VGCollect Forum
General and Gaming => General => Topic started by: 2ko on May 07, 2026, 10:43:33 pm
-
Article here (https://nerdvana.co/general/world-video-game-hall-of-fame-2026-angry-birds-dragon-quest-fifa-international-soccer-silent-hill/202171/#google_vignette)
The 4 new games added are:
- Angry Birds
- Dragon Quest
- Fifa International Soccer
- Silent Hill
Pretty solid list. The fact the DQ is only now being added led me to looking up what made it previous years cause it is such an important game in gaming history.
Honestly, some of their choices in past years are kinda.... strange. Especially when considering things that aren't in the hall of fame yet.
Like how did Madden Football make it in before FIFA? This is supposed to be the "World Video Game Hall of Fame". Does anyone outside of USA even care about American football? A quick google search also tells me that FIFA has sold about 3x what Madden has.... Heck, apparently NBA2K also outsells Madden. So why madden at all?
Anyways I thought it was a pretty neat tid-bit of news to share. Can't really argue with these 4 games being added imo. Looking into previous years has led me with some headscratchers though lol
-
So why madden at all?
Because it's an american thing i guess.
I looked over the list and it's highly questionable and makes me wonder if only young millennials and gen-z are involved. Skyrim and Angry Birds? That's what you induct before Maze War? Before Wolfenstein 3D? Before Maniac Mansion? Before Monkey Island? Before M.U.L.E.? Before Alone in the Dark (without that, Resident Evil wouldn't be a thing even...) and most of all: Where the hell is Pitfall?
This is as bad of a joke as every other "Hall of Fame" (like the Rock n' Roll one or the WWE)
-
Omg The level of baffoonery of this hall of fame is on par with what I'd expect from any hall of fame. Like Sly said. It seems universal for hall of fames to be lacking. But boy oh boy do we got some meat on this bone. What were they thinking?
My main thing is I don't know what gives this company the accolades or litigious credibility to even do this to begin with outside of a subjective self contained Joke. Isn't there usually a board and isn't that board usually selected at random by unanimous vote to assemble a "hall of fame" in other mediums? And doesn't that board usually consist of legends of said medium. Like for example Shigeru Miyamoto and Niel Druckman ect. I suppose I should take it with a grain of salt but I feel there is a large difference between a museum level "hall of fame" and some guy posting his top 20 games on YouTube. The care is lacking here. Not by who they put but by who they left out.
These 4 selections aren't entirely bad. But they become insanely bad once I find who's left off. If one were to represent mobile as a gaming medium it has to be through Angry Birds. It is peak for mobile gaming. Silent Hill seems quite a bit forced though. Get all the way out of here. If there is not one entry of Metroid, Castlevania, the Red Dead Redemption, Bioshock or Starfox franchises here. Get Silent Hill as far distanced from my face as possible lol.
On top of that. Why is it the first entry? 2 is far more influential and genre pushing and by far the critical consensus for the best Silent Hill game. We cant say the hall of fame always picks the first because they didnt with Grand theft auto III proving they are trying to pick the most influential to the franchise. Has anyone outside of silent hill die hard fans even played the first entry on OEM hardware? 2 is the king. 2 is the entry.
I think the company has also pigeonholed itself by allowing so few entires per year. It makes it so they dont get to everyone fast enough.
Bioshock not being here is quite frankly a loss of credibility. It has one of the most quoted endings in video game lexicon and pushed fps story telling in the 6th Gen landscape. A generation dominated by story driven fps.
Dude where is donkey kong country?
Banjo Kazooie?
Punchout!!!!! Literally punch out.
Do I have to get into the absence of fallout? Is fallout not one of the most innovative RPGs of all time? Am I in the twilight zone. That game is probably top 5 all time in terms of sheer influence on industry and cult establishing of a falollowing.
You get not one metroid or castlevania both of which have an entire genre named after them but you get garbage ass FIFA? Which has gone through an identity crisis most of its existence and only sells because its the only soccer game allowed on the market because of EA bully stranglehold on sports licensing. Applies to Madden to. Easy to sell 150 million units with no competitors.
Bejeweled over Castlevania? Isn't Bejewled Extremely Derivative? Why not Bubble Bobble.
Barbie Fashion Designer over Super Metroid?
This whole thing needs to be scrapped now. The more I ponder it the worse it gets lol. Started off a meh but now it's resentment. The hobby should he handled with care by now. Either do it right or not at all. Its not that hard to not do this imo.
-
I'm surprised that Silent Hill was ultimately inducted over other finalists like The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, League of Legends, and Mega Man. But after reading that one of the four criteria is influence, then that surprise is somewhat diminished considering that nearly every indie and modern survival horror game is inspired by it or Resident Evil. I'm also surprised that there wasn't just one but two MMOs as finalists: the aforementioned League of Legends and also Runescape.
While I don't care about these historical accolades and what has or hasn't been inducted and nominated, I will point out that there are four criteria to how selections are made:
Icon-status: the game is widely recognized and remembered.
Longevity: the game is more than a passing fad and has enjoyed popularity over time.
Geographical reach: the game meets the above criteria across international boundaries.
Influence: The game has exerted significant influence on the design and development of other games, on other forms of entertainment, or on popular culture and society in general. A game may be inducted on this criterion alone without necessarily having met the first three.
The Wikipedia article for World Video Game Hall of Fame (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Video_Game_Hall_of_Fame) also mentions that Influence is considered to be the most important criteria too, though there's nothing on The Strong's website itself to confirm that.
Like how did Madden Football make it in before FIFA? This is supposed to be the "World Video Game Hall of Fame". Does anyone outside of USA even care about American football? A quick google search also tells me that FIFA has sold about 3x what Madden has.... Heck, apparently NBA2K also outsells Madden. So why madden at all?
I agree, especially when considering that one of the four criteria for selection is geographical reach.
My main thing is I don't know what gives this company the accolades or litigious credibility to even do this to begin with outside of a subjective self contained Joke. Isn't there usually a board and isn't that board usually selected at random by unanimous vote to assemble a "hall of fame" in other mediums? And doesn't that board usually consist of legends of said medium. Like for example Shigeru Miyamoto and Niel Druckman ect. I suppose I should take it with a grain of salt but I feel there is a large difference between a museum level "hall of fame" and some guy posting his top 20 games on YouTube. The care is lacking here. Not by who they put but by who they left out.
The below text explains how final nominations are decided upon and the types of people involved in that process:
An internal committee of museum staff—including curators, gaming historians, and educators—reviews the nominees each year. They choose the 12 finalists based on the criteria of icon-status, longevity, geographic reach, and influence, and they also try to ensure that the finalists provide a range of game types (console, home computer, handheld) and a blend of returning and first-time finalists.
Personally, I'd consider these sorts of experts far more capable of making selections in this sort of process based on history and cultural influence than the kinds of industry figures you're suggesting. In the end, there is an exhaustive list of games that could be nominated or inducted. This is just one organization's selections.
-
Bejeweled over Castlevania? Isn't Bejewled Extremely Derivative? Why not Bubble Bobble.
While it wouldn't be the first puzzle game i'd think off, certainly not before Columns, Klax, Puzzle Bobble, it is a big franchise (50 million sold by 2010, obviously a lot more now) and it started the whole Match 3 Fad. There were and are thousands of copycats jumping up everywhere from straight up clones on google play to more interesting titles. It definitely belongs in a hall of fame but not before the other puzzle games that existed. Not before Klax or Colums that did all that connect stuff long before.
Personally, I'd consider these sorts of experts far more capable of making selections in this sort of process based on history and cultural influence than the kinds of industry figures you're suggesting. In the end, there is an exhaustive list of games that could be nominated or inducted. This is just one organization's selections.
I would say it depends on who these "experts" are. There are video game "scholars" in the way there are archaeologists or historians or scientists. In the end it might be some ex-ign morons or some random youtubers (god forbid some clueless people like the AVGN or Pat the NES Punk)
The problem is that the foundations are ignored. Rogue gets nominated once, when it should be in there from the start (especially considering today where tons of games are "roguelite" or "roguelike") and Starcraft first and Warcraft never even mentioned? Without the success of Warcraft 1 & 2, Starcraft would not even be a thing and Warcraft spawned World of Warcraft.
And tons of games never mentioned that should. I would put Wing Commander in there, given the fact that it pushed technological boundaries, is popular enough to spawn mods, was in the Guinness Book of World Records (WC3 and then 4 as most expensive video games until Shenmue) and where the reason why the whole "space opera" genre even exists (Colony Wars, Freespace, Freelancer, Starlancer and so on)
Same with Half-Life (shouldn't that be first ballot? influenced, the mods (counter-strike!), the culture about it, it made Valve and led to Steam and for over 20 years people ask where Half-Life 3 is)
Again, i just look at it, i don't claim to be an expert, but i definitely shake my head at those weird choices and nominations.
And then there's the induction of Barbie Fashion Designer...what exactly did that influence or how did that have any longevity?
-
Personally, I'd consider these sorts of experts far more capable of making selections in this sort of process based on history and cultural influence than the kinds of industry figures you're suggesting. In the end, there is an exhaustive list of games that could be nominated or inducted. This is just one organization's selections.
Can I ask why? Just off curiosity. I myself meet every criteria for what you just mentioned. Mostly all of that is self defined. You cant self define yourself as Shigeru Miyamoto or a legend in the medium. An artist. Anyone can say they are an expert. Self proclaimed experts do things like put Silent Hill 1 in a hall of fame before any Metroid title lol. I am a curator of retro games, I educate people on games I suppose, run a gaming page and media presence, and know vague game history. That bar is so vague and so low. I'm just a guy. I know as much as anyone else or less. None of which make someone's subjective opinion gospel to exclude and include people's sentimental gaming choices. At least with a developer or inventor they have autuority on the matter I can't have as a consumer. That is the problem with most review publications and hall of fames in general but at least most of those have board members that actually have created or transformed the medium. I'm not saying developers would be universally better. But that criteria you just quoted basically means any gamer on this site to James Rolfe or any other person in between. I guarantee our hall of fame would be better. Didn't this site make a top 100 games thing once?
I also don't understand your backtrack on Silent Hill 1 because I feel your gut instinct was definitely right, as it meets none of the criteria you show their site posted for a submission to the hall of fame. It's sole existence is because of a lane Resident Evil carved 3 years prior, even its own devs admitted this, so it cant possibly be considered innovative as a first entry into a genre. It didn't chart new ground. It altered an existing formula's mood. Aside from being first. 2 did everything better.
For every other aspect of gaming
Icon Status - 2 is far more known, sold way more units and is the beacon of the franchise that has been remade like 3 times because of how iconic it is.
Geographical reach - 2 sold more units in every country and was a cult classic in Japan
Innovation- 2 is the main torch bearer for psychological terror. It did it far better than 1. And 1 has mostly been considered to have aged poorly. And is not revered by casuals while 2 is.
To induct a game into the hall of fame that 97 out of 100 consumers hasn't even played is just insane.
And now I add the main reason why I dislike hall of fames.
What metric that you listed does Silent Hill do that Super Metroid or Metroid didn't do better?
Metroid is so genre innovating that it is literally the co-name of an entire genre. People literally couldn't name the genre without using the name Metroid. Metroid is more globally recognizable. Far more accessible to the average player considering Silent Hill isn't even played by children or casuals. Metroid has more staying power being that its older. It's not even in the same realm. It's maybe 10x more qualified. It is a pioneer.
I'm sorry. Off this alone this particular site loses credibility. To me anyway. I just wish these sites would say "our top q00" which screams "opinion and biased" not "hall of fame" which indicates consensus, authority and gospel. The entire hall of fame just off that observation alone doesnt have "historians" and game archeologists that should be taken with any ounce of sincerity over a typical guy. There is no universe where Silent Hill 1 gets in before 2. And no world where it comes even close to GTA 5 (the best selling game of all time. Other franchises have 2 entires) and Metroid. Metroid is possibly more hall of fame.worthy than Donkey Kong if i'm being frank. Unless we include spinoffs
I don't think I could have done worse if I intentionally tried. Like the rock n roll hall of fame. Its lost all meaning.
-
Bejeweled over Castlevania? Isn't Bejewled Extremely Derivative? Why not Bubble Bobble.
While it wouldn't be the first puzzle game i'd think off, certainly not before Columns, Klax, Puzzle Bobble, it is a big franchise (50 million sold by 2010, obviously a lot more now) and it started the whole Match 3 Fad. There were and are thousands of copycats jumping up everywhere from straight up clones on google play to more interesting titles. It definitely belongs in a hall of fame but not before the other puzzle games that existed. Not before Klax or Colums that did all that connect stuff long before.
Personally, I'd consider these sorts of experts far more capable of making selections in this sort of process based on history and cultural influence than the kinds of industry figures you're suggesting. In the end, there is an exhaustive list of games that could be nominated or inducted. This is just one organization's selections.
I would say it depends on who these "experts" are. There are video game "scholars" in the way there are archaeologists or historians or scientists. In the end it might be some ex-ign morons or some random youtubers (god forbid some clueless people like the AVGN or Pat the NES Punk)
The problem is that the foundations are ignored. Rogue gets nominated once, when it should be in there from the start (especially considering today where tons of games are "roguelite" or "roguelike") and Starcraft first and Warcraft never even mentioned? Without the success of Warcraft 1 & 2, Starcraft would not even be a thing and Warcraft spawned World of Warcraft.
And tons of games never mentioned that should. I would put Wing Commander in there, given the fact that it pushed technological boundaries, is popular enough to spawn mods, was in the Guinness Book of World Records (WC3 and then 4 as most expensive video games until Shenmue) and where the reason why the whole "space opera" genre even exists (Colony Wars, Freespace, Freelancer, Starlancer and so on)
Same with Half-Life (shouldn't that be first ballot? influenced, the mods (counter-strike!), the culture about it, it made Valve and led to Steam and for over 20 years people ask where Half-Life 3 is)
Again, i just look at it, i don't claim to be an expert, but i definitely shake my head at those weird choices and nominations.
And then there's the induction of Barbie Fashion Designer...what exactly did that influence or how did that have any longevity?
I'm starting to think Barbie Fashion designer is meant to troll. Because it's definitely a head scratcher. I notice a lot of these lists. Even ones done by rolling stone magazine always put a ridiculous take. They do this so people share it and roast it which only helps engagement.
Welcome to the video game hall of fame folks! To your left you will see Barbie Fashion Designer. Oh Fallout 3 and Half-Life? Those are in the archives. Didn't quite make the cut lol. Not up to snuff with Barbie. A titan of industry.
Half-Life is a good pick though. I had no idea they excluded it. I know its all opinion but some games just have to be there. And early. Half-Life is one of those.
-
Personally, I'd consider these sorts of experts far more capable of making selections in this sort of process based on history and cultural influence than the kinds of industry figures you're suggesting. In the end, there is an exhaustive list of games that could be nominated or inducted. This is just one organization's selections.
Can I ask why? Just off curiosity. I myself meet every criteria for what you just mentioned. Mostly all of that is self defined. You cant self define yourself as Shigeru Miyamoto or a legend in the medium. An artist. Anyone can say they are an expert. Self proclaimed experts do things like put Silent Hill 1 in a hall of fame before any Metroid title lol.
I also don't understand your backtrack on Silent Hill 1 because I feel your gut instinct was definitely right, as it meets none of the criteria you show their site posted for a submission to the hall of fame. It's sole existence is because of a lane Resident Evil carved 3 years prior, even its own devs admitted this, so it cant possibly be considered innovative as a first entry into a genre. It didn't chart new ground. It altered an existing formula's mood. Aside from being first. 2 did everything better.
I'm sorry. Off this alone this particular site loses credibility. To me anyway. I just wish these sites would say "our top q00" which screams "opinion and biased" not "hall of fame" which indicates consensus, authority and gospel. The entire hall of fame just off that observation alone doesnt have "historians" and game archeologists that should be taken with any ounce of sincerity over a typical guy. There is no universe where Silent Hill 1 gets in before 2.
Considering that these individuals are well-connected to a highly reputable institution related to the preservation, documentation, and education of video games, I will assume that they are far more informed about the history of games than you and I, and I would also argue that have more knowledge pertaining to games as a collective medium than individual developers whom often are far more like you or I as hobbyists of games than as people who actually study them.
Something I think you're failing to realize is that The Strong is a museum, and their collection of Hall of Fame selections comprise a physical exhibit for guests to visit—it is not just some list to garner online attention and discussion. If the barrier to inducting games into The Strong's Hall of Fame museum exhibit was limited to one game per genre, then the exhibit would be rather condensed while limiting a litany of other options that are just as worthy of being recognized. As a franchise, Silent Hill is not unlike Resident Evil, but it's also very much unique in its own way. Within the modern survival horror landscape of games, nearly all new titles are derivative of these two specific franchises, and it's quite apparent to identify which of the two is the inspiration. I'm not here to argue whether it's more appropriate to induct Silent Hill or Silent Hill 2 if they're the only two options being presented--they both have their strengths and lasting legacies and would be suitable to add to any list like this, though I'd personally say that it's the debut title that's most culturally impactful as the first three entries play identically besides the updated controls from tank to 3D locomotion, with the former also adopting a strong cinematic presence with its fixed camera design. Regardless, my own personal opinion doesn't matter in this conversation. Needless to say though, a universe does exist where a reputable organization (that shouldn't be dismissively compared to some news journalism site or YouTube personality) deemed Silent Hill better suited to such position than Silent Hill 2.
Of course, a game like Castlevania: Symphony of the Night would be just as appropriate to induct (as I'd argue that it specifically is far more impactful to games later developed as it spearheaded the pseudo-genre "Metroidvania" that you're alluding to), but as I mentioned, this is one singular organization's selections. Naturally, not everyone (far from everyone, in fact) will be satisfied with the final selections. However, I don't think anyone actually knowledgeable about the four inductees from the final pool of twelve each year would be able to argue in good faith that they aren't suitable options. And yes, this includes the previously mentioned Barbie Fashion Designer. Also, here is the extensive FAQ provided by The Strong (https://www.museumofplay.org/exhibits/world-video-game-hall-of-fame/faqs/) relating to how the Hall of Fame process is conducted.
And then there's the induction of Barbie Fashion Designer...what exactly did that influence or how did that have any longevity?
I'm starting to think Barbie Fashion designer is meant to troll. Because it's definitely a head scratcher. I notice a lot of these lists. Even ones done by rolling stone magazine always put a ridiculous take. They do this so people share it and roast it which only helps engagement.
Welcome to the video game hall of fame folks! To your left you will see Barbie Fashion Designer. Oh Fallout 3 and Half-Life? Those are in the archives. Didn't quite make the cut lol. Not up to snuff with Barbie. A titan of industry.
Fortunately, the internet offers us many opportunities to delve into topics we're unfamiliar with. Here is the Wikipedia article for Barbie Fashion Designer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbie_Fashion_Designer), complete with sources. Meanwhile, here are two (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRbqL69LEO8) videos (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p2tgYosjnQ) published by Strong Museum providing greater context to the game's history. And, lastly, here is the lengthy writing on The Strong's website (https://www.museumofplay.org/games/barbie-fashion-designer/) that goes into much detail about this selection.
Before dismissing something outright, it is best to gain knowledge about it first—this is sound advice that can be applied to anything in life. Then, opinions should be made, or else a person will likely present themselves as ignorant that will influence the effectiveness of their argument. With that said and after having gained an understanding of its impact, I stand by my previous statement that a game like Barbie Fashion Designer is a perfectly fine inductee. I'm not sure I understand why there has been such an impassioned display of opinion toward this topic, and especially when it's evident there's a lack of context being demonstrated too in that opinion's stance.
-
Personally, I'd consider these sorts of experts far more capable of making selections in this sort of process based on history and cultural influence than the kinds of industry figures you're suggesting. In the end, there is an exhaustive list of games that could be nominated or inducted. This is just one organization's selections.
Can I ask why? Just off curiosity. I myself meet every criteria for what you just mentioned. Mostly all of that is self defined. You cant self define yourself as Shigeru Miyamoto or a legend in the medium. An artist. Anyone can say they are an expert. Self proclaimed experts do things like put Silent Hill 1 in a hall of fame before any Metroid title lol.
I also don't understand your backtrack on Silent Hill 1 because I feel your gut instinct was definitely right, as it meets none of the criteria you show their site posted for a submission to the hall of fame. It's sole existence is because of a lane Resident Evil carved 3 years prior, even its own devs admitted this, so it cant possibly be considered innovative as a first entry into a genre. It didn't chart new ground. It altered an existing formula's mood. Aside from being first. 2 did everything better.
I'm sorry. Off this alone this particular site loses credibility. To me anyway. I just wish these sites would say "our top q00" which screams "opinion and biased" not "hall of fame" which indicates consensus, authority and gospel. The entire hall of fame just off that observation alone doesnt have "historians" and game archeologists that should be taken with any ounce of sincerity over a typical guy. There is no universe where Silent Hill 1 gets in before 2.
Considering that these individuals are well-connected to a highly reputable institution related to the preservation, documentation, and education of video games, I will assume that they are far more informed about the history of games than you and I, and I would also argue that have more knowledge pertaining to games as a collective medium than individual developers whom often are far more like you or I as hobbyists of games than as people who actually study them.
The credibility you claim they have is given by whom? What institution holds this kind of authority? What makes them more knowledgeable than say AVGN? Or us?
As a database mod for this site. A site cateloging more games than most sites do. For years. Why would you assume these random people have more knowledge on games than you? I don't believe that. I kinda feel you are taking to bat for them with not much context as to why. Even if they are gaming intellects. Possibly equal to other nerds. But not more. I could be wrong. But I guess unless you know these people personally we cant know their credentials so to me it's just another online opinion. I would even argue consuming media doesn't make you an expert. Pat the Nes punk knows more than us about the NES library i'm sure. But he's still biased by design. Knowledge isn't weighted in opinionated topics.
To say Silent Hill 1 having a more iconic legacy in the realm of gaming I feel is hot and counter cultural take.
I mean you are far more familiar with the silent hill franchise than me. So i'll defer tbh. But I was always under the impression that Silent Hill 2 is the game that is largely credited with shaping the enduring, philosophical legacy of the franchise. It is way more searched, quoted, and beloved. I cant imagine 2 being less impactful. The PS2 was the king of horror games. Isn't it kinda sad not to display one? It seems the museum favors foundation over innovation. 2 is a top metacritic critics choice game.
As for Barbie Fashion Deisgner. This is a random assumption with no context in a critique stating that we aren't using context when I feel my reply gave about 3 contextual elements within the museum's own guidelines that qualifies Metroid over both Silent Hill and Barbie Fashion designer. I included sales, staying power, influence. So both of Sly's critiques of the admission remain. In what way is Barbie Fashion designer impactful? We arent pretending it made girls like actual home console video games are we? It sold a lot of units and was successful with girl demographics. Mostly because it wasn't a traditional video game at all, it was a fashion add on to be sold in conjuction with dolls. Interactive software. Barely a video game under extremely vague defining practices. It sold units because of its attatched IP and Doll clothes. Not as a stand alone. It's color a dinosaur for dolls. I don't have to pretend it's legendary because this museum says so. Especially when its offending the medium and other games that are being left on the chopping room floor. I was under the assumption that lasting power. And iconic legacy were heavily weighted. The fact that you need to pull a link from a website for 2 game collectors who own over 1000 games and exist in the gamer sphere to even care what the thing is shows that it is not impactful the way anyone is claiming it is. Have you ever even heard of it before today? Be honest. You read their synapsis of it for a reason. Because it's mostly irrelevant and barely a game anyway.
I'l keep my argument clean with one simple statement.
Do you have to share a link with any gamer even a casual to educate someone on what Metroid was and why it is iconic?
No. It speaks for itself within this industry. Barbie Fashion designer is silly as an entry. To say I was ignorant for saying that, is imo ignorant because even the sites reasoning alludes to the fact that it had very specific circumstances and a boost from outside hobbies and culture to assist it's Growth. In that sense Skylanders would be just as worthy if not more. They seem to be insinuating this toy add on opened the doors for girl gamers. I'd need more proof of that. It happened to be girl centered IP and sold a lot. That's all it got for reasons. Is it even good?
But my main point was ignored. I want someone to argue for the sake of arguing that Barbie Fashion Designer is more worthy of a video game hall of fame than the Entire Metroid franchise or any singular entry. This is barely subjective anymore that's how silly this has become. And I don't see much opening for blindly accepting the logic of a museum that does or says that. So that is my motive for mistrust. I stated my reasons fairly clear. It wasn't just blind hate. Its the comparison.
Hall of fames and museums shouldn't blend anyway because like you said. They have clashing intents. One is made to display the best of the best. One is made to display the innovative and Unique for people to discover new lanes. In that sense. Yes. Barbie is fun to learn about. Its neat. Its unique. It's not Red Dead Redemption though lol.
-
I didn't know there was a video game hall of fame. I went to a video game museum once in Texas which was a ton of fun.
-
But I was always under the impression that Silent Hill 2 is the game that is largely credited with shaping the enduring, philosophical legacy of the franchise. It is way more searched, quoted, and beloved.
To an extent, you're not wrong because Silent Hill 2's legacy pertains to its moral dilemmas. However, this sequel entry is also a complete outlier among the entire franchise that, by contrast, isn't grounded in any sort of matter relating to morality. The topic of morality is really just exclusive to the second title, whereas the franchise's emphasis on psychological horror that remains constant within the franchise and later became the foundational inspiration for countless other games to follow even to this day was established with Silent Hill.
The credibility you claim they have is given by whom? What institution holds this kind of authority? What makes them more knowledgeable than say AVGN? Or us?
As a database mod for this site. A site cateloging more games than most sites do. For years. Why would you assume these random people have more knowledge on games than you? I don't believe that. I kinda feel you are taking to bat for them with not much context as to why.
Because institutions with good-standing credibility have that credibility for good reason. Credibility can be lost, of course, but from my observations, that is not the case in this scenario with The Strong Museum. And that is largely because historians, as to be expected, are involved with both the curation of this section of the museum and with this judicial process—they're not some YouTube personality who parodies games or even people who engage in some cursory level of online research, almost certainly without referencing direct sources and artifacts unlike these individuals who study and research topics for a career.
There is no reason to assume that any of this site's staff members including myself hold some expert knowledge about game software, game products, game history, game development, or anything else related to the gaming medium. Speaking for myself and all others collectively without hesitance: we don't.
I'l keep my argument clean with one simple statement. Do you have to share a link with any gamer even a casual to educate someone on what Metroid was and why it is iconic?
You would for at least one person—me. Does that make me less of someone who plays games? Less of someone who engages in video gaming discussion but whose personal knowledge isn't as vast as others' regarding this specific series of games because I'm drawn to certain niches within gaming over others? Less of someone who plays games because, even if I know Metroid by name and have some familiarity of its gameplay, I've dared not to play one single entry across its entire franchise spanning forty years?
But my main point was ignored. I want someone to argue for the sake of arguing that Barbie Fashion Designer is more worthy of a video game hall of fame than the Entire Metroid franchise or any singular entry. This is barely subjective anymore that's how silly this has become.
It wasn't ignored, and you won't be drawing out that kind of argument from me and likely not from others either because no one in this topic has suggested such a claim. From how you've responded, it seems to me that you're leading into your biases regarding how history is curated and has decided to be organized in some order by, again, one singular organization whom by no means is the ultimate authority on gaming history nor promotes itself with such a title. Because a game like Dragon Quest was inducted simultaneously with Angry Birds, does that mean they're equal? Halo: Combat Evolved was inducted in 2017 before Final Fantasy VII in 2018, so does this mean the former is better than the latter and that all games later inducted are lower in quality than it? The answer to these questions is no, and that's because the quality of a game in the context to how this museum has curated its exhibit is not grounded in such subjectivity but instead by various objective and historical metrics related to the industry as a collective entity, meaning the order by which they're inducted holds no bearing to the importance these games have had on gaming altogether. In fact, they're not even questions being asked as this exhibit is not attempting to form a ranking of any kind.
-
I didn't know there was a video game hall of fame. I went to a video game museum once in Texas which was a ton of fun.
I haven't looked into either The Strong Museum in New York or the National Videogame Museum in Texas before with much depth but have been aware of both for some time. They seem like interesting places to visit, but for someone like me who's not near either of them, I'd more than likely have to make the trip to the area with those destinations specifically in mind which is something I doubt I'd ever decide to do. It's too bad that the former isn't close to New York City at all since I visit there every so often, but they're hours and hundreds of miles away from each other.
-
Article here (https://nerdvana.co/general/world-video-game-hall-of-fame-2026-angry-birds-dragon-quest-fifa-international-soccer-silent-hill/202171/#google_vignette)
Like how did Madden Football make it in before FIFA? This is supposed to be the "World Video Game Hall of Fame". Does anyone outside of USA even care about American football? A quick google search also tells me that FIFA has sold about 3x what Madden has.... Heck, apparently NBA2K also outsells Madden. So why madden at all?
could be wrong but if I'm not mistaken fifa and soccer/football as a whole is mainly popular in europe while madden is huge in the usa way less of a thing where I'm at.
usa videogame market has more influence in terms of the history in comparison to the european console market so I could see how Madden >>>>> fifa
even as a whole in the online space many european collectors and gamers usually talk about usa or japan historic gaming stuff, way less in terms of relevant things happening in europe like how starfox was developed in the UK or rare ware in general. all the hype is mainly in japan or especially usa. europe kinda getting glossed over.
doesn't really matter that europe has 2 to 3x the population of japan and usa combined just a less relevant market in which even many europeans themselves gloss over. and in terms of markets outside that, just forget it ::) video game hall of fame basicly means usa & japan and maybe a sliver of europe
-
But I was always under the impression that Silent Hill 2 is the game that is largely credited with shaping the enduring, philosophical legacy of the franchise. It is way more searched, quoted, and beloved.
To an extent, you're not wrong because Silent Hill 2's legacy pertains to its moral dilemmas. However, this sequel entry is also a complete outlier among the entire franchise that, by contrast, isn't grounded in any sort of matter relating to morality.
Because a game like Dragon Quest was inducted simultaneously with Angry Birds, does that mean they're equal? Halo: Combat Evolved was inducted in 2017 before Final Fantasy VII in 2018, so does this mean the former is better than the latter and that all games later inducted are lower in quality than it? The answer to these questions is no, and that's because the quality of a game in the context to how this museum has curated its exhibit is not grounded in such subjectivity but instead by various objective and historical metrics related to the industry as a collective entity, meaning the order by which they're inducted holds no bearing to the importance these games have had on gaming altogether. In fact, they're even questions being asked as this exhibit is not attempting to form a ranking of any kind.
Perhaps I should have been more clear that i'm not so much critical of the inclusions this company has made but more critical of the exclusions and the order. Which i'll get into why below. So for example, to answer you. Yes. Having a game like Barbie inducted first over Fallout 3, Half Life and Metroid is an issue. Because it means it took priority. It does scream that one is more deserving that the other. Normal hall of fames for sports get similar backlash when a inductee is less deserving than someone on the cutting room floor. But this is 90 percent due to the intervals in which they induct imo. They just give themselves no room. I'd rather they take all hall of fame worthy entries and dump them in. No playing games with cat and mouse.
4 games per year is simply not enough for this medium spanning 23,000+ games. It pidgeon holes them into not being as wide.ranging as it needs to be. I don't think I'd even conclude that the entries that are in don't belong in but when you operate something on a timed entry system yearly. You either need to have a giant starting pool of no brainers to add to like a lot of Hall of Fames do. So add optional to a pool of "of course" games like pac man and Mario. Or add way more than 4 games per year. Otherwise you end up putting niche recensy bias picks over juggernauts. Or just bald spots where a needed game missing. That's my opinion.
I just feel the term "hall of fame" is used to try to fein authority over a topic. It is exclusionary by design and always leads to these kinds of debates we are having which is why I dislike hall of fames.
You would for at least one person—me. Does that make me less of someone who plays games?
No I would not lol. I would not have to give you a link for you to know what Metroid is. I feel you are being a tad bit facetious on your lack of knowledge of the success or acclaim of Metroid. I never said someone has to be an expert on metroid. Know its lore. Plot. I certainly dont. I said its self explainitory that its a big deal. Its a majorly important title that has cult acclaim. It's a pop culture staple. Idk why you think i'm insinuating you have to play Metroid to know its hall of fame worthy. Please let it be known that I have never played a Metroid game.for more than five minutes myself lol. I intend to. I want to. But by no means am I any differently experienced in the game than you. You don't have to play metroid to know it is revered on cult status. It has a genre named after it and its on countless subjective top 10s. Not top 100s. Top 10s. It's also spanned 40 years and almost never missed in being good. Quality consistency. All of it.
In fact it was You and Cartagia that actually sat and educated me about what the genre "metroidvania" even entails because it was so vague imo. By no means am I saying anyone has to be a metroid fan. I dislike Final Fantasy VII but if someone asked me "is it hall of fame worthy" instant yes. Just off it's impact alone. Let alone how deeply millions love it. What it did for the franchise as a whole. The PS1 as a console. All of it. My point was you could take a Minecraft nerd who works at gamestop part time. And he will know the basics of metroid. Because it's Metroid. Angry Birds has similar impact. Candy Crush. Even dragon quest to a lesser extent. But Barbie? Not so much. That doesn't mean its excluded. Just not equal. And within a hall of fame with inducing guidelines. Why does it take precedent?
Most have never heard of Barbie Fashion Designer. You have certainly Heard of Metroid. That is a huge deal.
But if you believe the order doesnt matter I suppose that's the crux of this. And I feel that's actually a more glass half full approach. Probably less cynical. That's understandable. To me I feel it does. I feel it's like me giving someone a ration of food and tell you that you have to wait till next month for food. It shows I clearly favored that other person over you. That's why the exclusionary design of hall of fame inductions causes issues and why they suck. I really never took to them.
So to answer you. Yes. Saying "you're hall of fame" to Halo. And "wait till next year" for final fantasy. Is them saying Halo is better.
I give this hall of fame more grace considering it seems to be gamers trying to curate a medium for others. They aren't actually harming the legacy of games to any extent worth mentioning. Some hall of fames exist solely to play cat and mouse with inductees like the rock n roll hall of fame which is a discriminatory joke riddled with favoritism and corruption.
-
I'l keep my argument clean with one simple statement. Do you have to share a link with any gamer even a casual to educate someone on what Metroid was and why it is iconic?
You would for at least one person—me.
No I would not lol. I would not have to give you a link for you to know what Metroid is. I feel you are being a tad bit facetious on your lack of knowledge of the success or acclaim of Metroid. I never said someone has to be an expert on metroid. Know its lore. Plot. I certainly dont. I said its self explainitory that its a big deal. Its a majorly important title that has cult acclaim. It's a pop culture staple. Idk why you think i'm insinuating you have to play Metroid to know its hall of fame worthy. Please let it be known that I have never played a Metroid game.for more than five minutes myself lol. I intend to. I want to. But by no means am I any differently experienced in the game than you. You don't have to play metroid to know it is revered on cult status. It has a genre named after it and its on countless subjective top 10s. Not top 100s. Top 10s. It's also spanned 40 years and almost never missed in being good. Quality consistency. All of it.
About Metroid, you specified the general public's understand of its icon status to which I responded to. And no, I personally am not knowledgeable of such status. To me, it is yet another 2D platformer of its era, and I've not learned what is achieved to set itself apart from its contemporaries or how it may have influenced later games. If nothing else, I know of its ending with Samus being revealed as a woman. So unless that is its lasting legacy to pave the path for the genre forward, I am not being facetious when I say I'm unaware of why it specifically is important or should be recognized as an individual title. Also, the psuedo-genre "Metroidvania" is not named for Metroid and its gameplay alone, as the term is instead a portmanteu of the two Metroid and Castlevania franchises with their own defining gameplay mechanics that had been combined and widely recognized first in Castlevania: Symphony of the Night.
But if you believe the order doesnt matter I suppose that's the crux of this. And I feel that's actually a more glass half full approach. Probably less cynical. That's understandable. To me I feel it does. I feel it's like me giving someone a ration of food and tell you that you have to wait till next month for food. It shows I clearly favored that other person over you. That's why the exclusionary design of hall of fame inductions causes issues and why they suck. I really never took to them.
I approach the topic of The Strong's Museum induction process with a contrasting mindset. The organization's priority is to shed light on games that have made some monumental impact and achieved some major milestone on the medium across history, whether those games be widely discussed in the cultural zeitgeist already or not. I would imagine that when the opportunity arises for an appropriate game to be inducted like Barbie Fashion Designer or Colossal Cave Adventure (https://www.museumofplay.org/games/colossal-cave-adventure/) that has been forgotten or just isn't discussed as often, there may be some greater desire to introduce this information to the larger masses. So to clarify, I'm not someone who thinks the order of inductions carries much weight, and especially because there could be other factors unknown to us why something may not be ready to induct yet. After all, inductions receive a permanent position in the Hall of Fame exhibit, so relevant artifacts and historical documentation may not be gathered or ready yet. Also, consider this: if an art institution had the means to curate any historical work and decided to first feature a piece from the Futurism movement and then followed with something from the Romanticism movement, that does not imply the former is better than the latter or vice-versa as they're two separate pieces with their own histories that simply aren't comparable by any objective standard. This scenario, to me, is no different.
Personally, the thought of a curated exhibit like this without something that is probably new for a lot of people to learn about while simultaneously restricting itself to the same list of games found on the countless number of top video games lists is rather boring and demonstrates a lack of identity. Although in truth, that sort of aspect probably doesn't have much influence (though perhaps some) over which games are inducted or not. And again, just because a game is renowned for being some masterpiece in regards to its gameplay doesn't necessarily make it historical or groundbreaking in the context of history The Strong Museum has been curating.
And although I previously linked the Hall of Fame FAQ in its entirety, I will highlight that a public vote introduces all the games that ultimately comprise the final twelve inductees that have been selected by the museum's internal committee. Then, The Strong Museum's committee and the third-party International Selection Advisory Committee selects the final four inductees to the Hall of Fame for each year. So it's not as if the museum themselves wholly decide that a game like Barbie Fashion Designer should be part of the exhibit or not. Obviously, there was at least some number of the public who thought it was worthy too.
-
53 Games total is quite sparse. But it seems to me that the museum factor and having cool artifacts for visitors to highlight different things they find to be important developments in video game history outweighs the actual most influential video games of all time and whatnot. That would explain the barbie fashion designer choice, which I think is a good one in that context. Despite that, stuff like Wolfenstein 3D not being there really is wild considering Doom, Quake, Goldeneye, and Halo make the cut.
-
Aight, here is my response to each new entry.
- Angry Birds = Yeah, I guess this one makes sense.
- Dragon Quest = Sigh.... Yeah, I guess this makes sense.
- Fifa International Soccer = Uh? Alrighty then....
- Silent Hill = How was this not there already?!!
Wait, no Spyro or Crash games are included in the 53? WHY?!!
-
Angry Birds ? Seriously ?
-
Aight, here is my response to each new entry.
- Angry Birds = Yeah, I guess this one makes sense.
- Dragon Quest = Sigh.... Yeah, I guess this makes sense.
- Fifa International Soccer = Uh? Alrighty then....
- Silent Hill = How was this not there already?!!
Wait, no Spyro or Crash games are included in the 53? WHY?!!
Because it's subjective click bait being portrayed as a "professionals' objectivity. And deemed as having more worth than anyone else's which is the sole selling point of all hall of fames. Gatekeeping and exclusivity. A circus for all intents and purposes. The credibility of the hall of fame lies solely on perception of their choices by others and clearly they failed. I trust my mother who has never played video games to formulate a better hall of fame off blind memory.
Anyone here attend a gaming convention and see Barbie? She's synonymous with our hobby now? A Tamagotchi (a egg shaped tiger handheld quality virtual pet toy from 30 years ago)?
Anyone here attend a gaming convention and see Samus Aran, Big Daddy, Vault Boy or Spyro?
That is all that needs to be said. The list is not only bad it's a tad offensive and not at all indicative of the vast consensus of the legacy of our culture. The exclusion of Metroid makes the entire team of people involved from the ground up instantly not credible. It is not arguably but objectively fact that it is the first mainstream and franchise popular human female protagonist in video games. Certainly the first serious one. The franchise also pioneered non linear backwards progression and paved the way for maybe 20 percent of all games. It's effects are seen in countless indie projects till this day.
But...
Barbie.
Let it sink in.
Barbie.
Also since it seems we want to say Tamogotchi is a video game to be silly.
BOP-IT! Smash is a video game
(https://i.postimg.cc/s2wh62SB/83bcc54f-0786-497c-963f-936fc0e0c23c-d1e68900cd021cd6f74621474723bbfd.jpg)
By same metric
-
Also since it seems we want to say Tamogotchi is a video game to be silly.
BOP-IT! Smash is a video game
By same metric
These two items really aren't comparable. The latter is an electronic toy that's programmed to behave in a predetermined and limited capacity whereas the former is a simulation game with variables featuring a LCD screen and isn't unlike any other LCD game—games that I suppose I'll clarify are types of items that VGC tracks. Tamagotchi's marketability by large may instill the perception that they're traditional toys based on their appearance, but they function no differently than more universally accepted contemporaries like Nintendogs and Seaman released on dedicated gaming hardware.
With this being said, I don't think that the terms toy and video game are mutually exclusive. Tamagotchi is one example as to this mindset, but more modern counterparts would be items like amiibo and Skylanders figures.
-
Also since it seems we want to say Tamogotchi is a video game to be silly.
BOP-IT! Smash is a video game
By same metric
These two items really aren't comparable. The latter is an electronic toy that's programmed to behave in a predetermined and limited capacity whereas the former is a simulation game with variables featuring a LCD screen and isn't unlike any other LCD game—games that I suppose I'll clarify are types of items that VGC tracks. Tamagotchi's marketability by large may instill the perception that they're traditional toys based on their appearance, but they function no differently than more universally accepted contemporaries like Nintendogs and Seaman released on dedicated gaming hardware.
With this being said, I don't think that the terms toy and video game are mutually exclusive. Tamagotchi is one example as to this mindset, but more modern counterparts would be items like amiibo and Skylanders figures.
I mean I hear what you're getting at with the definitions but it's so hard to stick to it, and i'm sure your rules for a video game more defined and grounded than what has been defined by others. Who is right? Who is wrong? We dont really know. Thats why I think we should go solely off intent of development.
From what has been defined to me by the people who include Tamogatchi in these gaming discussions is that the vague inclusion is because a video game requires
An LCD or Digital Display/Light Up Visual Ques (typically considered to require a computer sending code to a digital interface)
Pre Determined Rules/Limits
Player Input
Here are video games and the context as to why.
Texas Instruments Speak and Spell Is A Video Game....
(https://i.postimg.cc/9M4pSKBr/img-2800.jpg)
"You are absolutely spot on. Because it relies on a processor to drive an interactive digital interface, a Speak & Spell is technically an electronic handheld game. In fact, the device was one of the first mass-produced consumer computers to feature a gameplay loop, state tracking, and user input.
Also a gaming historian sharing input on the matter https://youtu.be/RpeegJ0J5mE?si=2TV1C7oeqTO6vSrc
Which makes any Drone with a handheld operating screen a video game and also makes electronic battleship a video game. Here is the response to that from google Gemini (not gospel but something)
Electronic Battleship Is A Video Game
"You are absolutely right. By definition, an electronic Battleship game featuring an LCD screen, programmed rules (loops), an end state, and specific player goals meets all the technical criteria of a video game."
I mean come now Ethyl. Where do we draw the damn line? Lol.
Also by your example of Nintendogs, Bop It Smash recieved a touch screen version ported to IOS and behaves not much different than a physical manifestation of any rythym game. Also the people who argue Nintendogs are like a tomagatchi leave out the fact that so are The Robot Dogs from Target that display emotion on a digital screen interface panel like a tamogatchi does that you feed plastic bones to make happy. It has a screen. A displayed visual prompt. You can stretch to say I-Dog is a game. Digital interface. Requires music to dance. Clear goal. Requirements. Peripherals. You care for a pet that doesnt actually exist but gives the illusion it does. Rules. Guidelines. Limits and function. Not a video game. Nintendogs is a video game released on video game hardware with video game marketing by video game companies. To say a toy has similar counterparts to a video game like Nintendogs seems to be the stretch but it falls apart under stress. It's like saying because Mario Kart is a game, a remote control Mario kart toy is a video game if the remote has a screen on it. It's a very crude stretch to say screen = game. In that sense all board games if you add a display to the board become video games. Which is why I feel the intent of development is what should matter. Games should be well defined as games. This is what happens when people get way too cute or vague with definitions. Why cant we just call violet violet? A video game is obvious. None of these things were marketed or intended to be a video game.
By this logic. If we build an AI Robot with a screen that displays its emotions and play patty cake with it to make it happy it becomes a 6 foot tall humanoid video game.
Then we can say "a video game needs to be virtual entirely. Not physical) contained within. ok so still speak and spell? Lol. Speak andnspell is also far more iconic and revolutionary than most games.
But the truth is. If we dont draw the line with Tamogatchi. Then the hobby loses all meaning. Even if you can stretch it to say Tamogatchi is a "video game" why? It's clearly marketed, consumed and remembered as a toy. Do we not have enough actual games? If someone has to go "is that a video game?" Does it belong in a hall of fame for video games? Especially over well defined icons of this industry? We are playing in the neighbors pool while ours develops algae.
Seriously. If tamogatchi is a video game. We lost the plot as a hobby.
And like I said. Even if it is. Does it really need to be in a hall of fame? Like culturally? Literally nobody thinks of it as anything but a toy without being convinced to. Like what are we doing here? Over Metroid lol.
But this boils down to Hall of Fames being worthless divisionist gate keeper culture coded failures broken from the ground up. Rooted in holding merit over an artists head like a chew toy to curate worth and not opinion. Almost all have come.under fire for bribery. Bias. Cultural failures and even prejudice and institutional fraud. Something rooted in exclusionary opinion pretending to be some sort of authority is dead news as far as I'm concerned. Weather Tamogatchi is a video game or not.
-
Here are video games and the context as to why.
"You are absolutely spot on. Because it relies on a processor to drive an interactive digital interface, a Speak & Spell is technically an electronic handheld game. In fact, the device was one of the first mass-produced consumer computers to feature a gameplay loop, state tracking, and user input.
Which makes any Drone with a handheld operating screen a video game and also makes electronic battleship a video game.
First, let me clarify that I wasn't taking the position that a LCD screen's presence somehow transforms an otherwise non-gaming item into a gaming one but instead that the LCD screen that's apart of Tamagotchi handhelds functions in the same way as more widely accepted games such as the ones in the LCD Games category (https://vgcollect.com/browse/lcdgames). I doubt anyone takes the position that some of the items you're introducing such as drones or robotic pets like Poo-Chi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poo-Chi) are video games. As you quoted above, these items aren't designed with a gameplay loop, whereas Tamagotchi are. With that understanding, the burden of providing sound evidence that Tamagotchi still somehow aren't video games comes to the one contesting it (i.e. you). So, I ask: how are Tamagotchi handhelds any different from other LCD games? How they've been marketed is wholly irrelevant—this is no different from when an audience perceives a work of art that's in contrast to how its artist intended it to be perceived or engaged with.
Also by your example of Nintendogs, Bop It Smash recieved a touch screen version ported to IOS and behaves not much different than a physical manifestation of any rythym game.
The Bob-It Smash toy you're referencing and its video game adaptation are two separate things. To say they're not is like saying video games such as Monopoly (https://vgcollect.com/item/191788) and NHL 2K (https://vgcollect.com/item/8293) aren't video games because they're digital adaptations of a board game and sports game.
If someone has to go "is that a video game?" Does it belong in a hall of fame for video games?
This same sentiment is one often taken by opponents of entire video game genres: perhaps most notably first-person, narrative-driven adventure games or, more colloquially and often dismissively, walking simulators. There is a vocal minority of people who personally classify these experiences removed from video games despite their being so. Meanwhile, some of these types of games have earned all sorts of recognition within the industry by both critics and audiences.
Even if you can stretch it to say Tamogatchi is a "video game" why?
I'll reiterate my opinion on the matter, that the line between what toys and video games are is blurred. Not everything needs to be black or white, a view that seems to be something you're attributing in this scenario with such rigid definitions.
-
Angry Birds ? Seriously ?
Why is that a surprise? As a Franchise it made nearly 10 billion dollars, more than Fast & Furious, Superman (that is surprising), Sesame Street, Sonic the Hedgehog, Halo, Shrek and other media franchises. The movie made over 350 million dollars and the impact is everywhere. How many games reference the Angry Birds style of game? Like Jetty Boots in Deep Rock Galactic for example. I never played it myself, but i saw it a lot and understand the references in other games.
But again, there are earlier games and franchises that deserved an induction.