Part of the reason I maintain an extensive library of video game magazines is to get as complete a history as I can on any given subject. I donât like loose ends! So when I was recently asked to talk on camera about how the American video game enthusiast media of 1995 felt about Nintendoâs RPG masterpiece, EarthBound, I was happy to be able to pull out what I believe to be every review written. And here they all are, lovingly scanned and restored by me! In order:
Electronic Gaming Monthly (July, 1995)
Nintendo Power (June, 1995)
Game Players (July, 1995)
VideoGames (July, 1995)
GameFan (âViewpointâ capsule reviews) (August, 1995)
GameFan (full review) (August, 1995)
GamePro (July, 1995)
Next Generation and Electronic Games did not review the game. Game Informer appears to have not, but I donât have the June or September issues, so I canât say that with 100% certainty (also, if you have Game Informer issues from 1995-1999, we should talk).  Itâs worth noting that Nintendo Power also had a ten-page extended feature that I did not include, as itâs an overview with no criticism as opposed to a review (heck, even the âreviewâ included here barely qualifies)
The biggest takeaway I get, slapping all these magazines on my desk and reading them back-to-back, is just how completely offended the critics were by the gameâs art direction. The âinfantile graphicsâ made VIdeoGamesâ Geoff Higgins âwant to gag,â apparently. EGMâs John Gurka âlaughed out loudâ when he first saw the game, while GameFan capsule reviewer Skidâs initial impression was âno way! These graphics are just to [sic] fruity.â  Not one reviewer seemed to like the art direction, though some - particularly at GameFan - were able to power through it and enjoy the game underneath.
Itâs tempting to look back and roll your eyes at how these critics just didnât understand, man, just as itâs tempting to look at Nintendoâs âThis Game Stinksâ marketing campaign as coming from a marketing department that also didnât understand, man, but I think they both tell us very clearly why this game didnât catch on: this was a very difficult game to sell in 1995.
Sure, we all basically agree that the game is gorgeous now, but try to put yourself in the mindset of a video game critic in June of 1995, when the game debuted. RPGs were only just catching on in the U.S., ushering in what many felt was the start of âmatureâ games no longer being exclusively for those rich kids who had computers. Squareâs Chrono Trigger was also coming out around the same time, so the sudden switch from the anime-inspired Square house style that most associated with the genre to a look that evoked childlike wonder must have been jarring.
And letâs not forget the rest of the video game industry at the time. Segaâs Saturn and Sonyâs PlayStation were already out in Japan (and the former would see a surprise U.S. debut right about when these reviews were written), so for most cutting-edge game enthusiasts, it was starting to look like 2D graphics were a thing of the past. Even Nintendo was starting to leave 2D graphics behind: at that yearâs Winter Consumer Electronics Show in January, when EarthBound was quietly shown for the first time, Nintendoâs main focus was on the 3D capabilities of its Super FX chip for the Super Nintendo. Literature from the time shows that its three spotlight games that show all had polygonal 3D graphics: StarFox 2, Comanche, and FX Fighter (literally none of these games actually managed to ship, but thatâs another story).
And in the middle of all of this forward-thinking excitement, weâve got this strange, backward-looking, reflective, beautiful game vying for attention. I canât imagine a scenario where the game could have been a hit in this environment.
[Aggregating EarthBoundâs contemporary review scores gives a figure of about 72%. If this was on Metacritic, that number would be in a yellow box.]
snowghoul
stormborns
baratheonpilled
blakekathryn
pixelskylines
tangentwithtanner
jacobvanloon
