Be Excellent To Each Other

*gasps*

He's taking the piss.

What's wrong with Dead Space? It's brilliant.

Titanfall however, that looks like someone is trying to appease someone else. And Splatoon.

And I'll take a Mario Galaxy 1 over Mario 3D world any day. Like a Monday.

Splatoon is probably the best online multiplayer game I've ever played.

Pfffft. MAG was the best.

Don't get me wrong, they're good games - just not Top 100 (or even 500) level.

Dead Space might make my top 200, maybe 100. It is Resi in space and with better controls.

Final Fantasy... XII

VI I can see the argument, though I disagree. VII is a stone cold classic. IX is my choice of the ones I've played. X I've warmed up to a lot on replaying it. XII... was alright.

Only one FF game because no sequels allowed yet Demon's Souls, Dark Souls and Bloodborne all in the list. Semantics at play.

Is that an official rule about the sequels because I've just had a quick glance and spotted loads on there.

I think perhaps it's "only one game from each series."

Sorry, yes. That's what I meant.

Ah right, that makes more sense.

For the 'only one in each series' there are 4 Zelda titles.

(and one is sorta just a rom hack / update of another in there - Majora's Mask and OOT / both N64 titles and came out within 18 months of each other)

They've squeezed a lot of Mario on there, too.

It seems these kind of lists must always have some old shit for some street cred, like Pac-Man and Space Invaders. Which is stupid, just like Tetris being on the list.

And some other annoyances that i usually have with these lists:
-Half Life 2 is one of the dullest FPS i've ever played.
-Always too much Zelda (and Nintendo). I would probably put WW somewhere there and let it be.
-WTF is Dead Space doing there?
-Too much console stuff. Where is Baldur's Gate 2? Where is Fallout? Where is Ultima 7? Where is Heroes of Might & Magic 3 (or 2)? Where is Monkey Island? Where is Day of the Tentacle? Where is Sensible Soccer? Where is Doom? Seriously, this is the worst top 100 ever.

Personally I would argue that a lot of the Zelda games are the best games ever made and there's absolutely nothing wrong with Pac-Man. Of course, like we've said, lists like this are put together to make people buy the magazine and talk about it which clearly it has achieved.

I would also argue that Tetris on the game boy is one of the best games ever made. It's certainly one of my top 10 most played games.

And most played is a good synonym for best in my mind.

Do you still play it now, though? If you do, then sure it should be on the list. If you'd rather play Tetris Blitz (which is lots of fun) then that should be there instead.

In an ideal world I would be able to play the original version, with updated graphics, sounds, music and so on. Have the option to play the new modes, with the powerups. But also the option to play the gameboy version. I dislike the ability to spin the tetromino at the bottom of the screen. I also think I prefer the gameboy form factor, to the touch screen. So yeah Tetris on the gameboy is better than tetris blitz in my opinion.

Has it though? All I've seen are posts on various forums with the list and people arguing.

I've only bought Edge when they did that whole 200 different covers thing, and I was tricked into it just to see what cover i got. I hated the magazine. Completely sterile, no soul whatsoever. They don't even bother to sign the articles, as if they're written by some sort of AI.

It's got people talking about it in any case. If it was to encourage magazine sales then this list can't have done any harm at all.

I have played 19 and "finished" 3.

Forgive my ignorance but isn't Tetris Blitz the mobile phone game? The one with in-app purchases? And touchscreen controls? It's therefore worse than Tetris on Gameboy.

Yup, but it's a lot of fun.

Edge still exists?

Plaued 58 of them.

I do, naturally, agree with #1.

This person thinks there are 69 games that are better than L4D2. That makes them fools at best, dangerously insane at worst.

Wat.

Yes.

good. I thought i was the only one.



Never played Tetris Blitz, but there's no reason for the original Tetris to be there instead of Tetris DS.

I disagree with the notion that classics should be replaced in lists like these with later games that basically do the same thing but with better graphics.

Anyone who doesn't like hitting zombies with fire axes is fundamentally broken.

It didn't add enough to be a genuine sequel, and it split the userbase by being released a mere 12 months after the first game.

And six years later we still don't have L4D3 - Evolve looks pants.

If they release a new L3D I will probably buy a new console. Maybe, I will not state for certainty I will, but I would certainly consider it.

For some reason I've thought of this part of the thread a few times throughout the day and it has amused me, so thanks for that.

If they basically do the same thing why would better graphics not make them better? Should people stick with worse presentation when better is available through some kind of weird loyalty to an older game? I don't think that really makes much sense.

You could argue they're better or worse games. Better because they've been refined and polished, or worse because they lack innnovation and are just a retread.

Lacking innovation doesn't somehow actually make a game worst to play though so I think that argument would be very hard to make.

It all depends what your criteria are for 'best game'.

Of course, but the implication here is that a game should only be judged 'best' if it's also the first to do something and that's not a meaning of the word best I've ever heard.

What about Call of Duty, or Fifa as examples? The most recent games might be the most polished and therefore provide the best graphics and gameplay, but franchise fatigue may ensure that no one would consider them 'best' in the series.

Fifa 15 > Fifa 16 (and 13 > 14. It's like the Star Trek films).

09 is the last one I played, so I'm enjoying 16 well enough.

It split the userbase into losers and winners, yes. Even if it wasn't a genuine sequel and was effectively just a map pack, that still has the same effect on the userbase.

not in the same way as then everyone has at least the core maps that you can fall back to. Rather than some people having both games, but the vast majority having just one or the other.

If something has the best graphics and gameplay then it's the best. It's completely fair for someone to say they're not interested in actually playing something because they're bored of that kind of game, but it still doesn't make any sense to deny that a particular entry in the series is the best example just because you personally aren't interested.

Actually it's completely subjective. My criteria for best game is obviously different from yours. This is where 'best of' lists fall down.

I am not sure I would replay CoD4 if it were released with updated graphics though.