What is the worst video game ever made?
- Thread starter thejboy88
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You all talk like you've never heard of Custer's Revenge.
This has to take the prize, surely. An Atari 2600 game, with all the photorealistic graphics and grand sweeping soundtrack you would expect of a game on that system, where the player's entire goal is to rape a Native American woman who is tied to a pole. That's it. Worst game ever made and I doubt anyone can find something worse.
This has to take the prize, surely. An Atari 2600 game, with all the photorealistic graphics and grand sweeping soundtrack you would expect of a game on that system, where the player's entire goal is to rape a Native American woman who is tied to a pole. That's it. Worst game ever made and I doubt anyone can find something worse.
Wouldn't be much point in having topic where we only list the majority voted "worst games".Mister K said:
And a lot of these games to suck a whole lot. If people can list reasons and be funny about it, then I don't mind even if it's a game I personally love (None yet).
But;
I HATE that game. Let's break down the gameplay flow shall we.Reasonable Atheist said:
Get mission from flat characters whichspeakreallyfastbecauseIsupposethevoiceactorswantedanearlylunch and then take a car and drive to the other side of the African continent, with your travel being interrupted by enemy jeeps with mounted guns that can travel at warp speed to collide with you. At that point, your car is broken and you need to jump out, kill the guys in the jeep, repair your own jeep and drive on. Repeat about 3 times per mission. Then there's fixed checkpoints on top of that, which also break your vehicles and has enemies that respawn EVERY SINGLE TIME you pass them.
Fast travel? It's halfway around the African continent, rather than all the way (Yay...). Furthermore, guns break. That is, they jam every 5 round after emptying 3-4 magazines of bullets. Then they explode. Because... I got nothing.
Which means that none of the guns you brought for the mission is actually usable (Or fun to use) once you reach the actual mission location. And the missions are practically all the same. Go there (Always the other side of the continent), kill stuff or break shit, go back.
But it's unique because if you die, you can have buddies come along and be useless and then die, because they are useless. In fact, if they die you have a choice whether to use one of your healing syringes on them or mercy killing them. Your mercy, not theirs.
But at least you can admire the wildlife. That one Zebra in Africa. That inexplicably always runs into your car and dies the moment it spots you.
Oh, and the actual progression of the game is abruptly stopped because you have FREAKING MALARIA and need to drive to the other side of Africa (AGAIN) to get pills. This happens at least 5 times.
But you do get a choice of which faction to support in the civil war. Except you have to do the missions for the other one once the first one's missions run out and the factions are completely interchangeable. Oh, and everyone shoots you regardless of whether you work for them or not. Which is great, because you can't tell which are which anyway, so you won't feel bad about shooting "friendlies".
As for the story, it's absolute garbage.
The guy you are looking to kill is supposedly the "good guy", selling shit guns to everyone to fund the evacuation of the civilians or some nonsense and "manipulating" you to kill the warlords. Except, you know, he armed them in the first place... And then your mercenary buddies ALL betray you. Because... I don't know. And then in the ending you kill yourself. GRAND FUCKING FINALE!
Oh, and you can select which one of several characters to play as which influence who your useless buddies are and the look of your arms and literally nothing else whatsoever.
Oh, and all the guns are left oriented, even though the character is right handed. So every time he shoots something he has hot brass flying right in front of his face. Smart! Your character operating the bolt on the bolt action rifle is magnificent in it's limitless stupidity. That's a minor peeve considering the other failings of the game.
Fuck Far Cry 2 and fuck the people that made that abomination.
The one single thing that is good about is the healing animations when you're out of syringes. Snapping a broken wrist into place and have it work just fine is just... Magnificent. It's beautifully gruesome.
I reckon Sonic 06 for actually screwing a famous reputation for awhile. Seriously, I knew nothing of Sonic back then and even I found all the jokes and negativity that followed it. It was as much of a joke as the Xbone's first release was. I reckon it has more impact when it nearly kills a loved franchise.
And including that it's incomplete, broken, poorly designed all over with a stupid story rubbing more salt in at every turn.
And including that it's incomplete, broken, poorly designed all over with a stupid story rubbing more salt in at every turn.
Not even joking here but every single time I've seen someone (Online videos) play the game they experience a bug that none of the people that have played it in other videos or guest commentating on the playthrough has ever seen or experienced.Nazulu said:
Every single time you play the game, it creates new ways to break.
It's essentially a rogue-like.
The Retsupurae playthrough is fantastic. I recommend checking it out.
I'm checking out now. Thanks for the recommendation.Mutant1988 said:
It's funny you know. Every time I've brought up this game as the worst people recommend videos for me. The last were Game Grumps who went up 100 episodes or whatever suffering through it, and Clement who made a 3 hour rant review, and some others I forgot now. It's hilarious. I somewhat love this game.
It's excellent as a case study on how NOT to make games. It is also hilarious to see people take the piss out of it or be completely stunned by how broken or terribly designed it is.Nazulu said:
I love it too. But most definitely not for the reasons SEGA would prefer. I have, shall we say, an academic interest in bad games. I like examining them to learn how they are bad. It gives me a greater appreciation of good design and makes me more able to appreciate good elements in otherwise unremarkable games. It's also fun to just take the piss - Read my description of Far Cry 2 for an example of that.
I do genuinely hate that game though. Some of that vitriol is entirely sincere. Really, if I were to express my true feelings on the game without an attempt at narrative or comedy, it would just be me posting "FUCK THIS GAME" about 50 times.
Which might have been funny for someone, but the mods would not approve.
Yeah, I have to agree with Yahtzee on this. The phrase "worst game ever" gets thrown about way too loosely.
Now, worst in MY experience... Man, that's gotta go to Who Framed Roger Rabbit. The driving was piss awful, and collision detection was non-existent, but I never figured out what the fuck to do because the game is piss-poor about actually communicating anything to the player, even by NES standards.
Seriously, even Dick Tracy KIIIIIINDA made some sense, even with how crap it was...
Now, worst in MY experience... Man, that's gotta go to Who Framed Roger Rabbit. The driving was piss awful, and collision detection was non-existent, but I never figured out what the fuck to do because the game is piss-poor about actually communicating anything to the player, even by NES standards.
Seriously, even Dick Tracy KIIIIIINDA made some sense, even with how crap it was...
@Mutant1988:
Also, don't play on the lower difficulties. I have seen far too many opinions and some gameplay where it's obvious that people play badly because it's too easy. Watching somebody bumble around in the open while being shot at and still survive is a painful sight. It's much more enjoyable to feel like it actually matters how you play.
By the way, checkpoint-guards don't respawn because of a timer, but because the sections of the maps get reset every time you re-enter them. So, how about just not driving back and forth through the checkpoints like a trained monkey?!? It doesn't sound like you had a lot of fun with that kind of playstyle. ;-)
That seems to be the main reason why a lot of people hate the game. I'll tell you a little secret about FC2: If it's repetitive then that's your own fault. There is nothing better you can do to ruin the experience for yourself, than to just treat the checkpoints as obstacles. What you need to do is to treat them as environmental puzzles. Sneak by them, stealth-kill them, or kill them from afar. Or alternatively just take a route across rough terrain or use the river. Basically experiment with different loadouts, playstyles and routes.
Also, don't play on the lower difficulties. I have seen far too many opinions and some gameplay where it's obvious that people play badly because it's too easy. Watching somebody bumble around in the open while being shot at and still survive is a painful sight. It's much more enjoyable to feel like it actually matters how you play.
By the way, checkpoint-guards don't respawn because of a timer, but because the sections of the maps get reset every time you re-enter them. So, how about just not driving back and forth through the checkpoints like a trained monkey?!? It doesn't sound like you had a lot of fun with that kind of playstyle. ;-)
I believe worst game ever is the current game that was overhyped and people rail against because it didn't hold their expectations. Or perhaps it's a new game in a series you don't like that sold well, so you claim it's the worst game ever to feel smug.
My personal answer is it's a game I don't care for but many think it's the second coming of Jesus, so I just troll people by saying it's the worst game to get them angry.
OT and serious answer: I would have to go off of games I have actually played, and the ones that I could claim as "worst" aren't bad, just to me not great like some may think. If I was to go with the worst game I have personally played and remembered, it would be Halo 4. I never cared for Halo, never got the appeal, my first experience with the franchise was through multiplayer, which I swear I could shoot a person in the head with 20 bullets and they are fine, but then they hit me once in the head with shield on and I die, I am fully convinced people cheat in the game. With that, the actual game was boring, with stuff happening that I could not care about. Also, Master Chief could show a little bit of emoting when
Yeah, I tend to stay away from games that are actually bad.
My personal answer is it's a game I don't care for but many think it's the second coming of Jesus, so I just troll people by saying it's the worst game to get them angry.
OT and serious answer: I would have to go off of games I have actually played, and the ones that I could claim as "worst" aren't bad, just to me not great like some may think. If I was to go with the worst game I have personally played and remembered, it would be Halo 4. I never cared for Halo, never got the appeal, my first experience with the franchise was through multiplayer, which I swear I could shoot a person in the head with 20 bullets and they are fine, but then they hit me once in the head with shield on and I die, I am fully convinced people cheat in the game. With that, the actual game was boring, with stuff happening that I could not care about. Also, Master Chief could show a little bit of emoting when
Cortana "dies". Your one "friend" dies and you in a monotone voice go "Cortana, No." Also, she's an A.I., as the Judge from Unforgotten Realms said about Schmoopy's Grandma "boohoo, then we'll resurrect the old b*ch". Pretty sure you can just make a new program with the memories and bam, you are good.
Yeah, I tend to stay away from games that are actually bad.
Do believe I played on the second hardest, because I'm good at shooters (Yes, really). And I did try to treat them as puzzles (Because the first time I vented about it someone suggested the same thing. And the next time. And the next next time etc) and it lost it's novelty the 5th time I passed the same outpost.StoleitfromKilgore said:
Actually, no, it got boring right away. Why? Because the enemy AI is inconsistent.
But thanks for the condescension buddy. The only trained monkey is the one that taught you manners.
I know why the enemies respawn. It's still a shitty design. Also not necessary, because Far Cry 3 did not do that and ran on the same hardware using the same engine (IIRC, Dunia I believe it's called) - The respawning checkpoints were by design or an oversight, not a system requirement. If it was a limitation of the current engine, then it's still their fault that it made the game worse, because they made the game and the engine.
I know I can sneak past the checkpoints. But the same puzzle 5 times or more isn't a puzzle - It's a chore.
The AI is blatantly cheating in regards to jeeps and seeing through vegetation (Forgot to mention that). Also, sneaking? That means walking across the entirety of Africa instead of driving (Which does save about 5 minutes, due to the constant stops, but still).
Walking across a completely lifeless sandbox is not fun. I don't feel immersed in a sandbox that is completely void of activity, character or purpose. It's just forest, sand, steppe, cliff, forest, river. Why? Because some jerkoffs told us to go across the ENTIRE map to kill some other jerkoff and then report back to the first jerkoff to get assigned to kill another (Or at least break his stuff).
Do you feel like defending the character select, malaria pill fetching, indistinguishable factions ("It's an aesop about the futility of war" is a weak justification), the incompetence of the AI, the constantly breaking guns, the repeating side quests (Answer radio, shoot guy in suit) or necessary but tedious collectibles (Diamonds - Inexplicably in briefcases strewn across Africa)?
Or how about the plot twists? Got any brilliant insights on those that I failed to touch upon?
I had fun with Far Cry 3. But that was because it was Far Cry 2 without the bullshit. It was worse than Assassins Creed in this regard. Although I did finish Far Cry 2, to be able to better verbalize how shit it is (And I like shooters, so it's a matter of pride to finish them).
Also, Far Cry Instincts for the original Xbox? Also better than Far Cry 2. Far Cry Instincts Evolution, the underwhelming and pseudo sandbox sequel? Also better. Why? They understood pacing, they understood progression, they understood FUN. The original PC Far Cry? Also better than Far Cry 2 (Up until the mutants).
If I want methodical and immersive gameplay I'll play STALKER, a game that actually provides that and isn't a chore to play.
Firebird released a compilation entitled "Don't buy this" [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Buy_This]. Not one, but five of the worst games ever.
Admittedly - our ability to make bad games may well have improved over the intervening years.
Personally my least favourite gaming experience was playing "Monsters Inc. Wreck Room Arcade (2001)", particularly "Monster Tag" because it shamelessly used a well-loved film franchise to get the hopes of my young son up - and then dashed them by presenting him with a game that would have been considered bad twenty years previously.
Unlike many people on this forum, I played ET when it first came out and I liked it. My expectations were much lower then. The ability to, apparently, move between two different areas having an 'adventure' was amazing. Up until then every other game I had played was on one screen (asteroids, pac man, space invaders).
Admittedly - our ability to make bad games may well have improved over the intervening years.
Personally my least favourite gaming experience was playing "Monsters Inc. Wreck Room Arcade (2001)", particularly "Monster Tag" because it shamelessly used a well-loved film franchise to get the hopes of my young son up - and then dashed them by presenting him with a game that would have been considered bad twenty years previously.
Unlike many people on this forum, I played ET when it first came out and I liked it. My expectations were much lower then. The ability to, apparently, move between two different areas having an 'adventure' was amazing. Up until then every other game I had played was on one screen (asteroids, pac man, space invaders).
The Fifth Element for the PS1 is the worst game I've ever played. Nothing in the game, works or is appealing in any way shape or form.
I got it as a gift from my dad when I was little and had no idea movie-licensed games tend to be horrible.
I mean, I have played some horrible games before and may end up continuing to do so, but nothing has ever really rubbed me the wrong way as much as that abomination of a game.
I got it as a gift from my dad when I was little and had no idea movie-licensed games tend to be horrible.
I mean, I have played some horrible games before and may end up continuing to do so, but nothing has ever really rubbed me the wrong way as much as that abomination of a game.
I'd have to say Call of Duty 4.
The game itself is amazing but by this point the quality of the game doesn't even matter. It is outweighed by the landslide of mediocre military shooters that were released in its wake.
I don't want to massacre middle-eastern soldiers who probably have families, I want to shoot demons the size of tanks with rocket launchers god dammit.
The game itself is amazing but by this point the quality of the game doesn't even matter. It is outweighed by the landslide of mediocre military shooters that were released in its wake.
I don't want to massacre middle-eastern soldiers who probably have families, I want to shoot demons the size of tanks with rocket launchers god dammit.
I don't know about the worst game ever made, I imagine there's quite a few that could claim that title. But the worst game that I have ever played was a little known PS1 fighting game called War Gods. I wish I could burn the memories of that game from my mind.
I don't know anything about the quality of the game itself, but I heard there was an old Roguelike where you had to buy a new copy of the game every time you lost.
That seems a bit unnecessarily harsh to me, honestly. Mind if I do a quick breakdown? Mind you, this is just my personal opinion in comparison to yours. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just - perplexed, is all.Reasonable Atheist said:
Gone Home: why? It's more of a narrative experience than a game, true enough, and I thought the overall message needed to be said in one form or another. It was the first game to really feature a lived-in environment, from my experience, with clutter that felt natural and not just designed for the inevitable "Press E to interact" prompt.
Kane and Lynch 2: yeah, no argument there, the game sucked balls. "Y'want an ending? EFF YOU IN THE B, PEASANT!"
Ninja Bread Man: no clue. Never played it. I'll have to defer to your judgment on this one.
FarCry 2: yeeeaaaah... The one fix I found for the game's problems was a trainer. Nix the weapon degradation and kill the whole malaria bullshit in the egg, and you've got yourself a mostly fun game.
The Walking Dead: which one, the shitty FPS with Daryl and Merle Dixon, or the Telltale series? If it's Option B, I'll have to disagree. Lee and Clementine made me freaking cry, and no other game has managed that ever since. It's the first series that's managed to put me in that bittersweet mood I get when I finish a book series. I know there's more in store for Clementine, but I also know I'll have a hard time getting over the series' inevitable conclusion.
Don't Starve: again, why? It's designed as a survival game, so it has to be fairly unforgiveable by default, if you haven't grasped its mechanics. It's not exactly Demon's Souls, but dying is part of the learning process.
Amnesia: once more, which one? A Machine for Pigs had great atmosphere but a terrible sense of pacing, while Dark Descent - for me at least - was a confused but hyper-passionate Lovecraftian monstrosity that oozed atmosphere from every pore. Played in complete ignorance of YouTube's cadre of reaction-cam subscriber-hunting drones (e.g. Pewdiepie), it's a formula that's actually pretty goddamn scary.
Dragon Age II: you actually got its name down pat.
As for the game, I think it was decent - just a disappointment after the first game's awesome retro-styled systems. It screamed "The franchise got handed to the former Mass Effect team, so the director's working with what he knows", which was disappointing. If anything, it made me realized how much I *didn't* miss silent protagonists in RPGs. I was glad to have Hawke speak.The entire non-core Wii library: that's kinda harsh... I remember thinking No More Heroes was worth it, and I'll have to admit I wasted at least forty hours with Trauma Center: New Blood. Going from semi-realistic ER procedures to "SPESS ALIENS TOOK OVER THIS MAN'S BODY, OMGWTFBBQ!!!" all in the context of a Medical Drama setting was just so... quintessentially Japanese and quirky that I couldn't resist.
As for my own disappointments, I'd have to go with the classics. Big Rigs and Ride to Hell are the worst of the worst of pseudo-AAA development. Shitty coding all around, mysoginistic character designs because someone thought that a Biker-based crime drama needed female leads all done in the Grindhouse style... Of course, you can take a lot of the recent Steam Greenlight alumnis on there.
Anyone who looks to Steam or to the games market and says "Hells yeah, free money!" deserves to take a long walk off a short cliff. This goes double for anyone who has basic Unity know-how and takes to the Steam forums like they're some sort of auteur designer.