Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Heroes of Might & Magic III got shafted by about 101 spots, but even experts make mistakes.

158. Pong (Coin-op, 1972)

facepalm

They even left out a lot of great titles like Battle City(Tank), Ice Climbers, Battletoads, Streets of Rage, Vagrant Story, Heretic, Syphon Filter, Perfect Dark...



104. Batman: Arkham Asylum (PS3/360, 2009)

Seriously...
In all honesty, the games rated lower are better than this game.
*ahem* Earthbound, Oddworld... *cough*



171. Bully (PS2, 2006)

Again, facepalm

While the game is indeed entertaining, the game's replay value is mediocre at best.



143. Assassin's Creed (PS3/360, 2007)

facepalmfacepalm

How in the blue hell could a game so repetitious, that it exemplifies that very definition, even be included in the Top 200?

i have this magazine. (my friend has it actually, let him borrow it and i keep forgeting to get it back so thanks for the reminder) but this one's special and it'll stay with me nicely stashed along with about 20 other video game mags that i've kept since i started playing video games eons back.

The original zelda at number 1? No.... just no.

This list lost all credibility after reading the number one spot, the Legend of Zelda on the NES defnitley started one of the best franchizes, but it was not a very good game in itself.

Questionable choices

Originally posted by Quincy
Questionable choices

A bit slow, that list was from almost two months ago now.

Anyway, I've already debated it to death at work. I don't agree with a lot of it.

What is the list based on? How do they decide what deserves first place and more?

i thought i'd be Super Mario Brothers for the NES as the #1 game. What is it with mario getting the shaft as of late. He's like the superman of video games. he reigns supreme but nobody will outright acknowledge it. i don't remember seeing a list with mario at number 1 in ever.

I have no problem seeing Zelda on the top. Mario is a classic, but so is Zelda. Both are good games, and Marie and Link both are legendary characters.

Of course, I would still want to know how they construct this list. What they base it on. It is hard to say "This game should be at the top and not that one" when we do not know how it was decided.

It's not a bad list to be quite honest. But because I crashes with my own list of top games....I can't really comment.

Top Games Missing from the list?

Golden Sun (gba) - one of the top GBA titles released.

Streets of Rage (megadrive)- for obvious reasons, one of them being the greatest midi 16bit OST in existance.

Donkey Kong Country (snes) facepalm

Grandia (saturn)

Nights Into Dreams (saturn) ffs, who made this list?

SFIV - one of the best revamps of an established ip in gaming history.

Commandos 2, defo an unsung hero in strategy games. And how did Halo 2 make it aswell as Halo? And Gears 2 didnt manage to make it?

Retarded list is retarded.

Originally posted by Quincy
Questionable choices

The list is a bit stupid really, it seems to think that the original games are the best.

Mario 3, World, Galaxy, 64 are all better than the 1st.
Most Zelda games are better than the original.

The same goes for a lot of the list.

I stopped reading after Grand Theft Auto III since I knew the list would only go downhill and continue becoming more inaccurate from that point on.

There needs to be a cut off point, at some point (time wise). The title isnt 'Gamings top 200 most INFLUENTIAL games' It's 'Greatest 200'

doom 94' > MW1? GTFO. PC elitist scum might drink Dooms Nutjuice because it was "teh first of it's kind", but that shit doesn't wash with me. It's a recent list, and it should be a relevent one. Im 27 and my first console was a Megadrive, so Pac-man means didly squat to me, gaming royalty it may be, playing it today is meh, wheres my PS3 controller and mw2 kthx.

Ive owned alot of consoles and was quite a heavy importer for many years , especially the Sega years. SNES MDrive/MCD/32X/Saturn/PS1/PS2/GCUBE/PC/ALL Nintendo handhelds/PS3/360 /Wii. I consider my self a today gamer, and an average voice of people of the 16bit generation. And i can say with the upmost confidence that beyond all retarded arguments, Conkers Bad Fur day is better than F***ing Tecmo Super Bowl (lol at it even being in the top 50 and nights into dreams not even making the cut) lol i say!

Id like to see the list compiled asking people under 30 , specifically under 30's because the gaming boom started at the 16bit era, snes and megadrive led the way to the 5year technological generation gap and the release system employes today.

And that Ikaruga should say (Dreamcast) and Super mario Brothers 2 was a travesty and has no right to exist.

Great(est) is a matter of definition. It's next to impossible to say "They are wrong" without knowing on what they based the list.

1. No one posted the criteria they used, which is essential to any list. Having read the article, the criteria they used make decisions like Zelda and Pong more palatable, if still debatable.

2. These things are meant to spark discussion, not be "right." Take it all with a grain of salt before heaping on the verbal barbs at Game Informer.

3. Dark Forces II was on the list. I'm sated.

That would be true however, there's only 1 reason GTA3 would be classed as 'greater ' than say, GTA San Andreas, and that would be because it came first. lets be honest, GTA 3 started it, but san andreas was the best one in that generation. Which leads me to believe that the list is actually supposed to be top most influential.

I'll bet if everyone is this forum made an HONEST top 20 games relevent to them, NO one NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON, would include Mike Tyson in their top 20. Be Honest.

'Haven't played 70% of that list, EVER.

Personally I believe 90% of the best games of all time to have been released in the last 10 years... It's called progress.

Originally posted by Juk3n
doom 94' > MW1? GTFO. PC elitist scum might drink Dooms Nutjuice because it was "teh first of it's kind", but that shit doesn't wash with me.
Either way, it did much more for gaming than Modern Warfail ever did.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
Either way, it did much more for gaming than Modern Warfail ever did. That shouldn't be the point, a game isn't good because of what comes from it. Modern Warfare is an improvement on Doom.

Originally posted by §P0oONY
That shouldn't be the point, a game isn't good because of what comes from it. Modern Warfare is an improvement on Doom.
Yup, and MW (as well as most shooters) probably wouldn't have existed were it not for Doom's success. It's a shame some can't have respect for the classic shooters too.

Obviously though, the Game Informer list wasn't going by the 'improvements'. Mainly the titles that were the first of their kind. Otherwise, OoT would've been #1 on the list instead of the NES Zelda.

Originally posted by Digi
Agreed. But see my #1 at the top of this page, because their criteria included historical significance as part of the rankings. According to your criteria, yes, a lot of that list is bonkers. According to theirs, however, it becomes much more understandable.

Also, a lot of that stuff is legitimately still fun. Simplicity can be awesome, grainy graphics and all. Naturally, I believe a list of significant importance would be drastically different too though. I mean. "158 - Pong"?

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
Yup, and MW (as well as most shooters) probably wouldn't have existed were it not for Doom's success. It's a shame some can't have respect for the classic shooters too.

Obviously though, the Game Informer list wasn't going by the 'improvements'. Mainly the titles that were the first of their kind. Otherwise, OoT would've been #1 on the list instead of the NES Zelda. I have respect for Doom, it's just an inferior game to modern shooters.

To add to Digis "Also, a lot of that stuff is legitimately still fun. Simplicity can be awesome, grainy graphics and all.":

I agree, hence the reason I didn't say 100%, there are fantastic classic games, a lot of them. Games have generally improved though. My top 10 would include a lot of old games.

(The 90% was plucked from the air btw, I didn't do the maths, I was just making a point.)

Originally posted by Digi
Eh, that's the problem with such lists. They include both historical significance AND modern playability. How much does one weigh each? I understand Pong being on any list that includes history, and agree with it, but I really think any list should just choose one or the other, and not try to mix both. I don't think you can really list games in such a way, because of these very points, everyone has different ways of weighing these things up.

One thing I would have changed. I would put Half Life further ahead, and maybe that spot Half Life 2 was.

Much more important game in my opinion. Other than that, it's a list. The picking new games over old sickens me. If a best of list is needed to be done, you have to include the old games and compare them to the impact the new games have.

Did Doom have a bigger impact than Modern Warfare 1 and 2? Yes it did. Is it better comparatively, hell no but compared to games in thier respective years, then Doom wins because it was the best shooter out and one of the best games.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
Yup, and MW (as well as most shooters) probably wouldn't have existed were it not for Doom's success

Don't you mean Wolfenstien 3D??

if it were'nt for that there would be no Halo and Call of duty's.

Wolfenstien was the first but it was Doom that ultimately made the impact.

Nirvana wasn't the first grunge band but they made a bigger impact.

Pong should be at least top 5 "greatest games" made.

It made the video game industry what it is today.



Admit it, it still is fun to play Flash pong games sometimes..

http://www.crazymonkeygames.com/Curveball.html
http://www.crazymonkeygames.com/Battle-Pong.html
http://www.crazymonkeygames.com/Insane-Orb.html

Pong is a shit game.

Still, it deserves respect for putting the gaming industry on the map.

It's the game that started it all.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
Still, it deserves respect for putting the gaming industry on the map.

It's the game that started it all.

Being the first isnt the same as being the best.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Did Doom have a bigger impact than Modern Warfare 1 and 2? Yes it did. Is it better comparatively, hell no but compared to games in thier respective years, then Doom wins because it was the best shooter out and one of the best games.
Co-signed. You basically summed up what I was going to say next.

Originally posted by Juk3n
Being the first isnt the same as being the best.
And being the best isn't the same as having the most impact.

in the top 200 best games of all time the latter shouldnt really matter though.

Meh. I guess that's where it begins to get subjective, since some still define the best games as ones that make the biggest impact on history, whereas others define the best games in terms of modern playability (all going back to what Digi first said).

As good as Game Informer is/may be, you can never have a 200 best list that'll be accurate to everyone.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Did Doom have a bigger impact than Modern Warfare 1 and 2? Yes it did. Is it better comparatively, hell no but compared to games in thier respective years, then Doom wins because it was the best shooter out and one of the best games. The list is "Top 200 Games Of All Time" not "Top 200 Games Of Their Time"

I'm not going to ***** about it. I got the magazine, thought it was informative, but I like what I like. Also let me know how much to trust game informer's ratings.

Originally posted by Juk3n
Being the first isnt the same as being the best.
I never claimed it was the best

Originally posted by Smasandian
Yeah, I know.

But if you don't add the old timers, then every game in the TOP 200 would be from the last 2 years because gaming as a industry improves year by year.

So you add old timer games that paved a way for the current games to be done. You should look at Doom objectively. Was the graphics good at the time? Yes. Was the gameplay at the time? Yes.

If we go by your way, that means games that have been released this year won't be considered the Top 200 because games 5 years from now have adopted and improved the gameplay.

Then there is no point in doing Top 200 lists of all time. That's not quite true, perhaps some technical skills evolve and perhaps some more things are possible but at it's core gaming seems to have stayed very similar. Look at the controllers for example, they have changed very little.

I like your list, Bardock42. I would personally put Warcraft II, Lemmings and Diablo higher But I like your list more than the first one, at least if we base the games on how fun they were. I am of course taking in consideration my age(s) when I played the listed games.

When I was little, I could've killed for some more playtime with Lemmings.

Originally posted by Q'Anilia
I like your list, Bardock42. I would personally put Warcraft II, Lemmings and Diablo higher But I like your list more than the first one, at least if we base the games on how fun they were. I am of course taking in consideration my age(s) when I played the listed games.

When I was little, I could've killed for some more playtime with Lemmings.

I only played Diablo after I played Diablo 2 so that probably influenced the fun I had playing it. I actually like most of the games on the list a lot anyways, it's only from Metal Gear Solid 4 on that I am more "meh" towards them.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
(all going back to what Digi first said).

these lists should go by era or decade.

they'd make much more sense.

After reading that historical significance was a prime factor, this list is instantly more appealing even if I don't agree with all the choices.

I don't understand the point of a top 200 list though. A quantity of 200 undermines the whole concept of what should be an "elite few." It's akin to giving out 100 honorable mentions.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
The numbers are all messed up.

The numbers are what they were on the initial list.

Yeah, I am a fan of meta information.

Originally posted by Bardock42
The numbers are what they were on the initial list.

Yeah, I am a fan of meta information.

But you actualy messed up the numbering, you wrote "9. Half Life" while Half Life was number 29 on the list, and probably other mistakes like that.

I'm surprised along with all the stupid shit they have on their list that minesweeper isn't there.

Originally posted by Morridini
But you actualy messed up the numbering, you wrote "9. Half Life" while Half Life was number 29 on the list, and probably other mistakes like that.

Oh well, probably deleted the 2 by accident, I think it'll be alright.

BARDOCK'S POOR NUMBERING CONFUSES AND INFURIATES ME!!!

Originally posted by Quincy
BARDOCK'S POOR NUMBERING CONFUSES AND INFURIATES ME!!!

Well, I guess it will be more alright for some than others. Haha

WTF. This list is cra...
Where the hell is Sacrifice, Giants:CK, Clive Barker's Undying,
Grim Fandango, the Curse of Monkey island...

Originally posted by SovNarKom
WTF. This list is cra...
Where the hell is Sacrifice, Giants:CK, Clive Barker's Undying,
Grim Fandango, the Curse of Monkey island...
Oh, get over yourself. Some of my favorite games aren't there either, and I'm not complaining.

Originally posted by SovNarKom
the Curse of Monkey island...
Originally posted by Juk3n

Golden Sun

Nights Into Dreams

Whether you've played them or not, these games should've definitely been included in the list as well.

Originally posted by Q'Anilia
Marie and Link both are legendary characters.


You apparently miss someone.

Originally posted by Wei Phoenix
You apparently miss someone.

Yeah...that's not even close to a typo. lol!

Of all the games on this list, I feel that the original Super Mario Bros. deserves to be in the Top 5.

The original Zelda in the number 1 spot... fail. Both OoT ALttP are more deserving.

Originally posted by Impediment
Of all the games on this list, I feel that the original Super Mario Bros. deserves to be in the Top 5.
Completely agreed, but which games deserved the spot is rather irrelevant now...

Originally posted by Morridini
But you actualy messed up the numbering, you wrote "9. Half Life" while Half Life was number 29 on the list, and probably other mistakes like that.

he actually ate that 2. and all the other missing numbers, as well.

he couldn't help it, what's it to you..

leave'm alone.

Chip 'N Dale: Rescue Rangers (NES, 1990)..

One of the best platform games.

No Fatal Frame even..

Super Metroid in a lower spot than Metroid? I'm not taking this seriously.

where's baldur's gate?

i just have to say that for me, super mario world is the best mario game out there. its the pinnicle of 2d platforming up until that point and for a while after at least.

well at least pac man made the list

Seriously wrong list.

The top four is essentially the same as when people list more than one album by a famous band.

Super Mario Bros and The Legend of Zelda were influential and Tetris was an addictive smash hit, but how are they the top three best games of all time?

This is what I hate; Games magazines or sites pride themselves on covering the most up-to-date developments and chronicling the advancement of games, game dynamics and game graphics as they head into bigger and better territories, then they'll go and suggest a Game Boy game is one of the best ever.

It just shits on everything and you can tell it's because they feel they have to.

I don't particularly care how much you love Duck Hunt, but to say it surpasses Resident Evil would be bonkers.

-AC

Is it just me or has Final Fantasy VI become really overrated? Don't get me wrong, I do love the game and it's nowhere near as out of place as the vast majority of games on the list, and it's not really about its placing on this list but it's a thought I've had for a while now and I just really don't see how a lot of people can rate it as highly as they do. I know people love to hate on Final Fantasy VII for a reason I'm not sure I entirely understand but how people think it comes close to VII or IX, let alone the best Final Fantasy really has me baffled.

Originally posted by Snow Villiers
Is it just me or has Final Fantasy VI become really overrated? Don't get me wrong, I do love the game and it's nowhere near as out of place as the vast majority of games on the list, and it's not really about its placing on this list but it's a thought I've had for a while now and I just really don't see how a lot of people can rate it as highly as they do. I know people love to hate on Final Fantasy VII for a reason I'm not sure I entirely understand but how people think it comes close to VII or IX, let alone the best Final Fantasy really has me baffled.

Dunno, I think FF is really overrated in general. FF7 most of all.

Planescape: Torment at 188 and GTA at 4.

This be making sense.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Dunno, I think FF is really overrated in general. FF7 most of all.

They're all incredible games, however some are overrated (VI and X in particular), but VII? It's barely overrated, if at all. It's recognised by many as being what it is (one of the greatest games ever made, and arguably the greatest, especially for its time) and a lot of people seem to like to hate on it for that very reason.

Bullshit FF 7 is waaaaaaaaay more overated then VI.

Considering how much better than VI VII actually was, and the fact that VI is generally rated as almost as highly as VII, and even more highly by a large number of people, I'm gonna have to give you a big "NO!" on that one.

FF7 IS overrated Imo. While it is a great game, its far from the "best game every made" ff7 fanboys keep spouting.

I personally regarded FFX as the best of the series.

FFVII was legendary for the fact that it revolutionized RPG in a completely 3D environment.

It definitely deserves a spot in any top 20 'best of all time' list.

Indeed. I'd put it in my top five personally.

FF7 isnt overrated. i'm not a fanboy or anything, i just remember the game being 'that' good. it captured me in a way not many other games did, it had an addictive and compelling story, and it had a really good turn based combat system. theres always going to be people who dont like it, we're all different. but there is a majority of people who regard it with distinction in their gaming life.

i think my personal top games would include ff7, super mario world, super mario kart, cod4, gta3, nba jam, street fighter 2.... theres probably loads that i have much love for, but would probably not be in a list such as this. for every 10 games i love, theres probably 8 of them people will disagree with.

Originally posted by BoratBorat
FF7 IS overrated Imo. While it is a great game, its far from the "best game every made" ff7 fanboys keep spouting.

I personally regarded FFX as the best of the series.

and then theres the fannoys who have a hard on for sephiroth.

the list was flawed before being made. You can't rate games of completely different genres and time periods and try to decide which is better. what a stupid idea

Originally posted by vandalworks
FF7 isnt overrated. i'm not a fanboy or anything, i just remember the game being 'that' good. it captured me in a way not many other games did, it had an addictive and compelling story, and it had a really good turn based combat system. theres always going to be people who dont like it, we're all different. but there is a majority of people who regard it with distinction in their gaming life.

It isn't overrated for those who grew up in your generation.

I started gaming in 2001? So i grew up with the later games thats why and VII didn't felt that revolutionary after wards.

Originally posted by Kazenji
and then theres the fannoys who have a hard on for sephiroth.
Don't remind me.