Game of the decade vote off?

[Hivemind]

World of Warcraft Classic


For single player titles, probably The Last of Us. I also quite enjoyed Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Portal 2, God of War, and Horizon: Zero Dawn.

But I spend the vast majority of my gaming time on online titles, particularly those with robust laddering systems. Overwatch probably takes the cake in that category. Starcraft 2, Rocket League, Hearthstone, and Teamfight Tactics deserve honorable mentions. Apex Legends probably worth a shout out among the Battle Royales, even if their ranked system is essentially non-existent.

Destiny 1 had tons of flaws (and I mean TONS), but is probably among the better community-driven online games of the decade (not quite an actual MMO). The core gunplay was really fun and enthralling.

 

[HanSolo]

I don't really think Destiny belongs in the conversation and that's coming from a guy that dumped hundreds of hours into it.

 

[Dolemite]

I don't really think Destiny belongs in the conversation and that's coming from a guy that dumped hundreds of hours into it.

Both games. The player base and influences are massive.

 

[syz]

Destiny's interesting in that it's kinda the inverse of something like a Bethesda game or The Witcher. The game play (outside of the first year of Destiny 2) has always been extremely good, but the content surrounding it has been either up and down or non-existent. The most disappointing thing is that all that grimoire card, external story stuff that the game got so much shit for is actually really good sci-fi writing? Like, better sci-fi writing than The Witcher's fantasy writing? But it's just... on a website instead of actually in the game.

Though I would still put Doom ahead of it for shooters within the last 10 years, tbh.

 

[Nemesis Prime]

Also casting a vote for these.

 

[Commander Clueless]

Destiny's interesting in that it's kinda the inverse of something like a Bethesda game or The Witcher. The game play (outside of the first year of Destiny 2) has always been extremely good, but the content surrounding it has been either up and down or non-existent. The most disappointing thing is that all that grimoire card, external story stuff that the game got so much **** for is actually really good sci-fi writing? Like, better sci-fi writing than The Witcher's fantasy writing? But it's just... on a website instead of actually in the game.

Though I would still put Doom ahead of it for shooters within the last 10 years, tbh.

That grimoire stuff would earn one of my most frustrating awards of the past decade.

I only really learned about it when I was almost finished the main story line (I admit I initially thoughht the grimoire stuff was some sort of trading card thing in the game that I promptly ignored ). They took the time to write some damn good stuff, but you don't understand what is happening while you do it. I remember the opening cinematic really drawing me into the world, and then.....that was it.

If they had taken the time to put the story in to the actual game (and also maybe to come up with a few different mission structures), the original Destiny could have been incredible. As it stands, it was just good(IMO, obviously). Probably a testament to just how good the actual shooting part was.

 

[mariopepper]

Witcher 3 or Dark Souls

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Well I started the thread and I've spent time on my list so here it is

DMST's favourite video games of the 2010's

The Legend of Zelda - Breath of the Wild (Switch)
Not much needs to be said about BotW. Unless you hate open world games, you played this and know how good it is.

The Witcher 3 - The Wild Hunt (PC)
Another one that needs no introduction. I will say I especially liked combat, unlike a lot of people. It isn't world-class or anything but I enjoyed how nimble Geralt is and taking out large groups of enemies with your sword and magic was always fun.

The Witcher 2 - Assassin of Kings (PC)
No open world and combat isn't much fun but a much, much better RPG than the third game.

XCom 2 - War of the Chosen (PC)
I always had a soft spot for this franchise, the original UFO was one of my first PC games: I never finished it because my English wasn't great and I wasn't a very bright kid. The 2012 reboot was solid but the second improves on every aspect of it while also increasing the difficulty and adding timers to most missions to force players to be aggressive.

Mass Effect 2 (PC)
A wonderful scifi shooter that does away with all the cumbersome RPG elements from the first game to make everything feel so much smoother and engaging. Great universe/setting and a solid cast make for a memorable experience and one of the last good games Bioware released.

Fallout: New Vegas
After the epic slog and snorefest that was Fallout 3, Obsidian comes back and showed just how vital writing, character progession and dialogue choices are. Basically does away with everything awful from Fallout 3 and puts greatness instead.

Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze (Switch)
The best 2d platformer ever made. Not by a wide margin but it truly is the best of its kind in my book.

The Last of Us (PS4)
I hate everything zombie and really don't think much of Uncharted to I resisted playing this game for a long time. Got it with my PS4 so I gave it a shot and what a great ride it was.

The Legend of Zelda - A Link Between Worlds (3DS)
A sequel to A Link to the Past with a great gimmick that sees Link become a painting a wall to get around tight passages. A real joy of a game and a precusor of things to come with Breath of the Wild.

Super Mario Odyssey (Switch)
Not quite as good as I had hoped, it still a wonderful game to play and has plenty to offer for those who like exploring every nook and crany of a level.

All of these are big budget games but I should mention some great indie games that I thoroughly enjoyed but that just didn't make the lasting impressions the big budget games did.

Mark of the Ninja
Papers Please
Hyper Light Drifter
Inside

 

[Shareefruck]

Other than Celeste, Into the Breach, Inside, Downwell, Ultra Street Fighter IV, and maybe Portal 2, I don't care all that much for most of the games released this decade, personally.

A lot of these story/production value/scale and "epic experience"-driven games that become so beloved just don't do very much for me and I kind of think makes the medium seem less impressive than movies, television, and music to me.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

I kind of think makes the medium seem less impressive than movies, television, and music.

It is an interactive medium, it shouldn't be compared to movies, books, televisions and music. The whole "games are art" is really silly.

 

[Shareefruck]

It is an interactive medium, it shouldn't be compared to movies, books, televisions and music. The whole "games are art" is really silly.

Personally, I think that anything can be compared to anything. It's not much different from saying that I've gotten more out of and respect the heights/value of videogames than I have from sporting events. It doesn't have to be an art thing.

I don't really know what actually qualifies as art, but I do know that I generally don't particularly care for "games as a product/service", which is what a lot of them feel like to me.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Personally, I think that anything can be compared to anything. It's not much different from saying that I've gotten more out of and respect the heights/value of videogames more than I have from sporting events. It doesn't have to be an art thing.

Allow me to rephrase:

It is far easier for mediums with no interactivity to be "more impressive" than one that has interactivity at its core.

In the mediums you compared games to, the creator has absolute and total control over your experience. This is not the case at all in video games.

Hence why I consider the comparison mostly silly.

 

[Shareefruck]

Allow me to rephrase:

It is far easier for mediums with no interactivity to be "more impressive" than ones that have interactivity at its core.

In the mediums you compared games to, the creator has absolute and total control over your experience. This is not the case at all in video games.

Hence why I consider the comparison mostly silly.

But I don't care how technically impressive or difficult to accomplish something is, I care about its effect on me, my appreciation of what I think it's actually successful at doing and how much value I see in that thing. If games are at a disadvantage because they inherently have more focus on elements that I care less for (things that are less driven by total artistic control, for example), then I'm going to think less of them. That's the reality of what I think of them and what I'm commenting on. I don't see what's silly or impossible to compare about that.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

But I don't care how technically impressive or difficult to accomplish something is, I care about its effect on me, my appreciation of what I think it's actually successful at doing and how much value I see in that. If games are at a disadvantage because they inherently have more focus on elements that I care less for (things that are less driven by total artistic control, for example), then I'm going to think less of them. That's what I'm commenting on. I don't see what's silly or impossible to compare about that.

Then yes, if by "I find these things more impressive" you meant "I like these better" then you are correct. Not much I can say about that.

 

[Shareefruck]

Then yes, if by "I find these things more impressive" you meant "I like these better" then you are correct. Not much I can say about that.

I'm more "impressed" by the things that I value more, regardless of the work that went into them-- subjective things like sensibilities and design choices and charm/tastefulness all managing to make something feel "right" (which I actually don't think is necessarily biased against interactive things)-- in other words, I'm impressed by the outcome (based on what I find valuable), rather than the technical feat/challenge involved in creating something or how much thought went into it.

I don't think that's necessarily the wrong way to use the word "impressive." We just have a different opinion of the factors that make something impressive.

And by the way, the definition of "impress" is "to make (someone) feel admiration and respect." not "to acknowledge accomplishment that's objectively undeniable." The way you're framing the difference between liking something and being impressed by it is incorrect, IMO.

 

[Nemesis Prime]

It is an interactive medium, it shouldn't be compared to movies, books, televisions and music. The whole "games are art" is really silly.

This is probably the most ignorant thing I've ever read in a long time.

 

[HanSolo]

It is an interactive medium, it shouldn't be compared to movies, books, televisions and music. The whole "games are art" is really silly.

Music is written for them
Dialogue and cutscenes are written, voiced, and animated for them
Landscapes and buildings are designed for them.
Histories and lore are written for them

How are video games not art? How is one video game not a collection of artistic efforts. Saying video games aren't artistic works is really silly.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Music is written for them
Dialogue and cutscenes are written, voiced, and animated for them
Landscapes and buildings are designed for them.
Histories and lore are written for them

How are video games not art? How is one video game not a collection of artistic efforts. Saying video games aren't artistic works is really silly.

It doesn't matter if they are is how I feel about it. I'm not saying you are wrong for saying it is, I just get exasperated when people want to compare them to 100% passive experiences. I say this as someone who loves cinema.

It was my bad, I misinterpreted what he said.

 

[The Head Crusher]

Has to be Skyrim. No other game from this decade (minecraft was a 2009) has transcended both platform or generation like it has. The fact that a 9 year old game still get released on new consoles says alot.

 

[Shareefruck]

Edit: Ahh, nevermind.

 

[Tonneau]

Has to be Skyrim. No other game from this decade (minecraft was a 2009) has transcended both platform or generation like it has. The fact that a 9 year old game still get released on new consoles says alot.

Skyrim having been released on many different platforms is nothing special. It's happened to other games as well. Bethesda has simply marketed the re-releases of their game a lot more than other companies have.

Dark Souls was released a couple months before Skyrim and has been released on every platform that Skyrim is on (unless you count VR as a platform, but VR makes no sense for third person action games anyway). However, unlike Skyrim, Dark Souls' popularity spawned a f***ing genre. Oh and Dark Souls is a much better game than Skyrim.

 

[The Head Crusher]

Skyrim having been released on many different platforms is nothing special. It's happened to other games as well. Bethesda has simply marketed the re-releases of their game a lot more than other companies have.

Dark Souls was released a couple months before Skyrim and has been released on every platform that Skyrim is on (unless you count VR as a platform, but VR makes no sense for third person action games anyway). However, unlike Skyrim, Dark Souls' popularity spawned a ****ing genre. Oh and Dark Souls is a much better game than Skyrim.

I do include VR as a platform. And while it has been cited as influencing the game play of other games like the Witcher 3 and the new God of War, I would hardy call it spawning a "****ing genre." You said your self it is a 3rd person action game, a genre that has existed long before Dark Souls; God of War, Tomb Raider series, Arkham Asylum, Metal Gear and Assassins Creed (granted these last 2 focus more on the stealth side but you can easily play it as an action game) for example.

The other thing we need to consider (or maybe clarify in this particular discussion) is that this is the game of the year, not series of the year. Dark Souls released 3 games over this decade and we must consider them to be separate entries, otherwise this would be a Dark Souls vs Elder Scrolls debate.

 

[Tonneau]

I do include VR as a platform. And while it has been cited as influencing the game play of other games like the Witcher 3 and the new God of War, I would hardy call it spawning a "****ing genre." You said your self it is a 3rd person action game, a genre that has existed long before Dark Souls; God of War, Tomb Raider series, Arkham Asylum, Metal Gear and Assassins Creed (granted these last 2 focus more on the stealth side but you can easily play it as an action game) for example.

The other thing we need to consider (or maybe clarify in this particular discussion) is that this is the game of the year, not series of the year. Dark Souls released 3 games over this decade and we must consider them to be separate entries, otherwise this would be a Dark Souls vs Elder Scrolls debate.

My previous post was about Dark Souls itself. The sequels are irrelevant.

Dark Souls was released on PS3, PS4, XBox 360, XBox One, PC (twice), and Switch. And when I say it spawned a genre, I don't mean third person action adventure games but the Souls-like genre (which isn't limited to 3D games by the way). Dark Souls wasn't the first Souls-like game (I don't know which game was, but Demons' Souls made by the same guys is an example of an older Souls-like game), but it is the one that made the genre an actual thing in the industry which is why the genre is named after it.

Dark Souls isn't my favourite game of the decade (though it is up there), but I don't know if there is a more influential one (Skyrim sure isn't). Dark Souls changed the video game industry itself by not only creating a new genre, but also by reviving interest in challenging games. Though it itself really isn't that difficult compared to many of the games that have come out since, at the time of its release it was widely praised for its difficulty by reviewers and players who felt that challenge was lacking in modern games.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Edit: Ahh, nevermind.

As I have now stated twice, I misinterpreted your use of the word impressive.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

My previous post was about Dark Souls itself. The sequels are irrelevant.

Dark Souls was released on PS3, PS4, XBox 360, XBox One, PC (twice), and Switch. And when I say it spawned a genre, I don't mean third person action adventure games but the Souls-like genre (which isn't limited to 3D games by the way). Dark Souls wasn't the first Souls-like game (I don't know which game was, but Demons' Souls made by the same guys is an example of an older Souls-like game), but it is the one that made the genre an actual thing in the industry which is why the genre is named after it.

Dark Souls isn't my favourite game of the decade (though it is up there), but I don't know if there is a more influential one (Skyrim sure isn't). Dark Souls changed the video game industry itself by not only creating a new genre, but also by reviving interest in challenging games. Though it itself really isn't that difficult compared to many of the games that have come out since, at the time of its release it was widely praised for its difficulty by reviewers and players who felt that challenge was lacking in modern games.

The only people for who Dark Souls spawned a genre is for people who are unable to describe anything without referencing another known quantity.

A hard game? Souls-like! Stamina? Souls-like!

Dark Souls is a very standard 3rd person action game. A very well made one but it didn't invent anything. Sekiro is way better anyway.