The all-involving mega-thread of statistics regarding VGChartz Top 100

[TruckOSaurus]

Killergran said:

elprincipe said:

All that needs be said about the list is it has a large bias in favor of newer, crappier games at the expense of out-and-out classics. I'd wager a large majority of those who voted have played few, if any, Atari VCS or NES games, for example. If they had, we might have seen a few VCS games in there and we would have seen a hell of a lot more than 3 NES games of course. It's tough not to laugh at a top 100 games of all time list that has twice as many Xbox games (not to mention PS2/X360/PS1/Wii/PS3/etc) as NES games.

It's easy to say people are stupid and have bad taste. It's a common belief on these forums. However, this is what the forumgoers on VGChartz actually thinks. It's as real as a list like this can ever get. If your top games are not on the list, it only shows that you have a different taste than the majority of people on this site.

Being allowed only 5 votes also had a considerable impact on the results. There's many games that I adore that I couldn't vote for because I was forced to name only 5. I couldn't vote for a Mario game, I had to choose which Zelda I liked best, there was no room for Brawl or Diablo II or any Final Fantasy.

Compressing 20+ years of gaming in 5 games is asking for important games to be left out. If VGChartz does another round of this, I sincerely hope they'll give us more than 5 votes.