VideoGame_Discussion

Shane12m wrote:

Games thst don't get a ton of press don't get a ton of reviews. I think 11 reviews is plenty. Apogee has been doing some cool things lately to make themselves relevant again.

benstylus wrote:

11 reviews is definitely not enough in my opinion. You add 5 reviews to that game that are mixed in the 70s or 80s and that drastically changes the overall score

Shane12m wrote:

Those games are not games anyone would even have on their list though. So you don't have to worry about that. And there are only 3 games above 90 that have 11 or less that would be eligible for this. And there is no way anyone here knew they existed before their lists were submitted.

Archer wrote:

Fair point :)

Archer wrote:

I knew about Turbo Overkill since I'm on Apogee's discord. But my list this year was all games that hadn't even been announced at the time

benstylus wrote:

I'd wager even with you knowing about it, you still wouldn't have put it on your list.

Archer wrote:

Not this year, this year was for unannounced games that probably wouldn't happen (but surprisingly 3 of them were announced, although 2 of those are 2024 releases).

Missed the boat on Lego (2K drive came out but I had called for Comic book lego game).

Also missed out on Tetris because although MyArcade released a new handheld with a custom version of the game on there, I don't think it got any metacritic reviews.

But I think I did all right with predictions on what would be announced or released, all things considered.

Talos Principle 2 has an 87 wow. Loved the first game.

I remember really liking the first game. I think it was free on PS+ at some point on PS4, like 5-6 years ago. I'll have to check the second one out at some point.

Okay guys, OP has been updated with scores for Like a Dragon Gaiden (79 on Metacritic) and WarioWare: Move It! (75 on Metacritic). I think those are the last two games for the year, but I'll go through later on just to confirm that. If those are the last two then I'll do a final tally, add alternates to people's final score, and we can wrap things up for 2023!

I'm on the board!

Of the mainline WarioWare games (meaning not counting the two low effort spin-offs on DSiWare and WiiWare or Game & Wario which was more of just a tech demo for the Wii U GamePad than anything), this is the lowest rated game in the series now. I almost picked it up on Friday when I was at Walmart but talked myself out of it because I know from the previous game that once I've played all the mini-games I will probably never play it again.

I think part of the problem is that it feels like we just had WarioWare get it together releases not too long ago.

Looking at Wikipedia it was 2 years ago but it's not really a series we need refreshed very often IMO.

Also i was pulling for a new Wario platformer

Okay peeps. I've updated the OP and everything is now final. @Shane12m finished 1st, @Best1989 finished 2nd, and I just held off @PizzaTheHutt for 3rd place. Wild year and congrats to both Shane and Best. I'll send you guys PMs with your prizes in a few minutes.

Such a wild year. Everyone has gotten much better at this game and I think this has to be one of the best years in gaming history, at least as far as review scores are concerned. So many games scored over 90. @TalonJedi87 finished 10th with 863 points but that would have been enough to finish 1st last year!

Tears of the Kingdom and Baldur's Gate III both scored 96 and were the best reviewed games on our lists. Forspoken (64) and Redfall (56) were the two most disappointing high-profile games. Those two definitely killed a few lists.

Thanks for participating everyone! I'll have the 2024 edition up and running sometime in December.

@DemonAlcohol @PizzaTheHutt @EB @TalonJedi87 @benstylus @sailorneorune @Bleed_DukeBlue @HybridCRoW @Incubus421 @SwiftJAB @Roko @Thatfootballguy @SilverOwl @Shane12m @Frank @SupremeSarna @Cevil @BloodPuppetX @Sefjwm @Ryan @Bogo @Boss @Archer @Scott @Lunar @Tonymack21 @Mattyg00013 @Bonham2 @Metsfan718 @Best1989 @3hitcombo @Jbjz

Thanks so much @Heavyd814life ! I already have my tentative 2024 list ready and waiting!

Dang, really thought I had top 5 this year...missed it by 2 points!

It was a close one for sure. Alan Wake II dropping from 90 to 87 cost me 3rd place.

This was a fun year. Congrats to the top three.

Next year the winner will only have a score of 724, due to it being the worst year on record, lol.

How does this work? It's based off of predictions on what scores/ratings upcoming games will get?

Woo got to 7 in the end, not bad for an insane year

nonamesleft wrote:


Yup. Pick 10 games in January (with two alternates as a backup plan in case any of your 10 get delayed) that you expect will score high and by the end of the year the scores are added up.

@Heavyd814life Are you still considering switching to use opencritic next year?

Crazy year indeed, congrats to all!

Archer wrote:

Yeah definitely. They have a better overall system, imo.

Does anyone have any suggestions for changes/tweaks we could make? I think we have a pretty solid setup here, but I'm definitely open to suggestions.

I'm not sure if it's been suggested or done before but is it better to essentially have highest of the 12 picks instead of using the 2 back up in case of delay? Not sure if it's better but just a thought.

If you get a dud and can still have a chance and not eliminated on the spot.

Made it to the top 10. Not gonna complain about that.

Looking forward to 2024!

Lunar wrote:

I disagree completely with this. It ads another layer to making your picks. Its part of the player strategy. We've actually had a lot of discussion about this in the past. And its usually a split down the middle on who thinks we should and who doesn't. But this is something I strongly believe should not be changed. It takes an element of strategy away from the game.

Oh wow I just realized I finished in the #10 spot. I’ll take it! Next year come on #9!

Heavyd814life wrote:

The less complicated the better, honestly.

Allowing remakes but not remasters is a confusing rule that could probably be dropped.

Heavyd814life wrote:

The less complicated the better, honestly.

Allowing remakes but not remasters is a confusing rule that could probably be dropped.

I understand the "no ports" rule but where would something like Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury land, for example? Yes it's a port but it had a sizeable amount more added on to it. (Thankfully we're just about out of Wii U games that could be ported with little effort to switch). Then you look at something like Ghost Trick. Is that a port or a remaster? And would allowing ports skew the results that much?

I don't know, maybe require at least one Indie game in the ten

Time for the yearly remake-vs-remaster conversation!

I'm fine with the current setup.

No remakes/remasters. It's usually an easy, lazy high score and requires no strategy.

I don’t mind true remakes like Resident Evil 4 or the upcoming Silent Hill 2 for example but yeah like ported remasters can be omitted imo.

Kommie wrote:

I agree that if we ban remasters we should ban remakes.

I just don't see a need to ban any of it

I don’t think we should make any changes regarding remakes. A remake is still a game built from the ground up using new hardware and technology. I think that would be silly to disallow them.

@Heavyd814life I'm fine with the current rules, but I really wouldn't care if you made changes either. I just have fun participating, and don't take it too seriously. You do all the work and put up the prizes, so, while it's nice to gather some input, I think you should just go with whichever rules you like

Same I just enjoy guessing. I say leave it as is too.

Here I was hoping for new suggestions, but we are back to the same old arguments lol. I'm with @Archer on keeping alts. Just making it 10 or even 12 games would take all the strategy out of it and no one will ever take risks because one delay and you're cooked for the year. Someone who picks all the Q1 games, for example, could win by default if just one popular game gets delayed. Alts allow things to stay competitive all year, imo.

And the remake/remaster debate will never end lol. But we go over it every year and we end up just keeping things as they are. I think these full remakes are such a big part of modern gaming and I don't know if it makes much sense to remove them. And there are no guarantees. Who knows how Snake Eater and Silent Hill 2 will turn out. Sure Resident Evil 4 scored in the 90s, but let's not forget that Resident Evil 3 was in the 70s. When it's built from the ground up you never know. That's part of the beauty of it, imo.

Maybe we should just keep things as they are. Everyone is familiar with the rules and I think the rules are simple enough for newcomers to understand. Maybe just don't complicate things.

Thanks for hosting as always. Looking forward to another year.

As always thanks for hosting!

Thoughts on current rules:
-i like the 10 +2 format
-definitely support opencritic
-the current re make/master setup is fine...the yearly convos are just comedy at this point

New thoughts:
-Heavy mentioned it, but adding in some sort of mandatory listing (indie/sport/whatever) could be interesting
-possibly have a mid-year review where we can make minimal changes? (like: "everyone can make 1 change") its not enough to make a huge difference, but at least makes things a bit more interesting
-would love to figure out a way to limit how many lists a certain game can be on...just kinda boring when 28 of the 30 have the same game on it.

Would love to do a fantasy football draft style game one year but there's absolutely no way to do that with this many people lol