I have long been evangelizing this as the single greatest game ever made (and the only time entertainment ever achieved true perfection!) and now the gospel spreads!

All joking aside (though I have been evangelizing it HAWRD), I think this game remains relevant because of all the things it did that were SO far ahead of its time, and still relevant today (no grinding, having enemies flee, having NPCs with multiple lines of incidental dialog, absolutely AMAZING localization, etc.) so it's good to see it finally getting some recognition and an official North America release beyond the SNES.

@atesh42 The difference is that A) Dark Souls out-and-out says the item has no use, whereas the ruler and protractor are just flavor text. B) the Dark Souls item actually DOES have a use (trading to the crow) whereas these are joke items that can only be sold for a pittance.

Alright, now convince Vinny and Jeff to do an endurance run of it!

You know you're gonna need that ruler for the battle with Giygas.

Great article, Patrick.

I kinda agree 100% with both of those Polygon chaps, personally - if such a thing is possible! Everything that I dislike about the game (read: most things) are also the same qualities that make it really stand out. I have to respect that, at the very least. It would be rude not to.

If I'd played Earthbound back in the day (which was pretty much impossible, being from the UK) it would most likely be my favourite SNES game by a country mile. As it is, without the nostalgia distorting everything, it strikes me as a really interesting piece of gaming history, that's more style over substance.

Also, I felt that bumping up the price of this game on the eShop was a really fucking gross move on Nintendo's part. Exploitative, I daresay.

Man, I remember playing this game in the '90s... doesn't look like it holds up very well, sadly, despite the quirky sense of humor.

Damn, this shoulda been an Endurance Run!

I know what you guys are trying to say, and there's definitely some truth there. That said, there are games/genres that were merely products of their time, and especially if you don't have context for the era, there's no way to enjoy them as anything but historical artifacts.

@tehpickle: It's still a fraction of what it originally cost at release on the SNES, and much, much lower than the king's ransom it sells for on eBay.

That guy in the glasses was trying really hard to have contrarian opinions. How edgy.

I've emulated this and Mother 3, quite enjoyed them. If they ever make a 3ds virtual console release and the price isn't crazy, I'd get it. Goes without saying for Mother 3, as unlikely as that is to happen.

The flaw in your point is that design evolves, along with our tastes. Look at every FPS since Modern Warfare. Nobody used down-the-sights aiming, and we were all fine with that. F.E.A.R. and Medal of honor were find games without it. Now try going back and playing them again, it's just not the same without what Modern Warfare did.

Does that make them bad games? Absolutely not, but they definitely don't hold up.

Nuking two of the McElroy Brothers sounds like the most evil thing I have ever heard.

I totally agree. The whole notion of "holding up" has really gone off the deep end. Like people asking if a game from 2009 holds up. A lot of times it seems like kind of a cop-out for people to not come up with legitimate reasons to dislike something.

As a matter of practice, every year I like to go back and replay at least two games that I originally played when I was under the age of 21 and see what holds up and what doesn't. Most recently, I bought the PC version of Final Fantasy 7 during the Steam summer sale and started playing it immediately. I'm on track to finish it tonight.

Final Fantasy 7 is the first JRPG I played, and I remember enjoying it quite a lot, however I do not have the great nostalgic reverence that so many others do - mostly because I too fell out of love with JRPGs once out of college, and I've conditioned myself not to worship old games because of my experiences with replaying them.

Much to my surprise, I found myself enjoying a great deal of FF7. The first 1/3 - 1/2 of the game is quite linear (despite the illusion of freedom) and well paced. My fuzzy memory gave me the impression I'd be fighting a ridiculous number of battles, but in reality the encounter rate was perfectly reasonable and the game is balanced in such a way that you'll level up enough going from point A to B that you don't need to grind out levels unless you wish to make the game easier. However, there's a point where the game opens up and throws several grindy sidequests at you, such as the Chocobo breeding. With little exception these quests are all more about making the player "work" than being entertaining. Chocobo breeding in particular is mind-numbingly repetitive - but required if you want some of the best items in the game. Those items are in no way required to beat the game, and unquestionably I'm a victim of my own compulsion to get them when I don't need to. However, it's a feature seemed to be more concerned with creating a time sink or making the player prove how patient they are, rather than being concerned about whether it was fun. This is a criticism I would make of aspects in most JRPGs, but FF7 does still seem to have less of them than the last JRPG I attempted to play, which was FF12. Had I skipped most of the extra stuff and finished out the story earlier, I think I would come away with an almost entirely positive view of the game.

Anyway, sorry that this is my own "cool story bro" and not a comment on Patrick's article, but I just wanted to share.

The one thing that is tragically missing from this release is a real version of the guide, which the scratch-and-sniff page. Fun fact: There was a related contest for guessing the scent, and for answering correctly, I received (much later due to what I'm sure was the cheapest shipping) a little air freshener of the Mach Pizza guy. So cool, and I wish I still had it.

@likeassur: Nope, old games are still good without what Modern Warfare games did because they were always good. I replay Half Life every year; it's still fun.

The tone of earthbound holds up. The gameplay gets pretty tedious

I could not disagree more.

There is no such thing as design evolution. What you are talking about, ESPECIALLY with down the sites aiming, is personal preference and trend. You mention Modern Warfare as being "evolved" FPS design, but I HATE Modern Warfare style FPS games. I think they are terrible. Are you right, or am I right? Niether. It's just personal preference. And what's trendy right now in the market is Modern Warfare and thusly, all games try to be modern warfare.

I can list a dozen sound design reasons why rechargeable shields ruin games. And, I can also list a dozen sound design decisions why they help the game experience. Niether is correct, it's just personal preference and whatever fad is popular at the time.

Being pretentious enough to think that whatever game you like right this second is somehow the "evolved" form of it is how people wind up looking at their yearbooks in 20 years and going "What the F was I wearing!?! I thought I was SO COOL in that picture..."

@tyler1285: Thanks for taking an example and thinking it was the main argument, it really shows you read what I said.

While I agree that DTS aiming is absolutely not a design evolution (It existed long, long before CoD and is totally a preference, I think it slows games down too much. It's crucial to separate trends from actual evolutions.) there is absolutely such a thing as design evolution. Super Mario 64 was the best of its time, it literally forever changed the way future 3D platformers would be designed and played. But so much of it doesn't hold up. It's still totally playable, but things like the camera, level structure and the like are just archaic these days.

Here's a design evolution: The gradual working away from limited lives in games. Super Meat Boy is harder than most old school games by far, but you don't get a limited number of lives. The game would be TERRIBLE if you got kicked to the main menu every 5 times you died, or even more old school, if you had to restart the entire game, because guess what? Being able to save your progress is also design evolution. As are checkpoints, and checkpoints, as developers used them more, also evolved over time to be strategically placed in ways that ensured the experience didn't come to a screeching halt.

There is, absolutely, 100% such a thing as design evolution. You not liking it has nothing to do with whether it's evolved or not. Fish evolved to not have legs, I like having legs, this does not mean that fish didn't evolve. (Don't make this an argument about how fish evolved and didn't have legs to begin with or I'll bitch slap you.)

The best part of the player's guide for the game is all of the extra information about the areas that augments the actual walkthrough. It's almost like a travel guide rather than a simple walkthrough. It's definitely an essential part of the overall experience!

Nintendo should release a lot more old classics like this one. The virtual console game that I want to see come out is that old Mario RPG which was also made by Square. I would buy that in a heartbeat!

Nice article Patrick!

Thank you Patrick, you got it 100% right. What you have written so far about Earthbound is way more convincing than the "Hey just play it" I used to tell people back when it came out. How 'bout that music huh? Best music of '95.

Are you kidding? You say "There's no such thing," then your last sentence is exactly what I'm saying. It's a hell of a lot more than just "personal preference." Do you want a better example? Take Goldeneye 007 and Halo: Combat Evolved. Are you really going to sit there and tell me that Halo's gameplay is just a "personal preference" and not an improved version of what Goldeneye did? Are Resident Evil's tank controls really on par with Devil May Cry's quick movement controls, and it's up to the individual to decide which is better?

I would bet you money that if Shigeru Miyamoto could go back and redo Super Mario Bros., he definitely would. In fact, that whole franchise shows the evolution of game design. Even something we take for granted - checkpoints and auto-saving - are things that were unheard of when Earthbound was out. You know why? Because game design changed. It's more than just "personal preference," because if that were the case, there would still be non-indie games that had Goldeneye's aiming, reset to the beginning if you die, and only manual saves. There's not, and it's impossible to go back without some sort of mini-culture shock.

I've been looking forward to your thoughts Patrick, thanks for sharing and I'm glad you're enjoying it as it's my favorite game of all time.

Worth reading is this comment I found on Reddit by the user handofreason. It really captured my feelings about the game better than I could say:

I've thought about this before and as I started deconstructing Earthbound, I came to the following conclusion:

Earthbound's gaming mechanics are nothing special. The notion of navigating around a map with live/random encounters is not new, nor did Earthbound innovate that system. I should note that Earthbound was the first game I played that had a fear system (enemies avoid you at a certain point and you auto-win against weaker characters), so I would give Earthbound credit for adding a bit of common sense to it. The concepts of magic (PSI) and leveling up are all common RPG tropes, as well as items that cure ailments, regain health, etc. So what exactly is it about Earthbound that makes it so damn amazing?

In my opinion: charm. Earthbound is perhaps the most charming game I have ever played. It has a certain factor to it... a voice that echoes a captivating experience because almost every stitch to the game has a feeling of real, down to Earth love and affection. It's weird without being offputting, quirky without levity, along with a uncompromising storyline that was serious but never pretentious. Both literally and figuratively, the game knew it was a game.

I think of Little Big Planet sackboys, Bastion's narration, or the humor in the GBA Mario & Luigi RPGs. Yes, they all have their separate merits but above all else something about them is alluring. It's that delicate balance of humor and cuteness while maintaining sincerity of purpose. It's basically the way most of us live our lives. We try and laugh as much as possible at what's funny, what isn't funny, all while trying to maintain perspective on what really matters to us (whatever that is).

I don't mean to say that Earthbound purposefully wrangles in these emotions. What I'm saying is that us, as humans, as gamers, are naturally attracted to charm because it reflects back the human condition. It's almost impossible to achieve that kind of charm on purpose because part of Earthbound's allure is that it never felt like it was trying to be funny, or trying to be preachy (unlike Borderlands 2 which hits you over the head with its humor). So regardless if you disagree with Paula's ability to pray, or you find the Mr. Saturns weird, or whatever your hangup might be that are probably legitimate criticisms with the game, Earthbound (and Mother 3 as well) has a charm that is impossible to ignore. It shines brighter because we've all played a ton of those kinds of games and just the little things like the moles breaking the 4th wall and telling you where the button is on your controller, or the photographer oddly saying Fuzzy Pickles, or the strange relationship with your father... all of it makes the system feel alive, like it knows what you want. It doesn't feel like boilerplate RPG or even common video game dialogue, and that is part of it, as well.

So while I may have deconstructed the game to understand its charm, the game still manages to be greater than the sum of its parts. In art, we call that Gestalt, and good art often comes from the amount of care and polish you put into the process. As I said before, every stitch of the game feels like it was sewn with a deft hand, but then stepping back and looking at the game as a whole, it just feels like a solid work.

A solid work that charms the pants off you.

handofreason

But what does it mean to say something was "a product of it's time"?

Because I was one of those people who was way into earthbound when it was new, and I can tell you that it was like pulling teeth to get ANYone to play that game. People didn't like the Charles Shultz, Peanuts-inspired graphics. They didn't like the fact that you played as children. they didn't like the combat menus. They didn't like fact that it was a SNES game when people were gearing up for next generation content. It's not that nobody KNEW about earthbound. The game had a massive marketing blitz, commercials on TV, and came in an oversized box that was impossible to miss. People just didn't want to play the game.

So how can a game be "of it's time" when it wasn't even liked in it's time?

I strongly believe that there is no such thing as videogame evolution. Or, rather, there IS, but gamers don't understand what evolution means. The working definition of "evolution" is that something gets better and better as it goes along. People who think this, think that modern games are better simply by product of the fact that they are newer. This is an erroneous understanding of the concept of evolution. In reality, the games industry evolves insomuch as it constantly puts out new content that it believes is best suited for the market. Video games adapt. If Call Of Duty rules the roost in FPS games, then all FPS games are going to try to be more like Call of Duty. This is adaptation, but it does not mean that the game has gotten better, as is frequently proven. It just means that the games industry is always trying to go after that one big hit franchise. The game that moves the most units. What happened when GTA hit? Suddenly everyone is trying to be like GTA. Even Tony Hawk. What happened when COD hit? Everyone starts trying to be like COD. What happened when WOW hit? Everyone starts trying to be like WOW. This it not evolution. It's a fad culture. It's fashion.

Personally, I would love to see a games site do a feature on all the games that, at one point, were "perfect 10" games that ruled the industry that nobody talks about/remembers anymore. I'm sure it would blow a lot of kids minds to know that games like Kings Quest 7 (The most expensive game ever made at the time), Strike Commander (the pc benchmark game for years and years), Magic Carpet (on the cover of every magazine and packed in with every videocard you could buy), were relatively as popular as COD and now nobody even mentions their name.

I'm glad, if nothing else, all these runaway kickstarter successes are showing showing the "evolution of games" to be the lie that it is. Publishers might all be looking for the next big thing, but when a not-popular-at-the-moment game genre can pop up and get half a million dollars in backing, it proves that the idea that people have "moved beyond that" is just false.

I'm glad you picked the number of lives as your example.

I can point out over a dozen reasons why eliminating lives from video-games hurts overall game design. For one thing, limiting the number of lives allows the player work to circumvent that limitation. For instance, "every 2000 points gives the player an extra life". NOW, the player actually has a reason to engage in combat and defeat enemies rather than just avoiding them. It also affects the "risk vs. reward" system. If I only have a limited number of lives, then a 1up floating above a pit suddenly becomes very enticing. Do I risk performing the maneuver that would snag the 1up, when I know that failure could mean losing the 1up and my current life? Etc.

Super Meatboy is a valid way to make a platforming game. But it is HARDLY the "evolved" way to do it. different does not mean better. Meatboy gave up a lot of game depth by focusing on pure challenge. I like Meatboy. But that doesn't mean it's somehow better, which is why Meatboy is not where Mario is right now.

@patrickklepek: I totally disagree. The expectations with which we come into a game are shaped by our time and our culture, so it can be difficult to go back and play a game made for people with a different mindset. In my experience, though, if you go into an old game with an open mind and are willing to set aside your expectations about what makes something good, you can always find real enjoyment there and not just intellectual interest.This also goes for visual art, literature and movies. I spent some time in school for art history though, so that might influence my thinking.

I'm not saying everyone is obligated to try every old classic, but I think it's often worth the effort.

By the way, Patrick, please tell me that you'll give Mother 3 a shot even if you don't end up finishing Earthbound. It pulls off an incredibly difficult thematic balancing act and manages to be as funny and dumb as it is heartwrenching while never coming off as cynical or sarcastic. If most games have the emotional maturity of a media-saturated 13 year-old boy with ADHD, Mother 3 is the good-natured old grand-parent who has lived through some dark times, but still wears a smile.

It seems like some cruel trick that after many years of searching for and finally buying a genuine copy of Earthbound for a non-ridiculous price (Being in the UK making it that much harder), it's become easily available for all to enjoy months later, haha. This game has SO much character it's insane - it's unreal how much music is in the game and how great it all is. Or how ridiculously silly the enemy types and attacks are. Such a fun game

In a vacuum, the gameplay is ordinary. Earthbound isn't about mechanics or graphics. It isn't tense or exciting. The game is about sympathy and if you can't sympathize with it, you're not going to enjoy it.

@hailinel: True as that is, it isn't realistically justiable. It's an intangible string of zeros and ones - there's an infinite supply, just like every other SNES game on the store.

I think it's gross that Nintendo squirrelled the game away for many years, building up a rabid demand, then unleashing it with a higher price. I don't think that any amount of infltated prices on Ebay can justify it. The two things are just not the same.

@tehpickle: It's a product of many man hours, just like any other manufactured good. Nintendo is free to charge what they want for it. The price is a two-dollar premium over most SNES VC games. That's hardly robbery.

I guess the reason this s on Wii U instead of the 3DS is because Earthbound was not a portable game and the 3DS only sells old portable games (alongside original stuff of course). I would much prefer to play this on my 3DS though... m-mainly since I don't have a Wii U and I'm hesitant to buy one.

Now, if they could get Mother 3 on 3DS...

YAY! Another believer!! I shall now erase your memory of the game, and you shall play it again until I think it's not funny anymore. Don't take it personally son.

You can take screenshots with the WiiU, you don't have to shoot pictures of your TV Patrick!

Eh, there are some things that viewed in retrospect are just archaic, bad, indefensible design resulting in games that are impossible to play now. But the games were still were amazing with top notch design for the time. Old RPGs like Final Fantasy viewed now had cumbersome UIs, terrible inventory systems, and basic battle systems. But they were still revolutionary and amazing games when I played them back in the 80's.

Lots of games I can't look back at them and just say it was "different" game design resulting in a different experience. They were worse, either due to the limitations of the hardware or designers muddling around in a new genre. But being impossible to play now or bad in retrospect doesn't invalidate something being loved and containing innovative game design in its time. Final Fantasy isn't retroactively a "bad" game because there's no way I'm playing through it now comparing it to modern RPGs.

Obviously there's no such thing as videogame evolution. Everybody knows that videogame jesus is behind the scenes pulling the strings.. Duh

@hailinel: The extra dollars (or pounds in my case) are simply a sign of Nintendo 'nickel & diming' a loyal and deeply nostalgic fanbase. Hell, in the UK we had to pay an additional premium for it because it was never released in this country originally, when no additional work went into its production for a same language speaking audience. As a UK gamer, I feel I'm supposed to be excited to pay more for it based on word of mouth alone from other countries, that were touched by the anointed hand of Nintendo, and were seen fit to be allowed to play it in the first place.

I can't excuse what amounts to ROMs having a tiered pricing structure for the same platform. The asking price of every other SNES game is the same, why should this one be different? Because they can 'get away with it?'

I just don't think there's an easily defensible argument to me made in it's defence frankly. It simply stinks.

It really saddens me that because the sales of Earthbound have been such a success, Nintendo have already confirmed that they'll continue with this multi-tiered pricing policy. Customers are begging to be mugged.

It's less about the amount of money, but the principle.

Earthbound is a fantastic game. Nintendo even packaged the box with a guide which was a godsend back in the day.

One of us. One of us. Gooble gobble.

I played Earthbound about 9 months ago, and It is easily one of the best games I played last year. The atmosphere and attention to detail are staggering, as well as the unique concepts they develoepd for some of the characters and story points.

@jazgalaxy

I don't particularly agree with much of what likeassur said, but he does have a point about character relative (aka tank) controls versus camera relative controls. At this point, I think one can empirically say that camera relative controls are a superior method of moving a character in a 3D space than character relative controls. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone arguing the merit of tank controls.

Granted this is one very specific mechanical aspect of games, but the point is there are elements of games that have evolved and for which a general consensus has been reached that new methods are better than old.

I'm sure it's been said, but this was done specifically so people who pirated the game got fucked at the end. I somewhat am amused by this.

Unless, of course, you didn't know you had to pray nine times.

Earthbound was, and always will be, my favorite game of all time.

This. Would totally pick this up if I could get it on the 3DS.

Right on soul brotha.

So cool to see all those people experience Earthbound for the first time. I did, myself, a few years ago and I spent countless hours in the game just trying to figure everything out. I especially loved the fighting and how it was less frustrating than other JRPG's and the random encounters.

Great stuff, thanks Scoops.

I would pay 20$ for this game on 3ds

One of the things I always love about Earthbound was how every town and major area had it's own theme with unique flair. Mr.Saturn Village, Threed, Fourside and just about every area in the game is an absolute joy to explore. Sure there's some caves that are kind of the same. Overall I just loved the environments in this game.

I was actually lucky enough to get a Gutsy bat on my old snes playthough.

Mother 3 is a wonderfully odd journey, even compared to other JRPGs.

I agree that it needs to be talked out more.

It's two extra bucks for a one-time purchase. And they did go the extra step of turning the entire strategy guide that was originally packed with the game in North America into a digital version that could be accessed from Nintendo's website. And no, no extra work went into the ROM for the UK audience, but:

A. That's because the game was never touched by NOE during the localization phase, and

B. Virtual Console titles are always offered in as accurate a state to the original ROM as possible. Changes are rarely implemented (as was the case when Wave Race 64 had to remove Kawasaki branding from the race courses due to an expired licensing deal). This goes the same for games that were never released in a particular region before. So Europe has the North American version of EarthBound, both territories have Sin & Punishment in its original Japanese state (which was actually fortunate to already be loaded with English text), and so on.

If you feel that extra two bucks is a deal breaker, that's up to you, but for a lot of people, it doesn't really make a difference.

Honestly, the choice between tank controls versus camera-relative isn't entirely clear cut. You look at games like Resident Evil 4 or Gears of War, and those games function on tank controls. They don't have the fixed camera angles of the older RE titles, but still, they're tanks. It's not about which control system is inherently "better," it's about which control scheme works best for the game you're designing.

@patrickklepek: If you want to take Wii U screenshots, it's easy. Any screenshot you post to Miiverse can also be pulled from Miiverse later by logging in from your PC and downloading the image file.