*** INTERNET PC GAMES CHARTS * Edition 364 ***
jojo
Internet Charts. We are proud to present you the new list of this week...
PC Games Top 100 - Video Games Top 100 - Singles Top 100 - Albums Top 100
Movies Top 100 - Television Top 100 - Websites Top 100 - Homepages Top 100
Female Stars Top 100 - Male Stars Top 100 - all at http://www.worldcharts.com
==============================================================================
| Urban Chaos {!} - Mucky Foot/Eidos AC |
| ...is this week's WCF Smash PC Game! (PC Game of the Week) |
==============================================================================
==============================================================================
| * * * I N T E R N E T P C G A M E S T O P 1 0 0 * * * |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (c) 1999 World Charts Foundation Issue 234 - Week 51 - December 20, 1999 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| This list is replied to email addresses from which we have received votes. |
| Send mail with "unsubscribe" in the body to pcg...@worldcharts.nl if you |
| don't want to receive any email from us. Send mail with "nolist" if you |
| don't want the weekly lists. Send "nocall" if you don't want reminders. |
| Send votes to pcg...@worldcharts.nl and comments to in...@worldcharts.nl. |
| Send us mail with "send doc" in the subject header for info about voting. |
| Send mail with "send pcgames" in the header to receive the latest chart. |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Send your votes to pcg...@worldcharts.nl or use the voting form at |
| http://www.worldcharts.nl/gvote.html and you get the next chart by email. |
| Read http://www.worldcharts.com/_voting.html for info on voting via email. |
| The format for every line with a vote is: points title [ ID ] |
| You must include the ID number, and between brackets! It is not optional. |
| Use [] or [0000] as the ID number for games not yet listed on the charts. |
| You can allocate a maximum of 20 points, but not more than 5 for 1 game. |
| An example can be found at the bottom of this list. Look at it first! |
==============================================================================
Support your favourite games! Use a button on your homepage, and make other
people vote for your favourites! See: http://www.worldcharts.com/_button.html
The following Top 40 contains the most popular download games at this time.
The list includes demo versions, shareware versions and freeware games.
Vote for a game in this chart if you think other people should download it.
==============================================================================
Internet Download Top 40 Edition 234 - Week 51 - December 20, 1999
==============================================================================
TW LW NW Title Developer/Publisher Cat HI ID
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 2^ 13 Unreal Tournament {D} Epic/GT SH 1 [3453]
2 1 29 Quake 3 Arena Test {F} Id AC 1 [3307]
3 3 12 Age Of Wonders {D} Triumph/Epic ST 3 [3469]
4 4 14 Homeworld {D} Relic/Sierra ST 3 [3439]
5 5 19 Mortyr {D} Mirage SH 4 [3377]
6 6 35 MechWarrior 3 {D} Zipper/MicroProse AC 5 [3241]
7 7 10 Alien Crossfire {D} Firaxis ST 7 [3488]
8 10^ 6 Age Of Empires (Age Of Kings) {D} Ensemble/Microsoft ST 8 [3550]
9 12^ 51 Alpha Centauri {D} Firaxis/Electronic Arts ST 1 [3131]
10 9 43 Natuk {S} Tom Proudfoot RP 2 [3186]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 14^ 28 Drakan (Order Of The Flame) {D} Surreal/Psygnosis AC/AD 2 [3313]
12 8 5 Indiana Jones (The Infernal Machine) {D} LucasArts AC/AD 6 [3580]
13 11 77 BattleCruiser 3000 AD {F} Derek Smart ST 2 [2608]
14 13 7 Rainbow Six (Rogue Spear) {D} Red Storm ST 13 [3441]
15 15 32 Heroes of Might and Magic 3 {D} New World/3DO ST 2 [3263]
16 22^ 21 Star Trek (Star Fleet Command) {D} Interplay WG 3 [3356]
17 20^ 3 Nerf ArenaBlast {D} Visionary/Hasbro AC 17 [3523]
18 24^ 10 Pharaoh {D} Impressions/Sierra ST 14 [3493]
19 17 30 Nethergate {D} Spiderweb RP 8 [3306]
20 23^ 43 Worms Armageddon {D} Team 17 AC/PU 4 [3179]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21 19 119 Demise/Mordor 2 {D} VB Designs RP 1 [2329]
22 16 4 AMA Superbike {D} Motorsims RA 16 [3489]
23 27^ 54 Descent 3 {D} Outrage/Interplay SH 1 [3089]
24 18 4 Messiah {D} Shiny/Interplay AC 18 [3601]
25 26^ 67 Wing Commander (Secret Ops) Origin/Electronic Arts AC/SI 2 [2903]
26 21 8 Sega Rally 2 {D} Sega RA 12 [3545]
27 -* 1 Final Fantasy 8 {D} Squaresoft RP 27 [3636]
28 28 13 Grand Theft Auto 2 {D} Rockstar/Take 2 RA 5 [3466]
29 25 21 Driver {D} Reflections/GT RA 13 [3286]
30 34^ 11 Disciples (Sacred Lands) {D} Strategy First ST 18 [3426]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
31 29 14 Septerra Core {D} Valkyrie/Monolith AD/RP 26 [3422]
32 32 4 Natural Fawn Killers {D} Fiendish SH 32 [3609]
33 37^ 18 FreeSpace 2 {D} Volition/Interplay SH 15 [3403]
34 -^ 1 Total Annihilation (Kingdoms) {D} Cavedog/GT AC/WG 34 [3548]
35 -^ 1 Heart of Darkness {D} Amazing/Infogrames/Interplay PL 35 [2919]
36 36 30 Lords Of Magic (S.E.) {D} Impressions/Sierra ST 19 [3023]
37 38^ 3 Wheel Of Time {D} Legend/GT AC/RP 37 [3579]
38 30 10 Mankind {D} Vibes/Cryo ST 17 [3471]
39 31 9 Asheron's Call {D} Turbine/Microsoft RP 4 [3505]
40 -^ 1 Crusaders Of Might & Magic {D} 3DO AC/AD 40 [3634]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dropped Out:
33 6 Odium/Gorky 17 {D} Metropolis/Monolith AC 7 [3474]
35 17 Star Wars Episode 1 (Racer) {D} LucasArts RA 23 [3331]
39 5 Tachyon (The Fringe) {D} NovaLogic SI 33 [3494]
40 16 GP500 {D} Melbourne/Hasbro RA 15 [3406]
The following games have not yet received enough points to enter the chart:
==============================================================================
Runners Up Edition 234 - Week 51 - December 20, 1999
==============================================================================
TW LW NW Title Developer/Publisher Cat HI ID
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 1 5 Close Combat 4 (Battle Of The Bulge) Atomic/Mindscape WG 1 [3606]
2 3^ 5 Urban Chaos {D} Mucky Foot/Eidos AC 2 [3602]
3 4^ 5 Deer Hunt Challenge {D} EA Sports SH 3 [3603]
4 5^ 5 Flanker 2.0 {D} SSI/Mindscape SI 4 [3604]
5 6^ 5 Tyrian 2000 {S} XSIV/Eclipse SH 5 [3605]
6 9^ 3 Lego Racers {D} High Voltage/Lego RA 6 [3621]
7 10^ 3 Spellbinder {D} Mythic RP 7 [3622]
8 11^ 3 Hangsim {D} Wilco SI 8 [3623]
9 12^ 3 The Longest Journey {D} FunCom AD 9 [3624]
10 13^ 3 Star Trek (Hidden Evil) {D} Activision AD 10 [3625]
11 14^ 3 Verge {D} Vteam SH 11 [3626]
12 15^ 3 AIWars {D} Nexus AC 12 [3627]
13 17^ 2 Test Drive (Off-Road 3) {D} Infogrames RA 13 [3635]
14 19^ 2 Demolition Racer {D} Pitbull Syndicate/Infogrames RA 14 [3637]
15 20^ 2 Boarderzone {D} Housemarque/Infogrames SP 15 [3638]
16 -^ 1 Fighter Ace 2 {D} Microsoft SI 16 [3642]
17 -^ 1 Majesty {D} Cyberlore/Hasbro ST 17 [3643]
18 -^ 1 1602 A.D. {D} Sunflowers/GT ST 18 [3644]
19 -^ 1 Hired Team {D} New Media Generation AC 19 [3645]
20 -^ 1 Interstate '82 {D} Activision RA 20 [3646]
The following Top 100 contains the most popular PC games at this time.
The list includes commercial retail games and registered shareware games.
Vote for a game in this chart if you think other people should buy it too.
==============================================================================
Internet PC Games Top 100 Edition 364 - Week 51 - December 20, 1999
==============================================================================
TW LW NW Title Developer/Publisher Cat HI ID
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 1 11 Age Of Empires 2 {!} Ensemble/Microsoft ST 1 [3476]
2 2 42 Heroes of Might and Magic 3 {!} New World/3DO ST 1 [3184]
3 5^ 29 Jagged Alliance 2 Sir-Tech/TalonSoft ST 2 [3294]
4 4 51 Baldur's Gate {!} Bioware/Black Isle/Interplay RP 1 [3115]
5 3 44 Alpha Centauri/Alien CrossfireFiraxis/Electronic Arts ST 1 [3168]
6 7^ 11 Homeworld Relic/Sierra SI 6 [3479]
7 17* 3 Unreal Tournament Epic/GT SH 7 [3615]
8 6 56 Half-Life/Opposing Force Valve/Sierra SH 1 [3046]
9 10^ 7 Fifa 2000 EA Sports SP 9 [3532]
10 9 28 Might and Magic 7 (For Blood and Honor) {!} 3DO RP 2 [3287]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 8 18 System Shock 2 {!} Looking Glass/Electronic Arts AC/RP 6 [3398]
12 13^ 89 Starcraft/Add-on {!} Blizzard WG 1 [2677]
13 12 16 Command And Conquer (Tiberian Sun) Electronic Arts AC/WG 3 [3417]
14 11 5 Age Of Wonders Triumph/Epic/G.O.D. ST 11 [3574]
15 26* 3 Ultima 9 (Ascension) {!} Origin/Electronic Arts RP 15 [3610]
16 14 58 Railroad Tycoon 2/Add-on {!} PopTop/G.O.D. ST 5 [3008]
17 16 19 Civilization 2 (Test Of Time) MicroProse ST 16 [3387]
18 15 20 Darkstone {!} Delphine/G.O.D. RP 10 [3378]
19 46* 2 Quake 3 (Arena) {!} Id/Activision SH 19 [3618]
20 18 40 RollerCoaster Tycoon/Add-ons Microprose ST 7 [3200]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21 21 59 Fallout 2 {!} Black Isle/Interplay RP 1 [2995]
22 19 15 Nexus (The Kingdom Of The Winds) Nexon AD 12 [3420]
23 24^ 27 Need for Speed (High Stakes) {!} Electronic Arts RA 14 [3323]
24 22 40 BattleCruiser 3000 AD V.2.0 Interplay ST 17 [3211]
25 32^ 4 Pharaoh Impressions/Sierra ST 25 [3593]
26 20 11 Driver Reflections/GT RA 20 [3477]
27 25 77 Final Fantasy 7 {!} SquareSoft/Eidos RP 7 [2811]
28 27 37 Championship Manager 3 {!} Eidos SP 14 [3248]
29 30^ 86 Might and Magic 6 (The Mandate of Heaven) {!} 3DO RP 2 [2696]
30 23 14 NHL 2000 {!} EA Sports SP 17 [3444]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
31 33^ 39 EverQuest {!} Verant/989 Studios/Sony RP 18 [3206]
32 28 23 Outcast Appeal/Infogrames AD 25 [3349]
33 29 25 Dungeon Keeper 2 Bullfrog/Electronic Arts ST 7 [3343]
34 31 6 Asheron's Call {!} Turbine/Microsoft RP 27 [3559]
35 36^ 7 Grand Theft Auto 2 {!} DMA/Rockstar/Take 2 RA 35 [3529]
36 34 54 Thief (The Dark Project) {!} Looking Glass/Eidos AC/AD 6 [3079]
37 39^ 37 Civilization (Call to Power) Activision ST 11 [3235]
38 59* 4 Gabriel Knight 3 Sierra AD 38 [3595]
39 35 25 Total Annihilation (Kingdoms) {!} Cavedog/GT AC/WG 7 [3342]
40 38 11 Freespace 2 Volition/Interplay AC 31 [3480]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
41 54* 3 Indiana Jones (The Infernal Machine) {!} LucasArts AC/AD 41 [3598]
42 43^ 17 Discworld Noir Perfect/GT AD 30 [3397]
43 42 116 Total Annihilation Cavedog/GT WG 1 [2402]
44 45^ 36 X-Wing Alliance LucasArts SI 9 [3249]
45 37 7 Revenant Cinematix/Eidos AC/RP 30 [3542]
46 41 11 Rainbox Six (Rogue Spear) Red Storm ST 29 [3458]
47 44 18 Star Trek (Starfleet Command) Interplay WG 13 [3400]
48 50^ 6 NBA Live 2000 EA Sports SP 48 [3541]
49 47 55 Heretic 2 Raven/Activision SH 13 [3067]
50 71* 6 X-Com (First Alien Invasion) MicroProse ST 50 [3499]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
51 67* 5 Delta Force 2 NovaLogic SI 51 [3560]
52 48 12 Prince Of Persia 3D {!} Red Orb/Mindscape AC/AD 35 [3461]
53 51 29 Star Trek (Birth of the Federation) MicroProse/Hasbro ST 20 [3296]
54 56^ 4 Myth (The Total Codex) Bungie ST 54 [3596]
55 49 111 Ultima Online/Second Age {!} Origin/Electronic Arts RP 19 [2399]
56 68^ 3 Septerra Core (Legacy Of The CreatorValkyrie/Monolith RP 56 [3613]
57 55 19 X (Beyond The Frontier) {!} EgoSoft/THQ AC 47 [3386]
58 40 63 Caesar 3 (Build a Better Rome) {!} Sierra ST 5 [2936]
59 57 4 Omikron (The Nomad Soul) Quantic Dream/Eidos AD 56 [3564]
60 58 31 Star Wars Episode 1 (The Phantom Menace) {!}LucasArts AD 29 [3282]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
61 90* 2 Tomb Raider (The Last Revelation) Core/Eidos AC/AD 61 [3612]
62 74^125 X-Com 3 (Apocalypse) {!} Mythos/MicroProse ST 4 [2351]
63 65^ 28 Aliens Vs. Predator Rebellion/Fox AC 14 [3280]
64 61 5 Theme Park World/Sim Theme PaBullfrog/Electronic Arts ST 61 [3561]
65 62 32 Rage Of Mages 2/Allods 2 (Necromancer) Nival/Monolith RP 20 [3272]
66 76^ 10 Pizza Syndicate Software 2000 ST 66 [3381]
67 53 105 Quake 2/Add-on {!} Id/Activision SH 1 [2529]
68 69^ 4 Odium/Gorky 17 Monolith/Interplay AC/ST 68 [3589]
69 52 10 Disciples (Sacred Land) Strategy First ST 26 [3483]
70 75^ 3 Thief Gold Looking Glass/Eidos AD 70 [3565]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
71 64 57 Carmageddon 2 {!} Stainless/SCi/Interplay RA 19 [3037]
72 66 58 Colin McRae Rally Codemasters RA 26 [2989]
73 78^ 38 Imperialism 2 Frog City/SSI/Mindscape ST 18 [3223]
74 60 24 Kingpin (Life of Crime) {!} Xatrix/Interplay SH 21 [3350]
75 70 16 Expendable Rage SH 54 [3348]
76 -* 1 Planescape (Torment) {!} Interplay RP 76 [3629]
77 63 23 Hidden & Dangerous/Devil's Bridge {Illusion/Take 2 AC/WG 28 [3364]
78 85^ 69 Warlords 3 (Darklords Rising) SSG/Red Orb WG 10 [2882]
79 89^ 79 Descent (Freespace - The Great War) Interplay SH 9 [2782]
80 77 154 Diablo Blizzard RP 1 [2154]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
81 -^ 1 Rally Championship 2000 Magnetic Fields/Europress RA 81 [3544]
82 79 69 Rainbow Six Red Storm AC/ST 7 [2883]
83 80 60 Grim Fandango {!} LucasArts/Activision AD 10 [2981]
84 83 38 Superbike World Championship Virgin/EA Sports RA 48 [3194]
85 81 46 SimCity 3000 {!} Maxis/Electronic Arts ST 13 [3152]
86 91^ 31 Grand Prix Legends Papyrus/Sierra Sports RA 55 [2935]
87 97^ 2 Rayman 2 (The Great Escape) UbiSoft PL 87 [3543]
88 95^ 53 Falcon 4.0 {!} MicroProse SI 30 [3091]
89 73 4 Wheel Of Time {!} Legend/GT AC/RP 68 [3575]
90 82 28 MechWarrior 3/Pirate's Moon {!} Zipper/MicroProse AC 9 [3311]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
91 92^ 82 Unreal/Add-ons {!} Digital Extremes/Epic/GT SH 2 [2753]
92 96^ 3 Flanker 2.0 SSI/Mindscape SI 92 [3535]
93 72 9 Shadow Company (Left For Dead) UbiSoft AC 60 [3502]
94 86 26 Heavy Gear 2 Activision AC/ST 30 [3335]
95 93 113 Age of Empires {!} Ensemble/Microsoft ST 3 [2424]
96 88 4 Warcraft 2 (Battle.net Edition) Blizzard AC/WG 88 [3572]
97 84 92 Battlezone Activision WG 4 [2642]
98 -^ 1 GP500 MicroProse/Hasbro RA 98 [3600]
99 -^ 1 Close Combat 4 (Battle Of The Bulge) Atomic/Mindscape WG 99 [3586]
100 94 11 Legacy Of Kain (Soul ReaverChrystal Dynamics/Eidos AC/AD 79 [3450]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dropped Out:
87 28 Midtown Madness Angel/Microsoft RA 22 [3288]
98 108 The Curse of Monkey Island {!} LucasArts AD 6 [2468]
99 1 SWAT 3 (Close Quarters Battle) Sierra AD 99 [3594]
100 55 Fifa 99 EA Sports SP 9 [3044]
The following games have not yet received enough points to enter the chart:
==============================================================================
Runners Up Edition 364 - Week 51 - December 20, 1999
==============================================================================
TW LW NW Title Developer/Publisher Cat HI ID
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 10^ 7 Chessmaster 7000 Mindscape ST 1 [3557]
2 47^ 2 Mig Alley Rowan/Empire/Interplay SI 2 [3630]
3 4^ 8 Nocturne Terminal Reality/G.O.D. AC 1 [3536]
4 38^ 5 Diplomacy Hasbro ST 4 [3599]
5 2 5 Slave Zero Infogrames AC 2 [3585]
6 50^ 2 Wild Wild West Southpeak AC/AD 6 [3633]
7 5 5 Interstate '82 Activision RA 5 [3590]
8 35^ 5 Bugs Bunny (Lost In Time) Behaviour/Infogrames PL 8 [3591]
9 7 7 Harley-Davidson (Race Across America) WizardWorks RA 7 [3558]
10 33^ 6 Field & Stream (Trophy Hunting) Sierra Sports SH 10 [3578]
11 8 7 NHL Championship 2000 Radical/Fox Sports SP 8 [3563]
12 9 6 Independence War Deluxe/I-War Particle/Infogrames ST 9 [3573]
13 16^ 7 Creatures 3 Mindscape ST 13 [3554]
14 14 8 West Front (Elite Edition) Talon Soft WG 14 [3530]
15 17^ 5 Test Drive 6 Pitbull Syndicate/Infogrames RA 15 [3588]
16 12 8 Pong Atari/Hasbro AR 6 [3533]
17 48^ 2 Nerf ArenaBlast Atari/Hasbro AC 17 [3631]
18 19^ 8 The Settlers 3 (Quest Of The Amazons) Blue Byte ST 3 [3538]
19 23^ 8 Axis & Allies (Iron Blitz) Hasbro WG 19 [3531]
20 24^ 8 Nascar Legends Papyrus/Sierra RA 20 [3534]
21 25^ 8 Test Drive (Off-Road 3) Infogrames RA 21 [3537]
22 26^ 8 Inherent Evil Head Games/Activision AD 22 [3539]
23 27^ 8 Trick Style Criterion/Acclaim RA 23 [3540]
24 28^ 7 Abomination Hothouse/Eidos AC/ST 24 [3555]
25 29^ 7 NFL Blitz 2000 Midway/Infogrames SP 25 [3556]
26 30^ 7 NBA Basketball 2000 Radical/Fox Sports SP 26 [3562]
27 31^ 6 AMA Superbike Motorsims RA 27 [3576]
28 32^ 6 Spec Ops 2 (Green Berets) Zombie/Ripcord AC 28 [3577]
29 34^ 5 Hype (Time Quest) Playmobil/Ubi Soft AC/AD 29 [3587]
30 36^ 5 Lander Psygnosis SI 30 [3592]
31 37^ 5 Star Trek (Hidden Evil) Presto/Activision AD 31 [3597]
32 39^ 4 South Park (Chef's Luv Shack) Acclaim PU 32 [3611]
33 40^ 4 Missile Command Atari AR 33 [3614]
34 41^ 4 Phoenix Team 17/MicroProse/Hasbro SI 34 [3616]
35 42^ 3 Microsoft Soccer 2000 Microsoft SP 35 [3617]
36 43^ 3 Hangsim Wilco SI 36 [3619]
37 44^ 3 Total Soccer LiveMedia/Iridon SP 37 [3620]
38 45^ 2 Crusaders Of Might & Magic 3DO AC/AD 38 [3628]
39 49^ 2 Antietam! Firaxis ST 39 [3632]
40 -^ 1 Warcraft 2 (Battle Chest) Blizzard AC/WG 40 [3639]
41 -^ 1 12 O'Clock High TalonSoft/Take 2 ST 41 [3640]
42 -^ 1 Urban Chaos {!} Mucky Foot/Eidos AC 42 [3641]
11 dec 1999: We're almost ready
You can soon visit our new web site Global100.com every day! This web site
is going to be the professional successor to the well known web site
worldcharts.com. During the last year we've spent many sleepless nights
writing a very advanced on-line charts engine. You are definately going to
enjoy all the marvelous things we will be able to show you. At this time there
are only a limited number of web pages available on the new site, and we
kindly ask you to help us testing and improving them. Everything is new there,
so don't be surprised when you find that some of the things aren't working
properly yet. We're working our asses off trying to get everything to run
smoothly. And the pages you find there are only the tip of the iceberg. With
our new on-line database and software we have lots and lots of surprises for
you up our sleeves. Go to http://www.global100.com to check it out. And be
sure to come back regulary and see what we've improved and/or added to the
site. Enjoy!
11 dec 1999: World Charts shutting down soon
The Global100 web site is the new and improved version of the former
WorldCharts web site. This means that worldcharts.com will be shutting down in
a few weeks. All the charts will be transferred to Global100, including all
historical data about previous issues and the votes from our readers. For now
the Global100 web pages are being TESTED. This means that the official charts
are still running on World Charts, and the Global100 pages contain real and
fake test data. We will properly announce to all our readers the exact moment
when the voting booth on worldcharts.com will be disabled and the voting booth
on global100.com will be for real.
11 dec 1999: Start Up of the Year
Millidian is the name of the new company that owns and operates the global
charts, as it was previously done by World Charts Foundation. On December 9
Millidian won the Business Plan 1999 contest (in The Netherlands), earning the
title "Start Up of the Year". Millidian had the best plan, strategy and
presentation of 600 contestants. A summary of the presentation (in Dutch) can
be found on the Contact page.
15 dec 1999: Beta-test now open!
The Global100 web site is now ready to be tested. Please have a look around,
try some of the features, and tell us if you like it. Note that this is NOT a
stress or security test. We know there are ways to bring each web server to
its knees, including this one. That's not the point of this beta-test. We just
want to know if you have comments or ideas about the features and the design.
Thanks for helping us to improve this free service!
17 dec 1999: Lots of new features
It's almost impossible to tell you about all the new stuff that you will be
able to find on the Global100 site now and later next year. Many of the things
we're working on right now deal with boring technical stuff behind the scenes.
However, there are a few new features I'd like to point out to you... 1) New
calculations of the charts will take place several times a day. This means you
don't have to wait an entire week to find out what's happening on the charts.
You can review new results every day! 2) It's finally possible to add your own
requests to our database and vote for them immediately. The titles you add will
be assigned a new ID number straight away. There's no need to wait for us
anymore, it's all in your own hands now! 3) All previous issues of all the
charts are now available in a proper lay-out. These are just a few of many new
features coming your way. We'll let you know when something new is worth
checking out.
Jurgen.
==============================================================================
Note: The editorials published here, and the Smash titles announced throughout
the website, are personal expressions of the editors. Personal views and
opinions have no influence on the fair and unbiased compilation of the charts.
==============================================================================
| TW : This Week | The Internet PC Games Top 100 are compiled using |
| LW : Last Week | votes sent by gamers from all over the world. |
| NW : Number of Weeks | The latest charts are published every Monday on |
| HI : Highest Position | Usenet in the comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.* newsgroups.|
| ^ : Climbing |--------------------------------------------------|
| * : Bullet | {free} Freeware | Send your votes like this: |
| AC : Action | {demo} Demo Version| > 5 Dark Invader [1435] |
| AD : Adventure | {share} Shareware | > 4 Action Force2 [1322] |
| AR : Arcade | {reg} Registered | > 5 Super Fighter [1502] |
| FI : Fighting | {O} OS/2 Only | > 2 Magic of Zuul 4 [] |
| IF : Interactive Fiction| | > 4 The Lost Tycoon [] |
| PL : Platform | | |
| PU : Puzzle | {!} Smash PC Game| |
| RA : Racing |--------------------------------------------------|
| RP : Role-Playing | (c) 1999 all rights reserved | World Charts |
| SH : Shooter | Distribution of these charts |J.B. Bakemakade 96 |
| SI : Simulation | is granted only by written | 3071 ME Rotterdam |
| SP : Sports | permission. | The Netherlands |
| ST : Strategy |--------------------------------------------------|
| WG : Wargame | |
| | http://www.worldcharts.com |
==============================================================================
=KS=
jojo <jo...@xs3.xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:83kqlp$758$1...@xs3.xs4all.nl...
ID
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
ID
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
mlwilliams
>
> Does anybody actually read these stupid things?
Only when people copy the whole damn lot past my killfilter! :)
BC3K at number 24 top selling chart, putting out more copies than
Pharaoh and Driver?! Yeah, right...
Mark
who...@wherever.com
:> Does anybody actually read these stupid things?
Most definitely, though I prefer the online version at worldcharts.com.
: Only when people copy the whole damn lot past my killfilter! :)
: BC3K at number 24 top selling chart, putting out more copies than
: Pharaoh and Driver?! Yeah, right...
Looks like you've missed the point for those charts. They're based on a
*popular opinion* of all gamers who bother to vote for their favorite
games through e-mail or on the website. Unlike some other similar
charts, there are *a lot* of voters and they use a complicated cheating
prevention system. Many smart game stores use this chart to plan their
purchases. Jojo's been making this chart for ages already - as you can
see, they're up to Edition 364, or 5 years, as of now.
I recall the times when Civilization totally ruled the chart as Doom hadn't
been released yet.. ahh :).
mlwilliams
>
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg mlwilliams <mwil...@signal.dera.gov.uk> wrote:
> :> Does anybody actually read these stupid things?
>
> Most definitely, though I prefer the online version at worldcharts.com.
>
> : Only when people copy the whole damn lot past my killfilter! :)
>
> : BC3K at number 24 top selling chart, putting out more copies than
> : Pharaoh and Driver?! Yeah, right...
>
> Looks like you've missed the point for those charts. They're based on a
> *popular opinion* of all gamers who bother to vote for their favorite
> games through e-mail or on the website. Unlike some other similar
> charts, there are *a lot* of voters and they use a complicated cheating
> prevention system. Many smart game stores use this chart to plan their
> purchases.
Well then they're insane. Who would base retail decisions on a chart
based simply on its longevity?! To hold any weight whatsoever the chart
should state the number of votes recieved for each game. My guess is
that an honest account of these figures would reveal them to be small.
Add to this the fact that it is a non representative sample prone to
manipulation and you have a worthless index.
--
Saturnalia
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/5676/sat.html
I'm sorry, I can't argue unless you've paid.
who...@wherever.com
: based simply on its longevity?! To hold any weight whatsoever the chart
: should state the number of votes recieved for each game. My guess is
: that an honest account of these figures would reveal them to be small.
: Add to this the fact that it is a non representative sample prone to
: manipulation and you have a worthless index.
Don't know where all your negativity comes from. You can read all about the
voting process at http://www.worldcharts.com/_voting.html and about chart
compilation at http://www.worldcharts.com/_compilation.html. Details on
votes received for the games can also be seen if you go to the charts'
homepage at www.worldcharts.com/gindex.html and click "Top 100 Details";
just read and *understand* the voting process first. Any chart is repre-
sentative of only a fraction of gamers' opinion, because there is no way
to force *everybody* to express their opinion on a subject. On the other
hand, this chart is hands down the most accurate indicator of games'
popularity *available*, because unlike anything published in magazines
it is unbiased (feel free to prove otherwise!), it's longevity, number
of vote(r)s and the fact that voting is open for anybody.
mlwilliams
>
>
> Don't know where all your negativity comes from.
Mainly because the rankings are wildly at odds with what I see on the
shelves and with charts compiled based on _sales_ rather than voting
rings.
> Any chart is repre-
> sentative of only a fraction of gamers' opinion, because there is no way
> to force *everybody* to express their opinion on a subject.
Since the only test of opinion retailers are really interested in is
sales the above statement is plain wrong. You 'force' people to express
their opinion on which games they are prepared to buy by measuring which
games they buy. It's simple. No amount of argument from a
'would-you-like-to-vote' chart maker will convince sensible opinion that
their chart has anything like the validity of a 'what-have-they-bought'
chart.
> On the other
> hand, this chart is hands down the most accurate indicator of games'
> popularity *available*, because unlike anything published in magazines
> it is unbiased (feel free to prove otherwise!)
It is as easy for me to prove this chart is biased as it is for you to
prove a magazine's chart is biased. I.e its a matter of opinion. You
might argue the magazine's chart is biased through a desire on their
part to please the advertisers, I would argue this chart is biased by
organised voting.
>, it's longevity,
Please explain why this is in any way relevent?
> number
> of vote(r)s
Why should I believe these figures?
> and the fact that voting is open for anybody.
This is a positive disadvantage and that you would argue it as a
strength shows you have a very poor understanding of census-taking.
Mark
who...@wherever.com
:> Don't know where all your negativity comes from.
: Mainly because the rankings are wildly at odds with what I see on the
: shelves and with charts compiled based on _sales_ rather than voting
: rings.
Ah, but you're comparing apples and oranges. From what I can tell from
the rest of your post, your opinion is that the only and objective way
of comparing games (and music, movies, etc) is by their hard sales.
Well, for each their own, but by solely depending on sales figures, Spice
Girls and Beatles ought to be the best musicians in the world and Deer
Hunter or Barbie Fashion Designer one of the best games (nod to the fans
of the respective titles).
On the other hand, jojo's charts are an attempt to measure people's *satis-
faction* with their games. Basically, they count the number of people who
are more or less satisfied with their purchase and willing to express it.
Raw sales figures, on the other hand, are influenced by numerous factors,
such as availability, branding, and marketing power of the publisher, not
*directly* by the actual qualities of the game. For example, all Star Wars
games or titles published by Microsoft don't sell that well because they
were so great, but because of the names and power behind them. Just because
a game is great doesn't mean it sells well.
Hope this clears things up. If you're basing your buying decisions on
sales alone, fine. If you don't like the chart based on public opinion,
you can simply filter jojo's address out and you won't see them.
Kevin Burnett
>Does anybody actually read these stupid things?
You quoted the whole damn message just to add that?
MORON.
--
k...@catnip.org http://www.catnip.org/
"CYNIC, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are,
not as they ought to be. Hence the custom among Scythiians of plucking
out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision." - Ambrose Bierce
Fidius
>> Any chart is repre-
>> sentative of only a fraction of gamers' opinion, because there is no way
>> to force *everybody* to express their opinion on a subject.
>
>Since the only test of opinion retailers are really interested in is
>sales the above statement is plain wrong.
Retailers? Who wants to know what retailers think? The charts aren't
for retailers, they're for gamers. But even so, would retailers not
be interested to know which games are more popular based on actual
use? And as for the statement being wrong, he's talking about sample
size and margins of error. Are you saying that statistical theory is
invalid?
>> On the other
>> hand, this chart is hands down the most accurate indicator of games'
>> popularity *available*, because unlike anything published in magazines
>> it is unbiased (feel free to prove otherwise!)
>
>It is as easy for me to prove this chart is biased as it is for you to
>prove a magazine's chart is biased. I.e its a matter of opinion. You
>might argue the magazine's chart is biased through a desire on their
>part to please the advertisers, I would argue this chart is biased by
>organised voting.
You have completely misunderstood the whole point of the chart. It
attempts to measure games' popularity, people's satisfaction with the
games they've purchased. That's much more valuable info to me than
what's selling. Remember Outpost? Got a good review from a strategy
freak, and sold enough copies to justify a sequel. But I don't know
anyone who wasn't disappointed with it once they brought it home.
Trophy Bass? I bought it for my dad for Father's Day like every other
son desperate for ideas. If he's played it once I'd be surprised.
>>, it's longevity,
>
>Please explain why this is in any way relevent?
Longevity speaks to penetration, obviously.
>> number
>> of vote(r)s
>
>Why should I believe these figures?
Aw come on. Why should you believe in an objective reality? If
you're gonna go philosopher on us, what's the point.
>> and the fact that voting is open for anybody.
>
>This is a positive disadvantage and that you would argue it as a
>strength shows you have a very poor understanding of census-taking.
While it's true that the chart could be better if the participants
were better distributed among the gaming community, that doesn't make
it useless, as you suggest. People who vote are people who feel
strongly about the game they vote for. And that's exactly what I want
to know before I buy a game... how many people feel strongly positive
about a game they have purchased. It's not perfect, and it's open to
abuse, but it's far from useless.
If you're only arguing for the sake of it, I apologize for not
catching it sooner, and for wasting your reading time with a reply.
BT
mlwilliams
>
> Mr. Mark,
>
Dr Mark actually.
> >> Any chart is repre-
> >> sentative of only a fraction of gamers' opinion, because there is no way
> >> to force *everybody* to express their opinion on a subject.
> >
> >Since the only test of opinion retailers are really interested in is
> >sales the above statement is plain wrong.
>
> Retailers? Who wants to know what retailers think? The charts aren't
> for retailers, they're for gamers. But even so, would retailers not
> be interested to know which games are more popular based on actual
> use? And as for the statement being wrong, he's talking about sample
> size and margins of error. Are you saying that statistical theory is
> invalid?
Since my Ph.D is in statistics I'm hardly likely to argue that
statistical theory is wrong. Furthermore I'm highly likely to know a
damn sight more about it than you. The fact that you would make such a
purile statement disinclines me from bothering to address the rest of
your post.
=KS=
Kevin Burnett <k...@blackhelicopter.catnip.org> wrote in message
news:83olnj$7j1$5...@samba.rahul.net...
>
Frank vd Eijkhof
>> Mr. Mark,
>Dr Mark actually.
>Since my Ph.D is in statistics I'm hardly likely to argue that
>statistical theory is wrong. Furthermore I'm highly likely to know a
>damn sight more about it than you. The fact that you would make such a
>purile statement disinclines me from bothering to address the rest of
>your post.
The moment somebody throws his/her title as an argument in stead of
giving good counter-args is the moment I stop listening to this person.
Good luck in your lonely tower...
Frank
PS. If you start giving real args, I will start reading your posts again!
mlwilliams
>
> In <3860A2...@signal.dera.gov.uk> mlwilliams <mwil...@signal.dera.gov.uk> writes:
>
> >> Mr. Mark,
> >Dr Mark actually.
>
> >Since my Ph.D is in statistics I'm hardly likely to argue that
> >statistical theory is wrong. Furthermore I'm highly likely to know a
> >damn sight more about it than you. The fact that you would make such a
> >purile statement disinclines me from bothering to address the rest of
> >your post.
>
> The moment somebody throws his/her title as an argument in stead of
> giving good counter-args is the moment I stop listening to this person.
>
> Good luck in your lonely tower...
>
> Frank
>
There is no point wasting good counter arguments on mindless drivel - I
was merely pointing out that I'm qualified to recognise mindless drivel
when this particular subject is being addressed. I suppose you like to
hear stats-mumbo jumbo from somebody who's just pulling it out of the
air and then waste time setting them right and endure the ensuing back
and forth as if it were all just a matter of opinion?
The rest of that reply was in exactly the same vein as the part that
invited me to dismiss 'statistical theory' on the grounds he didn't
understand sampling theory.
Mark
> PS. If you start giving real args, I will start reading your posts again!
PS - Introduce yourself to logic. How will you know without reading
them?
who...@wherever.com
: was merely pointing out that I'm qualified to recognise mindless drivel
: when this particular subject is being addressed.
...which in more common terms means that you're narcissistic enough to
prefer your own, absolutely not backed up opinions on the others', let alone
the facts, and basing it on your degree on somewhat unrelated field.
: I suppose you like to hear stats-mumbo jumbo from somebody who's just
: pulling it out of the air and then waste time setting them right
Unless you have some better, meaningful, unbiased indicators of PC games'
popularity to point at, you can keep your laughable philosophies on products'
superiority based on sales figures to yourself. Let alone those insane cons-
piracy theories you're hinting at.
: and endure the ensuing back and forth as if it were all just a matter of
: opinion?
It is. The charts are based on people's *positive* opinions. The fact that
you can find Battlecruiser 3000 AD v2 on it, which is probably the basis
on your accusations, means there's a number of people out there who love
the game, even if there's an equally big or greater number of people who
might hate it. So take these charts what they are, indications on the posi-
tive feedback on a game. Not sales charts. Not some sort of average based on
the opinions of a balanced section of the audience. And for what it's worth,
I say these charts are accurate and unbiased. Unless you can prove otherwise
and only THINK it should be any different given the data and methods des-
cribed, you can simply PISS OFF and take your Ph.D with you, troll.
Frank vd Eijkhof
>There is no point wasting good counter arguments on mindless drivel - I
>was merely pointing out that I'm qualified to recognise mindless drivel
>when this particular subject is being addressed. I suppose you like to
>hear stats-mumbo jumbo from somebody who's just pulling it out of the
>air and then waste time setting them right and endure the ensuing back
>and forth as if it were all just a matter of opinion?
Nope. IIRC, the question was whether the named gamelist was valuable.
And though I see the statistical drawbacks of the list, I consider
the list as a nice check on the quality of computergames.
Some years ago the author of the list argued with his readers about a good
votingsystem; I think that in the complex space of variables where his list
resides, the protocol he uses is good enough. Or you write a better one ;-)
The attack you responded on was a bit overdone, but your response ('Me big
boy, you listen or I hit') too... You're 'qualified'(as you put it above) by
argument, not by mentioning your title. And I think that you _can_ give a good
argument.
>The rest of that reply was in exactly the same vein as the part that
>invited me to dismiss 'statistical theory' on the grounds he didn't
>understand sampling theory.
But IMO his point was different, as I stated above.
>> PS. If you start giving real args, I will start reading your posts again!
>PS - Introduce yourself to logic. How will you know without reading
>them?
It was a gentle way of saying 'if you don't bully, I will talk again'. I don't
like to exclude you on such a tiny thing.
No hard feelings? ;-)
Frank
mlwilliams
>
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg mlwilliams <mwil...@signal.dera.gov.uk> wrote:
> : was merely pointing out that I'm qualified to recognise mindless drivel
> : when this particular subject is being addressed.
>
> prefer your own, absolutely not backed up opinions on the others', let alone
> the facts, and basing it on your degree on somewhat unrelated field.
How do you know it's a 'somewhat unrelated field' you surely do seem to
know a lot...
>
> : I suppose you like to hear stats-mumbo jumbo from somebody who's just
> : pulling it out of the air and then waste time setting them right
>
> Unless you have some better, meaningful, unbiased indicators of PC games'
> popularity to point at, you can keep your laughable philosophies on products'
> superiority based on sales figures to yourself. Let alone those insane cons-
> piracy theories you're hinting at.
I haven't a clue what you're talking about. Are you cutting and pasting
this from a webpage?
I'll tell you what: why don't you just invent some arguments, claim I
made them and then knock them down? Oh my, you've already done that.
Clever boy!
>
> : and endure the ensuing back and forth as if it were all just a matter of
> : opinion?
>
> It is. The charts are based on people's *positive* opinions. The fact that
> you can find Battlecruiser 3000 AD v2 on it, which is probably the basis
> on your accusations, means there's a number of people out there who love
> the game, even if there's an equally big or greater number of people who
> might hate it. So take these charts what they are, indications on the posi-
> tive feedback on a game. Not sales charts. Not some sort of average based on
> the opinions of a balanced section of the audience. And for what it's worth,
> I say these charts are accurate and unbiased.
Yup, it's a chart based on who can be bothered to fix it. I'm glad we
agree.
> Unless you can prove otherwise
I have to *Prove* otherwise now? Gosh & there was me thinking I'd be
allowed to express an opinion. Me thinks the cross-boy doth protest too
much :)
> and only THINK it should be any different given the data and methods des-
> cribed, you can simply PISS OFF and take your Ph.D with you, troll.
Well I can see you know you've lost the argument :) Thanks for showing
everyone else too.
Mark
mlwilliams
>
> mlwilliams writes:
>
> >There is no point wasting good counter arguments on mindless drivel - I
> >was merely pointing out that I'm qualified to recognise mindless drivel
> >hear stats-mumbo jumbo from somebody who's just pulling it out of the
> >and forth as if it were all just a matter of opinion?
>
> And though I see the statistical drawbacks of the list, I consider
> the list as a nice check on the quality of computergames.
> Some years ago the author of the list argued with his readers about a good
> votingsystem; I think that in the complex space of variables where his list
> resides, the protocol he uses is good enough. Or you write a better one ;-)
Well I'm glad we agree - it's a list with statistical drawbacks. I think
the drawbacks are sufficiently large such that they mean the list has no
interest to me, hence I made a brief post to support the original poster
whilst chiding him gently for repeating the whole thing.
>
> The attack you responded on was a bit overdone,
It was wasn't it.
> but your response ('Me big
> boy, you listen or I hit') too... You're 'qualified'(as you put it above) by
> argument, not by mentioning your title. And I think that you _can_ give a good
> argument.
It was nice of you to put quotes around what I said - only I said
nothing like that. Mentioning I knew what I was talking about was
necessary shorthand - the alternative would be to sprew forth reams of
stats theory to back up what I was saying. I can give a good argument
only it would not be short and it would not be interesting.
>
> >The rest of that reply was in exactly the same vein as the part that
> >invited me to dismiss 'statistical theory' on the grounds he didn't
> >understand sampling theory.
>
> But IMO his point was different, as I stated above.
His point - if he had a clear one - was so agressive and obfustrating
that it warranted the reply it got. If somebody is going to put words in
my mouth and offer shot-gun deformation then I have to do the best to
make it clear where I'm coming from. If somebody says I'm flying in the
face of statistical theory when in fact I'm very likely to have forgoten
more than they ever knew about it (statistically speaking :) ) then I
don't think it's too grandstanding of me to mention that I have Ph.d in
the subject.
>
> >> PS. If you start giving real args, I will start reading your posts again!
> >PS - Introduce yourself to logic. How will you know without reading
> >them?
>
> It was a gentle way of saying 'if you don't bully, I will talk again'. I don't
> like to exclude you on such a tiny thing.
>
> No hard feelings? ;-)
So many people seem to think you can't have an argument without taking
offense against the other person. Mind you since the other guy has just
posted to the effect that I should 'piss off' and seems to be of the
opinion that I should have my head kicked in for muddying the waters
with facts then it seem that statistically speaking you're right to
think I might have hard feelings towards you. Actually though I don't.
It's been a pleasure posting with you. Merry crimbo.
> Frank
Corwin
<who...@wherever.com> wrote in message news:83t9mk$o4r$1...@kadri.ut.ee...> : There is no point wasting good counter arguments on mindless drivel - I
> : was merely pointing out that I'm qualified to recognise mindless drivel
> : when this particular subject is being addressed.
>
> prefer your own, absolutely not backed up opinions on the others', let
alone
> the facts, and basing it on your degree on somewhat unrelated field.
>
> : pulling it out of the air and then waste time setting them right
>
> popularity to point at, you can keep your laughable philosophies on
products'
> superiority based on sales figures to yourself. Let alone those insane
cons-
> piracy theories you're hinting at.
>
> : opinion?
>
> It is. The charts are based on people's *positive* opinions. The fact that
> you can find Battlecruiser 3000 AD v2 on it, which is probably the basis
> on your accusations, means there's a number of people out there who love
> the game, even if there's an equally big or greater number of people who
> might hate it. So take these charts what they are, indications on the
posi-
> tive feedback on a game. Not sales charts. Not some sort of average based
on
> the opinions of a balanced section of the audience. And for what it's
worth,
otherwise
> and only THINK it should be any different given the data and methods des-
> cribed, you can simply PISS OFF and take your Ph.D with you, troll.
>
>
I won't try to put words in Mark's mouth on this, but I believe he was
trying to point out that charts like this one are equivalent to political
straw polls. Basically, the sample is self-selected, which is a Very Bad
Thing (tm) in statistics. While it's interesting to read, makes for fine
water cooler conversation, etc. It's not the same as a valid poll where a
random sample of gamers is selected by the pollster and then asked their
opinions. Were such a poll conducted, I'd bet that certain games with ...
ummm ... centrally controlled fan bases ... wouldn't even show up on this
chart.
I agree with you that this chart attempts to measure gamer satisfaction, not
sales. The problem is that it's statistically flawed in this measure
because of the self-selecting sample. Think of it as the National Enquirer
version of the news. Interesting, but highly distorted.
mlwilliams
>
> Unless you can prove
> otherwise
> > and only THINK it should be any different given the data and methods des-
> > cribed, you can simply PISS OFF and take your Ph.D with you, troll.
> >
> >
>
> I won't try to put words in Mark's mouth on this, but I believe he was
> trying to point out that charts like this one are equivalent to political
> straw polls. Basically, the sample is self-selected, which is a Very Bad
> Thing (tm) in statistics. While it's interesting to read, makes for fine
> water cooler conversation, etc. It's not the same as a valid poll where a
> random sample of gamers is selected by the pollster and then asked their
> opinions. Were such a poll conducted, I'd bet that certain games with ...
> ummm ... centrally controlled fan bases ... wouldn't even show up on this
> chart.
>
> I agree with you that this chart attempts to measure gamer satisfaction, not
> sales. The problem is that it's statistically flawed in this measure
> because of the self-selecting sample. Think of it as the National Enquirer
> version of the news. Interesting, but highly distorted.
Just so.
Now here's a fellow who understood what I was saying but even then was
careful not to misrepresent me. On the other hand we have a party who
seems completely at ease with the concept of ascribing any nonsense he
wants to me and then arguing against that - I can only guess he did so
because he either didn't understand my point or couldn't think of a
decent reply.
Anyway thanks for restoring my faith Corwin - have a good xmas.
Mark
--
Saturnalia
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/5676/sat.html
I'm sorry, I can't argue unless you've paid.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
who...@wherever.com
:> : pulling it out of the air and then waste time setting them right
:>
:> Unless you have some better, meaningful, unbiased indicators of PC games'
:> popularity to point at, you can keep your laughable philosophies on products'
:> superiority based on sales figures to yourself. Let alone those insane cons-
:> piracy theories you're hinting at.
: I haven't a clue what you're talking about. Are you cutting and pasting
: this from a webpage?
Good luck finding such webpage.
...somebody who's just pulling it out of the air...
...then waste time setting them right...
Here you rather explicitly claim that the chart is biased to the views of
the chartholder. If this was the US, and the holder of the charts had any
commercial interest in publishing them (like, say, PCData does), he could
probably sue you ;). My apologies for reacting so strongly to this claim
in my last post.
: Yup, it's a chart based on who can be bothered to fix it. I'm glad we
: agree.
Great, you got the idea!
You can claim that a chart based on such a mechanism isn't, from a mathema-
tical standpoint, an objective criteria to judge games' merits over some
others. That's cool. Neither are sales numbers by the way -- sales numbers
are just what they are, sales numbers.
The chart is indeed based on subjective opinions -- the positive opinions
of the voters. Interpretations on thereof, like whether it accordingly
indicates hard sales figures, sizes of fanbases, popular opinion on the
game et cetera, is left for the user. Me, and a lot of other people, think
it's a pretty good representative on games' popularity, and strongheartedly
disagree to the claim that the chart is useless; far from it. It mightn't
be useful for any particular purpose, but the chart, like magazine reviews
and word of mouth, is a good factor to base informed buying decisions from.
who...@wherever.com
: I won't try to put words in Mark's mouth on this, but I believe he was
: trying to point out that charts like this one are equivalent to political
: straw polls. Basically, the sample is self-selected, which is a Very Bad
: Thing (tm) in statistics. While it's interesting to read, makes for fine
: water cooler conversation, etc.
Actually, noone has ever claimed the charts represented the whole game-
playing community's opinions on the game, i.e. what game an "average" gamer
likes the most. That Age of Empires 2 tops this chart at the moment is not
supposed to mean that it's the favorite game of an average gamer. It means
that from the ones who felt like voting, the positive opinion generated by
the game, (which was calculated by summing up those people's "positive emo-
tions", *very* loosely speaking) was the greatest. Not that its lovers/
haters ratio was the greatest, or that it everybody or the "average" games-
buyer was fond of it.
: It's not the same as a valid poll where a random sample of gamers is
: selected by the pollster and then asked their opinions.
While such poll would be "fair" while we would be after the statistically
correct public opinion, realistically it cannot be taken. Not only would
there, unlike in presidential elections or such, be thousands of possible
"candidates" instead of a handful, but the criteria of "better"-ness varies
*wildly* from person to person and a really big statistical sample would be
required. (Though, you seem to be more qualified to say this).
: Were such a poll conducted, I'd bet that certain games with ... ummm
: ... centrally controlled fan bases ... wouldn't even show up on this chart.
Well, if a game *has* a fanbase, then it is more than likely a good game
at least in some people's opinion; otherwise there wouldn't be any fans to
it :). Besides, the voting is just as open to the fans of every other
game as well, and since jojo's chart is, dare I say, the oldest and most
respected in efforts on "charting" games, it's difficult for a small group
of people to sway a game's position significantly. Keep in mind that there
are a lot of voters, both "normal" and fans of other games, and a lot of
effort has been made to prevent cheating.
Minuteman
While the list in question does indeed have many statistical
flaws/imperfections, it is a fairly good barometer of which games are
popular and being played the most among at least the population of avid
gamers who 1) are online and 2) know about the list.
I know I have used the list in the past to get an idea of which games are
well-liked by my fellow gamers, and as such it has been useful to me when I
am considering buying a game (especially one outside my usual genres of
interest). I find that the list in particular has been good at identifying
which games are the most "addictive" and have the most replay value.
The list is similar to other fan polls I have seen. A good example is the
college sports fan polls that ESPN does on it's Sportszone site. While it
is possible for a very motivated and organized minority group of fans to
artificially inflate their team's ranking, for the most part the rankings
end up resembling very closely the "official" polls done of sportswriters
and college coaches. I would submit that if you did a scientific survey of
avid gamers' opinions of their favorite and most-currently-played games with
well-planned sampling procedures, that the rankings would come out very
similar to those in this unscientific ranking. In fact I expect that the
rank-order correlation would come out well above 0.90.
- Minuteman
Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
>Actually, noone has ever claimed the charts represented the whole game-
>playing community's opinions on the game, i.e. what game an "average" gamer
>likes the most. That Age of Empires 2 tops this chart at the moment is not
>supposed to mean that it's the favorite game of an average gamer. It means
>that from the ones who felt like voting, the positive opinion generated by
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I get a picture of the someone playing the world's most
fascinating, <more adjectives> game being too busy playing to even
think of voting. There he is: gaming away, totally oblivious to the
rest of the world (including this thread).
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
I have preferences.
You have biases.
He/She has prejudices.