Slashdot Mirror


IGN's Top 100 Games

fwice writes "IGN has released their list of the Top 100 Games of all time. This list covers games from all different systems, including PC and various different consoles. Each game listed has a write-up about why it was chosen and what makes it special." Yeah yeah, another list. This one's not bad, though, with selections including TIE Fighter, Tetris, and Civ II ranking high on the list.

175 comments

  1. Boring by ElectricBrain · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one who feels these "Top 10" or whatever lists are absolutely redundant? They're all the same. No matter what order the games are in, people always argue and bitch and moan. Blah blah blah.

    1. Re:Boring by Thedeviluno · · Score: 1

      How about instead of making lists they make some games?

    2. Re:Boring by cornface · · Score: 0

      IGN is more about making the line between website and advertisement disappear.

    3. Re:Boring by ElVaquero · · Score: 1

      This entire article is flamebait. I'm pretty sure it was thought up by IGN just to get their "community" going.

    4. Re:Boring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happened with Monkey Island. What kind of person puts Pokemon on there and ignores Monkey Island. IGN is up to no good again.

  2. If it's just another list by humberthumbert · · Score: 0

    ...why bother posting it?

  3. I don't think so... by Iscariot_ · · Score: 2, Funny

    The original Zelda isn't on the list. This list doesn't count.

    1. Re:I don't think so... by bleaknik · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As much as I loved the original (and I did), A Link to the Past trumped it in almost every possible way. Nintendo took the same brilliant gameplay that made the original great, and they multiplied everything by 10.

      Would seem that it would be kind of redundant to put both on the list...

      Then again... Mario, Mario 3, Super Mario World, Mario 64... lol. Also loved all of these titles, but I don't think all four of them needed to be on the list if they left off the original Zelda... :)

      --
      Deja Vu
      n. 1. The sensation that you've read this very article before.
    2. Re:I don't think so... by SetupWeasel · · Score: 1

      Zelda? This list snubbs PONG.

    3. Re:I don't think so... by SetupWeasel · · Score: 1

      Then again, look at how many Ultimas and Final Fantasys there were.

    4. Re:I don't think so... by Volvogga · · Score: 1

      Ya, but who the hell puts FFX over FFVII, or Super Mario World 2 over Super Mario World? All respectibility was lost right there. Then I didn't see Mortal Kombat or Final Fight either. Damn, that is without a doubt the worst list I have ever seen. 'Best of' is just too hard to put together, and they always leave something out or out of order, in my opinion anyway.

      The Most Influential list that 1up had a while back was good. That was kind of hard to argue with.

      --
      Vol~
    5. Re:I don't think so... by Jinsaku · · Score: 1

      Obviously, this is my opinion, but FFX trumped FFVII in every way, shape and form. The story was better, the characters were better, the visuals were better (course, PS2 vs PS1), the game was much longer (FFX took me 42 hours first time through, FFVII was closer to 20), and just a heck of a lot more fun. I'm actually surprised FFX wasn't higher.

      SMW2 over SMW is a bit ridiculous, though both games are definately excellent. I agree that MK1 should probly be on the list solely for the notion of the motion capture fighting (a lot of this list is not just good games, but "revolutionary", and MK1 was definately revolutionary.

      --
      -- Jinsaku
    6. Re:I don't think so... by melikamp · · Score: 1

      I am confused on two points.

      (1) The list is 99 entries too long.

      (2) Paratrooper is not on there.

    7. Re:I don't think so... by Chemical · · Score: 1

      I dunno. I don't think Zelda 1 was that good. At all. I have all the Zelda games and Zelda 1 is the one I play the least. I mean it was certainly a groundbreaking game for its day, but honestly it has been trumped by so many subsequent games that it inspired: All the Zelda sequels, all the Seiken Densetsu ("Mana") series, Alundra, Brave Fencer Musashi, and many others. Zelda 1 pales in comparison to the games that followed in its footsteps. By 2005, there are at least 100 games that are better than the original Zelda. I certainly don't think it deserves a trophy. I don't even think it deserves a pizza.

    8. Re:I don't think so... by iainl · · Score: 1

      You probably won't respect me for thinking Yoshi's Story is better than SMW either, then. I just think it's so much funnier, and I just found that SMW gets far too picky and fiddly from about halfway through; the rote-memory timing bits drove me up the wall.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    9. Re:I don't think so... by sbryant · · Score: 1

      Elite isn't there either. This list definately doesn't count.

    10. Re:I don't think so... by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### Super Mario World 2 over Super Mario World

      Maybe because YoshisIsland(SMW2) is lightyears ahead of SuperMarioWorld, way better graphics, more interesting gameplay, cool SFX2 special effects, a Yoshi that actually looks cool and stuff. SMW isn't a bad game, but even when it was originally released I found it rather disapointing, SMB3 was already better than it.

    11. Re:I don't think so... by TheSneak · · Score: 1

      Aparently the concept of "influential" isn't sinking in. There were so many games like zelda 1 because zelda 1 invented an awesome gameplay concept. One that many companies copied and then improved upon, including nintendo itself.

      --
      Nasa spent billions making a pen capable of writing in space. The Russians just use a pencil.
    12. Re:I don't think so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yoshi's Story was absolutely beautiful. I don't know why that game isn't better known.

    13. Re:I don't think so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FFX is a better overall game than FFVII, although far less influential and with a somewhat less interesting story and characters (personally speaking).

      SMW is a great game, amazing for its time. SMW2: Yoshi's Story is many, many times better than the first. There are many more "emergency" points in the game that require gamers to have a heightened sense of responsiveness than in the first, for example. That's why it deservedly ranks higher.

      Mortal Kombat was the first "dialer's" fighting game, a dubious honor at best. Various games in the series have had a pathetic combo system and, worst of all, weak collision detection. Its claim to fame was its gratuitous gore, which has always been so gaudy and is passe nowadays. This is stuff the current Xbox generation would have loved if they'd been born ten years earlier.

      Final Fight was a poor man's Double Dragon & River City Ransom, even when it was brand new.

      All just my opinion.

    14. Re:I don't think so... by Chemical · · Score: 1

      Right, but the list isn't the "Top 100 most influental" games. It's the Top 100 best games. Over the last 18 years, at least 100 games have come out that are better than Zelda 1. Many were inspired or influenced by Zelda 1, but they were better games. For this reason I don't thik Super Mario Bros. 1 should be on the list either, let alone in the number one spot.

    15. Re:I don't think so... by Thorkytel+Ant-Head · · Score: 1

      What gameplay concept did Zelda 1 "invent"? The adventure genre? You may want to check out Adventure on the Atari 2600 for that honor. Same top-down view, battles, dungeons, all that. Granted, Adventure was much more primitive, but I think it's overstating it a bit to say that Zelda 1 "invented" any gameplay concepts.

  4. where's King's Quest? by pbaumgar · · Score: 1

    a top 100 list of all time games and nothing from Sierra On-Line is on it?

    1. Re:where's King's Quest? by fowlerserpent · · Score: 1

      I noticed this, too. LucasArts and Sierra are the two pc adventure game kings. Lucas got Day of the Tentacle on the list. I'm a huge fan of Gabriel Knight and Kings Quest.

    2. Re:where's King's Quest? by updatelee · · Score: 1

      and dont forget space quest, man I wasted many hours on space quest I :)

    3. Re:where's King's Quest? by HoneyBunchesOfGoats · · Score: 1

      They mentioned Sierra Online in their entry for Tribes.

  5. not so bad by fowlerserpent · · Score: 1

    Normally I hate these lists. I mostly agree with this list. They made good choices, especially with PC games. They gave kudos to some of my favorites like Civilization II (#4), Starcarft (#7), Baldur's Gate 2 (#25), and Tie Fighter (#9). Super Mario Bros. made #1. I prefer Super Mario Bros. 3 (#23). SMB3 is SMB but much improved, with more depth, gameplay, and secrets.

    1. Re:not so bad by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      It's not that bad at all, but's heavily biased towards modern games. I mean, God of War, Halo, Burnout... they're all fine games, granted, but among the best of all time?. People do forget quick....

  6. It would appear that IGN is smoking gravel by azdruid · · Score: 1

    And..where is FreeSpace 2? I certainly consider that more fun than Super Mario....

    1. Re:It would appear that IGN is smoking gravel by KrisW · · Score: 1

      ...and I consider (my favorite game) to be better than (insert your favorite game here). It's opinion, what's your point?.

      --


      "Think you can take me? Go ahead on. It's your move." --Joe Don Baker in Final Justice
    2. Re:It would appear that IGN is smoking gravel by afd8856 · · Score: 1

      I've never managed to finish the mission in the nebula, searching for the lost pilot (arround mission 20 I think). But I've finished Freespace 1.

      Great game! Loved the fact that it had an editor and lots of maps. Anyone knows if anything happened with the source code? Any new game/mod came out from that?

      --
      I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
    3. Re:It would appear that IGN is smoking gravel by focitrixilous+P · · Score: 1

      Indeed, the Freespace 2 community is alive and well. Check the FS wiki For information about FS2_Open, which added some new graphics and such. It's messed up the whole thing for me though, so make sure you know where your install disks are if you try it, and back up your pilots and such. They also have a bunch of user campaigns and such, but I ended up geting the underdogs version of FS2 and they won't run for me.

      --
      SAILING MISHAP
  7. Nintendo by Tanmi-Daiow · · Score: 1

    I find it very interesting that alot of Nintendo games made it on the list. I didnt look. But i suspect that if you broke the list down by developer, Nintendo would have the most games on there.

    --
    "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive." - C.S. Lewis
    1. Re:Nintendo by rylin · · Score: 1

      Yes, but Nintendo games are made for kids, aren't they? *rolleyes*
      I mean, having a look at the top 30, we see Mario Bros.. that's about as much of a kid-title as the Giana Sisters.
      Ocarina of Time was also quite the fairytale, what with all the cute and cuddly dragons, spiders and all.
      Tetris? Does it get any more child-friendly than sharp blocks falling down to smash the ground?
      Mario 64 was somewhat child-friendly though, but that's negated by the mind-eating enemies in Super Metroid.

      Link to the Past was very nice - except you deal with lots of tragical events like your uncle dying in the first five minutes of the game..

      Nothing kiddy about Chrono Trigger imo, so we jump straight onto Mario Kart!
      While it is a child-friendly title, I've never seen anyone have more fun than a bunch of drunken adults playing it.

      Super Mario Bros 3? FF IV? Golden Eye?

      No, I'm sorry. I just can't understand the people complaining that Nintendo only publish kiddy-games.

      Just let me know when I can pre-order the Revolution, and I'll be happy.

    2. Re:Nintendo by DanthemaninVA1 · · Score: 1

      Did you even read the parent post? It didn't say anything about Nintendo games being for kids. It said that there seemed to be a high concentration of Nintendo-produced games on it. Chrono Trigger: Square FF IV: Square GoldenEye: Rare Learn to read before you just start mouthing off.

    3. Re:Nintendo by rylin · · Score: 1

      Who says my reply was aimed at the parent poster, rather than the gaming community as a whole?
      I simply found someone pointing out an interesting fact, and decided to further his comments with my own.

      It seems "everyone" is bitching about nintendo only doing games for kids.

      Take your fscking own advice.

  8. test by merkac · · Score: 0

    # 100 // River City Ransom River City Ransom Name: River City Ransom Platform: NES Developer: Technos Japan Corp. Publisher: Technos Japan Corp. Year Released: 1990 Why it Made the Top 100 List: Sometimes, kicking someone's ass is the solution to all of your problems. In the case of River City Ransom, it was kicking several hundred people's asses that solved Ryan's problems. The wonderful art style of thick headed toughies (also found in Technos' excellent Super Dodge Ball) makes beating the crap out of your enemies and stealing their money in order to buy upgrades to beat them up more efficiently so much fun! Fighting street gangs to get your girl back was pretty popular back in the early days of gaming, but River City Ransom brought style and light RPG elements into the mix to create one of the ultimate banger experiences. # 099 // Ultima Underworld: The Stygian Abyss Ultima Underworld: The Stygian Abyss Name: Ultima Underworld: The Stygian Abyss Platform: PC Developer: Blue Sky Productions Publisher: Origin Year Released: 1991 Why it Made the Top 100 List: Best known for being the first game to introduce full-range movement in a first-person perspective, Ultima Underworld helped usher a new era in digital entertainment. Apart from the revolutionary viewpoint, it offered a slew of innovative ideas that changed the action-RPG genre for the better. To start, you could manually change the speed and power of attacks. You could also engage in truly engrossing puzzle solving in a 3D arena. Plus, the game just plain offered a richly detailed game world for you to tear through. Blend this with solid action, cool items and spells (not to mention weapons) and you've got a recipe for gaming greatness. # 098 // BattleToads BattleToads Name: BattleToads Platform: NES Developer: Rare Publisher: TradeWest Year Released: 1991 Why it Made the Top 100 List: One of the best-looking titles for the NES, Battletoads borrowed heavily from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles property. It took a trio of harmless amphibians and mutated them into a band of green-skinned, ass-kicking super heroes. What made the game so unique, apart from the admittedly rad hero and enemy design, was the varied gameplay. Battletoads splits between various play styles such as racing and climbing stages, all of which sported insane obstacles. And by insane, you should understand these challengers were wildly difficult. Battletoads was near impossible to complete. While theoretically possible to complete, few gamers could profess to beating the game without having to totally lie about it. Still, it's one of the best games that came out of the 8-bit era. # 097 // F-Zero F-Zero Name: F-Zero Platform: SNES Developer: Nintendo Publisher: Nintendo Year Released: 1990 Why it Made the Top 100 List: While it could be argued that the newer GameCube update or even the Japan-only F-Zero X Construction Kit (N64) are the best of the franchise, the original was the one that jumpstarted the genre. It capitalized on SNES's 3D-esque Mode 7 visuals to bring futuristic racing, an incredible sense of speed, and addictive drift physics to eager gamers. In the 16-bit era it provided something unexpected and truly dazzling for the home console. It was a rare gem in its time, perfectly combining presentation and functionality to create a completely new gaming experience. Even today it is respected as one of the all-time top racers. # 096 // Mafia Mafia Name: Mafia Platform: PC Developer: Illusion Softworks Publisher: Gathering Year Released: 2002 Why it Made the Top 100 List:Illusion Softworks really pulled out the stops with their organized crime epic in 2002. It took the free roaming style of city-based gameplay that had become popularized in the Grand Theft Auto series, but created a much more detailed world set in the classic gangster ridden '30s. This heavy third-person action game not only provided some incredible missions both in challenge and variety. The developers managed to make all of the

    1. Re:test by bleaknik · · Score: 1

      Wow. That would have been so much more useful if there was at least some formatting.

      ;)

      --
      Deja Vu
      n. 1. The sensation that you've read this very article before.
  9. Best or Most Important? by screwballicus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem with this list is they're trying to straddle the line between honouring games which offer the best possible gameplay to players of any era and, simultaneously, games which, while historically signficant and great in their time, are now far from the best of their kind. And these two categories do not necessarily have anything to do with each other, in many cases.

    If this were a list of the 100 Most Historically Important Games of All Time, Super Mario Brothers would certainly fit in their as crucially influential. But few will argue that Super Mario Brothers is a better game than Super Mario Brothers 3, Super Mario World, and various successors in the genre. It probably shouldn't even be in a list of the "best" games of all time at all, evaluated independent of any and all history associated with it as a present day, uncontextualised gameplay experience. If SMB1 were released today as a never-before-seen title, it's fairly obvious what reviewers would have to say about it. Something I expect to the effect that, as free Flash games go, it's pretty dull. You certainly couldn't charge money for it.

    Creating a list which mixes unrelated criteria (good games and historically influential ones) as its basis for honouring certain titles is a ridiculous and purposeless exercise. Some will say any sort of list of this type is a purposeless exercise, but I think having an active critical discourse in the gaming world is crucial to its functioning as a meaningful artistic and recreational culture. But naming the "Top" games without basing those choices on something more specific is especially silly.

    1. Re:Best or Most Important? by grumbel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think they did a pretty damn good job with this lists, its a good mix of classics and new stuff, way better then most of these lists I have seen so far. Sure, you might argue if SMB1 should made the first place or maybe 86th place, but you can't get a objective list anyway, even if you clearly state your criteria, I mean how can you compare RE4 against Tetris? Beside sales there is no way and even that would be heavily biassed since Tetris shipped with the Gameboy. So simply ignore the numbers and look at the list as a collection of greatest games of all times, they might have forgot a classic here and there, but from a quick look over it they have caputured most of the good stuff. It gives a good overview about what games you might have missed in the past and which might be worth a second look.

      ### If SMB1 were released today as a never-before-seen title, it's fairly obvious what reviewers would have to say about it.

      If the price would lower then the standard 50EUR for a game I think it would still get away pretty well.

      ### Something I expect to the effect that, as free Flash games go, it's pretty dull.

      Even SMB1 is *not* dull, its still lightyears away from basically all flash stuff out there. It might have less features then Yoshis Island and not as pretty graphics, but the gameplay is still fluent, well balanced, challanging and most importantly straight forward. It always amazes me how good SMB1 still is, even so it was the first of its kind.

    2. Re:Best or Most Important? by ShadowMarth · · Score: 1

      I think it's fairly easy to see that the list is geared toward respecting both the best games of all time, and the most historically important. It's top is devoted to both. Games like OoT, SMB, and X-COM made the top many.

      Also, I think SMB would do quite well considering games like Alien Homonid. Then again, if it had never existed before, would we have a video game market? It would likely mean no donkey kong, no sonic, possibly no megaman, and none of the mario games in between.

    3. Re:Best or Most Important? by MuNansen · · Score: 1

      I agree. I was disappointed that it's not a "Most Influential" or "Best Of Its Time" list. How many people would really play SMB today over HL2 or H2?

      I was very disappointed by the bias against FPSes, though. Halo, Half Life, Half Life 2, and Deus Ex are all in the top 20-30. How is that possible for any reason other than they decided no FPS would make the Top 10 or 20? Two RTSes are in the Top 10, at least one in the Top 10.

      As an FPS gamer, this oversight ticked me off a bit. I've played just about every game on this list, and I consider HL2 to be the best singleplayer game I've ever played. Dr. J and Pistol Pete might have been great before, but Michael Jordan's still the best basketball player of all time. IGN's list, though, would have all the "old school" players on top, even though current players have far-surpassed their skill level.

    4. Re:Best or Most Important? by ShadowMarth · · Score: 1

      FPS games simply havn't had much impact. I play them frequently as well, but FPS games (with the exception of a couple good squad based games) are simply run and gun. There's little room for real innovation. Old school and strategy games are what it's all about. Oh, and about skill levels... Wow, you can aim your mouse faster... Lets see who would win a game of X-Com fastest, or master a species on starcraft. I like UT04 and BF2 as much as the next guy, but that's what real games are.

    5. Re:Best or Most Important? by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### There's little room for real innovation. There is plenty of room for innovation in fps, its just that developers care little to use it and simply continue with the same old game. One thing that I find extremly annoying is that in most first person shooters you are still just a pair of flying arms with a gun, what about legs or the rest of the body? How about actually using the arms when climbing a ledder, instead of continuing with carring a gun and climbing 'free-hand'? How about making jumps actually feel somewhat realistic so you don't get all those bunny-hopping issues? Those things aren't even innovative, just plain obvious stuff that even today a lot of shooters can't get right. However stuff like DeusEx or OperationFlashpoint shows that you can do much more in a game then just running around and shooting dozens of monsters, I just wish more games would try to actually do something interesting and not just trying to be Doom with better graphics.

    6. Re:Best or Most Important? by Thorkytel+Ant-Head · · Score: 1

      And of course, it is my duty to point out that Donkey Kong would still have existed even if Super Mario Bros. hadn't, since Donkey Kong predated SMB.

      I might also point out that Pitfall predated Donkey Kong, and was (I believe) the first game to feature a jump button, making it truly the father of all platformers. I point this out for no particular reason, other than to pay the proper respect to David Crane, whose praises can never be sung often enough.

    7. Re:Best or Most Important? by mesazoa · · Score: 1

      Um....fun? I think fun is the answer to that. Anyone who's played a game that tries to be TOO real, and end up not being fun can answer this question for you.

    8. Re:Best or Most Important? by metroid+composite · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough, between SMB1, SMB3, and SMW, the one I'm most inclined to go back and play is SMB1. Bear in mind too that I never got too far as a kid, and only picked it up in a flea market during my final year of undergrad (in a lot of ways, the first time I really played it) so I can't say I'm acting on nostalgia. I do, however, have a rather healthy respect for the level design, and the various hidden ways to give an extra challenge to talented players (killing each bowser through fireballs to find out what they were, for instance).

      The mechanics are nothing too special (play Super Tux, or Super Mario Land for comparison; same mechanics, but the level design's overall not as good; granted both games have their moments).

      Now, don't get me wrong: I'm not saying SMB1 magically became my favourite game of all time once I finally played it in-depth, or even that I liked it the most of the NES games I've gone back to play recently, but it's still remarkably playable...unlike some games that used to seem great at the time but aged poorly *coughStreetFighter2cough*.

    9. Re:Best or Most Important? by nekoes · · Score: 1

      Point taken, however much like AFI's list of the top 100 american movies of all time, IGN's list acts as a very good primer for someone looking for great games. Every game on the top 100 list that IGN put out is incredibly worth playing, and as much as I hate defending IGN, the atleast got that right. Otherwise I agree it's a bunch of crap the way they ranked them. They probably should have just made the top 100 games that you really need to play.

      That probably wouldn't pull in as many hits though...

      --
      Hey, it's my OPINION that dogs have eight legs and make a sound like a car horn every time they take a piss.
    10. Re:Best or Most Important? by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### Um....fun? I think fun is the answer to that.

      I doubt it, I can understand when a game like Unreal or Serious Sam doesn't try to be real, but Doom3 or one of the dozens of 'realistic' military shooters? Sure you might not want to have any game like OperationFlashpoint, since not everybody might like that level of realism, but having movement that looks more like a real human and less like SuperMario couldn't really hurt in a game that tries at least somewhat close to realism.

  10. Marble Madness by IceCreamGuy · · Score: 1

    Where is Marble Madness!??!?!!?!

    1. Re:Marble Madness by iainl · · Score: 1

      I've not seen the list yet (IGN blocked by my work proxy), but that's just obscene. Unless they've listed the much better Spindizzy Worlds instead. But there's about as much chance of that as my favorite dEUS album making some magazine's top 100 records list.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
  11. BattleToads? by jeblucas · · Score: 1

    BattleToads is number ninety-something? Is this game not universally reviled? IT'S FUCKING IMPOSSIBLE. Seriously, only Rush'N Attack was harder. If you want to put a hard game on there, put Rush'N Attack. If you want to put a great NES game on there, put Metroid. God of War makes the list? That game's like a week old! Where's Zork? NetHack? Street Fighter 2:Championship Edition? M.U.L.E.? 1-On-1: Larry Bird Vs. Dr. J? I'm just scratching the surface.

    --
    blarg.
    1. Re:BattleToads? by karnal · · Score: 1

      Another vote for one of the most difficult games I'd played on the NES: Ghosts and Goblins.

      Holy hell. Talk about a bad first game to get for the NES... every game I played after that seemed like a breeze. I don't ever recall beating Ghosts and Goblins until I got into the computer / emulation era, with savestates....

      I don't think that made the game "good", but it definitely tested your patience.

      Oh yea, had a friend beat Hydelide (sp?) once. That game was booooooring...

      Come to think of it, there were quite a few horrible games for the NES, even for the technology back then.

      --
      Karnal
    2. Re:BattleToads? by Sancho · · Score: 1

      Battletoads was an immensely addicting (if incredibly difficult) game. Most of the kids I knew played it for hours on end. And truthfully, there were only two extremely difficult portions that, these days, I skip over with cheats. Of course, I'm referring to the vehicle stages where you have to memorize the order of oncoming obstacles and you have less than a second to get into position for each one.

    3. Re:BattleToads? by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

      The real crime here is that River City Ransom got ranked two positions under it. That's just wrong. RCR was easily one of the ten best NES games there is, while Battletoads was crap.

    4. Re:BattleToads? by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      You forget the vehicle stage where you're on the giant circle thingie. It isn't even easy to practice, as it takes 45 minutes to get there. Never did beat that stage.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    5. Re:BattleToads? by CoffeeJedi · · Score: 1

      Street Fighter 2 made the top 10, i think they're including all editions in that entry.

      --
      May you be touched by His Noodly Appendage. RAmen.
  12. Feels like one guys opinion by biodeo · · Score: 1

    It also just feels like the opinion of a single person, like something you would see on a message board that nobody would listen to.

    But no, it's on IGN and people are paying attention to it for some reason (this is the second place I've seen it now). There's a good bit of lip service too, like even putting Halo on the list.

    --
    I'll stop being cynical when the world allows
  13. Their missing some amazing games by updatelee · · Score: 1

    Like

    - Any Kings Quest
    - Any Space Quest, esp space quest I
    - Wolfenstien 3D
    - Tomb Raider

    Those were all major games as I grew up as a kid and into my teenage years. Wolfenstiend led the way for me and first person shooters. Kings Quest and Space Quests are the games that got me playing on the computer and insted of a console. And Tomb Raider waisted most my university time :)

    1. Re:Their missing some amazing games by Tanmi-Daiow · · Score: 1

      Wolf 3d was not the best, just the first. Doom was arguably better.

      --
      "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive." - C.S. Lewis
    2. Re:Their missing some amazing games by furiousgeorge · · Score: 1

      I guess I missed something --- was Kings Quest actually fun?

      I more put it in the same basket as "Leisure Suit Larry", etc all.

      Those Sierra graphics games where what you have to do is walk up to and try to do something with EVERY THING IN THE ENTIRE DAMN WORLD to find where they hid something. It wasn't fun for 99% of the population - it was an exercise in patience and frustration.

    3. Re:Their missing some amazing games by Jarlsberg · · Score: 1

      Yes, King's Quest was a lot of fun (and the series kept improving until about KQ7, which was too cartoony and boring for most people, and KQ8, which was an FPS/adevnture hybrid that didn't really work). Most of the games Sierra produced were a lot of fun (with the exception of stuff like Manhunter and their action line). You obviously didn't like them, but that's really just you.

    4. Re:Their missing some amazing games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And Tomb Raider waisted most my university time


      I think the word you're thinking of is "busted."

    5. Re:Their missing some amazing games by Reignking · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's what the genre is -- adventure games.

      I loved those games, but eventually, they got boring. KQ3 and KQ4 were great, but 5 was too cartoony for me. I think they tried to turn it into a "storybook", and it wasn't fun.

      --
      One man's Funny is another man's Offtopic.
    6. Re:Their missing some amazing games by einTier · · Score: 1
      Basically, in any of these lists, if it's not made by Nintendo and developed before 1992, it's got a snowball's chance in hell of making the list.

      I don't know why this is, but I have yet to see any of the really great C-64 | Atari 800 | Apple II games (like Lode Runner, Jumpman, Space Taxi, M.U.L.E., Racing Destruction Set, Original Wolfenstein) make the list.

      --
      -------------------------------------------------- $665.95 -- retail price of the beast.
  14. This list is worthless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where is Alpha Centauri and Planescape: Torment? Why isn't Doom in the top 10? Was Ocarina of Time accidentally switched with the original one at the last minute?

    This is a terrible list.

    1. Re:This list is worthless by Dehumanizer · · Score: 1

      I agree about Alpha Centauri (best Civ-like game ever, much better than Civ 3) and Torment (best western-style RPG ever). Missing them is unforgivable, though I think the list isn't otherwise bad.

      I also think Resident Evil 4 should be higher, the game is fantastic, and reason enough to buy a Cube.

      --
      The Tlog - a technology blog
  15. What... no C64 or Amiga games :[ by JPyObjC+Dude · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I would have had Lode runner (c64) and stunt driver (amiga) on my top 20 at least.

    There was also a apple II game called dungeon quest or something like that which I know some people were very addicted to.

    1. Re:What... no C64 or Amiga games :[ by rohlfinator · · Score: 1

      Here's another vote for Lode Runner. Such a simple, yet addicting game.

      Interestinly enough, the lead programmer of a recent remake has put Lode Runner Online up as a free download on his site. It plays almost exactly the same the original with improved graphics and a few new gameplay elements. Very addicting stuff.

    2. Re:What... no C64 or Amiga games :[ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lode runner was MUCH better on vic-20.

    3. Re:What... no C64 or Amiga games :[ by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 1

      Since we're getting into old hardware, where is Pitfall for the Atari 2600?

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
  16. Shabby List by iolagnm · · Score: 1

    Ocarina of time at #2 and beating all the others in the series?

    Rome: Total War is at #14? While Counterstrike is #71 and Final Fantasy VII is #88?

    FFVII was below every other Final Fantasy on the list?

    Thrilled to see Starcraft at 7, but no mention of any Warcraft or Diablo?

    1. Re:Shabby List by Miaowara_Tomokato · · Score: 1

      Have you played Rome:TW? It's the capstone of the Total War series, and probably the best thing that's happened in strategy gaming since Civilization.

      It's the first worldmap/battelfield strategy game that actually makes it fun to play the battles, rather than getting bored or frustrated with a horrible combat system stuck into an otherwise good game (Rebellion comes to mind).

      The replayability factor is huge, and it looks good. Never before has running war elephants into masses of peasants been more fun, and THEN the burning pigs come out!

      Anyway, the list... it's a list someone else made, whatever. They did have some good picks at the lower ends - Ultima VII, Contra, Dragon Warrior, Bionic Commando, Grim Fandango (and what was the earlier guy in the thread complaining about? I count several adventure games),C&C... I'm nodding my head often enough reading the list to trust that their opinion is at least valid for those games I haven't played.

    2. Re:Shabby List by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      RTW is worth being on the list, although its a bit high. FF7 doesn't even deserve to be on the list, none of the PS FFs do.

      The sad thing is that original Zelda isn't even on the list. Wtf?

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  17. As always, mostly useless by trawg · · Score: 1

    As with just about every 'top' list, it doesn't tell you what it is ranking these games by. Number of units sold? Gross revenue? Most profitable?

    Without even reading it, I'm going to assume its totally subjective. I'm going to spare myself reading the comments, which I assume will be "What! Why isn't [Game X] included?!" and "You jerks, [Game A] is wayyy better than [Game B]".

    Subjective top x lists are pointless, unless you're a rabid fanboy prepared to soak up the opinions of basically anyone like a dry sponge. You can argue that IGN is a reputable game site that is worthy of your respect, but seriously, there is no way that they're going to anywhere near the same 100 games that I, or anyone else, probably would.

    1. Re:As always, mostly useless by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### Without even reading it, I'm going to assume its totally subjective.

      You of course never can get a 100% objective list, but that one here gets pretty damn close. It still might have missed out a few classics, but in a top 100 list there is only place for a 100 games, so thats inevitable. From all the 'Best games ever' lists its among the best I have seen so far, since it gets the mix between classics and current stuff quite right.

  18. I was just playing Dragon Warrior... by BurningDiode · · Score: 1

    I was playing dragon warrior just about an hour ago. Level 15. I've beat and restarted that game I don't know how many times. Theres something so calming and mind numbing about smashing slimes and drakes after a stress filled day at work. I receive a satisfying sense of accomplishment from beating a goldman sensless and robbing him of his gold.

  19. The problem with a "best of" list by Sancho · · Score: 1

    Other than the obvious "it's just someone's opinion" is that they tend to put real innovators on there, leaving out games that surpassed them. Case in point, Final Fantasy 3, where they left out the compilation for the Playstation, which was almost a direct translation except for better graphics. Do they just prefer the old version? Maybe for nostalgia value, but most of the rest of the world would probably prefer the updated graphics.

    Same goes for Super Mario Brothers, the number 1 on the list. It was good--for its time. But it absolutely shouldn't be on any "top X best" list because of the huge number of flaws. Give that game to anyone who didn't grow up with it, and they'll probably throw it across the room. You couldn't go backwards (to the left), the graphics are terrible, there were bugs all over the place (some of them were cool, but nevertheless, they often broke the game). The ending was nothing to speak of, and the music was, of course, sub-par compared to anything new.

    If you're compiling a nostalgia list, or a list of "best games of their time" you can get away with this sort of thing. But to consider innovative games as "the best" simply because they innovated is stretching the generally accepted definition of the word.

    1. Re:The problem with a "best of" list by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### Maybe for nostalgia value, but most of the rest of the world would probably prefer the updated graphics.

      I think it simply makes this list a heck of a lot clearer when they list only the original game instead of some obscure remake, especially since some games have been remade more then once. If they would list all SMB1 ever created, they would have like 4 places for SMB1 alone, add to that the SMB3 and YoshiIsland remake and you have already a good part of the list stuff with Mario alone. That would for sure be pretty pointless.

      ### But to consider innovative games as "the best" simply because they innovated is stretching the generally accepted definition of the word.

      If you can look past the graphics most of those games are still great, even today. The only game that I have spotted so far that I might not wanna play today is MsPacman, but the rest is still a lot better then most of the stuff that is released these days. The IGN list really got the balance between old classics and new stuff quite right, no need to diss it for the theoritical impossibility of creating a list that is right for everyone.

    2. Re:The problem with a "best of" list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Totally wrong on FF3. The PSX version was the EXACT same game (with minor bug fixes) and with FMVs added. Most players who played the SNES version actually prefer the original version due to the long load times present in the PSX version. Same with almost all the other re-releases of SNES games on PSX. The only one that people might prefer is FFIV, because it is a lot closer to FFII Hardtype, which was the original Japanese release. The North American version of FFII was FFIV Easytype plus American censorship.

    3. Re:The problem with a "best of" list by Sancho · · Score: 1

      But see, they wouldn't have to include all four Super Mario remakes, just the "best" one. My very point is that if updated graphics improve a game, it must be better than the original.

      And it doesn't make sense to mix a "classics" list with a "best of" list. Those are two completely separate traits, which actually is demonstrated by my post above. Even if the game is still fun today, that does not make it an "all time best." I think for that moniker, you've got to have something that was never replicated--or at least, never replicated quite as well. And of course, a sequel does not necessarily mean better, even if it uses better technology and updated graphics. But come on.. the only time I ever pop in Super Mario Brothers is when I'm feeling nostalgic, and I always turn it off again very quickly and move on to something more fun. And I haven't played the original itself in probably over a decade. I opt for the updated graphics of the Super Mario All Stars collection.

    4. Re:The problem with a "best of" list by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### My very point is that if updated graphics improve a game, it must be better than the original.

      Sometimes it might be better, but it still makes little sense to refer to some remake instead of the original game, especially when the gameplay is 100% the same. If gameplay is noticable different, say RE1 (PSone) vs RE1 (Gamecube) it might of course good to refer to them seperatly, but SMB1 vs SMB1 (AllStars) is really just a new tileset.

      ### And it doesn't make sense to mix a "classics" list with a "best of" list. Those are two completely separate traits,

      They are only seperate traits if you value graphics a lot, if you can see past some graphical improvments, sometimes some usability issues and actually get into the game almost all classics are still as much fun as on day one and many of them are still unmatched.

      While SMB1 on place one might be questionable, there is really very little in the list that wouldn't be worth to play these days.

      ### But come on.. the only time I ever pop in Super Mario Brothers is when I'm feeling nostalgic,

      Thats because you have already played it hundreds of times, of course it gets boring after a while, like basically every game. Sure SMB1 might not caputure your interest for 20h straight like a Halflife2, but thats the whole point, its a different kind of genre that is played quite different then todays heavily story based single player games. That doesn't make it bad, thats exactly what makes these games still so much fun, even today.

  20. Super Mario World by Eightyford · · Score: 1

    Super Mario World 2, is in no way even close to being better than Super Mario World!

    Ha, I just remembered the time I bought Mario is Missing... Super Mario Bros 3 it wasn't!

  21. Sims and Diablo by Gertlex · · Score: 1

    I'm very surprised neither Sims or Sims 2 did not make the list... One of the Diablos should have been there as well, I think they're a better choice than Baldur's Gate... Starcraft as high as it is... I absolutely agree :) There were too many good Mario games. I'd have thrown in a Pikmin too...

    1. Re:Sims and Diablo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you, high? There was little to no story involved with Diablo! Diablo marked the heyday of the "Click like Mad" genre that started and died with Blizzard's forays outside of RTS. Memorable it may be, but it in no way comparies to an RPG with, say, a story, and a finely tuned game system, and a challenge factor that consists of more complex logic than "Quick! Throw more monsters at him!"

    2. Re:Sims and Diablo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      watch the negatives.

      using a neither ... or with a negative made that sentance hard to parse for me.

    3. Re:Sims and Diablo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Sims or The Sims 2 are not games, they are computer generated doll houses.

  22. Doom by jebiester · · Score: 1

    Personally, I believe DOOM should have been higher on that list than 39th place. DOOM was the first game that got Amiga users to switch to PCs. It also started the 3D gaming revolution.

    At my Uni at the time large groups of people used to sneak into the computer labs to play it on the network. It also ushered in 3D games into the mainstream. I think it's probably had the greatest impact of any game in the PC market, and should be higher than 39th place. 'Sydnicate' should have been up there too IMHO.

    1. Re:Doom by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

      I agree. I gained some sort of respect for Gamespy (of all companies!) when they ranked DOOM #1 game of all time in their Top 50 a few years ago.

    2. Re:Doom by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      Ditto. I said the same a couple of posts below: it was technically impressive and groundbreaking (it certainly put to shame everything in that era), incredibly influential, with lots of production values, and FUN. Yes, FUN. The levels were so well designed... i only had that much fun when i played Doom 2, and then again, i felt like i've already seen it all. Doom was just a riot to play. And if you did multiplayer? Nirvana. It defined the term "FPS" (yes, even more than Wolfenstein 3D), and no one did it best ever since. Not even iD.

          It's easy to forget it now, but when it came out, it was a revolution. I know a lot of people who upgraded their PCs simply so the game would run smoother.

    3. Re:Doom by einTier · · Score: 1
      People forget just how groundbreaking Doom really was. When Doom came out, people were still wowing over the graphics in Wolfenstein 3D. True, real time, 3D graphics were not common, usually confined to racing games or flight simulators. Even then, they tended to be flat, colored polygons (see StarFox) and not actual textured surfaces.

      SoundBlaster sound cards were not something everyone had, and virtually no PCs came with them pre-installed.

      Although Wolfenstein preceeded it, both were made by the same company, and these were the very first first person shooters -- between the two of them, they virtually created the genre that dominates to this day.

      Last, Doom was the first true networked multiplayer graphical game. It's hard to remember how exceptional this was, but at the time, we snuck up to the computer labs and secretly installed Doom just so that we could play multiplayer -- because NO ONE had network card in their personal computers. Not even in the dorms. We actually compromised our gaming experience just to be able to play against (or with) each other. I still remember my jaw dropping the first time I saw another space marine and realizing that not only was he on my side, he was the character that my friend was controlling from across the room -- and that on his screen, he was seeing me much as I was seeing him.

      I can't think of a game that was more innovative than Doom. It absolutely deserves to be ranked number 1.

      --
      -------------------------------------------------- $665.95 -- retail price of the beast.
  23. Not Bad by Bellum+Aeternus · · Score: 1
    I was totally expecting to balk at the listing but I can agree on the top 10 (if perhaps not in that exact order).

    But I cannot believe Golden Eye beat out both of the Half-Lifes.

    Hey, now that there's been 2 half-lives past are we down to a quarter life?

    --
    - I voted for Nintendo and against Bush
    1. Re:Not Bad by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Hey, now that there's been 2 half-lives past are we down to a quarter life?"

      I was going to make a nasty joke about you sucking at math, but it's just too easy.

    2. Re:Not Bad by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

      Oh, and HL2 did beat Goldeneye.

    3. Re:Not Bad by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

      ...and HL beat both HL2 and Goldeneye. Christ, man. Learn how to count.

  24. Katamari Damacy by Paul+Slocum · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I really think it's a pretty good list, but the lack of Katamari Damacy shows poor foresight IMO. Katamari opened my eyes to the future of gaming in a lot of ways. After playing it at my friend's house, I borrowed his PS2 for a while just so I could play that.

    Also annoying is that they seem to think that the NES was the first video game system. When they're leaning towards landmark releases, not including a single Atari 2600 game seems odd for people who are supposed to be experts on video games.

    -paul

    1. Re:Katamari Damacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They seem to have left out these various things:

      -Non NES 70s and 80s gaming(U.K. gaming and 16-bit computers are both HUGE omissions)
      -"ultrapop/casual" titles(Myst? Sims?)
      -Recent Japanese developments(like Katamari, and music games like Konami's Bemani series)
      -Adventures, other than one or two exceptions

    2. Re:Katamari Damacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heavily biased toward modern games.

      No Lode Runner, for instance.

      No Zork.

      How is that possible ?

      And they put the same game several time. I mean what is *really* the difference between all the Zeldas or the final fantasies ? Very very good games, but there should not be several entries for those.

      And why is Fallout there, for instance ? It was a fine game, full of bugs, but there is nothing special about it.

      I suspect that the guy(s) that compiled the list is(are) in its(their) early 30's. Fallout was one of its first big games, so he(they) put it high.

      It also explain why Apple][/C64/Amiga games are ignored.

    3. Re:Katamari Damacy by Dr.+Molf · · Score: 1

      Sims was the title I was especially amazed they missed. We're talking about a game that really made a huge impact on the videogame industry, not to mention brought in a demographic that wasn't playing videogames. 1 Sims title is greater than 4 Final Fantasy slots any day.

      --
      indeed..
  25. Here we go again... by lightspawn · · Score: 1
    • The list is all wrong - some games are too high / are too low / missing / appear twice.
    • Define "top".
    • The list is worthless since it's highly subjective.
    • The list is actually pretty close to my personal one, that for some reason I feel the need to keep.
    • The list has too many new games and too few old ones.
    • This story appeared on slashdot before.
    • This story appeared on IGN before.
    • ... etc, etc.


    We've done it all before, and will do it all again, several times a year. Oh yeah, no Manic Miner on the list (he said with certainty, without even checking the article), so who cares anyway.
    1. Re:Here we go again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet we're talking about it, recallng our omitted personal favourites, and generating some traffic on their boards in the process. In some days, the list worked.

  26. Chrono Trigger by rreyelts · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else miss Chrono Trigger? It was easily one of the best games I've ever played and deserves to be on that list much more than FFX or FFVII. The epic storyline (with a sense of humor), the magnificent soundtrack, the detailed graphics (excellent for its time), the battle system (with triple techs), the lack of random encounters, and the replayability (so many different endings) all add up to make the game so enjoyable.

    Do yourself a favor, if you've never played it. Buy the remake for the PlayStation, but don't play it. (The load times will make you want to gouge your eyes out). Then download the ROM for the original SNES Chrono Trigger and play it on one of the emus. It'll be well worth your time and money, even for a game that's now 10 years old.

    1. Re:Chrono Trigger by fishmasta · · Score: 1

      Chrono Trigger's on there. Number 13.

    2. Re:Chrono Trigger by rreyelts · · Score: 1

      Heh - So it is. Dunno how I missed it. :)

    3. Re:Chrono Trigger by Malor · · Score: 1

      Chrono Trigger was absolutely one of the best games ever made. I didn't find it until very late, sometime around 2001... just screwing around with SNES9X. I was absolutely hooked. This was when Counterstrike was out, mind you, one of the most fiendishly addictive games ever. My Counterstrike habit came to a screeching halt for awhile.

      At the time, SNES9X didn't handle the multilayered transparency effects used about halfway in, so when I got to that stage, I immediately eBayed a used SNES and cart. The SNES was about $50.... the cart was $70, more than the console. Worth every cent.

      To this day, I remain absolutely floored at the sheer amount of depth they fit into that adventure. You are bouncing around through time, and most things you do in the past will carry over into the future. It just keeps opening up and expanding into new areas. And each area is *fun*... I don't remember ever being annoyed with tedium. As enormous as it is (and it is a huge game), and with its very complex plotting, they fit the entire thing into FOUR MEGABYTES. There are probably TETRIS games bigger than four megabytes.

      I STRONGLY urge folks to check out this game. If you haven't seen it yet, you really should. It reached a level of sheer brilliance that no other game ever has. I'm glad IGN had it on their list, but I think it should have been higher, based on technical achievement alone. After you've finished, you just flat won't believe they fit it into four megs. They must have been counting their RAM usage down to the individual bit. There's so much in here that I can easily see someone, during the development process, as being very proud of freeing up 16 entire bytes for someone else.

      If you're not grabbed by the game right away, stick with it until you finish 'the trial'. (You'll know it when you see it.) If you get through the trial and aren't enjoying it yet, then you probably won't. You're also an ingrate, and please mark yourself as a foe so I know to ignore you forever. :-)

  27. Dude... by wot.narg · · Score: 0

    NETHACK

    --
    Roses are red
    Violets are blue
    In Soviet Russia
    Poems write you!
    1. Re:Dude... by szyzyg · · Score: 1

      Said Perfectly

      NETHACK

      Oh, so it's commercial games only or something? If you don't pay for it and have an ad campaign you don't get on the list.

  28. Missing Games by theraccoon · · Score: 1
    They left out EverQuest. Not even WoW!

    What kind of a Top 100 gaming list doesn't include at least one of the two BIGGEST games out there?

    Not only that, but when was the last time you walked into an arcade and DIDN'T see a Dance Dance Revolution setup?

    Sadly, no FreeSpace. Or EarthBound. So sad.

    1. Re:Missing Games by Paul+McMahon · · Score: 1

      No MMORPGs are on the list. I'd put Ultima Online on it for popularizing the genre.

  29. No Total Annihilation? by dougmc · · Score: 1
    PC Gamer listed Total Annihilation as the `Best Game of All Time' in 1988. Granted, I'm not sure it's quite the best game of all time, even at the time, though I'd argue it certainly belonged in the top 10. Now, I'd say it belongs in the top 20.

    But it didn't even make this list's top 100? And yet Dune 2 did? Dune 2 may have started the RTS genre, but TA polished the interface until it shined. Games like Starcraft certainly had a much better story (and I like my games to have good stories) but TA had the interface down better than anything that came before and I think anything that came after it. And it was so much fun in multiplayer, and the ability to add units (and Cavedog kept releasing new ones) kept it fresh for a long time ...

    1. Re:No Total Annihilation? by iainl · · Score: 1

      They seem to be basing this list at least partly off historical significance. I can see no other reason for putting Super Mario Brothers above its various sequels, for instance.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    2. Re:No Total Annihilation? by 2008 · · Score: 1

      Amen.

      This list has a lot of great games missing*, but TA is probably top of my WTF-they-left-it-out list.

      *Worms, UT2004 & 99, Rez, AvP2, Lemmings, Bust-a-move, Ikaruga, DDR, Quake 3, Elite, Pikmin, Tekken 3, GTA 1, Serious Sam, Wip3out, Nethack, Super Monkey Ball 2... OK I'll stop now.

      --
      I quit!
    3. Re:No Total Annihilation? by king-manic · · Score: 1

      But it didn't even make this list's top 100? And yet Dune 2 did? Dune 2 may have started the RTS genre, but TA polished the interface until it shined. Games like Starcraft certainly had a much better story (and I like my games to have good stories) but TA had the interface down better than anything that came before and I think anything that came after it. And it was so much fun in multiplayer, and the ability to add units (and Cavedog kept releasing new ones) kept it fresh for a long time ...


      I know TA has it's loyal fans. The rest of us thought it was alright. Truly, no trolling. The mass tactis is what most RTS players despise and is the core of TA. It was fun for an afternoon with the boys but beyond that we didn't think it was very notable in our group of friends. We liked Warcraft 2 more and dune 2 was more ahead of it's time. When Stracraft ambushed our group of friends, we never played TA again... or saw sunlight.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    4. Re:No Total Annihilation? by Madoc+Owain · · Score: 1

      Not only did they not mention TA (which was definitely not released in 19*88* else I'd have never graduated college) but they totally skipped M.U.L.E., which was the grand-daddy of RTS games.

  30. Too many games to pick from by Dr.Opveter · · Score: 1

    Capture 20 years in 100 games? Of course we're going to miss some personal favortires.
    Some games i spent many hours with: Elite, Simcity, Lemmings, OMF2097

    --
    Sample this!
    1. Re:Too many games to pick from by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      OMF2097 and Body Blows were two fighting games me and my brother played until our fingers bled. One must fall, particularly, was great.

  31. *LOTS* of classics missing... by Lisandro · · Score: 1

    ... specially from the golden days of home computers like the C64 and such. Marble Madness? Uridium? Ghostbusters? Beachhead 2? Elite? The Summer & Winter games series from Epyx? Zak McCracken and the alien mindbenders? The original Maniac Mansion? And i'm sure i'm missing a lot that others that deserve to be atleast considered for a list of the top-100 best games OF ALL TIME. It didn't all began with the NES, you know.

        And, BTW, i feel Doom should be ranking a bit higher. It truly was a groundbreaking, well made, influential and fun game. The rest of the list was actually quite fine, and i enjoyed seeing so many Lucasarts games and System Shock 2 in the list.

    1. Re:*LOTS* of classics missing... by raminator · · Score: 1

      I agree with alot of the ones you have. Don't forget Burnin Rubber and Wolfenstein 3D.

    2. Re:*LOTS* of classics missing... by grumbel · · Score: 1

      Is there actually a single home-computer game in the list? They seem to have left out that area completly. Leaving out Elite should be considered a crime, especially since there was a very well done NES port of it. But overall I am quite happy with that list, while it misses quite a bit, includes a lot of good stuff.

  32. NES bias by Intellectual+Elitist · · Score: 1
    Yeah, the lack of anything pre-NES was pretty ridiculous, and there was an insane amout of bias toward Nintendo games in general. 4 of the top 10 games of all time made by Nintendo? Gimme a break.

    If the list was meant to reward genre trailblazers, then skipping proto-RTS/builder games like Sea Battle and Utopia on the Intellivision was a major oversight, as was skipping INTV's sports titles, which were the first to let you call plays and control every character on the field. And don't get me started on all the Atari 2600 games that were overlooked.

    If the list was meant to reward pure gameplay quality, then where are the classics that still hold up today, like The Dreadnaught Factor, or damn near any other Activision or Imagic game from the pre-NES period? What about the Colecovision version of Donkey Kong, which was considered to be the first near-perfect home translation of an arcade game?

    Granted, they only had 100 slots, and they did include some worthy games that you might not have expected them to (e.g. Herzog Zwei) -- but it's pretty obvious that the editors were weaned on the NES, and that's clouded their perception a bit. Oh well.

    1. Re:NES bias by Troed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      4 of the top 10 games of all time made by Nintendo?

      Sounds about right, yes?

      I haven't even clicked the link yet, but I assume two of those are Super Mario Bros 3 and Super Metroid. Maybe they've gone for Super Mario Bros 1 instead though.

      Now I'll go check ...

    2. Re:NES bias by Intellectual+Elitist · · Score: 1
      > Sounds about right, yes?

      Nope. I've never understood the amount of blind worship that Nintendo's gotten over the years. I figure it must come from people younger than me who grew up on the NES and SNES and are overly influenced by nostalgia.

      Nintendo's games have always rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe it's that overly boopsy, kiddie approach, or maybe it's casting that fat, shroom-dropping plumber in the lead role. Maybe it was the way that they fundamentally bastardized every arcade game that was converted to the NES, throwing in gratuitous heart icons and completely changing the structure of the game.

      Whatever it is, I have no special place in my heart for Nintendo, and I think it's absurd to give them more than 2 or 3 slots out of the top 10, considering the quality and volume of their competition.

    3. Re:NES bias by Troed · · Score: 1

      ... and when you played Super Metroid, your thoughts were?

  33. Rome by gronnsak · · Score: 1

    Nice that Rome made it to the list. If any Rome-fans here hasn't heard of it yet, Rome: Total Realism 6.0 is out, check http://rometotalrealism.com/. It adds so much to the game, and does away with all the historical stupididties of the original game, like the anachronistic egyptians.

  34. Myst by AaronLawrence · · Score: 1

    One of the biggest selling games ever, that pretty much defined adventures for many years, not on the list?

    Well, fine. They made a fair attempt at listing the games that they know and like, but it's obviously nothing more than that (one group's opinion).

    It would be possible to make a very interesting top 100 games list, but you would have to think about it and research it.

    --
    For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
    1. Re:Myst by corrosive_nf · · Score: 0

      Well go for it. Everyone would bitch about the list no matter what. Hell I would put Final Fantasy III (VI) at the top of my list. I still have a SNES just for that game. And 2 brand new snes systems in the garage incase this one dies. And dont give me the crap about an emulator. Its not the same.

  35. Nice "Revolution" ad by porttikivi · · Score: 1

    Half of their top games can be emulated on the Nintendo Revolution, and most for free and legally. And they will be available through easy to use official channels, not only from underground P2P networks.

    --
    Anssi Porttikivi / app@iki.fi
  36. No Phantasy Star? by Hidyman · · Score: 1

    Come on Phantasy Star was an awesome RPG.
    It kicked FF1 into the dirt. It is in the top 10 for sure.

    --
    You can't take the sky from me ...
  37. Too many console games, (where is Starflight?) by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    Too many console games on the list and two versions of Tetris?

    PC classics missing
    StarFlight by Binary Systems, has anyone equaled what they did on two 360k floppies?

    Empire, the only pure strategy game and one of the oldest

    No MMORPG titles made it though I think either UO or EQ deserve to be on the list because they helped establish their genres. I think that a key to making the top 100 list is how the game has either never been equaled, set new standards or established them, or is still played.

    Still way to many console games.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  38. You're Winner! by kleptonin · · Score: 1

    Every body knows Big Rigs: Over The Road Racing is best game of all time. It's winner!

  39. Okay list, kind of... by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

    The list is obviously wrong if they put Mario as #1 and Ocarina of Time as #2. Ocarina of Time is the definition of a Good Game. It's not only a great game, it could be proposed as a ludological constant to compare other games to. =)

    I was kind of worried about the list though - some really great games, yes... but I was reading this like this: "FF7 as #88? Could it be possible they considered it better than... that game? Oh no. FF10 as #86? Oh dear god no. (Nervously hits pagedown) Phew! That game, the Best PC Game of All Time (According to Me), is #84." Well, there's still hope for IGN. Or something.

  40. Not a bad list by Apreche · · Score: 1

    I could disagree with the order, but I didn't really notice too many games that didn't belong. Nor did I notice too many games that were missing. But the order was totally out of whack. ICO at #18? Give me a break.

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
  41. Lakers vs. Celtics and the NBA Playoffs? by Momoru · · Score: 1

    Is better then FF7? Better then Syndicate? Better then Alone in the Dark? Common, this had to be one of the worst basketball games of all time.

    And while there were only eight selectable teams and modes were limited to Exhibition and Playoffs

    Whoot. Hours of fun.

  42. Re: suction by TeknoHog · · Score: 1
    "Hey, now that there's been 2 half-lives past are we down to a quarter life?"

    I was going to make a nasty joke about you sucking at math, but it's just too easy.

    How about a joke of you sucking at physics?

    The time it takes for a radioactive substance to decay into half its original value is the half-live. Wait for another half-life and you have one quarter of the original left (it's exponential decay). Hence two half-lives = one quarter-life.

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  43. Moria? by jim_redwagon · · Score: 1

    No mention of Moria? I can STILL get locked up in that game for hours at a time letting my @ wander at dizzying depths facing creatures great and small.

    Maybe I'm just yearning to get back to my late 80's early mornings in the VAX lab. ;-)

    --
    I forgot what I wanted to say, but honestly, it was important.
    1. Re:Moria? by deletedaccount · · Score: 1

      It (or one of its later variants) should have been in the top 10. I can't think of another game I've been playing for 15 years.

  44. Are all of IGN's staff children? by burnetd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No Amiga games, no Atari ST games, no Spectrum or C64 games in fact nothing predating the NES and Megadrive (Genesis). Where's Elite, Sensible Soccer, Jeff Minter's games, and they've got a platformer at number one, I was bored of platformers years before it even came out.

    1. Re:Are all of IGN's staff children? by strongmace · · Score: 1

      They cater to their audience, just like any other business.

      --
      "If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." -Zapp Brannigan
  45. Missing Some Important Games by Tempest_2084 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is it just me, or does this list seem like they randomly picked some names out of a hat? Lakers vs. Celtics? Dear God! There are some important titles missing like Zork, Kings Quest, Wizardry, Phantasy Star, Karateka, Radient Silvergun, Fallout 2 (although they did get the original), Diablo I/II, etc. I suppose no list is going to have them all, but this lists seems so random. At least this one includes some 80's games for a change, most Top 100 lists start at the Playstation era.

  46. X-COM by ShadowMarth · · Score: 1

    Ok, slashdot is a bit behind here. They've been revealing these 10 at a time for a couple weeks, and they've been done for nearly as long. Also, X-COM (Otherwise known as UFO: Enemy Unknown) was moved down four spaces. The top 8 used to be my best experiences in gaming (with the exception of Master of Orion, but I'm happy with its placement), but no longer... Also, their reasoning for the placement of Metroid Prime is more than a bit odd.

  47. They missed. by IorDMUX · · Score: 1

    --Rogue--

    I mean... this game spawned its own genre, was the first GUI D&D game [Even Baldur's Gate (#25) owes it homage], is still played at college campuses nationwide... and c'mon, /.'ers, it was even released open source by Guys at Berkley.

    So let's hear it for the great-great-great-granddaddy of Neverwinter Nights, Pool of Radiance, and who knows what else.

    --
    >> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.
  48. Cornface's List by cornface · · Score: 0

    1.) Robotron
    2.) Tetris Attack
    3.) Robotron
    4.) Arkanoid Doh It Again
    5.) Robotron
    6.) Also Robotron

    There's no need for a seven. Every other game sucks.

    1. Re:Cornface's List by skepticult · · Score: 1

      1.) Robotron
      2.) Tetris Attack
      3.) Robotron
      4.) Arkanoid Doh It Again
      5.) Robotron
      6.) Also Robotron

      There's no need for a seven. Every other game sucks.


      If you were to add Rampart to your list, I would be inclined to agree.

  49. Any top 100 list is going to have omissions by p_conrad · · Score: 1

    But they should at least have a decent explanation for the #1 game being #1. They missed the most important aspect of Super Mario Brothers. It changed the format of action games from quick games based on arcade economics to long games based on an adventure game framework. This marks the point in history where home consoles stopped chasing the arcade games and became a profoundly different experience.

    1. Re:Any top 100 list is going to have omissions by skepticult · · Score: 1

      What's the history behind the Super Mario Bros. arcade game? Was it a port from the console?

    2. Re:Any top 100 list is going to have omissions by p_conrad · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure it was a from home to arcade. The only one I ever saw was a double sided unit that had Excitebike on the other side. This was long after the NES version were out there, and the machine was largely ignored in the arcade.

    3. Re:Any top 100 list is going to have omissions by skepticult · · Score: 1

      It was hard to choose "extra hard Mario" over Excitebike. Excitebike took your quarter to the MOON!

  50. Bullshit by DeadMilkman · · Score: 1

    Just because you didn't like the new style given to your precious pixels doesn't make it a bad game. You are letting nostalgia cloud your memeory.

    FF10 has one of the better skill impliments of ANY FF.
    (allowing customization, certain skills only optainable after story, yet at the same time everyone has a role to begin with and it is your decision if you want to diviate from that role.)

    FF7 had a good story, actually CHALLENGING sidequests, and a good mix of tech/fantasy.

    FF1-6 are not really better, Hell some of them are honestly worse!

    1,3, and 5 have EXTREMELY weak stories.

    5's is so bad its Job system was honestly the one of the only redeamable features of the entire game It was a HORRIBLE TRAVESTY this game came between 4 and 6.

    2 has a HORRIBLE skill/battle system. It is a nightmare of a design. AVERAGE players MUST cheat it if they even want to survive!

    4 was practically perfect, yet horribly edited, moreso than just about any other FF, in more than one case the bad translation left the player confused or completely changed story elements.

    6 was practically perfect...yet buggy. How buggy? don't use Relm or you'll often enough crash your game. Setzer could also crash it if you stacked enough battle actions after a gamble (easy done if on haste) Some of the story elements were a nightmare to actually open up on your own.
    (IE Shadow Inn scenes) I really have a problem with saying FF6 was great yet dissing FF10. Both have the same basic story and honestly FF10 does it better overall, while FF6 has a better villian.
    everything else is just the pixel art vs 3d.

    1. Re:Bullshit by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      FF10s skill implementation gets points for originality, but its not better than its predecessors. Just different.

      FF7 had a poor, confusing, storyline with holes you could drive a truck through. And it had tech- I don't *want* tech ion a fantasy game. Any. At all.

      FF6 and 10s storys are extremely different. I can't see a single similarity between them. WHatever you're smoking, I want some.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  51. instead of a top 100 list.... by rubberbando · · Score: 1

    I'd rather see some sort of database of all videogames ever made.

    Is there something out there like this on the internet. Sorta like imdb but for videogames?

    --
    DEAD DEAD DEAD DELETE ME
    1. Re:instead of a top 100 list.... by Madoc+Owain · · Score: 1

      Check out the Killer List of Videogames - http://www.klov.com/ . It is a pretty comprehensive list of arcade games, I highly recommend it. Lots of pictures and descriptions of gameplay.

      M.O.
      http://www.madocowain.com/
      http://www.playmaille.com/

  52. starcon by syrinx · · Score: 1

    I saw this list the other day, and I was impressed. Usually these lists totally suck. "OMG HALO2 BEST GAME EVAR!!!!11", and so on. (This list still inexplicably includes the first Halo, but you can't be perfect, I guess.)

    Mainly I was happy to see Star Control 2 so high. Such a wonderful game. "Do not forget to *enjoy the sauce*!"

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    1. Re:starcon by M.C.+Hampster · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, another believer. Welcome my brother. I can see you are one of us, simply by calling it "Starcon".

      As long as Star Control II made the list somewhere, I was ok. Yes, it should be rater higher than it is, but not everyone has the enlightenment we do. :-)

      --
      Forget the whales - save the babies.
  53. UO by antifood · · Score: 1

    It is interesting to see the lack of mmorpg's. I personally loved early Ultima Online. I was glad to see the two Ultima titles that were chosen, although it was a bit odd to see the neglect of both Wizardry and Might and Magic. Still, a surprising good list for IGN.

  54. Quake 1??? by roche · · Score: 1

    Not having Quake 1 on the list is a travesty. It is one of the most groundbreaking PC games of all time.

    Quake was one of the first games that was able to successfully take advantage of OpenGL. I know I wasn't the only one who ran out and picked up a Voodoo 1 card when I saw what it looked like.

    Don't forget Quakeworld. Quakeworld was a groundbreaking addon that allowed you to actually play the game over dial up, something almost unheard of at the time.

    Don't forget all of the mods. Quake was one of the first games out there that had a successful modding community. Sure there were a few Doom mods, but nothing like Quake 1 had. Does anyone remember Team Fortress or CTF?

    If Quake 1 was truly a groundbreaking game that should not be so easily overlooked.

    --

    roche
    Bah Humbug!
  55. WHERE ARE THE MMOs????? by kinshadow · · Score: 1

    I found the lack of MMOs very suprising. Personally I would have added EQ and UO (as the original MMO archtypes) instead of the THREE versions of Metroid (prime DEFINATELY does not deserve a slot).

    --
    Sigpilot : I'm in the pipe, 5 by 5.
  56. Utterly Useless by NJVil · · Score: 1

    No Diablo.
    No Diablo II.
    No Warcraft.
    No WoW.

    But there is Starcraft so it's not a total snub of Blizzard, which has been one of the most consistently high-quality producers (albeit slow) in the field.

    And besides there are hordes of "cartoonish" Mario-like games that made the list that were in no way should have qualified them for "top", so apparently there was a bias going into it.

  57. What about Asteroids? by Richard+Steiner · · Score: 1

    Or Space Invaders? Those two were HUGE in the early days of video arcades.

    I agree with others that Lode Runner and Elite should have been there, as well as The Sims.

    Where was Sopwith?? :-) :-)

    --
    Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
  58. I know. It's sad. :-( by Richard+Steiner · · Score: 1

    TA lacked a storyline, but frankly it didn't need one, and it *still* has the best and most consistent interface I've seen in an RTS.

    If only Blizzard and others would take a serious look at it and actually IMPLEMENT some of its ideas... :-(

    --
    Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
    The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
  59. Some other notable omissions... by amarc · · Score: 1

    An entry for the many superb incarnations of Team Fortress, the MMORPG genre, Metal Slug and many great Sega releases such as NiGHTS, Sega Rally etc... The futility of the exercise has been outlined by many preceding comments, though it was an enjoyable read & many of my favourites are present. Extra kudos to IGN for the inclusion of Advance Wars.

  60. Re: suction by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

    Hah, you got me there. Exponential functions such as the half-life have never been my forte.

  61. View from 1997 and 2002 by kisrael · · Score: 1

    2002:
    http://www.kisrael.com/vgames/egm100.2002.html

    1997:
    http://www.kisrael.com/vgames/egm100.html

    In 2002 I did some comparisons of how the list looked vs 1997...

    --
    SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
  62. I call bullshit by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

    Doom and Quake totally started and defined FPS games, doom was somewhere around 30 and quake isn;t even listed? Quake was one of the best selling games of all times, and Defined FPS games with 360 degres of movement and aiming... wtf?

    As a lot of other people have pointed out, a lot of good games weren't even mentioned but a lot of shitty ones were.. TA where are you?!?!

    TA defined RTS gaming and to this day still has all of the best elements that make a great RTS...

  63. Quake 2 by varebel · · Score: 1

    Quake 2 at #93?

    Blasphemy.

  64. Tecmo Super Bowl comment by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1
    I totally don't understand their comment on Tecmo Super Bowl.
    It offered season mode with full stat tracking, injuries, and all of the players from the NFL, like the unstoppable Barry Sanders. In fact, Barry Saders was so fast, many tournaments actually instituted a no-Detroit rule.
    I played this game a lot and still have it and an original NES system. Their comment about Barry Sanders doesn't make much sense because in that game, Barry wasn't the most dominant running back. The Raiders had Bo Jackson, who(in that game) had much better ability. He was much quicker and had better top speed than the Barry Sanders player.

    Tecmo Super Bowl had this "how is the player feeling" status where on a given week every player's condition would be bad, average, good, or excellent. Bo was always better than Barry, except if Bo was in a worse "condition" than Barry. If Bo was about one level down from Barry, then they were about equivalent.

    When I used to play full season schedules of this game with a couple of friends of mine, we used to have to agree to a "no San Francisco" rule. Joe Montana throwing to Jerry Rice really was unstoppable. The game abilities were so skewed on those players that you could triple and quadruple-team Jerry Rice, and he would still catch it almost every time.
    --
    We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
  65. Worms by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 1

    Funnest game I ever played. 'Twas addicted to it back in '96 or so. It would have been nice to see it on the list, but, from the comments I read, no one else seemed to miss it:-(

    --
    If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
  66. MOD PARENT UP by DoctaWatson · · Score: 1

    It may be offtopic, but an IMDB for videogames is the best idea I've heard in years.

  67. You're right by Nicolay77 · · Score: 1

    Worms was FUN !!!

    That's the most important thing in a game

    --
    We are Turing O-Machines. The Oracle is out there.
  68. Top XXX Lists? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

    When did IGN become the VH1 of video games?

  69. Ways to make it objective by iridium_ionizer · · Score: 1

    Gross revenue or number of units sold are a few of the ways that you could try to measure the goodness/popularity/influence of a game. You might also find the inflation adjusted gross revenue. Or divide the gross revenue by the revenue of the industry as a whole. Or divide the number of units sold by the estimated consumer base.

    My point is that there are numerous ways to objectively determine goodness/popularity/influence of a game, but most of them rely on finding hard to find data. The games industry is not as open (or flamboyent) about game grosses as the movie industry.

    Of course you could do as suggested and create a IMDB-like games database and have people vote. Of course, there might be vote stuffing like I found on a message board where John Wayne fans conspired to stuff his movie The Searchers to the top of IMDB. (I like his films too but come on, don't cheat).

    Another way with such a database to determine the historical influence of a game would be by adding a section (probably moderator approved) where you could submit which games directly influence a given game. Then you could analyze the database as a whole and find the most influential games. However, some influence might be over or understated by such a system. For example would DOOM be the most influential game because nearly all FPSs have borrowed from it, and PONG be nearly influence-less because very few games actually borrowed from the gameplay (although it definitely inspired hords of people in from the 70's to early 80's to risk time and money to get a must-have arcade machine, or console game- yes I admit that it was only must-have at the time because there was nothing else). Such a system is currently being developed by academics to weight the influence of their papers. Somewhat easier for them because they already have to include references.

    Furthermore the simplest and perhaps most accurate way to determine the most popular video games would be to simply conduct a statistically sound phone poll and ask people to name all the video games that they know off the top of their heads. Maybe you're wonderding why I would spend so much time writing about objectivity etc. Well I just read Freakonomics and it's a great book to read if you like thinking about the world.

  70. Here's the IGN Top 100 Games List Summary by iridium_ionizer · · Score: 2, Informative

    "Like last time, our criteria for this uber-list of games consisted of a variety of factors, including how good the game was compared to others at the time, the overall game design, how well it stood up over the long-haul, how influential it was in the realm of gaming and just plain how much fun we had playing the damn things." - the article

    For those who don't want to read the articles explanation for each game.

    IGN Top 100 Games
    1. Super Mario Bros. 2. Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3. Tetris 4. Sid Meier's Civilization II 5. Super Mario 64
    6. Sid Meier's Pirates! 7. StarCraft 8. Street Fighter II 9. Star Wars: TIE Fighter Collector's CD-ROM 10. Super Metroid
    11. Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past 12. X-COM: UFO Defense 13. Chrono Trigger 14. Rome: Total War 15. Super Mario Kart
    16. Castlevania: Symphony of the Night 17. Star Control 2 18. ICO 19. Metal Gear Solid 20. Ms. Pac Man
    21. Deus Ex 22. Half-Life 23. Super Mario Bros. 3 24. Tecmo Super Bowl 25. Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn
    26. Final Fantasy II (IV) 27. Burnout 3: Takedown 28. Half-Life 2 29. GoldenEye 7 30. Halo
    31. SimCity 2000 32. Resident Evil 4 33. God of War 34. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 35. Dune II: The Building of a Dynasty
    36. Command & Conquer: Red Alert 37. Wave Race 64 38. Madden NFL 2004 39. DOOM 40. Virtua Fighter 4 Evolution
    41. System Shock 2 42. Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec 43. Soul Calibur 44. Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island 45. Battlefield 1942
    46. Super Mario World 47. NHL 94 48. The Secret of Mana 49. Grim Fandango 50. Wing Comander II: Vengeance of the Kilrathi
    51. Grand Theft Auto III 52. Metroid Prime 53. Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings 54. Panzer Dragoon Saga 55. Fallout
    56. Final Fantasy III (VI) 57. Mike Tyson's Punchout! 58. Super Smash Bros. Melee 59. Bionic Commando 60. Maniac Mansion: Day of the Tentacle
    61. Sam & Max Hit the Road 62. Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time 63. Sonic the Hedgehog 64. Advance Wars 65. MechWarrior 2: 31st Century Combat
    66. Homeworld 67. Rayman 2: The Great Escape 68. Starsiege: Tribes 69. Lakers vs. Celtics and the NBA Playoffs 70. Pokemon Red/Blue
    71. Half-Life: Counter-Strike 72. Galaga 73. Return Fire 74. Syndicate 75. Crimson Skies
    76. Tetris Attack 77. Archon: The Light and The Dark 78. Star Wars 79. Shining Force II 80. Baseball Stars
    81. Freedom Force 82. Gunstar Heroes 83. Contra 84. Ultima VII: The Black Gate 85. Prince of Persia
    86. Final Fantasy X 87. Thief II: The Metal Age 88. Final Fantasy VII 89. Alone in the Dark 90. Master of Orion
    91. Virtua Tennis 92. Dragon Warrior 93. Quake II 94. Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six 95. Herzog Zwei
    96. Mafia 97. F-Zero 98. BattleToads 99. Ultima Underworld: The Stygian Abyss 100. River City Ransom

  71. Donkey Kong Country? by MagicDude · · Score: 1

    I'm disapointed that Donkey Kong Country didn't make that list. It may not have been "revolutionary" in terms of gameplay or anything, but it was damn fine eye candy, and the gameplay was varied and addictive. There were dozens (hundreds?) of hidden rooms to find for those players who like finding every hidden doo-dad in a game, while more casual players could just play from level to level and still enjoy it. There were so many different kinds of levels, like the mine car levels, the "On/Off" barrel levels, the ice rope levels, underwater levels, moving platform levels, moving platform levels where you had to get fuel barrels, and so on. And there was a wide variety of difficulty in the levels too. I remember a few levels where it took a fair amount of time to practice the platform jumps, and learn where you had to pick up a barrel and how long to hold onto it in order to kill the guy on your next platform, and so forth. And the fake ending, oh man, I still remember the first time I beat the game and how it caught me by surprise. It was so awesome, it had 3 sequels, though I really wished they had kept Donkey Kong in them, he was definately the most fun to play, at least for me.

  72. Where are the 'Lunar' games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lunar: Eternal Blue or Lunar: The Silver Star were pioneers back in the day on the Sega CD. I remember way back right when FF7 came out that Gamepro had an article about top 10 RPG's and the Lunar Games were 2 and 3 on the Sega CD.

  73. Re:Tecmo Super Bowl comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're completely correct in breaking down this comment on Tecmo Super Bowl. It really makes you wonder if the author(s) have actually played some of these games or how many of these descriptions are skewed.

  74. Videogame Database by Thorkytel+Ant-Head · · Score: 1

    Seriously, if anyone wants to work on this, I have already done some work on the database structure. To me, the important thing is to list all of the various connections between games: spinoffs, sequels, remakes, and so on. Let me know if you would like to help.