Well even though its not over: As of Today: 1. Half Life 2 2. Resident Evil 4 3. GTA IV 4. COD4 MW 5. WoW 6. Halo: Combat Evolved 7. Uncharted 2 8. Bioshock 9. Mass Effect 10. Gears of War 2
Generally decades are measured from the year ending in 1, to the year ending in 0. So the current decade goes from 2001 - 2010. Which means we have one year left. Although plenty of people measure it from the year ending in 0 to the year ending in 9 (which would make this decade from 2000 - 2009) but this is incorrect, since the first decade was from 1 - 10, the second decade from 11 - 20, and so on until we get to the 201st decade being 2001 - 2010.
If you are interested, there are more than a few similar lists on the forums. I find that googling "site:giantbomb.com forums [insert topic]" helps me locate threads that may already exist.
" Generally decades are measured from the year ending in 1, to the year ending in 0. So the current decade goes from 2001 - 2010. Which means we have one year left. Although plenty of people measure it from the year ending in 0 to the year ending in 9 (which would make this decade from 2000 - 2009) but this is incorrect, since the first decade was from 1 - 10, the second decade from 11 - 20, and so on until we get to the 201st decade being 2001 - 2010. "
Matty dropping the knowledge there. I always assumed it was from 0 to 9. Interesting stuff.
" The 2000s end this year and 2010 is the beginning of the next decade, count em out 2000-2009 is 10 years. "
Uh, no, that's not how it works. Decades are counted from the year ending in 1 to the year ending in 10. There was no year 0. The calendar goes from 1 B.C. to A.D. 1.
" While yes, technically, the decade doesn't start next year, did the millenium really start in 2001? Did people do a huge countdown for 2001? Hell no, they did it for 2000, cause it looks a lot cooler than a number with a hella ugly 1 at the end. And even then, Destructoid made a top 50 of the decade list. "
The size of the celebration doesn't negate fact. And yes, the millennium did start in 2001.
" Generally decades are measured from the year ending in 1, to the year ending in 0. So the current decade goes from 2001 - 2010. Which means we have one year left. Although plenty of people measure it from the year ending in 0 to the year ending in 9 (which would make this decade from 2000 - 2009) but this is incorrect, since the first decade was from 1 - 10, the second decade from 11 - 20, and so on until we get to the 201st decade being 2001 - 2010. "
I've always disliked the concept of even game of the year. There's no one who has played all the games that have released this year, especially not the Giant Bomb crew, so why should we take their opinion on the best game released in 2009 when there might be one that they have not played that could be better? Anthony Gallegos was saying on the latest episode of Rebel FM that he would have chosen Might or Magic: Clash of Heroes as his portable game of the year, but since he didn't play it until just recently that was not possible.
Also, I don't see the importance of it. Different games suit different people, and that's why users have different game of the year lists. Why do people anticipate these lists from major gaming websites so much? I don't get it...
" Generally decades are measured from the year ending in 1, to the year ending in 0. So the current decade goes from 2001 - 2010. Which means we have one year left. Although plenty of people measure it from the year ending in 0 to the year ending in 9 (which would make this decade from 2000 - 2009) but this is incorrect, since the first decade was from 1 - 10, the second decade from 11 - 20, and so on until we get to the 201st decade being 2001 - 2010. "
No! Year zero counts too! 1.2000 2.2001 3.2002 4.2003 5.2004 6.2005 7.2006 8.2007 9.2008 10.2009 amirite? "
" Generally decades are measured from the year ending in 1, to the year ending in 0. So the current decade goes from 2001 - 2010. Which means we have one year left. Although plenty of people measure it from the year ending in 0 to the year ending in 9 (which would make this decade from 2000 - 2009) but this is incorrect, since the first decade was from 1 - 10, the second decade from 11 - 20, and so on until we get to the 201st decade being 2001 - 2010. "
The modern calendar started at year 1, not year 0. And therefore the first decade was from 1 - 10, the second was from year 11 - 20, the third decade was from year 21 - 30, and so on until we get to the 201st decade, from 2001 - 2010.
Technically, we didn't start off at year 1 we started at 0, so if you measure the time up until the first year was met the first decade would actually be 0-9, I may be explaining it poorly but I'm quite sure I'm correct.
No such things as game of the decade I tell you. Game s of the decade I can accept but one single game alone? No. Never. Too many factors to take into and a lot of them are subjective.
" Technically, we didn't start off at year 1 we started at 0, so if you measure the time up until the first year was met the first decade would actually be 0-9, I may be explaining it poorly but I'm quite sure I'm correct. "
No we didn't. The calendar starts at 1. Why the hell is this so difficult to understand? Zero means "nothing." It is a number signaling nonexistence. The year zero does not exist.
" Generally decades are measured from the year ending in 1, to the year ending in 0. So the current decade goes from 2001 - 2010. Which means we have one year left. Although plenty of people measure it from the year ending in 0 to the year ending in 9 (which would make this decade from 2000 - 2009) but this is incorrect, since the first decade was from 1 - 10, the second decade from 11 - 20, and so on until we get to the 201st decade being 2001 - 2010. "
The modern calendar started at year 1, not year 0. And therefore the first decade was from 1 - 10, the second was from year 11 - 20, the third decade was from year 21 - 30, and so on until we get to the 201st decade, from 2001 - 2010. "
@Hailinel: I am well aware we started at year 1 but what you suggest is that we started at day 365, when we started at day 1. Meaning that we had not yet encompassed the first year regardless of what a calendar says. In other words, calendars are fucking retarded for starting at year 1.
" @Hailinel: I am well aware we started at year 1 but what you suggest is that we started at day 365, when we started at day 1. Meaning that we had not yet encompassed the first year regardless of what a calender says. In other words, calenders are fucking retarded for starting at year 1. "
...What? I have no idea what you're getting at. If you're well aware that the calendar begins at 1, why are you arguing otherwise? Are you just being contrary for the hell of it?
" @Hailinel: I'm arguing with calendars I suppose, regardless I suppose i'm becoming the devil's advocate of this thread. "
You can't be a devil's advocate to argue against something that is established fact. It's not like we're debating the existence of God or the pros and cons of abortion.
" @Hailinel: I am well aware we started at year 1 but what you suggest is that we started at day 365, when we started at day 1. Meaning that we had not yet encompassed the first year regardless of what a calendar says. In other words, calendars are fucking retarded for starting at year 1. "
It's the same way we measure our age, just worded differently. I think that's where you're getting confused. Either way, the first year is the first year. For instance, I would say I'm 27 years old; however, this is my 28th year of life. Whether you think calendars are stupid or not, that's how it is.
@cinemandrew: Yeah I suppose we will just leave it as that, regardless, what do you feel is in store for the following decade? Also, Halinel weren't you one of the people excited for Baynetta? It recently got an excellent review on IGN.
There's like 2 posts that actually responded to this guys question. Maybe 3 if you count the person explaining how decades work. I really was hoping to see lists of games by clicking on this title. Personally I find the spamming to be SEVERE! if you have nothing to contribute then stfu.
I really liked:
Braid Portal
Cave Story (is not best game of the decade, but an incredibly achievement for 1 man, and a great game) Wind Waker (adore the art direction in this one, even if it is mostly a rehashing of other Zelda games...wait...I guess all of them are.)
A decade is any ten years, so when we started the calendar (ie. 0 or 1) has nothing to do with it. We (as in, the overwhelming majority of the population, but apparently not this thread) just choose to group them from 'x0 to 'x9 (ie. The Exxies), because grouping them from 'x1 to '(x+1)0 would lead to an absurdly stupid and cumbersome naming convention.
If we want to be technical, yes a decade would end in 2010 because there is no year 0. But the concept of a decade is so arbitrary in the first place, that I'm always gonna side with "the nineties" include the years 1990-1999, so "the aughts" include the years 2000-2009.
The aughts end next week, Burnout 3 was my favorite game.
There's no Year 0 and there was never an actual Year 1 so both points are fruitless. The way we number the calendar today wasn't devised until 525 AD. Before that they used a different number system that had been established by a ruler who persecuted Christians, so when they came into positions of power they renumbered the calendar. During the time of "Year 1" they counted everything forth from the founding of the city of Rome. So Year 1 AD (Anno Domini) was 753 AUC (Anno Urbis Conditae). The Julian and Gregoria calendars (latter added leap year) which count the numbers of days within a year date back to 44 BC and 1582 AD respectively. Of course, according to the Jewish calendar it's the year 5770 and it's 4707 on the Chinese calendar. So this means that all of bickering meaningless because there are multiple correct ways to count the years and even multiple ways to figure out when decades begin and end. The old way was called Ordinal, it started with "one" as the first year of a decade. But, currently the popular way is called Cardinal, which starts with the zero year as the first of a decade. Either way is correct as long as you are consistent.
How can you have a game of "this" decade when a decade could be any 10 years. It does not matter if its 2001-2010 or 2000-2009, they are both decades. I personally think it would make more sense for a 2000-2009 list because I tend to think of the 70's as 1970-1979, same for 80's 90's and so on.
" Technically, we didn't start off at year 1 we started at 0, so if you measure the time up until the first year was met the first decade would actually be 0-9, I may be explaining it poorly but I'm quite sure I'm correct. "
No we didn't. The calendar starts at 1. Why the hell is this so difficult to understand? Zero means "nothing." It is a number signaling nonexistence. The year zero does not exist. "
So the year 2000 never existed? Oh ok, that simple to understand.
Log in to comment