Worst console/franchise

Recommended Videos

CyberAkuma

Elite Member
Nov 27, 2007
1,055
0
41
It just baffles me how many people are bashing the Virtual Boy, simply because that bad console can't hold a candle next to how horribly bad the Philips CD-i was.

Sure the Virtual Boy had some dumb design flaws to it, but the console was within a resonable price range and its games where actually not bad at all. The only problem with the games was just... they were only for the Virtual Boy.

The Philips CD-i on the other hand was a $700 monstrosity (do I even dare to say that it was even more expensive in Europe) that wasn't even designed to be a gaming console to begin with. The CD-i was intended [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dV9nAx0TOo] for use of "educational games", watching movies and "interactive encyclopedia applications".

When the sales began to swindle - they started to concentrate on what Philips call "games" or "interactive games" more likely. If you think quicktime events ('Simon Says'-events) are bad, this console had full length games that were nothing but an hour long quick-time event. The only way they could make notecable games was by filling the 600 MB discs with heavy movie-influenced games. We all know the legacy for those with the Sega CD. Some games though didn't use a lot of movies, and the graphics on those games were no better than the SNES graphics. Definetly worth your $700, eh?

Did I also mention that the controller was majorly unresponsive? I noticed when playing Space Ace that sometimes the controls where unresponsive and didn't properly respond to my button presses. I thought originally that there was something wrong with the game interpreting my buttonpresses - but no, it's the CD-i controller that is notorious for being one of the worst controllers ever. (yes, even worse than the Xbox brick)

Well, at least the CD-i had Zelda. .... oh... wait...
 

searanox

New member
Sep 22, 2008
864
0
0
Funny how nobody has mentioned worst franchises so far.

I'll start with one: Call of Duty.

Okay, the first game was good. Not amazing, but cool for the time, and one of the first World War 2 shooters other than Medal of Honor to do a good job at capturing the intensity of the battlefield.

The second game was also good. Kind of limited and didn't really add anything new to the formula, though. The graphics were admittedly pretty for their time, and are even okay today, but the mechanics were starting to show their age, what with the infinitely respawning enemies and stuff. Still, it brought us the grenade indicator, so that's something.

The third game basically just copied the second game without adding anything new. In other words, boring.

The fourth game basically just copied the second game without adding anything new (again), but stuck it in modern times and added some more interesting set pieces. Yes, the multiplayer is fun, I get it. No, the game is not all that great. It uses the same gameplay mechanics that were tired and boring before the second game came out, aside from one or two parts it's as linear as you can possibly get, it's short, and focuses entirely on style over substance. Oh, did I mention that the AI is completely broken? The game is practically an interactive movie.

If one franchise needs a serious overhaul, it's this one. In fact, I'd prefer if they just didn't make any more. Give it a new setting, focus more on non-scripted gameplay (no fucking infinite enemy spawns until you reach the trigger point), and open up the environment beyond linear corridors. Everyone thought Call of Duty 4 would be better just because of the new setting, and it was, but they let presentation impress them too much. If they send the next game into the future, I want to have laser guns, mechs, open-ended stealth gameplay, freedom in how to approach objectives, etc. Please, just not the same awful slog through thousands of enemies while shrugging off hundreds of bullet wounds by hiding behind picket fences.
 

zachatree

New member
Oct 1, 2008
164
0
0
haveyouseen_mywallet post=9.72894.776810 said:
the original gamegear, i had one of the ac adapters that never fit correctly which meant it never charged, also to a 6 year old kid the thing felt like it was 40 pounds. it was like a cinderblock with buttons.
man I loved the game gear....