This post is an indirect response and reflection on the recently highlighted Gamespot soap box article, "Can we, as Humans, determine the best game ever?'" I'm a longtime Gamespot reader, and though I 'm not typically a blogger, I feel compelled to at least react, because I feel this piece has touched on many issues pertinent to today's gamer. The writer of the original article had many valid points, and I'd like to stress this is in no way an attack, but rather a flushing out of what might be an incomplete inspection. The question of, "can we determine the best game," which seems a little pointless and endless to debate (probably branching into the philosophical of, can this be determined by a majority, will this always be personal opinion, etc.) interests me on the whole less than the subsequent and more important question, "how do we determine the best game ever?"

There is a general consensus, a trend I see in the articles and meditations of gamers on this site. There is a reflective yearning, pondering, reaching into the past, in order to distill what we as gamers fell in love with in our respective favorite first times. With increasing concern and anxiety over mediocre and flashy games with one or two tricks to explore before puttering out into flat and forgettable experiences, gamers have naturally, anxiously, attempted to articulate and touch on exactly what it is that made games good for them, what made them "timeless." What I'll write here is in no way unique, or original with regards to this search, but this is definitely an echo added to the rising resonance of voices.

Moving back to the specific piece in question, the writer of the original article made two key structural decisions, firstly he or she chose the aspects of inspection, that is the qualities he (I'll just go with male by default and laziness) would use to determine a timelessly good game-these were story, graphics, game play, and development, and secondly, he chose, on the whole, to focus on Final Fantasy 7, a wonderful choice given its historical prevalence as front-runner for best game. Now, both these decisions were strategic and to the point. The latter seems obvious, but the former is what prompted me to write this article in the first place. Though I'll tackle the category of story (because I don't think it was fully explored), aspects like game play, graphics, development, were all particularly and expertly chosen to make the argument that there can't be a timeless, great game. Narrowly focusing on these aspects, these ever-changing tumultuous aspects of games, would, I think, lead one exactly to the writer's conclusion, that a best game can't be found and preserved in history.

It seems far too obvious to me, at this point in the gaming world, to make the argument that graphics, development, game play, and change in tastes can never allow one game to crystallize forever as the victor of games. But I feel this is a little like approaching the question backwards. If we want to find what can make a game timeless, shouldn't we delve into its timeless aspects, and evaluate those strengths to see if they last the tests of time? Why should we focus on the myopic, mutable, and time-tied facets we know pin games to one generation or another.

Now, I know this was a long-winded and wordy introduction, but bear with me. Freeing ourselves from the technology and era-bound I'd like to go back and look at Final Fantasy 7, a consistently rated top game, and try to discuss why, clearly, it has been burned into our collective consciousness using different, more eternal, criteria.

Story or Narrative:

Now the original article attempts to argue that, perhaps, story isn't quite as necessary as one might think. Using the example of FF7 vs. Tetris, he points out that the latter has stood the test of time with no story whatsoever. Additionally, the writer goes on to say that, while we have classic literature such as say, Don Quixote, we, as modern readers, will continually find new favorites such as the Harry Potter series or the Da Vinci Code (meh…I'm just going to let that slide).

I have to respectfully disagree with both points, adamantly. While minimalist story will feed our thumb-twitching, reflex driven, superficial move and manipulate desires, and will, yes, last through the ages, I still have yet to meet the gamer who will say something of the effect that Pong is the best game ever. I'm not saying these people don't exist, but a game lasting a long time in social memory is only a facet of being the best game. Additionally, comparing old classics to new pop hits, though it proves the general point that we will always have new stories to intrigue us, is a bit like comparing apples and oranges. That has absolutely nothing to do with the resonant quality of those classics. I may pick up a cheap paperback thriller today for a casual read, but you would have to shoot me in the kneecaps before I'd tell you Dan Brown holds a candle to James Joyce.

The movement and recognition of video games as a new medium of art and story-telling, of constant discussion on changing narrative, convergence with film, and so on, are direct proof positive that gamers give quite a damn about story in rating their best game, myself included. I, personally, think story has everything to do with making a compelling game, a game that verges on true art. This is why we see such a critical and popular appreciation for labors of love that go to lengths to draw on powerful narrative (case in point, look at Braid's expansion of the classic but superficial save the princess platformer into a philosophical reflection on obsession, time, memory, etc.).

In an example of a game like FF7, you have many strong story criteria to draw from. There's the category of "firsts." This game arguably pulled a lot of firsts. You play as an eco-terrorist mercenary, you battle at length with, not a government, but a global corporation, you have an antagonist (to be discussed in character section) who is equally if not much more intriguing than your hero. Most of all, we have, of course, the iconic death of Aeris. Yes, historically, characters have been killed (e.g., FFIV like crazy), but not one whose relationship with the hero was so lovingly and tenderly crafted, through cut scene, through narrative, brought to the brink of gentle connection before DEATH BY STABBING. Whereas something like a novel limits your interactivity, your empathy for the characters, nothing stings you harder than battling and strengthening a character and having it wiped off the face of the game (those of you unlucky enough not to hear the well known spoiler ahead of time).

Arguing for "firsts," however, has its limits. They do, admittedly, become clichéd over time and lose their bite for future generations, which is why you also have to look at thematic depth. Themes of identity, goals, protecting loved ones, though not original to epic rpg gaming, took a particularly flavorful combination in FF7. I can't, for example, tell you the 2-dimensional plot points of all the rpgs I have played in my life time. But I can tell you, exactly, what it was I felt and experienced watching the character Red XIII learning his father was not the coward he always believed, but a true hero who sacrificed himself for his family and his people. This kind of emotional depth, combined with an appreciation with the groundbreaking aspects of FF7 (many of which I have yet to see even close to successfully replicated) make the game completely memorable, completely soul-stirring. So yes, story? Might matter a little.

Characters:

I don't want to get into a long discussion of "what's wrong with gaming today," but I have often come to a conclusion that characters is a huge part of the issue. Characters, if done correctly, sketched well and carefully, are just as lasting as the narrative they are coupled to. I don't need stock anime personalities or a silent everyman (though I will admit, they do the job quite well in a number of games, e.g. Zelda). I need people with compelling motivations, interactions, and so on. Whether it be Vincent Valentine, and his lost love and humanity, Red XIII with his aforementioned father, or Cloud, confused and introverted Cloud, finding his reason to fight, all these characters have stayed with me over the years.

One of the biggest example of compelling character is, of course, the consistently top voted villain, Sephiroth. Why would he be so awesome to us drooling nerds, especially so many years later? At first glance to a gamer today, Sephiroth seems the tried and true semi-effeminate villain that wants to destroy the world, so, I don't doubt the gamer of today would ask, what makes this silver haired sword-toter so special? A number of things, actually, that I can only speak to in my own opinion. His background, for one. A former national hero, champion of the people, someone Cloud (err…or Zack) looked up to in the past, Sephiroth, upon learning he was, in fact, the product of experimentation with alien genetic material, loses his goddamned mind. In a somewhat of a reverse Superman, we have a hero finding himself separate from the human race, finally able to explain his uniqueness, prowess and isolation, and embracing the destructive nature of his forebear to the max to cause flat-out meteor crashing chaos. Show me the character cooler than that. I've been dying for a good villain for a long, long while.

Music:

I'll make this one short, because I might blow my load just typing this. Nobuo Uematsu, need I say more? Flying in an airship over a ravaged planet isn't the same without a bursting musical score, watching your loved one die has no meaning if it's set to hip and repetitive bleeps and boops. Uematsu is a recognized genius for bringing real emotion, real heart into the score of a game like FF7. As video game music becomes a stronger and defined market, composers like Uematsu are lauded for giving us themes that move us. I wouldn't, for example, be nearly as touched by Red XIII if it were not for that damn Cosmo Canyon song, "The Great Warrior." A sweeping, cinematic score is definitely a cornerstone of an amazing, lasting game. From games like Shadow of the Colossus to Ocarina of Time, a haunting melody, a rising theme, definitely makes it as a criterion for a "best" game.

Design and Environment (vs. Graphics):

This final criterion is more of a counterpoint to the oft made argument about outdated graphics. I absolutely understand the current, younger gamer perspective and disinterest with archaic, large-headed lego-like characters. Part of me feels a little bad for these gamers, because had they played the game when it was new, they might have lowered their critical reservations just enough to truly enjoy the game. But seeing as how this is still a valid point, I would put forth that, what makes more of an impact, is game design and environment.

Nothing is more shocking in FF7 than that moment of moving out of the slum-filled, industrial city of Midgar in the game's beginning (you spend a few hours there initially), and discovering the giant sweeping plains of a planet you have yet to fully explore. From the look of the characters, to the towns, to the ruins, what you have is a cohesive stage, a setting, extremely important for a game. I will always remember, for example, the fields of Hyrule or the Lost Woods or the Goron City of Ocarina, or the echoing, dripping hallways of Bioshock. Because, yes, ten years from now, Bioshock will no doubt look just as cheesy and clunky as a game like FF7 does now, but if one cares for the environment the game is presented in, the world that one moves through, it's clear these games are masterpieces.

In Closing:

What makes a "best game ever?" Why would a game like FF7 consistently hit the top in mass polls? Given that the writer of the original article hasn't played the game, I can see why he might scratch his head and say there is no real formula. This is right, to an extent. The "best game" will change with taste and time, but some will always be much more powerful and meaningful than others. A game like FF7 reflects just that sort of game, and if we want to understand why it lasted, we have to look at its lasting aspects, not its superficial and anachronistic ones. Story, characters, music, environment, are all key components in the recipe for the best game. This is, of course, simply the opinion of this writer, but from what I have gathered and read from others here, this is a common feeling within the gaming community. The gems that we keep in our memory, that we will all secretly compare every future game to, have some archetypal, mythic power for each of us. I am not an artistic snob, looking down on your fun puzzle or fps games, I play those as well. Likewise, I am not a drooling fan boy that will defend a game like FF7 to the death. It has its faults, it has lost some of its contextual importance. I am just a humble gamer who is struggling to say just what it is he likes about what he plays and waits with bated breath for that next moving experience to keep with him for the rest of his life.