It’s almost completely subjective, of course, like all “Top N Media” lists. I doubt anyone’s going to put, say, Action 52 on their best games list, but past a certain threshold of quality you can’t really make a sound objective argument for any particular game to be included or excluded.
To echo Edges’ comment, I also think that how highly different people rank different titles can be greatly affected by when they played them. I completely slept on the N64 when it was current, but I played Wind Waker at launch and enjoyed it thoroughly. I got the special edition, so when I finished WW I put in OoT but stopped almost immediately because it felt like a weak demake of the game I’d just spent weeks playing. I’ve tried it again in later years but I just can’t stick with it. I understand why it’s an Important Game, historically, and I can imagine how it would’ve made a deep impression on many people who played it when it came out (I’d probably be one of them), but all I see now is how rough it is around the edges.
And then there are variations in personal tastes. I don’t think I’ll ever play Stardew Valley. That’s not the developer’s fault, nor is it mine, any more than anyone’s at fault if someone who doesn’t like bananas doesn’t want to eat a chef’s award-winning banana cake.
The real meat of a “Top N” list, if any, is in what the author says about the games and why they chose them, not in the list of games itself. Unfortunately, this article doesn’t say much beyond very nicely constructed review summaries that have been written dozens of times already.
It might be more interesting to identify a particular gaming “itch”, and list a few popular games that scratch it, as well as some perhaps lesser-known games that do, games that seem like they should but don’t, and games that seem like they wouldn’t but do. And most importantly, for each game, why.
It’s almost completely subjective, of course, like all “Top N Media” lists. I doubt anyone’s going to put, say, Action 52 on their best games list, but past a certain threshold of quality you can’t really make a sound objective argument for any particular game to be included or excluded.
To echo Edges’ comment, I also think that how highly different people rank different titles can be greatly affected by when they played them. I completely slept on the N64 when it was current, but I played Wind Waker at launch and enjoyed it thoroughly. I got the special edition, so when I finished WW I put in OoT but stopped almost immediately because it felt like a weak demake of the game I’d just spent weeks playing. I’ve tried it again in later years but I just can’t stick with it. I understand why it’s an Important Game, historically, and I can imagine how it would’ve made a deep impression on many people who played it when it came out (I’d probably be one of them), but all I see now is how rough it is around the edges.
And then there are variations in personal tastes. I don’t think I’ll ever play Stardew Valley. That’s not the developer’s fault, nor is it mine, any more than anyone’s at fault if someone who doesn’t like bananas doesn’t want to eat a chef’s award-winning banana cake.
The real meat of a “Top N” list, if any, is in what the author says about the games and why they chose them, not in the list of games itself. Unfortunately, this article doesn’t say much beyond very nicely constructed review summaries that have been written dozens of times already.
It might be more interesting to identify a particular gaming “itch”, and list a few popular games that scratch it, as well as some perhaps lesser-known games that do, games that seem like they should but don’t, and games that seem like they wouldn’t but do. And most importantly, for each game, why.