What, where do you get that? Any publicly conveyed copies of gpl-licensed software must make their source code available, and be published under the same license. This is true regardless of modifications.
I could be wrong and I’m more then welcome to being proven that. But wouldn’t this be like asking me to redistribute the whole process of running ZSNES on linux? Seems pretty infeasible.
folks thought the same for the Genesis and Atari flashbacks but some tinkering found they were using FOSS emulation. IMO FOSS projects should start charging companies that use their products dependent on scale.
I assume most FOSS emulators have a non-commercial license, so if a company is using it to make money they are already violating the law, but who is gonna go after Nintendo for that?
If they had that, they’d no longer be FOSS and instead “source available” and half the community will raise the pitch forks. Best FOSS licence to protect against this sort of thing is AGPL because it’s toxic for corporations. But even that could be used in this case if they had the source on the same computer imo (IANAL though)
In this comment: Someone who is not familiar with the history of Nintendo selling pirated versions of their own games and ripping off pirate emulators then passing them as their own.
There will be ways to force your Windows 10 machine to pull down the continued updates meant for government and extended support contracts, just like there was for Windows 7.
Not a good or particularly safe way to keep your PC, and even the extended updates will stop eventually, but worth knowing in case anyone is afraid of making the full switch to Linux.
The Overwatch 2 update was pretty widely hated, so that might be clouding things. I supposed they did put Destiny 2 on there though. It is for sure weird to not see FFVII or an Arkham game. Or hell, Dishonored.
@thingsiplay@DdCno1 this list is actually wild. Random flash in the pan games high up but also a bunch of evergreen classics and old games that were revolutionary but largely unplayed today while also missing some of the most popular games on PC. Not sure what this list is supposed to be except maybe engagement bait.
All lists like this are incredibly subjective and by definition about engagement. I wouldn’t call it bait, but it was definitely created for engagement. That is not necessarily a bad thing since it can generate some fun discussions.
I’m not AI and I really dislike Factorio. I would say it is a bit of a niche game, but Rimworld also seems niche. Probably just not to anyone at PC Gamer’s taste.
Factorio is not for everyone, but it’s also one of the all stars of its genre. With the upcoming expansion in a couple weeks, it’ll probably eat another few hundred of my free hours over the next few months, and I know I’m not alone on this one.
True, OK everyone has its own preferences but indeed ff7 missing looks surprising, didn’t see lot of city builders (not mentioning wolfenstein, fable, populous, Dk…)
Regarding the FF games, I think it’s actually fine considering some of the more notable omissions. Most FF games didn’t get released anywhere near when they were relevant.
Sure, but how do you explain then Persona 5 Royal then on place 5 then? Final Fantasy 7 Remake got higher ratings, I think sold more and was surely more popular on PC, right? Red Dead Redemption 2 was also released on PC when it anywhere near its initial relevance. Metal Gear Solid 3 or Mass Effect Legendary Edition is even worse, because those games are much much older.
Also Portal behind Slay the Spire? Team Fortress 2 34 places behind Hunt: Showdown 1896? So strange! These Valve games were revolutionary and defined their genre with huge number of players and fanbase.
My point is just, that the given argumentation here doesn’t hold up to me. But that is what you get if you ask people for their opinion. It’s just that and it will always surprise you.
The list is honestly bizarre and the rank placements are all over the place. Most of your later examples of that I completely agree with. I just think that the mainline FF games not being on the top 100 list of PC games is fairly understandable, and I say that as a huge fan of the series. Ironically, FF14 is quite literally the only game in the series that I haven’t played.
What if I told you I find Valheim to be just fine, so I am surprised it is on this list? The subjectiveness of enjoying a game is a very large spectrum
Honestly, there were a TON of games I was surprised to find on this list, but Valheim was not one of them.
Multiplayer games are especially vulnerable to the subjectiveness of enjoyment because not everybody has the same set of friends or experiences with their friends in the game, assuming they played with friends at all.
That said, I’ve been playing games for decades and I would put forth that even single player Valheim with no access to multiplayer would deserve to be much higher than the 100 placement on this terrible list.
I would say that it’s offensive to put Early Access games on those lists. It clouds people’s judgment as they are valued with different standards and are expected to get better (especially if more people support the game). Any game that’s not fully released is a 0/10 in my book even if they were my favorite games.
Valheim was a better game in it’s first version than a lot of the games that are “complete” on this list.
I get where you’re coming from, and certainly some games don’t deserve to even be sold in their “early access” state. However, I think saying none of them should count at all is a bit ridiculous.
Valheim offered hundreds of hours worth of entertainment even in the early versions and has only improved since then. It only takes up 1gb of data through some miracle, and runs fairly well even on the steam deck.
Honestly it puts many of the other titles on the list to shame. Ignoring it because the dev wants to continue providing MORE free updates instead of calling the game finished and then charging for “DLC” is not a reason to punish the studio, if anything they should be looked to as an example of what other devs should do.
I prefer 2 to 1, primarily because the choices are not as blatantly good/evil and it feels like they have more impact. I also think the character creation and items are more fleshed out. Just a shame it didn’t get the polish it deserved at launch. 1 definitely feels more “Star Wars”-y, though.
Prey kinda kicked off the immersive genre. I think the thing folks are not getting is that this is not a best game of all time list, even though they say “100 best.” It is a “100 Favorite Games of the PC Gamer Staff” list. It is going to be different than anyone’s exact taste. There are a ton of games on there that I think would not be in my top 100, but I am not mad or confused about it. It’s just something someone else is into.
On the other hand, how is doom even on the list? This isn’t a ‘most influential games’ list. Surely the 10th best game in 2024 isn’t Doom 1993? Their scoring system (Quality 60%, Importance 15%, Hotness 15%, Playability 10%) makes sense to me, but how they assign those scores is baffling.
Take doom and doom eternal for example:
Doom 1993: Q 8.41 - I 9.99 - H 6.81 - P 6.81
Doom eternal: Q 8.00 - 7.45 - H 6.09 - P 8.45
How is cardboard enemies, simplest damage mechanics, story made of 2 still pictures and exposition text, and single axis camera control higher quality than any modern shooter? And in what universe could a 30 year old game be called hot??
I don’t have strong feelings about level design. I think the levels I enjoyed the most were in other episodes. If this is about the keys I’m neutral about them, I like exploring everywhere anyways so I’d just collect them on the way. I don’t know what else to say
I feel the same way for smb. It has historical importance but it’s not up to the quality standards of today. I like the digital movement, feels better than the analogue stick in nwerer games
I’m a massive nerd for level design, and in my mind massive sprawling (especially proceedurally generated) maps/levels are a scourge on modern gaming.
I don’t think it’s hugely controversial, but I view E1M1 as possibly one of the best levels ever designed. But then again I also view Doom as more like a dungeon crawler RPG that just happens to be first person and real time, so who knows?
I think I also tend to be more into simpler games than ones with too many bolted on systems, which might also be why I tend to favour older ones (or indie ones).
Maybe that’s the point? Newer Doom games aren’t especially top tier FPSs, and you can find better examples of them (Bioshock (not so modern anymore), the alien-dinosaur-robot spaceship thing, and probably others). So they don’t make the list, and then Doom holds the classic place and genre defining status. (Hexen and Strife were never gonna make the list).
I agree that Super Mario Bros could do with a new lick of paint (and think Nintendo has given it more than a few of them) to bring it up to par. Doom, I’m less sure needs updated graphics, but I don’t think it’d hurt if it kept everything else the same.
(Favourite Doom levels are probably E1M8, E2M9, and some D2 and TNT and Plutonia levels I can’t call to mind off the top of my head.)
I’ve come to the conclusion I’m incredibly biased on this matter and also that you’re entitled to your own opinion, and appreciate that you’ve responded kindly and patiently.
I see, I don’t consciously think about the map/level design when playing something so my opinion of doom comes from its mechanics and presentation, both of which are lacking in comparison to what indie boomer shooters have today.
find better examples of them (Bioshock
I don’t know if I played it wrong or something but I really didn’t like bioshock 1. It lasted like twice as long as it was fun and as time passed enemies just got spongier. Ammo is super scarce in the beginning and super common at the end. Shooting not very satisfying. The existence of the elemental gun. Bioshock 2 was much better imo
I fully understand someone thinking x game deserves to be there instead of y but I think this is a great list that spans most genres and serves as a wonderful stepping stone for exploration within gaming.
If I give this list to someone who doesn’t know yet, what kind of games they like, this list will show them great games from all major “eras” and all kinds of dev studio sizes/budgets. And once they have played, say, KotoR 2 (since it’s in the same list that recommends new and good games like Baldur’s Gate 3, they are more likely to check out other old but great games like Gothic 1 and 2 (and, of course, KotoR 1).
The thing for me wasn’t so much the game choice but the placement. It feels like they took a big bag of 100 of the best games and randomly picked them out one at a time. If you start to ask is Y really better than X on this list then it starts to make less and less sense.
CS2 being ranked higher than Siege and Fortnite is really misguided. It’s been almost the same game since before the internet. Siege was a welcome improvement on the same formula. Fortnite continues to innovate with new games and new modes, all appealing to a wide range of people and skill groups. Even its main mode sees drastic changes with each season. It keeps things fresh, which is vital for a live service game like those three.
pcgamer.com
Najstarsze