Adventure Gamers - Forums
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
Post Marker Legend:
-
New posts -
No new posts
Currently online
The Top 100 - what changes would you make?
We will never agree all of us. As we use to say in Spain, opinions are like butts: everybody has got one.
Currently translating Strangeland into Spanish. Wish me luck, or send me money to my Paypal haha
REMOVE:
1) Everything by Jane Jensen.This must be some April Fools’, right?
No, that’s a fair assessment of her work.
She can create settings and premises that are interesting, but when the actual game goes on, it all falls apart.
Mazes in every game (even 15 years after Sierra!), cat moustaches, cuckoo clocks, ridiculously bad supernatural events, etc.
It’s not like those are the worst games ever made, but there’s nothing that would make them the best either.
The first Gabriel Knight was kind of OK, at least mercifully forgetting mazes which have sudden deaths and can lead to dead-ends, and all that. But what really made it special was the beautiful pixel arts and back then superb voice acting.
What happened with the remake?
Remove Luke Skywalker and Worf, replace state-of-the-art pixel arts with generic 3D models, and no one cared anymore.
The story itself remained the same.
Some people have defended Jensen by saying that she made adventure games more mature.
Now personally, when I’m running as a werewolf in the teleporting maze, I’m not so sure at which point I’m supposed to feel good about that. 
i guess you are a bit over your head here unless she betrayed you in a previous relation
I don’t get it myself, too, that is too harsh! but I can’t deny that I like strong opinions.. so as much as I can say it again, I think I always made it clear that I think JJ is a bit overrated, I would bury not her, as no one can argue that she had given life to two of the most important adventures in the history of the genre, but in the context of Sierra, only..
if you cant think where am I coming from with all this, let me say it like this, I never ‘loved’ Pink Floyd but also never dared to discredit their talents and impact
Exactly, those tops are meant to acknowledge something/someone for their contribution to the media, not just list editor’s favourite games (those tops are made collectively anyway). One of the most renewed adventure designers certainly deserved a place in the TOP 100 adventure games.
i guess you are a bit over your head here unless she betrayed you in a previous relation
Lol sounds like it 
PC means personal computer
I’m with Karlok re:sequels. There are so many games that deserve to be there that make it silly to have 4 Mysts and 3 MIs. If we keep in mind that the list is mainly for other people to discover games, if they play the first Myst or MI and absolutely love it, they’re going to keep playing the sequels.
Games I haven’t played yet but I have my doubts if they should be on the list:
-Sherlock Holmes: The Awakened
I agree with this, except it should be replaced by Sherlock Holmes and the Serrated Scalpel - for me, undoubtedly the best Sherlock game.
Another change I’d make - replacing Amnesia with SOMA. Amnesia is really good but the storyline is nothing special. SOMA’s is incredible.
Are you kidding?
The first Runaway was great! The sequels were a bit more difficult to take, one reason being how the protagonist changed from an accidental nerd to some cool dude.
Yes, the first Runaway was great. If I made my own Top 100 from scratch it’s likely it would sneak in there. The second and third I didn’t think much of.
AKA Charo
I’m with Karlok re:sequels. There are so many games that deserve to be there that make it silly to have 4 Mysts and 3 MIs. If we keep in mind that the list is mainly for other people to discover games, if they play the first Myst or MI and absolutely love it, they’re going to keep playing the sequels.
This is, quite simply, wrong.
The list, subjectively, is meant to be the top 100 adventure games, not a list of game series that people might like to try. Following the logic to it’s natural conclusion only the very first game of a series could be listed. That means, using this series as an example, only Mean Streets of the Tex Murphy games could appear in the list. That would mean newcomers would have to work their way through that game and The Martian Memorandum to possibly find their way to Under A Killing Moon and then The Pandora Directive. Whilst the first two games paved the way for the second two games I doubt that anyone would include them in a top 100 of Adventure games.
Nope, games have to live and die by what they are, in, and of, themselves as individual games.
Personally I’d remove everything Myst related and anything with Quest in its title but that’s never going to happen.
Slightly different note on this.
Some years back Advie(?) set up a play-off thread to decide the best adventure game of all time as decided by the members here. If anyone had the time to rework that into a slightly more broad based selection criteria (from memory he used the top 100 from AG as his starting point) that might satisfy everyone and the results could well be an interesting read.
Life is what it is.
Personally I’d remove everything Myst related and anything with Quest in its title but that’s never going to happen.
And some people said I was going too far with Jensen!
Haha!!
Although they might be OK with you there, because technically speaking your definition would allow her games to be included. 
You are correct though, many games that have Quest in the title get far better reception than they simply as random games would deserve. Like Space Quest IV, it had almost full score reviews back then, it’s regarded as a real classic, but as a game it’s actually not that good. Not even as good as games that both preceded and succeeded it in the series.
Nope, games have to live and die by what they are, in, and of, themselves as individual games.
A good point, but sometimes impossible to follow.
For instance, the self-referencing Space Quest IV loses about 73.2 % of its appeal, if you don’t know the earlier games in the series.
And would a new, fresh player have any idea what those latex babez are there for?
Some years back Advie(?) set up a play-off thread to decide the best adventure game of all time as decided by the members here. If anyone had the time to rework that into a slightly more broad based selection criteria (from memory he used the top 100 from AG as his starting point) that might satisfy everyone and the results could well be an interesting read.
Not a bad idea, but it’s still limiting voting to pre-selected candidates.
If all voters could first submit, let’s say, five games of their own choice, that way at least everyone would have their own favourite game in the running.
And some people said I was going too far with Jensen!
Haha!!
Although they might be OK with you there, because technically speaking your definition would allow her games to be included.
I’ve never actually been too keen on her games so wouldn’t worry about them going but I understand why people like them
Nope, games have to live and die by what they are, in, and of, themselves as individual games.
A good point, but sometimes impossible to follow.
For instance, the self-referencing Space Quest IV loses about 73.2 % of its appeal, if you don’t know the earlier games in the series.
And would a new, fresh player have any idea what those latex babez are there for?
But that’s very much the exception and happens in few games. Some certainly, but that degree of self-reference would stop them from being considered in my view. Maybe there’s a case for a sub-division of series that you need to play almost in order for them to make sense. Personally I wouldn’t bother but others may see a value.
Some years back Advie(?) set up a play-off thread to decide the best adventure game of all time as decided by the members here. If anyone had the time to rework that into a slightly more broad based selection criteria (from memory he used the top 100 from AG as his starting point) that might satisfy everyone and the results could well be an interesting read.
Not a bad idea, but it’s still limiting voting to pre-selected candidates.
If all voters could first submit, let’s say, five games of their own choice, that way at least everyone would have their own favourite game in the running.
Didn’t make myself clear obviously.
I wasn’t advocating using the top 100 as found here simply because we’re looking to update it so that would be self defeating. It’s what I meant by a slightly more broad based selection criteria. How that criteria is established would have to be open to discussion and your suggestion would certainly be a valid one.
Life is what it is.
I’m with Karlok re:sequels. There are so many games that deserve to be there that make it silly to have 4 Mysts and 3 MIs. If we keep in mind that the list is mainly for other people to discover games, if they play the first Myst or MI and absolutely love it, they’re going to keep playing the sequels.
This is, quite simply, wrong.
The list, subjectively, is meant to be the top 100 adventure games, not a list of game series that people might like to try. Following the logic to it’s natural conclusion only the very first game of a series could be listed. That means, using this series as an example, only Mean Streets of the Tex Murphy games could appear in the list. That would mean newcomers would have to work their way through that game and The Martian Memorandum to possibly find their way to Under A Killing Moon and then The Pandora Directive. Whilst the first two games paved the way for the second two games I doubt that anyone would include them in a top 100 of Adventure games.
Nope, games have to live and die by what they are, in, and of, themselves as individual games.Personally I’d remove everything Myst related and anything with Quest in its title but that’s never going to happen.
Slightly different note on this.
Some years back Advie(?) set up a play-off thread to decide the best adventure game of all time as decided by the members here. If anyone had the time to rework that into a slightly more broad based selection criteria (from memory he used the top 100 from AG as his starting point) that might satisfy everyone and the results could well be an interesting read.
Well, I have no qualms about putting Under A Killing Moon there instead of Mean Streets (that was my first Tex game, just like SQIV was my first Space Quest - I enjoyed both so much I ended up playing all the games in the series).
I’m certainly with you that games stand on their own merit. I suppose where I differ is the intention of the Top 100. If you want it to be simply a list of the best 100 games quality-wise, fine. Given that it’s (in my opinion) meant to be an informative piece I’d be really reluctant to include more than one game from a series, simply because it doesn’t help the reader a whole lot. At least not as much as including an entirely different title altogether, which might be undiscovered one.
I’d also say that a contest to discover the best adventure game of all time, with its own format of pitting games against each other to decide the winner, is different from a Top 100 designed to inform the public about the best 100 games. I know that at least for me, I’d guess that both would yield very different results.
AKA Charo
Some years back Advie(?) set up a play-off thread to decide the best adventure game of all time as decided by the members here. If anyone had the time to rework that into a slightly more broad based selection criteria (from memory he used the top 100 from AG as his starting point) that might satisfy everyone and the results could well be an interesting read.
Do you mean as in this thread Jabod: The Big AG ?
Some years back Advie(?) set up a play-off thread to decide the best adventure game of all time as decided by the members here. If anyone had the time to rework that into a slightly more broad based selection criteria (from memory he used the top 100 from AG as his starting point) that might satisfy everyone and the results could well be an interesting read.
Do you mean as in this thread Jabod: The Big AG ?
Thanks Chrissie as, yes, that’s the one.
Apologies to Bogi (whatever happened to him?) and Advie for mixing them up.
I’d forgotten that Bogi had added an extra 28 games (this was to make it up to 128 games which allowed for a natural run down to 1) via voting so it wasn’t just the 100 top games from here.
I’m going to go back over that when I have some time 
Life is what it is.
Yeah, Bogi’s List, is one of the greatest achievement done here by a forumite
whatever happened to
himBogi ?
sound like a cohen’s brothers movie
I’m certainly with you that games stand on their own merit. I suppose where I differ is the intention of the Top 100. If you want it to be simply a list of the best 100 games quality-wise, fine. Given that it’s (in my opinion) meant to be an informative piece I’d be really reluctant to include more than one game from a series, simply because it doesn’t help the reader a whole lot. At least not as much as including an entirely different title altogether, which might be undiscovered one.
I’d also say that a contest to discover the best adventure game of all time, with its own format of pitting games against each other to decide the winner, is different from a Top 100 designed to inform the public about the best 100 games. I know that at least for me, I’d guess that both would yield very different results.
The greatest 100 games of all time is simply that and nothing more - as voted for by the netizens of this site should it happen. It’s purely subjective and personal but, at the very least, it would be voted on by people who care enough about this genre to be members here.
What you appear to be suggesting is a list of games/series that newcomers to the genre might like to try - also as voted on by people here. In and of itself that’s no bad idea and could be useful (if just as contentious as a top 100 games list ) but it’s some way from where we came in which is adding and removing from the currently listed top 100 games.
Life is what it is.
for your point Jabod, i think ‘List of games/series that newcomers to the genre might like to try’ I think this is a great idea!
as for the general idea, i guess before we can add anything, we need to think first of what are those titles needed to be eliminated; we can take them from last to first, 10 by 10.. thru some mechanism, i would think about, or anyone else has an idea ...
for your point Jabod, i think ‘List of games/series that newcomers to the genre might like to try’ I think this is a great idea!
That’s really just an extension of what Charophycean was, I think, suggesting Advie.
as for the general idea, i guess before we can add anything, we need to think first of what are those titles needed to be eliminated; we can take them from last to first, 10 by 10.. thru some mechanism, i would think about, or anyone else has an idea ...
I don’t see why anything should be removed before additions are made. If we were to do that then it’s odds on, come the final 100, there’d be games in the list that some people would much rather be replaced with games that were removed prior to the “100” vote. No, I think all games should go in evenly and let them all live or die by as near a concensus as could be managed.
Life is what it is.
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
