• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

IGN’s Top 100 RPGs

W

Wafflecakes

Member
spirity said:
Well, Everquest laid the groundwork for WoW. Blizzards WoW team are made up of ex EQ guild leaders - Rob Pardo, Alex Afrasiabi, Jeff Kaplan to name a few. Blizzard hired these players because of their experience with Everquest. Its no exaggeration to say WoW was shaped by Everquest. WoW may have existed without EQ, but it would have been a fundamentally different game, and not in a good way. EQ's raid encounters were above everything at the time and anything that came before it. Blizzard wanted them in WoW.

You queried Everquest's entry on that list, but you didn't ask why WoW was on it too. If WoW is ok to be there, then EQ should be there too. (Of course, if the question is "what is an mmorpg doing in here", thats a different thing entirely. But as I've said, you seemed to be ok with WoW being there, so it doesn't seem like you take issues with mmorpg's being there, just EQ)
Click to expand...

I agree with the overall sentiment.

Underlined portion isn't really valid though. For all we know it could have been way better without the influence. Supposition.
 
N

NaughtyCalibur

Member
Yeah, I'm also on Team Morrowind. That game > Skyrim is so many ways that I won't even bother listing. However, I'm fairly certain that with enough mods that gap could easily be closed on PC.
 
L

Lothar

Banned
Uthred said:
No offence, but its clearly not. If you get a random gamer and have him play two games, one of which was influential but aged badly, the other which may be derivative but is extremely enjoyable he's going to prefer the superior *game*, not the superior phenomenon. Its rather ironic that you insisted no one rates games based on nostalgia and then argue more or less that games should be rated on nostalgia.
Click to expand...

This is why a list from a new random gamer would be worthless. Just a list of movies would be worthless from someone who hasn't ever seen a movie in his life. Who would even want to see it? It would be garbage. Quality is about more than how enjoyable something is. When determining the quality of games (or movies), you have to look at what it did for the industry. You have to look at what went into making the game. Did they just copy it from someone else or did they make something completely new? That's an important question.
 
S

spirity

Member
Wafflecakes said:
I agree with the overall sentiment.

Underlined portion isn't really valid though. For all we know it could have been way better without the influence. Supposition.
Click to expand...

Well, my reason for saying it was that Blizzard hired people who had experience with EQ's raiding game, and in particular what makes a good and bad raid encounter. They hand picked those people I mentioned and put them into senior positions to develop WoW. Without those people and their knowledge, I believe its fair to say WoW's raid events would not have been as good without them. They knew the pitfalls of raid design, because they experienced them as players in a game that had a really strong raid game (for its time).

I dunno, maybe there's still a case for supposition there, I just think the scenario that WoW being a better game because of those people is more likely, than one where the game would have been better without that experience leading the games development.
 
U

Uthred

Member
Lothar said:
This is why a list from a new random gamer would be worthless. Just a list of movies would be worthless from someone who hasn't ever seen a movie in his life. Who would even want to see it? It would be garbage. Quality is about more than how enjoyable something is. When determining the quality of games (or movies), you have to look at what it did for the industry. You have to look at what went into making the game. Did they just copy it from someone else or did they make something completely new? That's an important question.
Click to expand...

I'm going to drop this here because we are going around in circles. Either I'm not getting my point across or you're being deliberately obtuse. I dont expect people to agree with me but you dont seem to be even engaging with the argument being made. Hell, your response isnt even internally consistent, in one sentence you're saying that quality is about how enjoyable something is and then in the very next sentence you say quality is based on influence. Quality is based on the intrinsic nature of the piece being examined, this isnt an opinion, thats simply how it works. Influence and the importance of the work are a different extrinisic measure of the work. No serious (i.e. constructed by respected critics) list of films and literary works based on quality privileges works based on influence or impact .
 
W

Wafflecakes

Member
spirity said:
Well, my reason for saying it was that Blizzard hired people who had experience with EQ's raiding game, and in particular what makes a good and bad raid encounter. They hand picked those people I mentioned and put them into senior positions to develop WoW. Without those people and their knowledge, I believe its fair to say WoW's raid events would not have been as good without them. They knew the pitfalls of raid design, because they experienced them as players in a game that had a really strong raid game (for its time).

I dunno, maybe there's still a case for supposition there, I just think the scenario that WoW being a better game because of those people is more likely.
Click to expand...

I mean I love Warcraft. Quit WoW for other MMO's at least 4 times and have always come back. It really is the best MMO out there. Never played everquest.... I just don't like assuming that the game wouldn't have been as good without certain people. Is it probable? Yeah..... not verifiable though.
 
W

Wafflecakes

Member
It saddens me how few games on the list I have played. I was mostly an RTS/PC gamer until this gen..... and I can't stand older dated games. I try, but can't enjoy them :(
 
L

Lothar

Banned
Uthred said:
Hell, your response isnt even internally consistent, in one sentence you're saying that quality is about how enjoyable something is
Click to expand...

If you think I said something as dumb as that, then you should drop this because you are illiterate. I said quality is about more than how enjoyable something is. Your new random gamer would only care about what he finds enjoyable, so his list would be complete garbage.
 
U

Uthred

Member
Lothar said:
If you think I said something as dumb as that, then you should drop this because you are illiterate. I said quality is about more than how enjoyable something is. Your new random gamer would only care about what he finds enjoyable, so his list would be complete garbage.
Click to expand...

Apologies I did indeed somehow miss "more than", however you have again avoided engaging with the actual argument.
 
S

spirity

Member
Wafflecakes said:
I mean I love Warcraft. Quit WoW for other MMO's at least 4 times and have always come back. It really is the best MMO out there. Never played everquest.... I just don't like assuming that the game wouldn't have been as good without certain people. Is it probable? Yeah..... not verifiable though.
Click to expand...

Thats fine. But you should give Blizzard credit for seeing in those people something very valuable, something that Blizzard did not have at the time. That was experience with mmorpg's. So, they cherry picked the 'best' players from the leading mmo at the time to help design their mmo. That was Furor from Fires of Heaven and Tigole from Legacy of Steel. It also helped that their guild websites were receiving thousands of hits every day from EQ players who hung on every word Furor and Tigole said. Those guys were very vocal about EQ's shortcomings, explaining in great detail why such and such encounter was bad, and why such and such encounter was good. They knew mechanically the game inside out, they knew what constituted good loot vs time invested, and they showed how to make the game better. They talked smack about EQ and its designers constantly, but they backed up their arrogance and shit talk with how things can be improved. And they were always right.

But it's not enough that you can gather a talented team. Anyone can do that. You have to be able to assemble them in a way as to maximise their effectiveness. You can have the most talented team ever, but if they're all jackasses the product is going to suffer if there's ego problems and nobody gets on with one another. And its really hard as a player looking from the outside in, to be able to see the cohesiveness of the team they've assembled. So from that point of view, you could be completely right and I've just realised I've fucked up my original argument. God damn.
 
Sanctuary

Sanctuary

Member
cj_iwakura said:
From the three Elder Scrolls games I've seen(III/IV/V), I honestly don't see what makes them special or even remotely innovative. They seem like cookie cutter fantasy RPGs with the most standard aesthetics and gameplay possible, right down to canned animations.

Bloodlines at least tried new things.
Click to expand...

Morrowind was the best of the last three. Easily, and for many reasons. The only reasons Oblivion and Skyrim get as much praise as they do is because a) Many people haven't even played Morrowind b) graphics, graphics, graphics and c) hype.

Both Oblivion and Skyrim are simply retreads of Morrowind (sometimes leaving out huge amounts of what made Morrowind good in the first place) that are simply transplanted into a new engine on newer hardware--or in the case of the last two, the same hardware. Both Oblivion and Skyrim are games that you really want to enjoy, but if you've been gaming for more than a decade--or three--will easily see all of it's glaring flaws within twenty or so hours. Depending on your tolerance levels for repetition, you'll quickly get bored with it as well.

Skyrim had the potential to be a great game, but the mechanics of the combat are simply awful and they have not progressed past 1994 yet. Bethesda is great at making outside environments that you want to explore, and sometimes a decent, yet short narrative. Beyond that, they don't do anything special, yet are always forgiven for their shoddy work because people are starving for a big RPG, and they "look nice".
 
Sanctuary

Sanctuary

Member
spirity said:
Would you say that Morrowinds combat is better than Skyrims?
Click to expand...

Heh, no. Not really. It was pretty terrible in that game as well, but for it's time was "acceptable". The combat in Oblivion/Skyrim is technically "better", but more like a very small iterative tweak than a full on upgrade. It doesn't help that besides the actual mechanics, that the skills themselves were completely imbalanced in various ways.

Have you ever played Hexen? To me, that's pretty much what all of the TES games feel like combat wise to me.
 
B

BatDan

Bane? Get them on board, I'll call it in.
*sees Final Fantasy VI is #1* I was off by one. Drat.

Still, good choice for #1. But the others... why is Persona 4 not in the Top Ten?
 
N

Nosgoroth

Member
After glancing over the list, I have decided that the wisest course of action is to not touch this with a ten-foot pole.

And yet I'm posting to say it. Yeah, I'm doomed.
 
E

Earthpainting

Member
I don't particularly care about the actual ranking so much, but the fact that Partners in Time made it on the list baffles me. What's even more bizarre that it's the only Mario & Luigi game on that list. I can't imagine what kind of person would pick Partners in Time over the actually decent ones.
 
D

Dresden

Member
Xarudace said:
World of Warcraft should easily be top 3. There probably is no other game at all more widely appreciated and played than it so consistently and by so many. Hate on it all you want, but it is fun before you hit 300 days played and its sales and activity prove it.

I don't think any of those FF games should be top 10 (or even 50). FF games do not stand the test of time particularly well. Their mechanics are simple and boring. People play them and still say they are best due to two factors: nostalgia and hype. There are other games which are far better designed and far more fun than them. They just happen to be a part of a long list of copycats that at some point become more of the same and not as special. There's simply no way that the games of olde could stand up to today's gameplay mechanics. There's a reason no one produces big budget 2d RPGs anymore. It's because those games aren't better than what we have today.

The main point I try to make is that the list of top 10 RPGs should probably come from this console generation and last generation. Before that, consoles were incapable of making gameplay that is even remotely compelling by today's standards. At least not as anything other than XBLA games and the like. I'm sure some of you will disagree with that, and a few of you may actually feel what you purport to feel, but most of you don't play old RPGs because....they suck.
Click to expand...
Trolling hard I see.
 
G

GotchaForce

Member
Totally agree with 1 and 2. Though it's just by a hair.

Off the top of my head, my top ten:

FF6
Chrono Trigger
Knights of the Old Republic 1/2
Mass Effect series
FF Tactics
Persona 4/3
Fallout 3/New Vegas
Mario and Luigi SSS/BiS
Fire Emblem series
The World End With You
 
K

King of the Potato People

Member
Earthpainting said:
I don't particularly care about the actual ranking so much, but the fact that Partners in Time made it on the list baffles me. What's even more bizarre that it's the only Mario & Luigi game on that list. I can't imagine what kind of person would pick Partners in Time over the actually decent ones.
Click to expand...
I struggle to think of a better DS game than Bowser's Inside Story. More people should play it.
 
T

Toth

Member
I am surprised FFXII did not make the list either. While it is not my favorite FF, it is still better than at least half of these games. I would have also put 13 in 8's spot, moved 8 up about 5, and added FFV into the mid 60s.
 
C

cartman414

Member
djtiesto said:
Top 20 is way too western/MMO heavy for my tastes - at least CT and FF6 scored the top slots and FF4 got pretty high up. And that one of the few western RPGs I enjoyed (Planescape) made it up pretty high. Isn't System Shock 2 an FPS (with RPG elements)? Everquest, really? Or the original Diablo are the biggest questionables. (plus I hate Star Wars so I'd never vote for the RPG)

It was nice to see that IGN didn't forget the PS series (1, 2, 4 and Online all made the list) but not having Star Ocean 2, Valkyrie Profile, Panzer Dragoon Saga, or Nocturne is a crime.
Click to expand...

Word on VP and PDS. Least Baldur's Gate 2 was top 3.
 
D

djtiesto

is beloved, despite what anyone might say
spirity said:
Well, Everquest laid the groundwork for WoW. Blizzards WoW team are made up of ex EQ guild leaders - Rob Pardo, Alex Afrasiabi, Jeff Kaplan to name a few. Blizzard hired these players because of their experience with Everquest. Its no exaggeration to say WoW was shaped by Everquest. WoW may have existed without EQ, but it would have been a fundamentally different game, and not in a good way. EQ's raid encounters were above everything at the time and anything that came before it. Blizzard wanted them in WoW.

You queried Everquest's entry on that list, but you didn't ask why WoW was on it too. If WoW is ok to be there, then EQ should be there too. (Of course, if the question is "what is an mmorpg doing in here", thats a different thing entirely. But as I've said, you seemed to be ok with WoW being there, so it doesn't seem like you take issues with mmorpg's being there, just EQ)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't think MMOs should be on the list at all, since they are a completely different beast that are judged on completely different merits than single player RPGs. You'll find a lot of people who love single-player RPGs are cold on MMOs and vice versa. I am also one that thinks that the RPG list should be divided between Japan and the West too, due to tastes having little overlap.

Anyways, another issue I have with Everquest on there is that while it did influence WOW and lots of other MMOs (even though it was far from the first, see Meridien 59, Ultima Online or early text-based MUDs), it still was superseded relatively quickly and is extremely dated/grindy today. And there are plenty of influential (but dated) games on the list that are either not there (Akalabeth, pedit5) or are pretty low (DQ1, FF1). Perhaps it would be better placed in the 80's or 90's but not in a top 20 spot.
 
K

Khrno

Member
5 - Final Fantasy IV
4 - Pokemon Red/Blue
3 - Baldur's Gate 2
2 - Chrono Trigger
1 - Final Fantasy VI
Click to expand...

What an amazing Top-5, completely agree, especially with top 1 (and 2).

23138.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[Metacritic] The Top 25 RPGs of 2023
42
3K
Raven117 replied
PlayStation Store Japan: March 2024’s top downloads
Sales-Age
7
995
Thick Thighs Save Lives replied
27th Annual DICE Awards Finalists Revealed
News
11
1K
Thick Thighs Save Lives replied
Baldur's Gate 3 Wins Game of The Year at GDC 2024
News Hype
3
499
manfestival replied
Bafta Games Awards 2024: Longlist published for first time
19
1K
Wildebeest replied
Top Bottom