Exhuminator wrote:Re-releases of older games doesn't suddenly make them brand new again. That's a bit like saying because Lawrence of Arabia was re-released on Bluray it's no longer an old movie. (Now a brand new remake of an old game is a different thing of course.)
You would be amazed at how many film databases I work with that actually do just that.
Also with film, some filmmakers have taken old titles, spliced in new footage, and released it as a new film. This was a particularly popular tactic with certain production studios in Chinese cinema in the 1970s and 1980s. The rolling ten seems to be the best tactic, but some games can have a major influence from a later release despite being unknown at the time of their original release. Or if a game is rereleased with additional content and a new title(Onimusha becomes Genma Onimusha, Silent Hill 2 becomes Silent Hill 2: Restless Dreams), and that version makes an impact or is now considered the optimal version, should that version's release be the one that we consider?
As for the OS generation...that doesn't work for me because so many games work across differing OS, OSes don't always have a semi-standard life cycle(for example in a five year span we have Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows 2000, and Windows XP come out, not to mention variations of Windows CE usage). The rolling 10 again would work better for PC gaming, though I think (as with consoles)exceptions should be made for major releases that serve as a cultural reference point or serve as a major influence for games that come after. Conversely, modern updates to older series should also at the least be looked at.
But hell, why should I worry? I did the math and discovered the average release year for what I've beaten this year is in the 1990s.
