Is it better for a game to be influential, or for a game to be good?
>>12434956Good, obviously. Sometimes influential games are good, sometimes they're not. Good games are always good by definition
Those things aren't mutually exclusive
Wouldn't the more interesting question be good or original?
>>12435021No because arguments about originality are pointless and would be far less engaging than talking about a game's influence
>>12434956no game is influential unless there's something good about it.
What's an example of a game that's influential but not good? I'm struggling to think of one
>>12435270Diablo
>>12435270Old rpgs come to mind but a lot of those are good. They're just hard, archaic and they filter people. Particularly jrpgs.i personally think the 1st dragon's quest is very boring and repetitive while also not being challenging enough to keep me interested.
>>12435270Halo
>>12435278beat me to it
>>12435270Dune 2
>>12435270Final FantasyIt's treated as a foundational title for RPGs when it's really a kusoge that barely functions and gets mogged by both older and contemporary RPGs.
>>12435036Why would I give a shit about whether a game is influential? Either it's good, or unique, or it's trash.
>>12435270>>12435286First person dungeon crawler CRPGs as well. FromSoft was heavily inspired by stuff like Ultima when they made King’s Field. Those games were pretty rough around the edges, but ultimately evolved into the Souls formula.
>>12435595There are lots of influential games/movies/records that didn’t fully work, but had some interesting concepts that other people built upon. It’s interesting to go back to them from a historical perspective.
influential was always a buzzword
>>12434956>>12435270A game can be influential but in a bad way, like Final Fantasy VII.
>>12434956Often they go hand in hand, but it depends on your aims. If you want more games similar to the game you played, it's better for it to be influential. (arguably Sonic would have never existed without Mario)But, if you're just a dude playing a game alone then neither probably matters.
>>12435270>What's an example of a game that's influential but not good?Hydlide
>>12435270You'd have to look at early ones, but within their frame of reference they were all "good". Are you still up for some Colossal Cave Adventure or Zork? Most retrogamers aren't going to give those a legitimate shot without a guide, let alone non-retrogamers.Heiankyo Alien is considered the grandpa of various early maze and dig games (Even Lode Runner gets cited, but I can't find that interview) which in turn have their own debateable spawns, even was popular in Japanese arcades. Pac-Man ran with the idea and imo wisely turned it into the evade/attack format with which it ate its lunch and stole its identity. I generally enjoy playing most versions (aside from terribly slow type-in ones), but Pac-man is definitely more suited to arcades. I'd say it's an average game at best.Staying in Japan, there's 1 primordial PC developer (Game Kyōjin) who made clones/ports of arcade games which were generally acceptable (not good) and obviously not original. That phase of this dev's work get cited by a few important devs as their inspiration to do their own coding and they in turn made some influential stuff. This is more of a personal influence thing than 1 specific product though.>>12436440This fits as well. Wouldn't call it bad at the time, but it's definitely not good.
>>12435270Radar Scope bombed so hard they needed a conversion to save NoA which allowed Donkey Kong to be made. I'd say that's a pretty influential failure.
>>12434956All influential games are good or were good at the time it was released but stopped being well-regarded due to ‘Seinfeld isn’t funny’ reasons. No shit the original Super Mario Bros. isn’t that fun when you already played 4th gen+ platformers.
