I have done this twice before, once in July '09 before the massive influx of users, and then once again in March '10, after we gained a whole bunch of new people. As you probably should know, if you are a member (and if you are not, why not join up?) we host a games database where all users can add and rate games on Nintendo consoles. And we also average out all of the ratings, to get a (semi-)official list of the top rated games based on the tastes of the Negative World users.

First, a couple of rules. For the sake of this list, I am only counting games that have at least 10 ratings, and I have a new rule as well: I am only counting games that were unique upon release, no collections of previously released games. Of course Metroid Prime Trilogy is going to be very highly rated, it is 3 of the best games ever in one place! But I am more interested in seeing how the individual games fare, and not clogging up the top 10 with collections.

Another small point... although we round to the nearest hundredth for the scores we display, in the calculations no rounding has taken place. So when it appears that games have "tied" in reality one has slightly edged out the other, and I am displaying them in the order they have placed before being rounded.

Alright, let's do this!

Once again, only the smallest margin separated our top games, with only a .04 difference between #1 and #6. You know what this means, right? It means that if you haven't rated these games yet, you have the power to make a difference! So get rating! And while you're at it, drop some scores on the games that didn't make our top 10 as well. The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask is only .01 from making it into the top 10... wouldn't that be interesting if it made the list next time?

URL to share (right click and copy)

@Pandareus

Thanks Panda..that's what I just checked into

@Simbabbad

Pfft. You've still got time to delete your post and save yourself the humiliation.

@Simbabbad
No I agree... . if anything, this information will maybe perk other people on here to rate more games..



@Pandareus
hehe "humiliation" We aren't that mean are we?

@Simbabbad
Simbabbad, I like you. More than you'll ever know. But sometimes, I just gotta type a ton of words about Super Metroid, and this is one of those times.

I think you're over-simplifying Super Metroid's combat. Yes, Metroid 1 is a lot harder, but Metroid 1 is a lot harder than pretty much any game in the series (outside of maybe Prime 2). Metroid 2 is slightly more difficult than Super Metroid, IMO--I hadn't played it for years when I replayed it recently, and I still didn't die except on the final boss.

Anyway, bringing back Zebesian foes mixed with Samus's new arsenal is similar to what LttP did with its combat. No one will tell you LttP is more difficult than the original Zelda, but it doesn't mean it has bad combat. Link can now swing his sword in a much wider area-of-effect (as opposed to his stab in Zelda 1), do the spin-move, travel diagonally, and has access to all sorts of new goodies. This is pretty much the top-down equivalent of SM's controls/items. Yeah, it's somewhat easier, but it's still far from a cakewalk--the "red area" of Brinstar (thorns, etc) and pretty much the entirety of Lower Norfair (huge Sidehoppers, those red Kihunters, and the Silver Space Pirates) all put up a serious fight.

I also think referring to sequence-breaking as "glitches" is unfair. The only thing that can be qualified as a glitch is the Mockball, which is only really used in a single spot to shave off a minute or two. The main sequence-breaking stuff comes from the two semi-secret moves that let Samus really get around in the hands of a skilled player: the wall-jump, and the shinespark. The implementation of these moves is actually pretty brilliant: they programmed them into the game and decided not to block off future areas if curious players decided to really explore and put them to serious use. Contrast this to something like Metroid: Other M, which arbitrarily locks off doors and power-ups until you reach an established part of the game, and it's like night and day. There're so many ways to progress through Super Metroid, and it's because the game was designed with a philosophy that's sorely lacking these days: give the players the tools to sequence break, and reward their curiosity by leaving the world (mostly) open. The Legend of Zelda (NES) does the same thing, and it's also one of the most replayable games out there, IMO. It is nothing short of brilliant game design. For just one example, did you know you can shinespark into the Wrecked Ship and throughout Maridia, bypassing the Grapple Beam entirely?

It's fairly easy to get lost in some sections of Super Metroid. We've played the game to death by this point, but many players have a tough time finding the entrance to Kraid's lair (who bombs the walls in elevator rooms?), as well as the secret way into Maridia, traveling back to Norfair after getting the power-bombs, and even the side-wall in Crateria after you get the bombs. Those are some pretty obscure areas to find that require a pretty sharp eye for exploration. And again, there are tons of rooms that are much more than "rectangles." I mean yeah, they'll mostly be angular on the map screen since that's a minimalist representation of the world, but within those rectangles are crooked landscapes, cramped tunnels, wide open rooms and multilayered areas. I'd even argue that it's more varied than SM's follow-ups, Metroid Fusion and Zero Mission.

@Zero

I think you DEFINITELY have to factor in subsequent experiences. Part of everything is "how does it hold up over time?"

Excitebike is NOTHING like it was when we were younger..
I don't think game scores should really shift all the time, no, but your initial experience shouldn't be the end all.

@Mr_Mustache Well... I guess that depends. For instance, if part of everything is how does it hold up over time, should we not be allowed to rate games we haven't played within the last say... 6 months or so? And then have to keep replaying every game we have ever rated every 6 months or so in order to justify the scores? There is no way I'm going to go back and play through all of the games I have rated. A lot of those ratings are based simply off of "I remember this game freaking owned me". I don't think I have to keep checking in with every game just to make sure I'm still into it. It'd turn my ratings into a full-time job!

Now, games that can keep me coming back (Starfox 64 for example) will tend to get more appreciation from me over time. I probably rate it a tad bit higher now than I would have back in the days. And I might go back and play a game I used to love and think... really? and have that negatively affect my view of it a bit, and then I rate it a bit lower now. But in general I tend to take my original experiences as, if not the end all, at least the most significant portion of what goes into my scores.

Maybe it's because I've played so many classics near decades after their releases, but I've yet to revisit a game and then think less of it. I can find more aspects to like and dislike though, kinda like when re-watching a movie or whatever.


Final Fantasy VI is the only game on our list that I haven't played yet, but I have a cartridge to remedy that after I beat some other stuff.

And I'm a lazy bum since I've only rated one game on this list (Super Mario Galaxy 2). Hopefully the next time one of these rolls around, I'll have rated more of my games and Skyward Sword will be number 1!

Octorockin said:

Maybe it's because I've played so many classics near decades after their releases, but I've yet to revisit a game and then think less of it. I can find more aspects to like and dislike though, kinda like when re-watching a movie or whatever.

This is mostly the same with me, although on occasion something will bother me a lot more than when I played it through the first time (Viewtiful Joe 2 and Kirby 64 being recent examples).

However, that's the exception rather than the norm, and 90% of the time, I end up either enjoying the game all over again, or liking things about it even more. For the past few months I've jumped back into several Game Boy and N64 games; the Oracle titles still held up, as did Metroid II, Link's Awakening, Pokemon Snap, and Perfect Dark. Some of them rekindled my love of those games that I'd sort of forgotten. So yeah, Zero, I'd recommend replaying games you used to love; it'll almost always work out pretty well.

Zero said:

Link to the Past is pretty much the best game ever made. That or Super Metroid.

It's like we share a brain.

@Zero

No, I don't think you have to do it like that. I'm certainly not going to go back and replay everything either, haha! But like I said; who didn't absolutely LOVE Excitebike when they were younger? It was like THE coolest game possible. Everyone wanted to play, and the music was awesome. Fast forward 20 years; the music is STILL awesome..but the game is El Stink-o. Nothing against the game, but theres not even a real running order. Its purely time trials with other folks on the track. You and I know that Contra and Mike Tyson's Punch-Out!! are sweet without having to replay them. They should be graded as such.

Maybe there should be a cutoff? How do they stand up two or three generations later? If you're putting all of your ratings on "graphics," theres pretty much no way that an NES game should even be a 7.0. Right? I'm not like that though, and I personally grade on games similar to them, games from the same system, and focus more on gameplay and the like. Graphics are so far down the chart for me..


Star Fox 64 is a great game, too. That still holds up, yes?
Star Fox for the SNES? Eh, not so much. Star Fox 64 blew it out of the water just a few years later.
I don't think anyone here can say "I'd rather play Star Fox than Star Fox 64."

But we do KNOW there are people here who say "I'd rather play Super Metroid than Metroid Prime." Therein lies your answer.

Yeah but I still love playing ExciteBike. The core gameplay is great.

@Zero

I guess we rated it differently then, haha!
--Wait, why isn't my rating here??

*looking*

Alrighty. Apparently I haven't graded it anywhere.
(And IGN is broken so its not over there either, ugh)

I'll rate it sometime.. Prepare for 6.8.

@Simbabbad

Is the WiiWare game multi-player? Is there an actual running order?
What is different from the original NES version?

@Mr_Mustache

I have both the NES original on VC and the WiiWare version. The WiiWare version is in 3D and has a bit more variety in the tracks and an online multiplayer mode, there's also a lot of stuff to unlock. I play with my friend Tyler online sometimes. I really don't think the game is worth the price point though... how much is it, 1500 points? ....*looks up* oh wait, it's 1000 points...

Still... I think it's worth more like 800 than 1000...

But then again, I got it for free because my friend Tyler gifted it to me.

@Paleo_Orca

Oh yeah, I do remember the Online thing now that you mention it.. Can you only play with 2 or 4 people at a time? Is it a BUNCH of people?