| shio said: The rest seems fine, though I don't know much about Intelligent Systems. |
Advance Wars.
Fire Emblem.
Paper Mario.
Super Metroid and Metroid Fusion.
--
I think that should explain everything.
| shio said: While those studios haven't made bad games, some of them they still made mediocre games: - Lionhead Studios, for example, made the mediocre Fable and the decent Fable 2, and both are not good games. - Kojima Studios made the not-so-good Metal Gear Solid 2, and that bad game called MGS: Portable Ops Plus (or so I've heard). - Bioware made the very mediocre Jade Empire. The rest seems fine, though I don't know much about Intelligent Systems. I'm surprised you didn't pick quality juggernauts like Blizzard, Stardock and Relic. |
Both Fable titles are well-regarded, whether you agree or not, as are MGS2, Portable Ops, and Jade Empire.
Stardock is more of a publisher and hasn't been around that long.
Relic isn't very old, either.
|
Hates Nomura. Tagged: GooseGaws - <--- Has better taste in games than you. |
 |
GooseGaws said:
If you read the criteria, they exclude studios that no longer exist, haven't been around long enough (seems pre-PS1 is required), or have little variation in their output. |
Ah, my bad. Was just in too much of a hurry to mention Black Isle.
"The accumulated filth of all their sex and murders will foam up about their waist and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout "Save us!"...
....and I'll look down and whisper "no."
- Rorschach
| GooseGaws said: If you read the criteria, they exclude studios that no longer exist, haven't been around long enough (seems pre-PS1 is required), or have little variation in their output. |
The first game Harmonix made was in 2001, so evidently that wasn't a requirement
Anyway, a lot can be said, but definitely Lionhead has no place here. Fable ranged from mediocre to good, depending if you took into account the nice variety of choices or the horrible story, but it can be considered a good game. But Black and White was a truly bad game, it sucked
zexen_lowe said:
The first game Harmonix made was in 2001, so evidently that wasn't a requirement Anyway, a lot can be said, but definitely Lionhead has no place here. Fable ranged from mediocre to good, depending if you took into account the nice variety of choices or the horrible story, but it can be considered a good game. But Black and White was a truly bad game, it sucked |
Ah, good point! And they only make rhythm games, as well. Hmm...
The critics disagree with you on Black & White, though.
|
Hates Nomura. Tagged: GooseGaws - <--- Has better taste in games than you. |
|
| shio said: While those studios haven't made bad games, some of them they still made mediocre games: - Lionhead Studios, for example, made the mediocre Fable and the decent Fable 2, and both are not good games. - Kojima Studios made the not-so-good Metal Gear Solid 2, and that bad game called MGS: Portable Ops Plus (or so I've heard). - Bioware made the very mediocre Jade Empire. The rest seems fine, though I don't know much about Intelligent Systems. I'm surprised you didn't pick quality juggernauts like Blizzard, Stardock and Relic. |
Jade Empire was not mediocre, it actually got really good reviews and was for me anyway, better than KOTR. I'd say the Fable's were overhyped, but they were still good games and hardly the weakest link in lionhead's line up. Metal gear solid 2 was also a very well reviewed game and was amazing, kojima studio's falters on the metal gear acid games, portable ops was actually pretty good and got good reviews. I would also hesitate to call stardock and relic quality juggernauts. They make really good games, but they don't really have enought games under their belt to be called juggernaughts.
My question to this thread then, is what are the qualifiers of a good game? Is it up to personal preference or is it based on review scores? I think it should be up to review scores rather than personal taste just because it is less subjective. Also, I think highly reviewed games are more universally accepted as good games(no offense shio)
GooseGaws said:
Ah, good point! And they only make rhythm games, as well. Hmm...
The critics disagree with you on Black & White, though. |
Though some critics say now that they greatly overrated it back then.
http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/september03/25overrated/index26.shtml
GooseGaws said:
Something tells me you haven't been playing games for very long... |
What's that got to do with them making no bad games?
GooseGaws said:
The whole point of the article is teams that have been around for an extended period of time and have never made a bad game. Thus, Naughty Dog is disqualified. |
Naughty Dog have been around since 1986, and their least rated game is the first Crash Bandicoot, which has an average of 80 per-cent from GameRankings.
All of their games have been successful both critically, and commercially.
nojustno said:
What's that got to do with them making no bad games? |
The fact that they have made bad games. Where's Waldo and Home Alone, for a start.
|
Hates Nomura. Tagged: GooseGaws - <--- Has better taste in games than you. |
|
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
