TOP 64 — Week 1 — Poll 1

[Kong Wen]

Some people apparently vote in the BGE for games they personally like, enjoy, have fun playing rather than games they think are the best. (Or, to be clearer, they think that them personally enjoying a game IS what makes it "best".)

Best is subjective though there's no best thing ever.

I mean, exactly. This has been baked into the manifesto of the BGE Project since 2010.

Game of the Year votes and similar exercises are common in video gaming communities. The "BEST GAME EVER!!!" Project continues this impulse to its natural conclusion. The aim of the Project is to determine the single greatest video game of all time.

The “BEST GAME EVER!!!” Project’s tongue-in-cheek title betrays an underlying awareness of the absurdity of its mission. The competition itself is earnest, albeit under the pretence of the pursuit of an admitted impossibility. So what are its true goals? How does it promise to be a meaningful as well as entertaining event?

The Project embraces the necessarily subjective nature of our experiences with games and the various pleasures we derive from them. Attempts to measure their objective value—as narratives, as works of art, as pieces of interactive entertainment, as design achievements—and the restrictive definitions and categories leveraged in the service of this quantification are ultimately futile.

Eschewing this mindset confronts us with new avenues of discussion and analysis that can be simultaneously enlightening and discomfiting. Can we use the same interpretive tools on games of thirty years ago and games of today? In what ways can we claim a puzzle game to be “better” than an action game? How do we even compare them?

The purpose of the Project is to generate interesting discussions of video games, their place in our world, what makes them memorable, what makes them mean something to us. An additional benefit is that it will inevitably raise awareness of unknown or underrated gems that many players may not have given a chance.

My point above is that I find it very interesting that this kind of subjectivity seems to split people into two camps: those who would only ever tend to vote for games they personally enjoy, and those who are willing to vote for games they do not personally enjoy because of other merits.

I want to know what situation would persuade the people in the first camp to vote for a game they don't like as much against a game that they do like more.

[SkyPikachu]

Some people apparently vote in the BGE for games they personally like, enjoy, have fun playing rather than games they think are the best. (Or, to be clearer, they think that them personally enjoying a game IS what makes it "best".)

Best is subjective though there's no best thing ever.

I mean, exactly. This has been baked into the manifesto of the BGE Project since 2010.

Game of the Year votes and similar exercises are common in video gaming communities. The "BEST GAME EVER!!!" Project continues this impulse to its natural conclusion. The aim of the Project is to determine the single greatest video game of all time.

The “BEST GAME EVER!!!” Project’s tongue-in-cheek title betrays an underlying awareness of the absurdity of its mission. The competition itself is earnest, albeit under the pretence of the pursuit of an admitted impossibility. So what are its true goals? How does it promise to be a meaningful as well as entertaining event?

The Project embraces the necessarily subjective nature of our experiences with games and the various pleasures we derive from them. Attempts to measure their objective value—as narratives, as works of art, as pieces of interactive entertainment, as design achievements—and the restrictive definitions and categories leveraged in the service of this quantification are ultimately futile.

Eschewing this mindset confronts us with new avenues of discussion and analysis that can be simultaneously enlightening and discomfiting. Can we use the same interpretive tools on games of thirty years ago and games of today? In what ways can we claim a puzzle game to be “better” than an action game? How do we even compare them?

The purpose of the Project is to generate interesting discussions of video games, their place in our world, what makes them memorable, what makes them mean something to us. An additional benefit is that it will inevitably raise awareness of unknown or underrated gems that many players may not have given a chance.

My point above is that I find it very interesting that this kind of subjectivity seems to split people into two camps: those who would only ever tend to vote for games they personally enjoy, and those who are willing to vote for games they do not personally enjoy because of other merits.

I want to know what situation would persuade the people in the first camp to vote for a game they don't like as much against a game that they do like more.

One thing I've been doing recently is voting for well known games I know my partner loves vs games I know aren't great or I didn't enjoy.

Monster Hunter World is a good example. I couldn't get into it but my partner adored it to the point I would vote for it due to that.

[liu yuante]

Man, I'm not thrilled with either of these. I'm going to abstain for now.

[liu yuante]

Some people apparently vote in the BGE for games they personally like, enjoy, have fun playing rather than games they think are the best. (Or, to be clearer, they think that them personally enjoying a game IS what makes it "best".)

Best is subjective though there's no best thing ever.

I mean, exactly. This has been baked into the manifesto of the BGE Project since 2010.

I dunno. Yes, there is significant subjectivity when evaluating any art form due to personal tastes, but 1) I think there are still axes along which we can identify some objective hallmarks for greatness and 2) if we are able to self-reflect on our own personal tastes and recognize them as such, I think it becomes clearer to see what might be genuinely better.

For example, if a certain game employs a mechanic we don't like but it does it very well we may not enjoy it, but that's different from saying it isn't good. I think that gameplay or stylistic tendencies, or genre preferences, tend to be subjective most of the time. I don't like rhythm games. At all. But I know that's just me and not an objective evaluation. However, within a given genre or subgenre or gameplay/stylistic choice it becomes more valid to discuss objective quality. I don't like rhythm games but surely some are better than others.

Criteria that can be used to evaluate along these lines might include: innovation/originality, gameplay satisfaction, is the game a genuine attempt to make something of quality or a cynical cash grab, are the music/graphics of high quality (meaning not do we like them, but are they lazy, repetitive, unoriginal, glitchyetc.), does the game reveal more and/or remain fun (or become more fun) the more a player is exposed to it, or does it lose it's charm over time, etc.

That last one is key for me - I think works of genuine quality either continue to engage (in game terms this might apply to say, Tetris - it's always just Tetris but it's addictive and varied) or reveal more of themselves over time and are able to withstand increased scrutiny. Works of middling quality neither improve nor decline in impressiveness after repeat exposure and/or start to lose steam from a "fun" perspective in a way more compelling games do not. And works of poor quality show more and more cracks the longer a player spends with it.

However, there is one additional level to this, in my opinion, beyond inter-genre vs intra-genre comparisons, and that's that within the cluster of games that achieve some level of merit nearer the "genuine quality" level things become subjective again. Near the top the level of objective quality is typically so high that the easiest tiebreaker is personal preference. So, to partially agree with those saying "best" is subjective, yes - once you've thinned the herd it becomes harder to see objective distinctions because, in many cases, they may not exist. In fact, there is probably no "best game ever" but rather a tie between dozens of games.

But I do think there are some viable objective markers for finding our way at least to that top level, or near it. Not that this particular exercise is a great example since so few of us vote in it and there are some clear preferential streaks (some of us can reliably counted on to vote for old PC games from the 1980's, others, when presented with a Nintendo title, will invariably vote for it, etc.). It's still fun, though!

[Kong Wen]

I dunno. Yes, there is significant subjectivity when evaluating any art form due to personal tastes, but 1) I think there are still axes along which we can identify some objective hallmarks for greatness and 2) if we are able to self-reflect on our own personal tastes and recognize them as such, I think it becomes clearer to see what might be genuinely better. [...]

Criteria that can be used to evaluate along these lines might include: innovation/originality, gameplay satisfaction, is the game a genuine attempt to make something of quality or a cynical cash grab, are the music/graphics of high quality (meaning not do we like them, but are they lazy, repetitive, unoriginal, glitchyetc.), does the game reveal more and/or remain fun (or become more fun) the more a player is exposed to it, or does it lose it's charm over time, etc.

That last one is key for me - I think works of genuine quality either continue to engage (in game terms this might apply to say, Tetris - it's always just Tetris but it's addictive and varied) or reveal more of themselves over time and are able to withstand increased scrutiny. Works of middling quality neither improve nor decline in impressiveness after repeat exposure and/or start to lose steam from a "fun" perspective in a way more compelling games do not. And works of poor quality show more and more cracks the longer a player spends with it.

However, there is one additional level to this, in my opinion, beyond inter-genre vs intra-genre comparisons, and that's that within the cluster of games that achieve some level of merit nearer the "genuine quality" level things become subjective again. Near the top the level of objective quality is typically so high that the easiest tiebreaker is personal preference. So, to partially agree with those saying "best" is subjective, yes - once you've thinned the herd it becomes harder to see objective distinctions because, in many cases, they may not exist. In fact, there is probably no "best game ever" but rather a tie between dozens of games.

But I do think there are some viable objective markers for finding our way at least to that top level, or near it. Not that this particular exercise is a great example since so few of us vote in it and there are some clear preferential streaks (some of us can reliably counted on to vote for old PC games from the 1980's, others, when presented with a Nintendo title, will invariably vote for it, etc.). It's still fun, though!

Yes, I agree with you overall on pretty much all points, and I think you and I tend to weigh similar criteria when deciding on our votes. I just hoped to open the door back up to the idea of "self-reflect[ing] on our own personal tastes and recogniz[ing] them as such" as you put it, for some who may have been frustrated that I scrutinize their votes every time they either don't post rationale, or their rationale is just "I like it" (a valid rationale for this contest, but all valid rationale are worth scrutinizing).

For what it's worth, I dug up another one of the old original "BGE!!!" mandates from 2010 and it goes a little something like this:

The “BEST GAME EVER!!!” Project is not intended to champion any particular objective quality. The best game can be the best for any of a number of reasons: its earnings or critical reception, its influence and impact, the emotional resonance of its art or music, the playability of its mechanics or the thoughtfulness of its design, the immersiveness of its world, the quality of its writing and characterization, or the memories and nostalgia it invokes. All participants are invited to engage in their own ways, and nominate and vote according to their own criteria, however arbitrary and however personal.

Given the wildly varying ways in which people are indeed voting, I wish more folks were chiming in with a few words on their reasons. That would make this a bit more interesting than just some close numbers between two games. "Great tunes!" "Loved it when I was a kid." To this day though, I don't think we ever had anyone play the tournament by voting for games solely on the basis of their earnings / chart success. But the door is open!

[liu yuante]

For what it's worth, I dug up another one of the old original "BGE!!!" mandates from 2010 and it goes a little something like this:

The “BEST GAME EVER!!!” Project is not intended to champion any particular objective quality. The best game can be the best for any of a number of reasons: its earnings or critical reception, its influence and impact, the emotional resonance of its art or music, the playability of its mechanics or the thoughtfulness of its design, the immersiveness of its world, the quality of its writing and characterization, or the memories and nostalgia it invokes. All participants are invited to engage in their own ways, and nominate and vote according to their own criteria, however arbitrary and however personal.

Given the wildly varying ways in which people are indeed voting, I wish more folks were chiming in with a few words on their reasons. That would make this a bit more interesting than just some close numbers between two games. "Great tunes!" "Loved it when I was a kid." To this day though, I don't think we ever had anyone play the tournament by voting for games solely on the basis of their earnings / chart success. But the door is open!

Yeah, I get it. There isn't always a lot of discussion, and I've been guilty of that in the past. Sometimes it's as simple as remembering last minute I haven't voted yet and am just trying to get my votes in.