Yes, you heard right. Of course, this may sound completely absurd since the Sega Master System game library has copped years of derision by many gamers and no one has ever really done such a thing before - not doubt for good reason.
But what the hey: I see a challenge worthy of rising up to so bring it on!
When I was a kid I recall the Sega Master System being pretty big deal - in fact at the time I knew more people who owned a Master System than I did people who owned a NES. Of course this is from the perspective of an Australian - you know, a resident of a country that doesn't matter - but for a country that doesn't matter, the Sega was a hit in both Australia and Europe. In fact I remember seeing racks of Master System games and the issue of dodgy cover art never once come to mind.
But the US didn't think so - and subsequently the Master System was a flop. And when it comes to why many point to the issue of the MS game's artwork, regarding the imagery which was both daft and minimalist. And then there was, of course, the grid. The infamous grid that is the cause of much of the hate.
So can I defend this?
Lets start with the grid: I don't mind it. It was theorized that the grid may be a lame attempt at trying to replicate the holodeck from Star Trek Next Generation but for an attempt to suggest some technological device it' at least partway successful. At the time, the 80s, I was well aware that gaming was a new thing and nothing like I had ever seen before. And in that sense, the grid suggests such an advancement.
More importantly though, what I see is an old design trick being put to use: The use of the white space. As any designer will tell you, placing something within a white background will automatically draw attention - the eye is drawn to a massive space of white. So pretty much anything can be placed within a white background and it will still draw attention. Indeed, it's a design trick that has been utilized many times through gaming history, most notably through the Final Fantasy series:
And then there is the clipart-esque imagery. I don't find it a problem - if anything I originally found it something of a curiosity. It is the same principle as the white grid: It's a minimalist approach where a simple image is presented. An image that provides a suggestion as to the game contents - this in turn makes me, the potential buyer, curious as to it's contents.
Some examples:
Well if you're going to call to call your game Ghost House you'd want appropriate imagery to go with it.How can you not see bats and think Haunted House?
A foot kicking something? Well, what else are you going to match to a game called Black Belt?
This game is a clone of Spy Hunter. And this image says it all: A road being viewed from within, what looks like, a magnifying glass. Driving and doing spy things? I'm sold!
If anything, I find the Sega Master System box art relying on generating curiosity. If you present the basic idea then the imagination of the gamer can fill in the gaps. Indeed, it is nice to see game developers actually treating their audience like they have an imagination. Come on, it's not like we gamers are completely brain dead.
Ultimately though, the first round of games on the Sega Master System weren't really that good. Sure there were some diamonds in the rough but even I will admit there was indeed some shlock and, sadly, mirrored by a minimalist art direction. It is therefore fitting that as Master System games improved, more attention was paid to the box art and began occupying more and more
Nevertheless, the Sega Master System was a big hit in Europe and Australia but not in the US. Was the box art the deciding factor? That is hard to say: It can't be refuted that a decent enough box art can be enough to persuade a potential buyer over. But even now, different games get different box art in different regions.
Does that notion alone say something about the audience?
Well all I can say is that I'm glad I got this...
...as opposed to this:
No comments:
Post a Comment