With the end of the decade approaching, I've been seeing a lot of "Top _____ of the Decade" lists popping up. So I thought I would make my own, but instead of them just being based off of my own (very biased ) opinions, it should be everybody's opinions. So for the next 3ish weeks, everybody will be able to nominate whatever games they think are the best of the decade. I will put them all into a list here, and at the end of the 3 weeks, everyone will get to vote on what they think are the best. Voting will be open for 2 weeks, then I will post the results.
Rules:
Nominations are closed! Cast your votes for your favorite games of the decade here: http://surveys.polldaddy.com/s/7600F3F8F369957A/ You may only vote once, so make it count. When you vote, make sure only one game is ranked 1, one game is ranked 2, and so on.
Nominations
Top 25 Games of the Decade, as voted by You!!:
You would have had to vote for Baldar's Gate about 5 times to get it in the top three. Deus Ex, about 15 times. 1, 2 and 3 were sweeps, waaay above everyone else.
And seriously, how many times do I have to say it? Of course it's baised towards Stardock If I had done this on the Blizzard forums, I can garanttee you Blizzard games would have dominated. 70% of these forums are made up of PC strategy game elitists who hate consoles (not that I have any problem with that ). I'm surpised a console exclusive game (Halo) made it into the top 10.
well next time we could say that the stardock games are automatically on the first places so we leave them out to make it more balanced. [e digicons]:karma:[/e]
I have never played Sins so this list obviously doesn't make sense to me. it doesnt even look good to me, and I never considered ever getting it. Hmmm. Interesting. Galciv didn't suprise me *nergasms* amazing game, and after getting more familiar with Civ IV, That doesn't surprise me either. I recently got into ANNO 1404 and I have to say its probably my new favorite game of it's genre and it definitely gives civ IV a tought fight on the strategy game front. I honestly thought fallout 3 was better than what it got, which is surprising. I didn't even play the PC version, so I didn't get to play mods or make them, and I still thought it was phenomenal. LOL in no way should WoW be higher up than Warcraft III. Wow basically made the lore of Warcraft III non existent by killing off 99.9% of the main characters....*sigh*. Halo > Half Life 2???? Sims < Portal??? BWAHAHHAAH portal > Fallout 3. Yeeeaaahhh o well.
bioshock&deadspace didn't even get on the list...where mario galaxy and guild wars made it. What's wrong with the world today?
I don't think you can appreciate the brilliance of portals design. Otherwise yes.
You're missing out on a lot. Although, from your comments, I'm going to guess you're one of those RTS's suck, TBS's are better kind of people Why can't the RTS people and the TBS people just get along without arguing about one or the other being "better" or "more strategic"?
Anyway, rants aside, my personal take on the list is that it's good, with two exceptions. I think Portal should have been #1, and Homeworld 2 should have been on the list somewhere. There are a couple of smaller, less liked games that I prefer over some of the ones here, but I didn't really expect them to get too many votes.
Here's hoping to a Portal 2 and a Homeworld 3 in the new decade
One of those people who can't think.
@kyogre12- IMO, RTS vs. TBS is pointless, because both offer a different scope.
The RTS is a more local level (typically), where the player builds massive (or not massive, depending on the game) armies, but these armies are heavily micro'ed.
In a TBS the micro tends to revolve around research, production, and ship design. TBSs usually also offer a much larger playing field, so to speak (FreeOrion offers up to 500 star systems; of course, FO is only v0.3.13, but the galaxy portion is properly implemented).
TBS games also tend to offer much heavier research (I am probably overlapping into the 4X genre), in terms of subject # and diversity (there are exceptions of course). RTSs traditionally have very little in terms of research, with it usually being "this building is the prerequisite for this unit" instead of "research this subject in your lab to build this unit".
I personally think- a TBS is perfect for conquering large swaths of territory. An RTS is better for conquering only a little, but with extremely fine control of units; alternately, using a 4X-style game as an example- a TB4X (turn-based 4X) is better for conquering 1+ galaxies; an "RT4X" or space RTS is better for conquering a smaller corner of the universe, but at much more tactical/warfare strategic depth.
In other words- TBS for mass territory domination, RTS for getting down&dirty into warfare.
Sins, despite being a pretty good achievement, is still pretty shallow compared to dedicated RTS or 4X games.
I like RTS and sometimes TBS, and Sins didn't appeal to me at all. I remember reading a lot about it and dismissing it pretty quickly, me and my small group that would have played it together. Despite this being a Stardock forum and grossly skewing results because of that, I am pleased some titles, often ridiculed titles, actually received a small amount of the credit they deserve anyway.
I just checked this. Do I smell a strategy bias?
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
