IGN's Top 25 Game Franchises

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

11 Dec 2006, 10:53 PM
Yoshi

IGN's Top 25 Game Franchises

IGN's resident idiots have compiled their list of the Top 25 Video Game Franchises.

For those too lazy to click on the link or smart enough to want to avoid IGN's "writing," here are the results:

25. Virtua Fighter
24. Half-Life
23. Donkey Kong
22. Tetris
21. Command & Conquer
20. Mega Man
19. Sonic
18. Chrono Series
17. Pokemon
16. Tom Clancy Series
15. Madden
14. Dungeons & Dragons
13. Grand Theft Auto
12. Street Fighter
11. Star Wars
10. Civilization
9. Sim
8. Metroid
7. Resident Evil
6. WarCraft
5. Metal Gear Solid
4. Castlevania
3. Final Fantasy
2. Legend of Zelda
1. Mario
11 Dec 2006, 10:59 PM
SamuraiMoogle

Dungeons and Dragons and Command and Conquer. Lame!
11 Dec 2006, 11:02 PM
sethsez

I disagree with a few of those, but by and large... yeah, seems about right. Of course it depends on how we're measuring what's "top" but I'd say most of those deserve some place on the list, either due to critical success or simple longetivity and financial success.
11 Dec 2006, 11:04 PM
Yoshi

Quote:

Originally Posted by IGN

When voting, editors were asked to consider the overall importance of the franchise, the strength of its library of titles and the excitement for future games in the series. None of the editors agreed completely, as personal favorites earned higher votes from some. When it comes to games, what you love (and have fun playing) is always going to have some sway in your vote.
11 Dec 2006, 11:07 PM
Schlep

Even if you don't like the Halo franchise, the complete lack of it on the list is idiotic. It is IGN, though.
11 Dec 2006, 11:25 PM
sleeve

Warcraft >>> all
11 Dec 2006, 11:31 PM
Drewbacca

Halflife and Warcraft should be 1 and 2. How you would order those two as number 1 and 2 is highly subjective. May I recommend we cease talking about IGN's Nintendo jerk off list and create our own lists.
11 Dec 2006, 11:35 PM
Andy

Here's my list:

1. Shenmue
2. Madden Football
11 Dec 2006, 11:37 PM
Drewbacca

LOL Shenmue.
11 Dec 2006, 11:37 PM
MarkRyan

Franchises suck.
11 Dec 2006, 11:43 PM
SpoDaddy

IGN makes a shitty list every other month, and every other month TNL gets all pissy about it. Who cares.
11 Dec 2006, 11:45 PM
Nash

Given their criteria, how did they manage to include the Chrono series (which doesn't even really qualify as a franchise) but not the Halo series?
11 Dec 2006, 11:46 PM
StriderKyo

12. Call of Duty 3
11. Super Monkey Ball: Banana Blitz
10. Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi 2
9. The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
8. Monster 4x4 offroad
7. Marvel Ultimate Alliance
6. Rayman: Raving Rabbids
5. Red Steel
4. Wii Sports
3. Disney's Cars
2. Excite Truck
1. Wii Play
11 Dec 2006, 11:53 PM
SpoDaddy

That's a shitty Christmas list Strider, but I guess that's between you and Santa.
12 Dec 2006, 12:12 AM
NeoZeedeater

Quote:

Originally Posted by IGN

What else must be said about Mario. Without this plumber, none of us would be playing videogames today.

Dear IGN,

Please fire whoever wrote this immediately.
12 Dec 2006, 12:13 AM
Rocca

Crap list. Big surprise.
12 Dec 2006, 12:15 AM
Drewbacca

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater

Dear IGN,

Please fire whoever wrote this immediately.

Why don't you work for a gaming site? You're seriously the most knowledgeable person I've ever seen as it pertains to videogames and you come up with fun contests like Name that game (or whatever it was called).
12 Dec 2006, 12:23 AM
gamevet

Since when was Tetris a franchise? It was one good game, with a bunch of bad spin-offs that never captured the fun of the first.
12 Dec 2006, 12:28 AM
Rocca

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew

Why don't you work for a gaming site? You're seriously the most knowledgeable person I've ever seen as it pertains to videogames and you come up with fun contests like Name that game (or whatever it was called).

That's true, although I'd hate to see Neo stop taking interests into videogames because it consumes him in his work. Though, he's still the most knowledgable gamer ever, imo. =D
12 Dec 2006, 12:29 AM
sethsez

Quote:

Originally Posted by gamevet

Since when was Tetris a franchise? It was one good game, with a bunch of bad spin-offs that never captured the fun of the first.

Since an entire company popped up for the sole purpose of overseeing the creation of the thousand new Tetris games that come out each year.
12 Dec 2006, 12:31 AM
MarkRyan

Tetris Attack, imo
12 Dec 2006, 12:56 AM
Joust Williams

WTF, board ate my post

Anyway, Doom was far more influential than Zelda ever was (and the best game in the series was better too). And that's not even the most egregious thing about the list.
12 Dec 2006, 01:33 AM
Nirvana

Quote:

Originally Posted by gamevet

Since when was Tetris a franchise? It was one good game, with a bunch of bad spin-offs that never captured the fun of the first.

That did come to mind... What happened to Wolfenstein/Doom/Quake? And Silent Hill!?

..maybe Capcom VS (insert).. ;):lol:
12 Dec 2006, 01:37 AM
Daitokuji

You ever notice that Mario is usually number 1?
12 Dec 2006, 01:38 AM
Bojack

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nash

Given their criteria, how did they manage to include the Chrono series (which doesn't even really qualify as a franchise) but not the Halo series?

Seriously, Chrono Trigger/Cross' importance and overall impact on gaming is hella overrated.
12 Dec 2006, 01:46 AM
Cheebs

No Bemani anything on that list? I blow raspberries at their top 25.
12 Dec 2006, 01:51 AM
MarkRyan

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bojack

Seriously, Chrono Trigger/Cross' importance and overall impact on gaming is hella overrated.

Chrono Trigger is an all-time favorite among a bunch of editors, and they won out over the logic of the rest.
12 Dec 2006, 02:02 AM
Tenchimo Dos

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joust Williams

WTF, board ate my post

Anyway, Doom was far more influential than Zelda ever was (and the best game in the series was better too). And that's not even the most egregious thing about the list.

Doom far more influential than Zelda? I'm assuming you're comparing the two to piss people off? Really, what does Doom have anything to do with Zelda? I feel they're both influential in their own ways, and I don't disagree that Doom is/was influential. But one is a FPS and the other is an action RPG, not much in common for the two to even be argued in the same sentence. Plus Wolfenstein was far more influential than Doom.
12 Dec 2006, 02:05 AM
NeoZeedeater

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew

Why don't you work for a gaming site? You're seriously the most knowledgeable person I've ever seen as it pertains to videogames and you come up with fun contests like Name that game (or whatever it was called).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rocca

That's true, although I'd hate to see Neo stop taking interests into videogames because it consumes him in his work. Though, he's still the most knowledgable gamer ever, imo. =D

Thanks, guys. :) I still have a long way to go to become "most knowledgeable gamer"(not that that's even possible to quantify) but it would be nice to get some paid work in the game writing field. I have tried contacting various places but the problem is that I don't have much to show them. Hopefully, once I get more writing on the internet, it will help.
12 Dec 2006, 02:10 AM
MarkRyan

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenchimo Dos

Doom far more influential than Zelda? I'm assuming you're comparing the two to piss people off?

Responding to Joust is like scratching a scabbed wound--you'll just make it worse, so leave it alone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater

Thanks, guys. :) I still have a long way to go to become "most knowledgeable gamer"(not that that's even possible to quantify) but it would be nice to get some paid work in the game writing field. I have tried contacting various places but the problem is that I don't have much to show them. Hopefully, once I get more writing on the internet, it will help.

I'd still really love to see you doing stuff for IGN Insider.
12 Dec 2006, 02:53 AM
Joust Williams

"Plus Wolfenstein was far more influential than Doom."

Um...no. From the mod community to the mutliplayer to the desire to have ever increasingly powerful systems, Doom trumps Wolfenstein easily.
12 Dec 2006, 03:01 AM
sethsez

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joust Williams

"Plus Wolfenstein was far more influential than Doom."

Um...no. From the mod community to the mutliplayer to the desire to have ever increasingly powerful systems, Doom trumps Wolfenstein easily.

It could also be argued that Quake trumps Doom on that front as well.
12 Dec 2006, 04:46 AM
Joust Williams

But one came out before the other...Quake should be on the list anyway. I mean, Virtua Fighter is on there? lawls
12 Dec 2006, 04:52 AM
sethsez

Virtua Fighter is a hugely important franchise, though, as pretty much every 3D fighter since has followed its lead. The genre still has yet to really break from that mold.

And yes, Quake came after Doom. And Doom came after Wolfenstein 3D. And Wolfenstein 3D came after Catacomb 3D. If we're talking about influence and sales, then a very convincing argument could be made for Quake being bigger than Doom.
12 Dec 2006, 04:54 AM
Joust Williams

First person shooters are far more popular and have driven technology far more than 3D fighting games.
12 Dec 2006, 05:13 AM
sethsez

I don't recall debating that. I just think Virtua Fighter does have a place on the list. If something should be replaced it's the Chrono series, which is exactly two games (one of which has its quality pretty heavily debated) and a text adventure side game. There are certainly other entries on that list that are far less deserving of being there than Virtua Fighter.
12 Dec 2006, 07:07 AM
SpoDaddy

Toshinden was the big launch game for PSX, Virtua Fighter was the big Saturn launch game, Tekken Tag sold tons of PS2's (Tekken games in general moved tons of Sony hardware), Soul Calibur was the reason to own Dreamcast at launch; before Halo came along 3D fighters clearly had the lead on consoles (and DOA3 was a big launch game for Xbox as well...) Not nessesarily arguing that 3D fighters are more popular or have driven technology more, my point is just that they've been more important than it at first appears.
12 Dec 2006, 08:40 AM
RoleTroll

MarkRyan, yeah, hook up Neo at IGN. He oculd make Insider worth subscribing to.
12 Dec 2006, 10:43 AM
Bacon McShig

Quote:

Originally Posted by gamevet

Since when was Tetris a franchise? It was one good game, with a bunch of bad spin-offs that never captured the fun of the first.

Tetris Attack >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Tetris

Although, yeah, that's not a "real" Tetris game.
12 Dec 2006, 11:02 AM
gamevet

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bacon McShig

Tetris Attack >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Tetris

Although, yeah, that's not a "real" Tetris game.

I was waiting for someone to say Tetris 3-D (Virtual Boy). It's the one North American VB game I don't have, but would love to try.
12 Dec 2006, 11:48 AM
Frogacuda

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schlep

Even if you don't like the Halo franchise, the complete lack of it on the list is idiotic. It is IGN, though.

It's 2 games. That's barely a franchise.
12 Dec 2006, 12:38 PM
NeoZeedeater

Quote:

Originally Posted by RoleTroll

MarkRyan, yeah, hook up Neo at IGN.

He tried. I was thankful for that. They weren't interested when I sent them emails though. That's probably my fault as I didn't have much to show them aside from message board topics.

As for the topic in this thread, I think the list is kind of a waste. I suppose it works for the most part as a list of popular, influential games but unless you're new to the hobby, that's not very interesting or informative. I would like to see the media expose more underdogs since they're in the position to reach the most gamers.
12 Dec 2006, 01:19 PM
Schlep

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frogacuda

It's 2 games. That's barely a franchise.

As opposed to Half Life, weighing in at a mighty 2 1/3 games?
12 Dec 2006, 01:24 PM
sleeve

Half-Life has been several magnitudes more influential than Halo.

Don't get me wrong, Halo's a great series, but there's no comparison as far as this list's putative criteria is concerned.
12 Dec 2006, 01:26 PM
frostwolf ex

no ultima? say what you want, ultima was a big influence in both online and offline rpgs.
12 Dec 2006, 01:27 PM
burgundy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew

Halflife and Warcraft should be 1 and 2.

Not really, I don't give a shit about either franchise. IGN has and always will be slanted towards console games. Don't like it? Read GameSpot.
12 Dec 2006, 01:32 PM
JefmcC

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schlep

As opposed to Half Life, weighing in at a mighty 2 1/3 games?

Half-Life (series) is still the bench mark of the first person shooter game, though I think it's unfair to lable it just a shooter. Every FPS since uses HL(2) for it's model. If not, then they should be.
12 Dec 2006, 01:35 PM
Spent

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater

He tried. I was thankful for that. They weren't interested when I sent them emails though. That's probably my fault as I didn't have much to show them aside from message board topics.

As for the topic in this thread, I think the list is kind of a waste. I suppose it works for the most part as a list of popular, influential games but unless you're new to the hobby, that's not very interesting or informative. I would like to see the media expose more underdogs since they're in the position to reach the most gamers.

For the best, you are far and above working for IGN.
12 Dec 2006, 01:44 PM
Scourge

I agree with frostwolf about Ultima. And JeffmcC about Half Life. And I'd remove Command & Conquer, the Chrono "series" and Dungeons & Dragons (hello, Ultima slot right here).

And as big a fan of Star Wars as I am, what makes it a great game franchise? The Super Star Wars series was pretty awesome, but by no means groundbreaking. The original vector arcade game was great, but I don't know how groundbreaking it was either. KOTOR is supposedly alright. The Lego games are a nice diversion. I know there was a couple of PC games considered really good to great in years past... I guess this franchise makes the list by default for just being so huge it encompassed several games that were good along with the many that were really bad.

Are the Tom Clancy games on there because of the squad based stuff?

I think Pokemon should be number 1.
12 Dec 2006, 01:45 PM
Schlep

Well, I suppose HL is more than 2.3 games if you're including 3rd party mods.
12 Dec 2006, 01:45 PM
Frogacuda

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schlep

As opposed to Half Life, weighing in at a mighty 2 1/3 games?

A fair point, though they might also be including the likes of Counterstrike and Day of Defeat under that umbrella.
12 Dec 2006, 02:08 PM
Some Stupid Japanese Name

So someone make a masterlist of TNL's picks.
I'd eliminate the following:
Donkey Kong (is anyone really excited for the next DK rhythm or racing game?)

D&D (aside from Baldurs Gate, who give a shit about D&D games?)

Megaman (i think we've had enough thank you, more so since all the console versions since X4 and 8 have sucked)

Chrono (There hasn't been one in years, I don't feel like I'm missing out because of it)

Tetris (they've proven over and over that this was a two trick pony and need to just release prettier versions of the original and Attack for each new generation)

Sonic (I'd like to leave this life with fond memories of this series. Sega seems determined to ruin that notion)

So that opens up six spots. I'd add Doom, Devil May Cry, and Dragon Quest.
Give me three more, or make you own adjustments.
12 Dec 2006, 02:14 PM
Josh

lol devil may cry.
12 Dec 2006, 02:18 PM
FirstBlood

Quote:

Originally Posted by JesusC

D&D (aside from Baldurs Gate, who give a shit about D&D games?)

Torment. GTFO.
12 Dec 2006, 02:21 PM
sleeve

Quote:

Originally Posted by JesusC

So someone make a masterlist of TNL's picks.
D&D (aside from Baldurs Gate, who give a shit about D&D games?)

Torment
Neverwinter Nights
Neverwinter Nights 2
Icewind Dale
Baldur's Gate series
Gold Box series
Eye of the Beholder series

Respeck.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FirstBlood

Torment. GTFO.

Dayenu.
12 Dec 2006, 02:23 PM
MechDeus

Quote:

Originally Posted by JesusC

Megaman (i think we've had enough thank you, more so since all the console versions since X4 and 8 have sucked)

If they made a Megaman Legends 3 it would rock your face off.
12 Dec 2006, 02:29 PM
Some Stupid Japanese Name

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleeve

Torment
Neverwinter Nights
Neverwinter Nights 2
Icewind Dale
Baldur's Gate series
Gold Box series
Eye of the Beholder series

yeah, i stand by my original statment.
12 Dec 2006, 02:30 PM
sleeve

Quote:

Originally Posted by JesusC

yeah, i stand by my original statment.

You have terrible taste in videogames. Congratulations!
12 Dec 2006, 02:33 PM
NeoZeedeater

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleeve

Torment
Neverwinter Nights
Neverwinter Nights 2
Icewind Dale
Baldur's Gate series
Gold Box series
Eye of the Beholder series

Respeck.

AD&D: Treasure of Tarmin was awesome at the time too.
12 Dec 2006, 02:33 PM
burgundy

I point my +40 Staff of Notgivingafuck at all those games too.
12 Dec 2006, 02:52 PM
Frogacuda

I liked Spelljammer for some reason, too.
12 Dec 2006, 05:02 PM
bVork

Planescape: Torment is the best RPG not named "Ultima 4." That alone means that D&D deserves to stay on the list, though I think "Interplay-published D&D games" is more appropriate as it narrows the field but still covers all the truly excellent games. Gold Box D&D games were okay, but they were what you bought and played after playing the latest Origin or Sir-Tech RPG. Sort of like Sierra adventures, which were best played in the lull between LucasArts adventures.

Speaking of RPGs, Ultima and Wizardry are super influential and deserve spots on the list. But I guess you'd have to be playing games before PSX to know about them, so their omission is understandable.

I think Tom Clancy is too diverse a series to really be considered a single franchise.

Where's Gradius? Surely that's one of the most important franchises ever.
12 Dec 2006, 05:06 PM
Opaque

Quote:

When voting, editors were asked to consider the overall importance of the franchise

No Halo? The franchise which is solely responsible for the success of the Xbox?

LMFAO
12 Dec 2006, 05:21 PM
Some Stupid Japanese Name

Quote:

Originally Posted by IGN

When voting, editors were asked to consider the overall importance of the franchise, the strength of its library of titles and the excitement for future games in the series.

My Wizardry familiarity begins with the Snes Wizardry V continues to Saturn Wizardry and ends with Wiazardry Forsaken Land for PS2. Based on those games, I really don't care if more are made. I'm not denying the "greatness" of the classic Ultimas and Wizardrys, but their time has come and gone. I don't care if they make more.
12 Dec 2006, 06:14 PM
Yoshi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Opaque

No Halo? The franchise which is solely responsible for the success of the Xbox?

LMFAO

While I agree Halo belongs on the list, the bolded statement is not true. I have two Xbox's and a 360 and none of those purchases had a damn thing to do with Halo. I'm sure I'm not alone.
12 Dec 2006, 06:33 PM
Some Stupid Japanese Name

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoshi

While I agree Halo belongs on the list, the bolded statement is not true. I have two Xbox's and a 360 and none of those purchases had a damn thing to do with Halo. I'm sure I'm not alone.

While I am in the same boat as you, I think we are the exception, not the rule.
12 Dec 2006, 06:56 PM
Compass

lol at people trying to force the bland and dull flavorings of Halo into this list.
12 Dec 2006, 07:04 PM
Nomi

For those saying Halo doesn't belong because it was only two games, IGN listed the criteria of 'future installments' for how things were voted. Chrono is not going to continue in all great likelihood, while Halo already has 2 confirmed installments coming out. It should knock Chrono off the list.
12 Dec 2006, 07:07 PM
Compass

I'm saying Halo doesn't belong on it because it sucks. Chrono doesn't. IGN probably also recognized this important detail.
12 Dec 2006, 07:08 PM
Nomi

I'm not arguing anything on opinion of the game, but whoever brought up 'only 2 games' didn't pay attention to the criteria on future installments, or the fact that whether you like it or not it sold a lot of Xbox consoles.
12 Dec 2006, 07:19 PM
stormy

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleeve

Torment
Neverwinter Nights
Neverwinter Nights 2
Icewind Dale
Baldur's Gate series
Gold Box series
Eye of the Beholder series

Respeck.

Dayenu.

And not only these, but D&D games have been a big influence on their genre in general. Even if there aren't many people looking forward to the next Baldur's Gate, or one of the other games bearing the official logo, there will be a ton of interest in the next Elder Scrolls. A game which at it's core is a D&D style rpg in the vein of the gold box series.
12 Dec 2006, 07:19 PM
Yoshi

There is no objective argument that could put Chrono above Halo on this list, and I am not a big fan of either.
12 Dec 2006, 07:23 PM
sethsez

Quote:

Originally Posted by stormy

And not only these, but D&D games have been a big influence on their genre in general. Even if there aren't many people looking forward to the next Baldur's Gate, or one of the other games bearing the official logo, there will be a ton of interest in the next Elder Scrolls. A game which at it's core is a D&D style rpg in the vein of the gold box series.

Hell, the Elder Scrolls started as a D&D campaign by a couple nerds who decided to change a few things and release Arena.

And the only possible rationale I can imagine for Chrono Trigger is that it was a combination of the highest Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest talent, which was a massive deal at the time. But since Cross doesn't continue this, it's not really a franchise issue.
12 Dec 2006, 07:55 PM
burgundy

Since Square and Enix are one now, can't they do that again? What's the holdup? Since Chrono is like a billion times better than FF and DQ put together.
12 Dec 2006, 07:58 PM
sethsez

The problem there is that between Trigger and Cross, they're pretty much covered every possible timeline and dimension in which they could cram a suitably epic story already. A sequel would be extremely hard to make without contradicting one or both games and still being good and epic enough to justify the Chrono name.
12 Dec 2006, 07:58 PM
burgundy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Compass

I'm saying Halo doesn't belong on it because it sucks. Chrono doesn't. IGN probably also recognized this important detail.

QFT
12 Dec 2006, 08:02 PM
burgundy

Quote:

Originally Posted by sethsez

The problem there is that between Trigger and Cross, they're pretty much covered every possible timeline and dimension in which they could cram a suitably epic story already. A sequel would be extremely hard to make without contradicting one or both games and still being good and epic enough to justify the Chrono name.

I don't buy that.
12 Dec 2006, 08:06 PM
sethsez

Quote:

Originally Posted by burgundy

I don't buy that.

Then where could you stick a story? Chrono and pals all die a few years after Trigger, nothing much happens to Serge, and between both games we've covered the entire stretch of time and all alternate dimensions remotely connected to the plot. Unless you make a significantly smaller-scale plot, it'd be hard to make a huge threat that wouldn't have theoretically already been encountered by either Chrono or Serge at some point without some really hardcore retconning or outright contradictions.
12 Dec 2006, 08:08 PM
Therum

...Chrono? Seriously what the fuck?

I like Chrono Trigger. A lot. I also like Radical Dreamers quite a bit. Unless Chrono Cross, the one game in the series I haven't played, is the holy grail of gaming, then it deserves no place on that list. 1 really good game, 1 good game, and 1 might-be-good,-who-knows game =/= a Franchise.
12 Dec 2006, 08:14 PM
Nomi

Everyone knows I play a shit-ton of Halo so it's hard for me to come off defending it deserving a spot on that list in any objective manner. I do, however, love Chrono Trigger and like diff-x I thought Chrono Cross was a lot of fun. Two really great games, in my opinion. Square-Enix could probably do something new with the 'franchise' but they have already shown that they have little interest in that after letting that one trademarked name expire and all. Don't you think they would have done -something- by now if they wanted to continue it? While great games, neither moved a ton of hardware and realistically, the series is dead, plain and simple. Halo is most definitely alive and kicking, selling a ton of units and creating a much, much larger potential for new releases. I don't necessarily agree that it belongs on the list above some other franchises, but if Chrono's on there, I'm saying that Halo should bump it.

And Therum, Chrono Cross is no holy grail of gaming by any means. It disappointed a ton of people and even more will say that it's a bunch of crap, but I had fun with it. You should at least give it a play-through sometime.
12 Dec 2006, 08:19 PM
burgundy

Quote:

Originally Posted by sethsez

Then where could you stick a story? Chrono and pals all die a few years after Trigger, nothing much happens to Serge, and between both games we've covered the entire stretch of time and all alternate dimensions remotely connected to the plot. Unless you make a significantly smaller-scale plot, it'd be hard to make a huge threat that wouldn't have theoretically already been encountered by either Chrono or Serge at some point without some really hardcore retconning or outright contradictions.

Um, none of the shit that happened in Cross was remotely alluded to in Trigger, and designers could work with the entire time-space continuum in any given sequel. And so what if they retcon or contradict, who cares? A bunch of nerds on GameFAQs?

I don't know why there's no sequel, but I'm pretty confident this isn't the reason. Nobody ever let a little reconning stand in the way of printing money.
12 Dec 2006, 08:28 PM
sethsez

Quote:

Originally Posted by burgundy

Um, none of the shit that happened in Cross was remotely alluded to in Trigger, and designers could work with the entire time-space continuum in any given sequel.

Well, that's why Cross dealt with alternate dimensions, because they couldn't really do much more with time travel in that universe. Now that they've covered time travel AND alternate dimensions, I'm really struggling to think about what else they could pull out here.

Quote:

And so what if they retcon or contradict, who cares? A bunch of nerds on GameFAQs?

This is pretty much the only worthwhile series Suare has with any sort of consistent world or plot. If they abandon that, why call it a Chrono game? Final Fantasy has had time travel before too, and it's not like the battle system is consistent from game to game.
12 Dec 2006, 08:32 PM
burgundy

Since no previous Chrono game covered the...I dunno...entire breadth and width of the time-space continuum, there is plenty of room to work in events that that tie into the plot of either or both games.
12 Dec 2006, 08:37 PM
sethsez

Eh, I guess they could show another planet dealing with its own Lavos, but that would be pretty redundant.
12 Dec 2006, 08:42 PM
burgundy

This isn't cold fusion. Have you seen Back to the Future Part II?
12 Dec 2006, 08:44 PM
MarkRyan

Quote:

Originally Posted by burgundy

This isn't cold fusion. Have you seen Back to the Future Part II?

They made two of them!?
12 Dec 2006, 08:47 PM
Some Stupid Japanese Name

Quote:

Originally Posted by sethsez

Eh, I guess they could show another planet dealing with its own Lavos, but that would be pretty redundant.

Hasn't every RPG storyline since, i don't know, the first one ever made been redundant?
RPG's have (to me anyway) become less and less about story and more and more about graphics/battle system.
12 Dec 2006, 08:48 PM
Changeling

Quote:

Originally Posted by JefmcC

Half-Life (series) is still the bench mark of the first person shooter game, though I think it's unfair to lable it just a shooter. Every FPS since uses HL(2) for it's model. If not, then they should be.

Bullshit. If I used that logic, I could say Ninja Gaiden is a benchmark for the way cutscenes are interwoven into games. Half Life isn't the benchmark for anything EXCEPT rejurgitation on a series, or better yet, resting on a series laurels. Halflifes main mods are also guilty of this, and before you say most popular FPS's on the internet, I say its because almost ANY machine can run them.

Play Undying.
12 Dec 2006, 08:53 PM
sethsez

Quote:

Originally Posted by burgundy

This isn't cold fusion. Have you seen Back to the Future Part II?

Yes. In the first movie, they went to the past. In the second movie, they went to the future. Both were small-scale and focused on a couple characters and locations, so it would be perfectly possible to assume that a lot of shit was missed to make for many more movies if someone wanted.

Chrono Trigger covered the prehistoric era to the end of time and plenty in between, with each era covering the entire globe, in addition to focusing on a huge, time-spanning threat to the world (a threat equal to Lavos would have been hard to miss). There are significantly fewer places to stick an equally expansive story.

It's not the time travel aspect alone that makes it extremely hard to create a worthy sequel, but the sheer scope of what the game covered and the scope a worthy sequel would require. When you've covered every period of time, every dimension and every physical location on the planet, you're kind of fucked when it comes to expansion without doing something drastic like setting the next title on a different planet entirely, which is the only way I could see it going (who knows, maybe space exploration was mastered and they colonized another world, bringing parts of their civilization with them).
12 Dec 2006, 09:06 PM
burgundy

Quote:

Originally Posted by sethsez

Chrono Trigger covered the prehistoric era to the end of time and plenty in between, with each era covering the entire globe, in addition to focusing on a huge, time-spanning threat to the world (a threat equal to Lavos would have been hard to miss). There are significantly fewer places to stick an equally expansive story.

Yeah, but not only did the CT crew miss a huge threat...they fricking created it...which is the basis of CC. Plus CC did some ridiculous retarded temporal backflips that don't all work out, but it doesn't bother me.

And frankly, when you're talking about the entirety of the game universe, there's plenty room to work in a new story. It would just take some effort.
12 Dec 2006, 09:10 PM
sethsez

Well, Chrono Cross covered its ass with retconning by creating the Tesseract, but that was already kind of lame, and in its attempt to clarify what was going on the game wound up being really muddled. I can only imagine what would happen if they tried to set a third game on the same planet... most of the plot would just be trying to justify how it could exist. Hell, I'd argue that was what happened in Cross as well.

Now that I think about it, though, another game could work on a totally different planet if enough Chrono elements are kept. It would certainly clear up a lot of the bullshit Cross introduced.
12 Dec 2006, 09:22 PM
SpoDaddy

I haven't played a lot of either Chrono game. That said, I have a hard time believing Square covered every location on earth across every possible time period in two RPG's.

As for the list, Halo should replace Chrono Trigger/Cross.

Smash Brothers should be on the list considering it's done a great deal to sell 3 different generations of console and has outsold many of the franchises already on the list. It should replace Donkey Kong.
12 Dec 2006, 09:24 PM
sethsez

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpoDaddy

I haven't played a lot of either Chrono game.

oh okay then
12 Dec 2006, 09:24 PM
mollipen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew

Halflife and Warcraft should be 1 and 2. How you would order those two as number 1 and 2 is highly subjective. May I recommend we cease talking about IGN's Nintendo jerk off list and create our own lists.

I don't even really like Mario, yet there is NO way I'd put it under those two. I mean... you're just talking crazy talk here. The Mario series has sold far more copies, been a far bigger part of, and more influenced the gaming industry than either of those choices.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomi

For those saying Halo doesn't belong because it was only two games, IGN listed the criteria of 'future installments' for how things were voted. Chrono is not going to continue in all great likelihood, while Halo already has 2 confirmed installments coming out. It should knock Chrono off the list.

Chrono should NEVER have been on that list.
12 Dec 2006, 10:22 PM
SpoDaddy

Quote:

Originally Posted by sethsez

oh okay then

You're saying Square has performed a storytelling feat that nobody else ever has?
12 Dec 2006, 10:41 PM
Yoshi

Did I just read "Square" and "story" in the same sentence? The word "Tactics" must have been there too, despite the fact that I didn't see it.
12 Dec 2006, 10:43 PM
sethsez

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpoDaddy

You're saying Square has performed a storytelling feat that nobody else ever has?

I'm saying that although it doesn't cover every possible point in time and every possible location on the planet, it covers vast expanses of both and implies that what we don't see isn't particularly important. Much like how you know the worlds in most JRPGs don't really just have 15 towns, but the rest are omitted because they don't matter.

The point here is that between two games that together cover pretty much all of history, including alternate dimensions, on a single planet, there aren't many places for some great evil to hide without it having sprung up somehow in the other games. This is much easier in other RPGs because you can just have another Great Big Thing attack, but if you do that in the Chrono series you have to explain why neither Chrono nor Serge ever manged to hear about it in some respect. It's just a fundamental problem of covering such a vast expanse, and one Chrono Cross already suffered from a bit (many argue that the plot was needlessly convoluted, and most of that was due to trying to fit everything together without contradicting itself).

Could they fit some great evil villain on that planet and explain it away? Sure, but I imagine that the logical contortions that would lead to it would make for a story that would be too convoluted to be entertaining, which is why I think it'd be best to either leave the series alone, or restart it on another planet with its own history.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoshi

Did I just read "Square" and "story" in the same sentence? The word "Tactics" must have been there too, despite the fact that I didn't see it.

Well I can't think of any other reason people want another Chrono game, because the story is the only thing linking them together.
12 Dec 2006, 10:56 PM
Changeling

Quote:

Originally Posted by Opaque

No Halo? The franchise which is solely responsible for the success of the Xbox?

LMFAO

It wasn't the reason I bought an Xbox. Halo did well because it was on console. If it was on PC, it would have been shuffeled to the side in 6 months.

Wait, haven't we had discussions like this before? :)
12 Dec 2006, 10:58 PM
Compass

Quote:

Originally Posted by Changeling

It wasn't the reason I bought an Xbox. Halo did well because it was on console. If it was on PC, it would have been shuffeled to the side in 6 months.

It was and was.
12 Dec 2006, 11:05 PM
sethsez

If Halo were made specifically for PC it would have had infinitely better level design because it wouldn't have had a system launch deadline. The actual mechanics of the game are fantastic and were even pretty unique for PC FPS of the time.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:36 AM.