I liked the first one, never completed the second though cus I got bored.  Maybe one day I'll try it again.  But ya, after seeing 100 lists where the top 10 are games that came out 15+ years ago, it's nice to see one that isn't as nostalgia focused.

It's one way to determine a list, yes.  Resolution or polygon count gets tricky, especially when you get into mods.  Reviews can be tricky as well, because not every game has been reviewed the same way.  So ultimately finding a panel of members that you trust, with a basic set of rules for judging games is probably the best way to go.  If you want to get really accurate, then focus on just one genre at a time.

So, if it's based on trust, then wouldn't that be acknowledging its subjectivity? You can determine the greatest games based on who you decide to listen to.

I half agree with you. I definitely think this whole cultural relativism line of thinking is silly. Of course we can applaud, criticize, or even rip to shreds a list such as this. The fact that all lists are subjective doesn't prevent us, as consumers, from applying our own subjective perspective to them.

But I disagree about a greatest games list requiring some degree of objectivity. You simply can't measure greatness in any objective, empirical way. You can measure sales, and scores, and influence, but not greatness. So I'm fine with EDGE embracing the subjective opinions of its writers. Those opinions just happen to be far removed from my own, which is why I'm down on the list.

Sarcastic tone aside, it's not that they don't have redeeming qualities, it's that the qualities that make them great have been done in other games and have been done better.

In this scenerio there would be some subjectivity, not a lot, but some.  It more depends on the rules however, in the olympics there are certain rules in sports such as ice skating that automatically deduct points based on what the contestents do, such as if they fall they lose a half a point or whatever.  This takes away a lot of the subjectivity, but at the end of the day some judges will rank certain performances higher than others.

This is why I said it would be more accurate if we judged genres seperately with a panel.  The idea is that you get rid of judges who sway too far one way or the other, and you get judges who are honest about their choices.

Also, just so we are clear, I'm not arguing, i'm discussing.  Sometimes when people argue they try to pinpoint one sentence the person said and prove that sentence is wrong so they can seemingly "win".  That is not my goal here, I'm just trying to have a light conversation.  Everything I say is simply my opinion.

Obviously you can't.

and why is that exactly?