Active Users:356 Time:03/07/2025 08:14:34 AM
There's a lot of pressures they're trying to address with these choices. lord-of-shadow Send a noteboard - 17/02/2011 04:03:33 AM
They have to strike a balance between well-known games to draw people in, even if they're not really art, and games that actually are. That's why you see crap like Cal of Duty on the list.

They've got to get games with interesting back stories - that might be why you're seeing Flow, but not Braid.

They've got to get a variety of games, genres, systems, eras.

They've got to get historically important games in there, even if in hindsight many of them didn't age well, or lack in any artistic merit.


My only concern is that, by putting this to a vote, it's now a popularity contest, rather than a curated exhibit. This means that it's possible for some absolute drivel to get showcased, while Okami and Shadow of the Collosus, might not. And that's just naming from the list they have there.

I'm just glad that the step has been taken at all though.
Reply to message
The Art of Videogames at the Smithsonian - 17/02/2011 01:03:16 AM 643 Views
Max Payne 2 wasn't on any of the lists. Sniff. At least Earthworm Jim was. *NM* - 17/02/2011 03:25:16 AM 1483 Views
Second visit: I wasn't going to vote for Minecraft, but changed my mind. - 17/02/2011 02:51:51 PM 412 Views
Also why I chose it. *NM* - 18/02/2011 02:38:35 AM 182 Views
Yay legitimacy. *NM* - 17/02/2011 03:55:47 AM 181 Views
- 17/02/2011 03:57:25 AM 384 Views
There's a lot of pressures they're trying to address with these choices. - 17/02/2011 04:03:33 AM 444 Views
I am sure there will be curator input as well. *NM* - 17/02/2011 04:29:19 AM 209 Views
Also, they're stupid for not having a multi-platform section. - 17/02/2011 04:50:59 AM 394 Views
Yes. The popularity contest part of this is deplorable. *NM* - 17/02/2011 10:39:40 PM 185 Views
Their categories and choices suck. - 17/02/2011 10:10:58 PM 430 Views
Too obscure, relies too much on prior knowledge of the game industry - 17/02/2011 10:38:18 PM 403 Views

Reply to Message