By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - IGN: Best Games OVERALL! (And the winner is....)

Mazty said:

BS BS BS.
Completed HL2 a few weeks ago. It's just not a good game. It's a generic corridor crawl with bugger all story, bugger all tactics, and the only good parts are the last two levels because of a)Seeing the inside of the Combine HQ b)The all-new-and-improved Gravity Gun.
Halo was made in 2000 and a far, far more influential game than HL2 ever was.
Also what about other genre defying games such as Devil May Cry, God of War, Soul Caliber 2, Call of Duty, Unreal Tournament, Perfect Dark etc?
What a god-awful pile of crap to pick as being the best of the decade.

 

That's quite the meltdown over an IGN piece. 

On topic: I'd remove KOTOR and Fallout 3. DMC1 and MGS3 would be good replacements. Otherwise a good list.



Demon's Souls Official Thread  | Currently playing: Left 4 Dead 2, LittleBigPlanet 2, Magicka

Around the Network
selnor said:
I can see now why so many people have a problem with

1. These types of lists and

2. IGN.

Firstly. What the hell. Games which revolutionized their genres or best sellers not even appearing.
Halo 1?????
Reinvented console FPS.

No Gears 1? Revolutionized TPS mechanics.

No WOW reinvented MMO's.

The games that are there are in no way representative of the best of the last 10 years. Cmon people 10 years?!

Half Life 2 wasnt amazing it was good. A technical demo of the gravity at the time. Not amazing. To many unecessary bits. KOTOR? Really. ME1 a much better gam than KOTOR.

Look at IGN's best of each year over the 2000-2009 period. Now this list if genuine should contain there number 1's from each year. But it doesnt.

Poor poor lists. Dreadful in many cases.

Red - You think Halo deserves a place on the list, but go on to say Half Life 2 was a tech demo and wasn't amazing. I think you have a terrible, terrible taste in FPS. Half Life 2 also has sold more than Halo 1 (You talked about sales here). And the list is about quality, not how revolutionary the game was, otherwise Wii Sports would be on top.

Green - Wrong. For example, if game number 2 in 2003 is better than game number 1 in 2004... Game number 2 from 2003 will be hugher on the list.

OT:
Can't complain here, list is filled with excellent games. Although i do think Resident Evil 4 deserves a spot here.



                            

ssj12 said:
Gilgamesh said:

Horrible

No Metal Gear Solid games, no Final Fantasy (X) games (even Crisis Core deserves to be there), San Andreas was waaaaaay better then III.

I disagree with you. MGS has way to many flaws. Final Fantasy is a great RPG series, but I'd place The Witcher way before FF. And San Andreas didnt revolutionize the third-person action adventure genre like III, because well III was the first in the series to do it and did it well..

I would love to hear your flaws about MGS, because I can't seem to think of any. I believe either IV, III or maybe I should be on the list.



Gilgamesh said:
ssj12 said:
Gilgamesh said:

Horrible

No Metal Gear Solid games, no Final Fantasy (X) games (even Crisis Core deserves to be there), San Andreas was waaaaaay better then III.

I disagree with you. MGS has way to many flaws. Final Fantasy is a great RPG series, but I'd place The Witcher way before FF. And San Andreas didnt revolutionize the third-person action adventure genre like III, because well III was the first in the series to do it and did it well..

I would love to hear your flaws about MGS, because I can't seem to think of any. I believe either IV, III or maybe I should be on the list.

Just the fact its confusing, and since this is about the last decade, MGS4 being the best of the series in the last decade, it has way to many cutscenes.

 

Frankly, Splinter Cell is the better tactical stealth shooter, imho. Still, I hate these types of games anyways.



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 
Carl2291 said:
selnor said:
I can see now why so many people have a problem with

1. These types of lists and

2. IGN.

Firstly. What the hell. Games which revolutionized their genres or best sellers not even appearing.
Halo 1?????
Reinvented console FPS.

No Gears 1? Revolutionized TPS mechanics.

No WOW reinvented MMO's.

The games that are there are in no way representative of the best of the last 10 years. Cmon people 10 years?!

Half Life 2 wasnt amazing it was good. A technical demo of the gravity at the time. Not amazing. To many unecessary bits. KOTOR? Really. ME1 a much better gam than KOTOR.

Look at IGN's best of each year over the 2000-2009 period. Now this list if genuine should contain there number 1's from each year. But it doesnt.

Poor poor lists. Dreadful in many cases.

Red - You think Halo deserves a place on the list, but go on to say Half Life 2 was a tech demo and wasn't amazing. I think you have a terrible, terrible taste in FPS. Half Life 2 also has sold more than Halo 1 (You talked about sales here). And the list is about quality, not how revolutionary the game was, otherwise Wii Sports would be on top.

Green - Wrong. For example, if game number 2 in 2003 is better than game number 1 in 2004... Game number 2 from 2003 will be hugher on the list.

OT:
Can't complain here, list is filled with excellent games. Although i do think Resident Evil 4 deserves a spot here.

I didnt refer to Halo ouselling HL2. Just some other greatly recieved games not on their. And yeah I thought HL2 was pretty generic imo. But hey it's all opinion anyway. :)



Around the Network

I thought ME2 is better than U2 according to IGN?



No portal? :(



 

ssj12 said:
Gilgamesh said:
ssj12 said:
Gilgamesh said:

Horrible

No Metal Gear Solid games, no Final Fantasy (X) games (even Crisis Core deserves to be there), San Andreas was waaaaaay better then III.

I disagree with you. MGS has way to many flaws. Final Fantasy is a great RPG series, but I'd place The Witcher way before FF. And San Andreas didnt revolutionize the third-person action adventure genre like III, because well III was the first in the series to do it and did it well..

I would love to hear your flaws about MGS, because I can't seem to think of any. I believe either IV, III or maybe I should be on the list.

Just the fact its confusing, and since this is about the last decade, MGS4 being the best of the series in the last decade, it has way to many cutscenes.

 

Frankly, Splinter Cell is the better tactical stealth shooter, imho. Still, I hate these types of games anyways.

Confusing? you must not of played all the Metal Gear Solid games (atleast I - IV). If you did it wouldn't be confusing. Also yeh I guess Metal Gear Solid was made around 1999 so it doesn't count but there's still II, III and IV. A lot of people would say III is the best for me it's a tie between IV. The only confusing MGS game is II and really it's not that bad, just a lot of information being thrown at you at the end. As for cutscenes in MGS4 it was pretty much my favorite part, I was glad to see a cut scene come up.

Also the story alone beats out any game ever made (III and IV), truly a masterpiece of a game.



CGI-Quality said:
Some of you really think Half-Life 2 was nothing more than a mere 'tech demo'? O_o

Just like some people think MGS is perfect. Everyone has their opinions.



themanwithnoname's law: As an America's sales or NPD thread grows longer, the probabilty of the comment "America = World" [sarcasticly] being made approaches 1.

ssj12 said:
Mazty said:

 

Not at all. THe game is highly over rated and I'll say why:

Who are you? A scientist. Who worked for Black Mesa. Who the hell are they...Well apparently having worked for them and having a suit makes you into Rambo. Hell, you don't need lean or to look down the barrel of your gun, just run and gun.I can understand why they opted for Gordon not to speak, but the fact that there is so much dialogue aimed at you, it broke the immersion for me as these odd monologues kept on occuring. And an invincible guy in a suit kept showing up every now and again, only to deliever the most confusing ending I've seen because who is he? What the hell is he on about? This leads me onto the story...

What story? Iif you've never played the first you are given no direction as to what is going on other than the earth has been invaded by the Combine. Are they bad people? They seem to be keeping the city people down but for all I know the rest of the world could be an eutopia where the rivers are made of chocolate with gumdrop trees covering acre after acre and every troop I kill I'm depriving them of a loving wife and children etc, you see where I'm going with that.
In game the story is this: You are on a train. You meet the rebels, the teleport messes up, you meet up with the rebel HQ, then the majority of the game is getting from point A (where you are) to point B (where the rebels are being held hostage). Oh and somehow the younger "attractive" chick falls for Gordon even though she doesn't know him and christ, this sh*t reads out like Twilight for nerdy guys - as opposed to a book, it's a game, and instead of vampires, you are a geeky Rambo.

The gameplay can be best described as adequate. You can't lean which is a real b*tch considering the game is a giant corridor crawl, with some awful, awful vehicle parts. Yes Valve, you modified the Havok engine, congratulations, your vehicles still handle like sh*t, and if I can move a box, and can get over the sand/radioactive waste/electrified water fine, you don't have to feel obligied to put in these asinine game lengthing features more than once.

End of the day, Halo: CE was far, far more influential and came out the same time. The vehicles handled far better, the multiplayer was sublime, the storyline wasn't revolutionary, but the length and scale of the missions were, as well as games nowadays still feeling it's effect of regenerating health and a very balanced two weapon system, with melee and quick access grenades. To give HL2 the no.1 spot is just pleasing all the fans of HL2 out there instead of going for the game which has influnced shooters for the past decade.

 

Halo is far from influential. Frankly your confused on which game is generic.

Also Valve's physics engine inspired Havok. Not the other way around.

Just because you have no idea the angle the Half-Life franchise was going with narrative and plot, you should not insult art.

You can lean... you just obviously have no idea how to do it. (should br the q+e keys unless you stupidly changed them)

And comparing Half-Life to Twilight has to be a sin.

 

OT: I agree with this list. Battlefield 1942 influence the vehicle based combat in multiplayer games combining excellent gameplaying and vehicle combat.

Half-Life 2 is godlike. There is no better FPS.

 

Clearly you have no idea about FPS' before Halo:CE.

It was the one to bring regenerating health, a two weapon balanced system (Rocket launcher with very limited ammo), melee attack and quick use grenades. Almost every game since then has copied this forumla. What did HL2 bring to FPS?

How about you defend the 'art' instead of saying I'm ignorant to it? Don't try that cop-out. Explain why it is art.

No you can't lean. Well done on that stupid mistake.

Please explain why HL2 is so good, unless you are one of those mindless drones whose entire reasoning comes down to "Cuz it iz".