(no subject)

[deckardcanine]

The Washington Post today has an article on how video games are shaping the ways kids play with other toys. Based on my own childhood experience, Ron Stanley's point is very true. Video games don't hinder creativity; they just offer a unique framework.

That said, I can't let this go uncorrected:

"Levels and bosses are not only staples of video games, they're almost exclusive to them. They're not found in most board games, card games or sports. They date from the arcade game Street Fighter II, where, after defeating a number of smaller opponents, you had to face one powerful, difficult adversary -- the boss -- to complete each level. Ensuing levels featured greater numbers of opponents and larger, more difficult bosses."

That can't be right. SFII came out in 1991, six years after Super Mario Bros. introduced Bowser and featured numbered levels. Various other games jumped on the bandwagon during that time. Heck, SFII doesn't even have "smaller" opponents -- it's a one-on-one brawler in which all the characters are supposed to be roughly equal. (They get tougher at later levels, but the order in which you fight them varies.) And I don't think anyone in the game could rightly be called a boss, despite M. Bison's backstory as a totalitarian dictator.

I'm thinking that Mr. Stanley just got clumsy in selecting the title.

Comments

[deckardcanine.livejournal.com]

Not everyone counts Donkey Kong as a boss. At least, you don't battle him in a conventional sense.

[nefaria.livejournal.com]

Hmm, in that case I may have to go with the alien squid guy in the spaceship at the end of Phoenix. The game continues if you beat him though.

[deckardcanine.livejournal.com]

I haven't tried that game, but the example sounds valid.

[ceruleanst.livejournal.com]

Most shoot-em-ups have bosses, and the earliest such as Galaxian and Galaga at least had things that were called bosses even if they weren't quite what we think of as end bosses. Zaxxon certainly qualifies as an end boss.