[mag]

Originally Posted by Filmman

Tetris is a classic game I like playing Tetris alot

It definitely deserves a spot in the top 100, but the number one game of all time? I don't think so.

Anyway, I kind of like the way GameSpot does it. Instead of trying to rank them numerically, they just put all the games in their hall of fame. There's less fighting that way. We might disagree over which one of those games is better than the others, but most people can agree that they're great games.

mag

[Threepwood]

WHERE THE HELL IS "TIE FIGHTER"?

Crappy list.

Originally Posted by mag

It definitely deserves a spot in the top 100, but the number one game of all time? I don't think so.

Anyway, I kind of like the way GameSpot does it. . .mag

Agreed. I was actually going to mention how I like their kind of list as well. Plus, they happen to have a lot of great, obscure games that you won't find on other lists, but still really deserve recognition.

Originally Posted by Threepwood

WHERE THE HELL IS "TIE FIGHTER"?

On Gamespot's list. Heh.

[DaV]

I don't think Yahoo's list is numberically ranked at all, it's just the 100 Greatest Games of All Time (not ranked).

Finally, this game gets the recognitian it diserves.

[tknaps]

Looks like it's "that time of the year" or something. IGN has their top 100 up at:

http://top100.ign.com/2005/index.html

Originally Posted by Threepwood

WHERE THE HELL IS "TIE FIGHTER"?

Crappy list.

Well, at least IGN has it in their top 10

#28: Half-Life 2

#27: Burnout 3:Takedown

Screeching hault.

[Once A Villain]

IGNs list doesn't even count. It violates all standards of common sense. Earlier this very year they did their Best Games of 2004 list. They did a Playstation 2, XBox, GameCube, and PC game of the year, and then they had an overall best game of 2004 regardless of platform. Their Game of the Year for 2004 was Half-Life 2. Now, a few months later, they do a top games of all time and rank not one but TWO 2004 games (Burnout 3 and Rome: Total War) above Half-Life 2. This causes me to wonder where the IGN editors have left their brains, and I therefore can't take their list seriously even as entertainment (plus, not a single adventure game or Ninja Gaiden game...).

[gillyruless]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

IGNs list doesn't even count. It violates all standards of common sense. Earlier this very year they did their Best Games of 2004 list. They did a Playstation 2, XBox, GameCube, and PC game of the year, and then they had an overall best game of 2004 regardless of platform. Their Game of the Year for 2004 was Half-Life 2. Now, a few months later, they do a top games of all time and rank not one but TWO 2004 games (Burnout 3 and Rome: Total War) above Half-Life 2. This causes me to wonder where the IGN editors have left their brains, and I therefore can't take their list seriously even as entertainment (plus, not a single adventure game or Ninja Gaiden game...).

IGN list did have GF and DOTT. Way too low though. Overall with the exception of the noticeable omission of AGs, the IGN list is more well rounded than the Yahoo UK one.

[SakSquash]

Ahh, whoops already done, sorry.

[Reflection]

No Shadowrun on the list!

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by gillyruless

IGN list did have GF and DOTT. Way too low though. Overall with the exception of the noticeable omission of AGs, the IGN list is more well rounded than the Yahoo UK one.

Ah yes, my bad. You're right though...too low. The list is more well rounded than the Yahoo one, I agree. But I can't get over the fact that their 2004 Game of the Year ranked worse all time than two other 2004 games. That just makes no logical sense to me.....

[CrimsonBlue]

To be fair though, they had Sid Meier's Pirates! in number 6!

(but only because they were reminded on how good this game is through the excellent remake)