2010-2019

But it is you contrarian shit

Most normies would pick something like Minecraft or Skyrim. Dark Souls is the contrarian pick.

Funny enough my top 3 are all listed
1. Dark Souls
2. RDR
3. Fallout NV with mods

Are you out of your mind? Dark Souls is consistently the most upboated choice on leddit in threads like this

2010's had some of the worst (2014) and best years (2017) in gaming, so I'm a bit divisive of what I think of it at the moment. However, it also introduced so much bullshit that will likely remain in the 2020's, like GaaS, Lootboxes, and microtransactions.
GOTD for me is BOTW
Worst GOTD is Sonic Boom: Rise of Lyric

Zelda breath of ths wild.
No not ironically

Link? I can't find a terribly popular thread at a glance but this one has Minecraft and TW3 plastered all over the top.
reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/co3bm0/what_would_you_say_is_the_game_of_the_decade/

>still the best multiplayer in 2019, tf2, wasn’t even released in this decade
youtu.be/2NJbRF4CgAA

Attached: 413DC52C-7EE2-40FF-9430-5B1A626A0EF1.jpg (474x567, 49K)

Witcher 3 GOTD no contenders.

best of each year
2010: Bayonetta OR Red Dead Redemption (tie)
2011: portal 2
2012: dustforce
2013: max payne 3
2014: shovel knight
2015: undertale
2016: ?
2017: Cuphead
2018: ?
2019: RE 2

GOTD is Bloodborne easily. I struggle to think of another game that combines its themes and story with gameplay in such an organic way.
Worst GOTD that I have played is probably FF XIII.

For gameplay?
Bloodborne/sekiro
Multiplayer?
Ping
Story?
TW3
GOTD?
Death stranding

Meh
Didn't like much of anything this decade, even in its " best " years I just never got catered to.

2010: Fallout New Vegas
2011: Portal 2
2012: Crusader Kings 2
2013: Puppeteer
2014: DKC Tropical Freeze
2015: The Witcher 3
2016: Doom
2017: Breath of the Wild
2018: Spiderman
2019: Doom Eternal

GOTD is probably Skyrim

What other game consistently gets ports & mods to this day

Minecraft.
Minecraft also spawned Battle Royale as a genre, normalized early access for games, and made crafting/base building popular mechanics.

>narrative focused titles
oh boy

2010: bayonetta
2011: dark souls
2012: dustforce
2013: GTA V
2014: alien isolation
2015: bloodborne
2016: Doom
2017: the end is nigh
2018: celeste
2019: RE 2 demake

2010: Red Dead Redemption
2011: Dark Souls
2012: Persona 4: Arena
2013: Metal Gear Rising
2014: Bayonetta 2
2015: Bloodborne
2016: Titanfall 2
2017: Sonic Mania
2018: Yakuza Kiwami 2
2019: Ace Combat 7
GOTD: Yakuza 0
Worst GOTD: Aliens: Colonial Marines

It was pretty good, all things considered.

Attached: 1533447217373.gif (560x315, 3.65M)

Really good decade, don't mind the nostalgia fags. Favourite is Dark Souls without a doubt.

This decade fucking sucks compared to 90s and 2000s, I cannot possibly comprehend how anyone could believe otherwise. This generation in particular is by far the worst in years.

With that said, Bloodborne is the best game of the decade., Dark Souls not far behind. Standout years are 2011, 2013, 2017.

>It literally spawned its own Genre
No, that's what Demon's Souls did.

it was better then the 2000s

>No Monster Girl Quest
What a gay list.

Rough start, great finish.

2010 was great, but it started rough otherwise

>2016: ?
I'd say Azure Striker Gunvolt 2.
But then again I don't really remember anything else from 2016.

Attached: Copen character select.png (369x240, 52K)

literally the opposite

What a fucking garbage decade. Microtransactions, lootboxes, broken games at launch, all this stupid cancerous shit that's only going to get worse going forward.

Best game: Super Mario Odyssey, I guess?
Worst game: Hitman Absolution

The gaming crash can't come soon enough honestly, I can't think of anything the large AAA companies (EA, Ubisoft, etc.) made that wasn't filled with this trash. I guess a good thing is that indies seem to be getting better and better and the mid sized games and console exclusive games are good.

>GOTD
Dark Souls
can't wait for Elden Ring

Attached: chosenundead-maddoxfanx.jpg (660x1020, 218K)

The rest of you are all fucking idiots and wrong.
>Best Game 2010
Deadly Premonition
>Worst Game 2010
Deadly Premonition
>Best Game 2011
inFamous 2
>Worst Game 2011
Dead Island
>Best Game 2012
Gravity Rush. Nothing else was good this year.
>Worst Game 2012
Silent Hill HD Collection, SH Downpour, RE6, RE Revelations, RE ORC, all those shitty FPS and TPS games, so much garbage.
I think DmC also came out this year, so defacto worst game 2012.
>Best Game 2013
Saints Row IV is the only good game I really remember from this year honestly.
>Worst Game 2013
Last of Us, GTAV, Beyond, Bioshock Infinite.
>Best Game 2014
Ground Zeroes I guess.
>Worst Game 2014
Ground Zeroes I guess.
>Best Game 2015
Bloodborne? Splatoon?
>Worst Game 2015
MGSV TPP, easily.
>Best Game 2016
Dragon Quest Builders
>Worst Game 2016
Literally everything else.
>Best Game 2017
Resident Evil 7 on the first playthrough.
Gravity Rush 2 had more lasting appeal though.
Danganronpa V3 had the most heart and meaning.
>Worst Game 2017
Breath of the Wild.
I've never been more bored when playing a Zelda game. Exploration just feels like a complete chore here, there's no actual dungeons, and it took me months to sludge my way through the game, when I beat multiple Zelda games in the past in a week because I was having so much fun. Maybe open world shit just isn't for me.
Guess that means I'll sleep on BotW2. Hope this open world fad the series has will die out.
>Best Game 2018
DBFZ had a lot of "I regonize it so I clapped" moments.
Other than that, wasn't much else.
>Worst Game 2018
God of War. Series was already over, why are we continuing it and taking away the appeal of "DMC but for casuals" and losing its unique cinematics.
>Best Game 2019
REmake 2 or DMCV. DQXI S might also make it here, have yet to play it.
>Worst Game 2019
So far, haven't played many bad games. I feel like Death Stranding will make it here though.
And here's my 3x3 for fun.

Attached: My NEW 3x3 that is a perfect square be fucking jealous holy shit imagine not making your 3x3 in pain (1196x1196, 3.31M)

There were a few gems at the start, but overall quality was much higher in the back half. It's like people are forgetting the dark ages from the late 2000s to the early 2010s when Western gaming was completely dead, and Japanese gaming was almost dead. Hell, SE never recovered.

western games were not completely dead in the late 2000s

They mostly were. It was when EA and Activision's bullshit was in full swing.

Only one game released in 2007 was by activation you liar

This post is so stupid that I don't even know how to respond to it.

GOTD : Death Stranding
Worst GOTD : Death Stranding

*activition

Please correct me

the way esports developed is so disappointing. sc2 was pretty solid aside from blizzard balancing and the first game to really bring esports into the global gaming spotlight combining the reach of organizers like GSL, Dreamhack, MLG, etc, but we haven't had any truly successful 1v1 games since it fell off and the scenes we have now are not nearly as good. the thing with sc2 was it was great for both local play or smaller tournaments like fighting games but still had the mass appeal (for its time) and online accessibility that bigger games have today. Modern esports scenes feel so distant from the average competitive player, or players in general really, and more targeted at selling merch and microtransactions to secondaries/spectators. Games like fortnite wouldn't even be played competitively if it wasn't being used as a publicity stunt for epic.

unrelated to that I feel like it's becoming problematic how graphically complex games are becoming. with how much you need to spend on things like assets companies are going to become more risk averse and focus more on building games as services to squeeze out more money on things that are confirmed successes.

Dark Souls, objectively. But if I had to pick my own GOTD, it would go to DX HR.

>FFXV
>Persona 5
>Nier: A
Holy fuck this is suicide levels of terrible taste

no one cares lawl

Pretty good decade.

Attached: 3x32010s.jpg (900x900, 293K)

>DKC Tropical Freeze
ridiculously based

>2010-2015
I'll be honest, I fell out of gaming a lot in this time period so I don't remember what came out when. I know Portal 2 and Dark Souls were both 2011. DK Tropical Freeze was the single best thing on the Wii U. This board gets insanely triggered by The Last of Us but it really was a landmark, not GOTD though. Undertale was fucking great, ignore the cancerous fanbase.
>2016
The Witness
>2017
Breath of the Wild, sorry faggots. Fuckload of good games this year though.
>2018
What a disappointing year. Celeste because all the AAAs sucked.
>2019
So far, it's Fire Emblem: Three Houses

Demon's Souls was a really niche game. DaS was the game that popularized and cemented the genre. Also, DeS doesn't even count for GOTD, retard.

>POPULAR BAD
Jesus Christ kill yourself edgy retard.

The only retard here is you considering your total lack of reading comprehension.

endless trash
i wont even consider upgrading my PC, or getting a console next gen its not worth it anymore just emulate PS2 games or get a legit PS2

Eat shit faggot.

You started the series with DaS and your opinion doesn't count.

This post reeks of nintentyke.

>Ride to Hell: Retribution
youtube.com/watch?v=Hll0r6HD0H4&feature=youtu.be&t=128
Machinima nuked all of IG's old videos but 2:08 is all you need to know about Ride to Hell. Easy GOTD

>What a disappointing year. Celeste because all the AAAs sucked.
You're a fucking faggot and a retard
>RDR2
>God of War
>Spider-Man
>SSBU

I feel the 2010s were overall better than the 2000s. The 2000s surely had higher highs with games like Deus Ex, Warcraft 3, Shadow of the Colossus, Vampire Bloodlines etc. that modern games just can't match but the 2010s lineup simply has more great games.

>GOTD?
Dark Souls without a shred of doubt.

Dark Souls.
Close contenders are Mario Odyssey, Portal 2 and Bloodborne. Not sure if games from 2020 will count but if they do BotW 2 might be a contender, too.

I'm sick of seeing games becoming esports simply because they are popular. Coin flip simulators(hearthstone) simply do not belong as an esport. They can bea spectators game, but no way should it in any form be considered an esport.

Having Overwatch shoved down my throat also pissed me off, but at least that can be somewhat competitive.

This. There were some nice highlights here and there but mostly pretty boring.

>2013: Max Payne
Nah. Good gameplay but the constant interruptions in gameplay and terrible story kill it. I'd put Revengeance or even Paper's Please as goty.

I played all of those except RDR2.
>God of War
It was enjoyable and certainly gorgeous, but I think it was trying too hard to be The Last of Us and didn't have its own identity. The camera gimmick was inventive for storytelling (if only the menu were seamless too), but often frustrating for gameplay. Probably my 2018 runner-up nonetheless
>Spider-Man
It's Arkham x Ubisoft. Not much to say here, I'm pretty fatigued from these games, and it didn't surpass HZD or BotW for me. Makes you feel like Spider-Man.
>SSBU
More fun than SSB4 but World of Light was boring and online is awful.

arch.b4k.co/v/search/image/52pXKK1h4rmjVDrpQ8J5Og/
This faggot will never know who you are and will never give a single fuck about you. Why do you idolize him?

>GOTD?
Dark Souls or Bloodborne. Both games made me remember why I even like games in the first place.
Worst GOTD?
Anthem or Andromeda.

Pure trash. Of that list, Super Meat Boy is just barely playable, Dark Souls is good, Bloodborne is alright, Nier: Automata was acceptable, and every other game on that list is irredeemable garbage, and anyone who enjoyed any of them is a complete fucking retard.

Dark Souls is definately GOTD.

I'm kinda surprised by how consistent Dark Souls/Bloodborne are being mentioned as GOTD. I love it.

Attached: mini_solaire_and_siegmeyer_by_liadys-dadclti.jpg (1000x667, 490K)

Why are you surprised? Last year's poll for best game of all time put Dark Souls at #1.

>SSBU

I played over 600 hours of this trash and it's probably my biggest regret in life. The game was fucking awful, awful single player that is the definition of quantity over quality, and the worst online I've seen in any game, not to mention the unresponsive controls and input lag. God I hate this game so fucking much.

It's hardly a surprise, soulsborne games were literally the only thing this decade with any challenge.

Everything else I liked this decade was purely from a story standpoint. Soulsborne shit were the only fucking GAMES released this decade, which should really just be insanely depressing.

>GOTD?
Personally its NV, followed by Dark Souls 3.
>Worst GOTD?
ME: Andromeda, easily. What a fucking joke.

It helps no one to be reductive. There were plenty of hard games released this decade. There were also plenty of good games released this decade. Dark Souls just stands out among them.

How are the controls unresponsive?

>There were plenty of hard games released this decade. There were also plenty of good games released this decade.
Neither of these are true.

There were plenty of nice INTERACTIVE EXPERIENCES released this decade. But games? Nah, we haven't had many.

I don't know, I guess I just expected some other game to be Yea Forums's favorite. I fully agree though. It was the only game that I think really left a mark in this decade. It just did everything right.

Attached: 1502727263925.jpg (719x1111, 322K)

If you only care about AAA shlock that's your problem.

>GOTD
Skyrim. No question about it. I've put thousands of hours into it. Nothing comes remotely close. The game itself is pretty mediocre but the modding scene is fucking nuts. It was my gateway to actual RPGs as well.
>Worst GOTD
Red Dead Redemption 2. God that entire game was just one long chore. Erratic story pacing, trash gunplay, mostly unlikeable cast and just really long animations for every single little thing. It was a fucking tech demo, not a game. Fuck every single reviewer who gave that unresponsive piece of shit cutscene simulator a score higher than 7.

>I don't know, I guess I just expected some other game to be Yea Forums's favorite.
Honest question, no strings attached: when did you start visiting Yea Forums?

>How are the controls unresponsive?

The input buffering works in a retarded way on top of a ridiculous amount of input delay makes the gameplay feel like shit.

I mostly play first person shooters and I think this generation's were kind of lackluster. I have a feeling Ion Fury and Doom Eternal will be the real standouts of that genre. Other than Eternal, no game on the horizon has my interest.

Fine, we had a few nice SHMUPs too. That takes the total number of games released this decade from half a dozen up to about 30.

Still not great for 10 fucking years.

>It was my gateway to actual RPGs as well.
...Skyrim made you play pen & paper? That's an odd one.

Indie pixelshit doesn't count as good games, retard.

>>I mostly play first person shooters
I can't really have any respect for someone who considers themselves a fan of FPS games, and yet enjoyed Nu-Doom.

Maybe try a game that isn't designed for consoles, or one that came out before your 14 year old zoomer ass was born next time?

I'm not saying the 2010s were the GOAT decade, user. I'm just saying, there is more good stuff in this decade than Dark Souls. (Even though Dark Souls is the clear GotD.)

2007. I assumed something like Automata would be more mentioned.

Attached: 1470831837764.jpg (400x400, 167K)

You can like different styles of games, user. Original DOOM is obviously fucking great. But nu-Doom has its merits.

Okay.

Yea Forumsideogame RPGs

Take that back, faggot.

Attached: pig brown.jpg (1332x850, 134K)

I'm not suggesting that you are, I'm just saying that this decade was the worst one ever by a country mile, and the number of playable games has dropped off like a rock. The latter half of the last decade was rough, but even 2005-2009 would be paradise compared to 2010-2019.

DOOM came out in 2016 so it should probably go in that slot, I can't speak for 2018 since it was just a never ending fountian of shit

Well, Dark Souls has been one of the consistently most spoken about single games for the better part of 8 years now. It's not really surprising it gets the GotD vote.

Worst 10 years in gaming history.
Only Doom, Prey, Minecraft,Walking Dead Final Season and Dead by Daylight break higher than 5/10 on my scale.

Attached: Arnold_Schwarzenegger_Cards_Men_Painting_Art_Kai_521610_1366x768_1.jpg (664x678, 103K)

>single dude directs both the best games of 7th and 8th gen
The motherfucker

Attached: dark-souls-done-hidetaka-miyazaki-738x410.jpg.optimal.jpg (738x410, 44K)

>nu-Doom has its merits.
It has absolutely no merit. It's a weak Serious Sam clone with console tier enemy limits and arenas that aren't big enough to piss in.

Without the Doom brand, it would've been forgotten instantly. But because it has "the name", zoom-zooms like yourself seem to think it has some form of merit.

>Likes Skyrim
>Complains about the gameplay of any other game

Look, I don't like RDR2 either, but you have no right to criticize any other game ever if you like Skyrim. RDR2 might be shit but is still light years ahead Skyrim.

Nu-Doom is my favorite Painkiller clone. Also name a few better fps games from this generation, I've probably played them.

>Playing anything other than Mage or Archer
That's where you fucked up

What are you talking about? It's a reaction image, dude.

Pretty great

Attached: afasw.jpg (1064x3119, 1.59M)

Where is Stardew Valley?

But painkiller was a shoddy eastern european mess that was only fun because of the weapons. Nu-Doom manages to have even less on offer, with fewer enemies and guns that all feel like hot dogshit.

Asking me to name better FPS games this gen is pointless, because we both know there was nothing playable released in the past decade as far as FPS go. Being the king of shit mountain isn't an accomplishment.

I did, it was the only way I could stomach the game to even complete the main quest and some relevant side quests. It was still fucking trash.

>Dark Souls has been one of the consistently most spoken about single games for the better part of 8 years now
I guess I really shouldn't be surprised. I wonder if other websites/journos will agree or just say something like Last of Us 2 becomes the GOTD.

Attached: 83becdcfae21dd4b4e1fa6344aeda809.png (750x1031, 569K)

Oh, just fucking kill yourself you pimple faced fat faggot.

Attached: DcC1rPlUwAAIr2z.jpg_large.jpg (780x1024, 189K)

you gotta be one jaded fucking faggot to say this was a bad decade. or contrarian. or simply a troll.

>RDR1 and RDR2
>Witcher 3 plus its expansions
>all Dark Souls and Bloodborne plus expansions
>God of War
>Spider-Man
>BotW
>Mario Odyssey
>Dishonored
>DOOM
>RE2
>GTAV
>TLoU
>Rocket League
>Uncharted 4
>Skyrim
>Prey
>KH3
>MH:W
>FC5
>Hollow Knight
>BF1
>Crash and Spyro remakes
>Titanfall 2
>Metro games

great decade and i don't want to hear it. glad i still like video games.

Give Ion Fury a try. One of the devs even said to go ahead and pirate the game.

I don't know what to tell you man, anything that annoyed me about Skyrim usually had a mod fixing said annoyance.

I agree with you on the whole but

>Uncharted 4
Worse TPS than both Max Payne 3 and Quantum Break, both released this decade.

why the fuck is death stranding on there? pretty fucking cheeky to assume it won’t be doa.

Dark Souls 2 was fucking trash. God of War was a massive disappointment. DOOM was mediocre. Uncharted 4 was meh. Skyrim is just a bad game. KH3 is the biggest disappointment of all time. MH was never good.

It's not like there was competition though. Fumito Ueda's only game in the last 2 gens wasnt as great, and Nintendo just got their shit together after their worst era and just started experimenting with tech demos. Literally no one else can compete.

decades are 0-9 10 years
if you did 0-10 that's 11 years

>were literally the only thing this decade with any challenge.
highly recomend you play more games than just the most basic AAA

No mod can fix how terrible the gameplay of that game is, at best you can turn it into a cheap Dark Souls wanna be with 200 mods. You just have shit taste.

nostalgia mong

It could be 2011-2020, dumbass.

That is literally not how time works. The first century was 1-100, not 0-99.

>The first century was 1-100, not 0-99.
it literally was 0-99 thoough
the second you reached 100 it's a new century
hence the secon we reached 2000 it was a new millenia the old mellania ran 1000-1999
like are you trolling me or what

At least the brown and bloom meme died out.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_century
Like every other ESLfag poster, you're mentally retarded.

>RDR1 and RDR2
Decent for the setting but the gameplay is formulaic Rockstar trash
>Witcher 3 plus its expansions
Generic shitty gameplay good story. Not great but decent overall
>all Dark Souls and Bloodborne plus expansions
DS 2 and 3 were shit.
>God of War
LMAO shit
>Spider-Man
Are you a Sony shill? Shit
>BotW
Tech demo, BotW2 could be great
>Mario Odyssey
Good
>Dishonored
Mediocre
>DOOM
Mediocre
>RE2
Alright
>GTAV
Shit
>TLoU
Alright
>Rocket League
Shit
>Uncharted 4
Disgusting
>Skyrim
LMAO is this a joke?
>Prey
Shit
>KH3
Another joke? Is not funny
>MH:W
Dexent
>FC5
Shit
>Hollow Knight
Trash
>BF1
Shit
>Crash and Spyro remakes
Shit
>Titanfall 2
Shit
>Metro games
Shit

Kill yourself tasteless fag.

Retard.

nice cope yank
>Although a century can mean any arbitrary period of 100 years, a standard century in the Gregorian calendar is a period starting on a year of which the last two digits are 01 and ending on the following year which is a multiple of 100: The 1st century was the period from 1 to 100, the 2nd century the period from 101 to 200, and so on.[2] Although, the most common way to count centuries as well as decades is to group years based on their shared digits (i.e. the 20th century is in this case referred to the period from 1900 to 1999). However, this way to count centuries is formally not correct, as these periods end on a year of which the last two digits are 99 (i.e. 1999), and these years are no multiples of 100; this would make the 1st century being the period from 1 to 99 which is not a period of 100 years. This is sometimes known as the odometer effect. The astronomical year numbering and ISO 8601 systems both contain a year zero, so the first century begins with the year zero, rather than the year one
just because you're too thick to understand how numbers work and have to fuck it up because you're too busy wanking over jesus to establish 1bc as 0 doesn't mean the rest of the world is as retarded

>2012: dustforce
absolutely fucking based

>and these years are no multiples of 100
I don't really care about the angry ramblings of a retarded third worlder who can't in2English. The citation for that passage is this link.
lexico.com/en/definition/century
>Strictly speaking, centuries run from 01 to 100, meaning that the new century begins on the first day of the year 01 (i.e. 1 January 1901, 1 January 2001, etc.).

Try actually reading through the links next time, subhuman. You don't get to cite something and then paraphrase it incorrectly to pretend you have a point.

I don't play Skyrim for the combat, I play it to explore old dungeons, throw tornadoes at people and have sex with cat girls. It's the same with all Bethesda games. If you go in looking for a game with good combat you're gonna be disappointed. I don't like Dark Souls. It's boring to me. You either wait for your enemy to attack and learn their pattern or you die to them over and over until you learn how to beat them. That constant repetition doesn't entertain me. If that entertains you, more power to you. You like what you like, and that's cool. We all have our own tastes.

I criticised Red Dead 2's combat because I explicitly went in expecting the snappy gunslinging and structured story of the first Red Dead Redemption. It was an entirely different experience to what I was expecting and I didn't enjoy it. This is different to Skyrim because I don't expect good, engaging gameplay from Skyrim. I hope this has cleared any misunderstanding, I've tried to be as clear as possible.

>every post with TLOU
Immediately disregarded, try not outing yourself as a tastelet so easily.

Skyrim doesn't even succeed at what you described, all the quests are shit. Stop trying to justify your awful taste, kill yourself virgin.

i quoted it exactly retarded yank as you can see by if you copy and paste it into googe. i know it's tough for you yanks to think properly as you're literally confused by basic ideas asserted 300 years ago:
>In 1627, the German astronomer Johannes Kepler first used an astronomical year which was to become year zero in his Rudolphine Tables. He labeled the year Christi and inserted it between years labeled Ante Christum (BC) and Post Christum (AD) on the mean motion pages of the Sun, Moon, and planets.[9] Then in 1702 the French astronomer Philippe de la Hire used a year he labeled Christum 0 at the end of years labeled ante Christum (BC), immediately before years labeled post Christum (AD) on the mean motion pages in his Tabulæ Astronomicæ, thus adding the designation 0 to Kepler's Christi.[10] Finally, in 1740 the French astronomer Jacques Cassini (Cassini II), who is traditionally credited with the invention of year zero,[11] completed the transition in his Tables astronomiques, simply labeling this year 0, which he placed at the end of years labeled avant Jesus-Christ (BC), immediately before years labeled après Jesus-Christ (AD).
note also that the
>SO 8601 Data elements and interchange formats – Information interchange – Representation of dates and times is an international standard covering the exchange of date- and time-related data. It was issued by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and was first published in 1988.
says
>ISO 8601 prescribes, as a minimum, a four-digit year [YYYY] to avoid the year 2000 problem. It therefore represents years from 0000 to 9999, year 0000 being equal to 1 BC and all others AD. However, years prior to 1583 are not automatically allowed by the standard. Instead "values in the range [0000] through [1582] shall only be used by mutual agreement of the partners in information interchange."
but by all means keep rejecting science for christ yank retard

Whatever you say, man. Have a good life.

me? didn't celebrate the new millenia in 2000 that's too passe i celebrated it in 2001

Nigga I'm not that user but what you quoted literally proves the other user right, stop being a retard. You don't even have to go over all of this, it's common sense. When humans started counting the years they didn't start from 0 but 1, thus doing simple math you can conclude that this decade ends in 2020, and the next one starts in 2021, as simple as that. All of this mumble jumble is worthless when you use that simple logic.

Skyrim is trash.

>Where is Stardew Valley?

Attached: 1567333933777.jpg (700x734, 80K)

which part? you are welcome to quote it.
> When humans started counting the years they didn't start from 0 but 1
yes when humans started they made a lot of mistakes because they were obsessed with christ. over time more knowledge has rectified that mistake as i have demonstrated. it has been rectified to such an extent that it has entered common logic (of every develpoed country in the west besides the usa supposedly) that periods run from 0-9. hence the new millenia started in 2000 not in 2001.
the first decade of this millenia was 2000-2009. this is further demonstrated by the fact that EVERY outlet put their best decade or best two decades lists together counting 0-9 and 10-19

based contrarian retard

Attached: 542.png (680x444, 165K)

>Contrarian

LMAO using mental gymnastics now? Everyone agrees this game is shit. You are literally the first person a see defending it, even hardcore fans admit it's shit. Kys pathetic fag.

>i quoted it exactly retarded yank as you can see by if you copy and paste it into googe
I know that, you illiterate ape. The point is that the idiot who wrote it doesn't know English, which you'd have realized if you actually knew English.

>but by all means keep rejecting science for christ yank retard
Why did you just completely sidestep the objective fact that the citation for the original quote you provided proved you dead wrong and move onto pretending naming conventions are a matter of science? This is reddit tier pseudo-intellectual bullshit. Try sticking to one argument instead of jumping around, you stupid subhuman ESLfag.

nice cope yank retard instead of providing any evidence just cry that you don't understand it and that my citations are dubious - even though i used the same source as you.
it is ironic that someone who keeps crying about esl has such poor reading comprehension. although again i suppose this should not be surprising considering yank literacy rates.

That was a different user. I don't have any interest in talking to you anymore, you seemed pretty deadset on calling me trash over and over, so I figured I'd just stop replying. This is my last message btw. If anyone replies to you after this, they're just trying to gauge you for reactions. Take it easy, man.

Dark Souls and nothing else is even close.

Clearly a normie pisstation fag. Absolute dogshit tier list

>Although, the most common way to count centuries as well as decades is to group years based on their shared digits (i.e. the 20th century is in this case referred to the period from 1900 to 1999). However, this way to count centuries is formally not correct, as these periods end on a year of which the last two digits are 99 (i.e. 1999), and these years are no multiples of 100; this would make the 1st century being the period from 1 to 99 which is not a period of 100 years. This is sometimes known as the odometer effect.

There, it's literally confirming what I said. Are you gonna admit that you are retarded now?

>instead of providing any evidence
I literally quoted the webpage that YOUR quote cited, you stupid fucking insect.

Attached: 1547491910994.png (1280x720, 323K)

>nice cope yank retard instead of providing any evidence just cry that you don't understand it and that my citations are dubious
Nigger if your fucking evidence doesn't even line up with what you and the Wikipedia article are saying then there is a fucking issue.
>even though i used the same source as you.
No, you fucking didn't. You're trying to pass off that shitty Wikipeida article as the "evidence" here, but user actually looked through the citation for what you quoted, followed the link to Oxford Dictionary and found
>Strictly speaking, centuries run from 01 to 100, meaning that the new century begins on the first day of the year 01 (i.e. 1 January 1901, 1 January 2001, etc.).
Absolutely nowhere in does it state that measuring centuries like this is "formally not correct" as the Wikipedia article did. Whoever wrote that Wikipedia page is a fucking, and you are too for believing it. Kill yourself dumbass foreigner slime.
lexico.com/en/definition/century

Attached: watch out.webm (1280x640, 661K)

lmao your memory is fried mate. the closest thing to what you're saying is me quoting from a wikipedia page which you seem to think is invalid because you quoted from a different one first?
i think i've worked out the problem: you were born after 2000. you are literally too young to even be aware of how people count and this is your first "decade" where you are old enough to realise hold on a second it doesn't start at 1 for normal people
lad check your reading comprehension:
>Although, the most common way to count centuries as well as decades is to group years based on their shared digits (i.e. the 20th century is in this case referred to the period from 1900 to 1999).
so the most common i.e. the normal way to count is 0-9.
the next part identifies a problem with this in the gregorian calender
>However, this way to count centuries is formally not correct, as these periods end on a year of which the last two digits are 99 (i.e. 1999), and these years are no multiples of 100; this would make the 1st century being the period from 1 to 99 which is not a period of 100 years.
this is then resolved (by the part you selectively chose not to quote) by using a proper numbering and scientific system:
>The astronomical year numbering and ISO 8601 systems both contain a year zero, so the first century begins with the year zero, rather than the year one
i think we're done here lad. glad you understand now.
also if we want to quote from each other's sources:
>In practice and in popular perception, however, the new century is held to begin when the significant digits in the date change, e.g. on 1 January 2000, when 1999 became 2000. Since the 1st century ran from the year 1 to the year 100, the ordinal number (i.e. second, third, fourth, etc.) used to denote the century will always be one digit higher than the corresponding cardinal digit(s). Thus, 1066 is a date in the 11th century, 1542 is a date in the 16th century, and so on
rip you mate.

>is a fucking
kill me
*is a fucking idiot

lexico.com/en/definition/century
>In practice and in popular perception, however, the new century is held to begin when the significant digits in the date change, e.g. on 1 January 2000, when 1999 became 2000. Since the 1st century ran from the year 1 to the year 100, the ordinal number (i.e. second, third, fourth, etc.) used to denote the century will always be one digit higher than the corresponding cardinal digit(s). Thus, 1066 is a date in the 11th century, 1542 is a date in the 16th century, and so on
fucking yikes lmao. learn to read your own sources.

Worse than 2000-2009. Way fucking worse than 1990-1999.

>the closest thing to what you're saying is me quoting from a wikipedia page which you seem to think is invalid because you quoted from a different one first?
You fucking idiot, I copy and pasted in the dictionary definition that your wikipedia page cited.

The Wikipedia article says that though, it's says that is formally not correct to count it as people usually do, for example 1900-1999, because that would mean that the first century would only have 99 years. I think you guys are miscomprehending what the article says, including the guy that you are quoting because he was the one who posted it without realizing that it's actually contradicting him.

>>In practice and in popular perception, however, the new century is held to begin when the significant digits in the date change, e.g. on 1 January 2000, when 1999 became 2000. Since the 1st century ran from the year 1 to the year 100, the ordinal number (i.e. second, third, fourth, etc.) used to denote the century will always be one digit higher than the corresponding cardinal digit(s). Thus, 1066 is a date in the 11th century, 1542 is a date in the 16th century, and so on
here's your definition bro

Terraria was good. The rest was shit.

>1900-1999 is 99 years
hello brainlet

>here's your definition bro
Post the entire definition. I want the technically correct part. I don't care what the common retard perception is, and neither do you given that you posted this
>However, this way to count centuries is formally not correct
You set the precedent for the formal definitions being correct, now post the formal part of that definition, dumb subhuman.

lexico.com/en/definition/decade
> period of ten years beginning with a year ending in 0.
fucking rip you mate. your own source destroying you lmao

>which you seem to think is invalid because you quoted from a different one first?
He didn't quote from a Wikipedia article you fuckwit, he quoted from an entirely separate website that was cited in the Wikipedia article you brought.
lexico.com/en/definition/century
This is the article user is pulling from. Its citation 3 on the Wikipedia page you keep going back to.
Honestly, how are you having problems with this? Have you literally never written a research paper before?
>>In practice and in popular perception
So the Wikipedia article you keep going back to is still incorrect? The Wikipedia page said that it was "formally not correct" but now it IS formally correct, just not correct in popular practice?
>learn to read your own sources.
Real fucking ironic coming from you, ESL.
I think I understood it. "The proper procedure is from 1-00 but in common practice it is not done this way."

Welp, it seems I was the one who miscomprehended the text so fuck it I'm out of here. Ignore this shit too It doesn't mean you are right though, just that the article is bullshit.

Fuck off is 5:00 am

I'm gonna sleep.

lad you're too fucking thick to realise i'm making two assertions here
1. i am asserting that the common and practically used method to count is 0-9
2. i am asserting that the only problem with this method is that year 1 has been included by some religious retards but this problem is resolved by using a proper calender such as the astronomical one or the ISO 8601 (International Organization of Standarization).
you are welcome to pretend that yes means no and no means yes but people like me are going to call you out for being a retard when you say yes and mean no.
>You set the precedent for the formal definitions being correct, now post the formal part of that definition, dumb subhuman.
what I did is because i'm not a mong like you i selected the whole quote so you could understand it in context instead of just quoting the bit that unambigiuously supports me. I showed you how mistakes are made as a result of the christ calendar starting at 1. it is not my fault you are too thick to understand this.

GOTD:
1. New Vegas
2. Divinity OS2
3. Crusader Kings 2
4. Witcher 3
5. Hotline Miami 2

2-5 are basically interchangeable.

i quoted from lexico.com/en/definition/century for you
try to keep up.
are you fucking trolilng me here or do you not realise that the wikipedia definition and the oxford one are in concordance both isolate the issue with starting a calendar from 1 and making it not "formally" correct that counting then runs 0-9 let me relevant part for you because your reading comprehension is shocking:
>Although, the most common way to count centuries as well as decades is to group years based on their shared digits (i.e. the 20th century is in this case referred to the period from 1900 to 1999). However, this way to count centuries is formally not correct, as these periods end on a year of which the last two digits are 99 (i.e. 1999), and these years are no multiples of 100; this would make the 1st century being the period from 1 to 99 which is not a period of 100 years.

>i am asserting that the common and practically used method to count is 0-9
>However, this way to count centuries is formally not correct
You quoted that line. You literally quoted something that was talking about the formally correct way and not the common one.

>what I did is because i'm not a mong like you i selected the whole quote
Which directly contradicts you.

What do you define as a game compared to an interactive experience ?

>these years are no multiples of 100; this would make the 1st century being the period from 1 to 99 which is not a period of 100 years.
It's a period of 99 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 59 seconds. Which, you know, any sane person would just count as "100".

>Although, the most common way to count centuries as well as decades is to group years based on their shared digits (i.e. the 20th century is in this case referred to the period from 1900 to 1999).
so the most common i.e. the normal way to count is 0-9.
the next part identifies a problem with this in the gregorian calender
>However, this way to count centuries is formally not correct, as these periods end on a year of which the last two digits are 99 (i.e. 1999), and these years are no multiples of 100; this would make the 1st century being the period from 1 to 99 which is not a period of 100 years.
this is then resolved (by the part you selectively chose not to quote) by using a proper numbering and scientific system:
>The astronomical year numbering and ISO 8601 systems both contain a year zero, so the first century begins with the year zero, rather than the year one
i think we're done here lad. glad you understand now.
already close read it for you. is your reading comprehension really too poor that you don't understand this? if you ask what exactly you're confused about i will help you.
excuse me? it's 98 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 59 minutes. suggest you try counting again lad.

To be classified as a game, there needs to be the threat of failure. Modern games do not generally accomplish this, because failure ranges from a 5 second "continue?" screen to a 30 second backtrack

This isn't really sufficient to be considered a video game, in my opinion. A death should lose you a minimum of a minute, ideally 5 minutes or so of progress, and can go up to about an hour for a game over before people consider the game too shitty.

>i quoted from lexico.com/en/definition/century for you
Wasn't in any reply to me, brainlet.
>making it not "formally"
Nignog do you know what "formally" means? That Oxford link literally says that counting centuries from 1-00 is the formally correct method, which directly contradicts the Wikipedia article.
>However, this way to count centuries is formally not correct
This can not be true if the original Oxford page states
>Strictly speaking, centuries run from 01 to 100, meaning that the new century begins on the first day of the year 01 (i.e. 1 January 1901, 1 January 2001, etc.).
"Strictly speaking" is a synonym for "formally" in this context.

>excuse me? it's 98 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 59 minutes.
The century starts at 0:00:00 on the 1st of January, 1900, and ends at 23:59:59 on the 31st of December, 1999. You should check your fucking math, buddy.

I can't do it anymore. ESLfags are so fucking stupid and it's impossible to argue with someone who doesn't understand the logical flow between thoughts in English.

>Nignog do you know what "formally" means? That Oxford link literally says that counting centuries from 1-00 is the formally correct method, which directly contradicts the Wikipedia article.
from my very quote:
>Although, the most common way to count centuries as well as decades is to group years based on their shared digits (i.e. the 20th century is in this case referred to the period from 1900 to 1999). However, this way to count centuries is formally not correct, as these periods end on a year of which the last two digits are 99 (i.e. 1999), and these years are no multiples of 100; this would make the 1st century being the period from 1 to 99 which is not a period of 100 years.
you really are an illiterate retard you know that right
exactly 0-99 not 1-99 lol
nice illiterate cope yank. do not get angry at me because you have no reading comprehension

>from my very quote:
From the Wikipedia article. What about the fucking Oxford page, which states,
>Strictly speaking, centuries run from 01 to 100, meaning that the new century begins on the first day of the year 01 (i.e. 1 January 1901, 1 January 2001, etc.).
"Strictly speaking"
This means formally
Which means it is in direct contradiction of the Wikipedia article that uses this definition as its source, as the Wikipedia article states that measuring centuries from 1-00 "is formally not correct". Fucking foreigners can't understand English for shit.

Wait I'm this guy again: I thought about it a little bit more and I'm right, its just that your mumbo jumbo convinced me because it's 5:30 AM and my brain is fried. Admit that you are wrong.

>Although, the most common way to count centuries as well as decades is to group years based on their shared digits (i.e. the 20th century is in this case referred to the period from 1900 to 1999).

So the common way is 0 to 9

>However, this way to count centuries is formally not correct, as these periods end on a year of which the last two digits are 99 (i.e. 1999), and these years are no multiples of 100; this would make the 1st century being the period from 1 to 99 which is not a period of 100 years.

And this is the part where it says that it's wrong and by counting it that way would make the first century 99 years only

>this is then resolved (by the part you selectively chose not to quote) by using a proper numbering and scientific system:

I didn't read that part because the previous quote literally says that the common way 0-9 is "formally not correct"

So either I'm right of the article contracdicting itself.

Check mate faggot.

I'm gonna sleep now.

10s were a great decade for gaming. Standouts below:

2010: Mass Effect 2
2011: Human Revolution
2012: Dishonored
2013: Call of Juarez: Gunslinger
2014: Alien Isolation
2015: Undertale
2016: Too many good games to chose one
2017: Prey
2018: Subnautica
2019: Metro Exodus

Attached: 1396317622166.jpg (224x224, 9K)

Attached: 1569062080671.jpg (1471x1000, 412K)

are you trolling me or what that is EXACTLY what the wikipedia article says:
>However, this way to count centuries is formally not correct
meaning that 0-99 is not "formally" correct.
>as these periods end on a year of which the last two digits are 99 (i.e. 1999), and these years are no multiples of 100;
describing that the "formally" correct sequence is 1-100
>this would make the 1st century being the period from 1 to 99 which is not a period of 100 years.
they then give an example of why based on the gregorian calendar the "common" method doesn't work but the "formal" method does.
like i really don't know how i can make it any clearer. what the fuck is wrong with your brain.
been through this many times also running away does not mean you are correct.
as I said to another poster I have made two assertions:
1. i am asserting that the common and practically used method to count is 0-9
2. i am asserting that the only problem with this method is that year 1 has been included by some religious retards
also see above close reading to help with youir literacy xx

Attached: 1569062143200.jpg (1200x500, 772K)

Posting in autism rage bread

>Fire Emblem: Three Houses
>Katana Zero
>Devil May Cry 5
>Nier: Automata
>Breath of the Wild
>Super Mario Odyssey
>Hollow Knight
>Furi
>Hotline Miami
>Bastion
>Bayonetta 2
>Metal Gear Rising
>Titanfall 2
Based pilot chads. This was a terrible decade for shooters, but we also got one of the best ones ever made.

Attached: 2144440fc395346c7fecf9c8b802350a.jpg (1000x1100, 155K)

>what the fuck is wrong with your brain.
I haven't slept in 20 hours and the argument became such a shitshow I actually forgot what the Wikipedia page said and ended up getting it backwards kill me desu senpai

Attached: 1511198066152.jpg (480x778, 24K)

i appreciate your concession but maybe in the future instead of getting worked up and angry you realise that hey i'm pissed i've been awake for 20 hours maybe i'm not thinking straight.

>1. i am asserting that the common and practically used method to count is 0-9
Which is "formally not correct" according to your article. Correct would be 1 to 0, otherwise the first century would only have 99 years

>2. i am asserting that the only problem with this method is that year 1 has been included by some religious retards

Irrelevant, that's not what we are debating. It started from year 1 not year 0, so the correct way of counting decades is 1 to 0, which means I'm right.

Why are you still arguing with the ESLretard who doesn't know what "formal" means?

KI 2013, enough said

2018: Smash Ultimate, including the hype leading up to it

Attached: based banjo.png (900x900, 391K)

Maybe it wasn't made for you, grandpa. If you really think that a 2.5D shooter re-release would appeal to this generation of gamers, then you're wrong. Video games have to evolve to adapt to new generations demands, it's keep up or get left behind.

This is why I find boomer opinions so insufferable.

what i have done is made a teleological argument.
i have demonstrated that no one runs a decade as 1-10 and even quoted from your favourite place
lexico.com/en/definition/decade
>A period of ten years beginning with a year ending in 0.
what I have acknowledged is that if you take a strict reading of the gregorian calendar that the first century 1-99 is clearly not a century therefore that calendar should be replaced and it has been in science and standarisation - as i have again demonstrated. it has also been replaced implictly within common discourse and cultural which i have again demonstrated. when we celebrated the new millenia it was when the clock struck 00:00:00 2000 not 0:00:00:00 2001. the groupings are 0-9. The only problem as I have referenced since my original quote on wikipedia is the first century which if you are a christcuck runs from 1-99. I have shown how this issue has been easily resolved (by making 1bc into 0). we hence have uniformity across the whole calendar instead of the one outlier of the shortened 1st century.
hope you understand that all now.

DUSK came out in December

>2010
Bayonetta
>2011
Dark Souls/MvC3
>2012
Persona 4 Arena/Dustforce
>2013
MGR
>2014
Guilty Gear Xrd
>2015
Bloodborne
>2016
Furi/Titanfall 2
>2017
Hollow Knight
>2018
I dunno, MHW? Pretty shit year
>2019
DMC 5/Sekiro

I have no idea what to put at 2017

Attached: fav.jpg (1596x988, 509K)

As far as influence goes, I'd have to agree. Everything's trying to be a big open world dotted with shit to do around the map.

I don't like a lot of games

Attached: gotys.jpg (2724x1294, 1.09M)

you have bog standard taste tho, for better or for worse

>warcraft 2
>1995
jeez, that just feels so wrong, even though it's the truth, where did the time go

Attached: 1568872966328.png (453x567, 110K)

There's been a lot of good shit. It's easy to focus on the bad and this image doesn't do a great job of selling it, but I've had fun. Bar 2014 of course, fuck 2014. 2018 was pretty bad too.

BotW
P5
Mario Odyssey
Hollow Knight
Solid list. Tropical Freeze is pretty cool

>you are right but normies adopted an incorrect method

There. You don't have to write everything in unnecessarily long paragraphs to appear smarter. I never read more than 2 lines of whatever you write.

Thank you for admitting you are wrong, I can go to sleep now.

2007/08 was what cauesd the rapid decay. Games aren't games anymore, they're overglorified movies. Hey at least some of the smaller games have some godo stuff coming out

Is there a website to make these like with a 3x3?

It wasn't made for anyone with taste. Nu-Doom is another awful console shooter, another game that ignores all the advantages of consoles and instead focuses on creating a sub-par clone of PC shooters.

Console shooters are the ugly duckling. They try so hard to be recognized as ducks, when they never will be. Meanwhile, the swans like Goldeneye, PD, and Timesplitters, go forgotten.

>Games aren't games anymore, they're overglorified movies
This year we've had a bunch of gamey games, but okay. Keep living in your delusional bubble.

>There. You don't have to write everything in unnecessarily long paragraphs to appear smarter. I never read more than 2 lines of whatever you write.
clearly your reading comprehension is shocking.
it is ironic that you write "normies"
when it is people like johannas kepler who corrected it but i suppose when someone has as such limited knowledge as you do you have no idea who that is.
remember running away does not make you correct xx

>COD 4
fucking gay ass shit

Attached: e4234ac298691e79121b8c7484f2f5395a85db510738172d48d55a29c0569e56.png (502x520, 171K)

oh wow, get a load of this guy

Attached: pepe poopoo.gif (208x189, 1.99M)

epic

What you've been arguing is that culture has been trying to change it so that it's 0-9 instead of 1-0 for their holidays to make sense. That's irrelevant. There was not a "year 0" which means that the correct way is 1-0. Whatever society is trying to do right now I don't care and I'm not debating that. It was originally "year 1" not "year 0." And your rambling won't change that. So this conversation is over wether you like it or not. And you already admitted it too so it's over, son.

thanks made it myself

sorry for asking, think i should add more transitions after Harold?

Attached: pepe 26.png (229x220, 43K)

there is a year zero but you refuse to acknowledge it because you've been indoctrinated by the church.
(i would address your other points but you have already acknowledged you refuse to read criticisms and would ratehr stick your head in the sand like a "normie" so i'll leave it there)

didnt watch it

>no Hotline Miami
>Overwatch but no Titanfall 2 or Siege
>fucking Death Stranding which isn't even out yet

Where'd you get this garbage from, Reddit? It wasn't a great decade, but it was better than this list.

Some years were good, some weren't. 2019 has been one of the best ever though.

Attached: 3x3 2010's.jpg (3264x3264, 3.77M)

w-well duh year 0 exists, that's where cavemen lived

Attached: 1566691174803.jpg (643x839, 74K)

good :^)
i didn't need you to watch it anyway

Attached: seethingontheinside.jpg (601x508, 31K)

-1bc is considered year 0 as i have explained. your reading comprehension is really fucking bad lad.

you should try before you criticize. It's one of best military shooters, IMO second only to Delta Force BHD.
I recommend playing with ltspeirs' realism mod, which gives weapons realistic RoF, recoil, and increases number of enemies that can be spawned at once.

The fuck are you talking about retard, I don't give a shit about "the church" and I actually skipped your text everytime you mentioned it because again, I don't give a fuck. I don't want more arguments from you because at this point we are not even debating the same thing, I already proved my point and won the argument. Now you've just moved your goalpost to something I don't even care.

>It's 0-9!
>quotes article that proves himself wrong stating that 0-9 is "formally NOT correct"
>w-wait I actually just meant that's what culture has adopted, a-and it's what the gregoriwhatever calendar says too!

Pathetic.

1bc*
-1 is 2bc
-2 is 3bc and so on

why are you so proud of being retarded?
>and it's what the gregoriwhatever calendar says too!
you have this backwards.
funny how you're too fucking retarded to even construct my argument.

why are you stuttering on the internet lmao

>doesn't know obvious shitposting
im not that user you're arguing to nigger

>What is greentext

Are you new here retard? How old are you anyway?

What was the best gameplay breakthrough of the decade? Dark Souls' 3D metroidvania world design, Minecraft's build/survival open world, Shadow of Mordor's Nemesis system, Witcher 3's delayed quest resolutions, ...? Other examples you know?

i know he's shitposting but other people genuinely might think that and i'd rather correct it than anyone have the wrong impression

MGQ is not GOTD dumbass, it's GOTYAY.

i thought greentext was used to quote people or tell a story. you haven't used it for either. makes me think you're a bit retarded.
i'm 29. how old are you?

So you've given up huh? LMAO keep moving your goalpost retard.

I quoted you dumbass. Jesus Christ do you even speak English?

not at all but it's clearly not worth arguing with someone too incompetent to read my posts and certainly too stupid to understand them at all. at least other anons in this thread have realised their misreadings because fundamentally they have some ability... that is clearly not the case with people like you who wear their retardation as some badge of pride

are you schizophrenic? you have not quoted me stupid yank.

2010: Mass Effect 2
2011: Dork Souls
2012: Asura's Wrath
2013: Link Between Worlds
2014: Shovel Knight
2015: I have huge problems with both of them, but I guess tie between Phantom Pain and Witcher 3
2016: DOOM
2017: Nier Automata
2018: Spooderman I guess. Honorable mention to DBFZ.

GOTD: Mass Effect 2. Fight me.

>overwatch
>FFXV
>god of war
>death stranding, a game that isn't even out
>shitrim
>call of duty
>nu-doom
>the walking simulator
>the last of ass
>phantom shit
>shitsona
>dota 2
based retard

>at least other anons in this thread have realised their misreadings because fundamentally they have some ability..They just gave up because of your autism and went to sleep. I was actually one of them until I realized that you were being too retarded to let you go thinking you won.

You are a retard. I'm seriously questioning if I'm even speaking to someone who understands English at this point.

>im really retarded and instead of accepting that i will refuse to read my opponent says and will just make up what he says and i will refuse to respond to any criticisms of his points
am i doing this right?

right back at you yankie doodle

>Dark Souls' 3D metroidvania world
Metroid Prime already did this almost a decade prior. Dark Souls is probably the most influential game of the decade, but not for that reason.

Attached: Pepe sigh.jpg (251x242, 13K)

We already went through this, you already admitted I was right remember? saying something like you only meant it was just culturally 0-9 remember? And then you started rambling about other shit no one cares and accused me of being under the control of the church or some retarded shit like that.

It's over, you lost, get over it, stop replying and get out of Yea Forums because apparently is your first time posting too.

what i have done is made a teleological argument.
i have demonstrated that no one runs a decade as 1-10 and even quoted from your favourite place
lexico.com/en/definition/decade
>A period of ten years beginning with a year ending in 0.
what I have acknowledged is that if you take a strict reading of the gregorian calendar that the first century 1-99 is clearly not a century therefore that calendar should be replaced and it has been in science and standarisation - as i have again demonstrated. it has also been replaced implictly within common discourse and cultural which i have again demonstrated. when we celebrated the new millenia it was when the clock struck 00:00:00 2000 not 0:00:00:00 2001. the groupings are 0-9. The only problem as I have referenced since my original quote on wikipedia is the first century which if you are a christcuck runs from 1-99. I have shown how this issue has been easily resolved (by making 1bc into 0). we hence have uniformity across the whole calendar instead of the one outlier of the shortened 1st century.
hope you understand that all now.

Then what? It's the only aspect of the game I find truly above just good. The cryptic lore told through item description and placement is interesting, action gameplay is sub par, multiplayer was great on paper but poorly executed. Music was alright and voice acting is average at best.

I agree that the level design is great, but the aforementioned Metroid Prime did that in a 3D space a long time before. I think the take aways people had from it were the difficulty, bosses, atmosphere, multiplayer integration and the concept of losing currency upon death, AS WELL AS the level design. It was a mix of all those things. Also the more deliberate combat with the stamina bar was refreshing at the time. I know Demon's Souls did a lot of that stuff before, but it failed to have the same impact due to it being a PS3 exclusive.

this could be a copypasta

I actually just researched the Gregorian calendar you've been rambling about the entire thread, and turns out it was created in the year 1580, so the fact that it marks the first century until the 99 as opposed to 100 is irrelevant. The century was originally meant to end in the year 100, not 99, and the Gregorian calendar doesn't change that.

Checkmate once again, faggot.

nice

>memer
>fucking spider-man
>god of war
>dishonored
>TLoU
>BF1
>KH3
>skyrimjob
>fucking titanfall
>fucking FC
you have to go back, you zoomer retard

>narrative focused titles

Attached: 1568934213644.gif (500x375, 168K)

It was shit and this predatory bullshit will only get worse.

yes it replaced the justinian calendar which was reimagined by Dionysius Exiguus to demonstrate the years since christ's birth. shame you had the experience but missed the meaning.

I could say the same about Prime being only on Gamecube. I find Dark Souls implemented it in a more important way, where it improved the gameplay loop, world building and atmosphere.

Okay so the argument you've using the entire thread is invalid, great. Fucking retard.

>undertale instead of bloodborne
>max payne 3 instead of anything else

Nice bait retard.

i am more than willing to help you understand but when you try to brag about how you don't read what i write and continually misrepresent what i have said then i wonder if it's worth the effort. i am the one criticising this calendar you retard. and just incase it isn't already painstakingly obvious when we shifted to the gregorian calendar the years up until 1582 did not cease to exist they were still recorded and awarded numerical dates. hence we talk about say dionysius proposing the A.D system in 525.

>I could say the same about Prime being only on Gamecube
There were also two sequels with one of which being on one of the best selling systems of all time, and then there were other games like Arkham Asylum which has a Metroidvania design to them

Nothing beat Mario Glaxy, but still a lot of good games.

GOTD for me is probably The Witness. Or Nintendoland. Or Breath of the Wild.

Worst GOTD is hard. Lots of literally broken indie games. Some of which I made myself. The most infuriating piece of shit I actually wanted to like, and spent a lot of time on, was probably Skyward Sword.

Started out awful, slowly got better. The 7th generation is to vidya what the 90s were to comics

lol no

Actually, screw my previous Metroid Prime example. Here's an even earlier example. Educate yourself next time.

Attached: 91AF0+BXxbL._SX342_.jpg (342x348, 32K)

The BC (Before Christ) and AD (Anno Domini) was invented in the year 525 by a monk in the Roman Empire. The Roman numeral system, which was still in use at the time, HAD NO CONCEPT OF ZERO.

Thus, the day after 31 December BC was 01 of January AD. For this reason the current millennium, contrary to cultural belief, started in the first day of AD 2001, not AD 2000. The Gregorian calendar was invented in 1580 so it has no business here.

Took me 2 minutes of research to show that you are full of shit, lad.

Demons Souls has 4 spiritual sequels (due to Sony owning the rights), and sold between 750-800k to Prime 3's 1.1 million. Prime having the advantage of being an established franchise, a third sequel AND on the console with greater user base.

I think Demons had a far greater influence and Souls went above and beyond improving all its systems.

Here

That's a terrible example of a compartmentalised 2.5D game world.

I am the one arguing against the Gregorian calendar...
>Thus, the day after 31 December BC was 01 of January AD. For this reason the current millennium, contrary to cultural belief, started in the first day of AD 2001, not AD 2000.
where on earth did you get that from
The gregorian calendar is this calendar but updated to account for leap years. you talk about doing research but you aren't understanding it at all
>The Gregorian calendar was decreed in 1582 by the papal bull Inter gravissimas by Pope Gregory XIII, to correct the erroneous assumption in the then-current Julian calendar that a year lasts 365.25 days, when in reality it is about 365.2422 days
this is why we slightly adapted it. you seem to think the justianian to the gregorian was some major overhaul like the replacing it with the Hijiri (islamic).

As I have explained keeping to the gregorian calendar creates one single problem with dating from an teleological perspective - that of the first century which runs from 1-99 instead of 0-99 like all the other centuries do (100-199, 200-299, 1900-1999 and so on). To remedy this people like johanes Kepler came up with an astrological calendar which fixes this problem by assigning 1bc the value of 0 so the system works coherently throughout every century and the first century problem is resolved. This has become the standard as demonstrate by the ISO 8601 explicitly and by cultural implictly (we celebrated the millenia 1st january 2000).
does this makes sense now? i'm not sure how i can make it much clearer it's not a hard thing to understand .

>compartmentalised
>2.5D
So you haven't played it

>The gaming highlight is probably Dark Souls or Bloodborne
Shows how incredibly depressing the last decade was.

Attached: 1568321034226.gif (265x257, 1.78M)

>GOTD
Minecraft, it's the best selling vidya of all time for a reason

>Worst GOTD
Probably some walking simulator or Gacha game that I haven't played

I haven't really played that many games from this decade, but I do remember Terraria being pretty cool.

>Muh y-you don't understand!!

Yeah yeah sure, you've been proven wrong dumbass. Romans invented the calendar that was relevant at the time. The number 0 wasn't a thing for them. Therefore there wasn't a year 0, therefore it's objectively 1-0, not 0-9. Therefore I was right all along and you are a retard.

>Muh you don't understand the Gregorian calendar!!!

Stop moving the goalpost, I'm discussing the calendar that was relevant at the time, not the one who was created 1580 years later to pander the cultural beliefs.

for me, game of the decade is easily Dark Souls. Overall this decade/generation has been extremely forgettable, and Dark Souls has been the only thing that has truly captivated me in a very, very long time.

>2010-2013
Amazing send-off to last gen
>2014-2016
Boring as shit, specially 2014. The Witcher 3 and Bloodborne were the only two memorable games of that time
2017-2019
Persona5, BotW, Yakuza 0, Nier Automata and many many games both on ps4 and switch. The best smash bros, the best god of war, finally having KH3, a true reinassance.

what is wrong with you? why is your reading comprehension so fucked, are you just really fucking stupid.
YOU are the person who has been tallking about how calendars are/were updated to reflect further knowledge and now you are taking the position that the justinian calendar was infallible...
by the way if you want to be correct then the justinian calendar started before ad it was only dionysus as i said before who hundreds and hundreads of years later framed it around christ i.e. a completely arbitrary decision.

This

replace bayonetta with Super Mario Galaxy 2 and youre onto a half-decent list

darksouls.
aside from that the amount of few good games released in this decade is alarming.

>Amazing send-off to last gen
That was literally peak dark era.

>best god of war, finally having KH3
Never mind, you're retarded.

>Muhh you don't understand what I'm trying to say!!!

This is the argument people always use when they know they've fucked up and lost. Pathetic.

You are the one with the shitty reading. comprehension. And no you have the one who has been insisting on the calendars bullshit so I researched it and oh surprise, I was right. And I was right just by using simple logic, stupid fuck.

I'm not arguing about the credibility of the justinian calendar, again reading comprehension, I just said it was the one that was relevant at the time and the one who started counting the years. And back then 0 was not a thing, why can't you grasp that concept, you absolute retard? 0 didn't exists back then, I do not give a fuck if it was modified later on with the Astronomic and Gregorian calendars. The original is the one that matters and in that one 0 wasn't a thing. Fucking re-read this 100 until you grasp the concept.

It looks like Yea Forums's GOTD is Dark Souls judging by this thread.
Absolutely based. Nice to know this board has good taste. I only played it this year and I'm so glad I did.

GOTD: Either Smash Ultimate or Persona 5.

Worst game: Fallout 76 easily.

Nintendo is back to being one of my favorite developers again, we're in a golden age for arcade rhythm games, and indie games are the best they've ever been

GOTD is tropical freeze

How was the online when you played it? The most meloncholic thing, thinking back on dark souls, is that we'll never ever get to experience the early online multiplayer again. I'm sure the number of people playing is far lower than back in the day, but also most people playing it now have every location/strategy/trick memorized. But back in the day in the early multiplayer everything was unknown, and it was an absolute blast still figuring out the game while also co-oping/invading/being invaded by other people who also didn't know everything yet.

>This is the argument people always use when they know they've fucked up and lost. Pathetic.
i'm not surprised people often use it against you because you're thick as shit and rather than engage with what i say you keep repeating your nonsense.
>The original is the one that matters and in that one 0 wasn't a thing. Fucking re-read this 100 until you grasp the concept.
you are so fucking retarded you don't even understand what is being discussed. what the fuck is wrong with you user seriously how are you so fucking stupid.
you realise surely that every yearly date is completely arbitrary and a different calendar such as the hijjii has a different yearly date for "now" to the gregorian?
When the justinian was instigated there was NO BC and AD it was well before jesus christ was born. hell back then they didn't even have a proper nnumbering system the years were identified purely by who the counsels were. The reason we assign dates such as x BC to this period is our completely arbitrary decision! Being a christian dionysus in the 6th century thought wouldn't it be nice if we focued the calendar we use at the moment for the year around the birth of our lord jesus christ and so he did and so AD1 because the first year after the birth of jesus christ. This is a completely arbitrary distinction just like it is for the muslims who date around the birth of mohammad. There is no objectively correct way.
What has happened though is because people back then were too incompetent to use a year 0 it fucked up the yearly counting. just like the gregorian fixed the errors in the justinian so too did the asstrological proposed by kepler et al fix this error. they realised that actually there is a year zero and they added it by considering 1bc as 0. hence fixing the problem for everyone but christcucks like you clearly.
> A period of ten years beginning with a year ending in 0.

do you finally fucking understand you fucking stupid illiterate retarded yank

>meme game being GOTD is a good thing
Normie zoomer tourist detected, New Vegas was GOTD

I actually got invaded quite a few times. There was one guy who invaded right before the kiln. All of them kicked my ass aside from one though.
Besides that I didn't see many white phantoms or sunbros. Found a few dragon covenant duels though. It wasn't as 100% dead as you'd expect.

>Dark Souls is a meme game
Maybe if you haven't played it and hate popular things out of spite.

>Ten Best Games of the Decade
1. Undertale
2. Super Smash Bros Ultimate
3. Pokemon Black and White
4. Sonic Mania
5. Danganronpa 2: Goodbye Despair
6. Xenoblade Chronicles
7. Dark Souls
8. Shovel Knight
9. Splatoon
10. Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze

I don't know what you fags are talking about this decade was pretty great

1. Pathologic 2
2. Factorio
3. Victoria II
4. Crusader Kings II
5. Europa Universalis IV
6. Gary Grigsby's War in the East
7. Distant Worlds: Universe
8. Kentucky Route Zero
9. Papers, Please
10. Subnautica

It is in fact the definition of a meme game

you are probably the stupidest person i've ever had the misfortune to speak to. one doesn't like to wish ill on others but i hope you take a long look at your life and stupidity. you being too thick to understand something is not an argument and it certainly does not make you right. you have no coherent response to my teleological argument. you are a waste of time. i am done with you. you are the worst sort of person who googles something for 5 minutes misunderstands it and thinks they know anything. sort your fucking life out mate.

>It's popular but I don't like it so it must be a meme game
It's just good, user. Accept it.

>I-it was all arbitrary!

I don't care how it was dumbass. The calendar back then didn't use 0, so it was originally 1-0, not 0-9. You literally cannot deny this. Again stop moving the goal, Also, you really like to turn everything into a paragraph to appear smart huh? Nobody reads your wall of texts because they are irrelevant, so don't waste your time, retarded sack of shit.

1. The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild
2. Undertale
3. Bloodborne
4. Ys VIII: Lacrimosa of Dana
5. Groove Coaster
6. Crypt of the Necrodancer
7. Bayonetta
8. Monster Hunter World
9. Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze
10. Akai Katana

> "tasteless fag"
> doesn't have a taste in anything

Hint, every game which can be used in a "the X of Y genre" phrase is by definition a meme game, but you might be too young to comprehend that

After 2014 games turned to shit. Except Cuphead and Nu-doom.

It was good. Started out awful (2007-2013 may have been the worst period in the entirety of gaming history), but things started picking up towards the second half.

The political shitstorm and some business practices are a fucking shame. But games-wise? A lot of good shit. Extremely diversified genres, resurgence of strong small-to-mid ranging studios, weaking of the console influences, massive increase of quality of ports and multiplatform games, and quite a lot of fairly big budgeted titles that took some serious risks.
Most of the bad shit that is happening is ultimately irrelevant (token poilitical bullshit) or completely avoidable (microtransactions).

>GOTD?
I think it may be a toss between Factorio, and Pathologic 2 for me.

>Worst GOTD?
I really don't keep track of games that are shit.

You never had any argument to begin with, fucking retard. Your logic is fundamentally flawed, and you know you lost the debate a long time ago. I don't even know why I keep replying your no sense when you are incapable of grasping basic logic. Pathetic faggot. Also learn proper English and lurk more before you post, newfag.

Souls games are for turbo autists hence their popularity on this board. If you're not autistic they're mediocre at best.

>B-but it was a trend to call X the Dark Souls of Y.
It's not lazy journalism's fault that the difficulty was beaten like a dead horse.
This does not take away from the actual games quality in the slightest. To think so you'd have to be a bitter contrarian grasping at straws.
If anything it shows how influential dark souls actually was.
I'm sorry that a game you liked isn't getting recognised as much.

>2010s almost over

Wew

Attached: baby.jpg (1920x1080, 323K)

>game I don't like is for autists.
Your favourite game is for autists.

Meme game for zoomers

Whew. If this is the extent of the arguments against Dark Souls then it's no wonder why it's GOTD.

>tfw the 2010's are already almost over
jesus fucking christ, it felt like a flashing light
btw, fuck OP for not putting rayman legends in the pic

Attached: 1567642196461.png (626x531, 279K)

Pretty based taste

Attached: 1546466062526.jpg (429x1024, 290K)

Contrarian faggot who parrots opinions from Yea Forums and likely hasn't played any of the "worst" games

Dark Souls 3 is Game of the Decade

Imagine putting SH3 over 1 and 2 and expecting people to take you seriously

Attached: 1564681688985.jpg (485x480, 28K)

I never played Dark Souls therefore it cannot be GOTD.

>Only Doom, Prey, Minecraft,Walking Dead Final Season and Dead by Daylight break higher than 5/10 on my scale.
you have to be a special kind of shit eater to have such shit taste. I'm genuinely amazed at your shit taste.

>narrative focused titles.

Attached: blue.png (388x412, 262K)

>lol 2012, 2013 and 2014 there was LITERALLY NOTHING
I was going to say "wrong" but this was released in 2011.

Attached: 220px-Darkest_Hour_Cover.png (220x305, 79K)

Metro Exodus is massively underrated. Easily the best FPS of the decade

>POPULAR BAD
Don't know how you got that from my post when I put Saints Row IV, Bloodborne, Splatoon and RE7 in best game slots, and RE7 I have written 5 post essays here on why it's not good.
I put Ground Zeroes as a "Worst Game" because of what it represented. A game that you could, at most, get 20 hours out of being sold for $40. I liked it, but no fucking way was it worth the price of admission.
MGSV TPP is the worst game of 2015 because Kojima just kept raising people's expectations, and when it came out, all we got was Peace Walker 2 but worse, and with a story that just abruptly ends midway through and tapes we heard in the trailers had to wrap up the plot. Doesn't help that the gameplay is incredibly formulaic to match the incredibly formulaic missions.
I didn't like much in 2016, because I didn't really play much that year. Dragon Quest Builders was the only game I actually remembered enjoying at all honestly.
And I explained why I don't like Breath of the Wild and God of War.
Contrarian means "hates things because of an uninformed/no spoken opinion." You couldn't really say that before and you definitely can't say that now.
SH1 actually used to be where 3 was, but 3 won out because of soundtrack and characters being better. I love 1's aesthetic, monsters and how it handled its story, in particular how it structured the endings so you work your way from Bad all the way to Good+ through exploration and reading into the lore.
2 on the other hand I didn't enjoy as much. It looks very bland in a lot of areas, monsters have a lot more meaning but at the cost of any intimidation factor as you can just wail on them endlessly with a pipe (and they aren't fast) and by God did they fuck up area design and puzzles, the Apartments just make me want to stop my replays every time they're so boring to explore.
Also, 2 didn't have this
youtube.com/watch?v=JPuQeuUbKY8
>SHEEEEEEEEEE"S GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONE

bump

based tastes

>being this much of a contrarian

Some absolute terrible taste right here, Jesus.