IncendiaryDevice
Self-Ejected
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2014
- Messages
- 7,407
This is an attempt to establish a list of codex highly recommended RPGs.
felipepepe 's lists are great and they serve their purpose. However, they are both old and generate a lot of controversy. This is an attempt to remodel the method of establishing greatness via a less cumbersome and convoluted but more time consuming and laborious system.
At this point in time I shan't divulge the exact details of how this system works, as this is simply the first phase of a test run to see if this method looks like it could be viable, and because its at this point that some of the rules will need to be established and agreed upon anyway.
2003 has been chosen as the test year as this falls in the middle, time-wise, between the 80s and now, and because its a year I'm more familiar with myself, and because I'm playing a game from 2003 ATM, and because the games of 2003 are likely to still interest dedicated old-only gamers while also having some appeal to modern-only gamers. Its also a year with a relatively short list, enabling the test to be completed in one singular poll rather than separated into two confusing polls, which would be right confusing when at the stage when no-one has a clue WTF is going on.
So...
Phase 1: At this point in time it is not a matter of choosing what's best, it's a matter of finding out if anyone's actually played these games.
Please vote for which PC RPGs that were initially released in 2003 that you have played at some point in your life. Unlimited voting and you can change your vote if you still fuck up this simple process somehow.
Votes are not publicly visible, so no fear of shaming if you've played something you feel is embarrassing for whatever reason but you are free to look at the current vote totals without voting, you know, cos people could just vote to look them change their vote anyway. No king komrade cos it's pointless in this situation, you've either played some of the games or you haven't.
Definition of played: You gave it your best shot, at least a good few hours, before something prevented you from completing it. For example, loading it up and it not working either immediately or after a few minutes does not count as having played it.
Some rules that might need establishing:
1. This is just part of the PC section. Games that were released as console games in 2003 but later ported to PC are not included. Is this the right way to go about things? For example: Tales of Symphonia was released in 2003 and got a Steam release in 2016, should it be on the list?
2. The list takes the original release date, not the USA release date. For example: Gothic 2 was released in Germany in 2002 but didn't get its English translation and release until 2003, so it's not on the list because it was factually released in 2002. Is this the correct way to do this?
3. Should games that were fully designed for consoles but later got a PC port even be included in any list of PC best games, or should they be permanently restricted to lists of console games? Further to this, should the list be even more pedantic and judge whether a release that is released on both PC and console at the same time is either one or the other or should they have their own hybrid lists? This is probably the most complex rule problem.
4. The list has not included any MMO or MOBA games. Is this a good idea?
5. Are there any versions of RPGs you feel shouldn't be on the lists? For example: Diablo and its clones or Rogue and its clones etc etc etc.
Please be sure to comment if you object extremely strongly to an entry on the list for reasons of category...
...But not for reasons of quality, at phase 1 anyway, that can come later...
Please be sure to comment if you feel an RPG has been left off the list, it will be at phase 1 when this info is needed, otherwise it will be permanently excluded...
...But please don't bother if you think no-one except you has probably played it and you thought it was a bit crap anyway.
Also, use the power of your rating privileges to 'vote' on ideas and suggestions by any commenters as those with the most ratings will be the ones that are given more credence.
The poll will be active for exactly one week at which point it'll be closed. I'll bump it each day regardless of there being any posts that day or not, entitled "daily bump reminder". Staff can also prosper or retardo at their leisure if they feel it's the best way to proceed.
tl:drs are written in bold above.
felipepepe 's lists are great and they serve their purpose. However, they are both old and generate a lot of controversy. This is an attempt to remodel the method of establishing greatness via a less cumbersome and convoluted but more time consuming and laborious system.
At this point in time I shan't divulge the exact details of how this system works, as this is simply the first phase of a test run to see if this method looks like it could be viable, and because its at this point that some of the rules will need to be established and agreed upon anyway.
2003 has been chosen as the test year as this falls in the middle, time-wise, between the 80s and now, and because its a year I'm more familiar with myself, and because I'm playing a game from 2003 ATM, and because the games of 2003 are likely to still interest dedicated old-only gamers while also having some appeal to modern-only gamers. Its also a year with a relatively short list, enabling the test to be completed in one singular poll rather than separated into two confusing polls, which would be right confusing when at the stage when no-one has a clue WTF is going on.
So...
Phase 1: At this point in time it is not a matter of choosing what's best, it's a matter of finding out if anyone's actually played these games.
Please vote for which PC RPGs that were initially released in 2003 that you have played at some point in your life. Unlimited voting and you can change your vote if you still fuck up this simple process somehow.
Votes are not publicly visible, so no fear of shaming if you've played something you feel is embarrassing for whatever reason but you are free to look at the current vote totals without voting, you know, cos people could just vote to look them change their vote anyway. No king komrade cos it's pointless in this situation, you've either played some of the games or you haven't.
Definition of played: You gave it your best shot, at least a good few hours, before something prevented you from completing it. For example, loading it up and it not working either immediately or after a few minutes does not count as having played it.
Some rules that might need establishing:
1. This is just part of the PC section. Games that were released as console games in 2003 but later ported to PC are not included. Is this the right way to go about things? For example: Tales of Symphonia was released in 2003 and got a Steam release in 2016, should it be on the list?
2. The list takes the original release date, not the USA release date. For example: Gothic 2 was released in Germany in 2002 but didn't get its English translation and release until 2003, so it's not on the list because it was factually released in 2002. Is this the correct way to do this?
3. Should games that were fully designed for consoles but later got a PC port even be included in any list of PC best games, or should they be permanently restricted to lists of console games? Further to this, should the list be even more pedantic and judge whether a release that is released on both PC and console at the same time is either one or the other or should they have their own hybrid lists? This is probably the most complex rule problem.
4. The list has not included any MMO or MOBA games. Is this a good idea?
5. Are there any versions of RPGs you feel shouldn't be on the lists? For example: Diablo and its clones or Rogue and its clones etc etc etc.
Please be sure to comment if you object extremely strongly to an entry on the list for reasons of category...
...But not for reasons of quality, at phase 1 anyway, that can come later...
Please be sure to comment if you feel an RPG has been left off the list, it will be at phase 1 when this info is needed, otherwise it will be permanently excluded...
...But please don't bother if you think no-one except you has probably played it and you thought it was a bit crap anyway.
Also, use the power of your rating privileges to 'vote' on ideas and suggestions by any commenters as those with the most ratings will be the ones that are given more credence.
The poll will be active for exactly one week at which point it'll be closed. I'll bump it each day regardless of there being any posts that day or not, entitled "daily bump reminder". Staff can also prosper or retardo at their leisure if they feel it's the best way to proceed.
tl:drs are written in bold above.