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

[elprincipe]

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.

Well, first off, as you can see since you quoted me, I didn't say anyone was "stupid" at all.  So that is just putting words in my mouth, which I'll thank you not to do.

I realize the way the list was made.  I simply made comments reflecting my opinion of the list, that's all.  I know why it came out the way it did - that's one reason I lamented what made the list and what didn't.  The fact that games like Contra and Mega Man 2, widely viewed as some of the best games ever made for any system and games that remain immensely popular and spawning sequels today, didn't even make the list, compared to what did make the list, tells you a lot about the relative game-playing experience of the voters overall, for example.