Community RPG Codex People's Awards: Best RPGs

[Rake]

More like best RPGs of the late 90s/early 00s (and New Vegas).

This is so clearly a 20-something'er's idea of the top RPGs of all time.

I am disappointed in your level of Codex. Smells of

The survey (the PC section at least) originally intended to produce a top 50 (rather than top 10) of computer RPGs, allowing people to list 25 games without any order of preference, so as to produce a truly wide selection. Now apart from the fact that the Black Isle era games form a natural intersection of what most older and younger gamers will put on an unordered top 25 list, many of the 80s/early 90s classics (and, say, Vogel's games) suffer from the series syndrome: most people will have a favourite or two and opt to list that rather than a full list of Ultima, Wizardry or Gold Box games (because they consider their favourite to be representative of the series and hesitate to include what they consider to be weaker entries). Even where there is something like a consensus (Pool of Radiance, World of Xeen, Crusaders of the Dark Savant, Ultima VII?), it's not strong enough to put a game in the top 10, especially given the naturally shifting user demographics; hence higher placement of games like Betrayal at Krondor, Darklands and Dark Sun, where there is either no series or only loose (and lower quality) sequels.

This. It would be usefull to have a true "Top Ten" vote, with ordrer of preference. I would be curious how it will compair to this list.

 

[hiver]

The first five spots seem just perfect.

 

[Trash]

Because you started cherry picking, misrepresenting and tossing logical fallacies my way for two posts in a row. Not to mention your own passive aggressive tone since your first reply to me, Grunker. Remember how fucking childish I was for stating my opinion? Take a look at yourself before starting to puff yourself all up in righteous indignation. Plus I don't call you a sperger, I said we're going into sperger territory the way the discussion is going. Chillax again.

What is the fucking correlation between your accusation that the Codex are suddenly suckers for Direct X Newest.1 and this Top 10 list?

I already fucking answered it. Three times already. Here's the ofirst one. 'My facination with the resident graphic whorism stems from a nice experiment Blackadder once did here. He basically described the perfect 'Codex' rpg but let it have archaic graphics. A vast mayority voted against it on that basis alone.' There is the correlation you're looking for.

My fault. I should've simply brofisted Brother None's first post and let it at that.

 

[Crooked Bee]

Most of the old classics are a hassle to play and though they certainly deserve mention on lists like this by virtue of starting it all and laying the foundation, the best games are the ones in the late 90's that built on these aspects.

That's just, like, your opinion, man *

* (I mean, I know you were stating your opinion, but still, I feel the need to point out that my opinion is the opposite of yours, and I only first started playing older CRPGs about three or four years ago, so nostalgia isn't a factor in my case - otherwise I'd be all over Fallout or BG, which I am not.)

 

[Spectacle]

We've had polls like this one the forum since the beginning and the results are always the same. Fallout, Planescape, Fallout II and then a lot of Troika and Infinity games. Only difference between the new posters and oldies was that the mayority of the older ones actually knew and played stuff like Dark Sun: Shattered Lands, Realms of Arkania and Darklands. Nowadays most people don't go further back in their knowledge of rpg's than the late 90's or early 00's.

It's no big surprise really. Despite some dead ends (FMV interactive movies anyone?) gaming really was on a path of incremental improvement until about 2000, where new games built upon the features of the old, so it's only natural that the best games came towards the end of the period. Then the XBOX generation came and started the decline in full force, giving us the Dark Decade instead of the further incline we had been hoping for.

Really? My thoughts are that RPG's reached their pinnacle in 1992-3, the years of Ultima VI, Ultima VII, Serpent Isle, Wizardry VII, Darklands, Gates of Dawn, Blade of Destiny, the Ultima Underworlds, Might and Magic V & VI, Betrayal at Krondor, and the last of the SSI Savage Frontier.

1994 was the year of Ultima Pagan, which is symbolic for things that were about to go downhill. The late 90's and early 00's produced some good titles in my opinion, but they were made by dying companies and it was obvious.

Those are all excellent games, but their actual role playing mechanics are much more limited than those in the Fallout era games, so I have no qualms about labeling games like Fallout and Arcanum as "better RPGs".

 

[Grunker]

I already fucking answered it. Three times already.

Please highlight it for Retard-Grunker then, 'cause I just scrolled through our entire conversation, and all I can see you saying is that our supposed Graphics Whoreness is "indicative of the userbase of this site and thus explains why we got the list." How does that fucking explain what the latest shaders has to do with Fallout and Baldur's Gate?

lists like IGN's ot NEOgaf's

Are we seriously comparing ourselves to the likes of those?

You compare us to mainstream sites, felipepepe points out that we aren't like mainstream sites, and you ask him whether he seriously wants to compare us to mainstream sites? Who is the one misrepresenting whom here?

 

[Trash]

And now you're simple determined to throw a hissy fit. The post you're constantly harping on was already a reaction on someone else reacting on me. I simply gave my opinion on the people who voted. You're the one who took shit out of context and out of proportion. Relax man.

And nowhere did I make a comparison between the codex and other sites. Dude, catch a breath.

 

[Grunker]

* (I mean, I know you were stating your opinion, but still, I feel the need to point out that my opinion is the opposite of yours, and I only first started playing older CRPGs about three or four years ago, so nostalgia isn't a factor in my case - otherwise I'd be all over Fallout or BG, which I am not.)

Read my answer to Trash here, mrs. Bee:

Plus I strongly disagree with your opinion that the best rpg´s are automatically those of the late 90´s and early 00´s. But that´s just our opinions.

I'm not saying you should agree, I'm saying people voted for them because that's their opinion. Not because they've never played the classics and are graphics whores, which is your claim.

Crooked Bee: In fact, Bee, you're reaffirming my own position. I too, didn't play many of the old classics until in these later years.

And now you're simple determined to throw a hissy fit.

 

[JarlFrank]

Aaah, bickering children.

 

[Jaesun]

Fact is the Codex went down the toilet years ago, and there's not a lot of "down" left to go.

http://www.gamebanshee.com/editorials/110615-game-of-the-year-2012.html

 

[Themadcow]

It's an entirely fair comment to say that X title has 20 times more votes than Y title because 20 times more codexer's have played it.

It's an entirely unfair comment to say that X title is a better game than Y title because it has more votes.

I fully understand and support Trash's viewpoint that this list is more representative of the age and commonality of Codex readership than it is of quality of the games it contains. Equally I have absolutely no idea why Grunker seems to think that a time period in which something was made has a baring on the quality of the artistry of the product.

 

[Grunker]

I fully understand and support Trash's viewpoint that this list is more representative of the age and commonality of Codex readership than it is of quality of the games it contains.

Seems the logical thing to do when your favourite games didn't make the list.

Equally I have absolutely no idea why Grunker seems to think that a time period in which something was made has a baring on the quality of the artistry of the product.

Seeing as I've never claimed anything even remotely like this, I'd be inclined to agree that any such claim would, indeed, be bullshit. Fortunate that I never did make a claim like that, then.

 

[likaq]

Wow, decided to break my lurking to voice my disappointment in those polls, especially the fact that only 3 of the top 10 Computer RPG's are even 90's games.

Especially ToEE, Arcanum and Vampire, which are downright unplayable without mods. Even Fallout 2 had over 800 vanilla bugs left in the game after official patches, Killap over at NMA recently discovered at least 20 more vanilla bugs and this is 14 years later, imagine how many more of lurking in the code itself. I'm strongly of the opinion that early dungeon crawlers like Bard's Tale II on Apple IIG, Darkside of Xeen, Star Trail, Crusaders of the Dark Savant, and others, deserve a place on that list. These games were good straight out of the box.

Edit: Also the JRPG list is bad too, Shin Megami Tensei I & II are missing, yet they managed to add the PS2 game?

Why do you lie?
VTMB is perfectly playable with only official 1.2 patch. You don't need neither unofficial patch or mods. Only serious bug ( leopold society bug ) was fixed by official 1.2 patch.


Fallout 2 is perfectly playable with only official patches, no game or quests breaking bugs afaik.

So, once again: why do you lie?

 

[Clockwork Knight]

And there we went from having a nice conversation about games into sperger territory. Disagreeing with me all you want but if you're going to nitpick every sentence, misrepresent my words and try to use every logical fallacy you can find then we won't have much of a discussion here, Grunker. Everything I can say I already said in my first post here but I'll summarise my point as best as I can for you; the list is more indicative of the userbase of this site than as a defenitive guide on the best rpg's.

graphic whores who react disgusted whenever they see something not having the latest shaders and highest res textures.

Fallout, Deus Ex, Baldur's Gate

You can't answer me as to the correlation, so you call me a sperger? You asked me if I stepped on your toe or pushed your buttons, and I gotta fucking ask the same to you. I asked you to answer a pretty simple question: What is the fucking correlation between your accusation that the Codex are suddenly suckers for Direct X Newest.1 and this Top 10 list?

Don't talk to me about "misrepresenting your words" - boo-fucking-hoo - I'm asking you an honest-to-God-question. Why the fuck do you suddenly react all passive-aggressive to what was basically a pretty civil discussion?

The "latest shaders" part was a joke it looks like. But the argument is still that the results are the way they are because the current users are young'uns that don't know any better, so yeah.

Funny thing is that the back covers for the classics all boast about their sweet looking graphics for the time. This one is my favorite though, for a certain reason.

Spoiler

photo hosting

 

[felipepepe]

It's an entirely unfair comment to say that X title is a better game than Y title because it has more votes.

Define better on a (defined) RPG.

 

[Infinitron]

I only first started playing older CRPGs about three or four years ago

Hah, if I'm not mistaken your first posts on the Codex back in 2010 were in a Mass Effect 2 thread.

That must have been one hell of a year for you, though.

 

[Themadcow]

Most of the old classics are a hassle to play and though they certainly deserve mention on lists like this by virtue of starting it all and laying the foundation, the best games are the ones in the late 90's that built on these aspects.

You're certainly suggesting that games in the late 90's built on aspects of earlier games and therefore are 'the best'. I'm saying that equating changes in design and technical capacity with being 'better' is dodgy ground. It's like saying that a modern Ferrari is a better car than a 70's Ferrari because it's faster and has more gadgets - but it doesn't make it more fun to drive.

 

[Snikt]

We've had polls like this one the forum since the beginning and the results are always the same. Fallout, Planescape, Fallout II and then a lot of Troika and Infinity games. Only difference between the new posters and oldies was that the mayority of the older ones actually knew and played stuff like Dark Sun: Shattered Lands, Realms of Arkania and Darklands. Nowadays most people don't go further back in their knowledge of rpg's than the late 90's or early 00's.

It's no big surprise really. Despite some dead ends (FMV interactive movies anyone?) gaming really was on a path of incremental improvement until about 2000, where new games built upon the features of the old, so it's only natural that the best games came towards the end of the period. Then the XBOX generation came and started the decline in full force, giving us the Dark Decade instead of the further incline we had been hoping for.

Really? My thoughts are that RPG's reached their pinnacle in 1992-3, the years of Ultima VI, Ultima VII, Serpent Isle, Wizardry VII, Darklands, Gates of Dawn, Blade of Destiny, the Ultima Underworlds, Might and Magic V & VI, Betrayal at Krondor, and the last of the SSI Savage Frontier.

1994 was the year of Ultima Pagan, which is symbolic for things that were about to go downhill. The late 90's and early 00's produced some good titles in my opinion, but they were made by dying companies and it was obvious.

Those are all excellent games, but their actual role playing mechanics are much more limited than those in the Fallout era games, so I have no qualms about labeling games like Fallout and Arcanum as "better RPGs".

All of the games I mentioned, with the exception of Ultima VII, had just as advanced a character system as Fallout, if not more so. I found Fallout as an entire game profound but on a minute-to-minute basis of playing it somewhat boring, due to the inability to have an entire party and to manage them collectively. It's just walking around and getting dialogues. I think Fallout had a solid design and immersive setting, but the gameplay isn't fantastic.

I found Icewind Dale more interesting because you had 6 people and they all had heaps of abilities and stuff, it was really a joy because it really held your attention in managing all the aspects of your characters. Especially if you only used one Fighter and used Thief/Druid/Mage 2x/Ranger.

Also, it's incorrect to say that things like adventure game elements like dialogue from NPC and item interaction are "roleplaying elements, even if they change due to the character's stats.

 

[Trash]

Most of the old classics are a hassle to play and though they certainly deserve mention on lists like this by virtue of starting it all and laying the foundation, the best games are the ones in the late 90's that built on these aspects.

You're certainly suggesting that games in the late 90's built on aspects of earlier games and therefore are 'the best'. I'm saying that equating changes in design and technical capacity with being 'better' is dodgy ground. It's like saying that a modern Ferrari is a better car than a 70's Ferrari because it's faster and has more gadgets - but it doesn't make it more fun to drive.

I think you misquoted Grunker as me there.

 

[oldmanpaco]

I can't be bothered to read this whole deal but isn't Dues Ex actually 12th and thus unworthy of having a write-up like the other games?

 

[Rake]

It's an entirely fair comment to say that X title has 20 times more votes than Y title because 20 times more codexer's have played it.

It's an entirely unfair comment to say that X title is a better game than Y title because it has more votes.

I fully understand and support Trash's viewpoint that this list is more representative of the age and commonality of Codex readership than it is of quality of the games it contains. Equally I have absolutely no idea why Grunker seems to think that a time period in which something was made has a baring on the quality of the artistry of the product.

Even Trash in his first post said that back in the start of Codex, late 90' games were more popular that the older games, even among people who had played both.
"Better" is always subjective anyway. I liked BG2 more than the Gold Box games. Does that makes it objectively "better"?

 

[Themadcow]

It's an entirely unfair comment to say that X title is a better game than Y title because it has more votes.

Define better on a (defined) RPG.

I already have, earlier in the thread. The top 50 or 100 on this list should be taken as a starting point ('the shortlist') and then each game rated by those who have actually played it for 10 hours or more. Those who have not played the game, or have not played it enough to rate reliably, would provide an N/A response and wouldn't contribute towards the mean average for that game. Obviously, a minimum sample rule would need to apply.

 

[Grunker]

Most of the old classics are a hassle to play and though they certainly deserve mention on lists like this by virtue of starting it all and laying the foundation, the best games are the ones in the late 90's that built on these aspects.

You're certainly suggesting that games in the late 90's built on aspects of earlier games and therefore are 'the best'. I'm saying that equating changes in design and technical capacity with being 'better' is dodgy ground. It's like saying that a modern Ferrari is a better car than a 70's Ferrari because it's faster and has more gadgets - but it doesn't make it more fun to drive.

You misquoted, that's me and not Trash

That clears it up though then, you misunderstood me: I wasn't talking about anything technical. I was actually talking about streamlining of design, though not in the way it's used in the industry today, where streamlining is used as a synonym for cutting away gameplay elements and simplifying the remaining ones. I'm talking about having less clutter between you and playing the game, I'm talking about better game design. Note that this is still my opinion, and that my base argument is this:

People voted for these games because they liked them over older games, not because they are graphics whores/uneducated rabble. Claiming the latter, to me, comes off as trying to explain away the fact that people disagree with your own personal ideas of quality with them not having played your own favourites or having faulty ideas of quality. It's a circumvention of a difference of opinion into other people obviously being idiots who just vote for whatever they played. Which is disproved simply by the fact that there are people here who have play both old games and new ones and who didn't simply vote for the first games they played or, indeed, the classics.

 

[felipepepe]

Themadcow, I think Fallout 1 is a extremly solid, but short game, and although F2 is more rough around the edges, it provided me much more fun and playtime. Witch of them is "better"?

 

[Snikt]

Wow, decided to break my lurking to voice my disappointment in those polls, especially the fact that only 3 of the top 10 Computer RPG's are even 90's games.

Especially ToEE, Arcanum and Vampire, which are downright unplayable without mods. Even Fallout 2 had over 800 vanilla bugs left in the game after official patches, Killap over at NMA recently discovered at least 20 more vanilla bugs and this is 14 years later, imagine how many more of lurking in the code itself. I'm strongly of the opinion that early dungeon crawlers like Bard's Tale II on Apple IIG, Darkside of Xeen, Star Trail, Crusaders of the Dark Savant, and others, deserve a place on that list. These games were good straight out of the box.

Edit: Also the JRPG list is bad too, Shin Megami Tensei I & II are missing, yet they managed to add the PS2 game?

Why do you lie?
VTMB is perfectly playable with only official 1.2 patch. You don't need neither unofficial patch or mods. Only serious bug ( leopold society bug ) was fixed by official 1.2 patch.


Fallout 2 is perfectly playable with only official patches, no game or quests breaking bugs afaik.

So, once again: why do you lie?

I wasn't being literal. They have so many annoying bugs, some quests are broken, and smaller ones which distract from the playing experience and are overall badly coded software.

Vampire on steam doesn't even load up on my computer without using the unofficial patch, it gives error message.

Edit: Consider that the talking head animations, Hollywood-actor voice-acting and FMV in Fallout 2 was the most expensive part, and the fact that even after official patch the game had over 800 bugs left in the game.