kisrael

Could be. The ability to do 3D worlds (more richly than, say, the original StarFox) allowed whole new types of gameplay and immersive experience. And actually, I think Mario 64's graphics stand up more or less ok. Re, the N64 to GameCube head to heads; GC is still a fairly young system. For instance, its "proper" StarFox game is listed as on its way; and there's even word of a more-Mario-ish Mario, and we'll have to see how the new Mario Kart comes out. And I think you forgot Golden Eye/Perfect Dark<<< (same team, right? This might be arguable, I wasn't in love with the N64 FPS) Smash Bros<<<<<< Rogue Squadron<<<<<<<< (arguable on that last one; RS1 had a bit more variety in missions, but still, for putting you in the movies and against swarms of tie fighters, NO Star Wars game beats Rogue Leader) Blitz 2000<<<<<<<< (Well, that's the series I like anyway) There is a Turok for GameCube, btw. We all just wish there wasn't. One time when my little cousin was dithering on what GC game I should get him for his birthday, on our way to the store, I threateded him with "You decide in the next 5 minutes, or else YOU'RE GETTING TUROK".

Yeah, it's not a terrible list as I've said all along, but the lack of Mega Man plus their final #1 pick seem very eccentric.

I'm a big fan in general, but I do agree that graphics have come a long way since then. Playing around, say, Smash Bros Melee, and then going back to the same game on N64...it's suprising how you start noticing how many shortcuts the original took. (And first gen PSX graphics? Forget it. It's ass-tastic.) And yet...I think the system overall has aged well, which is why some of the carts still command highish prices (besides being a more expensive medium.) There was some excellent gameplay, esp. for 4 players. Though some games I don't see how they're going to improve the graphics all that much, like Mario Tennis...except maybe make the rackets non-paper-thin. (Heck, even the GBC version of that game looked nice.)

I thought I had pokemon puzzle league skillz 'til I came to Philly Classic 2002. Got beat in the first round by a guy who got schooled in the second. It's phenomenal how skill ramps up in that game, a good player sees combos and patterns that the good but lesser player is totally blind too...something you don't see in, say, Tetris.

Thanks. Just the image I wanted browsing AtA over breakfast.

I don't know about Wave Race, but I think Smash Bros has it all over Soul Caliber. Soul Caliber is the current pinnacle of fighters; Smash Bros is an awesome brawler, with 4 player action, a huge coolness factor thanks to using the Nintendo stable, and its throw-off-the-board system makes use the backgrounds a crucial part of the game in a way almost no other 2d/3d fighter does. It's a decent list. It's not your list. No one is on dope. Deal with it.

Solo: Rogue Squadron. Espcially the Battle of Endor, with its swarms of TIEs..made me remember why I loved the original RotJ so much. Group: Super Monkey Ball 2. Runner Up: Smash Bros Melee. (The former for Monkey Race, Target, and Fight. The latter because it's the game I would have designed in middle school--"wouldn't it be cool if all the videogame characters duked it out?")

Interesting decent Slashdot discussion, What Games Have Actually Affected You? The poster asked: "What games have affected you simply by playing them? What games immersed you so well into its environment that you actually felt different after playing it? For me, I'd have to go with System Shock 2. Basically the predecessor to Deus Ex, it was the only game that made me so afraid that the minute I heard a matron mother, I turned the other way and ran. What game scared you to death, or made you think after playing it?" I thought it might be fun to see what this crowd said. My answers: Starcraft lately; also more intensely than I previously remember. I tend to look at things in terms of opposing units and resource gathering, and its entered my presleep more frequently than other games I've played. GTA:VC ... I had to stop my self from thinking of pedestrians as ignorable potential targets. GTA3 came up a lot on slashdot. Tetris Attack / Pokemon Puzzle League I saw the blocks as I drifted off to sleep... DK64 a 3 day marathon session made me see things differently. Literally. Walking outside was weird, cars seemed to shrink to much as the receded down the street, buildings along the side of the road seemed a little too tall...I've had recreational chemicals that have had less effect. Gone in a day or so though. I don't remember games having that kind of effect on me when I was younger, not sure if I don't remember, or if I'm mor succeptible... Other interesting answers on slashdot were SimCity (one guy realized his entire argument for recycling and solar power was based on that game) and Civ, which tend to be more thought provoking.

Yah, I'm one of the few voices who thinks while some of the choices may seem questionable the lists are alright. Actually, what's odd about Tetris isn't that people fell nostalgic about it from their youth, it's that *every damn one* from secretaries to plumbers to gamers to librarians to doctors to little kids have played it. Few of the other games on the list come near to saying that, except like Minesweeper, and I think that's recognized as a good but not Tetris-good game. I remember being awed by DOOM and its non-perpendicular walls and floors of different heights and general spooky ambience, but thinking Wolf3D had better music... Theme wise, Wolf3D had some retrofuture stuff (like the boss Hitler in battle armor) but was a little goofier than DOOM's "Aliens"/demon themed vibe, so that's another thing in Doom's favor, along with the 3 you mentioned. Especially deathmatch over the network. That kind of echoes my point. The thing is, I don't think it's unreasonable to basically give a single place in the list to a series of games (actually, I wonder why they can't say series rather than individual titles, it might make a better list) and from there you can either pick the latest game, which is likely the best, or an earlier game in the series that was a "quantum leap" over the previous unstallment. And "best ever" in this case means "best so far". Obviously it would be way pessmistic to make a list "best of all time, past present and future"...

Nice, just what I was looking for. Ive been making pretty good use of the stuff at GameFAQs as well...

Personally, I can agree with Tetris, and that's it. As for Doom, I've always found it (and its entire genre) a very boring and uninteresting game, not deserving to be anywhere on top games list. You're in the minority on your opinion on Doom...obviously the genre is reasonably popular, and Doom was just fun...by using sprite based graphics, it could put in more enemies on a 486 than a modern system using polygons. Hell, I wish someone would make a port of Doom and its first sequel online for the PS2...I'd play it! (more fun than SOCOM or Tribes...) The first game to really scare the #)$*@ out of people on a visceral level, and cause them to physically try ducking in their chair to get away from a fireball. Zelda:WW, yeah; I think in the long run inferior to Z:OoT Madden I'm not sure about, but I wouldn't be surprised if, like auto simulation games (at least for the non-hardcore-fanboy) it does a pretty decent job of incrementally improving every generation, so that the latest is probably the Best Madden Ever. GTA, I completely disagree. First off, I think Mario 64 is regarded as both *incredibly* innovative AND holding up well as technology marches on and other games take its formula and tweak it. I'd be surprised if it didn't make the IGN list. I think GTA will hold up well for those same reasons. It's innovation is lesser than Mario 64's, but I think overlaying a story/mission structure on a large, just fun to run around and cause chaos and do minimissions, utilizing an engine just realistic enough to be fun and cartoony enough not to be annoying is brilliant, and I can't think of any game that did that before, at least not in such an enjoyable way. It won't stay in the top 10, but I think its place in the top 25 or 50 is very worthy. And actually, I think Tetris is a little overstated. Lovely in its simplicity, and incredible addictive for some people, but I don't think it's 2/3 as good as, say, Tetris Attack/Pokemon Puzzle League/Panel De Pon, which starts with an almost simpler system, but then has really interesting chains and combos. Tetris is cool in how many ways its been implemented, from the scale of entire buildings to nanotechnology.

From the article, it doesn't sound like it is the same list. But Madden...I dunno, the only football game I like is Blitz, but Madden has a huge hardcore following and a great reputation. Which makes me think it's one of the greatest games, even though I don't like it that much. It's less of a gamer's game and more a huge hit among the unwashed masses

Interestingly, MegaMan is another (long!) series where the "2" release has about the best reputation...I'm gonna go out on a limb and say MegaMan 2 is going to show up on the list. I think there are reasons why "2" tends to be good games...only games that were moderate successes, that had some interesting gameplay ideas for the most part, even get a sequal. But the developers are challenged to make a good game that really expands on the original...(or why else would people buy it) Also they can have some real world feedback on the problems with the original, and fix some of those. By the time a game series gets to "3", the first 2 games have been successful, and the companies are loathe to mess with success, so most of the changes are incremental, and generally most of the buzz will have died down, so even if parts of the game are better than 1 or 2, it won't be as fondly remembered, and not nearly as innovative (which seems to be some part of the criteria for this IGN list.)

Drink spitting aside, I agree with an earlier poster; it's a pretty reasonable list. Every list not made by you is going to contain games you just don't think belong there...it's always hugely subjective. With Star Control 2 and Bionic Commando and Star Fox, I'd say they're on target. Wonder if "Archon" will catch their attention, though in some ways, it's a subset of Star Control 2... It is interesting that they seem to agree with my general assessment that many game series hit their peak with the first sequel... Phantasy Star II, Warcraft II, Wing Commander 2, Rayman 2, System Shock 2, Virtua Fighter 2, Shining Force 2, Tobal 2 MechaWarrior 2, Resident Evil 2, Star Control II.

Dear God! Now I know this list is bogus. No Pokemon game belongs in the top 100 games of all time! Tempest It's not my cuppa tea at all, but I've heard the Pokemon games are quite competent little RPGs, and I can see the appeal of "gotta catch 'em all" (Actually, I kind of dig the idea of having so many distinct creatures, some are pretty imaginative) Just because the line got terribly over exposed (with cartoons, movies, card games, tangentally related games) and is sometimes overly cute, don't be so kneejerk against it.

Sorry, I wrote that after your one post and before the other. Glad we've chilled out any flamage between us at least. Anyway...I kinda started with IGN before they were pay, and between their extensive online archive of older games and a general principle of trying to support worthy online enterprises (I pay for Salon, even though truth be told I could survive without it) I shell out. Also I guess I can't be arsed to learn how to get around other sites, IGN has a pretty decent layout.

I would guess it was directed a bit more at the person who joked that subscribers should be beaten. I didn't take it too seriously myself, though I still haven't heard an argument about why subscribing or the general site is so bad, except the possiblity you can get some of the same stuff for free. (and not counting the individual cases of a writer getting screwed out of money)

The egplant theme was visually cute, and I'm glad I got through this game, but yeah, I'm not sure it belongs on the top 100. On the other hand, it's too bad the rumors about him in Smash Bros weren't true, there was some interesting potential there.

Not me,and anyone who pays to subscribe to IGN Insider should be beaten. AGREED! they try making it seem you cant get that information anywhere else, if you actually cant, it will pop up somewhere very soon. I'm a subscriber. What's so bad about it? First off, I'm sick of "everything must be free on the web" mentality that has killed a lot of promising sites. There's gotta be some room for professional work, not just dedicated amateurs. Second, they have reviews I trust, and videoclips I wouldn't have an easy time finding elsewhere.

I always thought they were a decent resource for online reviews. And I think its' suspect that they put WCII so *low* on the list. Man, that game was fan-frickin'-tastic. It wasn't groundbreaking like the first, but it improved on the original, mostly in terms of a story told with decent cut scenes instead of nothing but talking heads in a bar. It was cool seeing the best ship of the first game as the worst ship of the new game, and they added some cool stuff like the bomber. (And the starship combat in both was so much fun, with those funky scaled and rotated sprite enemies and a not-too-physicsy (cough Elite 2 cough) combat engine) The original is one of the primary forces behind my first non-8 bit PC, a 386-16SX. Seriously, people are so down on this IGN list, but so far it's seem great to me. Even when they disagree with some of my personal preferences, I can see where they're coming from.

Well, best ever, maybe. But in the top 100? I think we can take some educated guesses. I think it's better to make best guesses and put in some games that will drop out for the next iteration of the list than to be prejudiced against some of the coolest stuff that's happening today and just cut it out.

Yeah, while so far I think the ordering is kind of odd, (Kid Icarus above Wing Commander 2 and Sonic?) I'm happy to see they have a pretty wide view across all the generations of games. Splinter Cell? Golly I hope not. I hate that genre, I think it's more of a niche than anything else. And wouldn't Metal Gear Solid be pretty serious competition for that niche title even?

the Xbox.. C'mon, $250 for Halo is pretty darn steep

I think I disagree with the overall "can't know if new games are good" sentiment. I really do think that games are improving overall, with new technology letting designers do exciting new things, and the smart ones can learn from the elegance and simplicity of the past. I remember an amusing sidenote about a parallel contest, I think they had reader's choice for best game of all time, and in 1997 they were like "and stop voting for N64 Zelda...it's not even out yet!" (Though of course, the resulting game is a reasonable canidate for the position.)

EGM really dissed on 2600 games, "so bad they killed the industry" If you want to see the EGM lists themselves, The November 1997 list: http://kirkjerk.com/vgames/egm100.html And the January 2002 , with comparison to the previous list: http://kirkjerk.com/vgames/egm100.2002.html