Actually, fun fact, E.T. was one of the best selling games for the Atari 2600, with a grand total of 1.5 million units sold. With a game going for around 19 dollars, that meant 28 500 000 dollars in the good ol' 1980s.
Note that many of the cartridges were returned. Anyways, counting only gross revenue is misleading. A high gross revenue doesn't make the game a success. In this case Atari might have sold units worth of $25 million gross revenue, but overall they netted a loss of about $100 million.
It was still the time (and for quite many years after that) when the mentality was "anything will sell, if it's a video game; quality is irrelevant".
Joined: 6/11/2006
Posts: 818
Location: Arboga, Sweden
I do believe 1.5 million units "survived", whereas 2.5 - 3.5 million units were buried in a landfill in a desert somewhere around New Mexico. And to be honest, I have no idea how large the used game-business was back in the 80s, as I wasn't around back then. Perhaps one of the older members could tell me -------=====/o/
Anywho my point is that technically, E.T. could be considered a top game due to high sales. But let me tell you. I love E.T. It's so bad.
Warp wrote:
omg lol this is so fake!!!1 the nes cant produce music like this!
Yeah, that's a shame.
NNNNNNNEEEEEEXXXXXTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!
40. Perfect Dark (N64)
39. Burnout 3: Takedown (Xbox)
38. God of War (PS2)
37. The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (Wii)
36. Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell (Xbox)
35. Rayman 2: The Great Escape (N64)
34. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Xbox360)
33. Paper Mario (N64)
32. Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception (PS3)
31. Castlevania: Symphony of the Night (PSX)
30. The Legend of Zelda (NES)
29. Halo: Combat Evolved (Xbox)
28. Final Fantasy IX (PSX)
27. Super Mario Galaxy 2 (Wii)
26. GoldenEye 007 (N64)
25. ICO (PS2)
24. Bioshock (Xbox360)
23. Okami (PS2)
22. The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker (GC)
21. Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic (Xbox)
20. Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots (PS3)
19. Final Fantasy VI (SNES)
18. Uncharted 2: Among Thieves (PS3)
17. Mass Effect 2 (Xbox360)
16. Metal Gear Solid (PSX)
15. Super Mario Bros. 3 (NES)
14. Resident Evil 4 (GC)
13. The Legend of Zelda: Link to the Past (SNES)
12. Half-Life 2 (PC)
11. The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask (N64)
Dude, if this game makes number one, I've clearly misjudged Captain-no-Atari.
Really? It was not a massive jump from FF1 or FF2.
I had a weird thought driving home today - Which game would be better for a top list: Warcraft 1 or Warcraft 2?
As far as gameplay goes - obviously, Warcraft 2 wins. It took what Warcraft had done, and made it better. However, this is where movies are different - you can't do a sequel to Citzen Kane that is the exact same movie with just upgraded graphics, a few new characters, and other tweaks. A video game series, on the other hand, can and often does just that. Warcraft needs to be judged, not on gameplay alone, but on its impact to the industry. Otherwise, a top whatever list is just going to be nostalgic crap mixed in with the current best of every game type.
Anyway, I was curious on Cardboard's thoughts.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
Considering some of you people's views, my top 10 may surprise you.
10. Super Mario 64 (N64)
9. The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword (Wii)
8. Final Fantasy X (PS2)
7. Metroid Prime (GC)
6. Super Mario Galaxy (Wii)
5. Super Metroid (SNES)
4. Shadow of the Colossus (PS2)
3. Final Fantasy VII (PSX)
2. Chrono Trigger (SNES)
1. The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (N64)
There you have it.
Great list! Plus it gives me some great ideas of games I should try out. Obviously I'd have things rearranged a bit, but it's not too far off from where I'd place a lot of games. I especially like that you have Chrono Trigger and FF7 there near the top. As IronSlayer said though, it'd probably be better to break things up by genre.
Joined: 6/11/2006
Posts: 818
Location: Arboga, Sweden
DarkKobold wrote:
As far as gameplay goes - obviously, Warcraft 2 wins. It took what Warcraft had done, and made it better. However, this is where movies are different - you can't do a sequel to Citzen Kane that is the exact same movie with just upgraded graphics, a few new characters, and other tweaks. A video game series, on the other hand, can and often does just that. Warcraft needs to be judged, not on gameplay alone, but on its impact to the industry. Otherwise, a top whatever list is just going to be nostalgic crap mixed in with the current best of every game type.
Anyway, I was curious on Cardboard's thoughts.
Gameplay wise, I'd say that FFIII differed quite a lot from FFI and II. For starters, you had the most amazing job-system ever found in a video game up until FFV, somewhat related to the job-selection in FFI, but then again not, since you could switch on the go this time around. The four hereoes of light were quite similar to the heroes from FFI, since they were pretty much one of the many, each separate one made no difference to the plot, as opposed to FFII, where the characters really played a special part in the plot. III felt more like an enhanced version of I in my opinion (Crystals were back, no evil human empire, jobs, "regular" leveling system), which is all fun and games, because I love FFI and FFIII.
I believe that the biggest issue was that this game wasn't released outside of Japan until as late as like, 2006 - 2007, in a decent DS-version I believe (unless there was a Wonderswan-release before that one), giving it little chance to really shine as the masterpiece I believe that it is.
...aaaaaaanyway, my guess would be that someone who ranks MW higher than SMW, or 99 games higher than Mass Effect, doesn't include E.T. and does not really motivate why the games are where they are on the list hasn't even played the original Final Fantasy III. I think I'm more interested if 1997 meant Final Fantasy VI.
Following some activity in this topic, a "master topic" (similar to the "put all your crappy youtube videos here"-topic) with "list your 10 favourite games through all times" where people could post 10 games, motivate, and bash each others' opinions sounds like something that'd fit right up TASvideos' alley! Also it would fare best if was some kind of version of IronSlayer's idea with genre-based rankings.
And I would pay every cent (50...) I have to be able to see that version of Citizen Kane.
Warp wrote:
omg lol this is so fake!!!1 the nes cant produce music like this!
As far as gameplay goes - obviously, Warcraft 2 wins. It took what Warcraft had done, and made it better. However, this is where movies are different - you can't do a sequel to Citzen Kane that is the exact same movie with just upgraded graphics, a few new characters, and other tweaks. A video game series, on the other hand, can and often does just that. Warcraft needs to be judged, not on gameplay alone, but on its impact to the industry. Otherwise, a top whatever list is just going to be nostalgic crap mixed in with the current best of every game type.
While video games do indeed suffer from "sequels with incremental changes"-itis, I dispute this point. First of all, Citizen Kane is a masterpiece and cannot reasonably be improved upon in the first place. Indeed, if you were to compare it with similar "legendary" video games, I'd argue that you see very much the same pattern of following up a great game with a mediocre or poor sequel (I'd cite Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time and its sequel, The Warrior Within, as a prime example of this). Your point is correct, though, that the two industries are very different on a fundamental level. There is much more freedom to entice gamers with novel concepts and then expand upon those concepts in a sequel (Command & Conquer immediately comes to mind). I don't think the movie industry craves novelty in quite the same way that the gaming industry does.
But one particular example springs to mind of a movie that I think was made distinctly better with a fresh look. In 1997, the movie Insomnia by Norwegian director Erik Skjoldbjærg was released. The movie enjoyed a cult following and was enjoyed largely because it used a film noire style but emphasized these aspects with light instead of shadow. I've seen the film and although it is by no means a bad movie, I think it fell apart as it came to a close, failing to offer much resolution.
Christopher Nolan apparently enjoyed the film but had a unique take on its themes (which has practically become his calling card as a director). He released his version of the film in 2002, starring Al Pacino, Robin Williams, and Hilary Swank. Nolan kept the noire aspects of the film but expanded upon themes of moral ambiguity, guilt, and duty. It also features Robin Williams at his creepiest, Al Pacino looking so tired that he's more dead than alive (in a good way), one of the most asphyxiating scenes ever, and a truly satisfying resolution. While this is just one example, I think that this kind of "touching up" of a previous director's work is more commonplace than we think in films, especially with foreign films adapted to suit American audiences. Sometimes, even the same director improves upon his own film-- Pulp Fiction may very well be to Reservoir Dogs what Warcraft 2 was to Warcraft 1. I think there's a lot of room in the movie industry for re-imaginings of older films, provided you don't single out something like Citizen Kane, which is practically untouchable.
Warcraft needs to be judged, not on gameplay alone, but on its impact to the industry. Otherwise, a top whatever list is just going to be nostalgic crap mixed in with the current best of every game type.
While I do think it is a valid point, the list that goes by the amount of impact on the industry will be full of the "root" titles such as Pong, Pac-man, Space Invaders, Spacewar, Xevious, Astro Race, Interceptor, Defender, Breakout, Asteroids, Frogger, Tetris, and so on; almost all of them from the 70s and 80s. Have these games stood the test of time in their original form? Well, Tetris has, the others... probably less so.
In my opinion, a game's worth mainly depends on its longevity; i.e. the amount of time it remains interesting/entertaining for you to play. Obviously, single-player games are to be compared to single-player games, multiplayer to multiplayer, because obviously playing against a human introduces a completely different factor of interest.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Otherwise, a top whatever list is just going to be nostalgic crap mixed in with the current best of every game type.
Which is kind of the point. A list of the type you propose, one where you look at the game's impact on the industry and shit like that, is an objective list. A list like that would not be nearly as interesting as a subjective list that builds on personal experiences and stories with the games.
Just to check, I wrote one of the entries on my list. I'm not entirely sure where on the list it's going to be, so the writing isn't done yet. So far, I have a quote, a history about the game, a personal story and an explanation of why I like the game. Roughly 900 words. If I manage to get that much on each spot (which I obvioosly won't, but I have more to say about some and less tto say about some, so it probably balances out), that's fifty thousand words about games I love and why. Hopefully, fifty thousand interesting words. I want people to read my list and find it interesting even if they don't agree, and give people incentive to discuss the things I write, even when I only post one entry per day. I might tell you people when I start posting it, but it's not going to be acually directly posted on this forum.
I want to write a list of the best games ever. Not a list of the most important games, because that would just be an abridged history of video games. Which is a thing I've written for a school project once! So I'm not saying that's a bad thing as such, but it's really not as fun. Especially not to write.
Det man inte har i begåvning får man ta ut i energi.
"I think I need to get to Snoop Dogg's level of high to be able to research this post." -Samsara
Read my fanfic, One Piece: Pure Corruption
Warcraft needs to be judged, not on gameplay alone, but on its impact to the industry. Otherwise, a top whatever list is just going to be nostalgic crap mixed in with the current best of every game type.
While I do think it is a valid point, the list that goes by the amount of impact on the industry will be full of the "root" titles such as Pong, Pac-man, Space Invaders, Spacewar, Xevious, Astro Race, Interceptor, Defender, Breakout, Asteroids, Frogger, Tetris, and so on; almost all of them from the 70s and 80s. Have these games stood the test of time in their original form? Well, Tetris has, the others... probably less so.
I still love Frogger! And I have an original Asteroids Arcade machine. So yeah, those games are much better than Call of Warfare: Battlefield Duty 8.
However, I think it would be a misnomer to say that Frogger or Asteroids had a larger impact on the industry than later titles. Warcraft 1, World of Warcraft, Super Mario Bros, Halo 1, GTA, Madden Football, Final Fantasy 7, or numerous other titles.
Granted, I sorta realized with all these responses, it is my own personal bias; I love the history of video games, and find their evolution fascinating. Thus, "best" to me is weighted very highly by the impact they had on the gaming industry.
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
