irish times top 50 games of all time

Grand Theft Auto 3 being first isnt a bad choice, guys.
Was amazing playing the GTA series in a 3d world for the first time.

I agree with red dead being top 10 but that's about all, FIFA 12 at 15? Was that picked at random?

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I wouldn't pick GTA3 myself. I felt Vice City and San Andreas were better. Possibly 5 but I've yet to play it. Also I find the GTA games far too clunky. They are great when driving but once you get out of the car it's kind of crap and there's always a few duff missions in those games as well. GTA3 was groundbreaking and great game but it wouldn't get near my top 250 let alone my top 10. There's far more refined gameplay experiences. Again I feel the open world genre has come an awful long way since GTA3. I'd put Red Dead Redemption and Bully ahead of it any day.

I did like how weighty Marston felt in RDR, he sauntered and felt like he was part of the environment when you turned around and such.
I remember being amazed way back playing Flashback, and if you were running in one direction and quickly reversed then the sprite turned on his own axis and it looked like he had weight, I'd never seen that in a game before, most characters just flipped right-left in a split second. Ah the marvels of watching graphical details progress.

Devil May Cry 3 should have been in there somewhere too in my opinion.

All these lists are subjective, no doubt my list of 50 best games won't be near the same as most others

Sarky wrote: »

Mirror's Edge is "relentless first person combat"?

What the actual f*ck?


Oh, Irish times, you card.

WTF? I didn't even read the blurbs. Mirrors edge definitely deserves to be there imo however not for "relentless first person combat" what game were they even playing?

AllthingsCP wrote: »

I think they placed a lot of games in the top 50 for what they did for the industry. A lot of the games listed change a lot in gaming history and where the foundation of many of today's great ideas

Missing Doom, Quake, Duke Nukem kind of blows that facesaving argument out of the water.

Regards...jmcc

Retr0gamer wrote: »

OK going to leave this as my last post on the subject because I've dragged plenty of threads off track completely with this before. I just think that if a game really is that good then it should hold up. Yes it might have been pioneering in many ways but has since been surpassed and stuff like the terrible framerate really do affect the playability immensely. It has been surpassed and because we didn't have more modern FPS games to judge it against then we didn't know better.

On the opposite end of the spectrum there's stuff like Mario 3 which are still immensely playable to this day and arguably haven't been bettered. A FPS comparison would be Doom which despite being older than Goldeneye is a much better game. It doesn't have framerate problems and it's super fast no nonsense shooting mechanics have not aged a bit in the 20 years it's been out.

You're not recognizing that goldeneye was that first FPS on a console done right, it totally changed the market and let people know FPS could be done on a console when they were usually seen as something mostly done on PCs.

As a single player game, it is one of the few movie-games that actually follows the movie's locations and plot line fairly well while still maintaining gameplay integrity. The music is spot on right down to the elevator music and pause menu music.

When it comes to graphics, Goldeneye had a lot of detail. Bullet holes everywhere you shoot (not entirely common in its day) and even in the glass which was destructible as well. The animations I honestly think are still impressive, varied and entertaining, people would die depending on where you shot them. I believe it was also the first FPS game that set the standard to include scoped sniper rifles. You could be stealthy or aggressive and had to be careful not to let enemies set off the area's alarms. It wasn't all about shooting either, there were a multitude of tasks related to each mission. Taking pictures for espionage is a notable example.

Lastly, I don't think it's fair to be comparing Mario 3 to a FPS. They're entirely different games. You mention it's entirely playable these days... to people who like 2D side scrollers, sure. There's plenty of people who have no interest in such games and similarly people who don't play any FPSs. Different games age better than others, there's no doubt in that. The Mario games are classics and because they're 2D and very stylized it's hard to ever say they have 'bad' graphics even today, where as 3D games do not age as well because the advances made in these areas are huge every year let alone every decade.


Been thinking of doing a playthrough of Goldeneye emulated and commentary with it, either streaming it or pre-recorded.

This is getting far too many replys than it deserves.

marshbaboon wrote: »

Opinions differ.

Yes but that's no excuse for a really shoddy article that purports to be a reliable guide to the top 50 games of all time. Besides, people hold different opinions to mine all the time. That doesn't mean that they are right. And it is the Irish Times - that bastion of cluelessness when it comes to all things technical.

Regards...jmcc