Let's laugh at this loserish top 100 games of all time list!

[bipolarbear]

The 80's were wonderful- Personally, I find SMB3 or SMB2, or contra, or Iron Tank, or many other NES games much more entertaining than modern ones:

Yes, but did they have an adequate multiplayer that could keep at least 8 people, 4 of whcih would be playing, entertained for three days, food and soda supply permitting?

I cans till remember the tune from Dragon Warrior one. Nothing from more modern console games even enters my mind.

That was a truly awesome game. I loved killing the little colored balls of slime.

[bipolarbear]

IMO anyone who says the Japanese make all good games obviously doesn't look in the wargames market. Japanese wargames are horrid(from my experience, particularly KOEI ww2 games). Operation Europe was ridiculously unbalanced and difficult to play, PTO 1 was alright..but the AI blew, PTO 2 was far too complicated and required too much micromanagement, PTO 4 was too simplified and easy, though it does expand on the series.

the smae can be said for anime. AMerica made BIG O, and tha show is awesome!

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by bipolarbear
But surely, you have to admit, that modern games can surpass the crap of the eighties. Just becasue a game came out first, doesn't necessarily mean that it was at all good, let alone one of the greatest.

The thing is all of these games were great at their time. You simply can't judge them by today's standards -- although some of them probably are just addictive now as then.

Originally posted by bipolarbear
If a game is to be a classic, it not only has to be good when it comes out, but it also, MUST stnad the test of time.

By this logic, there would be no classic games. Newer games of a genre are always better than the older ones. All right, make that some of the newer games.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by bipolarbear
Yes, but did they have an adequate multiplayer that could keep at least 8 people, 4 of whcih would be playing, entertained for three days, food and soda supply permitting?

I remember that tons of people got hooked on rogue, who played the games for days on end.

[Imran Siddiqui]

My FATHER can make the difference between Civ and Morrowind. In Civ, you character doesn't appear on the screen

Neither in Morrowind if you play in first person view .

--

I think this era isn't that bad in video gaming. I mean there are plenty of great games that fall under the radar. I'm playing Gothic II for the first time and I'm having an absolute blast! Of course it is not a huge hyped mainstream game.

[bipolarbear]

The thing is all of these games were great at their time. You simply can't judge them by today's standards -- although some of them probably are just addictive now as then.

true Dat

By this logic, there would be no classic games. Newer games of a genre are always better than the older ones. All right, make that some of the newer games.

The earlier James Bond games are, in my opinion better than the newer ones.
Calssic games can still exist. Zelda is still more fun than Halo or Morrowind for me a lot of the time. That is a gmae that deserves to up at the front. It is still fun after so long. It doesn't deserve a reservation though.
If we reserve places for games, then we will eventually have to create top 200 lists, b/c the top 100 would already be 'reserved'.

Neither in Morrowind if you play in first person view .

You're actually sort of wrong. It is optional in Morrowind.You can switch between 3rd, and 1st person views.

[Zero]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


well my wife thinks all these games, are vaguely the same - she doesnt distinguish TBS, FPS, fighters, etc. Is that what you meant???

Exactly. So more geekier you get you can tell the difference between games. SO to a normal person that plays games civ and wargames. same ****ing thing ya know.

Dare I say that your pals who play fighter games sound like the geeky ones to me??

no **** sherlock. different kind of geek i might add.

[Zero]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

"Real time" my foot.

go back to ur TBS then, ya wargame freak.

Are all your pals as eloquent as you are?

As about as eloquent as my ass. How does that have anything to do with the subject. who the **** gives a **** if i didnt post my **** as fromally as if i was writing for the ny times.

live wit it and stop trying to steer the subject away from something else u ****ing ***.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Spiffor
GePap:
FF6

Dreamcast was weak on the RPG side (Skies of Arcadia is the best - it is very entertaining, but definitely not deep at all), and FFIX is one of the weakest of the series too.

dreamcast had like rpgs like whoa.
alot of them u had to import though.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

By this logic, there would be no classic games. Newer games of a genre are always better than the older ones. All right, make that some of the newer games.

There can still be classic games if u enjoyed playing something back in the day. It will bring u nostalgia and all. even if it was crappy game, as long as u enjoyed that **** back in the day.

obvioulsy older games are hardly gonna be good as newer ones that have been improved. Why give extra credit towards older games to make people think a sh*ttier game is actually better? just because it was out earlier?

like i said, older games hsould be respected in their own ways, but it doesnt automatically make them better because it was the first game to be the sh*tty version of that genre.

a good game should be judged without considering release dates.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Why give extra credit towards older games to make people think a sh*ttier game is actually better? just because it was out earlier?

Because without it this "better" game would not exist.

[Zero]

I like how u quoted "better". Better game doesnt have a clear cut definition anyway. graphic wise? game designwise? story plot wise? entertainment wise?

Anyways. Why not? Is Civ 3 a better game than civ2? Smac? what if they were released simultaneously? nuff said.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Zero
As about as eloquent as my ass. How does that have anything to do with the subject. who the **** gives a **** if i didnt post my **** as fromally as if i was writing for the ny times.

live wit it and stop trying to steer the subject away from something else u ****ing ***.

(gotta love how you push your lack of eloquence to the extreme when talking about this topic )

[DrSpike]

Wow did I accidentally log on to the bnet forums by mistake?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I like how u quoted "better". Better game doesnt have a clear cut definition anyway. graphic wise? game designwise? story plot wise? entertainment wise?

It's because you called them 'better'.

Why not? Is Civ 3 a better game than civ2? Smac? what if they were released simultaneously? nuff said.

But they WEREN'T released simultaneously! That's the point! One was a precursor to the whole thing. SMAC is a better game, but I'd list Civ2 higher on a Top 100 games list of all time because influence counts.