gamrConnect Presents: Their 1130 Greatest Games, as of 2019

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Mnementh said:

Nice list. Thanks mZuzek for the hard work. Disheartening that so many of my games have only one vote: mine. At least my #1 isn't dying alone with only one vote.

But there are funny coincidences: I have Monkey Island on #19, that put it at #621 in the result. But at the same place also turns up Monkey Island 2, a similarly great game. Also onnly one vote, so someone else had it in the same place as I, #19. I don't know who, it doesn't show in the official thread, so it must be in a list sent directly to mZuzek.

Rol is the only one beside me having Pandora's Tower on the list, so treat yourself y'all, it is a great game.

Both Dark Souls and Demon's Souls ended up tied at 85.  I found that interesting. I know I had Dark Souls high on my list, but I didn't put any other Souls games on it, because I feel they are too similar to get multiple entries on my list.

RolStoppable said:

Mnementh said:

Nice rant, but you are wrong with your assumption that players are stuck in a Nintendo bubble. The reason Nintendo games end up on top is that they are fewer, but of constant quality. What I mean with fewer: many people here had Final Fantasies on their lists. But there are 15 or so Final Fantasies, which is splitting the votes. Yet there are few Nintendo games all are agreeing are great.

I mean look at the separate lists from the people: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241290

Can you see so much Nintendo dominance in the single lists? I guess not. Sure, there are a few that have lists consisting mostly of Nintendo games, but at the same time you have others that have only or mostly PS in their platform column. That the end result is different is because everyone mostly agrees on the Nintendo games while from other devs and on other platforms very different games are picked.

Reality has a Nintendo bias and VGC's list reflects that.

Another point of view is the simple question which game publishers could carry a console on their own. With the only reasonable answer being Nintendo - as they are the only company that a large enough number of people would buy a console for - it makes sense that Nintendo occupies so many of the top spots while other game makers are more scattered across the list.

According to our top 20, Square Enix could, in theory, carry a console on their own.  And they played a very major role in the PS1's success, so there is some reason to believe that they could at least during generations 4, 5, and 6.  In reality though Sega actually did carry a console on their own that was very competitive with Nintendo, but only for one generation.  Sega also had more hits in the arcade than Nintendo did, but this list barely has any arcade games on it.  So Sega's game output was very comparable to Nintendo, but only for a certain period of time, which was a long time ago.

And that is really why Nintendo has so many games on the list, especially near the top.  They have been putting out high quality games for a very long time.  I have to half agree with you and half agree with Mnementh on this.  It is true that Nintendo makes games good enough to support a console, but more importantly, they have been doing it for a very long time.  If you look at mZuzek's best games by year list, 1981 is the first time a Nintendo game appears with Donkey Kong, and this year the best game was Fire Emblem: Three Houses, another Nintendo game.  There are many years where a non-Nintendo game is the best of the year, but Nintendo has just been making games for a very long time.  When you make a list of "greatest games of all time" there are going to be a lot of Nintendo games as potential candidates.  They have been at this for almost 40 years.  What other big publisher can say that?