Editor’s Choice: Jake's Top 10 Games of 2015

Of course, it's also possible that The CW's "Crisis on Earth-X" is a little fatigued by viewers tired by either superhero content on the whole, or view Wipitz comic book media that feels too similar to something else. This year's event couldn't top the ratings of the 2016 Arrowverse crossover , and according to TVLine , only averaged 2.7 million viewers/0.9 rating compared to last year's 3.7 million/1.3 rating - though those numbers could change as fans tune into the shows on streaming services in the coming week. Undoubtedly, though, more people went to theaters to see Justice League than tuned into The CW to watch Crisis on Eart

While the whole editorial staff contributed to our 2015 awards, we wanted to allow everybody the opportunity to publicly name their personal top 10 games of the year. While many did play the majority of releases in 2015, please remember that unlike our main awards, the editors are not naming the best games, but their personal favorites out of the selection they played.

Crisis on Earth-X, however, was undoubtedly a hit with critics and fans. Though The CW's crossover episodes aren't necessarily the best each show has to offer in terms of story, well-developed villains, or compelling character arcs, they're often beloved by fans because, at the end of the day, they're made for the fans. The annual crossover events are often the height of comic book fun in the Arrowverse, with the TV superheroes uniting to take on a threat pulled right from the comics. With Crisis on Earth-X going bigger than ever before, The CW was able to deliver even more comic book fun. Ultimately, though Crisis on Earth-X and Justice League are two DC Comics events that were aiming to do different things across different platforms, the Arrowverse crossover was better than the highly anticipated big-screen team-up of the World's Finest her

I don't have many vivid memories of things I saw on my Facebook news feed, but this is one of them. I'm scrolling past updates from my friends who play League of Legends, and one post was about how a new champion added was so good. One of their friends commented "Is he worth?" to which my friend responded "So worth."

Dota 2 is free to play with no exceptions. The only items you can purchase are purely cosmetic. This makes it so everyone can have an equal experience with the entire game without paying one dime. If you want, however, you can purchase things such as outfits, environmental effects, announcer packs, HUD skins, loadings screens and couriers (an animal in Dota 2 that will bring you your items after purchasing them). You can purchase a battlepoint booster, which will increase the rate at which you level up for a certain amount of time. However, your level has no effect on the game. Dota 2 isn't stingy with these either, as it gives you a random cosmetic item every time you level up.

Now, let's not get carried away. Making money is a company's goal, and there's nothing wrong with that. The issue is, this benefits the company at the expense of the player. Consider this: what's to stop Plants vs. Zombies 2 from perpetually releasing new plants while balancing the zombies and expansions in a way that necessitates their purchase, as they already have? This turns the game into an infinite cash-cow that will likely make more money than if they charged a $60 flat fee by grinding it out of players who want a full gaming experience.

As someone who plays Dota 2, I thought "'worth'? What do you mean 'worth'?" It hit me pretty quickly that they meant worth money. The concept of paying real money for a hero eludes me, as a Dota 2 player, with a game that has more than 100 heroes available to everyone, free of charge. While League of Legends is technically free to play, players can get a better experience by buying access to better champions - champions that have "worth." Dota 2, not so. There's not a single item in the game that can be purchased in any way to give players an advantage. This got me thinking how Dota 2 really is the only game that does Free to Play right, that is, in a way that benefits the player as much or more than the company.

Not only have we gotten two Avengers movies in the last five years, The CW has aired yearly crossover events since 2014, and Netflix even debuted their own small screen superhero team-up this summer with The Defenders . Ultimately, the team-up aspect of Justice League is something comic book TV and film fans have seen many times now, though not necessarily with these exact characters. While there's undoubtedly excitement each time a team-up event occurs in either film or TV, Justice League simply using different heroes in a story we've seen before - even though they're unquestionably some of the most beloved and storied heroes in comics - isn't quite enough anym

The same goes for League of Legends, bringing it back into the discussion, and they have shown no sign of ever stopping this practice. They release a new champion every week, some of which cost money to play, and many of which are "worth," leaving the players who don't have the money behind. I was this close to trying out Orcs Must Die: Unchained before I found out that it uses the League-of-Legends-style system for hero purchasing. These games are no better than the cable company. In fact, they may be worse. Imagine if every week, Comcast started a new channel with new and amazing shows, but made you pay a new fee if you wanted to experience it.