You're right in that these are poor questions and should probably be closed. In fact, by the time you're reading this, I'll have already done this.
I think there's a larger, underlying issue at work here, though. It's something I've been calling the "Wrong Rock" fallacy. The fundamental idea, as I understand it, is, "These questions are valid, because they have answers." In my opinion, that is wrong. The questions may have answers, but the questions themselves are inherently unanswerable.
Imagine that someone creates a new question on Geology.Stackexchange that can be summed up in four words: "Bring me a rock". Rocks (answers) flood in, and the asker is the sole governor to determine if the answer is correct, and should be accepted, or if the answerer has brought "the wrong rock".
In a sense questions like this become, "I'll know the right answer when I see it."
This is the wrong way to build a question.
The idea of stack exchange is that questions poll experts, who are able to deliberate between each other (up/down votes and comments) and come to an agreement about the definitive merit of an answer on its own. This is why upvotes can eclipse the "accepted" answer - because the experts of the stackexchange have determined it is a better answer.
The problem with questions like these is that they break the stackexchange formula. Due to their very nature, they are often speculative and meaningless - potentially interesting trivia, but otherwise a meaningless list or collection of lists. There is no definitive correctness to be judged - it either meets the criteria of the list, or it doesn't - and that's when the voting model of stackexchange starts to break down.
So how can one avoid asking for rocks? Oftentimes a question like this ends up asking for examples of something - so why not turn the question around so that the very examples you're interested in are useful in answering the fundamental question?
For instance, don't ask, "Which games have minus/worlds?" - ask "Why do some games have minus/worlds?", with a sentence or two in the question body asking for examples of famous instances. Don't ask "Which games on Xbox360 support 3d?", ask "How can I tell if an Xbox360 game supports 3d?". "What games can I play on my Macbook Pro under Bootcamp?" is almost an okay question, because the body asks "How can I translate my system specifications so I can know what I can run under Bootcamp?".
The "Wrong Rock" fallacy is part of why Game Recommendations are considered off-topic, and also why we close "Why did the Dev's design X this way?". The elephant in the room is that "Identify-this-Game" falls squarely into this category as well.
