A couple years ago I used to do these threads where Sup Forums would vote on vidya throughout the year and we'd have...

A couple years ago I used to do these threads where Sup Forums would vote on vidya throughout the year and we'd have long, interesting discussions on each game for months until the closest thing to a consensus could be achieved, and by the end of the year we'd have a pretty good image of Sup Forums's opinion on dozens of games.

Given how good this year seems to have been so far, I figured it might be a good time to revive this. For now we can nominate vidya for discussion and get some very early results. Rankings WILL change right up until the very end of the year, and the point is actually good discussion about vidya instead of rampant shitposting. If you think game X deserves rank Y, give actual reasons why and debate.

>Stellar
Nier Automata
Prey

>Great
Persona 5
Breath of the Wild

>Good
Nioh

>Bad
Mass Effect Andromeda

>Given how good this year seems to have been so far
yeah what the fuck, we got an entire good game.
when was the last time that happened? 2014?

>Stellar
My favorite game
>Unplayable
Your favorite game

>inb4 this thread is flooded with shitposters who claim that Nier Automata was shit
>inb4 2B fappers flood the thread with their shitposting
>inb4 everyone drowns in skub

>Okay
Resident Evil 7
Gravity Rush 2

>Average
Halo Wars 2
For Honor
Horizon

>Bad
Yooka Laylee
Torment

That's why I generally only did one or two per week, sometimes nothing for a few weeks and always at different times to get different posters. Sometimes there's be a whole lot of shit, sometimes some pretty good discussion, especially the further into the year it went when people got more into it I suppose.

...

Are you going to just update this after every post or what?

>Unplayable
Breath of the Wild
Nioh
Prey
Persona 5
Nier
Halo Wars 2
For Honor
Resident Evil 7
Horizon Zero Dawn
Wildlands

I would move P5 to Stellar and also put Yakuza 0 there. I would also consider dropping Nioh to okay.

oh we're not even debating this?

stellar- Animation Throwdown The quest for cards

Nioh is good enough to be in good.

Not with EVERY post, but I'm taking everything into account and things will get moved around regularly though for sure.

We're debating, I prefer having things on the image for starters.

Yakuza 0 to Stellar?

Didn't play Zelda or Nier yet.

Stellar:
Persona 5, Prey, Yakuza 0

Great:
Resident Evil 7, Styx: Shards of Darkness

Good:
Nioh, Gravity Rush 2, Little Nightmares

Average:
Horizon Zero Dawn

Bad:
Outlast 2

I haven't played the DLC, but I don't feel comfortable putting the base game in that ranking. I liked it well enough, but a lot of it was forgettable, and for so much to be forgettable in a game of it's length, I don't feel like it deserves to be place in Good.

Yeah, Y0 should be in Stellar. Honestly, even thoguh I prefer P5, I do think it's the one game that deserves that spot more than any other game that came out this year.

I'm second in Nioh should be in good tier. The criteria mentions enjoyable games for those that appreciate the genre. It's not up on par with say Bloodborne, but it's definitely the best offshoot souls-like

>this tier list so far

nu Sup Forums please leave

>couple hours of entertainment
>Nioh

What? Move it at least one category up.

>Stellar
Persona 5, Nier Automata, Yakuza 0
>Good
Nioh, Gravity Rush 2, Resident Evil 7
>Average
Horizon Zero Hour, Yooka Laylee
>Bad
Mass Effect Andromeda

I haven't played the rest.

That's fair enough, I'm not saying that it shouldn't be in Good, I just thought it was worth considering dropping it. Also, is Nier Automata deserving of being in Stellar. I haven't actually played it yet because I want to play Drakengard and the first game before it, but I've heard enough criticism that I would expect it to be in Great, rather than Stellar.

I'll be moving it still but you should try saying why. Once we have a good amount of games on the list I'll start putting up strawpolls most likely but I'd also like to encourage debate.

For now I've added your new recommendations.

Done. Trying to get titles in for each of these as I go as well.

I should note it's less of a strict criteria and more of a general, broad description of the usual types of games that filter into those categories based on years of doing these lists. Like by the end of the year this list will probably have pretty close to 100 games on it going by past experience.

Well, Nier Automata is a good-average game the first 30 hours, with excellent music, somewhat good but increasingly annoying gameplay (until you learn to pull combos/use the right upgrades) and a story that is a bit weak and nonsensical (that forces you to play the first part of the game twice with a different character/perspective just to get to the second part, where the good stuff happens).

And then the second part of the game happens where Yoko Taro suddenly enters your room from your window and asks you to unzip your feels and bend over. That's where the game turns fucking Stellar with a capital S

I thought the first part was more like good-great, and the second part was Elder God Tier and one of the best experiences I've had with a game probably this century.

I think Prey is one of the most interesting games to come out in a long long time but is it really an instant classic?

Like Arkane's Arx Fatalis I feel I have to force myself to love it, and man when I get into it I have a blast but it's so rough around the edges.

Also the ending does suck, but so did System Shock 2's.

Prey, Nier, Persona 5 to great.
Tekken 7, Guilty Gear XRD Rev 2 to Stellar.

Hollow Knight in stellar

Honestly the ending really isn't that bad except for its execution, which was fairly lacking. But I definitely think it's worthy of that tier, it's a phenomenal game and pretty much on par with SS2 for most of its duration. I really do think it's pretty much an instant classic, even Sup Forums generally seems to love it at least those who've actually played it and aren't just shitposting.

>First part of the game was good-great
FITE ME BRUH

Neither of those games are out yet, user.
Added!

>p5
>stellar
No, fuck that. I would move everything out of stellar, since none of them were flawless.
Nier could've done secondary quests way better from gameplay point.
Prey has a dragging last third of the game and Persona 5 has pacing and direction problems all over the place. Doesn't help that most of the social links/confidants are shit as well even those of your teammates.

I'd put Snake Pass in good. Original idea and gets more fun the more you master the controls, but towards the end it gets really fucking annoying if you want to get all the collectibles.

>4 tiers for good games
>1 tier for bad games
What the fuck?
I'm just gonna used "Unplayable" for "very bad"
>Stellar
Hollow Knight
>Great
Prey
Persona 5
>Good
Nioh
>Bad
Nier Automata
Tales of Berseria
>Unplayable
Rain World
Strafe
Night in the Woods
Shantae Half-Genie Hero
Owlboy

>nier
>bad
Why?

Do you even have a system by which you're assigning games to tiers?
If so, first wait until everyone posts their ratings, then calculate the average for each game, and only then assign

I disagree with P5 being demoted. It's not perfect, but it's still excellent and is engaging throughout the whole thing, which is an impressive feat in a game of its length. What flaws it does have are overshadowed by how well it does everything else. It could have easily been a huge disappointmet, even if ti were good, because people had been waiting or it for so long, but I think the fact that people are so happy with it speaks to its quality. Sure, there are some who still think other entries in the series are better, but it seems there are few of them compared to the people who are happy with it.

see

Is that your thread? Or something you agree with?

The latter

>Stellar
Breath of the Wild

>Great
Dreamfall Chapters
MK8:D

>Good
Yooka-Laylee

>MK8:D
Mortal Kombat 8 Happy Face Edition?

tiers for good games
tier for bad games
2 tiers for great, 2 for good, 1 for average, and 2 for bad. There's a larger difference between good-great-stellar than anything between bad-unplayable. I don't think it's necessary for another tier between them.

>I would move everything out of stellar, since none of them were flawless.
It doesn't say they have to be flawless, though for that matter, I think the ranking system is a little bit off. If a game is 3x3 worthy then that would make it worthy of being one of somebody's all time favorite games, which is putting higher praise on it than saying it's GOTY-worthy.

I think that the top rank should be for instant classics/masterpieces, 2nd rank for 3x3-worhty games and 3rd for GOTY-worthy games.

I wish.
Ba-bing Wahoo Racing 8: Cashgrab Edition

It's the best JRPG since Suikoden 2.

>Good
Tales of Berseria
>Okay
Ghost Recon Wildlands

Stylistically? Absolutely. It's one of the best examples of stylizing ui and the world around to fit a certain theme.
Direction? Hell no.

>There's a larger difference between good-great-stellar than anything between bad-unplayable
Literally the other way around.
Not to mention that technical difficulties should be a completely different rating matter entirely

At the moment I'm just adding games in with minor adjustments for a while. Eventually I'll be adding strawpolls when there's a large number of games in the image, and those will form the basis of where games sit but the threads are to serve for high-level discussion which also affect placement. The point is less anonymous polling and strict numbers but a more or less discussion-oriented approach to ranking. In the past I believe I've done a good job at this, there were no complaints about the approach once Sup Forums settled in. Calculating averages alone just allows for people to bomb polls with 10s or 0s like on metacritic, making it pointless.

The board needs more good discussion instead of shitposting, that's why I do these. If you want a game to get into a certain tier you need to really make your case and discuss it well. Once the image is filled in adequately it'll generally fall to discussion to change places, or high numbers of votes. Right now it's more malleable.

How about dont add any games and fix the tier list

How about tiers organized as:

>Stellar
>Great
>Good
>Average
>Bad
>Awful
>Unplayable

Truth to be told, having both good and average is redundant...and so is having both Awful and Unplayable.

>having both good and average is redundant
Are you retarded?

>having both good and average is redundant

>Stellar
>Good
>Average
>Okay
>Mediocre
>Shit
Fixed it for uou

Yes, i meant to say okay and average.
On my defence, i do post on Sup Forums

>>Average
>>Okay
>>Mediocre
Average and Mediocre are literally the exact same thing, user.

Stellar
Good
Average
Bad
Unplayable

>Good
>Mediocre
>Shit

Keep it simple

Sorry not my first language, I've mistaken that word

That's too narrow, many games lumped into the same tier will have pretty varied quality. 6-7 is a better sweet spot between too many and too few, while providing a solid basis for more accurate rankings.

Stellar
Great
Good
Average
Bad
Unplayable

You know what has not had its dick sucked enough?
Breath of the Wild.

>Dreamfall Chapters
>MK8:D

Not sure how to handle re-releases. MK8D isn't a just a straight port as far as I know, is it? And isn't Dreamfall Chapters' 2017 release just a complete edition?

Curious how anons want to handle stuff like this.

Woops didn't mean to include that image, I guess I accidentally pasted it.

For now I've got these tiers until we can decide on a better tiered system.

Player Unknown Battlegrounds for Okay tier. It's good for a few hours with friends

Average tier then, didn't see you changed the ranks

...