One icycalm has said, which I have no choice but to agree with. He is one of the very few people even qualified to make such a list. For 2 reasons
-He actually plays almost every genre. I don't, most people I know don't. So that disqualifies us from judging the whole selection of games. If all you play are 3 different genres than you can't really critisize and rank games outside of those genres. I could tell you the best platformers, my friend could tell you the best FPS, but neither of us could tell you the best games across all genres.
-He has played games from most eras across most consoles. If you didn't play PC games in the 80s or didn't play ps1 games than you can't judge those games against the rest of the available games. Furthermore if you didn't play these when it came out it's very hard to weigh their historical significance.
The point of a critic is to tell you things you do not know, not to affirm what you already believe as virtually all critics other than icy do. Icy's list of games is the only multi-genre list I can think of where I ever actually went off, played the stuff mentioned and had a good time with nearly every entry. Contrast this stuff with thing's like /v/'s list where they just mention every game every made or IGN's stuff where they just echoe the general census.