Why would you put the inferior game on the list? Next mario needs a better* fucking overworld. Badly.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
G4's Top 100 Games of All Time
- Thread starter Byrne
- Start date
*Sees #100*
Oh, that's cool. Pong is a legendary video game, and deserves to be treated as such. Good to see a homage to the classics.
*Sees #99*
I'm done
Oh, that's cool. Pong is a legendary video game, and deserves to be treated as such. Good to see a homage to the classics.
*Sees #99*
I'm done
Wow, I was NOT expecting to see Shadow of the Colossus even on this list, let alone in the top 10. That's one of my favorite games of all time, it's amazing to see it get real recogniton.
Also, lol at Words with Friends and Angry Birds being on the list. This poll must have incorporated Facebook voting
Prototype was a ridiculously boring game after the first 30 minutes, yet PacMan is still sought to this day. In 20 years, you will still see people playing PacMan but you will not see a single person giving a shit about Prototype. So who is delusional? PacMan is 100 times the game Prototype will ever be even if you don't account for things like hardware limitations, lasting effects on arcade gaming, or its competition at the time
Also, lol at Words with Friends and Angry Birds being on the list. This poll must have incorporated Facebook voting
We're talking about games, not pictures. Some people prefer their games to have good gameplay instead of OMG PRETTY! IT LOOKS SO REAL! I have some tin foil you can play with if you want to look at something flashy, I'd rather use a stick and play in the dirt. Nobody in their right mind could believe that graphics matter when we're discussing how good a game is. I'd argue that having limited graphics would actually improve gameplay because they don't have to worry about people like you who value looks over substance.
Prototype was a ridiculously boring game after the first 30 minutes, yet PacMan is still sought to this day. In 20 years, you will still see people playing PacMan but you will not see a single person giving a shit about Prototype. So who is delusional? PacMan is 100 times the game Prototype will ever be even if you don't account for things like hardware limitations, lasting effects on arcade gaming, or its competition at the time
Play Deus Ex.
awful list
yeah just ignore that whole argument, mr.virtualkaraokecircus was born in the same year as me and i don't feel like i have any right to judge games that people were playing when i was a fetus
unlike him i actually agree with everyone else and i would prefer to play pacman forever instead of prototype which is a game i didn't like anyway
there is a reason pacman is an icon for gamers and that people still play it
a lot of people will stop giving a shit about skyrim when the next elder scrolls game arrives but people will still turn off their halo-skinned xboxes to go play tetris.
I think the best way to judge a bunch of video games is to judge by what kind of experience you get when you walk away from the "game over" screen. How immersed were you in the game? It is pretty much the only way to compare games from different genre's from different eras (otherwise stuff like graphics and complexity of the game itself gets in the way).
Take for example Super Smash Brothers Melee, Tetris, and MGS. All of these games have in common an experience were you find yourself completely immersed in the game and feel like you got glued to the screen for some moments: beating the clock (Tetris), beating the opponent (Melee), and story (MGS). Stuff like Angrybirds has a pretty shallow experience compared to Tetris (which is why Angry Birds should be low). Meanwhile, Tetris can still beat out other modern games (take Fifa 12 and Assassain's Creed 3) because you are still really immersed in it whereas other games are shallow and there to occupy time.
I am really shocked how there are barely any racing games on there (unless I am blind). A personal favorite that I really wish was on there was SSX 3. I'm pretty sure that game is ahead of its time by just feeling so massive, you could literally ride down an entire moutain seeing all of the courses. In all that took like a half an hour and there was alot more you could do. I think it also made having a great musical score (at least for sports games) a standard.
Also all new games are better than old games? Do you want the masses of Smash players to rip your head out :P
Take for example Super Smash Brothers Melee, Tetris, and MGS. All of these games have in common an experience were you find yourself completely immersed in the game and feel like you got glued to the screen for some moments: beating the clock (Tetris), beating the opponent (Melee), and story (MGS). Stuff like Angrybirds has a pretty shallow experience compared to Tetris (which is why Angry Birds should be low). Meanwhile, Tetris can still beat out other modern games (take Fifa 12 and Assassain's Creed 3) because you are still really immersed in it whereas other games are shallow and there to occupy time.
I am really shocked how there are barely any racing games on there (unless I am blind). A personal favorite that I really wish was on there was SSX 3. I'm pretty sure that game is ahead of its time by just feeling so massive, you could literally ride down an entire moutain seeing all of the courses. In all that took like a half an hour and there was alot more you could do. I think it also made having a great musical score (at least for sports games) a standard.
Also all new games are better than old games? Do you want the masses of Smash players to rip your head out :P
I'm saddened to see how little respect people have for the older games...that being said though, Astroids at 3 is a stretch, I'd put Pacman over it, people seems to have forgotten just how big Pacman was. Bioshock at 3 is a surprise, I really like Bioshock, but to say it's the 3rd best game ever I dunno, Bioshock 2 to me had a bigger emotional impact over it, but Bioshock 1 thematically was better I guess.
Regardless, it's just their opinions, who really cares at the end of the day?
Regardless, it's just their opinions, who really cares at the end of the day?
Making a 100 greatest games of all time that pleases everyone is virtually impossible, espeically when a list goes across 40 years. All time lists seems terrible all the time when you're not making it.(Though seeing words with friends and angry birds on the list made me die a little on the inside)
But my thoughts:
I feel like when someone makes a top whatever list they have to include Pokemon, which they should, but Red and Blue? I think it's just all nostalgia, and I think every single pokemon game after them are way better, especially Emerald and BW.(Though that all may change this coming Sat.)
Very surprised there was only one FF game on(where's VI?) and only one COD on there(thank god and they actually picked the best one too)
Skyrim is only 31!? I figure with all the love it got last year that it would be in the top 20 at least.
I personally think it's sort of interesting that 3 LoZ games are in the top 11. Also where's Majora's Mask, I've heard from many Zelda fans that they prefer it rather than Link to the Past.
One game that's missing from this list that should be on every list is Portal 2. Portal was good and it deserves where it should be on the list, but Portal 2 should in the top 10, possible in the top 5. In my honest opinion it's a masterpiece. Nuff said.
But my thoughts:
I feel like when someone makes a top whatever list they have to include Pokemon, which they should, but Red and Blue? I think it's just all nostalgia, and I think every single pokemon game after them are way better, especially Emerald and BW.(Though that all may change this coming Sat.)
Very surprised there was only one FF game on(where's VI?) and only one COD on there(thank god and they actually picked the best one too)
Skyrim is only 31!? I figure with all the love it got last year that it would be in the top 20 at least.
I personally think it's sort of interesting that 3 LoZ games are in the top 11. Also where's Majora's Mask, I've heard from many Zelda fans that they prefer it rather than Link to the Past.
One game that's missing from this list that should be on every list is Portal 2. Portal was good and it deserves where it should be on the list, but Portal 2 should in the top 10, possible in the top 5. In my honest opinion it's a masterpiece. Nuff said.
it just pains me to see all the sports videogames there and no recognition for fifa whatever which are always the better of the sports games
i was about to say the exact same thing haha
Maybe it's because Black/White were horrible by Pokemon standards ? I know they were. If there should be any Pokemon games in the list it should be HG/SS.
Also, it's impossible to make a list like that with no bias, example: madden 2005 and NBA.. really?
Maybe not with zero bias, but I still contend that you could make one that causes much less outrage by actually considering what gamers think, as I've said earlier in this thread.
Every videogame website since the invention of the web has a similarly awful list. I don't know why people still give a shit
VKCA
(Virtual Circus Kareoky Act)
What planet are you on where every gaming journalist ever doesn't ejaculate all over shadow of the colossus every time they get the opportunity to? Not that it doesn't totally deserve it or anything, but every time I've seen any sort of "we think these games are good" lists SotC is always on it, or at least an honorable mention. It's like okami and portal, the games that journalists mention to be give the impression that they're legitimate and care about games as art etc.
Yeah sorry post was vague, wasn't talking about graphics. Merely that the depth and complexity of a game from the past 20 years is going to be sooo much more than any really old games. You can take anything I said for SotC if you like. Sorry for using such a (supposedly) terrible game for my example, people seem to be sort of caught up with it. It was literally the first thing that popped into my head, as I said I don't think I've ever played it.
Is how well games stand up to the test of time a factor? Metal Gear Solid 1 and 2 have not stood up to the test of time imo. I can go back and play 3 again but I can't play the first two anymore. Super Mario Bros. has really stood up to time. I can play it right now and have fun. So have all of the Zelda games from LttP onward.
Kind of interesting that Smash Bros Melee only made it to 82, and IMO the original was better than it.
The list I'm sure is just based on a readers' poll where the nominations came from G4 staff. Both sides of that are heavily subjective, so of course the list is going to have a random assortment of nostalgia and name recognition. The closest you could get to a top 100 list would be to somehow come up with a grading rubric for all games that actually assesses the quality of it through universally agreed-upon variables (like graphics, plot, gameplay, etc). This rubric not only has to be applicable to all games in all genres, but it has to be properly weighted to reflect the importance of some variables over others. The sheer prospect of getting everyone involved to agree on these variables and the rubric in the first place is nigh impossible, so we'll probably never see even a reasonably accurate top 100 list, let alone an accurate one.
I mean, the fact that you have Angry Birds on a top 100 list at all should be enough to destroy all faith you have in ranking systems...
The list I'm sure is just based on a readers' poll where the nominations came from G4 staff. Both sides of that are heavily subjective, so of course the list is going to have a random assortment of nostalgia and name recognition. The closest you could get to a top 100 list would be to somehow come up with a grading rubric for all games that actually assesses the quality of it through universally agreed-upon variables (like graphics, plot, gameplay, etc). This rubric not only has to be applicable to all games in all genres, but it has to be properly weighted to reflect the importance of some variables over others. The sheer prospect of getting everyone involved to agree on these variables and the rubric in the first place is nigh impossible, so we'll probably never see even a reasonably accurate top 100 list, let alone an accurate one.
I mean, the fact that you have Angry Birds on a top 100 list at all should be enough to destroy all faith you have in ranking systems...
you may very well be
