Games you just can't stand......

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2005-12-03 07:08pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:"Mein Leapen!"

Zeig Boing

McNum · Post by **McNum** » 2005-12-03 07:29pm

I'm not a big fan of sports games, double not a big fan of sports management games. If I'm going to play sports, I want to play, not watch others play.

Special mention goes to Morrowind.

"Here's a world. We won't tell you what it's about. Make a character. We won't tell you what the big difference between races are, so pick a random one. Pick a class, and no, we're not gonna tell you about them either. Done? Go into the world. Plot hooks? What're those? Just walk out there and get killed by wandering wildlife, repatedly, or something."

I did eventually find some kind of quest, but I had to kill... giant rats. Sorry, but after 2 hours of gameplay I'd like to have moved at least up to Dire Rats or venomous spiders or similar. Maybe even an Orc or whatever the Morrowind equivalent is.

And the conversation system was... lacking. "*Pages of text* choose from several words *more pages of text*". Those pages of text might have been more interesting if, you know, they'd told something, anything, about the Morrowind world before the game started. I don't mind exploring worlds, but really... Please tell me the basics of the world first, ok?

Hotfoot · Post by **Hotfoot** » 2005-12-03 07:38pm

McNum wrote:Special mention goes to Morrowind.

"Here's a world. We won't tell you what it's about. Make a character. We won't tell you what the big difference between races are, so pick a random one. Pick a class, and no, we're not gonna tell you about them either.

Um, are you someone who doesn't bother reading the manual? Because pretty much all of that was explained there in some detail, IIRC.

Done? Go into the world. Plot hooks? What're those? Just walk out there and get killed by wandering wildlife, repatedly, or something."

Ooo....kay...I guess you just don't like talking to people?

I did eventually find some kind of quest, but I had to kill... giant rats. Sorry, but after 2 hours of gameplay I'd like to have moved at least up to Dire Rats or venomous spiders or similar. Maybe even an Orc or whatever the Morrowind equivalent is.

...I'm still amazed how someone could play the game for 2 entire hours and not trip over one of the literally hundreds of side quests in the game.

And the conversation system was... lacking. "*Pages of text* choose from several words *more pages of text*". Those pages of text might have been more interesting if, you know, they'd told something, anything, about the Morrowind world before the game started. I don't mind exploring worlds, but really... Please tell me the basics of the world first, ok?

Again, I'm just baffled by this. You can learn enough about the world as you go, by picking up and reading books in the game, in addition to the conversations, which often contain useful clues. I'd never been introduced to the Elder Scrolls series at all prior to getting it apart from people telling me how much fun Daggerfall was back in the day. Yet somehow, I was able to immerse myself right away. Did you entirely skip the opening cinematics and throw the manual in the trash?

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2005-12-03 07:50pm

SirNitram wrote:There's a sense and logic to this: A sports enthusiast is really no different from a Star Wars fanboy, and thus it is both good business sense and good for the fans to get timely updates.

Well I just don't see why people would pay full price for something which could easily be put into an expansion. In fact, just updating the player rosters could easily be put into some form of free online updating service. That would be good for the fans (but it wouldn't be quite as good business sense. Although, the company that did it would probably not be seen as the pure evil EA represents, which could be a business tactic in itself...). Then you could also update the player stats to reflect how they're doing in reality...

But I don't know, maybe I'm just not a fanboy and/or like my money a bit too much...

HemlockGrey wrote:Because something like Madden football is much more accessible and much more interesting to a larger segment of the market than Final Fantasy: Ninja Fighting Big Tits Gaiden, and those people (myself among them) like to keep updated rosters and are willing to pay for it.

Yeah, see, that's part I don't get. Why are you willing to pay so much for so little (assuming you do buy the games every year)?

Acidburns · Post by **Acidburns** » 2005-12-03 08:09pm

I am dismayed by the number of classic games in here that people "hate"

Each to their own I guess.

It's suprisingly hard for me to come up with games I outright hate. I certainly can't think of any "good" games that I hate. Just the ones that are generally considered bad by everyone.

Hmm... the games that I hate the most would be the Army Men series. Oh it hurts just thinking about them. There are so many of them too, who is it that keeps buying them? ARGHH...

Utsanomiko · Post by **Utsanomiko** » 2005-12-03 08:16pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:
TheMuffinKing wrote:Uhh lets see, based on Earth: check.

Using real world equipment: check

To me that qualifies as realism based.
Those are pathetically narrow guidelines to judge realism on.

Actually, it's a pretty straight-forward way to determing the realism of the setting. It's the lack of realism of the gameplay he's failing to notice. I don't think I have to explain the difference to everyone else.

Anydangway, I really don't own many games I don't like, let alone played ones I loathe. I'm absolutely baffled by the failures of the game Quest 64, though; It was the first RPG on the system, yet it plays like an NES game. They delayed it for well over a year, yet it's so sparse in content. What the hell did they spend all that time on? There's no interraction, notable plot, no money nor complex magic or item system. You just rest at and run from one town to another and get waylaid by monsters every 3 seconds. Beat the thing in three days in summer '98, only notable things were the interesting music and scenery.

DarkSilver · Post by **DarkSilver** » 2005-12-03 08:20pm

DPDarkPrimus wrote:
DarkSilver wrote:ninja gaiden xbox version - visually beautiful game, and we were overdue for a new Ninja Gaiden game, but no camera control, and fucking hard bosses, fuck you!
1) I've only encountered... two instances where the camera was really poorly-positioned (out of approximately 12 hours of playtime)... and these were times where I knew exactly what I was doing so I didn't even need to see the character.

2) "The game is hard! Waaa!" What a great reason for hating it. I'm pretty sure every single reviewer out there said you would probably break a controller or two over it.

I didn't say the game was hard, I said the bosses where hard. And even then, not all the bosses. Like the samuri horseman boss. For a second level boss, he was inordanitly hard to do. I haven't broken a controller (yet), but I'm hating the jump in difficulty between the level itself, then the end boss (at least give a consistancy, if the boss is fucgging hard as hell to kill, at least give his minions more diffculty then a XXY combo to beat up.)

TheMuffinKing · Post by **TheMuffinKing** » 2005-12-03 09:02pm

Actually, it's a pretty straight-forward way to determing the realism of the setting. It's the lack of realism of the gameplay he's failing to notice. I don't think I have to explain the difference to everyone else.

Thank you.

Hotfoot · Post by **Hotfoot** » 2005-12-03 09:16pm

Muffinking, ever played SWAT or Rainbow 6?

Exonerate · Post by **Exonerate** » 2005-12-03 09:22pm

CS. Any game that rewards you for not aiming is just retarded.
Halo. I played it for the first time a few months ago and was completely underwhelmed - why is this game so popular?

Morilore · Post by **Morilore** » 2005-12-03 09:29pm

Star Trek: Dominion War is seconded.
Katamari Damaci deserves its own circle of Hell. That game gives me ADD just thinking about it.

Darth Quorthon · Post by **Darth Quorthon** » 2005-12-03 10:08pm

Dungeon Lords.

Buggy as hell, including a bug that prevented you from finishing the game. I waited three weeks for the patch, and then found out that it would wipe out my saved games. Sorry, I don't feel like going through this shit again, fuck you very much. You're constantly getting ransacked by groups of 8-12 foes, and you're always on your own - no party system in sight. Not to mention that on more than one occasion I was attacked by bats while I was underwater. WTF.

To a lesser degree: FF8 on the PC. Hey Square: high-res characters on low-res backgrounds looks like shit. Deus Ex: Invisible War; nothing like finishing a watered-down, overhyped, highly anticipated sequel in just over six hours. The Gothic games. Nothing like getting your ass handed to you over and over again by knee-high goblins and giant bugs right off the bat. Fun.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2005-12-03 10:42pm

Dooey Jo wrote:
SirNitram wrote:There's a sense and logic to this: A sports enthusiast is really no different from a Star Wars fanboy, and thus it is both good business sense and good for the fans to get timely updates.
Well I just don't see why people would pay full price for something which could easily be put into an expansion. In fact, just updating the player rosters could easily be put into some form of free online updating service. That would be good for the fans (but it wouldn't be quite as good business sense. Although, the company that did it would probably not be seen as the pure evil EA represents, which could be a business tactic in itself...). Then you could also update the player stats to reflect how they're doing in reality...

But I don't know, maybe I'm just not a fanboy and/or like my money a bit too much...

If it hadn't been for EA's New Strategy On Sports Games(IE, Why Make A Better Product When We Can Make It Illegal To Compete With Us?), this would have undoutably started turning up. And I can guarantee you if you built a game that did that, you'd nab a big share of the market share. Sell the updates for, say, four or five bucks a pop across your online service, and do them, say, quarterly, and chances are you'll see more pure profit than EA with their yearly updates.

But this is not possible now. EA's 'Exclusive contracts' mean they're the only game in town. Mores the pity, but I have hopes for 'The League', which, by not being NFL, is able to be over-the-top.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2005-12-03 10:43pm

Darth Quorthon wrote:To a lesser degree: FF8 on the PC.

FF8 PERIOD. I'm a huge FF fanboy, but this edition sucked the almighty balls. FF7 was at least tolerable. This? This was not fucking FF. It was trash wrapped in shit encased in spittle.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2005-12-03 11:00pm

Yeah, see, that's part I don't get. Why are you willing to pay so much for so little (assuming you do buy the games every year)?

It's the only way to get it, so I'll do it. If a cheaper way was available, I'd shell out for that.

Beyond that, I just really like the games. Why do people shell out $20 a month to wander around Azeroth?

TheMuffinKing · Post by **TheMuffinKing** » 2005-12-03 11:38pm

Muffinking, ever played SWAT or Rainbow 6?

Yes, and I loved em both. The only reason I don't play them much anymore is that I love having tanks and helicopters available.

Trytostaydead · Post by **Trytostaydead** » 2005-12-03 11:51pm

A lot of "puzzle" games that required you to move your mouse over everything over a screen to see if it was clickable.

A lot of action games that constantly required timed and controlled jumps. Pissed me off.

Xess · Post by **Xess** » 2005-12-04 12:18am

I haven't played too many games that I couldn't find something to enjoy. But I know that MOO3 sucks ass, the best part was reading the history sections of the manual. I also hated Aerowings or whatever it was for the N64, Harvest Moon kicks that games ass.

There are plenty of games I've found disapointing but that I then enjoyed, like KOTOR2, very fun until you hit the end and the cut content makes it a blurry mess.

Invictus ChiKen · Post by **Invictus ChiKen** » 2005-12-04 12:45am

Exonerate wrote:CS. Any game that rewards you for not aiming is just retarded.
Halo. I played it for the first time a few months ago and was completely underwhelmed - why is this game so popular?

For me I loved the sound track, the weapons, the storyline and the Marines are a major plus. Course on higher difficulty levels they go down quicker than a Souther Baptist country girl at her junior high dance...

-Russ

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2005-12-04 12:48am

Invictus ChiKen wrote:
Exonerate wrote:CS. Any game that rewards you for not aiming is just retarded.
Halo. I played it for the first time a few months ago and was completely underwhelmed - why is this game so popular?
For me I loved the sound track, the weapons, the storyline and the Marines are a major plus. Course on higher difficulty levels they go down quicker than a Souther Baptist country girl at her junior high dance...

-Russ

Uh...Invictus, he's talking about CounterStrike.

Now unless you're talking about CZ deleted scenes I don't see how that computes.

Ypoknons · Post by **Ypoknons** » 2005-12-04 01:04am

GTA4... Just couldn't take the concept of being a complete criminal, pimp, casual murder, etc...

Until I played it, of course (to show off hot coffee to my friends, at first...).

Vicious · Post by **Vicious** » 2005-12-04 01:05am

Ace Pace wrote:
Invictus ChiKen wrote:
Exonerate wrote:CS. Any game that rewards you for not aiming is just retarded.
Halo. I played it for the first time a few months ago and was completely underwhelmed - why is this game so popular?
For me I loved the sound track, the weapons, the storyline and the Marines are a major plus. Course on higher difficulty levels they go down quicker than a Souther Baptist country girl at her junior high dance...

-Russ
Uh...Invictus, he's talking about CounterStrike.

Now unless you're talking about CZ deleted scenes I don't see how that computes.

He's referring to the part of Exonerate's post dealing with Halo (emphasis mine). Which I personally thought was awesome. A friend and I beat it co-op and we both agree it was one of the funnest games we've ever played.

Noble Ire · Post by **Noble Ire** » 2005-12-04 01:07am

Uh...Invictus, he's talking about CounterStrike.

Now unless you're talking about CZ deleted scenes I don't see how that computes.

No, he's talking about Halo.
Personally, I think Halo was great for a variety of reasons, smooth gameplay, cool weapons and enemies, a lack of bosses, good soundtrack, and a good story (a common feature of Bungie games.) And of course, the endlessly replayable mutliplayer mode. The same holds true for Halo 2.

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2005-12-04 03:29am

The parallels between Total Annihilation and Pokemon are too great to be ignored.

Hotfoot · Post by **Hotfoot** » 2005-12-04 03:39am

Spyder wrote:The parallels between Total Annihilation and Pokemon are too great to be ignored.

Yeah, seriously. I mean, that section where you had to go and level up your Krogoth by fighting random K-Bots in the grassy fields for two hours so you could unlock his ultimate Gigadeathbeam attack and beat that pesky Arm Commander who had a level 62 Battleship with that ANNOYING FLOAT POWER OMG!

...seriously, wtf?