[game_preservation] Game Canon

[Devin Monnens]

For one thing, I don't think a canon can be regulated to a small list. Canon
should be larger and more expansive. The purpose of the canon is to find a
collection of games that we think people should be familiar with. For
instance, if you are doing something from the Adventure genre, you need to
know Shadowgate, Monkey Island, MYST, and Grim Fandango (just to name a
few). To be able to discuss an adventure game within the context of the
canon allows for a type of analysis and discussion that would not be
possible otherwise. For instance: you can't understand what made Halo such a
great game if you don't understand what made DOOM and Goldeneye so
successful.

The downside of the canon is that it is implicitly myopic: in order to focus
on some games, you must ignore others. For instance, if we are discussing
FPS games, who is to say Pathways into Darkness is not worth looking at, or
for that matter
Catechumen<http://www.christiananswers.net/spotlight/games/2001/catechumen.html>?
I think if we look at the canon from the lens of context, it makes more
sense - the canon isn't 'this is all you ever will play', maybe it's more of
a framework upon which to build criticism.

The other aspect that I think is raised with the UK list is that it isn't
just all the good games. Daikatana and Trespasser are on there. Why? These
games were complete crap.

On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Andrew Armstrong <andrew at aarmstrong.org>wrote:


>  Hey all,

>

> Should get back myself to thinking more about games and so forth - history

> wise - since currently all I'm doing it hard labour trying to sort parts of

> the UK's National Museum of Computing.

>

> Recently saw a link to a list of Game Canon - from a book appendix from

> 2008 - which reminded me of the SIG's attempt at it -

> http://gameshelf.jmac.org/books/canon.html

>

> Interesting reading; but in any case, should we get that restarted again?

> Or actively work on any projects between ourselves besides what small things

> me and Devin randomly do? It'd be interesting to utilize who is here if

> anyone has any time to put forward; I know we've randomly discussed things

> at GDC (although it seems the notes from 2010 have not materialized just

> yet, although I forgot myself :) ) but it's a bit more work to get something

> done.

>

> In any case, should we start some kind of informal list of game canon

> entries - notably with our own comments on each one - since Canon lists like

> the one above typically have a lot more recent games which do a disservice

> to the pioneers and in fact sometimes is oddly wrong or ignorant (even if

> the actual entries are okay to describe as good game examples) - for

> instance, in that list we've got StarCraft as the genre-defining strategic

> combat game - yet ignoring many previous much more important RTS games like

> Command and Conquer (and Dune) which literally defined the genre

> conventions, including the majority of StarCraft's.

>

> Andrew

> _______________________________________________

> game_preservation mailing list

> game_preservation at igda.org

> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_preservation

>




-- 
Devin Monnens
www.deserthat.com

The sleep of Reason produces monsters.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_preservation/attachments/20100803/46af3bb8/attachment.html>