Interesting that you brought up Zelda 2. I sometimes think there was an experimental tone to sequels back then. I suppose the idea of a game being a big hit and then getting a sequel was relatively new ground, and no one had yet settled on the “more of the same” default approach. SMB2, Zelda 2, Castlevania 2. Probably others as well, but those are the ones that come to mind right now. Sequels to hit games, where the sequel went in a very different direction.

I wonder how much that’s a reflection of, as you mentioned, no one knowing how long the industry would last. If video games might be gone in ten five years – hell, why not try something new?

Incidentally, I think this is a really good point: “One more thing about the test of time: whether you like it or not, it does exist and surviving it should be rare.” The very creamiest of the cream of the crop survive. For me, that’s Kirby’s Adventure. There’s some nostalgia there, but I think it mostly stands up as a well-designed platformer. Also pretty easy, which doesn’t hurt. I don’t have the patience for difficult games. Bollocks to Mega Man (now that’s a series of NES games which haven’t aged well).

I think maybe people confuse the enduring classicness of games with that of books, films, and music. Special effects aside, films lean heavily on writing, acting and direction – so they can be fairly ageless. Books definitely can. Video games rely on the technology of their time far more, so they inevitably age more.