success or achievement the company can lay claim to, you seem determined to 'prove' it isn't true. I don't get it, but hey, it's fun debating with you.

That's both unfair and untrue. I've only, to the best of my recollection, commented in that regard when it's clear said claims of Nintendo's 'innovations' are misguided or at the very least dubious. It's not "anyone" either as it's usually been yourself and, prior to that, C=Style too. Other times I recall commenting in that regard have been in response to the glaring factual inaccuracies, wild exaggeration and/or statements of revisionist history made in issue 101's NES 'Collector's Guide', NES-bit magazine (iirc) and the notorious case of an official Ninty magazine's UK website. I've been far from alone when having voiced such issues I might add.

It hasn't been solely about Ninty's "successes or achievement" either. Many issues have been raised by myself and others on the forum, e.g. the botched 3DS post-launch period up until the price cut and Mario games were released, the disastrous initial unveiling of Wii U, the lack of much new IP, hardware issues of 3DS, the need for Circle Pad Pro, the company's declining finances... and so on.

I appreciate you "don't get it" but, as you say, we sure have some fun debates from time to time.

Hmm, I know I'm not normally on Nintendo's side, but....

I do think some claims of their accomplishments and influence are, actually, entirely correct (to an extent).

I dont care for them CURRENTLY..... though there is a possibility for change with the Wii U, but that's another story and it's not out for awhile yet..... but I used to really like their stuff. I consider the NES to be one of my 3 favorite consoles of all time. The other 2 being the 2600, and the Saturn (though I have barely any games for THAT yet, so it hasnt been used too often).

I dont know much about how it was for you all in the UK, but here in the States, Mario and all of them got REALLY BIG, really fast. Everybody had a Nintendo console. Everyone wanted one. Everyone liked Mario, or Zelda, or Metroid, or all of them. I dont think Nintendo, as game designers, are particularly innovative right NOW, but back then..... yeah, I'd say they were. Particularly around here. I get the impression that things like, ah.... what are they, the older computer-ish things, like the Spectrum or the Amstrad or all of them.... were alot bigger over in the UK than they were here (they were nearly non-existant here), so that, as opposed to Nintendo's constant presence, might change perceptions.

Here though.... oh yeah. They had influence. And alot of it. A great deal of developers that are based either in the US, or over in Japan, have at some point likely been influenced by some of Nintendo's stuff of the past. Particularly indie devs lately; I *very* often see Mario or Zelda or Metroid listed as an inspiration for whatever game it happens to be at the time. And one way or another, their sales numbers, at least here and in Japan, were pretty darned huge.


And keep in mind when you're reading this..... it's *me* saying this, lol. You KNOW I'm not acting out of fanboy-ism.

[martyg]

Surely you kinda have to go by default with Tennis for 2, Space War or Pong at number one

Probably Pong I guess as it was the one that proved video games could be a commercial success both at home and in public (pubs arcades etc)

Without it games may never have taken off the way they did

I think the writer didn't do a lot of research when he named Tennis for Two as influential. That would mean it influenced something else, which it did not. It was a little heard of tech demo at Brookhaven that was shown twice at Brookhaven; once in 1958 and once in 1959. It wasn't brought in to public knowledge until Bill was unwitingly appropriated by several companies trying to use it as prior technology in the late 70's and Dave Ahl wrote about it accordingly. (The article gets the details wrong as well on why it didn't serve as prior technology, both in the 70's and in the 80's Nintendo tried to use it again).

Spacewar! was certainly influential, so is PONG. Tennis for Two, not at all.

[killbot]

Surely you kinda have to go by default with Tennis for 2, Space War or Pong at number one

Probably Pong I guess as it was the one that proved video games could be a commercial success both at home and in public (pubs arcades etc)

Without it games may never have taken off the way they did

I think the writer didn't do a lot of research when he named Tennis for Two as influential. That would mean it influenced something else, which it did not. It was a little heard of tech demo at Brookhaven that was shown twice at Brookhaven; once in 1958 and once in 1959. It wasn't brought in to public knowledge until Bill was unwitingly appropriated by several companies trying to use it as prior technology in the late 70's and Dave Ahl wrote about it accordingly. (The article gets the details wrong as well on why it didn't serve as prior technology, both in the 70's and in the 80's Nintendo tried to use it again).

Spacewar! was certainly influential, so is PONG. Tennis for Two, not at all.

IIRC Pong was created after Nolan Bushnell saw a prototype of the Magnavox Odyssey's tennis game at a trade show. If that is true (and Jagfest will know) then surely it's the Magnavox game that gets the credit, not Pong.

[Misery]

Surely you kinda have to go by default with Tennis for 2, Space War or Pong at number one

Probably Pong I guess as it was the one that proved video games could be a commercial success both at home and in public (pubs arcades etc)

Without it games may never have taken off the way they did

I think the writer didn't do a lot of research when he named Tennis for Two as influential. That would mean it influenced something else, which it did not. It was a little heard of tech demo at Brookhaven that was shown twice at Brookhaven; once in 1958 and once in 1959. It wasn't brought in to public knowledge until Bill was unwitingly appropriated by several companies trying to use it as prior technology in the late 70's and Dave Ahl wrote about it accordingly. (The article gets the details wrong as well on why it didn't serve as prior technology, both in the 70's and in the 80's Nintendo tried to use it again).

Spacewar! was certainly influential, so is PONG. Tennis for Two, not at all.

IIRC Pong was created after Nolan Bushnell saw a prototype of the Magnavox Odyssey's tennis game at a trade show. If that is true (and Jagfest will know) then surely it's the Magnavox game that gets the credit, not Pong.

If I recall correctly, this is indeed the case; Nolan Bushnell getting the idea from a prototype made by Ralph Baer (the difference between his version, and pong, was that one was digital, the other analog.... whatever that means).

I still give Pong a good deal of credit though, as one way or another, THAT specific version of that idea was the one that ended up all over the place, and started to get people interested.

That being said, Baer is still often referred to as the "Father of the Video Game Industry" for his many contributions, and rightly so.

A book I have about arcade classics had a section on this particular thing, is where I got the info.

[The Laird]

Pretty much, Ralph Baer's game inspired Bushnell to make Pong, which itself was originally meant to be just a exercise for engineer Al Alcorn.

Not that many people saw Baer's game, it was Atari's Pong that inspired the millions of clones that came after it so that is why it takes so much credit.