10 most important video games of all time, as judged by 2 designers, 2 academics, and 1 lowly blogger
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Mar 12th 2007 at 2:57PM }
Henry Lowood, curator of the History of Science and Technology Collections at Stanford University, and his four-member committee have announced the 'game canon', a list of games to be considered by the US Library of Congress for make benefit glorious history of interactive gaming culture. The canon grew from a proposal submitted to the Library of Congress last fall and is modeled on the efforts of the National Film Preservation Board, which produces an annual list of films that are subsequently added to the National Film Registry. The Registry is managed by the Library of Congress.Lowood and company's initial list (below) attempts to single out the ten most important games of all time by selecting titles that represent the beginnings of significant game genres and concepts. The committee is comprised of game designers Warren Spector and Steve Meretzky (of Infocom fame), Lowood's Stanford cohort Matteo Bittanti, and -- what's this? -- Joystiq's Christopher Grant...? So that's why you've been strutting around the office with that nose-in-the-air attitude, eh? Too good for us, Mr. "I decide what's worthy" Grant? What a sham.
The inaugural selections:
- 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)
- Sensible World of Soccer (1994)
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
nowhere @ Mar 12th 2007 3:02PM
No Pong? For shame.
Jack of No Trades @ Mar 12th 2007 3:01PM
Agreed. Super Mario World or SMB3?
Patrick @ Mar 12th 2007 3:03PM
wrong!
Mat @ Mar 12th 2007 3:04PM
Sensible World of Soccer? This is the only one I've never heard of... Anyone know why it's on the list? (just curious)
required @ Mar 12th 2007 3:05PM
it's clearly subjective because that list smell like ass
Kankles @ Mar 12th 2007 3:05PM
A few questions
Why No Ultima?
Why doom and not wolf3D?
Why the soccer one?
Why mario 3 intead of one or the hundreds of othe non linear games?
Tanster @ Mar 12th 2007 3:08PM
Not a single Zelda title or Metroid?
NintendoFanbot @ Mar 12th 2007 3:09PM
If anything is right in the world, 10 games a year is not enough.
It also neglects the market that initiated the console market: THE ARCADE.
Vidikron @ Mar 12th 2007 3:11PM
I can understand why the other games are on there, but why is Sensible World of Soccer on there? What impact did it have?
Suidae @ Mar 12th 2007 3:12PM
Important games that should have been on the list:
Street Fighter II - 'nuff said.
Grand Theft Auto III - not only incredible game, but also created the most political controversy.
Dune II (warcraft?!?!?!) - the REAL first RTS.
Pac Man - ever heard of the Pac-Man widows?
Ultima series (including Akalabeth) - RPGs RPGs and RPGs!
The SIMs - love it or hate it, no can deny its eaten up half of the best-seller list for many years.
Jake @ Mar 12th 2007 3:12PM
hmmm...Tough to reduce it down to 10. And you definately have to understand they are basing it on games that started genres and such, not off pure popularity and quality.
Don't agree with the soccer one. Don't agree with Civilization and SimCity both making it. Not so sure about Tetris to be honest. Was that the first somewhat popular puzzler of that general genre?
I can accept the list, but it is weird that SMB3 is the only game I could really stand to play right now.
ZOMG no Halo!! Joystiq BIAZ!!!
Jack of No Trades @ Mar 12th 2007 3:13PM
Sensible Soccer:
"It was widely regarded as the most successful football game of its time, constantly topping charts such as Amiga Power's "All Time Top 100", and achieving high scoring reviews mostly of 90% and above. Many dubbed it a vast improvement over previous games in the genre, such as the Kick Off series."
Richard DeV @ Mar 12th 2007 3:23PM
no zelda or mario?
Nessuno @ Mar 12th 2007 3:22PM
For the "why Doom and not Wolfenstein" or "why Warcraft and not Dune?" crowd, let me point out that it's not the most important to have done something *first*. It's more important to do it well enough that it changes the paradigm of gaming.
For example, does it matter that the Vikings discovered and settled North America centuries before Columbus? Not much, since it didn't lead to much. The important discovery was Columbus even though he wasn't first.
The people who made this list seemed to value the first really quality game that caught on over the one that was technically first.
Eric Ward @ Mar 12th 2007 3:29PM
Thanks, but could you include the reason WHY these games were chosen specifically. I'd really like to know. I obviously understand the historically significance of games like Sim City, but I'd like to know the reasoning behind these choices.
JodyAnthony @ Mar 12th 2007 3:30PM
Any list without 'Nuts and Milk' is worthless.
Anni @ Mar 12th 2007 3:31PM
Warcraft series? Is it fair to include the whole series? For my money, the Mario Bros. series put together is crazy significant as hell, but 3 is the only one noted here.
As far as this whole list goes, that's a big fat "whatever."
harmonica @ Mar 12th 2007 3:46PM
So you're saying Wolfenstein 3D didn't do the FPS well? Was it Doom that was the first to move the player as opposed to the background/stage??? I could be mistaken.
Not having Pong is inexcusible. It spawned everything. I don't really care about the Soccer Game, but there are some absolutely phenominal sports games that came out before 1994, if that is what they are getting at. Tecmo Super Bowl was probably the first true indepth sim that I can recall (where players stats change over the course of a season, had cut scenes for dramatic effect, full seasons/playoffs, and complete NFL/NFLPA license). Not sure of any other game in any other sport before it that had everything found commonly in todays sports games.
Ben @ Mar 12th 2007 3:39PM
Uhhmm,
Penn and Teller: Smoke and Mirrors? Anyone?
Derbeste @ Mar 12th 2007 3:42PM
I have to agree that this list is lacking to say the most.
Some I agree with (Tetris and Doom).
But no Zelda? That spawned a whole genre on it's own.
No Mario? That games continues to define the platformer.
No SFII???? This is the most agregious oversite. SF2 IS fighting games.
No Final Fantasy and/or Dragon Quest?????
again....these games define the beginning of console RPGs.
No PONG!!?? The first videogame of them all???
Guys...I think we can all do better.
Here is my list
- Super Mario Brothers
- Doom
- Tetris
- Pong
- Street Fighter II
- Dragon Quest (I would have said FF, but FF1 was realy an answer to DQ)
- Pac Man
- Everquest
- The Legend of Zelda
- Mario 64
Thoughts?
Geo @ Mar 12th 2007 3:46PM
Where is HALO...?
austenw @ Mar 12th 2007 3:52PM
I wholeheartedly 100% agree with all 10 games on this list aside from Sensible World of Soccer. However, I do find it strange that Zelda was not on there. The only reason I think they would leave that out is that Zelda is kind of a hybrid game, crossing RPG with action adventure. In which case, Mario and Zork would take the precedent over Zelda.
Jack @ Mar 12th 2007 4:01PM
Actually Wolf3D redefined the genre and is the cause for all the shooters we have today. And Wolf3D was a great game to boot, so the Vikings and North America argument doenst work
Jack of No Trades @ Mar 12th 2007 3:51PM
Hey they forgot Red Steel.
eekers @ Mar 12th 2007 3:57PM
where is Elite? first game where you had freedom to immerse in a game world,do whatever you want and get lost in it for hours.
HOw about a list not drawn up by people with beards and/or glasses
REUYL @ Mar 12th 2007 3:53PM
WTF? No Pong, Pac Man, Zelda: OoT or Super Mario 64? Heck, GTA III was another game that defined a genre.
Tatsuya @ Mar 12th 2007 6:38PM
To #13:
Dune II is the first RTS and probably the best well before Warcraft. The first Warcraft was crap and the serie really began with Warcraft 2.
Dune II was real time, had 3 really different factions(and not 2 like the first Warcraft, not really different either), great digital voices (that was a must back then) and even an animated introduction. That game created the genre and not Warcraft. It's not fanboyism it's just Giving to Caesar what is Caesar's.
Jon @ Mar 12th 2007 3:54PM
@Derbeste
I agree with your list more. Never even heard of Sensible world soccer. and think that Mario 64 did more for gaming than SMB3
Gavin @ Mar 12th 2007 3:56PM
Ralph Baer is the father of video games and Pong is the single most important game in that it came first and paved the way for everything else. Without Pong this list is useless and a futile attempt at best. What a joke...
Wraith @ Mar 12th 2007 4:18PM
No _______? This is an outrage! I, as a citizen of the Internet, hereby register my disgust!
mj @ Mar 12th 2007 4:02PM
Civilization is still playable, and by far the best game on this list.
I guess the list is deficient in modern console genres, but this is list heavy in the early stuff. So nothing wrong with leaving out fighters and FF style RPGs and racing games, etc.
It's only odd to include SpaceWar and exclude Pong when you're including Warcraft and excluding Dune. Seems inconsistent, that's all. But I doubt any gamer would agree with these academics (and blogger) on any top 10 list.
edgore @ Mar 12th 2007 4:03PM
The real reason taht Doom is on the list instead of Wolfenstein is Deathmatch - The revolution with Doom was not that it was an FPS - it was that you could stay late after work and shoot your cubemates.
C. Grant @ Mar 12th 2007 4:04PM
Everyone: It's not about being *first*, but about being the most important, as determined by above group. For example, it would be difficult to argue that Wolf 3D had a larger impact on the gaming world than DOOM. The entire FPS genre was actually called DOOM-clones for about 4 years after the game came out. From online deatmatch and user-generated mods to the beginning of the violence in games media circus (NOT started with GTAIII), DOOM had it all, even if it wasn't, technically, first.
Kankles: Non-linearity was only one reason for my selection of SMB3. Others included the game's immense popularity (arguably the best selling game of all time), it's cultural influence (SMB is one of the most remixed and recycled cultural properties today), the marketing storm around 3's release (now commonplace for major titles), and the evolution and perfection of the 2D platformer from SMB1 to SMB3 on the very same platform, before technology granted the designers more tools.
Jake: Playability was a primary concern in the selection of my two games: DOOM and SMB3.
Lord_NerdHammer @ Mar 12th 2007 4:04PM
The NY Times says that Christopher Grant put Super Mario bros. 3 on there. Maybe he could enlighten us in his blog? The Times article also covers the reasons for the selections in a bit more depth... but i still don't agree with the soccer one. That should have been Techmo bowl if they are looking for sports... Maybe they didn't want to fill up the list with nintendo titles ;)
Geo @ Mar 12th 2007 4:13PM
1- Pac-Man
2- Pong
3- Super Mario World
4- Wolfvenstein
5- Doom
6- Zelda
7- warcraft series
8- Sensible World Soccer
9- Half Life
10-Halo
fmuartstu @ Mar 12th 2007 4:11PM
lol you think red steel is that great.
I agree, sf2, mario 64, and final fantasy should b on the list. and of course legend of zelda. these guys who made this list are unworthy to make the list of worthy games.
Todd @ Mar 12th 2007 4:12PM
The point of this list isn't to find the ten best games of all time or even the ten most important or influential games of all time. It's a list of ten historically important games that should be preserved by the Library of Congress. So while OMG NO ZELDA!!!, this is just an initial list that will be, if they follow the trends of music and movies, be continually updated over the years. The lack of any game, say Pong, doesn't mean that the game in question isn't important and will not be preserved; it just means that it wasn't picked this year. Basically, relax. Just because your favorite game wasn't picked does not de-legitimize your enjoyment of said game.
Jake @ Mar 12th 2007 4:12PM
OMG, I just realized what game Star Raiders is. I used to absolutely friken love that game. Played it so much. Awesome! Anyone who hasn't played this needs to just to understand the roots of gaming. I am so going to find a version of this on PC now. I almost forgot about that game; been many years.
One thing I think wasn't clear enough in the article is these are top 10 console games of all time. That is why pac-man and SFII aren't in there, because those were arcade games that were transfered to consoles. And, while Pong was huge to the video game world, it didn't introduce many specific concepts that stuck. There weren't many or any successful Pong ripoffs.
The original Zelda, for as awesome as it is, didn't totally spawn tons of features that stuck in many other games to come. It more combined other features in a unique way and did an awesome job at it. But then again, Mario3 didn't introduce much for concepts and it is in there. All Mario 3 did was introduce the "world with icon that moves to different levels" feature. I think Zelda and Mario1 should be in and Mario3 should be out.
Metroid1 brought a bit to the table; it should at least get an honorable mention. Some will flame me for this, but Halo deserves a mention if Mario3 got in there. Halo introduced more features that have stuck to the FPS genre than Mario3 did to the platformer. They are both kind of similar in that they weren't the first to do a lot of stuff, but did them so well that they became standards for years to come.
Personally, I think they should have used 20 games just to cover every genre. River City Ransom anyone (I think that was the first run around and beat countless amounts of crap up game)? Grand Theft Auto 3 should maybe be in there, as it influences a lot of today's games. Doom is the only shooter in the list, despite the fact that 20% of today's games are shooters. Not even one shooter that involves aiming, the primary gameplay aspect of shooters? Soccer instead of Tecmo Bowl. You know the countless hordes of Madden players that were gaming in the NES days were Tecmo freaks, right. Madden, the yearly #1 selling game thingy if you haven't heard.
With only 10, though, there is no way to make a list that includes what is deserving. The list should be 20. Even though SFII was an arcade game originally, it should probably be in since it created fighting games. If you are going to have WoW, you better have Madden. (today's most popular games, both of which I don't like)
NintendoFanbot @ Mar 12th 2007 4:12PM
@ C. Grant
It's just kind of odd that the whole arcade generation seems to have been skipped over. I mean, Space Invaders, Pong. Arcade games marketing home console versions. Surely those were a sign of their cultural times as well. Though I'd agree their legacy isn't as known today, but still.
Thanks for the input anyways. :)
u @ Mar 12th 2007 4:13PM
the soccer one is on there cuz it was the first decent sports game morons .....
Nate @ Mar 12th 2007 4:13PM
Just because a game did something "first" or introduced something completely different to the genre, doesn't mean it was more "important".
Case in point: There is no possible way that Sensible World of Soccer was more important than Tecmo Bowl or the Madden series...no way.
Jonathan Tran @ Mar 12th 2007 4:32PM
ok, let me say this list is not perfect but the suggestions here are far worse.
Mario64? Why? Guess what, Tomb Raider should come before Mario 64.
Mario 3 was selected for being non linear. Mario 1 was great and all but was it so amazing of a play experience comapared to other 8-bit platformers?
Zelda: This did not really invent RPGs and, IMO, is it's "own" genre, i.e. it didn't contribute anything. It led to making more Zelda games.
Metroid: how is this game better than SMB3? It's not. Different? ok. Maybe it should get points for having a female lead. But most people outside of those who actually read the manual wouldn't know she was a girl. Tomb Raider for points.
Pac Man I agree.
Sims yes, BUT they said in SimCity's explanation that it led to the sims. So, technically it is covered.
Street Fighter 2 should yes, be on here. It STARTED fighters and spawned the arcade boom that laster 2 decades.
required @ Mar 12th 2007 4:15PM
It's shocking that the editor of this Nintendo PR site selected a Nintendo title. ;)
KiwiNick @ Mar 12th 2007 4:17PM
Street Fighter fvcking 2
robothouse @ Mar 12th 2007 5:03PM
No Elf Bowling? For shame...
just a guy @ Mar 12th 2007 4:21PM
You guys obviously don't know your video game history. Spacewar predated Pong by almost a decade, and had more complex graphics and gameplay to boot. However, Pong was produced for a mass audience and introduced people to home consoles, which is probably why it's on the list.
@10: Tetris is on the list because it pretty much created the casual puzzle genre. It reached unprecedented mainstream appeal.
In general, it's easy to track the evolution of video games throughout history, but it's difficult to pinpoint specific games that shifted paradigms or created genres. These guys have a difficult feat to accomplish.
Steve @ Mar 12th 2007 9:46PM
As much as I love Metroid I can understand why it wasn't included. It's not really all that groundbreaking, but why the hell is Pac-Man missing? Pac-Man was HUGE and from what I understand it was the first popular game where the player controlled an actual character instead of something genetic like a tank or ship.
Why SMB-3 instead of the original Super Mario? SMB-3 was definitely a better game than SMB, but in terms of historical impact the original had far more significance. Wasn't it even credited for reviving the video game industry?
While we're at it, why do all the games have to have had a positive impact? An important game can have a negative impact too, and from what I hear ET on the Atari 2600 is blamed for the death of the home video game industry in the early 80s. Surely a game that nearly killed video games was as important as the soccer game!
required @ Mar 12th 2007 4:23PM
Tetris made the Nintendo GameBoy, not the casual puzzle genre.
32_Footsteps @ Mar 12th 2007 4:24PM
Whoa... Sensible World Soccer? That important? I don't know, what did it do that affected that many developers and/or gamers? As much as I don't like the company now, I think EA's very early 90's games would beat it out for influential in either regard (I'm still fond of the NHLPA games, before the NHL license made them rinse fighting from the game for a while). Seriously, what ground did SWS break that EA hadn't already start running into the ground?
Also, anyone else find it odd that Adventure, Legend of Zelda, and Dragon Quest all got left off? I'd probably knock out SWS and Star Raiders in favor of Adventure and Dragon Quest, though there are good arguments that Zelda should make it in before Adventure.
Also, in terms of sim games - either SimCity or Civ (probably the latter) should be dumped in favor of M.U.L.E. The truly old-school know why.
ViperVisor @ Mar 12th 2007 4:24PM
Dump Super Mario Bros. 3 for SMB
Dump Sensible World of Soccer for GoldenEye or an earlier pro sports game.