nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

your top 10 games ever!!

marcuspheonix

i have been recently thinking what the 10 best games i have ever played are and i find it difficult to cut it down to just 10 games but here it is anyway.
ps, some of the games here may not necassarily be the best games ever but they are games that i have enjoyed the most.

in no particular order:
- goldeneye (n64)
- final fantasy 7 (ps1)
- resident evil (ps1)
- tomb raider 2 (ps1)
- mario kart 64
- super mario bros 1
- gears of war 2 (xbox360)
- fifa 95 (megadrive)
- half life the orange box (xbox360)
- zelda; links awakening (gb)

there are so many great games i have played over the years that i have left out of my list such as doom, medal of honor (ps1) mario 64 etc. let me know what u think of my list....

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Diddler82

- SuperMarioWorld
- Zelda OOT
- SuperMarioLand 2
- Midnight Resistance
- Metal Slug
- Street Fighter II
- Pacman
- Some old Kung Fu game on the Atari ST what was sh&t hard
- The Lion King
- Super Mario Bros 3

Retr0gamer

EnterNow wrote: »

Retro - this game is 13 years old. It looks like crap today, but it didnt 13 years ago. Back then it sold over 8 million copies, and probably contributed to what came next in terms of FPS games. Of course nowadays it plays like crap, but is that the fault of a 13 year old game running on an even older system? Or maybe because we have games today which were unimaginable back then?

Again as I said I'm not marking any game down because it looks crap, I never said that! Also when does a game selling a lot of consoles or contributing to how a genre developed ever been the qualification of a good game.

EnterNow wrote: »

Yeah Doom 2 looks crap today also, but when you say your running it @ 60fps, are you running it on a modern pc? Or a 16 year old pc which was around when Doom 2 was released?? I think you will find there is a difference. Run Goldeneye via an emulator with all the super duper direct x plugins that are available today and tell me it doesnt look better than it would running on an N64...

Actually Doom 2 running on a 16 year old machine would have been running on a 486 or a Pentium at the time and would have been running at 60FPS. Doom and Doom 2 were marvels of technology. They were well made within the confines of the technology of the time to run perfectly on the systems available, unlike goldeneye. Goldeneye pushed the N64 too far and resulted in a dreadful framerate that makes the game unplayable today. Sure you can play it on an emulator and get higher resolution and no crappy AA but the framerate in the Rom is capped and it still runs at a terrible framerate. I also would never run N64 games through an emulator because the emulation is far from perfect.

EnterNow wrote: »

By your own admission, it was the first mutiplayer fps on a console. That is what you should be remembering it for, not that its experience was lacking compared to Duke/Quake on a pc. I dont know about anyone else here, but when the N64 was around and Goldeneye in its prime, I could only dream of owning a pc...but I could never afford one back then. So Goldeneye stepped up to the masses, and provided vintage 2 player fun for hour upon hour.

Yes Goldeneye stepped up to the masses and offer console gamers a multiplayer FPS. It doesn't change the fact that there were better multiplayer and single player FPS games on the PC. Why would Goldeneye get in a top 10 list of games ahead of better games? Nostalgia isn't a reason. Innovation isn't a reason. It should be based on how good a game is and frankly nowadays goldeneye isn't any good and totally outclassed by the likes of Bioshock, CoD4 etc.

EnterNow wrote: »

It looks crap today, probably plays crap - but it didnt 13 years ago...thats how it should be judged. Retro gaming isnt always about how you feel playing those games today, for me a lot of it is about how it made you feel when you played those games years & years ago.

Yes retrogaming is about how you felt about the games back then. However a game shouldn't be judged on how you felt 13 years ago. Some games age and some don't. Super Metroid hasn't aged and it's still as amazing as the day it was released. Goldeneye however isn't very a very good game to play at all. It should be celebrated for what it brought to the genre but not held aloft of other games that are clearly better.

I used to think MK2 was better than Street Fighter 2 16 years ago. I'm not going to say that now because it clearly isn't true.

marcuspheonix

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Again as I said I'm not marking any game down because it looks crap, I never said that! Also when does a game selling a lot of consoles or contributing to how a genre developed ever been the qualification of a good game.

Actually Doom 2 running on a 16 year old machine would have been running on a 486 or a Pentium at the time and would have been running at 60FPS. Doom and Doom 2 were marvels of technology. They were well made within the confines of the technology of the time to run perfectly on the systems available, unlike goldeneye. Goldeneye pushed the N64 too far and resulted in a dreadful framerate that makes the game unplayable today. Sure you can play it on an emulator and get higher resolution and no crappy AA but the framerate in the Rom is capped and it still runs at a terrible framerate. I also would never run N64 games through an emulator because the emulation is far from perfect.

Yes Goldeneye stepped up to the masses and offer console gamers a multiplayer FPS. It doesn't change the fact that there were better multiplayer and single player FPS games on the PC. Why would Goldeneye get in a top 10 list of games ahead of better games? Nostalgia isn't a reason. Innovation isn't a reason. It should be based on how good a game is and frankly nowadays goldeneye isn't any good and totally outclassed by the likes of Bioshock, CoD4 etc.

Yes retrogaming is about how you felt about the games back then. However a game shouldn't be judged on how you felt 13 years ago. Some games age and some don't. Super Metroid hasn't aged and it's still as amazing as the day it was released. Goldeneye however isn't very a very good game to play at all. It should be celebrated for what it brought to the genre but not held aloft of other games that are clearly better.

I used to think MK2 was better than Street Fighter 2 16 years ago. I'm not going to say that now because it clearly isn't true.

retrogamer, u seem to be contradicting yourself in most of these posts. you did say goldeneye looks crap. and you asked "when does a game contributing to how a genre developed ever been the qualification of a good game" well if you dont think a game that is innovative and totally transforms a genre shouldnt be regarded as a good game then i wonder how much you know about games. and i played quake, doom, duke nukem when they were released and loved them, but they do not look any better than goldeneye when played today

TanG411

10. Uncharted 2: Among Thieves (PS3)
9. Kula World (PS1)
8. Super Mario 64 (DS)
7. Punch-Out!! (Both NES and Wii)
6. Super Mario Bros. (NES)
5. Metal Gear Solid (PS1)
4. Kirby's Adventure (NES)
3. Grand Theft Auto: The Ballad of Gay Tony (PS3)
2. Grand Theft Auto III (PS2)
1. Tombi! (PS1)

Myrddin

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Again as I said I'm not marking any game down because it looks crap, I never said that! Also when does a game selling a lot of consoles or contributing to how a genre developed ever been the qualification of a good game.

When a game sells that amount, its usually a good indication that is popular/good no?

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Actually Doom 2 running on a 16 year old machine would have been running on a 486 or a Pentium at the time and would have been running at 60FPS. Doom and Doom 2 were marvels of technology. They were well made within the confines of the technology of the time to run perfectly on the systems available, unlike goldeneye. Goldeneye pushed the N64 too far and resulted in a dreadful framerate that makes the game unplayable today. Sure you can play it on an emulator and get higher resolution and no crappy AA but the framerate in the Rom is capped and it still runs at a terrible framerate. I also would never run N64 games through an emulator because the emulation is far from perfect.

A Pentium if you were lucky Retro. On average most pc's knocking around in '94 were less powerful. My point is that running it on a pc today isnt a fair comparison. Doom 2 running on native 94 specs would not look the same as running it on a pc today. It might have ran @ 60fps back then, I wasnt lucky enough to own a pc, but I can be pretty certain its graphics & playability were different to running it on a modern pc. Besides, comparing pc games & console games today even draws arguments. The pc was, and always will be the domain of fps games - so cut the n64 a little slack, yeah it was out of its depth doing it...but in my opinion it gave it a damn good shot.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Yes Goldeneye stepped up to the masses and offer console gamers a multiplayer FPS. It doesn't change the fact that there were better multiplayer and single player FPS games on the PC. Why would Goldeneye get in a top 10 list of games ahead of better games? Nostalgia isn't a reason. Innovation isn't a reason. It should be based on how good a game is and frankly nowadays goldeneye isn't any good and totally outclassed by the likes of Bioshock, CoD4 etc.

As I said above, console fps today dont even compare to the pc experience, and even more so 13 years ago. Why should it be in the top 10? Well it wouldnt be in mine, but the thread title is "Your top 10 games ever!!" If someone owes gratitude to Goldeneye on the N64, who is anyone to argue with how they view the game? While there are games named here that I wouldnt like, I DO respect that for some people the games provided more to them than to me. Id argue that innovation IS a reason to remember a game fondly. And when dealing with video games that are over a decade old, nostalgia is the most important thing about retro gaming. Technology evolves, there are an elite group of retro games that hold their own today, but for the most part is nostalgia based...I find it surprising you feel differently...

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Yes retrogaming is about how you felt about the games back then. However a game shouldn't be judged on how you felt 13 years ago. Some games age and some don't. Super Metroid hasn't aged and it's still as amazing as the day it was released. Goldeneye however isn't very a very good game to play at all. It should be celebrated for what it brought to the genre but not held aloft of other games that are clearly better.

In your opinion. A retro game shouldnt be judged on how it made you feel when it was new? Well judging it against far superior games isnt really fair is it? As I said there are an elite group that do hold their own, but are you seriously saying its fair to compare DodgeEm with GRID?

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I used to think MK2 was better than Street Fighter 2 16 years ago. I'm not going to say that now because it clearly isn't true.

But they are from the same era. If you were slating MK2 because of the playability of SSF4, then that would bring us to the same argument here.

Retr0gamer

marcuspheonix wrote: »

retrogamer, u seem to be contradicting yourself in most of these posts. you did say goldeneye looks crap.

Then quote where I said it in my earlier post when you first brought it up because I didn't.

marcuspheonix wrote: »

and you asked "when does a game contributing to how a genre developed ever been the qualification of a good game" well if you dont think a game that is innovative and totally transforms a genre shouldnt be regarded as a good game then i wonder how much you know about games. and i played quake, doom, duke nukem when they were released and loved them, but they do not look any better than goldeneye when played today

Actually I would rank Quake, Doom and Duke Nukem ahead of Goldeney but I wouldn't rank them on looks, I never said I was ranking anything by looks. I'd rank them ahead of goldeneye on gameplay because they are better games to play and run at a reasonable framerate which makes them more fluid to play while goldeneye feels like you are moving through treacle. I don't know where you are getting me saying that I'm ranking these games because the visuals have aged because I never said it! And yes innovation doesn't mean a game is good. There's plenty of examples of innovative games that don't hold up. Renegade is regarded as a dreadful game in the arcades but was the first game to innovate the multiplaned side scrolling beat'em up. Hard Drivin' gave us the first racing game to use polygons but play it now and it's terrible framerate and gameplay make it a bad game (parallels with goldeneye, no?). Innovation doesn't make a good game but it can help. All that matters is if the game is still good to play now as it was back then and when you take off the rose tinted specs some games don't stack up while other games like Robotron 2087 are still amazing despite primative visuals.

EnterNow wrote: »

When a game sells that amount, its usually a good indication that is popular/good no?

No it's not. Rise of the Robots sold extremely well. Metal Gear Solid 4 sold extremely well. Fifa Road to World Cup sold extremely well. I could go on but these are a few examples of terrible games selling really well. Just because the general public deems them popular doesn't mean the games are good. This is the same general public that voted for Hitler and likes Coldplay.

EnterNow wrote: »

A Pentium if you were lucky Retro. On average most pc's knocking around in '94 were less powerful. My point is that running it on a pc today isnt a fair comparison. Doom 2 running on native 94 specs would not look the same as running it on a pc today. It might have ran @ 60fps back then, I wasnt lucky enough to own a pc, but I can be pretty certain its graphics & playability were different to running it on a modern pc. Besides, comparing pc games & console games today even draws arguments. The pc was, and always will be the domain of fps games - so cut the n64 a little slack, yeah it was out of its depth doing it...but in my opinion it gave it a damn good shot.

A load of my friends had 486's with turbo buttons in 94 when the game came out and I played the **** out of it. The graphics and gameplay were the exact same on those PCs as they are on modern ones since back then games weren't as scaleable like they are now. Even if Doom didn't run well back then you can't say it's a bad game since on later hardware you could run it perfectly. This is what happened with Ultima Underworld, a game that demanded too much of the hardware back in 94 but it's still possible to play it on later hardware to it's full effect at a good framerate. Goldeneye on the other hand is locked to really bad framerates so even playing it on an emulator you will still get all the slowdown from explosions and terrible framerate that contribute to the game not playing very well. Goldeneye doesn't hold up because it's been very much surpassed while games like Doom haven't aged at all because they are still really fun to play. There really isn't anything like Doom that came out after it that could turf around as many enemies (serious sam didn't feel right).

EnterNow wrote: »

If someone owes gratitude to Goldeneye on the N64, who is anyone to argue with how they view the game? While there are games named here that I wouldnt like, I DO respect that for some people the games provided more to them than to me. Id argue that innovation IS a reason to remember a game fondly. And when dealing with video games that are over a decade old, nostalgia is the most important thing about retro gaming. Technology evolves, there are an elite group of retro games that hold their own today, but for the most part is nostalgia based...I find it surprising you feel differently...

The thread is best games ever. Not 'what games you remember most fondly'. Sometimes you have to take off the rose tinted specs and just say 'I had a lot of fun with that game but it really doesn't stack up anymore'. I played the **** out of MK2 and loved it at the time. Looking back at it I realise it wasn't very good.

EnterNow wrote: »

In your opinion. A retro game shouldnt be judged on how it made you feel when it was new? Well judging it against far superior games isnt really fair is it? As I said there are an elite group that do hold their own, but are you seriously saying its fair to compare DodgeEm with GRID?

In a best game ever thread a game should be judged on how good it is not how it made you feel. I liked some terrible films as a kid like Hook but I wouldn't try to convince people now that it was a good film, why would I do that with games as well.

And yes comparing DodgeEm to GRID is fair. DodgeEm isn't very good GRID is better. And in a similar setting I'd take F-zero, Micro Machines or Mario Kart of GRID any day of the week despite them being old and not as technologically advanced as GRID

ghostchant

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Super Metroid hasn't aged and it's still as amazing as the day it was released.

As much as I loved Super Metroid, going back to play it now after the gba games, I can't help but feel that it has aged a little bit. I think it was the controls, they didn't feel as 'tight' as in Fusion or Zero Mission.

Retr0gamer

I'm kind of the opposite. I feel there was far too much hand holding in the GBA games (especially Fusion) and it never opened up and let you explore until the final act really. I've no problems with the controls in Super Metroid either and love how it's much more open and can be sequence broken if you really want to get into the game. It's not even that I played it when it came out, I only first played it about 5 years ago, in fact I think it was after I had played Fusion.

Actually a good example of nostalgia clouding judgement on games happened to me 6 months ago. I used to think HL was better than HL2 but was playing them both recently and I much prefer Half-Life 2 now.

ghostchant

Yeah that's fair enough, won't argue that Fusion was rather linear, though hasn't stopped me replaying it a whole bunch of times despite my growing game backlog (which is why I put it in my list). I think I need to dedicate some time to playing Super Metroid again, though these days I only have it on the Wii, and it looks pretty awful stretched across my HDTV. *runs off to hook the Wii up to his 19' crt*

petes

1. Super Mario World
2. Zelda: A Link to the Past
3. Super Mario Kart
4. Zelda: OOT
5. Resident Evil
6. Half Life/HL2
7. Deus Ex
8. Secret of Mana
9. Super Metroid
10. Goldeneye

Honourable mention to Perfect Dark and F-Zero (Might replace one of the above with F-Zero)

Goldeneye seems to be a bit of a contentious one. I haven't played it in years as with a few of them games above but I fcuking loved it when I was playing it. It gave me hours of fun and I even cleared everything in it which I don't normally do with todays games. For me it belongs in there which I think is the point of the thread.

I would have to put a bit more thought in my top ten though so it is subject to change. Not by much though.

I did love my SNES.

Myrddin

Retr0gamer wrote: »

This is the same general public that voted for Hitler and likes Coldplay.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

And yes comparing DodgeEm to GRID is fair. DodgeEm isn't very good GRID is better.

Im sorry Retro, but I have to say I think you've sorely missed the point about replaying old games. Bringing up Hitler, and saying Dodgem/GRID is a fair comparison...thats just ridiculous.

In the Games forum (which you moderate), there is a thread called "Old Console Games You Would Like To See Remade" or something to that effect. I made a suggestion, and you bashed it. In this thread, "Your Top 10 Games Ever", your bashing other peoples opinions. I think you have to realise that when you see the word "you/your" in a thread title, it might be aimed at ALL of us, not just yourself. Anyone who posts here should be entitled to name Goldeneye and not be childishly argued with "Its crap, its sucks, x was better" etc etc.

I respect your opinion as much as anyone elses, and nobody took the time to explain why your top ten list was sh*t... I know its a discussion forum, Im all for that, we are all gamers here, but your bashing peoples lists on a list thread...thats not very respectful or encouraging for people to post.

Myrddin

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Then quote where I said it in my earlier post when you first brought it up because I didn't.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Goldeneye looks like crap

Page 2.

NeoKubrick

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Actually a good example of nostalgia clouding judgement on games happened to me 6 months ago. I used to think HL was better than HL2 but was playing them both recently and I much prefer Half-Life 2 now.

You finally admitted it.

As for the argument about Goldeneye, I don't know why or how people place Goldeneye above Perfect Dark, because Perfect Dark is superior in every mode & detail. Quake and Doom were great games, but Goldeneye was better. Unfortunately, Rare didn't or couldn't future-proof it, and its graphics have dated faster than Quake's and Doom's, but then, Quake's and Doom's game design have dated much faster than Goldeneye's.

The re-release of Perfect Dark has shown that that style is still relevant.

o1s1n

Well to be fair, it is 'YOUR top 10 games ever!!' so I picked my own personal favourites.

For example, I know well that Sonic 2 is better than Sonic 1. But the first will always be favourite. I could say the same for a few other games on my list.

marcuspheonix

EnterNow wrote: »

Page 2.

ha, fair play to ya enternow, i knew he said it, hence contadicting himself

marcuspheonix

retrogamer, like enternow has highlighted, the thread is titled 'your top 10 games ever'. i listed mine and while it is subject to change as i thought of it off the top of my head, i loved the 10 games i mentioned. this post is not a discussion about the 10 best games ever made, but peoples favourite games. it is impossible to name the top 10 games ever made as everyone has their own opinion.i have noticed quite a few posters here mentioning goldeneye in their top 10. goldeneye was one of the best games of the 90's, no one can doubt that. look at any list of best games ever from critics and i am sure 75% of them will list goldeneye as one of the best games ever made, whether it has dated or not. i havent seen many of the games on your list mentioned here, however there is time for that to change!:)

o1s1n

marcuspheonix wrote: »

i havent seen many of the games on your list mentioned here, however there is time for that to change!:)

As retr0 said, popularity does not make a good game. I'm fairly sure 50 Cent's game sold more copies than most of the things mentioned on my list.

If popularity means things are good, Twilight films/books must be fantastic!

[Deleted User]

- Bubble Bobble (arcade)

- Kick Off 2 (amiga)

- Sensible Soccer (amiga)

- Mass Effect (360)

- Lotus Esprit Turbo Challenge (amiga)

- Area 51 (arcade)

- The secret of monkey island (amiga)

- Zookeeper (ds)

- Mario kart advance (gba)

- Project Gotham Racing 3 (360)

Bob the Seducer

Here goes...

Shenmue/Shenmue 2 (DC)

Soul Calibur (DC)

Crazy Taxi (DC)

Jet Set Radio (DC)

Metal Gear Solid (PSX)

Gran Turismo 2 (PSX)

Resident Evil (PSX)

Grand Theft Auto (PSX)

Sonic 2 (GG/PC/MD)

Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind (Xbox)

and Jade Empire or Fable (Xbox) I can't decide which...

With honourable mentions going to Wild 9 (PSX), Shadowman (DC), Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver (PSX), Phantasy Star Online (DC), Fahrenheit (Xbox), Ico/Shadow of the Collosus (PS2), Quake 3 Arena (DC), Psychonauts (Xbox), Rollcage (PSX), Colin McRae Rally (PSX), Rival Schools (PSX) MediEvil (PSX), Medal of Honor (PSX), Super Pang (Quickshot Supervision), Half Life (PC), Duke Nukem 3D (PC), the Monkey Island games (PC) and the two Sonic Adventures (DC)!

I'm certain I've forgotten some games (and I've ignored anything on current systems). I could probably go on listing honourable mentions all day so it's probably best to leave it at that.

Retr0gamer

EnterNow wrote: »

In the Games forum (which you moderate), there is a thread called "Old Console Games You Would Like To See Remade" or something to that effect. I made a suggestion, and you bashed it.

I didn't bash your suggestion of snatcher, just said that making it more action orientated would be a mistake.

EnterNow wrote: »

In this thread, "Your Top 10 Games Ever", your bashing other peoples opinions. I think you have to realise that when you see the word "you/your" in a thread title, it might be aimed at ALL of us, not just yourself. Anyone who posts here should be entitled to name Goldeneye and not be childishly argued with "Its crap, its sucks, x was better" etc etc.

It's a discussion forum, I was discussing peoples Top 10's. The OP asked for opinions on his one, I gave one. Feel free to lay into my top 10 if you want. I'd actually look forward to that.

NeoKubrick wrote: »

The re-release of Perfect Dark has shown that that style is still relevant.

I was actually surprised that I enjoyed the Perfect Dark remake a lot more and it was down to one thing, the framerate again. I was surprised how fast the game actually is, it zips along, while just like goldeneye on the N64 it's running in slow motion.

EnterNow wrote: »

Page 2.

marcuspheonix wrote: »

ha, fair play to ya enternow, i knew he said it, hence contadicting himself

Not really contradicting myself. You keep trying to hammer it home that I said goldeneye was a bad game because it looks like crap when I said nothing of the sort. I only responded that it looks like crap after you said that I had said it looked like crap and was a crap game for it. I had said nothiong of the sort and hadn't even said it looked terrible. The only thing close to it was to say that the FPS were terrible which nobody sane can disagree with. And well it kind of does look ****:

That's without the blur and low res of the N64. I'm definitely not a graphics whore, here's a screenshot of what I consider one of the best games ever:

I know the thread is entitled your best games ever, I just think people need to take of the rose tinted glasses and see that some of these games haven't really aged very well at all.

marcuspheonix

tbh just looking at that screenshot brings back great memories of a great game. we could probably go on argueing about goldeneye for days, but i have no doubt that it is one of the best games ever made, and im sure that there are more people that would agree with me than disagree. but hey, everyone has there opinion and thats yours dude. i just dont uderstand how people can play a game when it is released, think it is a classic, and then when time goes by and technology keeps improving it is all of a sudden a bad game. and before you say it, i know you didnt say it was a classic, but you have mentioned games that you thought were good when released but crap years later. if a game is one of the best of its generation and better than the games of the time, then it is a good game regardless..

Zombrex

In no particular order

01 Half Life (PC)
02 Half Life 2 (PC)
03 Deus Ex (PC)
04 Super Mario World (SNES)
05 Zelda Ocarina of Time (N64)
06 Sensible Soccer (Amiga)
07 Bioshock (PC) (mainly for the art design and twist, ending was a bit s**t)
08 Tetris (Gameboy)
09 Civilization 2 (PC)
10 Street Fighter IV (PS3)

Myrddin

In no particular order also:

1 - Half Life (PC)
2 - Half Life 2 (PC)
3 - Zelda 3 LTTP (SNES)
4 - Super Mario World (SNES)
5 - Sonic 1 (MD)
6 - Street Fighter 2 (Arcade)
7 - Zelda 4 OOT (N64)
8 - Doom (PC)
9 - Snatcher CD (Mega CD)
10 - Max Payne (PC)

Retr0 feel free to pick these apart. Its highly unlikely, if ever, that Ill play Doom again...but using it as an example, it would be ridiculous to deny how good, important & fun that game was. Just because there are better looking games out now, will never take away from how good a game was in its day.

Fifa Soccer (MD), Gunstar Heroes (MD), GTA 3 (PC), The Magical Quest (SNES), all get honorable mentions from me - and loads that I cant think of right now. Ill never judge retro games based on how they look now compared to their releas dates, if that was the case...I wouldnt have all the retro consoles I have. Id have a 360 & a PS3 just. Rose tinted glasses? Thats BS man, your denying games their lineage because there are technically better games around today. You cant be a collector if you dont realise that, you would be a hippocrite.

CiDeRmAn

Woohoo!
Nice to see someone else getting dressed down by Retro! Hurrah!

An alternate top ten of mine, simply because there wasn't enough room in ten for all the best games I have been lucky enough to play,

1-Ico, probably the best game on the PS2, probably one of the top 5 games of all time.
2-Shadow of the Colossus, probably the second best game on the PS2, probably one of the top 6 games of all time!
3-Super Mario World, one word review, Awesome!
4-Flight Unlimited 2-never would a flight sim hold my attention like this one did, the third game in the series, cunningly called Flight Unlimited 3, was really little more than a map and mission pack for the second one.
5-Super Metroid- breathtaking stuff, huge game, huge box, huge players guide, unrivalled until Metroid Prime, speaking of which....
6-Metroid Prime series- nothing compares to this in 3D adventuring, better than Halo, better than Quake, makes one wonder what Retro Studios might have done with Castlevania.....
7-3D Mario Games, all of them, from Mario 64, Mario Sunshine, Mario Galaxy and Galaxy 2 all represent the best examples of 3D platforming per generation, even the weak spot, Sunshine, is still leagues ahead of anything the PS2 or the Xbox produced.
8- Star Wars: Republic Commandos- Not many Star Wars games reached beyond the lazy port, Battleground was nice, but just a development of the Battlefield mod, Starfighter was fun, the original arcade game was great, while too many sucked, this FPS though was truly brilliant, using the visor effect from Metroid Prime, the weapon loadout owed lots to Halo and the setting was the exciting bits of the new Star Wars trilogy, it was fantastic, a real surprise and well worth anyone getting hold of.
9- Metal Arms, played it on both Xbox and PS2, fantastic fun, a 3rd Person shooter yet had somehow all the magic of Halo, funny, good bosses, great weapons, if you have never played it, why not?
10- Wild Gunman, I have this for my Nes and it is the only reason that I will always have a CRT in my games room because I can't imagine a future without being able to play this and DuckHunt, brilliant time wasters.

Lu Tze

Wouldn't really be able to pick out a top ten to be honest. But best game i played was Bladerunner on the PC, finished that game multiple times with multiple endings, don't think i ever got them all.

It was point and click though, so don't know if it is rightfully classed as a game or some sort of interactive story

landsleaving

Off the top of my head:

1: Final Fantasy VI
2: Legand of Zelda: Link to the Past
3: Super Mario World
4: Chrono Trigger
5: Final Fantasy VII
6: Shenmue
7: Fallout 3
8: Street Fighter II: Turbo
9: Streets of Rage
10: Broken Sword

Retr0gamer

marcuspheonix wrote: »

i just dont uderstand how people can play a game when it is released, think it is a classic, and then when time goes by and technology keeps improving it is all of a sudden a bad game. and before you say it, i know you didnt say it was a classic, but you have mentioned games that you thought were good when released but crap years later. if a game is one of the best of its generation and better than the games of the time, then it is a good game regardless..

Some genres get better as time goes on an FPS games have been one of them.

EnterNow wrote: »

Retr0 feel free to pick these apart. Its highly unlikely, if ever, that Ill play Doom again...but using it as an example, it would be ridiculous to deny how good, important & fun that game was. Just because there are better looking games out now, will never take away from how good a game was in its day.

I've absolutely no problems with Doom being on a best games ever list. I think it still holds up as one of the greatest videogames ever made and it's really like nothing else. It's still an absolute blast to this day. As for your list it's not bad. I think there's better platformers than Sonic 1 and Max Payne I feel is overrated somewhat.

EnterNow wrote: »

Ill never judge retro games based on how they look now compared to their releas dates, if that was the case...I wouldnt have all the retro consoles I have. Id have a 360 & a PS3 just. Rose tinted glasses? Thats BS man, your denying games their lineage because there are technically better games around today. You cant be a collector if you dont realise that, you would be a hippocrite.

I'm not judging these old games on how they look! How many times do I have to say that and I've also not said it once during this thread! Gameplay for me is all that matters. Due to the N64's hardware limitations Goldeneye has some severe framerate problems and it's gameplay has been surpassed. These faults were acceptable when the game was cutting edge but now it just doesn't hold up. There's plenty of games on the current gen systems that aren't going to hold up once the wow factors of their graphics look awful and their sub 30 FPS is going to feel really jerky. I'm also not denying the games lineage. It was certainly innovative and was popular back in the day and I couldn't possibly deny it that.

Tucker.Tim

I see RetroGamer's burning desire to be alpha nerd has railroaded another thread.

The fact is this is all opinion; the one thing that encapsuled this the most was your easy dismissal of Metal Gear Solid 4 as if it was somehow was an accepted fact that it was terrible. In more than one way that shows a high level of (whisper it) arogance on your part.

RetroGamer, your opinion is your opinion - nothing more. Quit trying to one up everyone else and let them enjoy whatever the hell it is they enjoy be it GoldenEye, MGS4 or, yes, Coldplay.

Retr0gamer

Tucker.Tim wrote: »

I see RetroGamer's burning desire to be alpha nerd has railroaded another thread.

The fact is this is all opinion; the one thing that encapsuled this the most was your easy dismissal of Metal Gear Solid 4 as if it was somehow was an accepted fact that it was terrible. In more than one way that shows a high level of (whisper it) arogance on your part.

RetroGamer, your opinion is your opinion - nothing more. Quit trying to one up everyone else and let them enjoy whatever the hell it is they enjoy be it GoldenEye, MGS4 or, yes, Coldplay.

You Coldplay fans just all have it out for me.

BTW the Hitler/Coldplay thing was a Super Hans quote from Peep Show. More people need to watch that show.

landsleaving

In Retr0's defense, he warned me about MGS4 and I didn't listen.

I should have.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

f you took that 16 euro and shoved it up your arse it would still be more fun than MGS 4. At least it wouldn't last 15 hours and make you watch 45-90 minute cutscenes after each push.

Too bloody right.