(This is my post to a topic in TG forums about a list of 200 best games...Maybe someone here finds this entertaining)
Since we seemingly have reached an agreement that writers of this list, and generally people working in gaming magazines know very little about games and absolutely nothing about classic games, my suggestion for future lists of this type will be following:
Just rate games by their names, stupid!
...If you think about it, you'll notice that name of the game tells all you want to know about it. No actual playing required.
Couple days ago when I watched a Stargate SG1 rerun, I came to conclusion that most of the movies/series with "star" in their names are actually rather good?!
Example: Star Trek, Star Wars, Starman, The Last Starfighter, Stargate. However, if you combine "star" and "trooper" the movie seems to be a total mess.
Let's look this more closely:
Stargate is a fairly good movie...Stargate SG1 is a fairly good series, although not as good as the movie, they've added too much stuff in it...for example do we really need to know that Goa'uld is actually a worm inside a human? How about all those different kind of Goaulds, Jaffas, Knox etc crap that came along with the series...no!
However I do like some new characters from SG1, especially replicators and Asgard.
Thor, The Supreme Commander of Asgard fleet
After Stargate SG1 they made Stargate Continuum, where was even more strange characters and stuff...and no McGyver!
...and then Stargate Atlantis...which is completely over the top. And I don't get it...what does the story of Atlantis have to do with STARgate?! Wtf...travelling in stars but underwater? Shouldn't it be called Watergate then?
Stargate - great
Stargate sg1 - good
Stargate Continuum - poor
Stargate Atlantis - rubbish
So we see that more we add to the name "STARgate", poorer the product is. Well, sequels often are.
Are they trying to fool us with fancy names?!
Now, let's try this on video games: Star Wars, Star Trek, Stargate, Star Castle. Wow! Works here too. All of these are great games.
However Stargate is a sequel of Defender, some extra stuff added, so by definition it should not be a good game.
Yet it is.
This is, of course, due to the NAME. The game is THAT good that they don't have to call it "Defender II", or "Defender Continuum"...but instead they call it STARgate.
Now think about some great, legendary titles. Most of them have good, snappy names:
THAT'S PRESTIGE RIGHT THERE, SIR.
No, not too much trying from marketing department. The product is good, the gameplay is solid and there's not too much stuff. No sequels. Sir, this product is a born winner. A legend in the making.
Then there are titles that still have fairly good, simple and straight to the point names:
Clearly these games know what they want and what they are.
THAT'S CLASS RIGHT THERE, SIR.
Finally, we have games named such as:
Eternal Darkness Sanity's Requiem,
Metal Gear Solid 4 Guns of the Patriots,
Chronicles of Riddick Escape from Butcher Bay,
Super Mario World 2 Yoshi's Island,
Maniac Mansion Day of the Tentacle,
Star Wars Jedi Knight Dark Forces 2
THAT'S COOL RIGHT THERE, SIR.
Or is it? Maybe marketing department is trying just a bit too hard. Maybe the name indeed is an omen.
General discussion on MAME, MARP, or whatever else that doesn't belong in any of the other forums
1 post • Page 1 of 1