Red Dead Redemption
Halo: CE
Fallout 3
Assassin's Creed 1, 2, Brotherhood
that's my list for now. RdR has to be one of the best games i've ever played. the storyline was great and kept me playing. the ending was just as great, well in a sense. and the soundtrack made the game. "bury me not on the lone prairie"
Originally posted by No End N Site
In dis order...1. SFIII 3rd Strike
2. MVC1 and 2
3. SSFIV and Vampire Savior
4. Samurai Showdown I and II
5. GG Accent Core +
6. KOF 98
7. GG XXX Midnight Carnival
8. Project Justice
9. SF Alpha 2 Gold or normal
10. A bunch of other shit.
Yup, mostly fighters.
Order is terrible.
1. MVC1 is ass. Fun, but ass.
2. Vampire Savior is better than any version of SFIV, by light years.
3. Midnight Carnival is better than Accent Core +. In AC+, Zato's Meta Knight/Igniz status. And don't create someone as awesome as Holy Order Sol and make him $h!t tier.
Hard to comment on most lists. More criteria establishment is needed, consistent with this:
Originally posted by Digi
With lists, establishing criteria is probably 95% of it. Because given varying criteria, I could make probably 5 different lists each with entirely unique games.So we have:
- Best for their era.
- Best period, applying modern sensibilities to classic games. Classic games can be and are still excellent, but it's simply false to say they wouldn't suffer from such a criteria. Such a list would have to include some sort of aggregate critical opinion, not just a personal one.
- Most influential and/or pioneering.
- Personal enjoyment....there may be other valid categories.
And I'd actually contend that a list of 10 is far too small for any but the last category. Any of the others would likely need 50-100 to begin to do them justice.
...or something similar. Most lists seem like "personal enjoyment," but then they can't really be commented on because it's subjective. If you like a sh*t game the best, we can't tell you otherwise. So the back and forth becomes largely moot.
With the other criteria (all-time, influence, etc.) we start to use more objective standards based on more than personal input, so those are potentially the more thought-provoking discussions.
Originally posted by Barker
I'm going to agree with Digi here, there wont' ever be a "best games ever" list. Too many variables.
I didn't quite say that. But ok. My point was more that you need to define criteria first, because most lists are a mix of varying criteria, and therefore have no basis for comparison. Like, a list that gauges my personal enjoyment and also historical relevance. Those two can't be combined logically. You just have to be specific enough to make sense. Even something like "my favorites that I also think are the best of all-time" creates problems when trying to discuss it.
For example, the Half-Life games would be somewhere on my all-time best ever list, but wouldn't make a list of my top 10 favorites. Enjoyable, just not a top 10 experience for me, but I can separate the two to realize it deserves a spot above, say, NHL '94 on an all-time list.
Bumping my own list from a while back, just so nothing gets started about me being against them.
Originally posted by Digi
Ok, so taking the "personal enjoyment" criteria outlined earlier, because hybrid criteria would be messy and arbitrary, here's my list:1. Jedi Knight: Dark Forces II (PC)
2. THQ Wrestling Series (N64 / GC)
3. The Legend of Zelda: The Ocarina of Time (N64)
4. Goldeneye (N64)
5. Dark Sun Series (PC)
6. Thief Series (PC)
7. NHL '94 (Genesis)
8. Lords of the Realm II (PC)
9. Tecmo Bowl / Tecmo Super Bowl (NES)
10. The Elder Scrolls Series (Daggerfall, Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim) (PC)
HM. Shining Force II (Genesis)I include series, because I usually find it hard to separate a game from its series when they are closely intertwined.
A few more recent games would likely contend for the list, such as WoW, the Assassin's Creed series, and the Mass Effect and Half-Life games. But I have not had time to accurately place them.
The last paragraph remains valid even years later. I kind of neglected my list and haven't updated it in a while. There would be some changes, though not massive ones.
Originally posted by Digi
I didn't quite say that. But ok. My point was more that you need to define criteria first, because most lists are a mix of varying criteria, and therefore have no basis for comparison. Like, a list that gauges my personal enjoyment and also historical relevance. Those two can't be combined logically. You just have to be specific enough to make sense. Even something like "my favorites that I also think are the best of all-time" creates problems when trying to discuss it.For example, the Half-Life games would be somewhere on my all-time best ever list, but wouldn't make a list of my top 10 favorites. Enjoyable, just not a top 10 experience for me, but I can separate the two to realize it deserves a spot above, say, NHL '94 on an all-time list.
Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Doesnt mean you cant list your ten favorites.
everyone's making they're own top ten list, just like the thread starter did.
I see no problem in it
why would you define criteria this an that? sounds like someone objecting anyone's list just because they take their opinion as fact and everyone be damned if they don't agree. it's well-nigh impossible to reach a consensus... which isn't the purpose of thread anyways