CS-Nation

Covering the future of Counter-Strike
topping tops
counter-point: topping tops
Is it possible to name what the best game of all time is? How about the 83rd best game of all time? That crazy duo of asspennies and rizzuh discuss this very important matter!
From: asspennies [mailto:asspennies@counter-strike.net]
To: rizzuh [mailto:rze@counter-strike.net]
Date: Thursday, June 26, 2003 10:00PM
Subject: Tops

A few months ago, IGN released their top 100 list:

http://top100.ign.com/

These were IGN's picks of the top 100 games *of all time*. It sparked just a little debate.

The biggest problem with these lists is always their subjective nature. Let's face it, no one can agree on the top 100 of anything, since individual tastes come into play. The closest thing anyone has come to an objective way of ranking games is Old Man Murray's infamous StC system. (http://www.oldmanmurray.com/features/39.html) Counter-Strike would score an easy 0 on that one.

As for IGN's list, Counter-Strike showed up on their list, which is commendable, but it was all the way down at #83—which is not.

As I write this at 10pm on a Thursday, over 67,000 people are playing Counter-Strike online. *Sixty-seven Thousand*. Battlefield 1942, in at #41, is being played by a comparatively minuscule 9,000.

There are lots of ways to account for this; Counter-Strike is easily played on less powerful computers, it's been around for a longer period, it's built on Half-Life, which everyone has. But let's face it, you and I both know Counter-Strike should be ranked much higher. It's in my (and I'm sure, your) top 10. And it can be argued that Battlefield wouldn't exist, or would be significantly different, if Counter-Strike had never been made.

Half-Life, which easily ranks as my favorite game of all time, only comes in at a meager #32. It isn't even the best FPS on the list—Goldeneye 007 takes that honor. Ok, it's a good game, but better than Half-Life? More important to the FPS scene? More influential on games, in general?

There's a lot to argue about with IGN's list. So let's do it. On my list, Counter-Strike is easily in the top 5. Where should Counter-Strike have ranked on your list? And how would your top 10 look?
From: rizzuh [mailto:rze@counter-strike.net]
To: asspennies [mailto:asspennies@counter-strike.net]
Date: Thursday, June 26, 2003 11:30 PM
Subject: Selective memory

I can understand someone having a favorite song.

I cannot understand someone having 100 favorite songs and assigning each one of them a rank.

Top game lists are unoriginal replacements for editorial content or anything resembling an interesting read. The only reason I read IGN's top 100—and I gather a lot of people do the same thing—is so I could mock their horrible, horrible choices. There's absolutely no way someone could take their "rankings" seriously.

When I have about thirty kids with some over-the-hill Mexican woman, I'll probably have a favorite kid. Obviously the hot teenage daughter; but I'm not going to have a 15th favorite. Really, once you leave the top 10 on any gaming list, the rest of the titles should be grouped into a massive 11th spot since the no single man can sort through all of these titles and select a non-arbitrary order.

IGN, however, consists of super men. And there are plenty of them! They have plenty of super men who have fairly and objectively sorted through gaming titles. Even then, they have "opinions" and make "judgments." An imperfect system is one that puts flash over substance. With that in mind, here's my list:

1)No One Lives Forever
2)Deus Ex
3)Half-Life
4)No One Lives Forever 2
5)Uh...
6)Photoshop 7

Hey look: This has steadily turned idiotic.

You take aim at Battlefield 1942 and I'll follow up on this game. Despite being fun and fairly well-received, it obviously has no where near the following of Counter-Strike. Then again, it's not like masses of people are always right.

The thing is that BF1942 is just... Well, it won't last. EA isn't even giving it time to grow as—just when the map editor is released (and keeping in mind that there is still no SDK for mod makers)—they have announced Battlefield Vietnam. Five years from now when IGamEGamers.comMepotN makes its definitive top 100 games of all time list, BF1942 won't be on it. I think the only reason BF1942 is on the list is because it's such a recent title.

Who knows if CS will be on it? Multiplayer games are the now. Can you canonize CS and make it into some sort of classic gaming experience? Keeping all of this in mind, IGN deserves credit for even including Counter-Strike on their list. The game has had a significant impact on the first person shooter genre and IGN is one of the few publications to actually notice this. I still think of CS as a modification in many ways, but its retail debut and the professional development behind it set it apart from "Q3CaptureTeamFortress 4.3b."

Counter-Strike—or any other multiplayer game—wouldn't appear on my top games list. I've spent more time with it than anything. It is my favorite game, but at the same time I recognize that a multiplayer title can't compare to a single player game in terms of story, set-up, and memorable experiences. Once CS fades out, you can't get that CS experience. Gamers can easily relive a Zelda game using an emulator or original hardware. And while a single player game is crafted by developers, a multiplayer one is crafted largely by its community.

So, CS is the most fun I've ever had with a game but I wouldn't include on my list. I guess this is what I mean when I say top game lists are stupid.