the best developer of all time = Rare

I personally think Retro blows them out of the water with the sublime Metroid Prime Trilogy and the fact that they completely schooled Rare in making Donkey Kong Country games recently.

and they all came out before 2000.

LOL just LOL

Except other studios you mention haven't run their most famous IP into the ground? And since this conversation is about best dev the fact you mention Square Enix is still laughable.

if it was 2002 I would agree conker bad fur day and banjo

Everything about these two comments from Rare's only good game being Banjo and FF13 being enjoyable is just.... Oiy.... Opinions. Sometimes freedom of speech blows.

Also, the lowest scoring Rare game on the n64 is Jet Force Gemini with an 80. That's epic.

Personally I'd have to go with

As a whole- it's ether Nintendo or R*

Can be good but only has a few amazing games/series under their belt aka runners up- Naughty Gods, Bioware or Konami

Fallen from grace and probably will never recover- Square Enix

Overrated- Valve

Final Fnatasy isn't perfect but they've made other games that are just as good as i mentioned, they are still great devs, and most games still average around 8-9, and they've been around a long time as well, their not perfect but just because you don't enjoy their games doesn't make them bad devs, myself and many others have enjoyed them.

Please name the other good games Rare has made besides Banjo Kazooie. The DKC games have bare bones platforming and graphics that have aged horribly. Banjo Tooie is a nightmare of fetch quests and backtracking. Their shooters have aged horribly or were bad in the first place. Star Fox Adventure is a game made entirely of fetch quests and busywork and the game is only half finished.

The FF13 series isn't perfect by any means, but simply not sticking to JRPG conventions does not make them horrible games.

Square Enix have become a bit of a joke nowadays, but what about their legacy: Square, Enix, Taito, Eidos. That's quite a legacy, rivalling even Sega and Nintendo.

How is Blizzard less reasonable than some of those other studios?

One of the most balanced RTS franchises that also happens to be a competitive institution, the greatness that was Warcraft, the most successful MMO by the countriest of country miles, and ...well I mean I guess some people like Diablo 1 and 2 a lot. Through out all that they have one arguable stinker on their resume(Diablo 3, albeit I'd argue Diablo in general, but that's me).

They would be far more deserving of that spot than Rocksteady(2 good games to their name, both of them Batman), Bioware(they were never even the best rpg dev of their own era), Konami(who fell off harder than humpty dumpty), and not even touching Rockstar or Naughty Dog.

Atlus is an inspired pick(even if it's literally just the Persona fanbase, but whatever Nocturne is the shit). But the rest of them have as much bad will as a recent Blizzard(which again completely ignores that Wings of Liberty was fantastic, and Heart of the Swarm was a solid expansion)

Yeah, I was thinking it's a bit odd singling out Blizzard when most of the others on that list are far less deserving to be on an "all time" list. Blizzard at least had a hand in shaping several different genres over the past two decades: RTS, Action RPG, MMORPG, and MOBA.

I'd have to disagree on Konami though. They have a very strong legacy going all the way back to the arcade golden age, and while they're definitely not as good as they used to be, they're still somewhat relevant today, with all the hype over MGS5 and all.

Again legacy is one thing, but by that very notion Blizzard shouldn't be dropped. Their legacy speaks for itself.

If "recent failures" means they get dinged, how do you not ding a company that has mostly sucked since. Silent Hill has nose dived, their best games are made by Kojima which is a separate studio, the best konami game that wasn't done by Kojima was done by Platinum, and then you have the rest of their franchsies and games that have at best been field fillers or usually pretty fucking bad.

Metal Gear is Kojima, and him and his studio should be held different from Konami. Otherwise Capcom deserves to be in that discussion if entirely based on Street Fighter, Resident Evil, Devil May Cry(pretty much shapes the hack n slash genre), everything Clover ever did(Okami, Viewtiful Joe) and Shinji Mikami stuff.

I have no disagreement with arguing Konami all time when it comes to their past legacy, but if we're knocking people down for not being able to stay competitive over the years, Konami would be the worst offender on that list.

Looking Glass Studios? They defined modern game design and several genres of games. Ultima Underworld and System Shock (First person RPGs and Immersion simulators), Thief (Stealth), Terra Nova (Tactical FPS) which were all precursors to games that everyone loves like Elder Scrolls, Deus Ex, Rainbow Six, Ghost Recon, Dishonored, Bioshock, etc. They were truly ahead of their time.

Blizzard is actually pretty horrible now compared to their late 90's-2007 god mode selves. WoW has been on a decline since Wotlk and every expansion is dropping in quality and content. MoP is now the longest running expansion for WoW, which is the worst expansion and SoO will be the longest running content tell the next expansion w/o any new content. Warcraft (RTS) is pretty much dead and we will probably never ever see a Warcraft 4.

Diablo 3 is so far gone even with the newest patch and most recent expansion release, all of that current content should have been in Diablo 3 on day 1 but Blizzard fraked D3 up so bad it left a sour taste to a lot of people and I'm sure not a lot of people are willing to give D3 another shot. Starcraft is slowly becoming a joke, ok not really a joke but it's slowly becoming irrelevant in the pro circuit since Terran have been dominating the circuit since the Starcraft 1 days. Protoss finally got some love not to long ago but it won't be long tell Terran will fill over half the win ratio in tournaments again.

Blizzard has been on a decline since 2007/2008 and it doesn't look like we will get that 98-2007 Blizzard quality anytime in the near future. Oh and to tarnish their name some more, yea it was pretty stupid of them to can Starcraft Ghost.

As for Bioware they have Kotor 1, Mass Effect 1, Mass Effect 2, DA Origins all within the last 11 years. Of course they do have some questionable games like Swtor, DA2 and ME3 but at least they're pretty decent at making "good" games unlike a certain company named Blizzard which outside of WoW, really hasn't made anything "wow" in the same time period.

Rocksteady not only made 2 of the best superhero games, but the best Batman games as well which have been known tell the Arkham games to be crap and a running joke in the gaming industry (as much as the Superman games). They proved that there can be "amazing superhero" games if you put work into it.

What makes FF13 -- the first one -- horrible is Square getting so obsessed with its really great battle system, they made a corridor game and failed to create a full RPG, and for people who don't have the time to play through all that -- I got too bored after 14 hours, so I gave it an honest shot -- it kind of diminishes the value of the other two, which I've read are perfectly mediocre -- since I have no interest in finishing the first one. I'm not wasting 30 hours of my time to spend another 60 some-odd hours on non-remarkable games. I have better things to do.

As for Rare, they created a ridiculous amount of high quality games. Goldeneye, Perfect Dark -- and yes, they've aged horribly, but they were revolutionary for console games when they came out -- Diddy Kong Racing, Donkey Kong 64, Blast Corps (the game everybody forgot about), Conker's Bad Fur Day, Killer Instinct Gold, etc... And as far as games aging, we're not talking about Rare's n64 games by today's standard, we're talking about the impact when they were relevant, and nobody released that many high quality games in such a short time frame.

Pre-Microsoft, Rare has a legendary track record, regardless of how you feel personally.

Even if I wanted to humor the idea that Blizzard is on a decline, they wouldn't be the biggest offender on your list. Konami has that by the countriest of country miles compared to what they use to be in the 2D/early 3D Era. They've since become Kojima stuff and shitty games(Revengeance being the exception, because Platinum is nice with it).

Starcraft is a joke how? Wings of Liberty did absurdly well, and all 3 of its major factions had sustained success during its run(2010 by the way), Heart of the Swarm mishandled sponserships and money stuff, that's all back end **** ups on Blizzards part, the game however was a perfectly fine addition to Starcraft. Wings of Liberty straight up had an excellent multiplayer suite that oh by the way still offers one of the most nuanced strategy gameplay on the market and custom games options, and one of the more varied campaign in the genres(personally I like Company of Heroes more for a campaign fix, but that's me). And on legacy alone their legacy SHITS on what Rocksteady did. I'm not discrediting how good the Arkham games are, they are good. But let's be real here we are comparing 2 videogames, with the qualifier being that super hero games sucked before them(hence low ass bar to live up to when you do something right), vs a studio that had 2 of the most impressive RTS games(genre filled with great games), the single most successful MMO that became a popculture icon, and then again I'm not touching Diablo as I don't even like the ones people hate.

They shaped 2 major PC gaming genres in their heyday, Diablo is popular as it is, and no it's not stupid of them to can: a game they didn't think was going to be good. That's a stupid thing to argue for how they are less deserving than the rest of that list. Not making a bad game isn't somehow more offensive than Urban Chaos( a bad game on Rocksteady's resume), the Manhunt series(rockstar), recent Bioware, or the straight fall from relevance that is the rest of Konami.

I'm not saying this as someone who would pick Blizzard as the GOAT studio, it wouldn't even be a name I'd consider for my personal tastes. But compared to your list, they wouldn't even be close to the most offensive group there.

too long didn't read edition: I have no desire to argue your personal list or rankings. My argument is more about "Blizzard being the least reasonable" ...because that is insanity.

Rocksteady also made Urban Chaos: RIot Response, which got only "ok" reviews but is probably my favourite PS2 fps.

Bioware were the best RPG guys for sure back in the Baldur's Gate days and are still pretty close to the top, albeit Dragon Age II knocked them down a few pegs.

Bioware!?! Really... not even gonna mention Dragon Age 2 or that AWFUL DS Sonic RPG they made are ya? Bioware hasn't been the same since Dragon Age: Origins and ME2 came out; its easily been a downward slide.

And Konami isn't a developer, they're a publisher. Just say Kojima Productions.

@IMAHAPYHIPPO: "they made a corridor game and failed to create a full RPG"
Corridors do not make it not an RPG. There are open areas and sidequests, it just takes a while to get to them. It really doesn't matter though since the battles and locations you go through are entertaining.

"for people who don't have the time to play through all that"
Why would they play an RPG if they don't have time to play an RPG.

"I'm not wasting 30 hours of my time to spend another 60 some-odd hours on non-remarkable games."
They're pretty entertaining though. 13-2 isn't as good as 13, which I played for over a hundred hours, but it's still a decent game. I'm looking forward to Lightning Returns, but I'm waiting for the price to go down.

"Goldeneye, Perfect Dark -- and yes, they've aged horribly"
So they aren't good then.

"but they were revolutionary for console games"
Revolutionary does not equal good.

"Diddy Kong Racing, Donkey Kong 64, Blast Corps (the game everybody forgot about), Conker's Bad Fur Day, Killer Instinct Gold"
Diddy Kong Racing is mediocre.
Donkey Kong 64 is collectathon hell. The entire game is built around monotonous backtracking through every area over and over again with every Kong because every Kong has collectibles and switches only they can get, even if they serve no other purpose in the area, It's completely mind numbing.
Blast Corps is basically incomprehensible.
Conker's Bad Fur Day has Rare's typical busy work backtracking and fetch quests in place of actual gameplay, with the bonus of running at 12 fps and having terrible controls.
Killer Instinct is a button masher.

"And as far as games aging, we're not talking about Rare's n64 games by today's standard"
Good gameplay transcends the era it was released in. Rare's games had garbage gameplay then and they have garbage gameplay now.

I'm respectful enough to let you know I'm not participating in this conversation past this post, as I don't believe you really know what you're talking about. Talking about FF13 being enjoyable is your own opinion, so the fact that I don't find it enjoyable means I'm not wasting 30+ hours for the game to get good. You said it yourself it takes awhile to get into the full RPG elements of 13, and I had no interest battling random enemies for dozens of hours -- nor did a large group of gamers -- and that's a perfectly acceptable reason for not enjoying the game.

In the n64 days, Rare were masters of gameplay and game design. Games don't have to age well over two decades to be good when they were released, and the company was known as one of the absolute best in the n64 days. You're part of a very small group that apparently thinks otherwise, and based on what you're saying, I find it hard to believe you've played most of these games.

Even games like Ocarina of Time and FF7 haven't aged that well, but that doesn't mean they didn't completely change the landscape of 3D gaming, and to do that, they were considered incredibly well made games in their time. It's very difficult -- almost impossible even -- to find a game almost two decades old that still plays well by modern standards, and judging them in that regard is an exercise is mania.

@IMAHAPYHIPPO: "the fact that I don't find it enjoyable means I'm not wasting 30+ hours for the game to get good."
It only takes about 20 hours for the game to open up and less than a couple hours for the game to get good.

"I had no interest battling random enemies for dozens of hours"
Like you would in basically every other RPG ever made.

"In the n64 days, Rare were masters of gameplay and game design."
How if only one of the games they made had good gameplay and design. Basically everything else they released focuses entirely on busywork and fetch quests to the point of pure monotony. Either that or it's a mediocre take on another popular game. Or it's a shooter with awful controls.

"Games don't have to age well over two decades to be good when they were released"
They have to actually be good though. Rare wasn't. Even Banjo Tooie, the sequel to their only good game, is pure agony to play, and was pure agony to play when it first came out.

"I find it hard to believe you've played most of these games."
I've played them all.

"Even games like Ocarina of Time and FF7 haven't aged that well"
They actually have some good gameplay and design behind their aging graphics and technical limitations.

"but that doesn't mean they didn't completely change the landscape of 3D gaming, and to do that, they were considered incredibly well made games in their time."
Except Rare's most popular games are often aping the popular games that came before them. They've made maybe one game that could be considered "revolutionary" and it belongs to a genre that's a wasteland of quality in the first place.

"It's very difficult -- almost impossible even -- to find a game almost two decades old that still plays well by modern standards"
No, it really isn't difficult. I can think of plenty of examples.

@jg4xchamp:

After reading your posts it's clear you haven't played a game made by Blizzard in a very long time. You also seem to miss my point on how Blizzard is no where near their "god mode" status as they once were. If this topic was made in 2005 or earlier I'd agree Blizzard is still a top tier if not the top tier dev but they aren't anymore and haven't been good since 07/08. The same goes for Square Enix, a once "god tier" dev who's been on the decline, should we give them a free pass just cause they were once amazing? no.

I get it you hate Bioware but they've done a lot in the past decade (good and bad) which you seem to ether don't care or it's going over your head. Konami/Kojima I only put up there for their MGS games which is the only thing they can do right atm which is fine by me cause I've only been disappointed with Kojima once (MGS2)

I've played both Wings of Liberty and Heart of the Swarm(2010 and 2012), the former was fantastic, the later was solid. Also Diablo 3, but that's diablo. Starcraft hasn't had some imaginary dropoff in gameplay that you seem to think it did, and any failure they've had is how they've handled their relation with the pro circuit, but not the game proper. I'm sorry reading comprehension is difficult for you.

And again I'm not trying to argue they haven't had a drop off. But "least" deserving" in that group is lunacy on legacy alone.

Also "hate" bioware

Dramatic much?

@jg4xchamp:

The only person that has trouble with reading comprehension is you, go back and read what I posted tool.

In case you can't grasp on what I said and you're just plain ignorant. I said SC is now a joke cause Terran just sweeps away in ranked/mp cause the amount of "advantages" they have compared to Zerg and Protoss, sure Protoss got a slight buff a couple patches ago but Terran are now back on top which they've been top dogs since Starcraft 1. How can people call SC balanced when Terran win over half of their matches compared to Zerg players and Protoss.

If you wanna talk ONLY about SP then yea SC2 WoL and HotS were pretty awesome (specially HotS, although I feel bad for Raynor) but they're not designed for only SP experience and the bulk of SC is it's MP which is a joke.

When was I saying Blizzard should be dropped? If that were the case, then I wouldn't be going on about how they influenced four different genres...

As for Konami, I don't quite get your argument. Kojima Productions is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Konami, who basically just took the key MGS team of KCEJ (Konami Computer Entertainment Japan) and gave them their own spin-off studio. Konami and Kojima Productions are about as inseparable as Nintendo and Nintendo EAD, or Sega and Sonic Team.

@Solid_Max13 said:

@inb4uall said:

@Solid_Max13 said:

@inb4uall said:

@Solid_Max13 said:

Yea they were good now their just a joke for MS to use, but there's better now Rockstar, Naughty Dog, Square Enix, MediaMolecule.

Square enix. LOL. Because they deserve a title like greatest dev of all time after what they did to final fantasy.

I still think their good devs despite what Final Fantasy stories have become, gameplay is always good and fluid, and they also have Kingdom Hearts, Bravely Default, The World Ends With You, Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, Thief, Dragon Quest, Sleeping Dogs, Star Ocean, They do more than just Final Fantasy and are still top tier devs despite what your opinion is of Final Fantasy

Except other studios you mention haven't run their most famous IP into the ground? And since this conversation is about best dev the fact you mention Square Enix is still laughable.

Final Fnatasy isn't perfect but they've made other games that are just as good as i mentioned, they are still great devs, and most games still average around 8-9, and they've been around a long time as well, their not perfect but just because you don't enjoy their games doesn't make them bad devs, myself and many others have enjoyed them.

Yeah But it also means they aren't the best dev of all time. Which is what this thread was about genius. And just FYI,, the general consensus is that FF13 is garbage.

*sigh* I didn't say YOU said they should be dropped. I merely said that of that list, Blizzard would not be the least reasonable if their entire knock is based on a current dropoff. Konami has been a worse offender, and you can't just gloss it over with Metal Gear is still good. It doesn't suddenly overrule Silent Hill has sucked post 3, Castlevania hasn't come close to it's glory days, and nevermind some of Konami's other works 99 knights or whatever, neverdead, etc. In a sense they would make the list more or less the way Blizzard makes it. More for their legacy, less for their recent work.

As for Kojima being Konami's EAD? okay fair enough.