racketboy.com

I only beat Ocarina of Time. I have played others, just didn't stick with them.

Classics is a relative term. I've played some classics that will never actually be called that, and overrated mediocrity that get called classics.

All I can say though is that I've played a TON of well known games over the years. Yet there is still a TON that I haven't played. Personally, I care more about how many games I know about than how many I've actually played. There just isn't enough time in the world to play every notable game

It's FAR more easy to try and check out all the notable stuff in other entertainment mediums than the big time sinks that video games are. I'm pretty sure I could see every important movie, hear every well known album, read every acclaimed comic book series in my life time. Not so with video games, not even close. Unless I just gave up on my social life....and my job.

MrPopo wrote:

sabrage wrote:I've only ever beaten two Zelda games.

Which two?

I counted again, and I've beaten both Oracles and Phantom Hourglass. So, three. But, I never completed the linked end-game content in Oracles, and I own/have played parts of Twilight Princess (on Wii and Gamecube), Skyward Sword, A Link to the Past, Minish Cap, Link's Awakening DX, Wind Waker, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, and the original. I just can never finish them.

sabrage wrote:

MrPopo wrote:

sabrage wrote:I've only ever beaten two Zelda games.

Which two?

I counted again, and I've beaten both Oracles and Phantom Hourglass. So, three. But, I never completed the linked end-game content in Oracles, and I own/have played parts of Twilight Princess (on Wii and Gamecube), Skyward Sword, A Link to the Past, Minish Cap, Link's Awakening DX, Wind Waker, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, and the original. I just can never finish them.

Any reason why? The linked games always offer so much more.

WallCrusher wrote:Any reason why? The linked games always offer so much more.

I couldn't beat those damned Twinrova when I was 12.

Gamerforlife wrote:Classics is a relative term. I've played some classics that will never actually be called that, and overrated mediocrity that get called classics.

Oh, indeed. But whatever your standards are, there are always more notable games and a gamer that has played long enough will start seeking the obscure out of neccesity because he has already played the most well-known ones.

Let's say I like first person shooters in single player mode. And it's easy at first because I have Doom, Quake and Half Life, but after a while it starts getting hard. You start playing Rise of the Triad, Hexen and other minor games. And then you realize you have already played that tier too and start getting into the obscure.

So if we consider Tier 1 to be the most well-known titles for each platform and Tier 2 the brightest of hidden gems we can probably call Tier 3 to be everything you only know after HG101 covered it and Tier 4 anything beyond.

So this places me at 1.5 at best. I'm practically finished with the tier 1 games but I haven't really ventured beyond, I have many Tier 2 games but I haven't really beaten enough of them.

I don't know if the tier things are strictly accurate either. I mean there's a pretty big gap between "most well-known titles for each platform" and "the brightest of hidden gems"

Somewhere between Castlevania and Crystalis you have a game like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II: The Arcade Game.

My peak gaming years were with the PC, NES, and SNES in the late 80s and early 90s, so, yes, I have played pretty much all the classics.

Now, I am working my way through the PlayStation titles I missed after selling off my PS collection in 1997 and not touching a PS system again until the PS2 in 2004.

It depends on what you consider the classics. It's far too broad and general a term. I could say I've played all the best known titles for the most popular consoles, arcade games, computers, but I'm sure I've missed something labeled as a classic on somebody else's list.

That said most of my to-buy wants these days are more obscure titles.

What would constitute as a classic though? Essentially, the more you dig, the more classics you would find. You can't really judge what is obscure or not, in less you dwell into commercial sales.


I'm thinking of what a typical guy at gamefaqs or something would play. But the question is still not that well thought out.

Ie, there are many, many gamers, who might have played at on of the classic franchises, but they couldn't name a single game other than Sonic on the Genesis. I wouldn't call something like Streets of Rage obscure, yet to many people, it is not a must play. Lot of gamers will look at a game like Metroid as like a gold standard, 5 star game or something, but they would look at Nights as skippable, assuming they even remember what that game is.

Not to mention there are always new classics being made. Also, would one have to acknowledge a game that they are not fond of, like hypothetically Madden or Call of Duty as a classic? They are a big staple of gaming, even though many "core gamers" feel that they can omit those games.


Then there are ton of arcade games which are not factored in like Burgertime and all that.


I think I get the vibe of what you're asking based on the examples, but it isn't very fleshed out.