Slashdot Mirror
A Top Ten and A Definitive Dozen
End-of-week lists are always fun. From CNet, we have a list of the top ten games of the last ten years, and from 1up.com the definitive dozen titles from the PS1's lifetime. From the 1up article: "Resident Evil
Capcom, 1996
Admittedly a straight-up rip-off of the PC adventure series Alone in the Dark (all the way down to the polygonal characters in static environments), Resident Evil was the first great example of Sony's commitment to quality, adult-oriented entertainment. Sure, the controls sucked, and the voice acting was worse. But for all intents and purposes, this was the game that helped the PS1 grab gamers by the throat, chew on their jugulars, and gnaw on their brains."
Shouldn't Nethack get a nod? It may not be a well-known game, and the graphics are a tad primitive, but its supporting most of the roguelike genre, and its a hell of a game.
I just glanced through both, and aside from Madden in the GameSpot list both are pretty alright.
The problem with top whatever lists is they seem designed to start flamewars. For example, the first list seems to me to be very biased towards pc games. It's almost as though the console games there were tossed on because even PC gamers know all about them.
The second list seemed very biased towards early games. Though you could argue that if it is a list of games that "defined" the PS1, then it's to be expected.
But someone already noted that the lists seem very good to them. So it shows what I know. Possibly means I'm biased, not the lists.
Hands down still the best 2D scroller ever made. The replay value is just insane, I can't believe I played a 2D game for like a year nonstop.
The PS1 version was great, but the Japanese saturn version supposedly allow you to play as Maria too.
They couldn't even bother to get an actual screenshot of the original HL. I have no idea where that bastardization came from, but I can guarentee it's not from the original campaign/models...
Not only that but the oldest game on the list is Quake, and it's 2+ years older than all the others. Lack of persepective much?
Most of the games in the list, but a couple, are fine games... but the list is clearly made by an american, because is incredible that they left out the Best video game. Just the Best: the Winning Eleven/Pro Evolution Soccer series.
When I was young, I played Wolfenstein so much... I spent hour after hour playing, I played so much one evening I reached a secret passage with a text like "If you've reached here, call Apogee Software" (Or was it Id yet?). Well: I think those soccer games are better than wolfenstein.
Every PS2 I know, about ten, has been bought just because back in the day there was the rumour that Konami was going to launch the next WE/PES games only for PS2! And exactly the same with the PS3. Real people don't think "dude, the PS3 will have a zillion CPU's working in a cluster" but "dude, the next WE/PES is only for PS3".
--
Superb hosting 4800MB Storage, 120GB bandwidth, $7,95.
Kunowalls!!! Random sexy wallpapers (NSFW!).
Hosting 20G hd, 1Tb bw! ssh $7.95
I seem to recall a storyline formula in both the original and the expansion that required playing all 3 races on one playthrough.
Sipping on Jolt and Dew. Laid back. With my mind of my cubicle and my cubicle on my mind.
Seriously, where did that screenshot come from? HL was punctuated by models that looked awesome at the time, but awful now. And never did a scientist sport more than five polys for his face. That guy has at least ten. This guy clearly has only played a newer version of the game... or has a model hack.
resident evil 1 was released on sega saturn at the same time as PSX. Resident evil 1 and 2 were later released on N64 and were better games, with much lower load times.
Sheesh the only good game on there was Zelda: Ocarina of Time. I laughed when it said that there wasn't a man alive who hasn't played Madden. What a joke. I'm sure there are plenty of gamers who have the sense not to play such a game. My list would have been much different... But I have to get back to work... (Darn clock)
I would definitely keep Ocarina of time (still number one on my list) , half life and GTA 3 .
The rest are very subjective , Starcraft was not a personal favourite , but i can see how it got listed .
The Sims may have done a lot for the Casual gamers , but it was dull as dishwate. Sim-city 3000 was far superior
Madden
Quake
Halo is one of the most over-rated games of the past 10 years
Everquest bored me silly . Again i can see that a lot of people enjoyed it , but if credit goes to any MMORPG of the past ten years it should be Ultima online . 5/10
In the place of the other 7 i would have
Mario 64 . the game the legend 9/10
Unreal tournament , amazing fun
Deus Ex , Taking System shock to the next level 9/10
Thief 2 , Removing the Zombie levels was a great idea 9/10
Pokemon Gold/silver/crystal
GoldenEye 007 , Countless hours spent living the life of Bond 9/10
Gran-Turismo 3
These lists are very subjective , and as such these are just my opinion .
I couldn't really do a top 10 properly , these are just a few from my top 50 list of games since Pong .
it's in non specific order(bar ocarina of time which sits solidly at #1).
There can be no definitive top 10 list
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Battle Arena Toshinden: Kind of klunky, too big on the supernatural moves. Check out Virtua Fighter or Tekken.
Ridge Racer: Four tracks. Really, four different paths around one track. Super-unrealistic controls. Easy. Done with it in a weekend. Why o why not Gran Turismo? It deserves two places in the list more than RR deserves one.
Jumping Flash: This game is simply awesome, especially considering how early in the PS1's life the game came out. It's too bad it didn't get more recognition.
Resident Evil: At least it was better than RE2.
Tomb Raider: Curvy polygons. Meh.
Crash: Agreed. Yum. Same for FFVII
Haven't played the rest. . .
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Honestly Parappa The Rapper has to be one of the most innovative games I've ever seen.
People are always jerking off over Miyamoto and his innovativeness (which is immense) but here we have an exclusive game for a platform that isn't Nintendo that doesn't follow the traditional video game path (sports, killing, simulation).
Not only that but Greenblat's artwork is amazing, and they way they were able to animate the characters and coordinate the music and the motion is beyond amazing.
Stop hating on it because you have no rhythm and couldn't beat your four year old cousin, and recogize what an amazing game it really is/was.
as the game that got the masses playing multiplayer FPS's. And you're right, where the heck's mario 64. It's up there with FFVII for influnce. And where the heck is Tekken (Sony's answer to the immensely popular Virtua Fighter 2)? Tekken 2 was particularily noteworthy for being _better_ then the arcade (still a big deal at the time).
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I would like to add one more to make it a baker's definitive dozen on the PS1:
Wipeout XL.
Insanely great racing game that was nothing like other racing games at the time. Or since, for that matter, since nothing so far as been able to quite match it.
The image corresponding to Half-Life is actually from Half-Life: Blue Shift, using the high definition skin pack, originally released in 2001, not 1998, and recently re-released on Steam. The scientist model is a telltale sign. I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure Half-Life 1 had only 3 scientist models, while a 4th was created, for Dr. Rosenberg, who appeared in Half-Life: Decay and Blue Shift.
First, Jumping Flash. I've never heard of it, and by the looks of it neither has anyone else. If you're going to include obscure but very good games then I have no objection (lord knows Valkyrie Profile largely defined the PS1 for me) but other than this game the list does not. Second: Battle Arena Toshinden. It is flat out the worst fighting game I've ever played. Now, if you want to include a PS1 fighting game that actually sold a million copies (like, oh, say, any of the Tekken games ...er, Tekken 1 was on the PS1...right?) then I would have no objection.
By far, this has to be one of the top ten worst top ten lists of games ever released.
Not to be blunt but Halo, Metal Gear Solid, and Madden have no place on any top ten lists. Halo was one of the most repetative (and dull) single player first person shooters ever released, it was a ton of fun for lan games but having "one amazing feature" does not make your game one of the best games. Metal Gear Games lack both interesting and difficult gameplay and attempt to make up for this by giving you tons of movies of a crappy storyline. Madden? Were they serious? "This year, slightly better with the new players. $50 please!"
I don't know when they're judging their 10 years by, but in my opinion games like Mario 64 and Goldeneye should be on the list. Even though I didn't like any of the following games they have had a massive impact on the industry (Tomb Raider, Pokemon, and Tony Hawk Pro Skater).
How can someone have a top ten list of best games of any period and leave off the best selling game platform (Gameboy) and it's successor which is also one of the best selling platforms (Gameboy Advance)?
Saying that Half-Life doesn't have the staying power of FF7 is silly, considering it's massive influence on the FPS genre, especially if you consider its mods (Counter-Strike being the obvious example).
In fact, I seem to get the urge to replay the entire game every year or so, and it still seems just as good as the first time.
The list does have 4 console games on it, 5 if you count Madden, but there are some key rankings I disagree with.
1) Ocarina of time should be higher on the list, somewhere in the top 4. The game is essentially as close to being perfectly made as any game can be. I do not think anyone who enjoyed the game can honestly pick out a part of the game that was particularly weak.
2) Everquest should be in the top 3. It basically proved that MMPORG's were a viable business model. And I also think that if you were to total up the number of man hours spent on that game, it would eclipse the rest of the top 10 handily.
3) Madden does not belong on the list. It is little more then an annualized re-hash of its self each time out. Any improvements to the series are strictly evolutionary, no revolutionary.
4) I find it highly suspicious that the top 4 games on the list were all PC titles.
END COMMUNICATION
I agree with you on Ocarina of Time and GTA 3. I'd also vouch for The Sims, although geek circles have largely turned against the game, it really was truly original.
The rest of the article's list doesn't measure up to the intro given it. As games, none of the others really changed gaming all that much; they may have made it more popular, but they didn't *change* it. Three of the ten games are first-person shooters....
Was it a "good games" list, or a "games that sold well" list? 'Cause that's what it fuckin' sounded like. Most of these games were loved by the sheeple we have been forced to share our favorite pastime with once the PS1 arrived. How about they make it a "best games that received mass media coverage and had a publicity budget that measured up to millions of dollars, which, as such, RUINED this industry because nowadays everything is a rehash of these games" ? Because that's what it fuckin' WAS, that list. I don't see any of the truly revolutionary games I've played in those last ten years. Oh, wait, there's one, right at the bottom of the first list. It's at the bottom because, "you know... For kids!" /obscure?
Let's create another bullshit top X list or otherwise our visitors will go away.
How long until the top 10 of "top 10 lists"?
Try looking outside "the world" a.k.a. the United States for a change, the rest of the world really doesn't care for your kevlar-clad people carging against each other for 5 seconds and pausing.
We prefer ice hockey, football (soccer to you) and rugby - the real men's version of your "football".
Kingdom Hearts
:) Some had multiple versions released, generally in those cases I refer to the 1st one. Unless it sucked, then I refer to the best one. My list will probably be different tomorrow, or even later today if I talk to a friend and he reminds me of one I forgot.
Resident Evil
Tomb Raider
GTA: San Andreas
Final Fantasy XI
Dark Cloud
LotR: The Third Age
Ico
Metal Gear Solid
SOCOM
Sure they're all PS2 titles. But it's my list so that's the rule.
Lists are fun.
VOTE!
I was looking through their screen shots of SOTN, and found this... http://www.1up.com/do/slideshow?pager.offset=4&mt= 0&cId=2016823&mId=1053111/
Either I don't remember that, or someone screwed up.
I haven't. Does that mean I'm dead?
It's hard to believe that its been almost 10 years since Quake was first released...
I feel old now. Oh wait, it's been about 20 since Super Mario Bros. was released.
Insert Sig Here
It's not that people hate the game. It's that Sony doesn't care to be seen as providing a platform that carries innovative games. Sony wants people to look at the PS2 (or upcoming PS3) and think "Final Fantasy. GTA. Resident Evil. Metal Gear." They most certainly do not want you to think, "Oh, this is that system that has that quirky little Katamari game... that was pretty fun."
So, the cool, innovative titles for PS2 aren't given much credit because Sony is working to foster a community that doesn't care for these titles.
Frankly I think that Parappa and Katamari would get a lot more (positive) attention if they were coming out on Nintendo systems. The fanbase knows how to react to the Animal Crossings and Pikmins of the world and is generally more interested in trying something new.
The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
"The gameplay itself was so addictive that players often played the game through three times just to experience it from the perspective of all three races."
Ok, i played through the game way more than three times, but isnt the campaign itself designed so that you play through it with each race? You don't need to play through the campaign three times....
"I don't think there's a man alive who hasn't played Madden."
Me. I hate sports games. I hate sports in general. I've never had an interest in them. The real world needs to understand that real gamers don't sit around playing Tony Hawk, Madden, and Grand Theft Auto. Sure, some of us may play those - but i doubt any of you would say those are your favorites, or even play them very often.
Ocarina of time should have been way, way up there. Almost all the other games you can point out weaknesses, annoying parts, parts that could have been better - I'm basically a PC gamer only - but imo I would have put it right at a tie with Half-Life, or maybe even above. It basically IS the perfect game. When I got it, I played through it about 40 or so times before I even TOUCHED another game. Since then I've pretty much fallen away from console gaming - but I can fight Gannondorf several times in one day if I feel like it and not get a sense of boredom. It's simply so....AWESOME....
"Potpourii doesn't taste as good as it smells." - Dark_Link2135
Every other reply to this "article" is just pure gold.
Here's how to build your own to match:-
1. Make mention of how pointless top ten lists are, since its all down to "personal opinion".
2. Make a list of your favourite games and compare that with the top list, criticising the journalist's choices.
3. Mention personal opinion again, just so everybody knows that you're fair.
4. Then say "But I still don't see how Crash Team Racing wasn't number one."
Repeat until satisfied.
My Mind Is Rewired. Is Yours?
Yeah when I think of Sony I think of Final Fantasy, GTA, Metal Gear, Gran Turismo, all the mega franchises it has.
I also like that there are unique games like katamari damacy and parappa on the system. By having a huge game library it's the best of both worlds. There are musthave titles for the gamer than the unexpected gem they find(parappa, katamari)
[20:36] wwwdot/.dotorg
No, it means you're a woman.
Note: posting anonymous since I work in the game biz, although I don't work for Bohemia or any affiliates.
The realism, the gorgeous graphics (for the time), the immense environment, realistic woods, expansive gameplay, dozens and dozens of different vehicles, an envolving plot with a profound ethical meaning, *REAL* freedom of action, great coop and team-vs (but flawed) multiplayer, ingame VOip (first FPS to feature it actually), still unsurpassed squad command system, I could go on for ages.
In my opinion there was never a game more illuminating and revolutionary than Operation Flashpoint.
(Well, not counting Madden, obviously) Does that mean we can infer that there haven't been any truly spectacular games since 2001? Or that the quality of recent games is less than the quality of those older titles?
hahahahaha awesome work. and seeing as the person that moderated your post as a troll clearly doesnt read till the end of posts before passing judgement, i think its safe to end this post with the comment that the moderator was a fucking moron.
It's really hard for me to take lists like this seriously when they say things placing them squarely outside the domain of the things they speak of. They (CNet) said in the StarCraft description, for instance, that the single player campaign and overall gameplay were so compelling that people would often play through the campaign three times just to experience it from the perspective of the three different races, and that's flat out wrong. The campaign taken as a whole was composed of three chapters, told one per race, and covering distinctly different timelines of story event. Any one of those three chapters (and hence races) would have told little story and made no sense.
Maybe I'm just nitpicking. But it bothers me, because anyone familiar with the game at all would immediately spot such an error, and it really takes credence away from anything they have to say on other games the reader may not have heard about. (I've heard of all of them, but hey, we may not all be so lucky.)
Also, it's a little haphazard to call Quake with it's brown-pallette hack one of the "best looking games ever," or credit it with the birth of the 'classic' keyboard-mouse FPS combo; that immediately says WASD to me, and Quake I was still in the era of "hold down this key to mouselook".
I never found GTA3 that much fun. Once the novelty of being a criminal wears off, it's just a bad driving simulator with some repetitive missions thrown in. I had high hopes for it (I only just bought a PS2+GTA3:vice city) but it's now sitting unplayed on my shelf after maybe five hours total gaming.
The article clames Battle Arena Toshinden is the reason people bought their ps1, but it's more likely that the announced release of mk3 a few weeks after launch was the reason people bought a ps1 considering how hot that game was in the arcades at that time. Battle Arena Toshinden was the game you bought because you were waiting for mk3 and wanted a ps1 at launch.
Top 10 lists are pointless tripe.
How long is YOUR e-penis?
Sorry. The formula of "hit the buttons in sequence displayed" got worn out years ago.
Crappa the Rapper was boring as all hell.
These lists are merely a function of the reviewers. Perhaps the reason the CNET list is "biased towards PC games" is because even today PC games tend to have more depth to them--if you are a fan of arcade/action and/or have too short of an attention span for such games then you might think such a bias is unjustified, but in my opinion the PC games dominate the list becase they are actually BETTER. A PC screen is always capable of crisper graphics than a TV, and PCs simply have more power and capacity to store and process more content.
As far as the second list being biased towards early games, look more closely at CNET's list. Six of the ten games on their list for the last ten years were released in the 1990's. Furthermore, the the NEWEST game on the list is FOUR YEARS OLD! And no, I don't count Madden as a "new" game because it could be argued that it doesn't belong on the list anyways--it was first released more than 10 years ago! (One could argue that only in the last 10 years has it proven to be a "great game").
Given that more than one source is "biased towards early games"--either in the early half of the last decade or early part of a console's live--you might conclude that the lists aren't really biased at all--it's just that the games out today basically suck. That's the conclusion I have come to anyways--I'd say more than 99% of currently published games are merely derivative works of the "greats" that often appear on "top lists".
As such, I would not even consider buying a new release for such absurd prices. I'll buy used or dig around the clearance bin thank you very much. I can get a used console and a couple of bargain games for the price of one of these new games alone. It is my fondest wish that such a practice catches on with consumers at large and that it decimates the videogame industry--it is in desperate need of another 1984. Not the Owellian kind of course, although online play + DRM might bring that into being...By that I mean the infamous industry crash that shook out all the chaff and paved the way for the NES and the next "renaissance".
If you honestly believe that PC games are better partly because they are capable of better resolution and have better processing power, then that seems to go against your later argument that older games - made when the capabilities were even lower - are better.
You're right---the technical specs of a platform are not an indicator of how well the games play. The platform DOES influence the game however--as I suggested, action oriented games tend to work better in a console environment with decent controllers whereas strategy games or others with "depth of play" work better on PCs, with keyboard and mouse control and hi-res screens. This is even the case with older "inferior" games--a 10-year-old PC still has the same keyboard and mouse and superior screen resolution even compared to consoles currently on the market. Sure, the old PC cannot pump out true-colour, full-screen, full-motion 3-D, but it is still capable of rendering text and details even todays XBox and PS2 cannot. The old PC might be inferior in every other respect, but the differences lend themselves better to different games.
And I am somewhat glad for modern pricing. It is possible for good new games to come out at $20 (Katamari Damacy) or $30 (quite a few more). Though many games come out for more, at least we don't have the inflated prices that came with cartridges during the Nintendo's hayday. Usually just special editions come greater than $50.
Assuming you are talking American dollars, I'd agree that it is better than it was when 2 carts cost more than the price of the entire NES console with Super Mario pack-in. I'd have to say however that they have a long way to go. Games are still overpriced--$20 shouldn't be the low end--it should be the average and $30 should be upper-end. For NEW releases. There is no single game in existence today, special-edition or not, worth $50. Compare it to DVDs--if you spend $50 you are usually getting a multi-disc set--an entire season of TV episodes or a set of sequels.
Yes it is possible to get a truly interesting game for a reasonable price ($20 for Katamari Damacy) but they are by far the minority. I find that the bulk of games that are released with an MSRP under $30 are garbage and that blockbusters are $40 to $60--and they are mostly crap too. If you're observations differ it is probably because in a matter of hours or days the price is reduced because stock is not moving fast enough.
I know there is still good stuff out there--there was good stuff out there in 1984 too I remember. The problem is when it becomes overwhelmed by loads of crap. In the meantime, I can get a used PS/2 for $50 or less and some still-very-fun games at the fleamarket for pennies on the dollar. When a game comes around that is truly compelling then I'll consider paying $30 or more for it. In the past year however, that has only happened once.