This. A thousand times this.DoPo said:
That game was fantastic, but i felt the end was very rushed. Like from a nice walk in the park to a maniacal sprint with parkour elements agains olympic champions rushed.
Games that were Almost Great
- Thread starter The Last Nomad
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That game was fantastic, but i felt the end was very rushed. Like from a nice walk in the park to a maniacal sprint with parkour elements agains olympic champions rushed.
I'd nominate Mirror's Edge for this. It was a brand new IP with a unique twist that mixed first person combat with platforming in a way that worked, even if it wasn't perfect, but really fell short with a story that was rather dull, cliched, and forgettable. And let's not forget the blinding art direction, beautiful scenery that was more effective than a flashbang to the eyes when I went to make a jump.
Battlestations pacific. Only thing holding it back was shocking UI and poor support from the devs/publishers. The gameplay was truly epic
Ok I am gonna get some flack for this, but here we go...
GTA3.
(Yeah, I know, I know! Don't kill me!)
I have only three problems with this game, but to me they just destroyed my experience with it.
1) Cutscenes at EVERY. IMPORTANT. POINT. At one point you have to kill a guy for some reason, I forget why. Anyway, you get to the guy's house, and immediately - a cutscene starts up showing him walking to his car and getting in. WHY? Why not just start the game with him in it? Or give us the option to run him over, which I guarantee everybody who reaches this point will want to do anyway?
2) Third-person shooting of the worst kind. By which I mean that if you raise the camera high enough to actually see what you're shooting at, your character aims at the floor. There is no way to see what the heck you're shooting at! I get the third-person driving sections - these work really well - but walking around on foot? Why isn't there a first-person option?
But the big game-destroyer for me is...
3) NO AUTOSAVE. ON A FREAKIN' PC GAME. I cannot even begin to describe how much this ruined my experience because I knew that, if I rolled a "mission" car, I'd have to start the mission again. If I got busted, wasted, fell in a puddle, I'd have to start the mission again. I would drive mission cars at about ten miles per hour so as not to accidentally hit a curb or something, and must have driven from my "house" to a quest-giver about six hundred freaking times. THIS IS NOT MY IDEA OF FUN. Horrible, horrible decision.
Oh and bonus 4) For the final quest, you get all your weapons taken from you. And have no way to get them back unless you've been picking up the "packages" throughout the game. Which you probably won't have been doing because they're completely unnecessary up until that point.
So yep... Grand Theft Auto 3. Great atmosphere, great world, I love all the people you come across, the graphics look good, the sound is good, the radio stations are good, the quests (until the last one) are pretty good for the most part. And because of the lack of autosave, it is a massive chore instead of a fun time. Thanks, Rockstar!
GTA3.
(Yeah, I know, I know! Don't kill me!)
I have only three problems with this game, but to me they just destroyed my experience with it.
1) Cutscenes at EVERY. IMPORTANT. POINT. At one point you have to kill a guy for some reason, I forget why. Anyway, you get to the guy's house, and immediately - a cutscene starts up showing him walking to his car and getting in. WHY? Why not just start the game with him in it? Or give us the option to run him over, which I guarantee everybody who reaches this point will want to do anyway?
2) Third-person shooting of the worst kind. By which I mean that if you raise the camera high enough to actually see what you're shooting at, your character aims at the floor. There is no way to see what the heck you're shooting at! I get the third-person driving sections - these work really well - but walking around on foot? Why isn't there a first-person option?
But the big game-destroyer for me is...
3) NO AUTOSAVE. ON A FREAKIN' PC GAME. I cannot even begin to describe how much this ruined my experience because I knew that, if I rolled a "mission" car, I'd have to start the mission again. If I got busted, wasted, fell in a puddle, I'd have to start the mission again. I would drive mission cars at about ten miles per hour so as not to accidentally hit a curb or something, and must have driven from my "house" to a quest-giver about six hundred freaking times. THIS IS NOT MY IDEA OF FUN. Horrible, horrible decision.
Oh and bonus 4) For the final quest, you get all your weapons taken from you. And have no way to get them back unless you've been picking up the "packages" throughout the game. Which you probably won't have been doing because they're completely unnecessary up until that point.
So yep... Grand Theft Auto 3. Great atmosphere, great world, I love all the people you come across, the graphics look good, the sound is good, the radio stations are good, the quests (until the last one) are pretty good for the most part. And because of the lack of autosave, it is a massive chore instead of a fun time. Thanks, Rockstar!
7.62 High Calibre and ToEE. Both had all the gameplay mechanics that made me drool, but were bugged as hell and totally unpolished. With the help of the modding communities those are some of the few non indie games who focused on substance in gameplay rather than going the safe route of lightweight pulp with some nice eye-candy...
No More Heroes: Desperate Struggle.
The game itself was too much cater for the fans-
Sure in the first game the entry fee to fight the next rank battle was a pain in the ass to gather the money so they remove the fee HOWEVER this make the game alot shorter! Sure getting the cash was annoying but it did help prolong the game longer.
There was no variety with Travis weapons. In NMH 1 it was simply your bean katana and keep upgrading it to make it more powerful. In NMH 2 they had instead given you a selection of the weapon type (2 bean katana, a long sword and dual blades) but there is no upgrades to those weapons so it feel rather limited.
Sure in NMH it was abit like GTA with a explorable town but it was a ghost town so they decided to ditch it in favour of a simple map to point and enter despite the creator said he would make the town more life to it.
The minigames in NMH 1 were funny and fun so they thought they make it better in a form of 8 bits style tyype of game. This only result with the minigame feeling bad copies of the original 8 bits game. It felt like a chore to do since it was alot longer to gather the cash from the minigame compare to the first game.
The game itself was too much cater for the fans-
Sure in the first game the entry fee to fight the next rank battle was a pain in the ass to gather the money so they remove the fee HOWEVER this make the game alot shorter! Sure getting the cash was annoying but it did help prolong the game longer.
There was no variety with Travis weapons. In NMH 1 it was simply your bean katana and keep upgrading it to make it more powerful. In NMH 2 they had instead given you a selection of the weapon type (2 bean katana, a long sword and dual blades) but there is no upgrades to those weapons so it feel rather limited.
Sure in NMH it was abit like GTA with a explorable town but it was a ghost town so they decided to ditch it in favour of a simple map to point and enter despite the creator said he would make the town more life to it.
The minigames in NMH 1 were funny and fun so they thought they make it better in a form of 8 bits style tyype of game. This only result with the minigame feeling bad copies of the original 8 bits game. It felt like a chore to do since it was alot longer to gather the cash from the minigame compare to the first game.
I completely disagree with the control statement (But agree with the rest). The controls were very unique and while they did cause some odd deaths, once you got used to the controls that stopped happening. InFamous is probably one of my favourite games of this generation. I can't wait to get the second.J-Alfred said:
I was really looking forward to this game until I played the Demo. I was really interested in the sorta unique setting and the platforming looked really fun. But then I played the demo. The plaforming is far to restrictive, you can't even jump unless its at specific places. So close to greatness.Frybird said:
I don't think a top down version would have worked so well on consoles. certainly not with the way you control the party members. I still believe it is an amazing game, and as close to Baldur's gate as any others. I've been looking for modern versions of Baldur's Gate for ever and this is probably as close as I've ever seen.loa said:
Divinity 2 and Kingdoms of Amalur
I don't know if anyone ever has this but with games like the previous two I had this feeling :
THIS IS A GREAT GAME....6 Hours later >Stop playing for some reason and never return to it
I don't know if anyone ever has this but with games like the previous two I had this feeling :
THIS IS A GREAT GAME....6 Hours later >Stop playing for some reason and never return to it
I agree about ToEE. (We're talking "Temple of Elemental Evil" here, right?) Way too much effort put into Hommet, but I'm not really interested in that stuff. The elemental planes were a bit boring - there was nothing to do except fight - and I have no idea how you're supposed to level up enough to even THINK about taking on the Balor guardian.Smokej said:
So yeah, some levelling issues and a lack of focus on the main quest, plus some massive bugs, all spoilt this one for me. A pity because I really liked a lot of what they did in the game.
Also it has one of the best game soundtracks EVER IMO. The ambient music is fantastic, especially when you get to the elemental planes.
Skyrim. Let's face it, it isn't a great game; it's only a good game. With some cohesive structure and a more bloated and complicated political situation, (and far less of a focus on being Dragonborn), the game could've been great. It's a curious trend of Bethesda to make rich intricate worlds and having them feel completely shallow and empty, perhaps it has something to do with the lore being confined to the Wikipedia in-game articles among the sea of (barely) adequately-written and too long pulpy short stories. It's a shame because the environments are pretty stunning and there's a rock-solid foundation for a great game, it just doesn't execute anything particularly well.
Batman: Arkham City.
Now, this might just be a matter of expectations, after all I didn't play the first game, but I belive there is enough flaws with the games that stand on their own.
When I first booted up the game and went through the beginning, I was stoked. Although the idea of building a prison in the middle of the city without any infrastructure or order might seem a tad bit ridiculous ("might"), I was willing to let it slide in order to enjoy the story. Having Hugo Strange as the main villain was awesome, and the mystery behind Protocol Ten piqued my interest, everything was set for a great story.
However, what followed was a cavalcade of disappointment and one-off appeareances, crowned by one of the most stupidest reveals and twists ever. Namely, the mysterious benefactor of Hugo Strange and what Protocol Ten was.
These are however, not the only problems with the story, theres also the matter of Batman going back and forth from the same locations because *GASP* while he and Mr. Freeze were fighting pointlessly, Joker stole the serum!
Ugh, the only saving grace for this game was the combat system and the stealth sections, and even that was often times hampered by the terrible control scheme.
Now, this might just be a matter of expectations, after all I didn't play the first game, but I belive there is enough flaws with the games that stand on their own.
When I first booted up the game and went through the beginning, I was stoked. Although the idea of building a prison in the middle of the city without any infrastructure or order might seem a tad bit ridiculous ("might"), I was willing to let it slide in order to enjoy the story. Having Hugo Strange as the main villain was awesome, and the mystery behind Protocol Ten piqued my interest, everything was set for a great story.
However, what followed was a cavalcade of disappointment and one-off appeareances, crowned by one of the most stupidest reveals and twists ever. Namely, the mysterious benefactor of Hugo Strange and what Protocol Ten was.
RAS AL GHUL? You mean the same fucking guy I just beat in single combat some missions before? At first I expected him to be the main guy behind this all, but then I beat him to a pulp and though "Well, hes not going to pop up again, because that would be incredibly anticlimatic and stupid". What a fool I was, underestimating the awfulness of the story and the writers.
Then theres Protocol Ten, one of the most stupid plans I have ever heard. A plan that everyone who posses a modicum of knowledge on how the world works and criminal psychology in general can see is stupid, all of this is coming from A GUY WHO IS SUPPOSED TO BE A DOCTOR IN PSYCHOLOGY. How the fuck would killing the criminals do ANYTHING? He knows that this is just a symptom of a larger problem and that new criminals will be arrive? Right?
Now, expecting the writers to think beyond "HURR NINETIES EXTREME" might just be a problem with my expectations, who knows.
Then theres Protocol Ten, one of the most stupid plans I have ever heard. A plan that everyone who posses a modicum of knowledge on how the world works and criminal psychology in general can see is stupid, all of this is coming from A GUY WHO IS SUPPOSED TO BE A DOCTOR IN PSYCHOLOGY. How the fuck would killing the criminals do ANYTHING? He knows that this is just a symptom of a larger problem and that new criminals will be arrive? Right?
Now, expecting the writers to think beyond "HURR NINETIES EXTREME" might just be a problem with my expectations, who knows.
These are however, not the only problems with the story, theres also the matter of Batman going back and forth from the same locations because *GASP* while he and Mr. Freeze were fighting pointlessly, Joker stole the serum!
Ugh, the only saving grace for this game was the combat system and the stealth sections, and even that was often times hampered by the terrible control scheme.
Assassin's Creed.
The seires itself is great, but the first game was overly repetitive. Steal, kill, bribe, listen to a really long monologe, repeat. Still, Assassin's Creed II is one of my favorite games of all time. Major improvement over the first.
The seires itself is great, but the first game was overly repetitive. Steal, kill, bribe, listen to a really long monologe, repeat. Still, Assassin's Creed II is one of my favorite games of all time. Major improvement over the first.
This.Random Fella said:
I was fairly close to naming it this decade's BG2, but... it really isn't. Too buggy, too short, too much faffing about, not enough variety in content. Definitely a good game, but fixing any one of those would have made it leagues better.
Alternatively, fucking multiplayer. I'd have given up the whole dovahkiin immersion just to be able to slay dragons with a bro at my side.
Far Cry 2. Seriously, that game is just a patch and a half away from being perfect. You could list that game's problems on only one hand, but they're so glaring it can really spoil the experience. And yet, we get absolutely no post-release support even when the issues are so obvious. As a result, Far Cry 3 can go screw itself- no matter how good it turns out to be.
I could also say Just Cause 1, but we all got the game that game could have been with the sequel anyway, which improved everything. Except maybe the music, which it only managed to equal. But you know what? That's good enough.
I could also say Just Cause 1, but we all got the game that game could have been with the sequel anyway, which improved everything. Except maybe the music, which it only managed to equal. But you know what? That's good enough.
Brink immediately comes to mind
Id say with just a little more polish and work it could have been absolutely amazing. at the moment its just good a 6.5/10
also Farcry2
i loved this one but there things id do to improve it (these are my surggestions feel free to disagree)
- add wild life
- make weapons less accurate but higher damage
- fix the faction system
- maybe more towns
- get rid of malaria
- add co-op? (if they use my gun play changed)
- also make weapon degradation worth a damn, i could swap my guns with new ones every 5 seconds and not have to worry
Id say with just a little more polish and work it could have been absolutely amazing. at the moment its just good a 6.5/10
also Farcry2
i loved this one but there things id do to improve it (these are my surggestions feel free to disagree)
- add wild life
- make weapons less accurate but higher damage
- fix the faction system
- maybe more towns
- get rid of malaria
- add co-op? (if they use my gun play changed)
- also make weapon degradation worth a damn, i could swap my guns with new ones every 5 seconds and not have to worry
Catlevania Lords of Shadow - the characters were good and the story was good but everything was just "ignored". Through out the story Gabriel is constantly changing and giving in to darkness, the enemies he kills drive him ever closer to darkness but Konami decided to bury these details in walls of text and physically show no changes what so ever. They had established a great Metroidvania formula and they went and abandoned it and to top it all the levels weren't designed all that well, safe to say the 2-D moments were the best, I can only imagine what Symphony of the Night would be like with those graphics 
but in all honesty I hope they abandon this style and continue with their Metroidvania style or the hybrid that was introduced in Order of Ecclesia, which is my favorite Castlevania to date, Shanoa is one hell of a protagonist she just looks really cool. I really want to see more of her
Darksiders - not a bad game by any means but so much potential was thrown out the window, sure the action was okay and the puzzles were... well they were there, but so much was just wrong. To start a horseless horseman isn't a good idea and the copy paste items were disappointing. I really wanted to love this game as it was going to be Zelda like but in the end it just felt like the game was unfinished, almost like a demo. I have high hopes for the 2nd one still Joe's constant mentioning of multiplayer scares me that he wants to turn the series into a brawler and not so much a Zelda game
speaking of which how many Zelda type games are there? I really can't think of any other than Zelda, and I'm talking current gen, Musashi, Lufia, and Alundra are as dead as can be
but in all honesty I hope they abandon this style and continue with their Metroidvania style or the hybrid that was introduced in Order of Ecclesia, which is my favorite Castlevania to date, Shanoa is one hell of a protagonist she just looks really cool. I really want to see more of herDarksiders - not a bad game by any means but so much potential was thrown out the window, sure the action was okay and the puzzles were... well they were there, but so much was just wrong. To start a horseless horseman isn't a good idea and the copy paste items were disappointing. I really wanted to love this game as it was going to be Zelda like but in the end it just felt like the game was unfinished, almost like a demo. I have high hopes for the 2nd one still Joe's constant mentioning of multiplayer scares me that he wants to turn the series into a brawler and not so much a Zelda game
speaking of which how many Zelda type games are there? I really can't think of any other than Zelda, and I'm talking current gen, Musashi, Lufia, and Alundra are as dead as can be
