Game of the Year

Well, although I didn't play Oblivion for ages as I didn't have a suitable system for a long time, just on hours played alone, it's my undoubted Game of the Year.
 
I didn't really like Oblivion and I was still mostly playing Civ 4 in 2006. The only other game that stands out from that year is Prey. One of the best and most original FPS I've ever played.
 
Nobody voting for medieval 2 TW for 2006? I think it is the best TW ever.
 
Just gonna ask civver: most people already gave 2005 answers even if you didn't green lit it. So could you just tally up those votes and give an official "opening" to 2006, before more unorder ensues?

I pretty much take weekends off and I was sick yesterday so no update, but votes are tallied. There's no set rules of when to move to the next year, just when activity dies down I usually tally. So it's totally fine with me if you guys jump ahead.

Civ4 is runaway winner for 2005 with 7 votes. A bunch of others with a single vote each.

Hmm.
I'm not going to dig through 27 pages here, so can anyone tell me if this thread has any rules on expansions ? Or games that come out broken and are only patched into a playable state the next year ?

I'm also bummed to have missed 2004. I just realized that's the year Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines came out and it's one of my favorite games of all time (with the fan patches).

The rules are kind of as you see fit. If you just absolutely have to vote for an expansion I'm not going to discount your vote, but it'll probably not win because most people don't vote that way. I personally won't vote for expansions, I consider the expansion in totality of my initial vote, cus hey, hindsight is 20/20 and this is a looking back on things kind of thread. The only thing I would like to clarify is for release dates, please use the NA/EU dates, whichever is first, and hopefully they'll be close enough to be same year! I don't want us voting for some game release in Japan that didn't come to the US for three years, or voting for the same game multiple times based on different dates. That doesn't happen much any more though. Same thing with platforms, don't vote for a game twice cus it re-released on nintendo 3ds or digital or something like ocarina of time did.
 
Alright

for 2006 I'll vote the Legend of Zelda Twillight Princess
even though I only played it years later
 
2006 is a weird year for me, not hard though, I know hands down what my winner is. It's weird cus there are a ton of significant games I have but haven't played enough or dislike.


I hate, hate, hate oblivion, but I never tried to mod it. I played like 6 hours, hated the combat, the first person point of view you're forced into or can't click objects well enough, and got stuck on some part, hated the leveling. And then never went back to try to fix it. Of course this was like in 2012 when I bought it for $5.


Lego Star Wars II - the original trilogy release in 2006. It was awesome. But not quite enough for my top vote. Blowing up the death star in a lego x-wing was pretty cool.


I own total war medieval and heroes of might and magic 5 but haven't actually played either sadly... just part of my never ending backlog. So can't vote there.


Star Wars: Empire at war came out this year. It seems good but I honestly only played it a few hours before getting sidetracked yet again.


Neverwinter nights 2 - I liked this game, seemed like an interesting story, but ultimately the d&d rules killed it for me. I didn't understand what I was doing, I kept trying to play it like I did dragon age origins and it is nothing like that. Most rpg/action titles are just d&d inspired in that they do "rolls" for hits but they're really just percentages and they use similar stats and classes. NVN2 is like simulated d&d actual table top play with d20 rolls and stats and rounds of combat. In reality it's turn based, it just happens quickly so it appears real time. I kept moving my guys around and wondering why I was dying to these attacks of opportunity until someone explained it to me lol. Again I played this in like 2011 or something, not at release. It would probably be a really good game if I followed a leveling guide and learned what to do.


Zelda Twilight Princess is another one of those games I never finished and I don't know why! I got about 4 hours in, got busy with real life, never came back. Does that mean it sucks that it couldn't draw me back to it? Idk, maybe lol. I'd like to go back and finish sometime.


Also wii released this year, there has to be a shout out to Wii sports just for the bowling! That game was awesome! I mean motion control has kind of lost it's niche, it seemed amazing at the time, now VR is the new hotness. But when Wii first came out bowling was like the only really cool thing you wanted to try on it with your friends. We used to have people over just to check out the wii.


However my pick is completely easy for me. Though I played this when it was released on wii six months late in 2007, the original release was september 2006. It is The Godfather video game! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Godfather_(2006_video_game)


The wii version I guess was a little different, had a couple extra leveling perks/skills. But the main difference was the motion control. You aimed with the controllers and could swing them to hit people and pull of execution moves. Like to strangle a guy you shook both controllers together. I guess it was kind of silly but it was fun.


The game followed the Godfather movie plot where you're a new character not in the movies, but everything you do follows the movie plot. Like you have to go protect Don Corleone in the hospital from assassins and stuff. It was open world a lot like GTA series. You could go into various shops and demand they pay you protection money and then you'd take them over and they'd pay you every week.


To get them to pay you you had to intimidate them first. This part was cool, cus you would slap them around or break stuff in their shop and there was a little intimidation meter showing how much they'd pay. If you intimidated them more they'd pay more, but everyone had a breaking point where they'd lose it and not pay you at all and call the cops. And then you had to run or kill them and come back next week when they respawned lol. So the trick was push them as far as possible to get the most money. And then all had a special weakness like breaking stuff, physical threats, gun threats or whatever that would net you extra money.


Then you'd take the money and go find weapon dealers and do various side missions. Plenty of weapons to chose from like pistols or tommy guns or shotguns with various upgrades. the leveling was straightforward, get experience for killing enemy mobsters but you got more if you pulled of various executions or headshots and stuff vs just shooting them. Every level you got a point to spend on a perk. Some were passive and would like give you more money from shops. Others made you stronger or aim better or gave special abilities. You could also go buy safehouses and find a bunch of other things. I'm not sure if it's as deep as GTA San Andreas or GTA4, I didn't play those, but for me it was perfect amount of free rein combined with plot and story direction. It was just darn fun. I played it a lot, probably around the 100 hour mark.
 
The game that had me most excited that year was Empire at War. Mostly because it looked like it would be a more modern, better take on Star Wars grand strategy than Rebellion. Instead what we ended up with was a galactic map as an excuse for RTS-style combat, where the game is pre-set to actively punish you (by calculating higher casualties) if you don't want to go through the hassle of fighting tactical battle after tactical battle.

Some modders (eg, the Thrawn's Revenge team) have done a formidable job making the game better, but even with all their best work, the game remains what it is: a game where the grand strategy aspects merely serve as an excuse to walk from one tactical combat to another.

Would give Empire at War "Disappointing game of the year" in a landslide.

Total War, of course, largely has the same problem.

Really, of all the options, I'd have to give the win to Oblivion. It was far from a perfect game, but it was fun, and kept me entertained - brewing potions, if nothing else.
 
Oblivion was okay, it was fun, I enjyoed it, it has a lot of great mods, and some great sights to see, a few NPCs who are memorable not because of how bad they are (there were tonnes of those) but because they were at least decent or funny, and some good quests.

It has aged terribly though, and really isn't *that* great of a game overall. I certainly wouldn't recommend it to anyone anymore.

The GodFather game was fun, not bad. Prey was also a good game, though I didn't play it until years later.

Medieval 2: Total War is probably the best one that actually came out that year though. It had its flaws, and bugs, but it was the last Total War game that could truly be modded and it has some amazing mods.
 
RoN was (as I remember) primarily marketed on the RTS aspect (albeit a more civ-like RTS). I don't even think I was aware of the Risk-style campaigns until I actually played the game. It generally delivered what it promised.

Whereas EAW and (to a lesser degree, at least for Shogun) TW put a great deal of emphasis on the strategic map, but then mostly use those as excuses for tactical combat.
 
EDIT on voting mechanics:

2005 - Civilization IV
Civilization IV - 7 votes
SWAT 4 - 1 vote
Jade Empire - 1 vote
Black and White 2 - 1 vote
Battlefield 2 - 1 vote
Lego Star Wars - 1 vote
Pyschonauts - 1 vote
Age of Empires III - 1 vote
Hey i voted for X3:Reunion! Minority rights are not being respected here. I will report it to UN :gripe:
 
I'll join the Medieval II bandwagon for 2006. Didn't get around to playing it until 2008, but it's a fun enough game that I still played a complete campaign (plus a bit) in 2015. While it had its quirks, in the end it was still a really fun game, with a decent amount of replay value.
 
After playing Skyrim I decided to pick up Oblivion. And, I think, objectively speaking it is a pretty awful game. I get that its a sand box, but honestly i dont see why that is supposed to make it good. I think Bethesda get an unfair reputation as the best the genre has to offer. Their only game i have really really enjoyed was Skyrim. Fallout 3 was totally awful. In fact, i have not really enjoyed fallout since fallout 2. A good sandbox game IMO is Grand theft Auto. Its not a true sandbox, in the sense that you can see all characters all the time. But it is infinitely more believable than the cardboard characters and poor story lines that Bethesda churn out year on year. The only reason i think their reputation is so high is because modders basically fix most of their nonsense and thus improve the game and give it lasting appeal. Oblivion looks passable if you can be bothered to spend 4 hours trying to mod it.
 
I just found this thread and see that I missed out on some good years. For 2006 I also need to go with Medieval II: Total War. In many ways this was the peak of the series. It took the structure of Rome and constructed a more dynamic world with more replayability. The castle/city choice was a simple and fun addition. And who can forget the hokey voice acting, MEIN KAISER? The game did desperately need its patches to fulfill its potential, though. It also allowed for The Third Age and Broken Crescent, which would rank high on any mod list. This game is still worth revisiting every few years.

Honorable mention to Twilight Princess.

I just got Skyrim last year and played it. It's the only Bethesda game I've played. So is it worth picking up Oblivion now at this late hour?
 
It's worth playing for historical value and for Patrick Stewart, Sean Bean and Terence Stamp. Interestingly, unlike Morrowind and Skyrim, you aren't some ancient hero of legend, but rather a fellow recruited by the Emperor because he kept dreaming about you.

Definitely get the DarN UI mod though - it changes the Xbox HUD into something far better for PCs and it's very easy to install.
 
Yeah, getting Oblivion first and *then* Skyrim probably makes me a lot more favorable to the earlier.
 
Most things with the benefit of five and a half years of technology and experience are better than their predecessors. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom