racketboy.com

retrosportsgamer wrote:The members of Racketboy are not exactly the audience for these type of pieces in magazines like TIME but I was pretty surprised at the detail of some of the selections.

Saved the complete "Deslide" page, thanks ExedExes for the link! I usually don't care much for top 100 lists since most are just a list with no information. Time Magazine made the effort and posted a paragraph of each game making for a good read, something that should be done on any Top 100 listing. Now I'm on the hunt to see if its the paper edition.

Test your knowledge! After saving the Web page, open the sub folder and view just the pics. Try to guess how many games you recognize. Also a great screen saver slideshow

prfsnl_gmr wrote:In my opinion, the problem with lists like these is that games that were groundbreaking 20 years ago are relatively simplistic by today's standards. (In other words, Super Mario Bros. was an incredible plaformer at the time of its release - and it remains a good game to this day - but is it really "better" than the recently-released but much less influential New Super Mario Bros. Wii or Rayman Origins?)

In my opinion, yes SMB is better than those games. The original SMB is the best SMB I've played so far, and it isn't just due to influence.

But yes, I do get your point. I don't like list that mix influence with their personal preference on what they liked better.

prfsnl_gmr wrote:

retrosportsgamer wrote:I like that EGM list and recall reading it before.

#31 NFL Gameday '98 (!) - a great game somehow topped by Madden '98 at #19 for the Saturn and PSX (not sure I agree with that but dont think i've played those versions).

I still have the original issue 100 - which, BTW, is the best issue of EGM ever - and it contains relatively detailed explanations as to why each game: (1) made it on the list; and (2) placed where it did on the list. I have not paid much attention to the sports game rankings, but I will take a look at it and see why EGM's editorial staff ranked Madden above Gameday.

I have EGM 200 which had the top 200 games, and it was my favorite issue that I read. I think I discovered Sonic CD or at least discovered how highly praised it was due to that list. I tried it out two days ago and was pretty disappointed though .

Violent By Design wrote:I have EGM 200 which had the top 200 games, and it was my favorite issue that I read. I think I discovered Sonic CD or at least discovered how highly praised it was due to that list. I tried it out two days ago and was pretty disappointed though .

I actually just played through Sonic CD recently. It ended up being a very solid game, but not my Sonic game by long shot. (That honor goes to the sublime Sonic 2.) That said, I did appreciate it, and I could see why some people might really like it. ( I appreciated it more than I enjoyed it.)

Back on topic, I am pleased that Time magazine has dubbed video games significant enough to deserve a list, and I think that - as far as Top 100 lists are concerned - it is at least as good as most. (Certainly better than anything IGN has ever produced...) I also like that it contains some analysis of each game, a fact that places it in the company of EGM 100's excellent list.

I have to say, I was pretty impressed with the TIME article. It's a better list than I expected.

No Ys games?! This list is invalid.

prfsnl_gmr wrote:In my opinion, the problem with lists like these is that games that were groundbreaking 20 years ago are relatively simplistic by today's standards.

But if you think that way then you just end up with lists that are 50% games from the last 5 years and then filtering to maybe 10-15 years old if you're lucky.

I just looked at certain games, but this error in the Diablo II entry jumped out at me:

then topped that all off with a fully fleshed-out multiplayer mode (Diablo had none)

I sure must have spent a lot of time mass hallucinating with friends at LAN parties in the late 90s. *cough*

yes if you're talking historical importance than context is a big deal. The problem with these lists is lack of clear criteria.