"Walk of Game" website ([url]http://www.walkofgame.com/)[/url]
Now, while I think the idea of creating a "Walk of Stars"-esque tribute to games a bit silly, I can tolerate the existance of one... even if it's in an odd place. The Walk appears to be an attempt to honor gaming icons -- creators, games, and characters. This I can accept. It's odd, but I understand the premise.
This year's inductees are: Nolan Bushnell (ok), Shigeru Miyamoto (goes without saying), Mario, Link, Sonic, and... Halo.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it a wee bit early to be handing out some sort of "permanent award" to Halo? If the intent is to be a "landmark honoring the icons and pioneers of the videogame industry", wouldn't you want to honor stuff with a bit more history behind it? Otherwise you're simply "honoring" the latest fad.
I'm not saying that Halo isn't worthy of honors -- I'm just saying that it seems rather odd to establish a sort of permanent system of recognition for important games and then give the only game award to a relatively new title. If Halo still has the same pull in five years, then I'd fully understand this... but it really seems more like flash-in-the-pan hype.
(Yes, I know -- the awards were chosen by the votes of folks visiting the website. Using such votes to set up what purports to be a permanent landmark seems even more inane.)
Now, while I think the idea of creating a "Walk of Stars"-esque tribute to games a bit silly, I can tolerate the existance of one... even if it's in an odd place. The Walk appears to be an attempt to honor gaming icons -- creators, games, and characters. This I can accept. It's odd, but I understand the premise.
This year's inductees are: Nolan Bushnell (ok), Shigeru Miyamoto (goes without saying), Mario, Link, Sonic, and... Halo.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it a wee bit early to be handing out some sort of "permanent award" to Halo? If the intent is to be a "landmark honoring the icons and pioneers of the videogame industry", wouldn't you want to honor stuff with a bit more history behind it? Otherwise you're simply "honoring" the latest fad.
I'm not saying that Halo isn't worthy of honors -- I'm just saying that it seems rather odd to establish a sort of permanent system of recognition for important games and then give the only game award to a relatively new title. If Halo still has the same pull in five years, then I'd fully understand this... but it really seems more like flash-in-the-pan hype.
(Yes, I know -- the awards were chosen by the votes of folks visiting the website. Using such votes to set up what purports to be a permanent landmark seems even more inane.)