StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Invictus ChiKen wrote:

Schuyler Colfax wrote: No shit Sherlock.

Well if you didn't want an answer ya shouldn't have asked.

I was clearly being sarcastic. It was clearly a rhetorical question. I even through a smiley in there.

1. It was a laughing smilie, which is the same as giving someone a derisive snort in real life when answering. Either way, you didn't protray what you wanted.

2. Deal with it and move on or I'll stop the hijack my way.

I declare this thread no serious the instant I saw the first 10/10. You can't give a "perfect" to anything "Graphic" or "Replayability" it's like saying Left4Dead is infinitely repayable. Not even Tetras is infinitely Replayabe, as the game does fall in into a detectable repeatable pattern at some point. 10/10 in these areas means that it can be no better it is in fact perfection. 10/10 in anything is of course subjective, but in these areas it's silly at best.


But then some things are so subjective they lead to arguments. For example I'd say Wolfenstein 3D made better use of color and looked better but featured cookie cutter enemies. While DooM(It's successor, something most people forget) adds in multi-player much better animations and use of "outdoor" areas. Plus multi-player.

But lets be honest both games look arse back then and were only "amazing" because there had never been anything else. Fast forward to Chex Quest and we saw how massive the pixels were.

I suppose one could give something a 9.5/10 and round it up, in which case they wouldn't nessissarily be saying it could be no better. But the shear number of ten out of tens is absurd. Really, if you're scoring a game above 50/60 total, I don't think you're being honest. I wouldn't score any game I've played above a 45.

Mr Bean wrote:I declare this thread no serious the instant I saw the first 10/10. You can't give a "perfect" to anything "Graphic" or "Replayability" it's like saying Left4Dead is infinitely repayable. Not even Tetras is infinitely Replayabe, as the game does fall in into a detectable repeatable pattern at some point. 10/10 in these areas means that it can be no better it is in fact perfection. 10/10 in anything is of course subjective, but in these areas it's silly at best.


But then some things are so subjective they lead to arguments. For example I'd say Wolfenstein 3D made better use of color and looked better but featured cookie cutter enemies. While DooM(It's successor, something most people forget) adds in multi-player much better animations and use of "outdoor" areas. Plus multi-player.

But lets be honest both games look arse back then and were only "amazing" because there had never been anything else. Fast forward to Chex Quest and we saw how massive the pixels were.

Fuck, it's all subjective. I just don't need someone getting titty-twisted over someone else's rose colored days.

It's about the best you've enjoyed, and it's enough to have people just express that because no one is going to convince a significant amount that their fave is anything but that. Sure there are some games that are universally praised/panned, but even amongst fans very few consider it THE game.

Ghost Rider wrote:
Fuck, it's all subjective. I just don't need someone getting titty-twisted over someone else's rose colored days.
.

Yeah but I was nit-picking the Doom example, because so damn many people forget that FPS's were truly born with Wolf3d and Gamers love of shooting Nazi's was born at the same time as the FPS era.

But like I said, this thread is not serious in any way shape or form, scores aside because the godamn title is Best Damn Game EVER. Sure it's not EVER!!11!! but it's close.

10/10 in these areas means that it can be no better it is in fact perfection.

Since we're only using a system with 10 or 11 possible scores, I don't see the problem with reserving "10" for "as close to being unimprovable as a game is likely to be". Otherwise you've just turned the rating system into one of 0-9, and the problem just moved a number - after all, if you can't give a game a "perfect" ten, than nine becomes the new ten, and so forth.

In a system of this low a resolution, giving a game a "ten" when it has no visible flaws and cannot be reasonably improved doesn't seem all that unreasonable, as long as you keep in mind that these are ratings are shorthand for subjective opinions and not objective, mathematical descriptors.

That said, I agree that the masses of tens for obscure, niche games that weren't all that good to begin with are hilarious.

Yeah but I was nit-picking the Doom example, because so damn many people forget that FPS's were truly born with Wolf3d

Are we forgetting Maze War?

Hmm, best game ever? For me it was Battlefield 2. It had awesome graphics, was very replayable on account of being multiplayer and having a ton of mods, and when people weren't being fucktards, it was quite immersive.

Deus Ex

Surprise, surprise, from the guy with JC Denton as his avatar.

Quality/Innovation (9/10): The late 90s witnessed the creation of shooter/RPG hybrids and the stealth-based action game. Deus Ex took two hybrid avante-garde genres, and combined them into a hybrid-hybrid. Deus Ex is barely even genre classifiable. The game had a strong storyline, optional quests, upgradeable stats, and persistent, engaging NPCs, which all point to it being an RPG. On the other hand, it ran on the Unreal engine, had familiar shooter weapons, and featured action that felt like a shooter. At least, it felt like a shooter if you wanted to play it like a shooter. In contrast to running and gunning, a player could navigate the entire game while killing only a handful of key people. Finally, Deus Ex could be played as a combination of a shooter and stealth action game, a sort of stealth-assassin game. While individually, none of these elements were of the highest quality (Quake III was a better shooter than Deus Ex, Thief II was a better stealth action game, and Torment was a better RPG) no game at the time, or even to this very day, successfully combined so many disparate genre elements into a single game.

Graphics/Sound (8/10): The technical graphical quality of Deus Ex was good, but not spectacular, compared to shooters released the same year. Deus Ex did do very well in its artistic presentation, creating a very believable, near-future world for the player to explore. Also a definite plus at the time was the lip-sink for the voice acting. Games years later would still (inexplicably) not include this. Though the sound effects were nothing special, the game featured (to me, anyway) a memorable musical score. However, most impressive of the game’s artistic qualities was the superb voice acting, which really brought the characters to life. The game also featured full voice-overs for every spoken line of dialogue. Again, games released years later still had players reading through “spoken” text.

Fun Factor (9/10): I loved Deus Ex (obviously; I’m writing about it here). Once I figured out that I had an array of options by which to approach any problem, the game really opened up to me. Also, I’m very meticulous in my exploration when I play a shooter or any game, and Deus Ex greatly rewards this sort of careful, methodical play. Every corner of the game world contains something useful or interesting to discover. Finally, the plot completely sucked me in. Deus Ex contains one of the most interesting and memorable stories in any game I’ve ever played.

Replayability (8/10): The initial version of the game contained no multiplayer mode, and although this isn’t really the sort of game that (in my opinion) needs multiplayer, I will dock it a point for that. Having to get your multiplayer thrills from Counterstrike instead of Deus Ex, the game’s replayability is as good as any RPG. Aside from the innumerable choices on how to handle a specific, tactical problem, the game features multiple resolutions for many quests, where your actions or inactions will affect details later in the game, to the point of killing key NPCs. There’s also so much content in this game, that no one will hit everything the first time through.

Learning Curve (7/10): The game did have a couple abilities that were essentially useless, while others were absolutely essential. Figuring out which was which significantly affected the game’s difficulty. It took some time learning how to both hide from and kill the enemies in the game, so in that sense, Deus Ex contained a learning curve of a shooter and a stealth game.

Immersion (9/10): Deus Ex had interesting, memorable characters, an interesting setting with innumerable back alleys to explore, and a plot that kept me glued to my computer for several days. Deus Ex was a game where I truly couldn’t wait to find out what happened next in the story.

It was a tough choice between Deus Ex and Baldur’s Gate. I chose Deus Ex, because for one, Baldur’s Gate’s already been nominated, and also, Baldur’s Gate is best taken as a series. If I had to pick a single title, I’d pick Baldur’s Gate II: Shadows of Amn, not the original Baldur’s Gate. I can nominate Deus Ex by itself, as a single game. I also strongly considered nominating Torment, but I’ve played Deus Ex more recently, and considered myself more capable of writing a review of it.

Ha! This thread might be a trap and full of absurd game suggestions, but even I made an entire newthread to mock it rather than hijack. And people say I'm mean!

Best game ever is clearly ultima underworld btw. Calling Deus Ex 'barely genre classifiable' exploded my absurdo-meter.

I have a bad feeling about this, but let's talk about Deus Ex. Why do you think it's easy to genre slot?

Since when did not 'unclassifiable' equal 'easy'? Oh sorry you're biased. No hijacks.

Ah shit, my edit time ran out.

EDIT: Fuck it. Fine, that statement's absurd, whatever. Having an argument about Deus Ex isn't the point of this thread. Forget I said anything.

D13, it's obvious that people think 'replayability' = 'I obsessively played it 50 times'. Some people can replay games over and over in the same way some people can watch episodes of a television show over and over - that doesn't mean there's any actual features or content that makes it 'replayable'. Turns out people this 'I like it' = 'it is good'. You can play - say - Burnout Paradise forever, but there's fuck-all 'replayability' because the events themselves don't change so once you've got a Burnout Elite rating there's very little motivation and zero benefit to ever repeat the events. Multi + tooling around != replayability.

But then, I know what genre Deus Ex is, so I'm not really on the level for a self-indulgent thread like this.

BTW, spacewar. Infinite replayability, physics, cutting-edge graphics circa 1964.

Mr Bean wrote: Yeah but I was nit-picking the Doom example, because so damn many people forget that FPS's were truly born with Wolf3d and Gamers love of shooting Nazi's was born at the same time as the FPS era.

Hey! I take offense at that! I did play Wolf3d! It truly was the first FPS game, but DooM was the one that actually kickstarted the genre by perfecting the formula. IT'S THE TRUTH!

Now, seriously, the whole thread is a nostalgia trip, how can anyone take it too seriously? I mean, I even said that, back in the day I though the game was Photorealistic. Of course it was impressive back then, compared to anything else, but photorealistic? That's some major colored goggles right there!

And fuck everyone, I like to spell it with the capital M at the end.

Palantas wrote:Deus Ex is barely even genre classifiable.

Lol, obviously "FPS w/ RPG elements" is hard to classify lol.

OMG I'm sucking up too much from Strak.

The sad thing is I love that game, unlike Strak.

Can I just point out to everyone - I have never gotten past about 4 hours in FFVII. And I stopped because I hated it. Just want to make sure that EVERYONE understands that I am a JRPG hater.

LAWL this aer not trollz thred rofl.

Now here is what will happen - Each nomination will get it's own thread, and anyone may submit their ratings of each one - here is where it gets difficult - I'm going to ask each one of you to put on your "honest" hat and only rate games that you yourself have played. Each person will rate the aspects of any of the nominations that they have played. When each thread is finished, the ratings will be tallied and averaged, and a final end-all-to-be-all thread compilating the top ten games of all time (as determined by SDN [lol?]) will be posted. Since someone already nominated Star Control 2, I will not waste bandwidth by doing it again.

Civilization II

Quality/innovation - 8, Honestly it probably rates higher in that it was the first game purpose built for Windows instead of DOS-emulation but the fact that its CivII and not Civ keeps me from placing it any higher. That said the isometric viewpoint, the beginnings of the era system, the new combat system, the viedoes of in-game advisors in their regalia, all were huge leaps over the original.

Graphics/sound - 9 The score to the game and the isometric viewpoint (along with the built in viedoes) were all well ahead of the curve for the era in which they were released. Hell the advisor videos are still pretty good looking against videos of equivalent size. Moreover the score was just perfect to fit the mood of all encompassing god-awesomeness.


Fun Factor - 9, Any game this addictive has to be rated at least that high and its only the micromanagement tedium of the end-game that keeps me from clocking this as a 10. Oh sure its not the most historically accurate but once you start playing you just have to keep going. The one more turn syndrom may have been first diagnosed with CivI but this game turned sleep deprivaiton into an art form all its own. Add in the flavor elements and it just gets better (score, videos, etc)


Replayability - 8, The end game doldrums and the generaly similair way the game plays out keep this from a higher scroe but with multiple ways to win, different nations to lead, different maps to play on the game can gives thousands of variations but they all tend to be notes on the same chord. Still I am still playing it some 15 years later so I suppose it could be a point or so higher.


Learning Curve - 8, the god-game concept is rather ingrained now but for the time a better tutorial and more explanation of the more esoteric features woudl be useful. That said on the easiest levels the strategeis you chose are pretty easy to plan out and ramping up the difficulty level scales pretty well.


Immersion - 9, I'd give it higher but the main reason for thsi is the darn in-game advisors. They are awesomeness defined and the constant change of garb and attitude is pretty neat as well. Moreover the city-naming system, and the ability to play through history in a sort of pop-history way makes it seem like you are re-creating earth.

I should add that I agree with the greatness of the games being presented here (at least the ones I know). I also agree with the fact that you can't make different genres compete with each other, as each has its own appeal. I mean, even games like Total War, Heroes of M&M and Civlization, although superficially seen as strategy games, are too different to be classified aganist one another.

Pong.

A pretty damn good game for me was

Tales of the Abyss - for Playstation 2.

Quality/innovation: 9/10 - This has a very large improvement on the prior Tales game, Tales of Symphonia, it that it actually allows you to fight a real-time battle in the RPG system in 3D for real. This means that you can run your characters around in a three-dimensional battlefield, dodge spells and attacks, and so on and so forth. It is very entertaining and intense to play, particularly on the later battles where you have to do it to survive.


Graphics/sound: 8/10 - The graphics are good, but not amazingly life-like during the normal play; Final Fantasy X probably had better game-play graphics. The cinematics are generally decently-drawn anime-style cutscenes.

It's on the sound where this game shines. I love the character voices, and the voiceovers, and the battle sounds are good too.


Fun Factor: 10/10 - Oh hell yes. This game was tremendously fun to play - if I didn't have to work and do other important life stuff, you could probably play this game for countless hours on end (and it is even more fun in that two people can play - I beat this with my brother).


Replayability - 7/10 - It's a good game to replay, but a major time commitment.


Learning Curve - 9/10- The controls are pretty straightforward, with some greater difficultly in setting your AI guys to do tactics. Still pretty easy, though, and fun.


Immersion: 10/10 - This is something that Tales of Symphonia had as well, but the story and plot in Abyss were just fantastic and fun to follow. It had its own internal logic, great characters (ones you could both sympathize with and feel contempt for, with no really irritating characters like Lloyd in Symphonia), and a complex but understandable story. I listed this under the "most emotional games" thread, because there are moments where you really feel for the characters and their struggles.

Deus EX.
The things that drew me in were:
1. Level design-I'm not talking about pretty graphics but the fact that into every building there are 3-4 different entryways each testing a different skill or an augmentation which increases replayability.
2. Music-Other than Unreal the best music soundtrack in my opinion.
3. Story- Not necessarily it's premise which really combines a huge variety of conspiracy theories but it's execution in the game.
4. Large number of side quests which though not comparable in number to a true RPG game are each far more thought out and immersive than those in an average RPG game where side quests look more as if they were computer generated.

Then there is Unreal and Freespace 2.
Interestingly both Unreal 2 and Deus Ex 2 suffer from same limitations compared to their predecessors: inferior music, while graphics are better the actual level design is worse, enemies are designed badly (compare military bot from Deus Ex1 with that of sequel or the way Skaarj moved in Unreal with the way they move in the sequel). With Deus Ex there is also the simplification of the augmentation/skills system which further kills the game.

Super Mario Land

Quality/innovation - Well the game wasn't really innovative, as most of what it did had been done before on the NES. Still the game had a different formula from the "big" Mario games, which included submarine+airplane levels which made it "refreshing" enough. Dunno if that would qualify as innovation here.
Quality on the other hand was great, the game was hard but fair, it had thought out levels with secret passages and different settings every three levels or so.
10/10

Graphics/sound - The Game was never that pretty, although Nintendo did a heck of a job on the Gameboy platform. As for sound quality, well it was stereo if you used ear buds, aside from that I really dug the background music.
7/10

Fun Factor - My sister and I absolutely loved this game and took turns playing it on our Gameboy. I remember my friends liking it as well.
10/10

Replayability - I must have beat the game a hundred times. So for me personally with had very high replayability.
9/10

Learning Curve - One button to jump, one button to run. Doesn't get easier than that. The first few levels are easy enough, so you can get familiar with the controls. The game does become harder with each level that you beat, so the Game Over music will probably ingrain itself into your memory when you first start playing.
8/10

Immersion - Tatanka captured Princess Daisy and Mario has to get here back. Not much story to be found here. The game still captivated me though.
7/10

King's Bounty by New World

The precursor to HoMM which I played for years on my Amiga 500 before I got a PC. I'm not going to rank it the way these games are ranked because by today's standards graphics are shit and playability, despite 4 classes and 4 difficulties, was shot due to the maps never changing.

However, it was amazingly fun, amazingly addictive and pretty much shaped my love for this type of game (I love the HoMM franchise) to this day. I even downloaded a freeware DOS version so I could play it sometimes... despite having still not completed HoMM V due to being distracted by family duties.