IGN's Top 10

[Weaver]

Half-life 2 is my favorite FPS game ever created. I think you all have poor taste
It had great characters, great level design, amazing atmosphere and variation AND an actual story that was well written. The shooting mechanics were solid, the enemies were fun to kill and it was just a great game.

If you played it on a console... I pity you for having to suffer through a game that really shouldn't have been ported. Joysticks do this game no justice.

 

[Solid Snake2053]

It's always interesting how people seem to fall over themselves in the urgent rush to express their subjective opinions as absolutely universal law. "ME2 SUCKS! IT IS A TERRIBLE GAME"

If you think ME2 is a bad game, you are wrong. Not because I think so, but simply because, on a variety of measures (production values, accepted writing archetypes, etc) it is an excellent game. If you don't like ME2, if it's not the sort of game you enjoy, then that's perfectly valid. It's a considerable achievement regardless of one's opinion, however.

Also, the hate for IGN is kind of amusing. It seems to have reached the point where people hate them simply because they're big and therefore evil and corrupt. Anyone been to GameSpot/GameSpy/GameTrailers/etc? Compared to most of the other key reviewers, I agree with IGN's reviews more often. Which also begs the question of why they have to be tarred with one brush? You may not agree with their review of MAG (I, for example, think it was overly generous) but it doesn't mean *everything* they say is invalid. I guess knee-jerk blanket judgments are more fun than reasoned evaluations, though.

Aside from all this talk of opinions, however, wtf is up with all the dislike for HL2? I just can't wrap my head around that one. What are the single-player alternatives? Halo? Modern Warfare? BioShock? F.E.A.R.? Riiiight. If HL2 is a bad game, good games don't exist.

Generalization much? If Half-Life 2 isn't a good game, there are no good games? Wasn't you who just called people out on expressing their subjective opinions as absolute universal law"?

Here's a few points that are, of course, my opinion, which is universal law (it's in the good book somewhere). F.E.A.R's A.I. beats HL2's down into the ground. Coordinated, intelligent, tough enemies with grenades and assault rifles beat ridiculously unthreatening and uncoordinated aliens hands-down. Bioshock boasts difficult combat as well as an intriguing story and an incredible amount of alternatives in battle from lighting your enemies on fire to electrifying them to death in water, to sending a Big Daddy after them. And let's not forget the one big point that makes all of these games better than HL2 and that is their transition between action and travel: traveling in HL2 is BORING. When you're in F.E.A.R, you're either in combat, or being terrified by Alma and her visions which ultimately lead you to the next firefight. In Bioshock, you are constantly in fear of being blindsided by a splicer while you try to move on to the next location. And in Modern Warfare, one mistake means instant death, which is pretty intense if you ask me.

So as far as I can see, most of the games you listed blow HL2 out of the water. But that's just my opinion.

 

[Fraught]

Wow... the same site that said ME1 was the biggest leap in the RPG genre in the last decade and also claimed it is the best Xbox 360 game EVER and it did not even make the list... I never understand these sites.

And what was the game they chose instea for the 'best game of 2007'?

Fucking Super Mario Galaxy.

I mean, really? The game was a fun platformer, but I'd never, ever in my life put it above Mass Effect. Or many other games that year, in fact.

All in all, this list is pretty preditable and shit.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

So IGN posted their top 10 games of the past decade.

You see what I did there?
It is their opinion.
THEIR.
You can't be dissapointed with their games of the decade. What should they do? "Oh, sorry, the majority thought WoW must be here - I guess will put it in somehow".

 

[AWAR]

The OP certainly hasnt played half life 2 on the pc...

It's my fault that I played it on a console? I find it incredibly hard to justify a game's relevance and "goodness" based on whether it's played on a console or a PC. If it's a good game, it won't matter whether it's on console or PC.

The OP certainly hasnt played half life 2 on the pc...

How does playing it on PC make it better? And don't say graphics, because super, ultra intense graphics with awful gameplay and story does not a good game make.

Nope thats wrong.Its an entirely different game on the pc, leave aside all the mods.
Half life is a fast paced game which can only achieve its full potential only when played on pc and in a high difficulty.

Then it's a poor game. I fail to see how a game can change *that much* between PC and a console port, but if you say that it is that different in translation, I have to argue that we're looking at a serious game weakness. Plus, you're also implying that you have bought and played it all the way through on a console; if you haven't, you have no frame of reference.

Is it a weakness for a game to perform better on pc?And yeah ive played half life 2 on a console until i was completely saddened by the shitty gameplay that is
Again half life is a fast paced game like quake and UT. These kind of games are best on pc because they are meant to be played on pc.Valve released the orange box on the consoles only for the money.As you can see all valve games are inferior (no updates, worse support e.t.c)
You cant half life 2 with a gamepad as it is meant to be played thats why it might get boring and stale.Also remember it was released in 2004.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

Aside from all this talk of opinions, however, wtf is up with all the dislike for HL2? I just can't wrap my head around that one. What are the single-player alternatives? Halo? Modern Warfare? BioShock? F.E.A.R.? Riiiight. If HL2 is a bad game, good games don't exist.

Those are some pretty good alternatives.
Not to say I disagree with you, though.

 

[CheckD3]

The best thing about these lists are they let you know other's views upon games and give great reason for discussions about the games that made up the era in discussion. Plus it gives other games to people who haven't heard of them. A lurker might see some of these games and think "that games gets a lot of praise, I bet it's good" and bam, they're introduced to a new game, and form opinions that they can add in the next debate

 

[Ben Legend]

Hmmmmm.... I would remove half life 2 for sure, it was good, but not memorable.

I would put Mass Effect in there, alongside FF IX or Lost Odyssey. GTA: Vice City instead of GTA 3. I would put Rock Band in there too.

 

[HollywoodH17]

SNIP.

Is it a weakness for a game to perform better on pc?And yeah ive played half life 2 on a console until i was completely saddened by the shitty gameplay that is
Again half life is a fast paced game like quake and UT. These kind of games are best on pc because they are meant to be played on pc.Valve released the orange box on the consoles only for the money.As you can see all valve games are inferior (no updates, worse support e.t.c)
You cant half life 2 with a gamepad as it is meant to be played thats why it might get boring and stale.Also remember it was released in 2004.

So by this logic, 360 and PS3 games (any console game, really) that are fast-paced are inferior to all games on the PC that are fast-paced. I find this to be a huge leap that you are taking. If the motion of a mouse versus the motion of a thumbstick really changes all that much about a game, then don't you feel that something is amiss?

 

[AWAR]

SNIP.

Is it a weakness for a game to perform better on pc?And yeah ive played half life 2 on a console until i was completely saddened by the shitty gameplay that is
Again half life is a fast paced game like quake and UT. These kind of games are best on pc because they are meant to be played on pc.Valve released the orange box on the consoles only for the money.As you can see all valve games are inferior (no updates, worse support e.t.c)
You cant half life 2 with a gamepad as it is meant to be played thats why it might get boring and stale.Also remember it was released in 2004.

So by this logic, 360 and PS3 games (any console game, really) that are fast-paced are inferior to all games on the PC that are fast-paced. I find this to be a huge leap that you are taking. If the motion of a mouse versus the motion of a thumbstick really changes all that much about a game, then don't you feel that something is amiss?

You are not understanding what im saying, this is getting pointless goodbye.

 

[HollywoodH17]

So IGN posted their top 10 games of the past decade.

You see what I did there?
It is their opinion.
THEIR.
You can't be dissapointed with their games of the decade. What should they do? "Oh, sorry, the majority thought WoW must be here - I guess will put it in somehow".

Can't disagree more. I am perfectly entitled to be disappointed with whatever I want, as well as post about it, and generate a discussion on whether other people feel the same way or not.

 

[bladeofdarkness]

super mario galaxy ?
what, did NOTHING good come out during 2007 ?

no bioshock ?
no mass effect ?

what the shit IGN ?

 

[oppp7]

Regenerating health wasn't innovative, it was something that games started doing so they'd be like Halo. AI helping from inside the suit? You mean someone telling you through an intercom what to do? Pretty sure that's been done. Sticky grenades...that's a tough one, because while yes it's starting to be done more, you might be able to find that in the past in a game that people have passed up, it just brought it to light, so in that sense I can giveyou that one. And armored supsersoldiers? That's not innovative, that's just characters, and I can guarentee that since gaming began, there have to be at least a few games with armored supersoldiers before Halo. What Halo did was bring some of these things to light, taking the basic FPS frame and building it into a (and I'm afraid to start using this word) mainstream game that stays safe and is made for the pure reason of making money.

Everything Halo does has been done before, just not in the same light Halo does it. Plus, being from Microsoft only, and I'm sure was a big release for orginal Xbox owners who had nothing else to call their own, that built the popularity. It's not innovative, just popular, and just because something's popular doesn't mean it's a high quality game, it's just popular

Um, ya, they started using regenerating health in their games but Halo came up with the idea from what I can remember. Also, I forgot about how you could only carry 2 guns, which many games have taken from them, although that might have been in Golden Eye. And what has HL2 done? As much as everyone says storyline is something it does well, I don't see anything special in HL2's storyline compared to other games. It had refreshing characters (with the protagonist being the most boring), but they never really seemed to do anything other than give orders or make small talk. Atmosphere maybe, 1984 (probably, I've never read it and am going on what people have said about it) had a similar atmosphere of oppression, with both of them based off of the Soviet Union for realism. Gameplay it wasn't really too innovative, with the gravity gun being the only thing that was really that new.
And what's wrong with making a gameplay mechanic more well-known? Improving upon a system is a great way to get new gameplay, Blizzard taught us that with WoW and Warcraft 3. And what about gameplay length? Even if the story and gameplay were great, the amount of time it took to make HL2 means that you would get tired of the game long before the sequel comes out. Compared to multiplayer, which has different gameplay types, opponents with different strategies, and maps, single player games can't normally stand up to multiplayer too well in gameplay length.
However, if I was in charge of the top 10 of the decade, the only reason HL2 wouldn't have gotten on is because Gary's Mod was a fan made game. I don't have it, but if it's anything like I think it is then it's probably the only sandbox editor that could possibly rival Warcraft 3's.

 

[oppp7]

super mario galaxy ?
what, did NOTHING good come out during 2007 ?

no bioshock ?
no mass effect ?

what the shit IGN ?

Portal, Team Fortress 2, God of War 2, 4th generation of Pokemon (for the US), Overlord, Halo 3, CoD 4, Assassin's Creed...

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

So IGN posted their top 10 games of the past decade.

You see what I did there?
It is their opinion.
THEIR.
You can't be dissapointed with their games of the decade. What should they do? "Oh, sorry, the majority thought WoW must be here - I guess will put it in somehow".

Can't disagree more. I am perfectly entitled to be disappointed with whatever I want, as well as post about it, and generate a discussion on whether other people feel the same way or not.

Okay, I must have misspoken.
I can be dissapointed sure but you can't tell them what to put in that list?
Better?

 

[Kramcake2516]

Super mario? it ant that good got bored about halfway through. Half life 2 would probly be up at the top speeking of which what about portal or did they mean orange box?

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

So IGN posted their top 10 games of the past decade. They first went through and did each individual year, then took the 10 "best games" of each year and put them all in their own top 10. Here's what they came up with:

10. Uncharted 2 (2009)
9. Battlefield 1942 (2002)
8. Okami (2006)
7. Fallout 3 (2008)
6. Counterstrike (2000)
5. Super Mario Galaxy (2007)
4. GTA III (2001)
3. Star Wars: Knight of the Old Republic (2003)
2. Shadow of the Colossus (2005)
1. Half-Life 2 (2004)

I must be totally missing something here. I stopped playing Half Life 2 halfway through because of how god-awful boring it was. Sure, there was an impressive physics engine, and lots of inside jokes that only people who played the first Half-Life series would get (which I didn't, so I missed all those), but after that, meh. The guns were stereotypical FPS fare with the exception of the gravity gun, which wasn't even that great... the storyline was lame, and every two levels you're made to do a long, tedious, pain-in-the-ass "riding" mission on an ATV or water jet thing, both of which control like semi trailers full of bricks. I was so unimpressed that I stopped playing it.

Shadow of the Colossus, ok with top 5... #2? Dunno about that. KoToR is great but it's not the best game of its kind. GTA III should be higher. It basically founded the sandbox genre, so trade it with KoToR or Shadows. Galaxy, I dunno. It's a great game and all, but is *another* Mario game really revolutionary? Counterstrike can suck it. I was an Enemy Territory man. Fallout 3 should be higher. So should Uncharted 2, from everything I hear; I haven't played it and can't say. Same with Battlefield and Okami.

Notably missing is World of Warcraft. Someone fucked up; it's the most successful, most widely-played, most lucrative online game *of all time.* Think about this: it came out maybe six years ago, and STILL over 12 million people actively play it. I dare you to find me a higher credential. Everyone was apparently busy blowing Gordon Freeman in 2004, though, so he beat WoW.

That's how I feel I'm not happy with the list at all.

TL;DR - IGN is kinda bad.

Just because lots of people play a game doesn't exactly make it a great game. Lots of people eat scorpions and deep fried mars bars so does that mean I should? Also this list is pure opinion and so will all lists of this type ever made and ever will be made be so don't get worked up over it. In fact I think there should be a Top 10 ways to stop IGN from being shit for everythign but news list. That however doesn't roll off the tongue.

 

[Hollock]

Well it's opinion, and really they don't have any bad games on that list

 

[yourbeliefs]

This list is severely lacking. First off, not to be a fanboy, but how could you leave ALL the Halo games off of this list? Halo 1 basically made the rules for FPSes for almost the entire decade. Also, where the hell is Resident Evil 4, or Unreal Tournament 2004, or even The Sims? The best selling game series of all time deserves SOME sort of mention at least, even if it is the personification of casual gaming. And yes, WoW probably deserves at least some accolades.

Another problem this list has is that they used just the #1 games for each respective year. That may sound like a dumb complaint, but just because a game was GOTY in 2005 doesn't mean that it was better than the 2nd or 3rd best game in a given year. All of these years were not equal.

As far as the list itself, CS, GTA 3, KOTOR, and HL-2 definitely belong on the list based on their impact, but I'm sorry: SotC is NOT the 2nd best game of the decade. Yes it's very original, imaginative, immersive, etc etc, but there's at least 20 games I can name made in the decade that I'd rather play instead of that at any given time.