Well, I don't know. For the neophyte, such lists give guidance (but I'd say committee videogame lists are useless in that regard). For others, they confirm reputations -- Citizen Kane is still respected. Though I guess it's a fair point that after one or two lists like that, you already have an idea of what reputations are like and subsequent lists lose interest.
What interests me more about committee lists would be the possibilities for compromise. I think just having individuals make their own top lists, then tally them up, is a lame way to do it. I think it'd be more interesting to have a dialogue.
Take me for example. Would I be willing to vote down R-Types and Castlevania 3 if those games weren't likely to be rated highly anyway to ensure that, say, SMB3 could take the top spot rather than (I don't know) Final Fantasy 7? I certainly think a compromise would have to be reached regarding the SMB/SM All Stars issue; splitting the vote like that would be disasterous.








