By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sc94597 on 02 May 2008
Edit Thread
TheRealMafoo said:
sc94597 said:
TheRealMafoo said:
sc94597 said:
You know what. Don't look at the HIGHEST RATED GAME as THE BEST GAME OF ALL TIME. Games aren't reviewed for all time are they? So why say the game is going to be the best game of all time when you know a future game will eventually replace it. Instead say it is the BEST GAME FOR ITS TIME. That would be more correct. It would also make this thread / and I would love that.

I agree 100%, and that's what I was trying to say when I got flamed (in my other post). :)


I think its the way you said it. You should have never said GTA IV was better than OoT. You put an opinion in a thread about facts, and that is where people got pissed off. I for one believe they are too much of different games to compare even thought hey are the same genre. Now I might prefer OoT because I had more fun, even though if I never played it , and just played it now I wouldn't have as much. Next time just keep the opinions out, like I did in the thread that I just made about this subject.


So, let me use different subject matter to say the same thing, and tell me if you have the same opinion.

If I bought the best TV in the 1950's, and it was light years ahead of any TV before it, I can say it's the best TV of its time.

If I buy the best TV on the market today, I can say it's the best TV of it's time.

But if I compare the best TV today, to the best TV of the 50's, and by todays standards call the 50's TV worse, I am incorrect?


 You are correct. In this case it's different though. Games don't automatically get better if they are released later for example look at Ninjabread Man, and Chicken shoot. Games are too diverse from eachother to compare them as accurately as you compare the tvs. I have more fun playing FF6 than I do FF12, because it's a better game. You do though have to compare a game by how much fun you have imo. That is the point of games to have fun, and if you don't have fun then the game automatically gets a 1. If you do have fun then you have to consider how much fun. In this case I believe I have more fun playing OoT than Gta IV, but that doesn't mean that you would think the same. Game reviews are basically opinions, and shouldn't be the only thing you do before you get a game. Now the reviews are based of the time period , and you compare other games in this same time period rather than other games in previous ones. I could count countless games that came out before GTA IV and OoT that I like more. You just can't do it in this linear way.  So in conclusion what I'm trying to say ( I don't know if this is what you are trying to say) Games are as good as how much fun you get from them. Games Reviews are opinions, and shouldn't be tooken too seriously, and Game Reviews should be compared to other games similar to the game such as it's predecessors, or rivaling games, and by the time period this game was released. Game Reviews Scores are so skewed I look at the content anymore rather than the scores.