To celebrate its 200th issue,
Game Informer is out with its top 200 video games of all time. And it is a doozy of a list. A brief synopsis and screen shot accompany each choice providing a trip down a digital memory lane. The problem with lists like this, whether it be "best movie", "best song", "best album", "best Adam Sandler movie" or "best whatever" is that largely the top of the lists are often predictable and homogenized and thus ultimately, pretty boring.
You know when you start discussing certain topics, passion, experience and personal preference are going to come in to play, but really when you talk of best movies for example its usually over the details of deciding if Citizen Kane is REALLY better than Casablanca or if Gone with the Wind is as good as Lawrence of Arabia or in what proper order to put The Godfather, Star Wars and Blade Runner in the top 10 is. There is no real debate about the best; sure every so often someone wants to throw in a 2010, or a Clockwork Orange or a Pulp Fiction much higher than it should be, but in the end ultimately and simply the best are the best because they are the best.
Placing video games in such a list is the same. Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Tetris, Final Fantasy...there are games that are going to be there. The details come down to which is #1 and which is #5. Basically some are going to say Zelda, some will say Mario, there may be an argument here or there for a Donkey Kong, or a Doom or even perhaps a Halo, but again ultimately the cream of the crop is not up for much debate.
I mostly agree with the list as I imagine most gamers will. Sure I personally would flip #1 and #2, but its a solid list; and ultimately a predictable and boring one. But even so, I am ALWAYS up for discussing and debating it of course. Believe it or not, I at times have been accused of being a fanboy. It is a tag I neither really dispute or argue. Of some things I am an unabashed fan boy. And proud of it. Most of the criticisms are because of my feelings towards Microsoft's Xbox family of machines. Now despite the
original XBox's oversized controller and the failure rate of over
50% on the 360, I can agree that machines are fine. The graphics are fine and sure the 360 has done considerably better than its competitors in online gaming. But there is a reason no Xbox games show up in the top 10 of this list. Despite its popularity and its penchant for failing the XBox and the 360 just frankly have not had as important of an impact on gaming.
I've been told that I am flat out wrong on this a couple of times today, but I still maintain my stance. Using GI's list as a starting point, there are not that may games here and for good reason. Microsoft has used their gaming consoles to homogenize the gaming industry and really have just built on others successes and ideas. Again I am not saying everything about these consoles are terrible. The UI on the 360, Xbox Live, the S-controller, Halo. All good. But again my entire feeling on the Microsoft era of gaming is that they have not done anything unique, interesting, groundbreaking or compelling that has a lasting game-changing impact on gaming. I am a hard core gamer and even had the original Xbox for quite ahwile, but have never been compelled to get a 360. Everyone's argument is "xbox live xbox live! its so good!" Well it is an extra paid service, I would expect it to be good. But compelling? The want me to pay extra to have some 11 year old redneck kid cuss me out and shoot my ass in Halo? No thanks. And the Dreamcast had a great online experience. Just 8 years to early.
Show me Xbox's Zelda. No, not an RPG on the xbox that is similar to Zelda. Show me an RPG on the XBox that defined or redefined the genre. The broke down barriers. That created an iconic world renowned franchise.
Show me Xbox's Mario. Where is their genre defining, game changing, icon creating platformer? A franchise that reinvigorates itself with each new title, bringing unique innovations to the genre time and time again.
Show me Xbox's Metal Gear Solid. A game that rewrote the rules on what an action game should be.
Halo? Sure its great. I attended the private premier party thrown by Bungie in Chicago for fans and the media for the original Halo as a writer for the now defunct www.amazing-colossal.com website. I played it. I liked it. I saw it demoed on Macs. (Everything Bungie did that evening was done on a Mac, except of course playing the game on Xboxs ). But, I'll take Goldeneye and Quake 3 any day.
Honestly, I love my PS3 and think the UI is great now, but they are not really doing much compelling new stuff now, but the playstation family has. I think if I was new to gaming the choice between the 360 and PS3 would be difficult. I think really Nintendo is the only company still innovating and moving things forward in an interesting and unique way with the Wii and DS. There are lots of great games for PS3 and 360, but I do not see Microsoft or yes Sony now doing anything as important to gaming as Nintendo, Sega and Sony did in the past.
I am going to go play some Advanced Dungeons and Dragons or Tron Deadly Discs on my Intellivision now. Here are my top 10 in honor of GI's massive list.
1. Super Mario Bros. (NES)
2. The Legend of Zelda (NES)
3. Metal Gear Solid (PlayStation)
4. Super Mario 64/Super Mario Galaxy (tie) (Nintendo 64)/(Wii)
5. Metroid (NES)
6. The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (Nintendo 64)
7. Mario Kart (Super Nintendo)
8. Quake 3/Goldeneye (tie) (Dreamcast)/(Nintendo 64)
9. Resident Evil: Code Veronica (Dreamcast)
10. Gran Turismo 2 (Playstation)