The intended use of tags is to represent a category that might attract specific experts. I can see how chess would be worth a tag; chess is a very complicated game, and as such, I would expect that there could be some experts in chess game development.
In contrast, I do not perceive the likes of pac-man, breakout, pong and arknoid to be as complex to warrant expertise specific to these games. In fact, I see some potential issues with the way two of the proposed tags have been used, so far:
- tetris has currently only been used on two duplicate questions. They both roughly ask 'can I make a legal Tetris clone'. I would not expect a tetris expert to be as reliable in answering these sort of questions as I would a legal expert. In these cases, tetris appears to be a metatag, and should be removed.
- snake has currently only been used on a handful of questions. They all appear to specifically ask in regards to completing a mechanic for snake, specific to the developing platform that particular user is using. Once again, I would not expect a snake expert to be able to reliably answer questions pertaining to any random development platform. I would expect the expert in that development platform to offer the reliable answers. As such, once again, I consider this tag to mostly (if not, completely) be used as a metatag.
I am therefore against creating tags for the further mentioned 'beginner games'. If new developers look for resources, they are likely more interested in finding said resources relevant to their platform, regardless.
I would also suggest we consider whether we need the tetris or snake tags. I am on the fence, on this matter, but there seems to be a clear misuse thus far. At best, they need a clear usage guideline.