🚀 go-pugleaf

Matthew Murray wrote in message ...
>On Fri, 7 Aug 1998, Mark Asher wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 7 Aug 1998 15:45:45 -0400, "azog" <az...@planet.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Without rehashing something that's been said time and again:
>> >
>> >Games become "classics" when they have fresh and new ideas. Games that
are
>> >clones of that classic are nothing more than "one-night stands". However
>> >many clones of Doom there are, be they good or bad, Doom will always
stand
>> >out as a classic. I am not sure Quake (1 & 2) can classify, because it
is
>> >the same old thing with a few new ideas. Not fresh ideas, just new.
>>
>> So you're saying the Civilization 2 and Heroes of Might and Magic 2
>> are not classics?
>
> I have never played Heroes of Might and Magic 2, but I would most
>certainly >never< consider Civilization 2 a classic.  Granted, it is a
>very, very, very, very, VERY good game, but hardly a classic.  Likewise, I
>would never deign to refer to SimCity 2000 as a classic, though both the
>original Civilization and SimCity can be called nothing but.

Here's another theory:  What we consider "classic" games is SUBJECTIVE, its
kind of like how we pick a favorite song.  I think we consider a game a
classic if it blows us away, INDIVIDUALLY, when we first play it.  My short
list of classics are games that had a huge impact on me when I played them.

For example, I consider Civ original to be one the great classic turn based
strategy game.  But I know people who got PCs after Civ and their first
experience with that type of game was Civ II.  They consider Civ II to be
the classic.  There are lots of other examples.