bioshit deffo takes my number one spot followed by grid; a happy go smash racing game with bollocks physics that shits in the face of people who like racing games.
Mine would be Dragon Age 2. It's separate buttons because you can also go prone. If it wasn't separate buttons you wouldn't be able to go from one to the other and it's important when you're being shot at and hiding behind a rock or something.
What is detached or distant? Not only is there not a cornucopia of nuclear aftermath distopian games, but they are far from holding a detailed richness that Fallout 3 and (what I expect, once I play for more than 5 hours) New Vegas have. Not only are the locations inviting of exploration, but I have been impressed numerous times with a inconspicuous detail or amusing tidbit that gives a little more info about the time and situation these denizens are in. I believe the Bethesda team does a great job of opening doors to missions and exploration and allowing you to affect the game in several ways. I think they covered all their bases with these titles. I greatly enjoy them and am more than happy to buy the other two add-ons for NV that I haven't gotten yet and plan on rebuying/replaying 3 through, along with the goty edition addons.
Dead Island for the PC. Every patch that is issued seems to break something else. Last week it wouldn't launch at all. After some forum searching found out I had to modify an *.ini file just to get the thing to run after that sorry excuse for a patch. Playing last night, when picking up my thrown weapons, they are now going to my inventory instead of my available weapon slots like before. Oh yeah, and quest paths randomly disappear from the minimap. I wanted to finish this game at least once, but I'm really starting to hate this B.S.
Probably Burnout paradise. The game is just so badly made. Can't forget paradise city (The song) that plays 90% of the time too, gets old real fast.
I know you can go prone, but I don't see why you need three buttons when two suffice. Look at (I'm sorry) CoD games: one button goes prone, no matter whether you're standing or crouching. If you're already prone, you stand back up. The other button makes you crouch, no matter if you were standing or prone. Press it while crouching, and you stand back up. Already that's one superflous key, and my feeling about Arma was that it was much more complicated than necessary. I also don't understand why it's so deep-end from the start. Why do we have to have every mechanism turned on? Can we not start out with a little more simplicity and work upwards when we feel like it (removing advanced squad management if desired for instance)? One of the few things I thought Operation Flashpoint did well was its difficulty balanced with realism. You have enough squad control for it to be useful, but not so much as to be bewildering. I'm using the prone/crouch and squad control examples here, but there are others too, which makes it so incredibly frustrating to use that I can't be bothered with it. It wasn't that badly made? It works pretty well, even with a wheel (which a lot of arcadey games fail on), and is good fun. The music is annoying as hell however.
Whole interface is terrible, f1 and f2 to switch pages on the main menu. . I thought I would give it another chance last night and did afew runs and so many times I had passed a car (rather close sure, but more then a noticeable gap) and I crashed into thin air. Is it just me or is there no speedo what so ever too? Races feel like they lack something big and I just can't put my finger on it. Maybe it gets better later on, but I'm really not willing to be bored for that long whilst trying to have fun.
And the cars have an infinite supply of gears, if you keep listening. But the interface was designed for a 360 Controller. It's a straight console port, basically. It's not a bad game, though, Just boring as heck if you don't have enough friends to constantly go on Multiplayer with
FIFA11 for PC - actually needed a google search to help in setting up the controls... worst console port ever imho.
SEGA GT, a Gran Turismo knock off originally for the Dreamcast but really badly ported to PC. It had terrible graphics even for its day, souless racing, and music much like what you'll hear in the background at a shopping mall. It needed a powerful PC to run smoothly because of the bad port. SEGA Rally from 2007, not rallying, not challenging, bad graphics, bad, bad, bad, bad, bad. Outrun 2006: Coast 2 Coast. Pretty much Sega Rally but in ferraris and on road with worse graphics. You know what, its pretty much everything I got in a SEGA bundle on steam with the exception of the Total War games.
I see what you mean, but that's just a matter of perspective. CoD is like that because it has to work on consoles with limited buttons. Arma is like that because it works on keyboards with plenty of buttons. I think others would say that the Arma way is better because each stance has it's own button. 2 buttons for 3 stances is odd. For me I have it set as Z, X, C. So it's right under my movement keys and I can instantly go to whatever stance I want without having to think about it or toggle anything. Makes sense to me. There also aren't many other keys to use, it's not much different to other shooters. You can start out however you want, that's one of the best things about the game, it's completely customisable. The game comes with about 20 standard missions and most of those don't even have a squad that you can control. The campaign is pretty worthless imo, but played online is where the game shines and you can play that however you want too. If you play Warfare you have full squads with full control, and if you play the other game modes you have no squads. It's one of the best games I've ever played and it's because of all this complexity. If you want a simple shooter you have countless ones to choose from. All the CoD games that get released every 5 minutes, Crysis 1, warhead, 2, etc.. all the lesser famous ones and even BF3. The beauty of Arma2 is that it doesn't care about being simple. It has full on depth because that's what a lot of people want. You can drive tanks, trucks, bikes, planes, choppers, and use any weapon, control entire squads of varied units, build your own bases, and it's all done in massive locations the size of a whole country. If they simplified stuff it wouldn't be the same game. Admittedly it was pretty bad in some ways though. The controls feel clunky sometimes, especially in tight spaces, and the UI is bad, the campaign was a total waste of space and probably did far more harm than good to the games reputation - it would have been better just not having a campaign. But other than that I think it's great. I don't think the complexity is a fair criticism because it's so tweakable and moddable, you can play it totally on your terms. Don't like squads, then you can play almost unlimited missions that don't have any. Or play Warfare when you can have them if you want and dont if you dont, and if you do have a squad, you dont need to do anything other than Go here, Stop, and Follow me. I felt a bit overwelmed with it at first too, but after a few days I got my head around it, and it's at this point when I usually start getting bored of CoD type games, but with Arma it just gets better and better because that initial depth ends up being what keeps things interested for a long time. I still play it often and I've had it for almost 2 years now.
i think worst game i own is battlefield bad company 2...played 2 rounds of the multiplayer and got sick of being spawn raped...shooting people that dont die ( i mean standing behind someone and shooting into there back for them to turn around and one shot kill me ) and teamates shooting me in the back. i then put the game down, and havent played it since
I agree with pretty much everything you wrote about Bioshock, and it's on my list of worst games I've bought too. The scenery got boring after a while for me, the action followed the same trend too. I just couldn't get into this game, despite giving it a fair trial. I think people tried to make out this game was smarter than it actually was. The game that sticks in my mind as the worst I own though is Making History: The Calm and the Storm. I bought it on Steam acting on a whim, but just couldn't get into it at all. It's a turn based WWII RTS, and I found it boring as hell to play. I have played a few RTS games and enjoyed them, but this one just seemed like hard work, with not enough reward to make it worthwhile.
I feel exactly like you. I was beginning to think it was only me who noticed this. I fire an entire magazine at someone at close range and miss. 2 hours total time played steam says, and its going to remain 2 hours.
I've played copious amounts of Bad Company 2 multiplayer and I hate it with a passion. I really, really do. The problem is less with the game mechanics themselves (though there are problems with those too) and more with gamers themselves, though. All the servers are now mainly populated by people who have played the game almost every week since release, day in, day out, and now know the maps, weapons and strategies by heart. Playing against them is so impossible that it's actually boring. I dub this 'The Counter-Strike Problem'.
