You Say You Want A Revolution...

[Jay]

Just noticed this article on Kotaku -

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/10/molyneux-picks-the-most-revolutionary-games-of-past-20-years/

- in which outspoken game creator Peter Molyneux lists what he thinks are the 5 most revolutionary titles of the past 20 years, along with one line justifications for his choices.

So, whaddya think? Agree? Disagree? What else deserves to be mentioned?

For the record, his choices are: Super Mario 64, Tomb Raider, World of Warcraft, Halo and Dune (the RTS version). I'll pop my own thoughts down a bit later.

[9warbane]

Halo: The title brought FPS games to consoles.

Yeah because FPS on consoles didn't exist before Halo. http://smiliesftw.com/x/rolleyes.gif

[Jay]

They did, but I think he means twin stick shooters. But yeah, I'd suggest Goldeneye has more of a console legacy than Halo...

[Serenity]

Where's Doom or Wolfenstein 3D? They were pretty revolutionary for FPS, even though they were originally on PC.

Edit: Meh, never mind.

[Lex]

Goldeneye was kind of a mess, looking back. It worked because we wanted it to work, But the controls sucked. As average as halo may be, it nailed the controls, and created it's own feel and style that was unlike any console fps before it.

[Lazlow]

Halo: The title brought FPS games to consoles.

Right game, slightly wrong rationale.

It gave everyone a reason to long onto Live, it brought online console gaming to masses. Yes, in Australia the Dreamcast was there first, but it didn't have a Halo that streamlined and popularised online gaming for the masses.

[Jay]

This I agree with.

As for Goldeneye, it is difficult going back to it, but its influence at the time is undeniable.

[Slippery]

I'm not sure I agree with Tomb Raider, hardly did a lot for the portrayal of women in games :/

[AranchineD]

I'm surprised he didn't say Black & White and Fable. >_>

Narrowing this kind of thing down to five games would be pretty hard, for sure...but to get the 'most revolutionary games ever' down to those five?

Halo, yeah, I'll take that. But I don't think Dune 2 would be the most revolutionary RTS; sure, it started a whole type of RTS gameplay, but there's been so many other games more recent than that that have gone and completely changed the landscape of what we'd call an RTS (Starcraft, Homeworld, Shogun/Total War in part) that it seems odd to label Dune 2 the biggest one of all there.

SM64 and Tomb Raider also were quite unique games in their time, sure, but I think it's odd to put them together on a list of the most revolutionary games. A medium that has such a huge variety of genres, and he goes with two 3D platformers (at heart, this is what Tomb Raider can basically be deconstructed to, really).

And, finally, we have WoW. I guess it didn't specify if these were all positive revolutions...

[Watchers]

So I assume the dog made Fable 2 number 1, yeah?

[Serenity]

I still think Doom should be in there, it and Wolfenstein singlehandedly made (or popularised, at least) the genre. If that's not revolutionary, I don't know what is.

[Jay]

I'm not sure I agree with Tomb Raider, hardly did a lot for the portrayal of women in games :/

Yeah, it's hard to know where the line sits between between empowerment and exploitation with that character.

[Jickle]

Right game, slightly wrong rationale.

It gave everyone a reason to long onto Live, it brought online console gaming to masses. Yes, in Australia the Dreamcast was there first, but it didn't have a Halo that streamlined and popularised online gaming for the masses.

The first Halo didn't have online play on XBox, did it?

[Jay]

I don't think so. That came in with number 2, didn't it?

[Lazlow]

Shit I though it did.... that said I'd only played on an XBOX once, co-op, with a mate at uni. Other times on PC. >_>

[AranchineD]

I still think Doom should be in there, it and Wolfenstein singlehandedly made (or popularised, at least) the genre. If that's not revolutionary, I don't know what is.

Doom also revolutionised other forms of media, ensuring games were never taken seriously by others ever again. >_>

[adam_91vn]

Disagree with all bar 1

[Halt, Hammerzeit]

I agree with Super Mario 64, Halo and World Of Warcraft (as much as I hate WoW), although I'm on the border with Halo. It popularised FPS really well. I don't think there's been an FPS before or after that created the hype that Halo did. Doom and Wolfenstein were awesome games for their time, but they didn't have the impact that Halo had. But we're not talking impact, we're talking revolutionary games.

My list would probably be:

Super Mario 64
The wow factor of 3D gaming on that scale for the first time was awesome. The first time I played it I was in Germany. It didn't matter that I couldn't understand what the hell was going on, just the environment in the game itself was brilliant.

Starcraft
This is really the first RTS I got into and still one of my favourite. The observation has been made a few times by different people that Blizzard aren't great innovators, but what they do, they do so well it blows your mind.

TIE Fighter
Although it's a game genre that's all but died out, I really loved the flight sims early on. X-Wing was good, but TIE Fighter just took what X-Wing did and ran with it. Bringing in secondary mission objectives added a whole new level of difficulty to it.

Legend Of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass
The DS was a very different system to program for, but PH took full advantage of it. It used all the features, from the mic and the touch screen to actually having to close the DS to complete a puzzle. The way you could mark your map to find items and the boss battles between the two screens made it a revolutionary game for me.

Super Mario Galaxy
I'm not sure if this really is a revolution, but the memories of this game are enough to keep me excited about SMG2. The physics engine in this game was awesome and the way it played was sublime.

I may have been scraping the bottom of the barrel with the last one (nothing decent was coming to mind), but I stand by my first four picks.

[SOX]

Right game, slightly wrong rationale.

It gave everyone a reason to long onto Live, it brought online console gaming to masses. Yes, in Australia the Dreamcast was there first, but it didn't have a Halo that streamlined and popularised online gaming for the masses.

Pretty sure Halo had none of those things.

EDIT: damn you Jickle.

[Lazlow]

read up champ.

[aubergine]

Right game, slightly wrong rationale.

It gave everyone a reason to long onto Live, it brought online console gaming to masses. Yes, in Australia the Dreamcast was there first, but it didn't have a Halo that streamlined and popularised online gaming for the masses.

I don't think 9warbane read the actual article. Or anyone else by the look of it, but as I recall from the other day, Molyneaux provided actual reasons for his selections, and the reasons he gave for Halo was it introduced the now ubiquitous recharging shield/health thing and the, frankly, so-obvious-but-totally-ingenious realistic weapon swapping.

I don't think Halo brought online gaming to ANYONE, pretty sure that was Halo 2? I played both games only momentarily but I could be wrong there.

I have to agree with Molyneax's reasons. I'm not a Halo fan by any stretch, but the success of recharging health is obvious by it's now-common usage, and the weapon swapping introduces a whole new play mechanic, apart from neatly dealing with the grossly unrealistic "I can carry an arsenal of 12 weapons UP MY ARSE apparently) which had been the norm since Wolf 3D, or, to go back further, all role playing games ever made.

Molyneax's list is quite insightful I think - as consumers we can disagree but look at the games from what revolutionised the way games were developed or thought about by developers or business folk. I'm pretty sure a lot of people on the developer/publisher side are interested in the model for World of Warcraft for example, which surely has to be the most financially successful game ever made?

[Rambo]

Someone earlier said Halo was the first twinstick FPS on console.

Nuh-uh, in GoldenEye you could choose the controller setting Octopussy and use 2 controllers for ultimate precsion. :)

[Fenrir]

Goldeneye was kind of a mess, looking back. It worked because we wanted it to work, But the controls sucked.
Alright, answer the damned question this time. Which Bond girl did you prefer,

Honey

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Ursula_Andress_as_Honey_Ryder_crop.jpg

or Solitaire

http://jamesbond007.net/galerie/jane3.jpg

?

[sausage]

Jane Seymour - ugh; I'd have to bend her over. So it'd have to be Honey cos it would be bald no question.

OT: any so-called "revolutionary" list without space invaders on it is limpdick.

[Clockw0rk]

Jane Seymour - ugh; I'd have to bend her over. So it'd have to be Honey cos it would be bald no question.

OT: any so-called "revolutionary" list without space invaders on it is limpdick.
"Past 20 years" doesn't include Space Invaders.
I agree with Halo. Goldeneye was released at the same time as Quake 2, which is leaps and bounds ahead in comparison. Halo was the first console FPS that looked and played as well as a PC one, and legitimately brought FPS games to consoles. Everything before that was a good attempt, just not good enough.

[sausage]

"Past 20 years" doesn't include Space Invaders.



Jesus am I that old? :(

[Lex]

Alright, answer the damned question this time. Which Bond girl did you prefer,
?

this time? what?

if you're getting at the control schemes, they were all shitty. because the 64 controller was shitty for fps.

[Jay]

Just FTR so is the Dual Shock.

[Lex]

Just FTR so is the Dual Shock.

what's that got to do with anything?

in any case, it's shitloads better for fps than the 64 pad.

[Jay]

Nothing, I was just making a pithy comment. But please, feel free to get aggressive, Lexy.

[Lex]

in what way was I getting aggressive?

[Jay]

It was the look in your eye. It creeps me out. :p

Anyway, I am also surprised Molly didn't try and slide one or two of his own games onto his list. Maybe he was hoping others would do it for him, in discussions like this one. :)

[AranchineD]

Starcraft
This is really the first RTS I got into and still one of my favourite. The observation has been made a few times by different people that Blizzard aren't great innovators, but what they do, they do so well it blows your mind.

Really, though, if you think about it, Starcraft was their most innovative title ever (in gameplay mechanics I mean, if not really in setting and story) and it's like one of the most played RTS games ever.

[Halt, Hammerzeit]

Really, though, if you think about it, Starcraft was their most innovative title ever (in gameplay mechanics I mean, if not really in setting and story) and it's like one of the most played RTS games ever.

Who was it innovative, though? I mean, the way the sides played were totally different from each other, and the units themselves were fun to come up with new ways to use them (I loved playing Brood Wars and using a Dark Archon to control an SCV and Zerg Drone to have all types of units available to me (plus 200 max unit cap per Terran, Zerg and Protoss. I think they took that out in a later patch, though. Glad I never got the patch :P)

I guess I'm clutching at straws a bit here because the only RTS I played before Starcraft were Total Annihilation and Dark Reign, and even that only a handful of missions into each. I don't remember that much about them either.

[Ad-Rock]

I agree with all of those choices in the article. I would be hard pressed to think of other games which have influenced the "gaming landscape" so extensively.

He doesn't seem to include games which have revolutionised story-telling. You could possibly include metal gear solid for the movie-esque way the story is presented, or an RPG like The Witcher where your choices actually make a difference and are not always clear-cut good & evil.

[aubergine]

What probably made Starcraft, and in a very real sense, Blizzard, was I think Battlenet. As a precursor to Wow Battlenet would have given Blizzard an advantage of experience over more or less every developer in existence. Battlenet had also kept people playing Starcraft for over a decade now, which is preposterous.

Another list of innovative / effective games Services would look like:
Battlenet
Xbox Live
Steam
App Store
World of Warcraft

Live is noteworthy for CHARGING for what Battlenet provides for free, and somehow getting away with it. The charge remains a barrier though (as well as $150 wifi) as I believe m$ would profit greater from cheap / free live and therefore more content sales and higher multiplayer software sales / fewer second-hand resales.

Steam for popularizing downloaded full games to a disc-manual addicted public.

App store has changes the way developers make games, and what's reasonable to charge for one.

[Ad-Rock]

On the Halo front I would like to say that not only were the health/shield system and the 2-weapon system "revolutionary", but that the enemy AI was like nothing I had ever seen before. They co-ordinate attacks, run to get back up & wait behind cover for you to show yourself.

Except the abomination which is The Flood.

[Jay]

Though I'm sure the Flood were programmed to be the antithesis of that, weren't they? If so, very successful!

[Halt, Hammerzeit]

The Flood were just mindless. All they knew was how to consume, which is how they were meant to be. The Covenant did act more like a unit than individual AIs

[aubergine]

IPhone is too retarded to let me complete that post:

obviously odd one out is World is Warcraft, but only because we are thinking about it in the terms blizzard markets it to us with. A feature of WoW is regular, "free" content updates, rebalances, in game events and so on. It's a clever way of making people feel they are getting new gaming from their generous friends when of course it is the new content which keeps people paying and playing over long periods. Like xbox Live, this is a multiplayer gaming and content delivery service you have to pay for, but unlike Live, most of the content is "at no extra charge" (again marketing language - WoW costs what, 3x a live subscription, and is only good for playing ONE game you already bought?)

WoW has barriers for me. While with Live I'd like to see free content (charging for wallpapers is pathetic) or cheaper fees, with WoW I'd like a pay-to-play option like prepaid mobile, because I might play it a few hours in a month. Under their current model, I won't be signing up at all, sorry, but hey, they do fine without me I read.

[AranchineD]

I think The Flood themselves aren't too bad, it's just that almost every single level involving them are extremely shittily (now an official word) designed and went on for far too long that they ruined the impact they had.

I'm sure the first time most people played the level in Halo: CE where you first ever encounter the Flood they'd admit it was pretty unnerving experience, what with the Covenant acting all crazy, and some crazy human soldiers who actually shoot you because they're that far gone.

But, of course, every single instance involving the Flood after that, they're just used as annoying bullet sponges and the challenge is to try and get through the level without falling asleep.

[Halt, Hammerzeit]

WoW has barriers for me. While with Live I'd like to see free content (charging for wallpapers is pathetic) or cheaper fees, with WoW I'd like a pay-to-play option like prepaid mobile, because I might play it a few hours in a month. Under their current model, I won't be signing up at all, sorry, but hey, they do fine without me I read.

Just because something is revolutionary doesn't mean it's perfect :P Personally, I'd like to see that for all subscription-based gaming services, but people are paying for monthly subscriptions, and they'll make more money off that (because not everybody has your restraint) that off pay per play services.

[Ad-Rock]

That's what I meant when I said they were an abomination. The first level with them was exciting and made me wee a little. After that they became monotonous.

But yeah, I realise that's what they are supposed to be like. I never get tired of fighting the Covenant, though.

[Nic Xtreme]

My favourite level in Halo 3 so far has been the flood one. It was awesome.

Also Molly's list - don't really agree with it. Well, except for WoW, which should be on there. Mario 64 I guess - his justification for that one is strangely compelling.

[dinopoke]

Why doesn't anyone remember Everquest or even Ultima Online? They were just as revolutionary as WOW.

[Halt, Hammerzeit]

Not really. Millions of people are still playing WoW after how many years? Everquest and Ultima Online weren't anywhere near that popular.

[aubergine]

I think Richard Garriot's failures have erased some aspects of his achievements.

[Nic Xtreme]

Why doesn't anyone remember Everquest or even Ultima Online? They were just as revolutionary as WOW.

You answered your own question! It can be argued that WoW is far more revolutionary because it has truly made its way into the wider community - far more people are aware of the genre than ever before. From what I know, neither Everquest nor Ultima Online pulled the sort of numbers nor had the wide effect as WoW has been able to do.

[dinopoke]

But is it really a revolution or just a natural progression along with the growing widespread usage of the internet? From what I've seen, WOW has hardly made anything new except for more accessibility but would you call that a revolution?

[AranchineD]

Of course WoW was a revolution, it was the game that pretty much killed off the RPG part of, what was called up until then, 'MMORPG'.

[Fenrir]

this time? what?

if you're getting at the control schemes, they were all shitty. because the 64 controller was shitty for fps.
Honey, then.

I've asked you before, with the images too. It's okay - if you never got into Solitaire because she was a bit too advanced for 10-year-old Lexy, that's fine, you can admit it. :)

You answered your own question! It can be argued that WoW is far more revolutionary because it has truly made its way into the wider community - far more people are aware of the genre than ever before. From what I know, neither Everquest nor Ultima Online pulled the sort of numbers nor had the wide effect as WoW has been able to do.
Gaming doesn't really need WoW's fanbase. The only thing necessarily impressive about that game is the technology underpinning it - making an MMO capable of supporting a player base like that is a ****ing huge, complicated and expensive undertaking - and has nothing to do with any contribution to gaming or gameplay concepts, at all.

[Xanafalgue]

For the record, his choices are: Super Mario 64, Tomb Raider, World of Warcraft, Halo and Dune (the RTS version). I'll pop my own thoughts down a bit later.

I agree with all of them. Don't know about SM64 though, a proper 3D platformer was going to happen anyway, regardless of who did it first. Replace it with BUBSY 3D.

[Australian Ninja]

Interesting article, thanks for the link (oh and yes I read it, AFTER scrolling through pages of this forum and realising there was a link at the first link to the actual article)

http://www.thatvideogameblog.com/2009/10/22/molyneux-picks-his-top-5-most-innovative-games/

The games he picked all make sense, the only thing I take exception to is this:

"Furthermore, Molyneux pointed to Mario 64 as the true precursor to the likes of GTA IV as it heralded the arrival of the free roaming around an open environment."

I don't flat out disagree, but the term "free roaming around an open environment" is not something I would associate with Mario 64.

Sure the stages were large, but the game still used a hub structure (like Soul Reaver, Spyro the Dragon for example), and progression is somewhat linear if you think about it.

If you imagine a tree and it's branches for Mario 64, you start with the trunk (or hub / central home world) and then move to the branches (stages) but return to the central hub before moving on to to a different stage.

In my definition of a "free roaming open environment" such as in GTA III, Fallout 3 etc - you don't have to return to a central hub or position before moving to a new area, you can move sideways, forwards, backwards or whatever and still get somewhere new.

How do you define "free roaming open world". In Mr M's article it seems implied that "open" is synonymous with "three-dimensional", otherwise we might as well throw Super Metroid and other games into the mix.

Still, open world and "sandbox" get abused so much these days the words have practically lost all meaning.

If you ask what kind of games I like now I'd have to say "non-linear mission based 3D games set in a large virtual playground like environment on terra firma that allows for multiple solutions to many of it's problems"

Because "sandbox" doesn't mean jack-shit anymore. Getting off topic here...

[sausage]

Hey guys don't confuse popularity with revolutionary. Christianity and the notion of a sole omnipotent God was none too popular when it was first thought up by whoever thought it up. Also; hula hoops were staggeringly popular for something that facilitates the exact same motion as having a ROOT that has been around since forever.

[aubergine]

Have you ever USED a hula hoop then had a root? I'm pretty sure it's not quite the same movement, unless you dick is severly curled.

[sausage]

Don't question my baseless speculation!

[[m]averick]

IMolyneaux provided actual reasons for his selections, and the reasons he gave for Halo was it introduced the now ubiquitous recharging shield/health thing


That was Halo 2

[Blue]

averick;1131282']That was Halo 2No, you're wrong.

My list:

Doom - Popularised FPS and deathmatch gameplay, and set the standard for years to come.

WoW - Once again, it was standard-setting, and truly brought MMORPG gaming to the masses.

Super Mario 64 - Far more revolutionary and important than Tomb Raider as a 3D platformer, which gets more respect than it deserves, in my eyes.

Metal Gear Solid - Brought cinematic gaming to consoles. Games now to be taken seriously as a high-tech storytelling medium, thank you very much. Psycho Mantis.

Wii Sport - System-seller. I don't like the system, I'm well and truly over the game, but there's no denying how well this game conned millions of people into trying video games.

Honourable mentions to Guitar Hero (although games like Guitar Freaks and other bemani games had already set the template), Halo (the most important FPS SINCE Doom), GTAIII (very convincing open world, a pioneering virtual playground), and Madden Football.

[Rambo]

So what are your reasons for Halo being "the most important FPS since Doom"?

[Blue]

So what are your reasons for Halo being "the most important FPS since Doom"?The same reasons as Molyneaux's. It defined modern FPS mechanics.