🚀 go-pugleaf

Darin Johnson <darin_@_usa_._net> once tried to test me with:

> Rikard Peterson <trumg...@bigfoot.com> writes:
> 
>> I notice that Grim Fandango is also missing, which is another great 
>> oversight. Or what about the original Adventure? Or Myst? Or Tetris? I 
>> could mention many more that deserve to be on such a list.
> 
> I think there's a tendency, not just in games, to have current titles
> show up in the "top" lists that are based on fan votes or popularity.
> Partly it's because those are still fresh in people's minds, but
> also because there are a lot of people who firmly believe that newer
> is better.

Newer usually IS better. In gaming. Because every new game at least has the 
opportunity to see what worked before and what didn't. And plus they have 
the technological edge.

> Gene Siskel was on the radio today regarding his book about great
> movies, and one of his judgements about what makes a movie great is
> whether you would feel bad if you could never see a certain movie ever
> again.  The same could be true for computer games.  I wouldn't shed
> a tear if I never played KOTOR again, but I'd be disappointed if I
> could never manage to get Grim Fandango or Planescape to work in the
> future.

I disagree. Games aren't like movies. Movies aren't so limited by 
technology. I might have really thought that Castle Wolfenstein was 'teh 
shit' back in the day, but now it would suck ass.

-- 

Knight37

The gene pool could use a little chlorine.