The top 100 games of TNL *temporarily on hold*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valgar

We should define what a game needs to be in order to be in the TNL top 100, like Nick was saying, so we are all on the same track.

For example, Street Fighter 2 is influential, but does that mean it is a Top 100 game of all time?

---

Easily. You wouldn't say Fidel Castro is crazier than Escobar or Al Capone just because he's still around and owns a country would you?

SF2 was so far ahead of every game at the time it wasn't funny. If that doesn't warrant a spot in the top 100, then Joe Montana, JOhn Elway, Dan Marino etc. are all hacks and shouldn't be in the top 100 next to Michael Vick, Favre, Manning etc.

I think we should pretty much decide whether we want to judge games by when they were released or by how good they are today.

Personally, I'd go for how well they've aged over anything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Captain Canuck

Easily. You wouldn't say Fidel Castro is crazier than Escobar or Al Capone just because he's still around and owns a country would you?

SF2 was so far ahead of every game at the time it wasn't funny. If that doesn't warrant a spot in the top 100, then Joe Montana, JOhn Elway, Dan Marino etc. are all hacks and shouldn't be in the top 100 next to Michael Vick, Favre, Manning etc.

---

This is why we need to define what a Top 100 game is. In My viewpoint, SF2 shouldn't be included, because I will never play it again, and I don't WANT to play it again. I don't know many other people who would take SF2 over a new fighter either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tain

I think we should pretty much decide whether we want to judge games by when they were released or by how good they are today.

Personally, I'd go for how well they've aged over anything else.

---

Some types of games just age better than others though. For example, all the past fighitng games are pretty much obsolete now. The games you play for over 100 hours age way more than games you finish once and don't touch again for awhile. Besides, I think games that age well are just fond memories or nostaglia working.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valgar

This is why we need to define what a Top 100 game is. In My viewpoint, SF2 shouldn't be included, because I will never play it again, and I don't WANT to play it again. I don't know many other people who would take SF2 over a new fighter either.

---

Yeah, I wouldn't play SF2 ever again either, but technically it would still be a better game than something I would play again like FF2 us cause I haven't finished it in 5 years. Why? Simple, SF2 was way better than FF2 US back in the days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valgar

This is why we need to define what a Top 100 game is. In My viewpoint, SF2 shouldn't be included, because I will never play it again, and I don't WANT to play it again. I don't know many other people who would take SF2 over a new fighter either.

---

I would but then again im old school like that.

I would rather play my Street Fighter cab then any hyper capcom vs. neo busters 2020 shit any day..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valgar

This is why we need to define what a Top 100 game is. In My viewpoint, SF2 shouldn't be included, because I will never play it again, and I don't WANT to play it again. I don't know many other people who would take SF2 over a new fighter either.

---

It's unfair to judge a 10 year old game by today's standards. If you're gonna make the list like that then it would just consist of recent games, which would be retarded.

Very few people would choose an old game over a new game of the same genre, but that doesn't mean the old game wasn't a helluva lot better for it's time than the new one, or that the new one is any more important.

Just my two cents.

I don't know Omni, nostalgia does a lot. Many people would pick Goldeneye over Perfect Dark, even though PD is technically a superior game. I think we should only be allowed to pick 4, maybe the genre thing Mzo suggested would be good if we could all vote 1 for each genre. The only problem is that you'll have people like me that don't know a lot about... say.... 2D fighters and I'll be able to vote. Kind of defeats a level poll.

Valgar had a good point too in the fact that a lot of people would choose a game like Street Fighter 2, whereas the more recent updates of that game are better in almost every way... it's just too hard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valgar

We should define what a game needs to be in order to be in the TNL top 100, like Nick was saying, so we are all on the same track.

For example, Street Fighter 2 is influential, but does that mean it is a Top 100 game of all time?

---

Influence is important. But I think the most pertanent thing for the list has to be if you could play it today and still find it to be a great game.

I find it hard to play SF2 anymore, but SSF2 Turbo was able to find the great balance that makes it fun to this day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OmniGear

Very few people would choose an old game over a new game of the same genre, but that doesn't mean the old game wasn't a helluva lot better for it's time than the new one, or that the new one is any more important.

---

But that's not true... I would still pick Half Life over any other FPS around today... and I would still pick FFIV over any other RPG around... and I would still pick Starcraft over any other RTS around. Being old doesn't mean the game has to be good only nostalgically, all of those games are still the tops in their genre's.