Have you guys seen IGNs Top 100 list?

-FCM-

Rookie
If so, what do you think about it? I know it's been done before many times, especially by them, but this on looks like they put a lot of thought into it and took a lot of factors into consideration. Based on your guys' philosophies I've observed so far I'm assuming you think lists, ones ranking games of all time in particular, are stupid, but I was just wondering what your opinion on it was.

I think it's an okay list. Problem is they make a point of not putting on games that came out in the past year to offer perspective, but the list is littered with games that came out the year before or not all that long ago that just aren't all that enduring. Resident Evil 4 is great and everything, but look at all the games it beat. 10 of all time? Really? And Half Life 2 at 6? Was it really number 6 good? I think that's the question they forgot to ask.


http://top100.ign.com/2007/

There it is if you wanted to check it out.
 
I can see where they're coming from for that. I mean, what else would be number 1? The fact that it doesn't totally suck over 20 years later, much less be pretty awesome fun, is impressive.
 
hmmm.. guitar hero - 50ish?,
Golden Eye 75?, FInal Fantasy 7... #76!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*begins to write IGN an angry letter*
 
-FCM- said:
I can see where they're coming from for that. I mean, what else would be number 1? The fact that it doesn't totally suck over 20 years later, much less be pretty awesome fun, is impressive.
You know what else is still fun after 30 years? Adventure on the Atari 2600. And it revolutionized item getting, castle searching and dragon killing. Therefor it is the greatest game ever.
 
UrbanMasque said:
hmmm.. guitar hero - 50ish?,
Golden Eye 75?, FInal Fantasy 7... #76!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*begins to write IGN an angry letter*

Those are about right for me...

Final Fantasy 7 is not that good of a game...

I am more surprised on Civilization and Pirates! doing so well.
 
Nobody will ever agree on a final Top 100 list because everybody favours different games. Call me Cpt. Obvious.
 
my comment:

one per page!?!? that's the sleaziest trick i've ever seen to get you to view 100 pages, and 100 advertisements on ign.
 
Duke_Ferris said:
my comment:

one per page!?!? that's the sleaziest trick i've ever seen to get you to view 100 pages, and 100 advertisements on ign.

Although, to their defence a lot of the pages have the same ads.

Then again, I have a 56k connection, so you can see how 1 page per entry, with about 2 minutes of loading time per page can really lose an audience.
 
-FCM- said:
I can see where they're coming from for that. I mean, what else would be number 1? The fact that it doesn't totally suck over 20 years later, much less be pretty awesome fun, is impressive.

Then doom should have defiantly been on the list
 
Duke_Ferris said:
my comment:

one per page!?!? that's the sleaziest trick i've ever seen to get you to view 100 pages, and 100 advertisements on ign.
Yeah that was annoying as hell. It basically made me just check out the top 10. And shouldn't the top 10 games have longer descriptions than those in the 90s?
 
Yeah, well I don't have the income to support a Broadbadn connection. In fact, I don't have an income, period.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
16,731
Messages
270,928
Members
97,760
Latest member
flintinsects
Top