GameFAQs Game of the Decade Daily Polls...

[Arnieboy]

MM is winning surprisingly.

 

Since FF9 went out i went with MM as i do think it is a slightly better game than FFX.

 

I have a bad feeling that Brawl is going to win this whole thing though...and it really isn't game of the decade.

[Tales]

You are comparing a shooter against an action/adventure....In my opinion you can't say which one is best, but you can say which one is your favourite. And that's what you vote.

 

And lol, an FF vs Zelda final is impossible now.

[Oxigen_Waste]

MM is winning surprisingly.

 

Since FF9 went out i went with MM as i do think it is a slightly better game than FFX.

 

I have a bad feeling that Brawl is going to win this whole thing though...and it really isn't game of the decade.

 

Na, whoever wins this battle will win, basically.

 

Here's hoping MM wins. At least it's in the top 10 best games of the decade, I guess. FF10? I mean, yeah, it's great, and it deserved to win up till it got paired with Resident Evil 4. FFX > resident evil 4? Heresy, that's just being stupid.

 

You are comparing a shooter against an action/adventure....In my opinion you can't say which one is best, but you can say which one is your favourite. And that's what you vote.

 

And lol, an FF vs Zelda final is impossible now.

 

Of course it's possible. That's why it's constantly being done.

 

Also, what are you talking about? oO What shooter am I comparing to which action adventure?

 

This is the final, pretty much. Whoever wins this one will win.

[MadDog]

Why should everyone pick the best game, not their favourite?

 

Surely they would be the same...

[Oxigen_Waste]

Why should everyone pick the best game, not their favourite?

 

Surely they would be the same...

 

No. It's not that. I mean you should vote for the one you think is best. I think the best is SoTC, many people will think the best is RE4, or MP. I don't really care what they think. I just care that they vote for the one they actually think is best, instead of the one they preffer. Yeah?

[MadDog]

No. It's not that. I mean you should vote for the one you think is best. I think the best is SoTC, many people will think the best is RE4, or MP. I don't really care what they think. I just care that they vote for the one they actually think is best, instead of the one they preffer. Yeah?

 

What? But i'm always going to prefer the best one, in my eyes.

[Oxigen_Waste]

What? But i'm always going to prefer the best one, in my eyes.

 

You think too highly of yourself. You're not an impartial person. You can't differentiate your opinion from overall quality.

 

Why they call me pretentious, I'll never know. At least I can look past myself to at least try and see things without any bias.

[MadDog]

You think too highly of yourself. You're not an impartial person. You can't differentiate your opinion from overall quality.

 

Why they call me pretentious, I'll never know. At least I can look past myself to at least try and see things without any bias.

 

How do i?

 

If i thought a game was better than the other game, why would i prefer the poorer game? Because people told me the other is better? No, it's about taste.

[mcj metroid]

So it's super smash bros brawl versus whoever wins Zelda and final fantasy?

 

..........why is smash bros there lol.

 

OH fuck it I could be asking a lot of questions here I give. I would be happy enough if MM wins. though I'm sure most people who voted at this point are doing so purely because they are zelda fanboys and probably have.t played the game but I'll roll with it

[Oxigen_Waste]

How do i?

 

If i thought a game was better than the other game, why would i prefer the poorer game? Because people told me the other is better? No, it's about taste.

 

You don't choose prefference, MadDog. If you preffer something, it's a compulsion. As for what you consider best or not, it's a rational proccess. What's so difficult to understand? oO

[MadDog]

I understand, i just disagree.

[The Peeps]

It's so close!

 

I really want MM to win. It'd really be great if an old title like Majora's Mask ends up winning. I definitely think it deserves it, especially over Brawl.

 

[Ellmeister]

I wrote a response like Flinky's earlier but I just deleted it because I can understand what you are saying Oxigen_Waste.

 

Like Maddog I disagree with you, without being able to play all the games I cannot make an informed opinion and thus I will have to vote for my favourite game which may not be as good as another but since I haven't played it I wouldn't be able to know!

 

Also there are a lot of different criteria on what makes a great game as well as the subjectivity of it all. Some may prefer rpg's over FPS's but the FPS may be "considered" the better game because it was such a big game in that genre's development. Just because that rpg was not groundbreaking doesn't make it the better game.

 

I may just be muddling myself up but yeah FFX to win :p

[Jonnas]

Wow, MM is winning by 600 votes. Probably the closest match in the tournament.

 

You don't choose prefference, MadDog. If you preffer something, it's a compulsion. As for what you consider best or not, it's a rational proccess. What's so difficult to understand? oO

 

The game of the decade is Metroid Prime.

 

I'd love to see you prove the above statement wrong, without a shadow of a doubt.

 

Consider this a continuation of the discussion we started in the success thread. I believe this "a game/book/film/whatever can be factually good. Opinion is a different thing" view of yours is nonsensical. If you like something, then that work has qualities that click with you, which means that that work has qualities that make it good from your perspective (for example, you love Dragon Ball Z, there must be a reason for it, whether it be the varied characters, the memorable powers/techniques, the overall flashiness of the series, that unique PT dub, etc. In other words, charm. In that case, the series' charm bears worth, so calling it a bad series because its storytelling is poor seems very narrow-minded) P.S.: I'm ignoring the problems present only in the Anime, like fillers and excessively drawn out action scenes. Let's keep this mostly to the manga/Kai

So far, it seems that your definition of "good" is "work that I believe a lot of people who kinda think like me - though not exactly like me - will like". Isn't this, once again, down to your own tastes and opinion?

 

For the record, I do not believe most of the people voting for this contest are qualified for it, either, but it's mostly because they have other motives for voting other than genuine personal taste/preference. Not because they are "voting with their hearts", or whatever.

Edited December 23, 2010 by Jonnas

[mcj metroid]

Ya I see where Oxigen-waste is going with his point though.

 

Sometimes I would know a game is good even if I might not enjoy it as much as others. Most FPS games aren't for me for instance.

While I KNOW COD games are fantastic games in their own right it isn't MY favourite game.

 

A lot of people have this "If I don't like it then it = shit" attitude. It's the wrong way of judging things.

 

Not speaking OW if this isn't what he meant. This is how I feel personally.

[Jonnas]

Ya I see where Oxigen-waste is going with his point though.

 

Sometimes I would know a game is good even if I might not enjoy it as much as others. Most FPS games aren't for me for instance.

While I KNOW COD games are fantastic games in their own right it isn't MY favourite game.

 

A lot of people have this "If I don't like it then it = shit" attitude. It's the wrong way of judging things.

 

Not speaking OW if this isn't what he meant. This is how I feel personally.

 

I see what you're trying to say, but I can't honestly place those games on my "good" list, as they have flaws that stop me from enjoying them. In GTA or Tomb Raider, the clunky movements/controls stopped me from enjoying the games properly, in Gran Turismo, I simply find that kind of slow racing game boring, Mario Kart's multiplayer fun grows thin and repetitive quickly, etc.

 

Anyway, if there weren't people out there telling me they didn't mind the flaws, and could play and enjoy the games by overlooking them, I would quickly forget about them, and move on. Therefore, I can't honestly say that any of these games are better than/as good as the ones I like.

Except when recommending games for other people, of course I often need to present options that I know many others enjoyed.

[Captain Falcon]

Ya I see where Oxigen-waste is going with his point though.

 

Sometimes I would know a game is good even if I might not enjoy it as much as others. Most FPS games aren't for me for instance.

While I KNOW COD games are fantastic games in their own right it isn't MY favourite game.

 

A lot of people have this "If I don't like it then it = shit" attitude. It's the wrong way of judging things.

 

Not speaking OW if this isn't what he meant. This is how I feel personally.

 

I'm like this too.

 

I don't like realistic racing games, but I can sit and play GT for quite some time before getting bored.

 

It's like I think Tetris is one of the best games ever - easy to pick up and play with no barriers thanks to simply controls and rules. I can see why people get sucked in and want to best their high score too as that can apply to any game.

 

But speaking on a personal level, I don't really enjoy playing it. That gameplay just does nothing for me.

 

I can appreciate a game based on it's own merits but that doesn't mean I have to enjoy it.

[Diageo]

Haha, this is so funny. To even think you can objectively judge the quality of a game. The criteria of the best game would never be agreed upon. It's impossible.

 

So many things you would have to decide first. Game of the decade by being the best, best at what? Entertaining surely, since it's a form of entertainment. No one can objectively measure how entertaining something is.

Edited December 23, 2010 by Diageo

[Jonnas]

I see what you're trying to say, but I can't honestly place those games on my "good" list, as they have flaws that stop me from enjoying them. In GTA or Tomb Raider, the clunky movements/controls stopped me from enjoying the games properly, in Gran Turismo, I simply find that kind of slow racing game boring, Mario Kart's multiplayer fun grows thin and repetitive quickly, etc.

 

I'd like to correct this. My dislike for Tomb Raider does not qualify here, as it simply has a single, easily identifiable flaw amidst everything else that's good.

The other 3 still qualify, however, as it is not merely a simple flaw impeding my enjoyment.

 

The rest of my post still stands, though.

[Captain Falcon]

To even think you can objectively judge the quality of a game.

 

Maybe not all of it, but parts yes. You know if a game performs well on a technical level. Is it full of bugs causing it to crash all the time? Is the frame rate in the single figures making it run like a slide show? Does the game feature a ridiculously complex rule system that is never at any point explained? Is the game so difficult as to make any chance of progress more luck than judgment because you never get a chance to learn?

 

Are those not objective things?

 

Now you might turn around and say our tolerance for them is subjective but if they are game breaking, then it's too late for personal levels of acceptability.

Edited December 23, 2010 by Captain Falcon

[Ramar]

If Brawl wins then GameFAILqs.

[Fierce_LiNk]

Well, you should vote according to what you've played, so out of everything you've played, keep choosing the one you though was best (instead of the one you preffered). I also don't think people should vote when a game is up against something you haven't played. I guarantee you that's how Baldur's Gate 2 got knocked out so fast... Skies Of Arcadia is absolutely brilliant, but Baldur's Gate 2 is the best wrpg ever made, and the only reason it lost was that 90% of the people voting for Skies Of Arcadia haven't ever even played BG2.

 

Yeah, it is perhaps unfair to vote against a game you haven't played. But then, there's also no real way of telling if somebody has played all of these games. I would guess that only a small majority have, which therefore doesn't make these results accurate.

 

Which brings me to another point, does it really, really matter who wins? If Brawl does win, will many people consider that to be the game of the decade? Probably not. This is just a poll on a gaming website. Also, I don't really care what wins and what doesn't. But, I do admit that it is nice to see the games that I enjoy doing particularly well. The fact that MM is doing well is a testament to its fanbase. Well, I hope so anyway.

 

And I never got that "the game of the decade for you will probably be the one you enjoyed the most". What does one thing have to do with the other? I mean, my favourite game was, without a doubt, Resident Evil 4, but I'm well aware that Shadow Of The Colossus is the superior game, here.

 

Well, let me ask you this: What does it matter which game is "technically" superior? In the grand scheme of things, does it matter? Ultimately, we play games because we want new or challenging or emotional gaming experiences. If you say that your favourite game was "without a doubt" Resident Evil 4, then my question is what prompted you to choose that game instead of one which you said is superior? To me, it seems like Resident Evil 4 did something which Shadow didn't, for you to have claimed it was your favourite game.

 

Also, lets also remember that this is a poll where games are pitted against each other, and the users vote for "the best one." The users being the gamers. Now, what are they going to vote on? How do you define better? Of course people are going to vote on which game they enjoyed more. If I enjoyed MM more than, say, Metroid Prime, why should I vote for the other one? Because it has better sound? Because it is on technically better hardware? I'm going to vote for the one which gave me the better gameplay experience. Its an opinion poll. If you want a "technical" poll where people choose which is "technically" the best game, or critically, then maybe it shouldn't be open to users.

[Captain Falcon]

If Brawl wins then GameFAILqs.

 

Until you next get stuck on a game and then it's cool again

 

Seriously though, it may be called "Game of the Decade" but all it is a series of votes as to which of the two games pitted against each other is more popular - of just those two. In theory, a game that went out in the first round could have got to the final, and won, if it was in a different bracket.

 

I've never played the game but I'd probably rank World of Warcraft as game of the decade just because of what it's achieved. As a game, it might be a mind numbing grind-fest, but for millions of people around the world, gaming begins and ends with that one title.

 

That might sound like an absurd way of looking at it but I guess it depends on what it means to be the game of the decade (as Diageo mentioned earlier).

 

The other probable candidate being GTA3 and everything that came about (read: half a dozen sequels and a million copycats) because of that one game.

[Oxigen_Waste]

The game of the decade is Metroid Prime.

 

I'd love to see you prove the above statement wrong, without a shadow of a doubt.[/size]

 

It's wrong in that it's not that exact. Because there are obvious contenders who are just as good as Metroid Prime, therefore rendering it not 100% correct, which means it's somewhat wrong, whithout a shadow of a doubt.

 

I never said there was a strict scale which diferentiated every single item when compared to others, but there are certainly levels of excelence. Or are you really going to tell me that the difference in quality between Apocalypse Now and a 3 Ninjas movie is debatable?

 

Consider this a continuation of the discussion we started in the success thread. I believe this "a game/book/film/whatever can be factually good. Opinion is a different thing" view of yours is nonsensical. If you like something, then that work has qualities that click with you, which means that that work has qualities that make it good from your perspective (for example, you love Dragon Ball Z, there must be a reason for it, whether it be the varied characters, the memorable powers/techniques, the overall flashiness of the series, that unique PT dub, etc. In other words, charm. In that case, the series' charm bears worth, so calling it a bad series because its storytelling is poor seems very narrow-minded) P.S.: I'm ignoring the problems present only in the Anime, like fillers and excessively drawn out action scenes. Let's keep this mostly to the manga/Kai[/size]

 

Why is it nonsensical? I love that you mentioned DBZ, because it's the perfect example. I like the characters because I do, it's like people you like, you don't like them for a specific reason, you just like them, emotions aren't rational (and you can't argue with that)... I love the characters, and am absolutely devoted to them, however, they're one dimensional, predictable and clichéd. But I like them. For no reason other than I just do. Their powers are all the same and are all pretty much a clone of the spiritual energy wave as a manifestation of combat power invented by tezuka, and everything you bring up I can have a similar rebuttal for. You're missing the point in that I didn't call DBZ a bad show... I just said it's not very good. And even ignoring the anime, charm alone can't turn it into a good show. In order for it to be good, it would have to be at least acceptable in everything, or most things. And it's not. No matter how much it "clicks" with me, it's never going to change the fact that, if I look at it impartially, it's just filled of gaping flaws. And maybe the charm is good enough for me to personally enjoy it, but it's not enough to make it a good show on it's own. Once again, I'd like to reiterate that it doesn't much matter to any one individual how good something is, because you may still enjoy it, but it's important from a global viewpoint, in that it can be equated to other items in a rational manner.

 

So far, it seems that your definition of "good" is "work that I believe a lot of people who kinda think like me - though not exactly like me - will like". Isn't this, once again, down to your own tastes and opinion?

 

That couldn't be more wrong actually. The fact you're actually bringing the act of judging something down to liking something or not actually destroys the whole point. It's not about wether or not most people will like it or this certain group will like it or not. Citizen Kane is one of the best scripts ever written (and guess what, this is a fact, too!) for a reason other than people liking it. It's well written because it speaks about an everlasting and all-encompassing cause, whilst breaking it down in a way which is pertitent/poignant and relatable. It doesn't matter if most people hated it, even the critics who didn't like it praised it for being so well written. Because the damn thing is just well written and there's no two ways about it. It is what it is.

 

And a good personal example is something I recently mentioned. Which is the Lone And Wolf And Cub manga. I don't like it. People who think like me probably won't like it either, because it's a very traditional piece and it rests on archaich and somewhat obsolete narratives.

 

Out of all the manga I've read, it's one of the ones I liked the least. And yet, it's one of the best I've read. And I realized how good it was, whilst reading it. I just wasn't clicking with it, because I (and people who think like me) don't really like that type of fiction. But the truth is, it's historical presentation of the Tokugawa Shogunate is absolutely masterfull... historical fiction at it's best. And I still didn't like it. Doesn't change the fact that it's a ridiculously good work of art.

 

Olha, é como a Mensagem do Fernando Pessoa, por mais que eu adore o FP, odeio a Mensagem, talvez porque nunca fui muito dado a patriotismo. Agora, não tenho dúvidas nenhumas que em mais nenhuma ocasião ele escreveu de forma tão poderosa e visceral. Parece que estão vivas as palavras... aquela merda é intensa demais, quase. É uma obra prima... e sentes isso a cada segundo. E no entanto eu sempre vou detestar a obra, pessoalmente. Sempre fui muito mais fã do livro do desassossego. E olha que para alguém gostar da mensagem tem que pensar muito diferente de mim, que aquilo para mim é propaganda a lixo.

 

Hell, the best example is the fact that there's only one common element in the movies I think are the 10 best and the ones which are my 10 favourites. And most people who think like me would probably not like some of the ones I think are the 10 best. I don't like 3 of them.

 

Also, we're getting severely off topic here, aren't we? I missed being a thread ruiner, lol. And it's always the same argument, ahah.

 

in Gran Turismo, I simply find that kind of slow racing game boring

 

Perfect example. I agree with you there. I hate hate hate hate GT. Always have. I'm much more of a Burnout guy. I love Burnout!

 

But Gran Turismo is better than Burnout. We just can't enjoy GT because our personalities are incompatible with it, I guess.

 

I'm like this too.

 

I don't like realistic racing games, but I can sit and play GT for quite some time before getting bored.

 

It's like I think Tetris is one of the best games ever - easy to pick up and play with no barriers thanks to simply controls and rules. I can see why people get sucked in and want to best their high score too as that can apply to any game.

 

But speaking on a personal level, I don't really enjoy playing it. That gameplay just does nothing for me.

 

I can appreciate a game based on it's own merits but that doesn't mean I have to enjoy it.

 

Ran out of thanks. Apllies to both you and MCJ.

 

Haha, this is so funny. To even think you can objectively judge the quality of a game. The criteria of the best game would never be agreed upon. It's impossible.

 

So many things you would have to decide first. Game of the decade by being the best, best at what? Entertaining surely, since it's a form of entertainment. No one can objectively measure how entertaining something is.

 

Not a 100% accurate scale we're proposing here. But there are most definitely palpable levels of quality.

But I wouldn't expect you to even remotely understand it, you're one of those obnoxious persons who are so insecure that they insists on creating a parade to defend everything they like just to make themselves feel justified for liking it. It's like you need to feel perfectly adequate just to live with yourself. Is it that hard to admit you have bad taste in something?

 

Seriously, just name one thing you like and think is crap. Please answer honestly! Winning an argument just for the sake of winning is foul, so be honest and don't just give me some random name to prove a point that is false. And the smell of your own farts doens't count, I'm only talking about "art" (hate the word, but you know what I meant).

 

And it's not "a form of entertainment" per se, it's a format of expression, which just happens to be mostly used for entertainment, but that's not it's primary function. Pure entertainment is something like sewing or knitting for pleasure, in that it's a concrete task you execute, instead of an abstract amalgam of concepts and ideas that are intended to create an interactive environment with the user. It's quite different, to be honest.

 

Well, let me ask you this: What does it matter which game is "technically" superior? In the grand scheme of things, does it matter? Ultimately, we play games because we want new or challenging or emotional gaming experiences. If you say that your favourite game was "without a doubt" Resident Evil 4, then my question is what prompted you to choose that game instead of one which you said is superior? To me, it seems like Resident Evil 4 did something which Shadow didn't, for you to have claimed it was your favourite game.

 

It doesn't matter which one is ultimately "the best", but I think it's important to establish which were the highlights, in general... for future generations.

 

As for the rest. I thought SoTC was better in everything. I just had more fun with RE4. I completed the game about 10 times now. 6 in GC and 4 in Wii at the very least. The only reason it's my favourite is that I had more fun with it. And personally number two would be a tie between SoTC, Silent Hill 2, Half Life 2, Shenmue 1+2, F-Zero GX, Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes and Skies Of Arcadia... because personally, these were the ones I enjoyed the most. Even if I think Metroid Prime is better than most of them.

 

But if we're being honest, there really is no distinction between SoTC, RE4, Metroid Prime, Half Life 2, etc... They're all as near to perfection as gaming gets, and the differences between in quality between them sort of balance each other out. And that's pretty much a fact, almost. But personally, I believe SoTC stands out of the bunch as the best.

 

Also, lets also remember that this is a poll where games are pitted against each other, and the users vote for "the best one." The users being the gamers. Now, what are they going to vote on? How do you define better? Of course people are going to vote on which game they enjoyed more. If I enjoyed MM more than, say, Metroid Prime, why should I vote for the other one? Because it has better sound? Because it is on technically better hardware? I'm going to vote for the one which gave me the better gameplay experience. Its an opinion poll. If you want a "technical" poll where people choose which is "technically" the best game, or critically, then maybe it shouldn't be open to users.

 

You don't get my point. The game you like the most, the game you think is the best and the game which actually IS the best are 3 different things. And in my mind, this poll should be about which game you think is the best, not the one you like most. Not because of techincality or whatever... just perceive that difference in your own head between something you like and something you think is good. This way, I think it gives a false idea of what the overall people on the gamefaq boards thought the best game of the decade was.

 

But I'm just saying the same thing over and over and over.

 

 

Also, this tournament format is unfair. It should just be open vote from the start and then rank them total. Because this way it'll look like the people thought Shenmue was worse than Mario Kart Wii, just because it had the misfortune of getting paired up with Zelda in the first round. And Shenmue would most likely have many more votes than MKWii if every user only had one vote to use on one game.

 

Long post is looooooooooong!

[The Bard]

You think too highly of yourself. You're not an impartial person. You can't differentiate your opinion from overall quality.

 

Why they call me pretentious, I'll never know. At least I can look past myself to at least try and see things without any bias.

 

You presume that "quality" is an attribute independant of human interpretation. As if quality is some sort of Platonic abstraction to which worldly things conform to in varying extents. I think this is kind of ridiculous, since a work of art is made entirely to be interpreted. Therefore, any qualification of worth of a work of art that situates its "quality" outside the interpretation of an individual must necessarily be socially arbitrated; ie. a things worth is quantified by its overall value to society. Of course, my use of the word "arbitrated" was not coincidential, since social worth is entirely arbitrary, and subject to the discursive shifts in the zeitgeist through time; what is valuable to a society is contingent on the attributes of that society in any one moment in time, which is something that you can never ever holistically determine. And regardless of all this, society at large is not a sentient mass, its value is placed in the individual, who begins to differentiate from the moment he is born, and is thus evidently going to have a different nuance in perception from everyone else. To impose objectivity is to homogenise the individual, and take away the qualities that give them worth in the first place.

 

Quality, or worth, cannot be situated outside the individual. Of course what you can do is get an idea of that persons socio-ideological position by virtue of the things that he comes to associate himself with, including works of art. I can get an inkling of a persons attitude towards the idea of love (as well as a whole host of other things) from whether they prefer the film Lost In Translation or Twilight for example. Of course, this assumes that we shared correlating interpretations of the two films, and didn't come to entirely different conclusions. The whole system operates on assumptions and analogies. And we all analogise differently because we've all had different experiences. About now, I assume you can see the lack of surety and finality there is in any work of art.

 

Sorry dude, I really used to agree with you. Unfortunately, nothing that pertains to interpretation can ever be anything other than subjective. I think your ideas of quality are dependant on the verdicts of conoisseurs and critics of the specific mediums that you're talking about, which is fine and good, but a far cry from objectivity.

 

Why do you think Ulysses is often classed as the best book ever written by literature scholars? It because the vast array of research that can be done into it eclipses that of practically any other text, and this is really the only (although not entirely) quantifiable measure of its worth (and even then, only to a very specific group of people). Everything else is emotional interaction. I guess if you situate worth in the amount of people that have an emotional response to something, then you're taking a populist stance, which we both know the shortcomings of.

 

Inevitably, with art, there is no black and white, only infinitely expanding grey area, which is what makes it so great. Because the possibilities for exploration, interpretation and debate are almost endless. Hell, I just came up for an analogy between Call of Duty's multiplayer and the American middle class, but that doesn't tell me anything about some inherent quality the game has. Only that my brain is odd.

 

Sorry for the long post, and also for the retarded language. Was writing an essay and this comment is just sort of a mental overflow from that.