By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - NatGeo's "The Evolution of Video Games" The 80's: The Decade that Made US

Tagging! I have to run to a meeting, but I want to add my two cents later.



Around the Network
Michael-5 said:
kain_kusanagi said:
Michael-5 said:

Yea, I know, I'm just saying it's not a good timeline in particular.

Yea, Super Mario was 1985, but Mario was around before that, and Donkey Kong was a big arcade game before Super Mario Bros. Giving credit to Super Mario Bros. as Mario's origin is like giving credit to Final Fantasy as the first JRPG, or giving credit to Halo as the first major FPS....

wait... they gave Halo credit for that too!!!

I have had to explain this so many times, but everyone seems to be looking at this timeline wrong. It's not a list to give credit to the best of gaming stuff. It's a timeline.

Super Mario Bros is on the timeline because it was a major turning point. If it was my timeline I would have at least included Donkey Kong as a bullet point in an entry for Arcade games.

Halo is not being give credit as the first major FPS. I think it's on the timeline to show where MS jumped in and made a big splash. It's bullet points don't claim it is the first, best, or most important FPS. It is just a landmark on the road of video game evolution. If I made a timeline for FPS games I would have made room for Wolfienstin 3D  and Doom and Quake and Half-Life and Goldeneye and Perfect Dark and so on. But as this is a short overview of the broad history of video games I think I can forgive NatGeo for trying to do something other than print pictures of Lions and Tigers and Bears.

I get that, but the timeline is missing so many major moments. Final Fantasy saving Square-Soft being a big one, Sony entering the market in 1994, the death of Sega, etc.

So it should be a mile long and include everyone's interpretation of what's important? Why can't it just be a quick look at where it started, where we are now, and a few interesting tidbits in-between? I'm a huge Sega fan so if I made the timeline I would have had more than the Dreamcast on it, but even as a Sega fan I have to admit that for such a short snapshot of the history of gaming Sega, as well as Final Fantasy, are blips. Halo is a blip too, but NatGeo readers probably know what Halo is while they probably think Final Fantasy is that Disney animated concert thing they never saw.

If you had to reduce the history of gaming from 1947 to 2013 down to a handful of landmarks that the average none gamer might be able to put into perspective I doubt it would look the same as one made from a hardcore gamer. NatGeo's timeline doesn't insult gaming or gamers. It just uses widely recognizable stuff to illustrate what's been going on in gaming for the past 66 years.



kain_kusanagi said:
Michael-5 said:
kain_kusanagi said:
Michael-5 said:

Yea, I know, I'm just saying it's not a good timeline in particular.

Yea, Super Mario was 1985, but Mario was around before that, and Donkey Kong was a big arcade game before Super Mario Bros. Giving credit to Super Mario Bros. as Mario's origin is like giving credit to Final Fantasy as the first JRPG, or giving credit to Halo as the first major FPS....

wait... they gave Halo credit for that too!!!

I have had to explain this so many times, but everyone seems to be looking at this timeline wrong. It's not a list to give credit to the best of gaming stuff. It's a timeline.

Super Mario Bros is on the timeline because it was a major turning point. If it was my timeline I would have at least included Donkey Kong as a bullet point in an entry for Arcade games.

Halo is not being give credit as the first major FPS. I think it's on the timeline to show where MS jumped in and made a big splash. It's bullet points don't claim it is the first, best, or most important FPS. It is just a landmark on the road of video game evolution. If I made a timeline for FPS games I would have made room for Wolfienstin 3D  and Doom and Quake and Half-Life and Goldeneye and Perfect Dark and so on. But as this is a short overview of the broad history of video games I think I can forgive NatGeo for trying to do something other than print pictures of Lions and Tigers and Bears.

I get that, but the timeline is missing so many major moments. Final Fantasy saving Square-Soft being a big one, Sony entering the market in 1994, the death of Sega, etc.

So it should be a mile long and include everyone's interpretation of what's important? Why can't it just be a quick look at where it started, where we are now, and a few interesting tidbits in-between? I'm a huge Sega fan so if I made the timeline I would have had more than the Dreamcast on it, but even as a Sega fan I have to admit that for such a short snapshot of the history of gaming Sega, as well as Final Fantasy, are blips. Halo is a blip too, but NatGeo readers probably know what Halo is while they probably think Final Fantasy is that Disney animated concert thing they never saw.

If you had to reduce the history of gaming from 1947 to 2013 down to a handful of landmarks that the average none gamer might be able to put into perspective I doubt it would look the same as one made from a hardcore gamer. NatGeo's timeline doesn't insult gaming or gamers. It just uses widely recognizable stuff to illustrate what's been going on in gaming for the past 66 years.

If I had to reduce gaming history to a short list of landmarks, I would not have included Kinect, and mention either Gameboy, Wii, or Playstations entrance into gaming instead.

Kinect really doesn't belong, and various medium sized landmarks overshadow large scale ones. Like where is the crash of 83? Rise of Nintendo (especially their dominance over handhelds, and Tetris starting it all)? Where is Solitaire!?

LOL, I think some of the events on that list, plain suck.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Augen said:
kain_kusanagi said:
What's wrong with you people?

I think you have a problem kain.  I use to get annoyed by it, then upset with you, but I think you suffer from some deep delusion.  It's fine to like a game, but it is not the jewel encrusted golden gift from the treasure vaults of Xerxes you seem obsessed with convincing everyone it is.  


This^



Augen said:
kain_kusanagi said:

I have apsolutely no problem with anyone who critisizes any game I enjoy so long as they do it from an opinion bases. What I don't like is when people claim a game is garbage, it's positive reviews are bias or paid off, and considers those who do like it to have bad taste in games. That's when I get defensive. But that has more to do with people who think their opinion is worth more than other people's. Most of the time I just state why I like it and move on. I don't derail conversations, but I do respond when I disagree, just like anyone does. I did the same thing in regard to Mass Effect 3's ending.

"...it is not the jewel encrusted golden gift from the treasure vaults of Xerxes you seem obsessed with convincing everyone it is. "

That's your opinion. Mine is the opposite. I hate to break this to you, but your opinion has no more value than mine or anyone elses.

"You act like this is your only child or something and I think you have some sort of deep seeded issue. Calm down kain, it is, in the end, just a game."

You must be reading more into my words if you think I need to calm down. I assure you I am calm, but I am serious about this. You're the one claiming I'm delusional and have deep seeded issues. Those are personal attacks. I don't appreaciate that and it's against forum rules as well.


Wow.  This is worse than I ever imagined.  Look, kain, this is clearly something deeply personal to you.  I am not going to argue with you, okay?  I'm not your enemy or someone trying to hurt you.  I am just going to suggest you look into counseling, and that's not an attack kain, many good people have and it can be very helpful.  I sincerely wish you all the best in life.


I think you are spot on with this... Reading through all of these comments... KainKusanagi or w/e... You have SERIOUS issues... You are in your own little bubble and refuse to see things for what they are.... It is very obvious you have some deeply rooted issues... I don't think he is at all off base to suggest you seek help... Because I was thinking the same thing before I even saw this comment... I don't know what it is about you... Kind of passive agressive.. Actually majorly passive aggressive. Something is off about you.. You DO get extremely defensive over your "favorite game" and throw out a bunch of meaningless statistics to defend it.... This entire list was horrible for the most part.. But you can't see that... You are truly a delusional human being.. You Don't see it and would never agree... But seriously, seek some help. and stop being so extremely defensive. You almost seem to have huge insecurities, and jump at any chance to defend your point of view.. while at the same time calling people out for expressing their point of view... You have major issues man.. Not being mean, just stating facts. 



Around the Network

Guys, please stop attempting to psychoanalyze kain based on some posts he made on a video game forum. We all have our favorite games and we're all protective of them.

@OP: the original blog post reads like something from someone only marginally interested in video games, but I appreciate the effort. About the infographic...the 1970s an 80s are well-covered -- although I would have liked to see Ultima, Space Invaders, The Legend of Zelda, Donkey Kong, and the Game Boy -- but when it gets to the 90s and 00s it takes a turn for the worse. I think Wing Commander could be replaced with Doom or Street Fighter II, two games with a much greater legacy in the industry. I've ambivalent about StarCraft; it's an outstanding game and definitely influential, but why not use Super Mario 64 or Quake for that period?

As far as this Halo controversy goes...while I agree with kain that the game is a masterful, seminal piece of software, I think that space could have gone to Grand Theft Auto III or to Wii Sports. Furthermore, I don't understand the list beneath Halo. It doesn't really focus on what made Halo a revolution. The Kinect thing is also strange. Maybe it would make more sense if the infographic focused on its applications outside the world of video games, e.g., athletics, medical care.



sethnintendo said:
thismeintiel said:
sethnintendo said:

Why the fuck is Diablo 1 listed in pre 70s? Am I seeing this pic wrong? Was there an original Diablo in the 70s that Blizzard copied?

It's not.  It looks like they were going to have qoutes from different games all over the list, but abandoned that idea half way through.  You'll notice Pro Wrestling falls between '71 and '72, but it was released in '86.  The Mario qoute just so happens to fall beside its game mention.  Lol, further proves that the list went to crap after 1990.



lol... That shouldn't have confused me but it did. You know what would have been more relevant? Putting the quotes in the actual decade the game was published... Just further confirms that this list is crap. Not a good sign to use a 90s game quote in the pre 70s bracket.

Lol, yea.  Though, it also wouldn't have been quite as confusing if they had kept with the qoute idea going throughout the list.  It seriously looks like they gave up on putting any effort in the list about half way through.



This looks a lot more thorough than my high school presentation.....and yet, less accurate.



I am the Playstation Avenger.