Top 100 lists are always complete bitches to compose, particulary for those actually producing them.
PC Gamer (UK) has, for several years now, done top 100s, and pretty much the basic rule they allow is "no sequels and expansions" (Though that hasn't stopped GTA3 sharing the list with GTA2, or Quake being just grades away from Quake 3 Arena. Their reasoning is that while they are expansions, they're totally different games) and on the whole they've done well. Not all the games are there purely to satisfy the publishers, with NetHack being in the list for as long as I can remember, and Introversion's brilliant "hacker-game-on-a-shoestring-budget" Uplink receiving placements in the last list (As well as scoring a brilliant ninth place in the reader's poll). Old, abandoneware titles such as Elite+ and the original X-Com are also almost guaranteed a spot every year.
For essentially every year since their release, Half-Life occupied the top-slot with Deus Ex occupying second. This, essentially, was a guarantee. Every year you could always count on those two results, and year in and year out people would complain. There were the die-hard Deus Ex advocates that kept bitching on how their game (Which was infinately better than Half-Life, ITHO) was always bridesmaid and demanded that they get fair play next year. There were those that didn't like Half-Life, saying that it was "too old, and by the way, what the f*** is Ultima 7 doing in the list you old dinosaurs?" and didn't deserve the top slot year after year. "The plot is b-movie substandard," they'd yell, "the graphics engine is crap." they'd whine, and when they had the chance in the reader's poll to ammend it... They'd shut up and let others vote for Half-Life.
All that changed last year. Medieval: Total War was voted in, with Deus Ex in second and Half-Life was third. The backlash was astounding. First of all you had the Deus Ex fans that thought that they were gypped once again. Then you had the "I like Half-Life but not Deus Ex" crowd who were outraged that Deus Ex beat them, after all Half-Life was the better game just last year, why are they now third? And then you had the "I love Half-Life and Deus Ex" group who thought pretty much the same thing without the hostility towards Deus Ex, and would have rather that finish first than Medieval. And then you had those who thought that Medieval was not that good a game, and in many ways they were right - It certainly hasn't had the longevity enjoyed by both HL and DE, and the expansion was treated with lukewarm reviews at best. There's nothing really there to put Medieval at the top of the list. And then the readers results came in, and Half-Life was top yet again with Medieval somewhere in the arse-end of the top ten.
PC Gamer is a fine magazine, but if there is one thing I don't like about it, it's the "we're always right" attitude they exhibit. Every time a letter is published, or a reader's review in the Uncensored section is printed that disagrees with their views, the reply will inevitably contain the words "you're wrong" in that order. The flak they've taken over the Hitman series has been astounding, as it seems that for every bad game there's always a crowd willing to like it. However, even they couldn't have predicted the backlash over the "Medieval is better than Half-Life and Deus Ex" debacle, and even made some concessions. Granted, the most visible was a screenshot of one invincible Blue Shift scientist leaning against a blood-stained wall with the caption "All right, I admit it, Half-Life is the best. Now can you please stop shooting me?" but the concessions were there, as exhibited in the much scaled-down Medieval presence in the magazine in the following months.
Plus, it was noted on several occassions that Jim Rossignol, a former staff writer at PCG was one who went on to actually work on Medieval: Total War, and this somehow influenced their decision. And those who said this were probably right, as PC Gamer always seemed to get preferential treatment whenever any new information was to be released. PC Gamer's impartiality has been soiled with this whole affair, and its probably something that will never happen again.
What? Oh yes, the point of all this. Top 100 games lists are, essentially, like any chart be it for movies or books or music that is based on opinion rather than sales (And let's not claim that sales is a good indicator of quality: After all, if it were then the best game in the whole world would be The Sims) it will only ever express the opinion of the writers. Everyone has their own opinions, and I can honestly and without any malice whatsoever say that each and every opinion in the world is wrong on some level.
PC Gamer (UK) has, for several years now, done top 100s, and pretty much the basic rule they allow is "no sequels and expansions" (Though that hasn't stopped GTA3 sharing the list with GTA2, or Quake being just grades away from Quake 3 Arena. Their reasoning is that while they are expansions, they're totally different games) and on the whole they've done well. Not all the games are there purely to satisfy the publishers, with NetHack being in the list for as long as I can remember, and Introversion's brilliant "hacker-game-on-a-shoestring-budget" Uplink receiving placements in the last list (As well as scoring a brilliant ninth place in the reader's poll). Old, abandoneware titles such as Elite+ and the original X-Com are also almost guaranteed a spot every year.
For essentially every year since their release, Half-Life occupied the top-slot with Deus Ex occupying second. This, essentially, was a guarantee. Every year you could always count on those two results, and year in and year out people would complain. There were the die-hard Deus Ex advocates that kept bitching on how their game (Which was infinately better than Half-Life, ITHO) was always bridesmaid and demanded that they get fair play next year. There were those that didn't like Half-Life, saying that it was "too old, and by the way, what the f*** is Ultima 7 doing in the list you old dinosaurs?" and didn't deserve the top slot year after year. "The plot is b-movie substandard," they'd yell, "the graphics engine is crap." they'd whine, and when they had the chance in the reader's poll to ammend it... They'd shut up and let others vote for Half-Life.
All that changed last year. Medieval: Total War was voted in, with Deus Ex in second and Half-Life was third. The backlash was astounding. First of all you had the Deus Ex fans that thought that they were gypped once again. Then you had the "I like Half-Life but not Deus Ex" crowd who were outraged that Deus Ex beat them, after all Half-Life was the better game just last year, why are they now third? And then you had the "I love Half-Life and Deus Ex" group who thought pretty much the same thing without the hostility towards Deus Ex, and would have rather that finish first than Medieval. And then you had those who thought that Medieval was not that good a game, and in many ways they were right - It certainly hasn't had the longevity enjoyed by both HL and DE, and the expansion was treated with lukewarm reviews at best. There's nothing really there to put Medieval at the top of the list. And then the readers results came in, and Half-Life was top yet again with Medieval somewhere in the arse-end of the top ten.
PC Gamer is a fine magazine, but if there is one thing I don't like about it, it's the "we're always right" attitude they exhibit. Every time a letter is published, or a reader's review in the Uncensored section is printed that disagrees with their views, the reply will inevitably contain the words "you're wrong" in that order. The flak they've taken over the Hitman series has been astounding, as it seems that for every bad game there's always a crowd willing to like it. However, even they couldn't have predicted the backlash over the "Medieval is better than Half-Life and Deus Ex" debacle, and even made some concessions. Granted, the most visible was a screenshot of one invincible Blue Shift scientist leaning against a blood-stained wall with the caption "All right, I admit it, Half-Life is the best. Now can you please stop shooting me?" but the concessions were there, as exhibited in the much scaled-down Medieval presence in the magazine in the following months.
Plus, it was noted on several occassions that Jim Rossignol, a former staff writer at PCG was one who went on to actually work on Medieval: Total War, and this somehow influenced their decision. And those who said this were probably right, as PC Gamer always seemed to get preferential treatment whenever any new information was to be released. PC Gamer's impartiality has been soiled with this whole affair, and its probably something that will never happen again.
What? Oh yes, the point of all this. Top 100 games lists are, essentially, like any chart be it for movies or books or music that is based on opinion rather than sales (And let's not claim that sales is a good indicator of quality: After all, if it were then the best game in the whole world would be The Sims) it will only ever express the opinion of the writers. Everyone has their own opinions, and I can honestly and without any malice whatsoever say that each and every opinion in the world is wrong on some level.
When in mortal danger,
When beset by doubt,
Run in little circles,
Wave your arms and shout.
BattleTag: Schrau#2386
When beset by doubt,
Run in little circles,
Wave your arms and shout.
BattleTag: Schrau#2386