Jump to content

Top 100 games of all time (Rllmuk 2015 edition) - Results now showing: No. 1


Benny
 Share

Recommended Posts

:lol: Oops, I'd skim-read, got mixed up, and somehow decided that the previous page's The Last of Us chatter was because it had appeared in the last set of results!

REVISED PREDICTION:

1. Resident Evil 4

2. Dark Souls

3. Super Mario World

4. Halo CE

5. Zelda: Ocarina of Time

6. The Last of Us

7. Zelda: A Link to the Past

8. Super Mario 64

9. Half-Life

10. GoldenEye

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the demographics of the forum was ten years younger, GoldenEye would be nowhere near the top 20, let alone top 10.

As someone who never played it at the time, I find it astonishing that it is still in the top 10. Then again, this isn't a list of top games that you would advise people to play today so it isn't that surprising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it hasn't shown up yet then it will certainly be in the top 10. I saw it more than enough times in the voting thread. A funny game really, it was never received as a game changer as the other games that will make the top 10 and has more than enough faults (Skyrim was a far bigger hit critically and commercially). But it's a game that really made an impact with a lot of people and really sneaked into the top ranks.

I like New Vegas more, but that's a very different thing than that first experience of the Capital Wasteland, which is still unique for 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, how do you objectively decide what is a better game? Can that be done without it resorting to measuring frames per second or numbers of polygons on screen at any one time?

I mean, I do actually agree with you about Goldeneye in particular - it is a product of its time and I wouldn't list it as one of my top 20 greatest games you could play in the world right now. But as a list of greatest games of all time I think you have to take into account the context surrounding each game, and for me Goldeneye's context was playing a magnificent game (and no one would doubt it was magnificent in 1997) on your own and with 3 friends in the same room at a time when consoles had never enjoyed an FPS game like it.

In an era where console based FPS games are plentiful and often executed brilliantly, with online multiplayer allowing you to play with 31 or 63 or however many other people, playing a graphically ropey game with 3 friends on a quarter of a 28" screen doesn't hold a great amount of appeal and I probably wouldn't steer a videogame newbie towards it other than as a history lesson.

But dear God, wasn't it some of the most fun you've ever had playing games? It was for me. What else should a list of the greatest games of all time be about?

Yeah it's difficult. Obviously it's incredibly hard to be objective about things, I meant more that if people played it again in 2015 rather than base everything on their memories of twenty years ago then they'd quickly discover in just how many ways its inferior to many modern games.I feel like how kind the passage of time has been to a game should absolutely play a part in a list like this. Some games may have a place in most important/influential/revolutionary lists, but the argument that a best game ever list should be based purely on the fun you had at the time/how important it was would surely mean many other old games sticking around forever when nobody really wants to play them anymore. There are tons of games I had a blast playing as a kid/teenager which are shit now.

For it to not even make the top 100 though!

Yeah it is a bit surprising but I guess people have given their 'ropey FPS which was great at the time but dodgy now' vote to Goldeneye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That, and few people are particularly willing to vote multiple times for the same franchise (with the exception, it seems, of Nintendo's franchises), so HL2 will have taken a lot of the potential HL votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it's difficult. Obviously it's incredibly hard to be objective about things, I meant more that if people played it again in 2015 rather than base everything on their memories of twenty years ago then they'd quickly discover in just how many ways its inferior to many modern games. I feel like how kind the passage of time has been to a game should absolutely play a part in a list like this. Some games may have a place in most important/influential/revolutionary lists, but the argument that a best game ever list should be based purely on the fun you had at the time/how important it was would surely mean many other old games sticking around forever when nobody really wants to play them anymore. There are tons of games I had a blast playing as a kid/teenager which are shit now.

I'm not sure how else you'd judge it. I'd put Street Fighter II in my top 5. If I had to choose one iteration maybe it'd be SF2T or SSF2T, even though it was SF2 which was really seminal and probably swallowed most of my time. SFIV has since come out and is objectively better in a lot of ways, certainly when compared to vanilla SF2. But, although I've played SFIV a fair amount it's had nowhere near the impact on my life that the earlier games had.

My top 5 would also include San Andreas. If I had to choose between GTAV and San Andreas for a desert island now then I'd choose GTAV but, during its time, I've enjoyed it less than San Andreas. So, GTAV is more advanced and 'better' in a lot of ways but at the time that it was released it didn't stand out as much.

I think it's possible to look back over your favourite games and determine whether they have stood the test of time or would be crap now. Perhaps a 'desert island games' thread would be worthwhile. That would force people to pick stuff they'd still want to play. Of course then the list would be skewed towards games that give near-unlimited entertainment like Street Fighter rather than shorter story-driven efforts like Arkham Asylum. Maybe games to take on a six-month desert island stint? :)

That's how I rationalise it anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another way to rationalise the problem is to have two lists, one for shit that has objectively stood up to the ravages of time and progress, and another for rose-tinted glasses wearers. There are some games I'd put in my alltime favourite list that I couldn't justify in a best of list of actually still bloody amazing classics deserving of continued praise. Which I suppose is the age old problem of head or heart :)

GoldenEye definitely is more heart these days, the controls are shockingly bad for one thing, and it technically so doesn't hold up. I was shown and tried to play Perfect Dark a few years ago, another game laid low by technical limitations. I'm assuming Blast Dozer still holds up a lot better than those two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I try to avoid talking about (ugh) "retro" games with rosetints; to me they're just games, and it's great when I can play a game from 20 years ago and still enjoy it as much as I did then. It's even better when I play a game from 20 years ago for the first time and enjoy it with no preconceptions. Sure, I included FFVII in my 20, and the PSX polygon heads look like ass now, but the story, materia system, character arcs and sidequests still make it a decent RPG. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean yeah that as well.

You simply can't put some titles ahead of others though. It's considered poor etiquette. Same with putting stuff like Race the Sun and Splinter Cell: Blacklist in your top 10 of ALL TIME videogames. That shit just doesn't fly and invalidates your opinion from there on out.

Just taking the piss pob don't worry. Actually, no I'm serious, what the fuck are you thinking mate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My top 10 of all time:

  • Metal Gear Solid V
  • GTAV
  • Arkham Knight
  • The Last of Us
  • Destiny
  • Watch Dogs
  • Splinter Cell: Blacklist
  • Dishonoured
  • Alien Isolation
  • Race The Sun
All those games came out in the last 2 years, and mgsv just a week ago. You need at least a year to let games settle into your memory.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm too minds about the aging argument. On the one hand yeah, okay something made in 1997 probably isn't going to be technically up to par with modern games and it will probably suffer in comparison because of it. On the other hand it takes away a lot of context as to why a game such as Goldeneye was considered such a great game in the first place and why people are still playing it today (it has a very active time attack community).

This is why there will never be a "correct" top 100 because a lot of game experiences are carried by subjectivity. The subjective factors are what make games enjoyable for a lot of people.

It all boils down to people who want an objective list vs people who made their votes subjectively. People who are dismissing others choices are failing to account for the fact that each persons memory of a game is based on the experiences they had when playing it, that's what separates games from other mediums, each person experiences games differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't imagine not having something like Deus Ex in my top 10 or 20, despite the fact it'd be diabolical to play now. It was awesome and progressive at the time and is responsible for some of my favourite gaming memories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.