Entertainment Weekly's Top 50 Videogames
Good morning, welcome back to work. Here’s a list that we can all disagree on. GTA IV ahead of GTA III? Silent Hill 2 ahead of Silent Hill? I mean, there’s no frame of reference, explanation of key evaluation points, or explanations at all, so… Good ol’ lists!
Yes, that is mighty weird organizing. I think you wouldn’t be hard pressed to find people who would agree with some ways that it’s prioritized, but its system of prioritization just seems so inconsistent and completely unexplained. Putting GTA IV in front of GTA III and Silent Hill 2 in front of Silent Hill suggests that they’re saying that the later titles improved upon the storytelling and mechanics of those they built upon. Putting the earlier titles on at all suggests that they’re giving some credit for having been groundbreaking in the first place. But elsewhere, early, groundbreaking titles that haven’t stood the test of time as well get top placement (Doom in the top 5, ahead of Goldeneye and every iteration of Halo..?).
Yeah, probably a real rush job. I mean, there could be a logic to it, but it’s not readily apparent, and should be explained.
That said, I do get the sense that a lot of people thought Silent Hill 2 was a greater artistic achievement than the original. I think they’re both about equal, but since 2 did a lot of the same things as 1, I see it as slightly inferior. That said, I was thinking how I should replay them both to get a better sense of it now.