• Log In | Sign Up

  • News
  • Reviews
  • Games Database
  • Game Discovery
  • Search
  • New Releases
  • Forums

Adventure Gamers - Forums

Welcome to Adventure Gamers. Please Sign In or Join Now to post.

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread


   

Top 100 All-Time Adventures update

Avatar

Total Posts: 422

Joined 2012-10-03

PM

Hi, I’ve been following this from afar as often, but just thought of something. Maybe this is a bit idiot, but why not make several top 100 lists? I don’t mean to give more work to the AG team, but I see it more that way: as time goes by, there are more and more games, the tastes of people change, the technology evolves, etc. If we project outselves in the future, this top 100 list will not be able to exist in 50 years, and in my opinion it is very complicated to update it. The games that were in the top 100 at a certain time deserve to remain in the top 100. So why not make a new top 100 every 5, 10, 15 or 30 years? I find that the current Top 100 is a good photography of an era and it would be a shame to change it. And there are so many new good adventure games that we could easily make a top 200, but would it make more sense? I feel that a “Top 100 1970 - 1990”, then a “Top 100 1990 - 2010” and a “Top 100 2010 - current days” (for example!) could be a good idea.
Or a Top 50, or different periods of time, or…??? I don’t know, you’re the ones who like to think and talk about these things haha Grin This is just an idea that I wanted to share before someone would take the decision to modify the current list. Please don’t modify the current Top 100, I used it several times to find games I never heard about before: I don’t care if they’re old, and I’m sure that younger players might want to see it too. It’s like movies, some people like to watch old ones, they were somewhat as good as many new ones.
I understand that a “Top 100 all-time” is interesting but it sounds a bit unrealistic to me. You will always have to delete some of the best games of the past at some point, just because great new games have appeared. Then people will fight to know if it is better to keep the great classics in the list, or to put instead the new successful games.
I mean, imagine, we’re in 2040 and Grim Fandango is about to be removed because it’s dated, doesn’t work on Windows 15 and there’s this new adventure in 3rd person view that is so much better, more beautiful etc. Then do you really want to remove Grim Fandango from the list? Does it have to be removed from the memories as the #1 game in the Top 100 of 2019? I don’t think so.
Another way of seing it would be to make several Top 100 lists at different periods of time as suggested above, and then make a Top-100 all-time next to them, which would take the best of each list. But at least there would still be the possibility to check the Top 100 of a different time… For History! Smile

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 1036

Joined 2013-08-25

PM

I think extending the list to Top 130/Top 150/Top 200 is actually a great idea. Of course, several lists sound like more fun, but hell lot of a work, and it will just confuse both editors and readers. Adding new games to the old list, on the other hand, won’t upset anyone. Plus older gems missing from the current list for some reason could be added as well. I mean, it is nice to see Woodruff in the “You might also like” section and all, but putting it on the actual list would bring balance to this world and beyond Smile

     

PC means personal computer

Avatar

Total Posts: 5523

Joined 2013-08-26

PM

Extending the list sounds like a great idea, but it would require reshuffling 100 games or the order of the games would lose all meaning.

     

I can take care of myself. I’ve been doing it for centuries. - Snow, The Wolf Among Us

Total Posts: 211

Joined 2003-11-10

PM

Simon_ASA - 27 September 2019 05:35 AM

I understand that a “Top 100 all-time” is interesting but it sounds a bit unrealistic to me. You will always have to delete some of the best games of the past at some point, just because great new games have appeared. Then people will fight to know if it is better to keep the great classics in the list, or to put instead the new successful games.

Isn’t the point of a Top 100 of all times to select the, well, top 100 games regardless of their age ?
If a new game comes out and is better than an older top 100 game, then it’s only logical that the older game would be removed from the top.
Especially since, as it’s been pointed out, some of the old games in the top 100 feel like they’ve been put there because of the lack of competition rather because of their own worth.
And if someone uses the list to chose the AGs he/she wants to play, then isn’t it better if the list includes some recent excellent games rather than some ok older games ?

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 422

Joined 2012-10-03

PM

I have a different point of view Ninth, but as I said I was only sharing an idea, not trying to start a debate. I know most people won’t agree with me - It is often the case actually Wink I seem to see things differently, so nevermind.

     

Total Posts: 864

Joined 2004-01-06

PM

Simon_ASA - 27 September 2019 05:35 AM

Hi, I’ve been following this from afar as often, but just thought of something. Maybe this is a bit idiot, but why not make several top 100 lists? I don’t mean to give more work to the AG team, but I see it more that way: as time goes by, there are more and more games, the tastes of people change, the technology evolves, etc. If we project outselves in the future, this top 100 list will not be able to exist in 50 years, and in my opinion it is very complicated to update it. The games that were in the top 100 at a certain time deserve to remain in the top 100. So why not make a new top 100 every 5, 10, 15 or 30 years? I find that the current Top 100 is a good photography of an era and it would be a shame to change it. And there are so many new good adventure games that we could easily make a top 200, but would it make more sense? I feel that a “Top 100 1970 - 1990”, then a “Top 100 1990 - 2010” and a “Top 100 2010 - current days” (for example!) could be a good idea.

I like the idea of keeping the current Top 100 list as it is.
Instead of messing with the old list, removing peoples’ old favorites, then facing the onerous task of
re-ordering the whole thing and editing the webpage, I’d rather see AG make a new list that covers a later time range.
Maybe a “2003 to present” list for games that work natively on XP and later.
Or a “2007 to present” list for games that work natively on Vista/7/8/10

We don’t need another list full of the same DOS games that are on every other “top games of all time” list. I’d rather see a new list that includes some more recent games that would get skipped over otherwise, not because they aren’t good but because there isn’t room and people feel obligated to include the “classic DOS games.”

I have no problem with different lists that cover different time ranges, but that would be more work for the AG staff so it’s up to them.

Simon_ASA - 27 September 2019 05:35 AM

Another way of seeing it would be to make several Top 100 lists at different periods of time as suggested above, and then make a Top-100 all-time next to them, which would take the best of each list. But at least there would still be the possibility to check the Top 100 of a different time… For History!

That would be nice, and maybe more useful for people looking for games from a particular game era to play, but would be more work for the AG staff.

Just for reference…

The current Top 100 list is here
https://adventuregamers.com/articles/view/18643
is from 30 December 2011

and the “top 134” list made by the forum is here
https://adventuregamers.com/forums/viewthread/4659/#84816
and is from 19 February 2015

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 5887

Joined 2007-07-22

PM

Simon_ASA - 27 September 2019 05:35 AM

Hi, I’ve been following this from afar as often, but just thought of something. Maybe this is a bit idiot, but why not make several top 100 lists? I don’t mean to give more work to the AG team, but I see it more that way: as time goes by, there are more and more games, the tastes of people change, the technology evolves, etc. If we project outselves in the future, this top 100 list will not be able to exist in 50 years, and in my opinion it is very complicated to update it. The games that were in the top 100 at a certain time deserve to remain in the top 100. So why not make a new top 100 every 5, 10, 15 or 30 years? I find that the current Top 100 is a good photography of an era and it would be a shame to change it. And there are so many new good adventure games that we could easily make a top 200, but would it make more sense? I feel that a “Top 100 1970 - 1990”, then a “Top 100 1990 - 2010” and a “Top 100 2010 - current days” (for example!) could be a good idea.

Why are games different than movies or books? They are not, Top 100 games should be a definitive (subjective) list of all time up to the day the list was published. If you wanna make the list of “Best games of 2019”, fine. If you make the list of the “Best games in the last 5 years”, that’s OK too. But if you want to make the “Best 100 adventure games of all time”, then it should be exact what it says it is.

The different question is when the AG stuff will feel the “need” to update the list, or issue a completely new list (like they already did, by issuing the new Top 100 list instead of the old Top 20). I suspect 10 years between the lists (or updates) at least.

     

Recently finished: Four Last Things 4/5, Edna & Harvey: The Breakout 5/5, Chains of Satinav 3,95/5, A Vampyre Story 88, Sam Peters 3/5, Broken Sword 1 4,5/5, Broken Sword 2 4,3/5, Broken Sword 3 85, Broken Sword 5 81, Gray Matter 4/5\nCurrently playing: Broken Sword 4, Keepsake (Let\‘s Play), Callahan\‘s Crosstime Saloon (post-Community Playthrough)\nLooking forward to: A Playwright’s Tale

Avatar

Total Posts: 3986

Joined 2004-07-12

PM

I may be wrong. I often am. But it seems as if the concept of replacing games with new ones is being misinterpreted.

An analogy I would prefer to use is that it is like setting a starting field in auto racing. Forty five cars are qualifying for thirty three slots. The first car to qualify gets the number one slot. It keeps that slot until another car qualifies with a faster speed, and then it is “bumped” to number two. And so it goes until all thirty three slots are filled. This obviously means that twelve racers will have either been bumped or failed to qualify fast enough to get into the starting field.

If, for example, Obra Dinn is deemed good enough to be in the number five slot, it does not mean that it replaces the current number five game. It means that the old number one hundred game gets bumped from the field.

Now if someone wants to maintain the list, in sequential order, of games that have been bumped from the top 100, more power to him/her. I think this is what Simon had in mind.

     

For whom the games toll,
they toll for thee.

Casual Game Developer List
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AohuMgk8BGFTdExjM2s4eGdJRGZmcWJxMUNoUTlMZVE#gid=0

Avatar

Total Posts: 1184

Joined 2012-02-17

PM

I actually like lists, and I’d be happy to do something like a Top XX of the 1990s, 2000s, 2010s, etc. Either that or thematic lists like Top Horror, Sci-fi, etc. (That’s a lot tougher, though, since those distinctions are often blurred.)

But I still like having one “definitive” (ha!) all-time list, even if it needs to be updated every once in a while. Since posting that Top 100, there are more great new games that deserve to go on than old ones that deserve to come off, but that’s part of the fun of debating. Smile

To be clear, if/when we do another update, we’ll probably adapt the existing article for search continuity purposes, but we’d be sure to keep the previous list saved for posterity, probably in point form at the end so people can compare how it’s evolved.

     

Editor-in-Chief, some obscure little site called Adventure Gamers

Avatar

Total Posts: 3986

Joined 2004-07-12

PM

I think it would be a great ideal to revisit the AG Top 100 games annually. Add new games to wherever they fall in the mix. And, however many games get added to the list, in whatever position is decided, the equivalent number of games get bumped from the bottom of the list.

I think it would be good to set a limit to the number of new games that can be added to the list in any given year. My suggestion would be to limit the number of new games added to ten. What those ten games should be, and where they should be placed deserves a thread of its own.

Of course I think that we must use the current AG list as the fixed point of reference.

     

For whom the games toll,
they toll for thee.

Casual Game Developer List
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AohuMgk8BGFTdExjM2s4eGdJRGZmcWJxMUNoUTlMZVE#gid=0

Avatar

Total Posts: 1436

Joined 2010-01-10

PM

rtrooney - 27 September 2019 09:33 PM

And, however many games get added to the list, in whatever position is decided, the equivalent number of games get bumped from the bottom of the list.

This would be fundamentally wrong to implement.

As some new games are seen to be worthy of a place in the top 100 and others are seen to have no place in the “Brave New World” ( Smile ) there will be others within the current top 100, quite possibly very near the bottom of the list, that are, in retrospect, now deemed of a higher placing. If the bottom ones are automatically discarded with no rhyme nor reason other than current position then games that deserve a listing, and possibly a higher listing, would vanish quite unjustifiably (I acknowledge that there would be people who’d be quite happy to see said games go. I know that there are a number within the current 100 that I think “what on earth are people on about!).

     

Never cry for something that can’t cry for you.

Avatar

Total Posts: 2146

Joined 2007-01-04

PM

There are many top 100 lists out there. Top 100 movies, etc. they all are updated periodically and I am sure our top 100 list will get the same treatment.

Heart

     

I enjoy playing adventure games on handheld systems- PS VITA, Nintendo DS and ipad mini.

Avatar

Total Posts: 2294

Joined 2013-03-14

PM

I’ve always liked IMDb’s top 250 list. It’s constantly living, dropping and adding movies, but at the same time, it still is a good combination of old movies and newer ones. At times, some new and popular movie can enter into it for a while, but usually, they tend to leave the list if they aren’t that great. It does help that it is automated though, so it isn’t dependant on someone manually fiddling it unless there is a need to alter the algorithms it uses.

https://www.imdb.com/chart/top?sort=rk,asc&mode=simple&page=1

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 3986

Joined 2004-07-12

PM

Jabod - 28 September 2019 05:42 AM

This would be fundamentally wrong to implement.

Only if the top 100 is just that, i.e., a conglomeration of games that people think deserving of that status without regard to ranking. If the games are ranked from best to worst, as they are in the AG top 100, it’s very easy to implement.

I would be more than happy if the AG “Editorial Board” took an annual look at the top 100 ranking, did some judicious reshuffling and picked some games it thinks should/could be deleted.

     

For whom the games toll,
they toll for thee.

Casual Game Developer List
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AohuMgk8BGFTdExjM2s4eGdJRGZmcWJxMUNoUTlMZVE#gid=0

Avatar

Total Posts: 2294

Joined 2013-03-14

PM

This topic inspired me to write this article: https://playernone.blogspot.com/2019/09/a-history-of-adventure-games.html

It is a history of adventure games, where I try to lay down some of the broad strokes in how the genre was born evolved.

     

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Welcome to the Adventure Gamers forums!