Poll: The 'This Great Game Sucks' thread

Recommended Videos

Zaydin

New member
Mar 2, 2009
373
0
0
Fable and Fable 2 didn't live up to the hype for me. They were good RPGs overall, but they weren't as epic as Peter Molenyux(sp?) promised they would be, and they lacked the huge level of interactivity that Peter promised.
 

squid5580

Elite Member
Feb 20, 2008
5,106
0
41
HUBILUB said:
Shadow of the Colossus sucked! .... Just kidding, it was the best game ever.

But I did not find that AC2 lived up to my expectations.
I thought SOTC did and I am not kidding. That is my opinion though. There have been lots of over hyped games I didn't like. And lots of games everyone said sucked and I liked. And lots that were hyped that I liked and lots that I thought sucked along with everyone else. Too many variables to be reduced into a 4 point poll. I could have been in a bad mood or good one. I might have got stuck somewhere. It might have crashed at a bad time costing me hours. I might have just finished a better game and end up comparing the 2 unjustly in my mind. I might have had different expectations than what I got. Timing has alot to do with whether I enjoy a game or not.
 

Mistermixmaster

New member
Aug 4, 2009
1,058
0
0
Dragon Age: Origins... Was awesome for the first 2 hours, then it got kinda repetitive. Was expecting more from BioWare after enjoying Mass Effect so much. =/
 

NickCaligo42

New member
Oct 7, 2007
1,371
0
0
lSHaDoW-FoXl said:
Oh, sorry, I was thinking of Call Of Duty.
Oh yeah. Because the multiplayer shooter with the less-than-six-hour-long single-player campaign, the ultra-contrived Russian terrorist plot, and your character getting nuked to shreds every time you beat a level (thus removing any sense that NOT dying actually was important) is so much better. Please, bobby kotick, please "take the fun out of making games" some more and make life hell for aspiring game designers like myself who actually care about meaningful content beyond shoveling out gaming cocaine.

If not for that I honestly see where you're coming from, and for the record if there's one cool thing about the Call of Duty series it's that it acknowledges that America isn't the only country on the planet. For what it's worth, it's also got just about the best design of any multiplayer shooter. One word. "Perks." Getting back to the topic at hand, though...

Infamous. Dear friggin' God, Infamous. I just don't understand the appeal of this game, and I can't imagine how Yahtzee just glanced over this thing without tearing it to shreds.

First off there's those moronic comic book panel-style cutscenes that just glance over important plot points. Literally, you move through a fistful of still images while Cole briefly narrates about it in his overly raspy, unlikeable voice. After one of the first missions you're told, briefly, that you botched up the job, everybody died, and then you're introduced to a new character who's a federal agent and who will be giving you missions for the rest of the game.

It sounds like the kind of thing that'd be played out with a bit of dialogue and exposition, right? Wrong, that brief description is exactly as much detail as you're given. I don't know what pisses me off about it more. On one hand I'm left there staggering over how I could've FAILED the mission when I so obviously beat it. On the other they just introduced a MAJOR FRIGGIN' CHARACTER and couldn't even bother to give her the time of day, much less get me acclimated to her. Who's to say this is all actually happening, anyway, and not just Cole rambling to himself while he reads bad comic books without word bubbles? Worst narrative design ever. It wreaks of that typical game development studio who's so afraid that actually trying to tell a decently detailed story will put off gamers that they condense the crap out of it until it's a soulless, meaningless bunch of glue holding together their missions. I would personally rather have had a Metal Gear Solid cutscene than this bullshit--and that's saying a lot, because I honestly think Metal Gear Solid drags too long. Either that or I'd have preferred Crackdown, where it didn't have a story and didn't pretend to have one.

That's just for starters, though. Let's talk about that HUD. Infamous is one of those offenders in the "immersive gaming" category, so intent to hide the fact that it's a game that the developers opted not to have a health bar. Instead, they have a red tint superimposed around the edges of the screen, sort of implying bloody, broken glass. It's so slight and so transparent, especially in the midst of the enormously cluttered city scenery, that it's impossible to see, so you hardly realize that you're even taking damage until you're almost dead--at which point the game turns the camera all black-and-white, removing all traces of color contrast and making it more difficult to see where you're going and what you're doing at the very moment that you most need to be able to navigate. And then you die. And die. And die. Compounding the issue, you get almost no feedback for when you take damage, other than rumble. You can't see bullets and they come from every direction. "Immersive" my ass. What's so immersive about countless unnecessary and frustrating deaths? What's so immersive about forgetting the concept of simple convenience and clearly communicating information? And this is the same game that's trying REALLY hard to not have an overbearing story and just be a game. Cripes, what a stupid game.

I can go on about this 'til doomsday, but I just hate this game. I hate the half-assed storytelling, I hate the way Cole's always clinging to crap when I'm just trying to get across the freaking street, I hate the generic story, I hate Cole himself, and most of all, I hate the design philosophy behind this game.
 

Trivun

Stabat mater dolorosa
Dec 13, 2008
9,831
0
0
Prince of Persia. I haven't played the Sands of Time games, so I can't comment on those, but the newer one was pretty hyped up. However, I played the demo of it and found the controls to be so badly done and so difficult to use, I put it down and never touched it again. Lucky you don't have to pay for demos, also lucky that this was one of the demos they have in some GAME stores...
 

BubbaJeff

New member
Dec 2, 2009
125
0
0
Halo 1, 2 and 3.

Played all of em through, all three were a parade of mediocrity being celebrated as the second coming.
 

Gladion

New member
Jan 19, 2009
1,470
0
0
I usually skip hyped games. When I play a game that was hyped to no point then only because I checked it out before the hype and thought that what I saw looked cool. For example God of War and Metal Gear Solid.

With that said, there is only little left for me to choose from:

A) Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. I just played the game a few weeks ago. It was nice. The sniping mission was pretty thrilling until you get to the Ferris wheel, which made me wanna puke. They always tell you to lay down in the grass and snipe-fuck the horde of enemies. Stupid me believed the game and after a gazillion tries (no joke, I counted it) I just restarted and snatched an AK-47 from an enemy. Finished that part the first time I tried then.
But not much more than 'nice'. I figured out several ways to make the popular nuke scene much more impressive the moment I experienced it (though it was not exactly bad, it just felt like IW was resting so much on their graphics enginge they didn't give shit about anything else).

B) Bioshock: I don't know. Can't say much more than that. The game just doesn't get me. I don't know. I haven't finished it and I haven't played it in months, but I'm planning to start over some time soon because from what people described the game to me it's just my kind of thing. I don't know why it wasn't. Hmph.

Edit: Wait. Halo - but I'm not going to rant on it now. I just didn't enjoy it, that's all.
 

CloggedDonkey

New member
Nov 4, 2009
4,055
0
0
NickCaligo42 said:
lSHaDoW-FoXl said:
Oh, sorry, I was thinking of Call Of Duty.
Oh yeah. Because the multiplayer shooter with the less-than-six-hour-long single-player campaign, the ultra-contrived Russian terrorist plot, and your character getting nuked to shreds every time you beat a level (thus removing any sense that NOT dying actually was important) is so much better. Please, bobby kotick, please "take the fun out of making games" some more and make life hell for aspiring game designers like myself who actually care about meaningful content beyond shoveling out gaming cocaine.

If not for that I honestly see where you're coming from, and for the record if there's one cool thing about the Call of Duty series it's that it acknowledges that America isn't the only country on the planet. For what it's worth, it's also got just about the best design of any multiplayer shooter. One word. "Perks." Getting back to the topic at hand, though...

Infamous. Dear friggin' God, Infamous. I just don't understand the appeal of this game, and I can't imagine how Yahtzee just glanced over this thing without tearing it to shreds.

First off there's those moronic comic book panel-style cutscenes that just glance over important plot points. Literally, you move through a fistful of still images while Cole briefly narrates about it in his overly raspy, unlikeable voice. After one of the first missions you're told, briefly, that you botched up the job, everybody died, and then you're introduced to a new character who's a federal agent and who will be giving you missions for the rest of the game.

It sounds like the kind of thing that'd be played out with a bit of dialogue and exposition, right? Wrong, that brief description is exactly as much detail as you're given. I don't know what pisses me off about it more. On one hand I'm left there staggering over how I could've FAILED the mission when I so obviously beat it. On the other they just introduced a MAJOR FRIGGIN' CHARACTER and couldn't even bother to give her the time of day, much less get me acclimated to her. Who's to say this is all actually happening, anyway, and not just Cole rambling to himself while he reads bad comic books without word bubbles? Worst narrative design ever. It wreaks of that typical game development studio who's so afraid that actually trying to tell a decently detailed story will put off gamers that they condense the crap out of it until it's a soulless, meaningless bunch of glue holding together their missions. I would personally rather have had a Metal Gear Solid cutscene than this bullshit--and that's saying a lot, because I honestly think Metal Gear Solid drags too long. Either that or I'd have preferred Crackdown, where it didn't have a story and didn't pretend to have one.

That's just for starters, though. Let's talk about that HUD. Infamous is one of those offenders in the "immersive gaming" category, so intent to hide the fact that it's a game that the developers opted not to have a health bar. Instead, they have a red tint superimposed around the edges of the screen, sort of implying bloody, broken glass. It's so slight and so transparent, especially in the midst of the enormously cluttered city scenery, that it's impossible to see, so you hardly realize that you're even taking damage until you're almost dead--at which point the game turns the camera all black-and-white, removing all traces of color contrast and making it more difficult to see where you're going and what you're doing at the very moment that you most need to be able to navigate. And then you die. And die. And die. Compounding the issue, you get almost no feedback for when you take damage, other than rumble. You can't see bullets and they come from every direction. "Immersive" my ass. What's so immersive about countless unnecessary and frustrating deaths? What's so immersive about forgetting the concept of simple convenience and clearly communicating information? And this is the same game that's trying REALLY hard to not have an overbearing story and just be a game. Cripes, what a stupid game.

I can go on about this 'til doomsday, but I just hate this game. I hate the half-assed storytelling, I hate the way Cole's always clinging to crap when I'm just trying to get across the freaking street, I hate the generic story, I hate Cole himself, and most of all, I hate the design philosophy behind this game.
dude, calm down. They're only games and you can always just return them.

Fallout3. I loved the game, just didn't live up to the hype and didn't play like the trailers made it look like it would.
 

scar-x-

New member
Aug 19, 2009
90
0
0
I'd like to start by saying I don't own a PS3 so I'm not going to go anywhere near that and seem like a fucking uninformed fanboy.

Roight then -
Timeshift: Fun at first, got incredibly boring.
Elder Scrolls: I like em', they're just not as good as advertised
Counter Strike: Need I say more?
FarCry 2: I think I'll walk around this orange little world for a little while and do the same mission over and over.
Warcraft 3: Not an RTS fan so much. Move along.
GRAW: Not really fun
Halo 3: Multiplayer's great, but ask me about my general opinions about multiplayer and you'll see why I don't like it. http://screwattack.com/blogs/Trivial-Opinions-1/Multiplayer-Should-Not-Come-First
Burnout Paradise: Fun to do "Road Rages" but not much else. Play for an hour and move on. Come back another day.
 

NickCaligo42

New member
Oct 7, 2007
1,371
0
0
I think I'll vent about a few more. Next up: the Prince of Persia series.

That's right, all of them. It goes without saying that I can't stand the boring train wreck that is Prince of Persia '08, but I actually dislike the Sands of Time trilogy as well. Why? Well, they just aren't games. They're collections of linear platforming puzzles, with exactly one way of beating every single obstacle. Superficially it all looks really cool, and I can't say enough good things about the game's dialogue, but to me it's mind-numbingly straightforward, just one notch above quick-time events in terms of engagement. I dislike the Uncharted games for the same reason, though at least Uncharted has decent shooting. Combat in Prince of Persia feels like it's only present because the designers were obligated to put it in, and it's downright painful in the first game of the series.
 

BubbaJeff

New member
Dec 2, 2009
125
0
0
Gladion said:
B) Bioshock: I don't know. Can't say much more than that. The game just doesn't get me. I don't know. I haven't finished it and I haven't played it in months, but I'm planning to start over some time soon because from what people described the game to me it's just my kind of thing. I don't know why it wasn't. Hmph.
I totally understand that; once you get over the ooooooooooooh perdy 40'sness of it all, and the twist about an hour in - all the enemies are exactly the same, with poor AI, and the ending is...... unneccesary.
 

NickCaligo42

New member
Oct 7, 2007
1,371
0
0
CloggedDonkey said:
dude, calm down. They're only games and you can always just return them.
Yeah, I only rented it and it was no real loss for me, and frankly, it's futile of me to complain about Infamous alone. Designers are going to make the games they want to make one way or another and it stands to reason that if they weren't making Infamous that it wouldn't have meant the'd have made something that appeals to me more. But I can't stop other people from making similar games based on its success and (to me) inexplicable popularity, and it represents a lot of trends in the industry that I just despise. Because of Infamous and games like it, there will be, in general, fewer games that I enjoy being produced in the future, and I'm already looking at a really short list as of this console generation.
 

Vanguard_Ex

New member
Mar 19, 2008
4,687
0
0
Fable II. All the way, fucking Fable. The amount of promises and hype they put behind this game, and then when I started playing...god I wanted to cry and swear death upon Molyneux. Let's hope Fable 3 is actually as good as he's going to hype it up to be.