EDGE: List of games awarded a 10 in their history.

Josey Wales

EDGE have an article up here discussing the 15 games they have awarded a 10 to over the lifetime. Here is the list:

- Super Mario 64
- Gran Turismo
- The Legend Of Zelda: Ocarina Of Time
- Halo: Combat Evolved
- Half-Life 2
- Halo 3
- The Orange Box
- Super Mario Galaxy
- Super Mario Galaxy 2
- GTA IV
- LittleBigPlanet
- Bayonetta
- Rock Band 3
- The Legend Of Zelda: Skyward Sword
- The Last Of Us

It sounds like a very impressive list of games but I'm surprised at how few I have played and actually finished. From the list I've finished Halo 3 and Little Big Planet. Halo 3 was the first and only game I've played in the series and I thought it was thoroughly underwhelming. Little Big Planet I thought was excellent but am surprised by the 10 because of the jumping physics causing so much frustration.

Of the others I've played GTA IV, Super Mario Galaxy and Super Mario 64 (although only last year for the first time, never had an N64). Of those I think Galaxy could be a 10.

What do you think of this list? Overrated games or a valid list?

Kirby

Only ones on that list I haven't played are Bayonetta and Little big Planet. It's a pretty good list.

I would say that Mario 64, Ocarina, Mario Galaxy and The Last of Us deserve to be on a higher level than games like Halo and Gran Turismo though. Perhaps they should have received nines instead of tens.

Giblet

I would rank Super Mario 64, and Ocarina higher. Although Link to the Past and Super Metroid would eclipse either. GTAIV is a favourite of mine, although playing it normally isn't fun, but the sandbox is great. Halo is useless, Quake 3 is far superior as a multiplayer game. I found Goldeneye and Halo to be baby versions of Quake and Quake III.

Azza

I've completed Super Mario 64, Super Mario Galaxy, Half Life 2 and GTA IV and the Orange box.

I've also played but not finished Bayonetta, The Last of Us, Ocarina of Time and Halo Combat Evolved and Gran Turismo.

Bayonetta, just didn't do anything too me. Was too over the top and the screen tearing on the Xbox version reduces me to tears literally.

GTA IV was good, but after the hype died down, the game has significant flaws.

Half Life 2 I'd rate the highest, although I didn't rate too highly on my first play through. I came to appreciate it more on later play throughs. Still a little on the easy side.

Orange box was overall very good, but I had played 2 of its 5 games already. Team Fortress 2 never held my attention although I found it good the little I did play. Portal was excellent and Episode 2 was great, with a really good ending.

Mario games where fun, but to me platform games will never end up on my favorite games list, they just seem like a lesser genre. No plot, no sense of peril, limited challenge, and gameplay that's just not as exciting as other genres. They get by on charm.

GT was good at the time but racing isn't a genre I like too much.

Halo:CE was solid to me but very overrated. Nothing stood out to me when I played it. Nothing terrible either, just apathy towards it.

Ocarina of Time never clicked with me. 3 attempts to get into it and I just end up not bothered going back. Hard to put a finger on why though. I think the N64 version gave me motion sickness and the 3DS version gives me hand cramps!

The Last of Us was pretty good , but it can't compete with some of the games I'm currently playing in multiplayer. I'm sure I'll get back to it at some stage and enjoy it.

richymcdermott

Ugh super mario 64



Sonic adventure is much better

Creamy Goodness

Rockband 3 seriously?

Retr0gamer

richymcdermott wrote: »

Ugh super mario 64



Sonic adventure is much better

What utter rubbish. Not only was it a game that completely revolutionised player control in a 3D space it is also still one of the best games ever made.

While I'd agree with most on that list there's a few that I feel were over rated. Halo was a great game on release but was hardly earth shattering in comparison to PC FPs games at the time. That and the whole backtracking in the second half and the boring flood mean it's far from perfect. Halo 3 I enjoyed but was quite underwhelmed by. Even the so called innovative forge mode was a poor mans level editor and was done far better on consoles with farcry instincts.

GTA IV was real emperor's new clothes. A lot of people got very excited about it but in retrospect it wasn't that great. I feel the same about the last of us. While I believe it's a much better game and truly excellent there's some really annoying parts in it that don't make it the exceptional game for me. There's some dodgy gameplay moments and I felt one of it's final moments was trying to emulate spec ops but without any understanding of why spec ops worked.

Skyward Sword as well is thoroughly underserving as well. A fine game but also by far the weakest of the 3D zelda games.

Now if only Edge would apologise for giving Gunstar Heroes 6/10 instead of 10.

moc moc a moc

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

Rockband 3 seriously?

I've had more fun from that one game over the past 3 or so years than almost any other game I've ever owned. Must be literally over two thousand hours at this point. I think it's the only game other than Quake that I've continued playing at least every couple of weeks this long after the original purchase.

calex71

These things are very subjective but it's a strange list of 10/10 games all the same, not that most of the games listed don't deserve it but I'm surprised that others haven't made it on, I must go and have a look and see what they scored some other games that came to mind.

mystic86

Retr0gamer wrote: »

What utter rubbish.

Steady on, each to their own retro.

TimeToShine

Surprised at LBP and GTA IV. I personally found LBP to be a very childish game and had absolutely no time for it but of course I can see why it would appeal to some people. GTA on the other hand is quite a surprise, it's a good game but very flawed.

Never played Rock Band or Bayonetta but i'd agree the rest are fairly worthy of their scores.

johnny_ultimate

mystic86 wrote: »

Steady on, each to their own retro.

Not when defending Sonic Adventure over Mario 64 :pac: It's like favouring getting punched in the face to winning the lottery.

(and Richy has admirably stood his ground on this one many times before, even though he's absolutely wrong )

Azza

I notice richy has a sonic avatar and retro has a mario avatar.....looks like we have some fanatics here.

ykt0di9url7bc3

Josey Wales wrote: »

- Gran Turismo
- Half-Life 2
- The Orange Box

I have only given these games serious playtime, I have seen or play some of the others but not enough to warrant a serious opinion.

It is easy to praise Half-Life 2 and The Orange Box, they play very well, nice pacing, not too difficult, and not piss easy. Valve's quality shines through on these titles easily.

Gran Turismo looks very dated now but when it was released it shocked gamers.

This is a video of Need for Speed 2 , released 1997

Then this trailer came on a UK PlayStation Demo Disc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-s4qihzPajA

• 140 cars
• 11 Tracks
• Driver licenses (which was a challenge mode)
• Split Screen Multiplayer
• Arcade and Career Mode
• Engine customization

Colin McRae Rally came out in the same year and Codemasters must have been kicking themselves when they realised what they were up against. While Colin McRae Rally had some amazing tracks, they felt empty, narrow and flat in comparison to the venues that GT served up. The cars available to the GT ranged from the everyday to the top of the line dream sports cars. Codemasters Toca Touring Car was a big seller six months earlier in the UK but GT's sales were unreal, "to this day, remains the best selling video game for the PlayStation"

It was a leap forward, maybe the AI wasn't a good as Toca, maybe there was some noticeable pop-up scenery on some of the tracks but that was true of nearly all the games at the time.

GT was 10/10

Riesen_Meal

Weird,

I've owned//still own everyone of them games except Skyward Sword as I had sold the Wii at that stage, been reading Edge for years also unsurprisingly.... :P

Retr0gamer

Azza wrote: »

I notice richy has a sonic avatar and retro has a mario avatar.....looks like we have some fanatics here.

I prefer prophet of truth.

RobertFoster

Azza wrote: »

I notice richy has a sonic avatar and retro has a mario avatar.....looks like we have some fanatics here.

Oh crap, it's like the 16-bit era all over again. It'll be Super Soakers and Pog battles at dawn if we're not careful


As for the list, I think it just shows how selective EDGE are about giving out tens. Gaming scores are skewed high at the best of times, i.e. 7/10 is average rather than 5/10. I think EDGE tries to be different.

Adyx

GTA IV was hugely overrated and the only time Halo should get a ten is out of a hundred. I remember when I bought it (PC) and there was so much hype about it. I don't think I ever got more than an hour out of it. I have to say I also prefer the 2D Mario games. Of the games there I've played, only the Orange Box would get a 10 simply for value. That said I don't really like scoring as an accurate measure of a games quality.

ShadowHearth

Halo 3 got 10/10? ..... Okay.... :rolleyes:

carpejugulum

They don't like RPGs and strategies?

cherryghost

Everything on the list seems bang on with the exception of Halo 3.

Riesen_Meal

cherryghost wrote: »

Everything on the list seems bang on with the exception of Halo 3.

I repectfully don't agree, Halo 3 shaped how all FPS games should be done on a console platform for the following 3 years after it was released imo...

It was the first Halo game for the 360 (as Halo fans were still playing Halo 2 BC on 360 for a good while waiting on 3) - the longevity of the multiplayer portion of the game kept it going for years, and a lot of people still play it religiously....

It is the penultimate Bungie Halo imo and the multiplayer will be fondly remembered by me and my whole friend list on XBL... the strategy, mini battles, matchmaking, forge etc all worked amazingly well for a console and set an XBL benchmark for others to follow...

Falthyron

Fieldog wrote: »

I repectfully don't agree, Halo 3 shaped how all FPS games should be done on a console platform for the following 3 years after it was released imo...

It was the first Halo game for the 360 (as Halo fans were still playing Halo 2 BC on 360 for a good while waiting on 3) - the longevity of the multiplayer portion of the game kept it going for years, and a lot of people still play it religiously....

It is the penultimate Bungie Halo imo and the multiplayer will be fondly remembered by me and my whole friend list on XBL... the strategy, mini battles, matchmaking, forge etc all worked amazingly well for a console and set an XBL benchmark for others to follow...

Halo is an incredibly overrated series. I reckon most PC gamers would agree. While I can appreciate what the original Halo brought to the Xbox (first real FPS with good controls, multiplayer, graphics and physics), it pales in comparison to FPS games that were coming out on the PC at the time and the years preceding it's release.

It brought nothing new to the genre. When you consider the original Unreal Tournament came out in 1999 and then compare that to Halo in 2001, there is very little change.

I'm not undermining the story or lore or what has since come from Halo, but in terms of input or influence to the FPS genre, Halo did very little, if any at all. Bungie's success should be recognised as being the first developer to accurately emulate FPS success with the PC platform on a console. Making it accessible, enjoyable and as simple as possible to play without a mouse and keyboard. But that's it.

ShadowHearth

Fieldog wrote: »

I repectfully don't agree, Halo 3 shaped how all FPS games should be done on a console platform for the following 3 years after it was released imo...

It was the first Halo game for the 360 (as Halo fans were still playing Halo 2 BC on 360 for a good while waiting on 3) - the longevity of the multiplayer portion of the game kept it going for years, and a lot of people still play it religiously....

It is the penultimate Bungie Halo imo and the multiplayer will be fondly remembered by me and my whole friend list on XBL... the strategy, mini battles, matchmaking, forge etc all worked amazingly well for a console and set an XBL benchmark for others to follow...

Its an **** thing, not advantage... So we can blame Halo for all corridor linier shooters with regen health.

RobertFoster

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Its an **** thing, not advantage... So we can blame Halo for all corridor linier shooters with regen health.

Do you miss health packs?

richymcdermott

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Not when defending Sonic Adventure over Mario 64 :pac: It's like favouring getting punched in the face to winning the lottery.

(and Richy has admirably stood his ground on this one many times before, even though he's absolutely wrong )

its like a kitten fighting a pack of wild dogs :pac:

johnny_ultimate

Because hundreds of instacure health packs lying around the place is such an elegant alternative. Both regenerating health and health packs are incredibly unrealistic gameplay mechanics, but both have been used wonderfully to create a compelling gameplay rhythm and flow, just as much as they've been used erroneously.

And in Halo's defense (three words I don't use everyday) the regen health is based on consistent internal logic, pretty much seamlessly tied into both the fiction and the mechanics: certainly an FPS where everything is built from the ground up. It's the less consistent ones themselves that should be blamed for taking a great idea to farcical lengths.

Azza

No RTS games on the list.

I notice they gave very few obscure games a 10, Bayonetta being about the most obscure one (but Platinum have a decent track record). I wonder how many of these games got 10's on the back of there marketing campaigns and how many games didn't get 10 because they didn't have one.

Retr0gamer

The only thing consistent about Edge's review scores is how inconsistent they are.

Dravokivich

If a game is to be measured 10, to me that means 2 things, its the most innovate/immersive game of its genre, alongside everything else released around the same period of it. Of the games ive played that are on that list, which admitdly isnt many, im not sure why halo3 and GTAIV are there. All they seemed to do for me was expand on visual pleasure, but then forgot about making a game...

Royal Irish

No Skyrim or RDR ?

Falthyron

Royal Irish wrote: »

No Skyrim or RDR ?

While I would rate RDR very highly, Skyrim is the greatest commercial success of the Elder Scrolls series. However, it is not the greatest Elder Scrolls game. I recommend this critique on the state of the series.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JweTAhyR4o0

In terms of RDR, I would consider it to be superior to GTA4, but I don't think it is worthy of a 10. Games that follow a formula that can be traced through predecessors or contemporaries shouldn't be on a list supposing to suggest games of the greatest impact. RDR is very similar to GTA4 in terms of gameplay, same can be said of the Assassin's Creed games. While each iteration adds new stuff to do, the same old stuff or mechanic prevails. It becomes formulaic and it is a concern I have for WatchDogs, especially after seeing the similarities between Far Cry 3 and Assassin's Creed (liberating a territory or going to high points to scout out an area).

Personally, games that deserve a 10 are games that stand out from others for features or concepts either not yet seen or used, or done in a new and refreshing way. As well as the other important things like story, etc..

Azza

Watch that and video and my thoughts on the Elder Scr......Wait a minute holy cow, my ignorant ass didn't know you could get Keyboard and Mouse adapters for console. Got to get me one of those.

Retr0gamer

They work terribly unfortunately.

Pixelbastardo

moc moc a moc wrote: »

I've had more fun from that one game over the past 3 or so years than almost any other game I've ever owned. Must be literally over two thousand hours at this point. I think it's the only game other than Quake that I've continued playing at least every couple of weeks this long after the original purchase.

imagine if you had invested over 2000 hours into learning to play a real guitar ?
youd be at hendrix's level by now

why isnt MGS1 on that list ??

ShadowHearth

Falthyron wrote: »

While I would rate RDR very highly, Skyrim is the greatest commercial success of the Elder Scrolls series. However, it is not the greatest Elder Scrolls game. I recommend this critique on the state of the series.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JweTAhyR4o0

In terms of RDR, I would consider it to be superior to GTA4, but I don't think it is worthy of a 10. Games that follow a formula that can be traced through predecessors or contemporaries shouldn't be on a list supposing to suggest games of the greatest impact. RDR is very similar to GTA4 in terms of gameplay, same can be said of the Assassin's Creed games. While each iteration adds new stuff to do, the same old stuff or mechanic prevails. It becomes formulaic and it is a concern I have for WatchDogs, especially after seeing the similarities between Far Cry 3 and Assassin's Creed (liberating a territory or going to high points to scout out an area).

Personally, games that deserve a 10 are games that stand out from others for features or concepts either not yet seen or used, or done in a new and refreshing way. As well as the other important things like story, etc..

That is a great video. He just explained perfectly why I hate Skyrim. It just so bland and shallow ( or plastic as said in video ), that I just could not continue.

pm1977x

Amazed to see Bayonetta on the list, didn't think it had been so well reviewed - not sure I'd give it a 10 but it's the only game I've ever finished and then started a fresh play through straight away, gutted the sequel is Nintendo only :mad:

Lu Tze

ShadowHearth wrote: »

That is a great video. He just explained perfectly why I hate Skyrim. It just so bland and shallow ( or plastic as said in video ), that I just could not continue.

Cant wait to delve back into morrowind when they have the skyrim engine mod up and running!

Riesen_Meal

Falthyron wrote: »

Halo is an incredibly overrated series. I reckon most PC gamers would agree. While I can appreciate what the original Halo brought to the Xbox (first real FPS with good controls, multiplayer, graphics and physics), it pales in comparison to FPS games that were coming out on the PC at the time and the years preceding it's release.

It brought nothing new to the genre. When you consider the original Unreal Tournament came out in 1999 and then compare that to Halo in 2001, there is very little change.

I'm not undermining the story or lore or what has since come from Halo, but in terms of input or influence to the FPS genre, Halo did very little, if any at all. Bungie's success should be recognised as being the first developer to accurately emulate FPS success with the PC platform on a console. Making it accessible, enjoyable and as simple as possible to play without a mouse and keyboard. But that's it.

I was referring to console FPS shooters, not the PC -Halo 3 was for Xbl (back then) is pretty much what Steam is doing full fold nowadays multiplayerwise for PC...

The thing that Halo 3 had in spades over most of the other fps games on a console was it's longevity - it was one of the few titles that had a level editor mode (on a console, at the time - it was unheard of) and thus kept things fresh for ages....

I never meant to come across that the game reinvented the wheel, of course it didnt, I played Unreal Tourny on PC myself prior to Halo....

I meant it did for a console game - it gave console gamers a proper taste of things that the PC had been doing for years....flawlessly, unlike a lot of the competition that was around at that time....

Retr0gamer

Fieldog wrote: »

The thing that Halo 3 had in spades over most of the other fps games on a console was it's longevity - it was one of the few titles that had a level editor mode (on a console, at the time - it was unheard of) and thus kept things fresh for ages....

It got so much praise for that but it was a really awful level editor especially compared to level editors in other console FPS games like Timesplitters and Farcry Instincts which also let you share them online.

Falthyron

Fieldog wrote: »

I was referring to console FPS shooters, not the PC -Halo 3 was for Xbl (back then) is pretty much what Steam is doing full fold nowadays multiplayerwise for PC...

The thing that Halo 3 had in spades over most of the other fps games on a console was it's longevity - it was one of the few titles that had a level editor mode (on a console, at the time - it was unheard of) and thus kept things fresh for ages....

I never meant to come across that the game reinvented the wheel, of course it didnt, I played Unreal Tourny on PC myself prior to Halo....

I meant it did for a console game - it gave console gamers a proper taste of things that the PC had been doing for years....flawlessly, unlike a lot of the competition that was around at that time....

You are quite right about Halo's impact on consoles. My problem is with console gamers who seem to imagine that Halo was the first FPS... Completely flawless, a trailblazer for the genre and something any gamer had never seen before. When you strip back the console paint, it really is quite a standard FPS when compared to others in the grand scale of things.

TerrorFirmer

Falthyron wrote: »

You are quite right about Halo's impact on consoles. My problem is with console gamers who seem to imagine that Halo was the first FPS... Completely flawless, a trailblazer for the genre and something any gamer had never seen before. When you strip back the console paint, it really is quite a standard FPS when compared to others in the grand scale of things.

I'm a massive PC Gamer and it's a rare day I play the 360 these days but I consider Halo as up there as of the Best FPS games of all time - speaking of the longevity of multiplayer, that is, I enjoy the single player campaigns but realistically they're enjoyable but par for the course comparatively with other big budget first person shooters. Co-Op mode though is fantastic and worth mentioning as well.

I don't like how there's generally an air of 'Console Gamers didn't know any better' when referencing the impact of Halo - anyone who's a big Halo fan, regardless of whether or not they're also a PC Gamer - knows it's about a lot more than that. I grew up playing all the staples - Quake and Quake II, Unreal Tournament, Quake III, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Battlefield, and so on, but Halo is it's own game which, in my opinion, doesn't really have any sort of equal on the PC (aside from the now antiquated Halo 2), which is the sole reason why I still own a 360 - exclusively for Halo 3, Reach, and Halo 4 multiplayer. I think it's a shame that Halo 2 was the last PC release, as being such a PC gamer, it's disappointing to see the last release, Halo 4, struggling a little on the 360's outdated hardware.

Halo's multiplayer isn't just a triumph for consoles, it's a triumph for FPS multiplayer gaming in general in my opinion. I have my own biases; Battlefield 3 on the consoles I feel is an abomination when compared with the 'true' PC version, but Halo is genuinely something special that people, especially PC Gamers, should not write off as an inferior product. Map sizes and design blend perfectly with player numbers to create what I considered the perfect 'pitched battle' involving vehicles achievable on current gen consoles, whereas a lot of other vehicle based titles tend to find themselves swimming a little in the sheer size of maps designed for more players than the consoles limitations can support. The game itself is massively customizable within game, and the sky is really the limit when it comes to creating your own game modes, maps and gameplay mechanics. The implementation of vehicles is one of the best ever seen in a game period. The game is just ridiculously fun - not quite a ridiculous game, but yet never takes itself too seriously either, and no game is ever quite the same as the one pre or pro ceeding it.

I'm not sure I'd say Halo is my favorite multiplayer title of all time, but the fact that it's a strong contender and I've been playing PC games since about 1994 speaks volumes enough.

Falthyron

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Halo's multiplayer isn't just a triumph for consoles, it's a triumph for FPS multiplayer gaming in general in my opinion. I have my own biases; Battlefield 3 on the consoles I feel is an abomination when compared with the 'true' PC version, but Halo is genuinely something special that people, especially PC Gamers, should not write off as an inferior product. Map sizes and design blend perfectly with player numbers to create what I considered the perfect 'pitched battle' involving vehicles achievable on current gen consoles, whereas a lot of other vehicle based titles tend to find themselves swimming a little in the sheer size of maps designed for more players than the consoles limitations can support. The game itself is massively customizable within game, and the sky is really the limit when it comes to creating your own game modes, maps and gameplay mechanics. The implementation of vehicles is one of the best ever seen in a game period. The game is just ridiculously fun - not quite a ridiculous game, but yet never takes itself too seriously either, and no game is ever quite the same as the one pre or pro ceeding it.

I'm not sure I'd say Halo is my favorite multiplayer title of all time, but the fact that it's a strong contender and I've been playing PC games since about 1994 speaks volumes enough.

I must admit, you make a good argument. But, the elements you have listed as merits for Halo are factors and mechanics that have existed on PC and in PC FPS titles for years. One such example is Half-Life which was released in 1998. Half-life was modded and changed to add new and fun elements. Even games! (CS, TF and DoD). Quake II, Unreal Tournament, Duke Nukem 3D (you could play the entire campaign in Co-Op); all of these games were released before Halo and held their own when it came to multiplayer.

As I said before I really feel Halo's place in FPS history is disjointed. Instead of the importance it had to pushing the genre forward or being a pillar, it should be acknowledged for the efforts of Bungie/Gearbox to bring PC FPS gaming to a console. That is where the true credit lies. They simplified the control system for a controller, introduced a community through Xbox Live, and gave modding tools to the players; all of which had been in practice by PC developers years before.

I may be biased in this, but in many ways Bungie are responsible for the greatest achievement, and simultaneously, the greatest disaster for FPS gaming. By showing how to properly transfer the best assets of PC gaming on to a console, it also created a precedent for derivative shooters due to the limited nature of console systems. Where as on PC, you could enjoy tools, community, graphics, gameplay, mods, fixes, that would be limited only by the power of your PC, on console, you simply couldn't have all of that without a price. It is that price which, I feel, led to many changes to the FPS genre, and depending on your point of view, for good or for bad.

cloud493

Must not have been the PS3 version of the orange box :pac:

Angron

Of the stuff on that list I've played Super Mario 64, The Orange Box, GTA IV, and the Halo games. I'll freely admit that I don't like the Halo games, and I don't think they are good enough for a 10/10. Rock Band being there baffles me a bit too, I never thought any of those sort of games were fantastic (unless you compare them to DJ Hero).

Retr0gamer

Falthyron wrote: »

They simplified the control system for a controller

I see this getting pushed out a lot as well. I was using the same control scheme on Medal of Honour, Forsaken and Quake 2 on the PS1.

Magill

Guess it just depends on the reviewer. I personally don't think Halo 3 was even close to HL2 in terms of quality, both in single player and mp. Same with Halo CE, there are quite a few shooters that came out before it which were much more deserving of a 10 imo.

Radiosonde

I think its a pretty good list, bar Rock Band, though i've not played LBP, wouldnt have given more than 8 to any gta, and i certainly dont give a s*** about Gran Turismo but its probably great if you like that sort of thing.

Resident Evil 4 seems a big omission, that deserved 10 imo.

abbir

I've played all the games on the list. I can agree with the Mario games, Orange Box and Ocarina of Time. Also to a degree with Rock Band 3 since it was perfect for that type of game. Gran Turismo could be well deserved as for its time it was very impressive but for me I was never a big racing fan and when I played Gran Turismo it had been out a while. Bayonetta is another one that is brilliant for the type of game but it's not really my thing.

The others on the list I can't agree with. Halo, as some people have already said, is really overrated. I remember playing it and thinking what's the big deal, there was far better FPS games on PC. I enjoyed GTAIV and bought it on release but it's really flawed and at times very boring. I finally finished it this year, not 10/10. Skyward Sword was good but flawed. The constant battles with the Imprisoned are enough to make it lose at least 1 mark! Last of Us is good too but at times I find problems with the gameplay mechanics. LittleBigPlanet, no. The editing and things people have made can be interesting but the mechanics of the actual game and the platforming were so frustrating.

Games I think are missing: Starcraft, Deus Ex and Resident Evil 4.

Also to the person who said Sonic Adventure over Super Mario 64. Are you serious? I have both it and Sonic Adventure 2 on Dreamcast, finished both of them but they're not great games. All the characters control poorly and Big the Cat, come on!

K.O.Kiki

pm1977x wrote: »

Amazed to see Bayonetta on the list, didn't think it had been so well reviewed - not sure I'd give it a 10 but it's the only game I've ever finished and then started a fresh play through straight away, gutted the sequel is Nintendo only :mad:

Well if it wasn't for Nintendo, there wouldn't BE a sequel...

pm1977x

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

Well if it wasn't for Nintendo, there wouldn't BE a sequel...

True, but there may as well not be a sequel as far as I'm concerned, I'll not be buying a Wii U just for Bayonetta 2 (not for a few years at least)