In considering the inevitable online and journalistic discussion of 2009's Game of the Year candidates, I went back and listened to one of my favorite Bombcasts: the nearly 3 hour epic discussion/battle royale between Metal Gear Solid 4 and Grand Theft Auto 4 for that honor last year. It always is interesting (at least for me) to look back and see what was the best, especially in a yearly model. Thus I started thinking to my self, "Hey, Self, you've been around for 25 of those year and three months of another. What were the best games of those respective 365-day cycles?"
 
So here I attempt to give my nominees for that honor: Game of the Year, for every year I've been alive, starting with 1984 and resulting in my decision for 2009. Before I begin, a few ground rules:
 
1. I have played any game I name as the best; I can't just assume all the good things I've heard are true
2. There can be only one. No ties, no matter how amazing a year was. I'm looking at you, 98.
3. The release dates are based on the North American release; this will become mostly important in the NES years, when there were years that seperated some of the best titles coming out in the US. I refer to Giant Bomb and Wikipedia for accurate release dates.
 4. All of these are of course my subjective (if I'd like to think informed) opinion. Feel free to discuss and disagree in comments.  That's what this is for, really.
 
So without further ado, lets start off with:
 

1984

 

Marble Madness (Arcade)

 
In many ways, 1984 represents the nadir of video game history. The crash has occured and the industry was unsure where it was going to exist for another year. So it would be easy to disregard Marble Madness as simply the best of the worst. But that would undermine the simple genius of the game. The Escher-inspired surreal visuals and ambiant soundtrack create a sensory experience, but what really draws the game to a new level is the tactial marble-shaped controller. By physically moving an object in digital space, it provides a certain mind-turning physicalness to the gameplay. Add the fact that halfway through the game begins to break its own rules, with levels that move upwards, and you have a deceptively heavy, artful arcade classic.
 

1985

 

Alternate Reality: The City (8-Bit Atari Computers)

 
There seem to be two sets of gamers: those that have never heard of the Alternate Reality series and those that speak of it in hushed reverance. Even by modern standards, the scope and ambition of the games are staggering, a six-game epic that would allow you to transfer character data from one game to the next. The opening scene of the City alone is worth induction into a fictional game museum, especially considering the generation and hardware it was released on. Earth's inhabitants are all abducted, along with the player character, and transported to some vaguely alien other location. It then becomes your mission to determine where you are, why everyone seems to know you and how you can get back home. The game's titular city was a defined place to wander in, with set characters and items to encounter. Allegiances and relationships could be formed and broken; in fact, a hidden alignment unknown to the player but randomly generated in character creation would effect how NPCs would react to you initially. Sadly, Philip Price's opus was left incomplete with Datasoft went belly up after only two releases. Alternate Reality is a unsung masterpiece of games and an inspiring example of ambition and innovation. To say it was ahead of its time is a disgusting understatement.
 

1986

 

Super Mario Bros. (NES)

 
And thus begins the Nintendomination. Honestly, I'm having a hard time finding something to say about Super Mario Bros. that hasn't been said already a million times. While it didn't really "invent" platformers, it certain perfected the genre early on and offered a vision of what gaming was to be for the next 10 years and beyond. The amount of detailed attention that goes into level design, the varied enemies you encounter, the relative graphical detail, the responsive controls, the unforgetable digital honky tonk, the amount of devious secrets to uncover and enjoy. Every individual piece of the game is so finely crafted that it in one instant rewrote the history of games. 25 years later, the firm foundations of the game still prove valid, as Nintendo releases another 2D Mario platformer. While there is no way to guess where gaming would be today without Mario, it is undeniable that it would be decidely different.
 

1987

 

The Legend of Zelda (NES)

 
The remarkable thing about the original Zelda isn't only that it was developed and designed simoltaniously with Super Mario Bros. Nor is it that both projects were headed by the same mind in Shigeru Miyamoto. The remarkable thing is that both games are so remarkably different, despite that similar origin. Yes, there is something about the art direction and graphical layout that give away that the same developers worked on the game, but the head space experience of the games is completely different. While Mario is about precise movement and jumping in a linear path, Link's adventure is based on exploration and puzzle solving. The opening screen, which dumps you in what looks like a vast wasteland with no clear direction of where to go next, is both daunting and exhilerating.  While Mario ultimately would have more influence over time, the first Zelda game shows an amount of sophistication both exhibited by the developers and expected of the players. For anyone who was paying attention, it could be taken as a sign that Nintendo was serious about making games for everyone.
 

1988

 

Bionic Commando (NES)

 
The arcade title Bionic Commando is a competent but unremarkable shooter, pitched as a spirtual successor to Commando with a grappling hook mechanic and super deformed graphic. The Nintendo title Bionic Commando is a sci-fi shooter/RPG hybrid about a group of terrorist Nazis attempting to ressurect Hit-...um, "Master-D". Either way, this is clearly an improvement and was another sign that Capcom (along with Konami and of course Nintendo) was one of the big shot developers in this budding new age of video games. The swinging mechanic which replaces jumping creates both an obstacle and a sense of freedom, allowing you to jettison upward and take care of "Badds" that much more easily. The bullet collection mechanic and the ability to earn in-game clues as to what awaits ahead of you just adds layer of depth. And to be true to the name, Commando style top-down shooter levels are included to break up the pacing a bit. While the name has been somewhat tarnished with GRIN's sub-par stab at retooling the series, the original still remains among the prime NES titles, despite having a somewhat lower profile to some other Capcom brethren.
 
And that will do it for now. Tune in next week when I cover year 1989-1993. Here's a hint: there's more Nintendo.

So finally got around to participating in one of the live betas for the US tonight.

Overall, I'd say this was a surprisingly enjoyable experience. The "live" atmosphere was fairly well structured, with commercial breaks being cut-in by "Chris" who would talk to the crowd and call out particular players. One of the more ingenious touches was the host asked users to e-mail him their pictures. Out of context (and to be honest, in context) it sounded really creepy and I feel sorry for the producer who had to sort out the (I can only  assume endless stream) of dick pix to find the ones of players with their children and significant other. It was a neat interaction with the game that really heightened that live feel.

The other thing I was really impressed with was how recent the questions felt. There was one about the Bruno "incident" at the MTV Movie Awards. There was a high call for pop culture recall, though most of it was stuff that I was kind of ashamed that I knew. Did learn that Ashlee Simpson named her kid Mowgli, and that apparently Australian Red Bull has cocaine in it. None of the questions seemed terribly difficult, especially given the three-option multiple choice format; the above Mowgli question I got right simply by the process of elimination. Granted, I might be having too high expectations; I was horrified when some people didn't know the date Cinco de Mayo occurred on, but everyone knew MySpace existed before Facebook.

The only criticism I have (besides the difficulty of the questions) was when I participated in the second, "Extended Play" version, the theme was E3 related questions. I was excited about the chance to flex my gaming knowledge, but once I got started it became evident very quickly that the whole thing was a giant chance to advertise Microsoft's E3 offerings.  Here's an example of one of the questions:

"Which Oscar-winning director appeared at the Microsoft E3 Press Conference?"

X) Vin Diesel    A) Uwe Boll    B) Steven Spielberg."

While that is kind of amusing, it also really just serves the purpose of highlighting "WE HAD SPIELBERG AT OUR PRESS CONFERENCE," and really robs the game any fun of being a challenge. I understand that Primetime is more or less a giant opportunity to advertise, and I fully accept that as I had fun with the experience. But to be so blatant as to put the company crowing front and center in the actual gameplay, you lose the sense of momentum and fun. I just become very aware and uncomfortable with the fact that I'm pitched to. Still, that wasn't in the real live event, which I highly recommend everyone try out next Friday. Hell, let me know if you do; maybe a Bomber will get to be the One.

Perhaps it is because of the incessant "DINGING" of people playing Donkey Kong constantly in the background of G4's live coverage, but this E3 has made me seriously consider the "DNA" of gaming: where we've come from, where we're going and how that growth is reflected by the basics that defined the beginning of the movement.

Of course, Donkey Kong isn't from the first video game. But it is probably near the beginning of games as a narrative device, with clearly defined characters and conflict that were lifted beyond just the abstract shapes reflected on the screen. The modeling on "Jumpman", the very name which reflects the primary action of the game, and the intricate work on Donkey Kong himself is still a marvel to watch today. For anyone who's never played the original arcade Donkey Kong, I suggest you seek it out if you can, or at the very least watch video of it being played. The balance and system of it is quite well conceived and executed, mostly because of a young Shigeru Miyamoto's obsessive need for precise gameplay. There is no sense of cheapness in the game, which doesn't exclude it from being insanely difficult. The actual gameplay is just responsive and simple: press a button to jump and avoid objects that can kill you and clear gaps. This is why people like Billy Mitchell and Steve Wiebe can really grok onto this and excel, along with some basic hand-eye coordination.

So to see this relic and grandfather of modern games held up in the same breathe as God of War III really drove home for me the maturing the genre has gone through. Not maturing in the sense of graphical fidelity or adult content (whether the actual narrative of God of War is intended for the mindset of "grown ups" is up for serious debate), but rather that while the key player action has remained the same, the amount of weight to those button presses has become more dramatic. The variety of inputs has significantly increased, allowing the player to participate in gorey cinematic moments with minimal actual effort. Kratos is a bad-ass, in a sense, as our proxy, in the same way Jumpman is our proxy in battling the maddened gorilla. The amount of finese required to truely succeed in God of War is dramatically lower, and the story acutally has an inentional end, but the same core mindset of allowing the player to participate in something exceptional with extremely simple input.

Of course the elephant in the room is the new mind-set that "You are the controller", and while it is Microsoft's catchphrase, the same philosophy runs through each of the three mainline console developer's motion-controlled strategy. The promised land seems to be one-to-one response between translating your movements and actions in real-space into the digital world. There is a certain cyber-reality hopefulness, operating under the assumption that the only thing better than offering that proxy is to allow you to actuall exist within the game world yourself, burying the "barrier" and allowing you to become the actual actor.

The issue with the one-to-one analog philosophy is that it creates the question of "Why?" Why play Tony Hawk Ride, when you can actually skateboard? Why play Wii Sports when all of those sports can be just as easily enjoyed in the real world? The element of fantasy and wish fulfillment is at risk the more you move into the territory of forcing the player to actually physically excel at what they are attempting to accomplish. And some games have answered the question of why pretty well. Yes, Guitar Hero is less satisifying than playing a real guitar, but you also get the wish fulfillment of the rock star experience. Yes, having a personal trainer would be nice, but EA Active offers you a lot of that same benefit while not coming with an additional monthyl or weekly fee.

As this new movement (no pun intended) in gaming continues to develop, the question of "Why?" will need to be at the forefront of the mind of developers, press and consumers. It can be answered, but it is an additional challenge. Meanwhile, traditional proxy gaming answers the question of "why" pretty well. It offers experiences outside of the mundane, providing a sense of escapism and excitement. By acting as the prime motivator for Kratos or Jumpman, I can accomplish something through them that I otherwise would not be able to. Robert Ashley's description of the God of War series' success sums it up nicely: "It allows you to feel like a bad-ass with the minimal actual effort on your part." And when talented game developers step into design with this as the core to their process, they create the best that games have to offer.

So BioWare has released another trailer for Mass Effect 2. Neat. Lets take a closer look at it though and see what all can be taken from the video. While it seems strange to say this for a game not yet released, this might constitute as "spoiler" territory if you don't wanna know anything about the game before it comes out. You've been warned.

First, lets just post the video in here for reference, from the fine folks over at GameTrailers:


Hot. But what all is going on here?

"Shepard...But Your Dead": Of course the biggest talking point is the confirmation that Shepard is in fact going to be in the game and playable. Which is a relief, but not that much of a surprise. The previous OXM article (which I'll be referring to a lot in this discussion of the trailer) already more or less let that cat out of the bag, though it also seems like you might be creating another character as well. Raiden-scenario possibly? Either way, Shepard is back and will be playable.

Illium: The majority, if not entirety, of this trailer seems to take place on and around Illium, an Asari colony world that had already been confirmed as one of your main locations. BioWare has talked the most about this mission, with almost every demo taking place on it. The talking points seems to be that an assassination attempt is going to occur, and Shepard must make the decision to either stop it or help the would-be killers. This offers a little more fuel to the Raiden-esque rumor, as it is entirely possible that Illium is a "prologue" world not unlike Eden Prime where something happens to Shepard, and you then take the story over from a different perspective. More info promised at E3. The world is supposedly based on Dubai, and looks like a very different setting from the previous game. It certainly is much more detailed than locations like Noveria. Very promising.

A Little Old, A Little New: Perhaps the most surprising, albeit blink-and-you'll-miss-it, feature in this trailer is the inclusion of what looks like a quarian hanging with Commander Shepard as part of his crew. Could this be Tali? Certain players of the original Mass Effect will know from a side-mission in that game that Tali made very clear that, win lose or draw, she was returning to the Flotila after the battle with Saren was done. Of course it is impossible to know thanks to Quarian's enviro-suits if this indeed everyone's favorite quarian pilgrim, but it does raise the possibility. Also featured in the trailer is Thane, a member of a new race called the drell introduced in Mass Effect 2, doing his assassin neck-snapping thing. Also, a black alliance officer is also with Shepard's crew. This could possibly be the Jacob of "Jacob's Story" fame, though impossible to tell with the different art styles between the two games. Oh, and we have a new evil asari hissing at Shepard in her best villain-rasping voice as well as some new enemy types, as well as blowing away some good old husks.

New Weapon: As mentioned in the previous Pre-E3 video, a new heavy weapons class has been added. This seems to function similiarly to a rocket launcher, possibly similiar to the rampage ability you can aquire with shotguns. It is primarily used seemingly for long distance blasting of foes and looks awesome. And speaking of weapons, this video marks our first official look at Mass Effect 2 combat which looks...a lot like Mass Effect 1 combat. Not a bad thing, persay, though BioWare has said they have changed things up be having an ability for you have conversations while actually in battle.

And Oh Yeah...It Looks Amazing: Despite its graphical pop-in, when Mass Effect was running smoothly it looked incredible. The same level of visual quality is on display here, and it seems to even outdo it predecessor. The amount of detailing on the Illium environments is really stunning to see, and it makes me all the more excited for a game I'm already hyped to moon about.

Anything I missed?

So while doing a general browsing of the front page of Giant Bomb, I saw this under the New Releases section:



It feels strange even complaining, especially after I have made an effort to purge myself of any needless nostalgia, but what the hell is this? I remember Math Blaster (and his literate, less number-crunching brother Reading Blaster) and this, sir, is no Math Blaster. In case you forgot, this is edutainment at its most basic. No wry smirk, cool hair or super powers are going to disguise that. In fact, it makes the whole enterprise that much more embarrassing for someone who would much rather actually be playing something cool. The games even boast a rather convoluted  and surprisingly nihilistic storyline now. A sample from Wikipedia:

"In the Sixth Millennium, humans have come to rely so much on computers and robots that they have forgotten how to do simple math.

This allowed a very smart computer, Cyclotron X, to become so smart and powerful that it was able to create a device to make humans not only lose what little ability they had to do math, but also to forget what math even was. On the eve of what was to be the beginning of recruiting for an elite squadron of intergalactic peace keepers called the Blaster Corps, Cyclotron X took control of Earth and its two colonies on Saturn and Pluto.

In the years between this event and 8296, AIMEE, an artificial intelligence program created to work the Blasters, has been moving through the computer network undetected, waiting for someone to accidentally stumble onto and unlock a dormant Blaster recruitment kiosk. When someone with an unnatural curiosity eventually finds it, he is instantly turned into a member of the Blaster Corps, complete with the holographic power hand and the force field which protects him from all elements, and spikes up his hair as a side effect of the energy."

To be clear, I'm not criticizing the core gameplay or idea behind Math Blaster, Reader Rabbit or any other title in this field of software. I know for
myself, the frantic pace of Math Blaster  (the REAL Math Blaster, mind you) helped me memorize my multiplication tables that much better. These are good tools, disguised as games. But you really are pushing the limits of even a child's patience when you suggest that the very idea of "math" has been forgotten, yet we somehow can still colonize an ice dwarf. You know what the story of the original Math Blaster games was? "Some yellow blob thing stole your buddy; what is 4 times 12?"


Check out  the OG Blaster of Math. I'd make some comment about his hair looks, but I can't. Because he has the decency to wear a goofy bulbous helmet to make sure you know there is nothing remotely "cool" about what he does. Furthermore, he's not smirking, striking a pose or otherwise trying to lure people into thinking they're getting in anything other than hella long division. Hell, the word "math" takes up a good half of the box art. There is no fucking around about what is in store for you.

Of course there are other versions of the above helmeted, correct variant of Math Blaster. The one I'm actually familiar with has more of his face visible, but the basics still apply: he's simply designed, memorable, chubby and hates incomplete math formulas. And that is all you need. The more layers and sense of conflict you add to fucking Math Blaster, the more you distract from the core function of getting your report card scores up so your mother isn't disappointed in you anymore. And of course the core irony is that we apparently already live in a world where computers need to remind us what math is anyway. So maybe Math Blaster: The Prime Adventure is the most meta game of the year and I'm just a jaded old coot who cares too much about a game's art design.

But it still fucking sucks.