[manasecret]

Herein lies (part of) the lameness of top 100 lists that DH brought up. How do you compare strategy games to FPS games, to platformers, to rhythm games, to fighting games, to sports games etc. etc. etc.

I agree, I think more strategy games should be on the list, as they are easily my favorite genre of game considering how much time I have sunk into them. I also agree that both Civ II and Civ IV should be on the list. But that begs the question, which one comes before the other? How do you rank innovation (II) vs. perfection (IV)? If innovation, then why not Civ I?

So not only are there problems comparing games between genres, and games within the same genre, but even games within the same series. Multiply popular game series of, oh, let's say 500, by the sequels within each series of let's say an average of 2, and you get 1000 games that could easily make a top 100 list that are nearly impossible to compare to each other.

Not ranting on you Mr. S, but just on the absurdity I'm realizing of these lists.