Edge (British) magazine's top 100 games of all time

[Zeus]

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?optio ... 1&Itemid=2

[Kupek]

Yawn.

I don't mean to give you shit for posting it, Zeus. It's just that I'm tired of reading nobodies try to achieve significance by making ridiculous Top 10(0) of All Time lists. The entire concept is broken. It's a cop-out of a feature. No insight is required, just a list with three to four sentences per game. I'd give them more respect if they just dropped pretense and said "100 games we liked a lot and want to talk about."

[Don]

I was reading an article on ESPN that said about how easy it is to come up with Top X list which is why they always make those when they run out of things to talk about. It's not like you'll question whether event Z is really the 8th or 45th best (whatever) ever. They pretty much only need to figure out the first 3 or so (and those are relatively easy to figure out) and then after that you can't even argue with it.

[kali o.]

Yawn.

I don't mean to give you shit for posting it, Zeus. It's just that I'm tired of reading nobodies try to achieve significance by making ridiculous Top 10(0) of All Time lists. The entire concept is broken. It's a cop-out of a feature. No insight is required, just a list with three to four sentences per game. I'd give them more respect if they just dropped pretense and said "100 games we liked a lot and want to talk about."

What a fuddy-duddy...make something interesting outta this. Like, I'd love to know what everybodies Top RPG of all-time would be...

I'd give the nod to Fallout 2 (which remains significant and interesting in both story and gameplay to this day - which is HUGE) or Final Fantasy 3/6j (which changed the direction/presentation of the series heavily and introduced some novel gameplay concepts - PS: yes, I played 5j).

Now I'm going to check if either of those games are on this list...if they aren't...expect some bitchin.

[kali o.]

Sure enough, neither were there...what a stupid list!

Actually, it was pretty stupid. What was the purpose of the list? Top rated games? Most influential? Editors picks? I'm still confused as to the actual intent behind the list...it really was stupid. I criticized Kupek to soon, it seems.

[Chris]

yep neither were there....but somehow Manhunt was on that list. and calling manhunt shit would be a compliment....this is the worst list I have seen ever

[Julius Seeker]

Lots and LOTS of generic titles on the list that probably aren't even good enough for us to play. My favourite RPGs:

1) Skies of Arcadia
2) Final Fantasy 8
3) Xenogears
4) Chrono Trigger
5) Earthbound
6) Final Fantasy III/6 Advance
7) Fire Emblem Advance (The one with Hector, Eliwood, and Lyn)
8 ) Xenosaga Episode 3
9) Baten Kaitos (got to the ending of this one finally, and it has SUCH an awesome plot twist).
10) Shadowrun (SNES, just something very attractive about the game setting, it had a lot of flaws in it though).

Favourite Adventures:
1) Ocarina of Time
2) Terranigma
3) Majora's Mask
4) Illusion of Gaia
5) Vagrant Story
6) Adventure of Link
7) Castlevania III
8 ) Faxanadu
9) Wind Waker
10) Twilight Princess

[Zeus]

Yawn.

I don't mean to give you shit for posting it, Zeus. It's just that I'm tired of reading nobodies try to achieve significance by making ridiculous Top 10(0) of All Time lists. The entire concept is broken. It's a cop-out of a feature. No insight is required, just a list with three to four sentences per game. I'd give them more respect if they just dropped pretense and said "100 games we liked a lot and want to talk about."

It's the biggest UK magazine putting out a list. Figured it would be nice to see what someone outside this continent is saying

One thing I've noticed with all Top X lists: they tend to have a large proportion of newer games on them (ie. less than 3 years old at the time). Why do you guys think that's about? I think it's at least partly due to the nature of the medium (technology really does help make games better) and the fact that it's still in its relative infancy.

[Tessian]

One thing I've noticed with all Top X lists: they tend to have a large proportion of newer games on them (ie. less than 3 years old at the time). Why do you guys think that's about? I think it's at least partly due to the nature of the medium (technology really does help make games better) and the fact that it's still in its relative infancy.

I think it has more to do with the fact that the latest greatest games are still fresh in your mind, thus you remember them first and more vividly when coming up with a list like this.

That and aside from certain classics there aren't too many games older than 5 years that can stand up to certain titles made today. Sure we still have shitty ass releases (Gun Witch) but the average game from 5+ years for the most part will beat out any average recent game in nearly all aspects.

[Chris]

Yawn.

I don't mean to give you shit for posting it, Zeus. It's just that I'm tired of reading nobodies try to achieve significance by making ridiculous Top 10(0) of All Time lists. The entire concept is broken. It's a cop-out of a feature. No insight is required, just a list with three to four sentences per game. I'd give them more respect if they just dropped pretense and said "100 games we liked a lot and want to talk about."

It's the biggest UK magazine putting out a list. Figured it would be nice to see what someone outside this continent is saying

One thing I've noticed with all Top X lists: they tend to have a large proportion of newer games on them (ie. less than 3 years old at the time). Why do you guys think that's about? I think it's at least partly due to the nature of the medium (technology really does help make games better) and the fact that it's still in its relative infancy.

still....fucking manhunt........that game was like being raped by a pack of rabid warewolves

[Zeus]

One thing I've noticed with all Top X lists: they tend to have a large proportion of newer games on them (ie. less than 3 years old at the time). Why do you guys think that's about? I think it's at least partly due to the nature of the medium (technology really does help make games better) and the fact that it's still in its relative infancy.

I think it has more to do with the fact that the latest greatest games are still fresh in your mind, thus you remember them first and more vividly when coming up with a list like this.

That and aside from certain classics there aren't too many games older than 5 years that can stand up to certain titles made today. Sure we still have shitty ass releases (Gun Witch) but the average game from 5+ years for the most part will beat out any average recent game in nearly all aspects.

Yeah, makes sense. It's just so much more pronounced than other forms of media, like movies

[Tessian]

I think that's because a) movies have been around a LOT longer and b) plenty of movies can almost totally ignore any technology/special effects and still be great movies... games have and always will be limited by the technology available at the time.