DrBloodmoney

DrBloodmoney's Super Scientific Ranking of Games!

687 posts in this topic

@The_Kopite - just realised I made a mistake on your priority assignment, and put RE5 instead of the RE2 Remake:facepalm:

 

Corrected now! :blush:

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

@The_Kopite - just realised I made a mistake on your priority assignment, and put RE5 instead of the RE2 Remake:facepalm:

 

Corrected now! :blush:

I thought there was something going on, maybe Chris' muscles demanded RE5 be first lol :P

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The_Kopite said:

I thought there was something going on, maybe Chris' muscles demanded RE5 be first lol :P

 

He may be able to punch his way through a boulder, but no one can punch their way through science!😂

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what the game Zero Zero Zero Zero is, but if it does not end up at the very bottom I will be severely disappointed.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

10 minutes ago, pinkrobot_pb said:

I have no idea what the game Zero Zero Zero Zero is, but if it does not end up at the very bottom I will be severely disappointed.

 

😂 Have to wait for the science, of course, but I have to warn you - I doubt it...

 

If you've never subjected yourself to the 'wonders' of The Mysteries of Little Riddle, I can assure you, it will take some beating for the wooden-spoon award! - I don't expect Zero Zero Zero Zero to make much of a showing - it's not great by any stretch, but it's not in that league by a long shot...

 

We'll just need to see how it fares once I put on the lab coat though 😄

Edited by DrBloodmoney
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not surprised at where Detroit landed on the list, great review ;) 

Obviously couldn't (scientifically speaking) beat Manny Calavera's charm.

Thanks for the science!

 

If I'm allowed to suggest another game, I'd like to put forward Dokuro (a game I recommend for Vita, for sure) for scientific judgement! 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Soraking1991 said:

I'm not surprised at where Detroit landed on the list, great review ;) 

Obviously couldn't (scientifically speaking) beat Manny Calavera's charm.

Thanks for the science!

 

Glad you're enjoying mate, and happy to be of scientific service 🤓😄

 

3 minutes ago, Soraking1991 said:

If I'm allowed to suggest another game, I'd like to put forward Dokuro (a game I recommend for Vita, for sure) for scientific judgement! 

 

Absolutely - I'll flag that one with your name on it... (from memory though, I must warn you, the science might be a little less aligned with your personal assessment there than on Detroit... 😮😜)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Absolutely - I'll flag that one with your name on it... (from memory though, I must warn you, the science might be a little less aligned with your personal assessment there than on Detroit... 1f62e.png1f61c.png)

 

No worries, I might be remembering this game through rose-tinted glasses. I tend to over-value Vita games overall as I have an enormous soft-spot for the little handheld 😍

 

Still, science must be heard! 😁

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terminator Salvation is what some regard as one of the 'OG' easy platinums. I rented it from Gamefly to see what the buzz was about, and yeah, it was crap from the day it came out.

 

The movie of the same name was just as forgettable. Terminator 1 & 2 basically cemented Arnold Schwarzenegger's legacy in cinema, Hollywood history. Terminator Salvation was utterly laughable and dull.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AJ_Radio said:

Terminator Salvation is what some regard as one of the 'OG' easy platinums. I rented it from Gamefly to see what the buzz was about, and yeah, it was crap from the day it came out.

 

The movie of the same name was just as forgettable. Terminator 1 & 2 basically cemented Arnold Schwarzenegger's legacy in cinema, Hollywood history. Terminator Salvation was utterly laughable and dull.

 

Yup - can't disagree - you can make a perfectly serviceable cover shooter out of pretty much anything, but if you're going to use a bad movie to start with, you'd better be prepared to bring the funk, and on this one, what they brought was funk-all 😅

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

8 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

Yup - can't disagree - you can make a perfectly serviceable cover shooter out of pretty much anything, but if you're going to use a bad movie to start with, you'd better be prepared to bring the funk, and on this one, what they brought was funk-all 1f605.png

 

 

Games based off a movie have a history of sucking and this one was no different.

 

1 hour ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Cities: Skylines

 

Summary: 

The premier city-building simulator on console (and arguably on PC too at this point, as I understand it,) Cities: Skylines is simultaneously a ton of fun, an endless sinkhole one can lose entire days into, and the final nail in the coffin of Maxis' Sim City serieslong and illustrious tenure as the king of the City Sim!

 

I was an enormous fan of the original Sim City version that was released on the SNES back in the day, and even more so for the incredible Sim City 2000 on PC, but I fell off the City-Building tip around the release of Sim City 3000. The reason for that was simple - despite being as a result of improvements and refinements, the level of simulation those games trafficked in simply outpaced my personal attention span and tolerance for learning the more complex mechanics required to be a successful mayor.
Learning the amount of complicated game mechanics driving the background of the simulation became more work than fun for me - which is not a slight on the games, of course, but meant my relationship with them waned.

 

Reading that, one might be tempted to assume - considering how much I liked Cities: Skylines - that its simulation had gone back to a more simplistic flavour, but actually, the opposite is true. 
Where Sim City 3000 and other city builders of the era became more and more complex, pushing me out, Cities: Skylines is the first entry in the genre to become so much more complex, that it actually looped around, and pulled me back in!

The reason being - the simulation mechanics has become so good, and so nuanced, that it no longer feels like learning a phone-book's worth of complex rules and win conditions, but actually feels like... well... running a city!


Where in City Builder games of the past, if you had, say, a problem with traffic management, you would need to read all about how the rules of the game work, and figure out a solution to meet their conditions. With Cities: Skylines, when I had that exact problem, the solution was not to look up strategies to work the game mechanics - it was to look up actual cities with good traffic management pull up some Google Earth images of their road layouts and highway junctions, and actually recreate those in the game! The simulation is now complex and realistic enough, that aping real life scenarios is the way to succeed, and as a result, the game is oddly more approachable. The player does not need to think about how to 'game the system' - instead, they need to think about what would work in a real City and go from there. That is an astonishing achievement!

 

There's no doubt in my mind that Cities: Skylines was heavily influenced by the SimCity franchise. Will Wright spent years studying and tinkering to come up with a city builder game, took a risk and the rest is history.

 

SimCity 2000 is definitely a nostalgia trip. I was too little to play it when it came out but I was lucky enough as a kid to play it on a Windows 98 PC back in circa 1998 - 2000. I only ever beat Dullsville in the scenarios, the others were much too complicated for my young mind to figure out. But I played the game a couple years ago and it's easy to see why so many people loved it. It has good music, a good interface, everything is neat and laid out.

 

I never knew why Coal Power Plants were bad and why things like industry and prisons lowered the desirability of housing. As a kid I wanted to have skyscrapers but I didn't know you had to have a lot of commercial demand, which you usually didn't get until you could build an airport. Kids aren't going to understand this stuff, my dad however did.

 

Fun times.

Edited by AJ_Radio
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I could not help but think they had more enemy types in Terminator Salvation at some point and basically had to remove them at the last minute because of AI or general performance issues. Or maybe someone at the film studio had to approve the game and told them they could not have a generic soldier enemy type because they were not in the film, so they had to take them out a week before release.

 

If that is not the case and the execution is 1:1 what the design was, then they really had no clue from the get-go.

 

Still, I quite enjoyed getting the plat in this game within a couple of days. But then again, I only paid a couple of euro's for it. Paying full price for it would have been very unfortunate back in the day.

 

Also, I have pretty low standards and I am very much not a scientist.

Edited by pinkrobot_pb
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

15 minutes ago, pinkrobot_pb said:

I could not help but think they had more enemy types in Terminator Salvation at some point and basically had to remove them at the last minute because of AI or general performance issues. Or maybe someone at the film studio had to approve the game and told them they could not have a generic soldier because they were not in the film, so they had to take them out a week before release.

 

If that is not the case and the execution is 1:1 what the design was, then they really had no clue from the get-go.

 

I do remember hearing an interview with the studio lead - a Giant Bomb feature I think? - a long time ago, where the excruciating deadline was mentioned, and the amount of compromises required to get the game delivered on a ridiculous schedule was discussed, so I wouldn't be at all surprised if that were the case.

 

That studio (Grin) is the one who did the Bionic Commando Rearmed game, which was a brilliant 2D game, so they did have some chops at one point, but I think that game's wild success catapulted them out of their depth a little, and between Terminator Salvation, the Wanted PS3 game and the big 3D Bionic Commando game, it started to show.

 

A shame, because that interview showed the lead dude to be a hell of a nice guy, but the studio is long gone now, and never came close to reaching the heights that Bionic Commando Rearmed promised.

Edited by DrBloodmoney
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Void Bastards and/or Dead Cells please.

Two similair but different games, I don't want a comparison between the two but simply what you thought of each.

I found Void Bastards to be much more fun than Dead Cells but I recognise that Dead Cells is objectively the better game.

Also I like how Void Bastards encouraged the restart ship function while backing out/creating saves/ restarting areas in Dead Cells almost felt like cheating making the game much more of a chore (I presume thats how you approached the game, if not I salute you and your gaming skills).

Anyway, I really like Void Bastards as a game and a concept so I hope it fares well on your list wheras I'm confident that you enjoyed Dead Cells and I'm sure it will hit top 10 if not top 5.

 

I like your checklist and it's great that you have such a big completed game list to choose from.

I look forward to your next update.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez, Watchmen: The End is Nigh was that bad, huh? No wonder I haven't heard about it after the release.

 

It was also divided into two parts for some reason. I guess the second part was as boring, if not worse. The critics score is even lower.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, elpoko said:

Void Bastards and/or Dead Cells please.

 

Both added to the priority ranking - courtesy of your good-self ☺️👍

 

9 minutes ago, Alderriz said:

Jeez, Watchmen: The End is Nigh was that bad, huh? No wonder I haven't heard about it after the release.

 

It was also divided into two parts for some reason. I guess the second part was as boring, if not worse. The critics score is even lower.

 

Ho-boy, yeah - I actually bought both parts at the same time if I recall correctly, but after the first one, I think I would have rather rubbed my face across a rusty rake than ever load up that second part!

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great to see Cities Skylines so high up the list 👏

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Cleggworth said:

Great to see Cities Skylines so high up the list 1f44f.png

 

Yup - takes a well deserved high spot - the only thing harder than trying to rank that game on the list, is trying to put the controller down and go to bed once you start playing it 😂

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 5/3/2021 at 2:41 PM, DrBloodmoney said:

Sounds like you would enjoy doing your own scientific ranking list, my friend 263a.png - you want a lot more wordiness per game than I can be doing.

 

When you’ve got 500-plus games to get through, you need to rely on brevity, and in the end, a game I found to be as staggeringly dull, bitterly irritating and desperately disappointing as Jak II, isn’t that much fun to write about, so it gets a quick review and a ranking - but comparative to the others, I think it got it’s fair share of my thoughts and time 1f605.png


I stand by every word of what I said about Jak lI

 

I am putting in plenty of though to what I say, these aren’t off the cuff remarks.

 

Having S-Ranked every one of these games, I feel perfectly comfortable and well within my rights to say what I say about all of them, and to stand by it.

 

Can’t win ‘em all though, and as I said at the top of that post - I had an inkling Jak II would be a controversial one 1f602.png To be honest, I’m surprised you are the first dissenting voice to castigate me on it - but I’m sure you won’t be the last to take issue with a scientific analysis before I retire my labcoat! 1f609.png
 

262e.png

 

Meh. Didn't want to reply, but you made certain edits to the post since and then added another separate post after that. If I got something out of it, maybe. No, "wordiness" isn't the issue. The issue is how one-dimensional and unauthentic the Jak II description is. This also applies to your overly generous description for TLOU, which I originally had a comment for with the JII post but ended up scrapping. 

 

Having 500+ games is not a valid excuse to give poor descriptions and be selective with how much time you look into a game because of personal feelings and emotions. You're sharing your opinions online—with the undeniable intent of influencing people's minds/feelings on these games—and going even further by foolishly treating them as these unbiased, highly analytical/scientific reviews, when that really isn't the case for multiple games, so if you're going to take on that responsibility then you need to honor that and do it right. Some critics and players who also disliked/hated the game and listed negatives did a much better job with their review, because they weren't blind to the game's great designs in other places and listed them. The game was among one of PS2's best when it released and remained so to the end of the generation, and it still holds up great overall (audio quality, voicework, story, graphics, performance/60fps, skippable cutscenes, physics, animations, and I can go on).

 

You can stand by your word and keep that pride, but it's still a horrible, disingenuous, and inaccurate description of the game [Jak II]. Not that I like appealing to groups, but if the game truly somehow was that bad then there would be a widely greater and more prominent backlash against it, like what's been the case with Ride to Hell Retribution, Fallout 76, etc. The game has virtually been out for 20 years—plus re-released across three-four completely separate platforms (two-three of which even put the game in a more disadvantageous position by being inferior to the original, something to actually take into consideration with newcomers and old players wanting a "refresher")—and that has not been the case. It just doesn't make sense for a "review" to be so narrowly pessimistic and blatantly ignores good qualities that utterly deserve acknowledgment. Negative descriptions like yours should only apply to the absolute worse of games in all of history.

 

Plenty of thought? Based on some of the other games' descriptions I can't see it. It seems to be a selective case.

 

Having S Ranked the games doesn't mean much on its own. You're a single person, reviewing a multi-hundred number of games, spreading across various timespans and generations, in the present, within a quick/weekly timeframe. It's already an insane task to do such a thing. It's not even like you're actually replaying all of these older games too, instead relying heavily on extremely old memories from many years ago in some cases. Revisiting all the games for a few hours, assuming you've done even that, doesn't cut it either. It also can't be denied that especially with this many games being covered that recurring false memory would be a problematic variable clouding your judgment at points. Another issue is the collective information and formed thoughts on ports and remasters, which aren't always the definitive/superior experience, even the good ones. The original versions of games/series like Sonic Adventure, Silent Hill, and even Jak, and more, are the best ones. There are differences big enough to score them differently than their original counterparts and completely different games. Etc. S Ranking these games also doesn't mean you possess the knowledge to speak on a game during the timeframe it released during and how it stacked up back then. For so many reasons "having S Ranked games" just doesn't hold much weight here. Of course one thing that it does mean is that you have some experience with the games. If this topic didn't have an agenda, some of this would be a lesser issue and not one at all.

 

No-one stepped up. Someone's gotta do it. I already know your other opinions on a few other games I disagree with (just about all of which pose some kind of competition or connection with TLOUII), and eventually those will be added here. 

 

At the end of the day people are going to do whatever they want, because they want to. That's why one part of me doesn't care. The other part of me couldn't help but respond to the abysmal Jak II description, especially since there isn't even a single good quality or pro listed. It's almost as if the description is bait. Some of your other game descriptions are fine, but conceptually I think this topic is a mistake. The topic would have been better off like the ones made by many other people describing their experiences and feelings with the games on their profile. Your topic is different and goes for this "objective" style that isn't honest and fair.

 

On 5/3/2021 at 11:23 PM, DrBloodmoney said:

Still, even going with the issue as framed, I think it’s a bit pedantic to want to go as far back as the pre-Sony days, just to try and prove Jak II isn’t technically their worst game...

 

I mean, at that point, you are delving so far into history that I’d be surprised if any more than a tiny handful of personnel - if any - from that era are still within the company.

 

If someone made some grievous error in their life, and described it as ‘the stupidest thing they had ever done’, you wouldn’t rush in with an old photo album and shout “um well, actually, when you were a 1 year old, you covered yourself in peanut butter and then fell over, so...” I mean, sure, that might be technically correct, but that hardly whitewashes the stupid thing they did as a grown adult 1f602.png

 

It's not, it's completely fair to count those games if you want to actually have a serious, genuine, and truthful discussion on the topic of "the company's worse game". You don't get to choose what does and doesn't count so that it can fit your narrative. If you don't like it, then improve your writing and use the appropriate formation of words. Otherwise, you don't have to right to complain about a claim being criticized for being literally incorrect and misleading.

 

Funny thing. That can be said about Crash Bandicoot, especially since Naughty Dog actually lost all their design documents for the series, but we all know you and other people would count it as relevant history under their name. Don't even try to tell me "I wouldn't count Crash either" or try to rationalize why you would list it. It's a lose/lose position you put yourself in.

 

It's best not to complicate this with the insertions of false equivalences, and that's a pretty bad position to take. They legitimately made at least 6 whole games. . . and had them published before Crash Bandicoot. There's multiple other developers who have created great and successful games their first attempt and then others through their first few attempts. Naughty Dog isn't part of either those groups. That's how it is. Just because you might feel they are the best game developers now doesn't negate where they came from, what they produced, and how not-so-great they once were.

 

Sorry I couldn't submit this directly after your responses. 😓

Edited by EcoShifter
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great to see RE2 Remake in the top 10 for now, and I think your assessment was very detailed and fair. Best chance I feel of seeing one of my 3 favourite franchises in your top 5 list is on of the Final Fantasy's I feel. Will be interesting to see!

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

36 minutes ago, EcoShifter said:

 

[snip]

Having 500+ games is not a valid excuse to give poor descriptions and be selective with how much time you look into a game because of personal feelings and emotions. You're sharing your opinions online—with the undeniable intent of influencing people's minds/feelings on these games—and going even further by foolishly treating them as these unbiased, highly analytical/scientific reviews, when that really isn't the case for multiple games, so if you're going to take on that responsibility then you need to honor that and do it right.

 

[snip]

Some of your other game descriptions are fine, but conceptually I think this topic is a mistake. The topic would have been better off like the ones made by many other people describing their experiences and feelings with the games on their profile. Your topic is different and goes for this "objective" style that isn't honest and fair.

 

[snip]

It's not, it's completely fair to count those games if you want to actually have a serious, genuine, and truthful discussion on the topic of "the company's worse game". You don't get to choose what does and doesn't count so that it can fit your narrative. If you don't like it, then improve your writing and use the appropriate formation of words. Otherwise, you don't have to right to complain about a claim being criticized for being literally incorrect and misleading.

 

*sigh*

 

🙄 

 

Okay mate, listen...

 

I don't like ruining the fun, and so this will be the only post in which I do this...

 

 

I can't believe I actually have to spell this out to you...as it is so plainly, clearly and obviously apparent from the very beginning on my thread - and has been completely understood by everyone else, including people from all over the world whose first language is not even English -

 

Spoiler

THIS BEING 'SCIENCE' IS A JOKE.

 

It is tongue in cheek!

Of course these are opinions!

Jesus Christ - a fucking child could understand that.

 

I mean seriously, get a grip on yourself - did you actually even read the intro to my little project here?

Did you actually think I, or any of the people following along are under the impression that i am conducting real 'science' here or am under any obligation to be 'objective' - whatever that could even be, where criticism of entertainment is concerned?

 

These are my opinions, obviously - I am ranking MY GAMES, on MY PROFILE, and doing it on MY CHECKLIST.

 

I am having some fun ranking my games, and some other people are following along.

 

I'm happy to engage in spirited debate about my analyses, and I love passionate debate about games - but to complain about the whole endeavour conceptually, just because you are the one person in the entire site who didn't get the joke, and then to fill up massive posts like yours whinging about it,  to the extent that I have to drop the fun of it for a moment, take you by your angry little hand and explain that to you, is so sad to me.

 

You are only embarrassing yourself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by DrBloodmoney
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

27 minutes ago, The_Kopite said:

Great to see RE2 Remake in the top 10 for now, and I think your assessment was very detailed and fair. Best chance I feel of seeing one of my 3 favourite franchises in your top 5 list is on of the Final Fantasy's I feel. Will be interesting to see!

 

Glad you enjoyed, mate ☺️

 

As far as the other two franchises go - I'm not a big Sonic guy, but as far a FF goes, we'll have to see how this science comes out, but I did love that Final Fantasy VII Remake an awful lot, so I expect it to make a good showing when its time comes...

Edited by DrBloodmoney
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great read so far! I also love a good list and ranking stuff too.

 

If I can suggest something, I'll go with Mass Effect 2. It's something I've not played personally, but would be interested in your assessment and something I'm interested in with the collection out soon. Seems many love the game, but I'd interested where it would fall your personal ranking.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GloriousFury9414 said:

Great read so far! I also love a good list and ranking stuff too.

 

If I can suggest something, I'll go with Mass Effect 2. It's something I've not played personally, but would be interested in your assessment and something I'm interested in with the collection out soon. Seems many love the game, but I'd interested where it would fall your personal ranking.

 

Nice to hear mate, cheers ☺️

 

I shall flag Mass Effect 2 for priority with your name on it - quite a few on there now, (and that's a big one there!) so may be a few more rounds before it gets it's go, but I'll get there soon 👍

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.