Thoughts on "Top 100" List

Now, much of the outrage stems from the noticeably absent games from the early era of PC gaming.  Where are the games from the 80's and 90's (yes, there are a few)?  Where are those well respected classics?  There are also several games on the list that are early access games that are not even completed yet (Kerbal Space Program, Starbound, DayZ--which isn't even a game, but a mod).  What about the original Half-Life.  I can still fire that up and enjoy smacking head crabs with crowbars.  What about the original Starcraft?  Or any of the pre-WoW strategy games from Blizzard (Warcraft-Warcraft III)?

Needless to say, this list is a little mind boggling.  In the magazine they explain how they picked them, but really?

I guess when it really comes down to it these "top" lists are very subjective (and I don't wonder if they pander to some of the publishers--after all, they have to work with them to write their articles and reviews).  Every gamer has their favorite game or genre that they will stand by.  I like RPG's and tend to lean towards them, but I also like strategy and the occasional shooter.  I was happy to see several RPG's on the list (namely Mass Effect and The Witcher).  Seeing Mass Effect 2 at the top of their list was a little surprising especially after the Mass Effect 3 EndingGate scandal.  Mass Effect 2 would definitely top my own personal list, but is it really the "all time greatest?"

Who knows?  And really it's extremely subjective.  I'm sure there are other nerds out their compiling their own top 100 lists.  Let's face it--lists like this will always start arguments.  That's the fun!

EDIT:  -1 to reading skill for me.  Bioshock is on the list...I missed it.  My bad!