In a world where high-definition graphics and ultra-realistic detail are the breadwinners of the sports genre, where do we sit the arcade sports games at the dinner table in the house that Mario built? There is something to be said for the games that take the basic premises of a given sport and press the remix button. When you remove the strict rule sets that govern an activity or sport but keep the essence and primary objectives, true creativity can flourish. Franchises like Madden are forced to come up with gimmicks and new ways to repackage a game that has remained virtually the same for the past 15 years. When the noticeable differences between versions year after year are harder to distinguish, the genre needs a reboot. Of course change like that isn’t possible, at least for the companies whose business plans revolve around pumping out yearly iterations to satisfy a rabid fan base.

This week marks the release of The Bigs 2, an arcade simulation of baseball in nearly every way imaginable. “Big” is not just the title, it’s the motto. And this isn’t the only arcade sports game to earn TV time in the SugarFree household. Remember NFL Blitz? The countless opportunities to choke-slam quarterbacks after the whistle and run that cross-up pattern that works like a charm every time are just some of the classic memories this game has bestowed upon N64 faithful. Taking a trip in the way-back-machine also brings us NBA Jam, or it’s more modern version, NBA Street. Both offered all the flash and insanity expected in a game that allows you to do front flips and 720 spins on your way to the rim. Hockey fans got a stellar arcade edition in NHL 3-on-3 and even soccer hooligans could give FIFA Street a kick when 11 on 11 wasn’t enough action on the pitch. And if you want to think outside of the box a little, the hardcore racing fanatics of Forza and Gran Turismo could forego their S-Class licenses for the insanity of the Burnout series. Clearly, if you are a fan of any major sports simulation game on the market, there’s an arcade offspring waiting to be enjoyed.

The games that are not bound by reality offer an entirely different gaming experience. Starting with the basic rules of a given sport, developers can throw the metaphorical kitchen sink at these games and find a way to make virtually any creative choice make sense within the context of their games. Take a look at Burnout Paradise. There are cars, streets, an accelerator, and if you find it necessary (spoiler: you wont) a brake. After that, reality checks out and you start power sliding, flying through the air and causing wrecks that put Michael Bay to shame. As fun as it is to get involved with the nitty-gritty details and minutia of gear settings and suspension stiffness, sometimes I just want to step on the gas and go fast. Sometimes Ricky Bobby is better than Helio Castroneves. Sometimes I just want to plow through another car instead of worrying about the timing of my braking into a turn. Don’t get me wrong, I am extremely excited for Gran Turismo 5, but there is a reason I am still playing Burnout Paradise 18 months after it was released.

I wonder what would happen if these developers were not bound by yearly deadlines to iterate on an existing product. You all saw what kind of creativity is possible with these groups with the release of NHL 3-on-3. They took an existing game engine and put a twist on what hockey is commonly thought of and produced a fairly competent hockey spin-off. These studios have more talent than their design documents require, and it is shown in games like NHL 3-on-3. For as much reality as the simulation genre offers, it will always be criticized because it isn’t ‘real enough.’ They will always be held to the impossible standard of reality. High-definition graphics are great, but they are no substitute for the real thing. They never will be. They never can be. I suppose that benchmark of reality can be a proper motivator for developers. Trying to achieve the impossible will continue to push technology to its limits to bring gamers the most realistic gaming experience possible. But these games can only go so far before the law of diminishing returns takes over.

Sports simulation games are also held back by a steep barrier of entry. While there are often a training modes and easier difficulties, there is still a lot to understand and ultimately master. NBA Jam was able to succeed where NBA Live couldn’t because it was able to focus on the simplicity of the game of basketball. Pass, shoot, score, maybe play some defense. That’s it. I know there was more to that game, but my point is that it stripped basketball down to its core. There were no plays to call, no pick-and-roll, no high/low game, no triangle offense, no zone defense, no box-and-1, no Hack-a-Shaq. Everyone that knows anything about basketball can pick up an arcade-based game like NBA Jam and immediately enjoy it without having to know how the Princeton Offense is supposed to work. That type of simple connection with gamers is what makes these games so appealing and occasionally so successful. There is a time and a place for hardcore reality based simulation, but in my video game collection I prefer the preposterous to the plausible.

Look at it this way: If a developer is tasked with making A football game instead of THE football game, gamers will get the opportunity to experience games like Blood Bowl instead of Roster Update 2010.

Guess which one I look forward to more.

I’m big time over at Talking About Games (.com). Check me out, doin big things.