Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Games of the Year

Posted by michael on from the stop-reading-slashdot-spend-time-with-your-family dept.

markpapadakis writes "Gamespot and Gamespy have released their top games for 2002. Gamespot features worse game of the year as well as some additional categories."

10 of 241 comments (clear)

  1. This is better.. by new_breed · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Penny Arcade has some of the best games of the year as well ;)

    We're Right part one

    We're Right part two

  2. Best Game No One Played on PC by Weffs11 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Moonbase commander, Best Game No One Played on PC.

    Anyone else look for the games that fall through the cracks of marketing and end up in the discount bin? I know there are other poor college kids out there that can't afford $40-50 a game.

  3. Strategy games by Jacek+Poplawski · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All nomined strategy games are RTSes. Worst game is Civ3 multiplayer. I haven't played it (I like single player games), but to me Civ3 is one of best games in last year. Almost every other "strategy" game is RTS (arcade/strategy mixture) or HoMaM-like. Do you remember first Heroes of Might and Magic? It was succesfull only because graphics and simplicity. Today nobody say "HoMaM is for children". In world where RTSes are best strategy games and Civilization is "dissapoiting" (I know it's about mp-add-on, but last year everyone talk how bad Civ3 is) - HoMaM is no more childlish.

    PS. Nobody noticed Moonbase Commander? It was the only strategy (except Civ3) I found fun last months.

  4. For those that don't want to click a lot ... by angle_slam · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here are the winners:

    Gamespot:
    Best budget game: Serious Sam: The Second Encounter
    Most Improved Sequel: Hitman 2: Silent Assassin:
    Biggest Surprise: Battlefield 1942
    Best Game No One Played: Moonbase Commander
    Best single-player action: No-One Lives Forever 2: A Spy in H.A.R.M.'s Way
    Best Multiplay action: Battlefield 1942
    Best Adventure: Syberia
    Best Driving: Rally Trophy
    Best RPG: Neverwinter Nights
    Best Sci-Fi Simulation: Star Trek: Bridge Commander
    Best Simulation: Flanker 2.5
    Best Sports: Madden 2003
    Best Single Player Strategy: Medieval: Total War
    Best Multiplayer Strategy: Warcraft III
    Game of the Year: Warcraft III
    Most Dissapointing: Civ III: Play the World
    Worst Game: Demonworld: Darl Armor

    Gamespy:
    Action Game of the Year: Grandtheft Auto III
    Adventure Game: Syberia
    RPG: Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind
    Strategy: Medieval: Total War
    Sports Game: Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2003
    Racing: NASCAR Racing 2002
    Game of the Year: No One Lives Forever 2: A Spy in H.A.R.M.'s Way

    1. Re:For those that don't want to click a lot ... by Mac+Degger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You know what? After all the hype, and all the anticipated games, I only now, after reading this list, realise how mediocre this years games are!?

      I mean, NWN was supposed to be the be-all-end-all RPG...but SP was just Diablo, and MP is Diablo+chat(+usre made adventures, but user made content is such a butch that you can't give it points for that, really).

      Then we have UT2k3...a quake-ified UT...looked good, played ok, but nowhere near a big wow-factor. Not even close.

      The rest? GTAIII; if it wasn't so bug-riden and limited, it would stand a chance. Medieval: Total War; Shogun with different sprites. Warcraft III; YARTS (yet another RTS).

      There was nothing really cool this year; nothing really innovative, nothing to make me sit up in front of my keyboard and really say 'wow'. The closest was Morrowind, but even that wasn't a truly great game.

      Odd, but it';s been a bit of a lackluster year. Here's hoping Paradise Cracked and Homeworld 2 will make 2003 worthwhile, gamewise.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
  5. Exclusivity by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Gamespot:
    All other things being equal, we preferred to honor those games that were released exclusively for a particular platform
    Dickheads. Exclusivity is a pain in the arse to gamers. I want to play Buffy The Vampire Slayer and GTA Vice City. Rewarding exclusivity in your reviews isn't exactly pro-user, it's pro-marketing bullshit.
    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  6. Frogger did make the list... by Xenex · · Score: 5, Informative

    What's more, Konami Arcade Advanced did make it into GameSpy's GBA Game of the Year awards list. It's right here.

    Whoever submitted this article only linked to the PC section, but they should have linked to the main page, which has awards for PS2, Xbox, GCN, GBA, PC, and 'Multiplayer'.

  7. Real-time VS. Turn-based ?! by haggar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have read the sites, the nominees and the winners, but what I find confusing, with regards to the strategy games, is that none of these sites makes it clear whether a strategy game is turn.based or real-time. For me that's hugely important, because I stopped liking real-time strategy games a few years ago. I got slow (eh.. the age) and more impatient with RTS games. And I know at least one more guy like me in my town ;o) so there is at least some segment of the market that would really like a clear information about the kind of strategy game at hand. Note that most of the time not even the box/cover of the game spells it out clearly whether it's RTS or turn-based.

    My question, finally, is: is there a gamer's site that lists strategy games and has an appropriate designation whether a game is RTS or turn-based? It seems that perhaps there's a lot of fine strategy games out there, except for the Civiliation and HOMM series - the ones to which I'm sticking, for now...

    --
    Sigged!
  8. Macintosh Gaming by Spencerian · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...does exist, and is alive and well for its size.

    Since it's not really represented on either review page (for obvious reasons of market size), I'll throw in my $0.02 on selected games I've seen or played that were ported to Mac OS X this year. No real ranking except for overall value, out of 5 stars. (YMMV)

    Star Wars: Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast. (***-1/2) Nothing is more fun than the powers of a Jedi Knight with a lightsaber in a very realistic (for Star Wars) environment. AI isn't bad. Humor is prevalent. Single-player game is great--once. Not as strong a replay value, any mods out on the 'net notwithstanding. Needs very powerful hardware since this Q3A-derived game apparently had some hooks in its PC version that aren't available for Mac OS, despite the point that I had a more powerful G4 and video card than on a PC I used for playing that version. As a result, the game can lag in some maps. Multiplayer is good, especially since MP supports multiple processors. Combine with high-speed connection, and you're the Emperor.

    Return to Castle Wolfenstein: (*****) Artful, authentic, realistic single-player. Great replay value since the diversity of how to accomplish a mission can be modified. Its multiplayer game shines brightest, with great maps and strong diversity in four soldier classes.

    Medal of Honor II: Allied Assault: (*****). Just play the Omaha Beach at Normandy level to know the art that this game represents. Very good AI, ultra-realistic.

    Other notables:
    Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos (If you bought one for your PC, you have the Mac version, too)
    No One Lives Forever
    Soldier of Fortune II
    The Sims: Hot Date
    The Sims: Vacation

    --
    Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
  9. Re:Games by mustangdavis · · Score: 4, Interesting
    There's not that much strategy involved in WarCraft 3. It's fun and all, but it's definitely not a game of strategy.


    Obviously, you haven't played WC3 enough to make that judgement ...

    I used to think the same thing when I first started plaing it, but then, after a week of plaing it, I realized that this game has a TON of strategy! I used to be a big Age of Empires buff, and thought that this game paled in comparison to WC3 when it came to stratgey, but I found out that I was very mistaken ....

    In fact, the strategy in WC3 is unbelievible! You have to micro-manage EVERYTHING! Loosing just a couple more units in one battle can turn the tide of a game. Healing units is VERY important, as is managing the limited gold on the map. I have won MANY games where I had less resources, produced feweer units, and had less technology than my enemies .... and these were high ranked players! How is this possible, you may ask?? STRATEGY!!!

    Try playing the game for a month or so against some better players, and you will see what I mean. It took me to see it to believe it myself. WC3 is one of the BEST strategy games out right now. In fact, I quit playing Age of Mythology and went back to WarCraftIII just because I am sick of the shitty stratgey in the Age of xxxxx series (I thought I'd never say that!!!)

    Just my 2 cents ...

    --
    HallmarkOrnaments.Com