IGN's decade list

[charlesr]

Batman begins is a terrible film - they tried to make it all serious and dark but then twinned it with a laughable plot. I was switching between tears of sadness and tears of laughter the whole way through. But it was Radio 1 Listener's film of the year when it came out. Goes to show I'm getting old or something The dark knight wasn't much better, but at least the action scenes were well thought through. Rescue Dawn was better than anything on that list and starred Bale - hugely tense / a fair amount of action / gorgeous natural scenery (not constant cgi).

Games list looks pretty believeable although I've barely played anything on it....

[Guts]

I personally hated Fallout 3, I feel as if I am the only person in the world who could see it was a horrible game.

You're not.

It's not a horrible game, just a truly mediocre one, certainly nowhere near the greatest games of all time or even last decade.

Sure, it has a lot of stuff in it. Too bad that 90% of that stuff is made out of copy-paste and boredom.

Mass Effect 1 or Dragon Age are both better western RPGs.

[sj33]

I personally would have put Oblivion in it's place. Fallout 3 is good, but it's setting is often it's worst enemy. For example, one of the really nice bits about Oblivion was the fact that the towns were packed with people, all with their daily routines. In fact, some of the quests even revolved around this. There was a noticable passage of time and a transition from day to night, and people would be getting on with their daily life in accordance to the time of day. It made it all feel quite 'alive'.

Due to the post-apoocalyptic setting of Fallout 3, they couldn't really do this, and it was noticable - everything felt rather lifeless, mainly because it actually was. I find it hard to fault the game for not being something it's not supposed to be, but I do prefer Oblivion as a result.

[Guts]

Due to the post-apoocalyptic setting of Fallout 3, they couldn't really do this, and it was noticable - everything felt rather lifeless, mainly because it actually was.

I think it's more to do with Bethesda being lazy.

It's easier to make dozens of generic dungeons with stuff to shoot than even a few well-developed and interesting settlements.

Fallout 2 (1998) had about 7 large cities and a few smaller towns with a LOT of braching quest-lines, NPCs to talk with etc.

Fallout 3 (2008) has 2(!) actual towns and a few small settlements with little to no quests in them.

That's just crap.

[sj33]

There certainly seemed to be much less to do. I was wandering around Oblivion for about 2 months, doing very little of the main plot... just wandering around the cities and villiages, speaking to people, doing quests and just generally exploring. I used to go to work and plan out what I would do next on the game when I go home.

In Fallout 3, everything seemed much more linear, one thing lead to another and so-forth, with little encouragement to explore. The game world was also a fraction of the size too, and it was all quite sparce and barren in between areas (though I suppose it is a wasteland).

I'm still interested in New Vegas though, going by the recent trailer, it looked like there's a bit more 'life' to things.

[Guts]

I'm still interested in New Vegas though, going by the recent trailer, it looked like there's a bit more 'life' to things.

Because it's being developed by Obsidian Entertainment (with a lot of talented people who worked on the original Fallout and Fallout 2) I'm willing to give the game a chance. At least it should have better writing and more interesting characters this time around.

[rmoxon]

IGN is full of geeky fan boys, which explains why all their favorite movies are based on comics or are Lord Of The Rings.

Not that any of those are bad movies really, If you were making a list of "best blockbusters" most would come near the top.

Personaly though I feel the games list is more annoying. For instance I dont like GTA games that much, but surely GTA 4 was a MASSIVE improvment over GTA3. So how can GTA3 be one of the best of the decade if the fourth one isnt? And they cant say its becuase it was a sequel, thats like saying Batman Begins Shouldnt have been in their list becuase Dark Knight was there too.

Fallout 3 is an unpolished turd as well really.

[rmoxon]

OHHHHHHH....

I just looked at the site, and we are all stupid. (or well I am)

Those lists only have one movie/game from each year in the last decade... Its the best from each year and then placed in the sites order of preference....

This actualy makes more sense now, its not actualy a top ten of the decade list.....

[prinnysquad]

All this anti-Fallout 3 talk... pfft, totally misses the mark. The development costs to avoid a supposed copy and paste game world would be astronomical, totally unrealistic. I found it a hugely enjoyable experience and one of the best games of recent years. The VATS system in particular was an excellent addition to the genre. There were plenty of distinctive areas, and, with the add-ons, sizeable diversity.

[spagmasterswift]

I'll save you the bother!

Films
10. Spider-Man
7. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
6. Batman Begins
4. Spider-Man 2
2. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
1. The Dark Knight

There's something wrong with this picture...where the **** is Spider-Man 3 and The Lord of the Rings: The One in the Middle?

I just looked at the site, and we are all stupid. (or well I am)

They got something right tho!

[mekanor]

There's something wrong with this picture...where the **** is Spider-Man 3

not on the list, exactly where it should be