Misjudged Games

[Scrustle]

I liked the drifty way the cars handled, although I will concede that it wasn't a long lived game. There wasn't a huge variation in feel between cars. Some were slightly more slidey some were slightly less. It was a good mix of Burnout and NFS though which is what you'd hope for from Criterion. Hopefully Forza Horizon or the new Citerion NFS game will be the sandbox driving game we've been waiting for.

HP didn't feel "drifty" to me, it was more like when you turned you had no idea whether you were going to sharply veer off or just twitch a little. It doesn't matter how much you actually pushed the stick, the game would just randomly decide to do whatever it felt like. I never felt like I could trust the controls, and my failures were never down to my own lack of skill. It was just the short temper of the game.

Now Shift felt drifty to me. Every single tap of the stick brought out the rear end. Zero grip at all. It didn't matter how fast you were going or how you turned, it always sent you in to a slide. And not an arcade style slide like with Burnout where you can keep your speed up and control direction. It just fucked everything up. The sequel mostly fixed the problem and the game was actually playable, but the first was so terrible I don't even understand how they thought the game was in a fit state to release. It was like pre-alpha or something.

 

[Macemaster]

Predator: Concrete Jungle is my choice here, it had a lot going for it, and has so far been the only game to capture the feeling of actually being a Predator, yeah, it had problems, but if it had gotten a sequel, I think it would have been a damn awesome game.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

There are two that stand out to me for being underrated heavily by the critics, and one that seems to be dismissed too much by the general gaming fanbase.

The first critically underrated game, for me, is Alpha Protocol. I didn't run into many bugs (actually, just one that I can think of), and as far as making your choices have actual consequence story-wise, it delivers much more than most games. I've played through the game several times, and it's never been exactly the same each time, due to changing up seemingly minor things. It actually felt less buggy to me than Fallout: New Vegas, yet the latter game gets crazy praise.

The second critically underrated game is Stranglehold. Don't get me wrong, it's not an extremely good Game of the Year contender type of game. It is a John Woo movie put into video game form. And you know what? It totally delivers on that. There was one mission that annoyed me (fucking lasers...), but I didn't regret buying the game (used, of course, for cheap) at all, nor playing through it. It's shallow pleasure, but it is still pleasure, and not a slog.

For the game that I feel has been too harshly slammed by gamers in general, it is Mass Effect 3. Yes, the original ending sucked. That said, I felt the rest of the game was definitely strong enough to make up for it. The party characters were more developed, the chats between characters on the ship felt natural, the voice acting was even more improved from the second game, the romances (assuming you continued one) were extremely heartwarming, and the game managed to be humorous, even when it was by far the darkest game plot-wise.

But nope, the ending sucked, invalidating the rest of the series. And if you disagree with the general consensus of the game sucking, you are objectively wrong.

 

[Andy Shandy]

Mainly, though, I'd point to The Last Remnant. The game was sprawling, had great designs of characters, monsters, setting and items, a solid storyline, and a combat system with a surprising amount of depth for those who bothered looking for it. It's a true shame that it wasn't better received for I can not think of another 'new' franchise with greater potential.

Have to agree with this, I think my main problem with the game was the long loading times, but besides that I thought it was excellent.

I'm one of the few who likes Shadow the Hedgehog...in fact, pretty much every Sonic game outside of 06 and the Riders games I found to be at least "okay". I can see why people don't like a lot of the games, but some people come down way too hard on some of them. People may accuse me of being the problem with the Sonic fanbase, but I don't particularly care.

Perhaps not, Shadow the Hedgehog (mainly because I've never played it so I don't have an opinion on it) but I agree with you for the rest of them. I think they tend to be harshly judged just because it is a Sonic game.

GTA IV - It's a good game, no doubt about it, but no way is it anywhere near the levels of greatness that has it at 98 out of 100 on average at Metacritic. Especially since it's competitor that year, Saints Row 2, had the fun that GTA IV lacked for the majority of the game.

 

[Techno Squidgy]

Alright, the gist of this topic is that I want your opinions on game reviews that you believe were way unfair. This can be in the instance that a game was given too low a score, or even too high. One example that I'll give (for my opinion) is Alpha Protocol. I realize that it has it's flaws, but I think that it's a good enough game to deserve a 6 or 7. But definitely not the lowly 2 that it was given from Destructoid.

I won't be the first or the last to say this, but number ratings are meaningless and arbitrary. Which is why I don't understand why people get so bloody worked up about them. It's like the Jimquisition episode 'Hate out of Ten', that just stupefies me. You can't quantitatively judge the quality of a piece of art, it's just not possible. Then again, I struggle to understand people in general.

Except that he still uses them. So I suppose that makes him a hypocrite?

I don't think he's ever said that, I was just expressing my opinion on numerical ratings and on that video.

 

[cjspyres]

Alright, the gist of this topic is that I want your opinions on game reviews that you believe were way unfair. This can be in the instance that a game was given too low a score, or even too high. One example that I'll give (for my opinion) is Alpha Protocol. I realize that it has it's flaws, but I think that it's a good enough game to deserve a 6 or 7. But definitely not the lowly 2 that it was given from Destructoid.

I won't be the first or the last to say this, but number ratings are meaningless and arbitrary. Which is why I don't understand why people get so bloody worked up about them. It's like the Jimquisition episode 'Hate out of Ten', that just stupefies me. You can't quantitatively judge the quality of a piece of art, it's just not possible. Then again, I struggle to understand people in general.

Except that he still uses them. So I suppose that makes him a hypocrite?

I don't think he's ever said that, I was just expressing my opinion on numerical ratings and on that video.

Oh, well in that case, all's well. The fact is though, people feel they need a system to gauge how a game is. I don't, cause in my case, I play the game regardless. It's why I always rent first, no matter the game. Something

I've never understood is why he (Mr. Sterling) feels he needs to get shock views with low ratings. I've always seen Yahtzee and Sterling at complete opposite ends of the same comedy. Yahtzee "angrily" makes fun of a game, but can still admit he likes it. Sterling on the other hand is a complete elitist who uses flamebait as a means of getting views

 

[Techno Squidgy]

snip

Oh, well in that case, all's well. The fact is though, people feel they need a system to gauge how a game is. I don't, cause in my case, I play the game regardless. It's why I always rent first, no matter the game. Something

I've never understood is why he (Mr. Sterling) feels he needs to get shock views with low ratings. I've always seen Yahtzee and Sterling at complete opposite ends of the same comedy. Yahtzee "angrily" makes fun of a game, but can still admit he likes it. Sterling on the other hand is a complete elitist who uses flamebait as a means of getting views

I don't read Destructoid, I only watch the Jimquisition because it can be pretty funny at times, and at others can have a somewhat decent point.