1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Other Your most hated games

Discussion in 'Gaming' started by Pete J, 30 Sep 2010.

  1. pandoraocicat

    pandoraocicat New Member

    Joined:
    16 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    109
    Likes Received:
    3
    My new worst game is spiderman shattered dimension. But worst part is I like the game apart from the developers trying to make you hate it. Why. The camera that seems to be controlled by someone having a fit. The controls have shockingly bad targeting system. Your aiming your webb here nope sorry ive decided you want to go there.

    Dont even attempt to climb a wall as the camera goes all over the place.

    what amazes me in 2010 is dont these games get playtested. And if they do the idiot that said this was okay should be shot.

    Maybee some studios should look at APB (now RIP) and there developers. Didnt listen to playtesters released a pile of trash and are no longer with us.

    Good game ruined by dodgy controls and mad im going leave you know idea where your going camera.
     
  2. paisa666

    paisa666 I WILL END YOU!!!

    Joined:
    4 Mar 2009
    Posts:
    809
    Likes Received:
    42
    Ok, here's my list of games I hate(that I also own :p), some of them are really old, but even by the time they were made they sucked:


    Far Cry 2: Yes, how can you not hate this game, the checkpoints spawning system of the rebels its ridiculous (I remember taking one of this checkpoints down, then getting killed by a rebel who apwned right there, behind me, im sure this happen to more than one person).

    But that's not all, after a while I think got used to it, didnt matter if they spawned like worms from the ground, what really pissed me off whas the travel system, it is boring as hell, driving and swiming through the same locations over and over and over again was tiresome. I never finished this game really.

    Age of Empires I: the AI its lame, the managment system its frustating, I know it was the first of the series and you should spec some gameplay letdowns and everything, but the the way it was marketed is what it made it worst, you dont get those nice formations, your villagers are extremely dumb, and the sound quality was terrible (Warcraft: Orcs & humans is older and the sound its awesome).

    Actua Soccer: laughable, the first 3D soccer videogame for PC, and it sucks, impossible to control, the passes system drops the ball to nowhere and the game doesnt recognize diagonal movements, wich is ridiculous in a 3D game, so forget about gaining control of the ball at any time.

    Microsoft Soccer: Actua Soccer but in 2D, the field its showed in diagonal like in the old days Fifa 94, 95 and 96, but forget about diagonal movements with the arrow keys, you had to play with the numpad, yeh I know... awful
     
  3. kasmirkocot

    kasmirkocot ~kasmirkocot~

    Joined:
    4 Nov 2010
    Posts:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Haha I totally agree.


    For me... Every single goddamn zombie shooter and war game, ever, on any platform. Bold statement? No! I like plot, I like graphics, I like storyline, I like character depth and realism. :sigh:

    Give me a game that isn't made for horny, frustrated men, and I'm sure to love it.
     
  4. deathbringer67

    deathbringer67 New Member

    Joined:
    9 Nov 2009
    Posts:
    60
    Likes Received:
    0
    Counter strike:source, a game i loved to play and played for many years in clans and public but it just seems to hate me, many years i put it to the game and coummunity but it just stabs you in the back now i hate playing it , it has made me friends (i thought)and lost me many also.

    I miss it, but it doesnt miss me.
     
  5. blueviper11

    blueviper11 New Member

    Joined:
    9 Sep 2010
    Posts:
    108
    Likes Received:
    2
    Every single TreyArch Call of Duty game. Seems like all they do is build on the previous game with some add-ons.

    E.g. COD3 based on COD2 basically with the graphics and weaponry.
    World At War based on COD4 but set in older times and different weapons.
    Black Ops based on Modern Warfare 2 with new maps.
     
  6. knuck

    knuck Hate your face

    Joined:
    25 Jan 2002
    Posts:
    7,668
    Likes Received:
    302
    you can't blame them for doing exactly what they're asked to do
     
  7. marone

    marone New Member

    Joined:
    11 Nov 2009
    Posts:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Black & White (both 1 & 2)
    Both had lots of promise and rave reviews but despite trying (on several different occasions) to really get into them it just didn't happen.

    Steam reliant games
    Just don't like the steam platform / business model. Just a shame that most of the games are going that way now :sigh:
     
  8. Yslen

    Yslen Lord of the Twenty-Seventh Circle

    Joined:
    3 Mar 2010
    Posts:
    1,966
    Likes Received:
    48
    Oh golly this could be quite a list... here goes;

    Empire/Napoleon Total War - I built my PC to play Medieval II and I've been waiting what feels like a very long time for a game that replaces it in my eyes. I struggle to think of a period of history in which I am less interested than that chosen for these two games. Why CA thought a total war game based almost entirely around lines of men standing still shooting at each other was a good idea is beyond me. Compared to the ranks of pikemen, cavalry charges and hordes of angry Scotsmen found in medieval these two games are just plain dull.

    "Civilization" (any of them) - Okay so I like total war quite a lot. I personally don't understand why anyone would want to play a game which is essentially total war but without any battles. I've mentioned this on bit-tech before and it would seem quite a few people agree with me.

    Supreme Commander 2 - This game actually made me google "equine body part supplier" in search of a suitable decoration to be placed on the pillow of whoever was in charge of making it.

    Supcom is a glorious game; an RTS that is refreshingly different from any other I've ever played with a real sense of grandeur to it. Supcom II is inferior in EVERY SINGLE WAY.

    The graphics are not as good. There are less units. The AI is exceptionally challenged when it comes to waging war. The economy has been dumbed-down. The introduction of "research points" forces players into conflict and removes every style of play other than rush tactics. The experimental units that remained in the game are smaller and far less important than in the original, where they could change the course of a game in your favour if used properly or lose you the game if used improperly... and I'm going to leave this list alone before I have some sort of seizure. <Breathes deeply>.

    Prince of Persia (2008) - I made the mistake of buying this game a week or so after its release based on screenshots, gameplay videos and a rave review from a major online review site. Of course after five minutes of playing the game myself I realised how incredibly dumbed-down it is compared to older games such as Sands of Time.

    It takes precisely no skill to play (and I mean none; we're talking monkeys + keyboards & mice = game complete here) and as a result is possibly the most boring game I've ever played. I struggled on with it for three or four hours in the hope that things would improve, enjoying the rather nice graphics and trying not to think about how much I'd spent on it.

    Alas, once I realised one of the quickest ways to progress through an area was to intentionally fall off something so that the game skipped past that particular puzzle for you I gave in and relegated the DVD to a stack on a bookshelf in the corner. It currently keeps company with my copy of Windows 98 Second Edition and the Gamecube version of James Bond: Nightfire, amongst other things best forgotten.

    Star Wars - Knights of the Old Republic II - This is more of a love/hate situation, as KOTOR II is also one of my favourite games of all time. Unfortunately, despite being rather old now it's still riddled with game-breaking bugs that were never fixed and quests that have no conclusion because so much content was cut from the final game.

    It could have been epic, but it ended up distinctly average - and I mean average in the true sense of the word; consisting of high and low points that add up to 25 hours of "meh".

    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare - I actually enjoyed this game, right up until the point where I realised the enemies never stop spawning and there are no real variations in how it can be played. It could be an FPS designed by Apple; everybody seems to love it, it sells in huge numbers, it's incredibly shiny and polished but it has no real depth and precious little in the way of freedom and flexibility.

    Fallout 3 - This game bored me to tears. Well not actual tears, as I stopped playing long before it made me cry, but I really did find it dull. The game world felt small and repetitive (probably as it all looks exactly the same) and it was damn ugly to boot. Why exactly, decades after a nuclear war has ended, does everything still look like it was blown up yesterday? The folks at Bethesda need to go take a look at Hiroshima city centre. Nuclear war isn't particularly effective as a herbicide.

    There were very few side quests compared to previous Bethesda games (see below) and the main plot was so bad I was actually embarrassed if anyone was ever around to witness me playing the game. The general vibe of the game didn't agree with me (I'll admit I've never been a fallout fan) and I found the whole experience very shallow and frustrating. To top it off the combination of RPG and FPS elements was done extremely badly, in my opinion. It was rather annoying to get a perfect headshot, only to then be killed by whatever enemy happens to be immune to bullets in the brain because some hidden spreadsheet says it still has some hitpoints left.

    More recently I got around to playing the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games... lets just say I won't be going back to the Fallout franchise any time soon.

    Oblivion - Okay, so I saved the big one until last. I spent a lot of time playing Oblivion, and I may well go back to it some day, but I know I'll come away with the same conclusion: it's not as good as Morrowind was, and both games are clearly designed by people who don't actually spend much time playing this kind of RPG.

    I'll begin with Oblivion in comparison to it's predecessor. Yes, it looked nice and you could ride horses, but fundamentally several things actually went backwards between TES III and IV. Spells such as lock and levitate were removed, presumably because locking doors caused problems with the AI system and flying around caused problems with frame rates. Regardless of the reasons behind these decisions, I missed having the ability to do things like this.

    The AI system was nowhere near as good as originally portrayed (remember the woman setting fire to her dog?) and while it was nice to have people walking about instead of standing in the same place all the time it meant Bethesda felt the need to include an immersion-destroying compass system. They then combined this with a map that wasn't in colour (why?!) and a fast travel system that meant you never really saw any of the beautiful world they created unless you forced yourself to go out and see some of it.

    Morrowind on the other hand had no compass and the in game map was basic, if brightly coloured. If you wanted to work out where you were going you had to read your journal for the description an NPC gave you then consult the fold-out map that came with the game. You could of course fly around, but only if you were powerful enough; otherwise you had to pay for transport on silt-striders or boats then walk the rest of the way. In most cases you came across something new and interesting en-route. Being powerful actually meant something too; you could walk into the wrong cave at level 5 and be butchered by some mean-looking Daedra, or walk into the same cave much later in the game and defeat them all. In Oblivion you always fought enemies of the same strength, so the possibility of biting off more than you can currently chew didn't really exist. The loot is levelled in Oblivion as well, so when you've killed your cave rats or goblins you never find anything particularly interesting.

    I could go on for quite a while here, as there are so many aspects in which Morrowind was superior: there are far more factions and side quests, you can become a werewolf, you have missions to do as a vampire AND as a werewolf, the overall art style was more interesting and the culture of the native people really shone through (Bethesda had been reading Robert Jordan novels that year, I think). There were of course problems with Morrowind (such as the difficulty of being a mage, the dull melee combat system etc) that were fixed rather well with Oblivion, but these improvements were all countered by dumbing-down and simplification in other areas.

    Why. for example, were the arena teams called "yellow" and "blue"? Surely they could have come up with more interesting names. Where are all the factions we were told are "In the imperial city" in other Elder Scrolls titles?

    One thing above all infuriates me in Elder Scrolls games however and is the reason I stop playing every single character I create in any of them after twenty or so hours. The guys at Bethesda clearly need to go re-watch the Matrix. As Agent Smith so graciously explains, humans don't actually get on particularly well with worlds that are too perfect. We need adversity, we need to be challenged. So why, after a dozen or so missions with any faction in any of the games, am I always promoted to the position of faction leader?

    Just once I want to play an elder scrolls game where this doesn't happen. To become stuck as second or third in command despite all my hard work would be incredibly refreshing. Becoming the leader invariably means you have no further involvement with that faction because the developers ran out of ideas for quests and the time and money to create them. Even a simple system such as "faction wars" that continue almost indefinitely (see GTA San Andreas or Stalker Clear Sky) would add a great deal of perceived depth to the game. Instead of "right I've finished that faction storyline, on to this other one" it would be a case of having to juggle commitments to all of the factions you join or else risk being kicked out or your faction going under.

    There is also the problem of every single character ending up the same. Regardless of actual character build, they can all cast spells, they can all sneak, pick pockets and steal things, and they can all hit things with melee weapons or shoot them with a bow. Combined with the fact that to get a decent amount of gameplay hours out of the game you have to do the missions for two or three factions at least, every character you play invariably ends up being exactly the same person. I've lost count of the number of times I've been Arch-Mage, The Gray Fox and the Champion of Cyrodil all at the same time. Aside from being repetitive, its also rather unfulfilling having a load of titles that means nothing beyond "there's nothing left to do in this section of the game".

    I'm fed up with being King of the World in Elder Scrolls games; it's just dull, especially when the game doesn't seem to recognise what you've achieved. I'm pretty sure I stopped playing all of my mage characters upon becoming the arch-mage and then walking into the Arcane University only to hear "Ah, you must be the Arcane University's newest recruit!". Quit game. Uninstall. Hide DVD in corner under Windows 98 and Prince of Persia to avoid wasting any more time coming to the same unsatisfying conclusion at any point in the future. Job done.


    Crikey look at the time. No doubt I'll skim read this in the morning and find a whole load of typos, errors in logic and badly structured arguments but for now it'll have to do. Night all!

    p.s. Given all the negativity in my post I feel I should quickly list my favourite games of all time. In no particular order they are KOTOR I & II (told you it was love/hate), Stalker CoP, Diablo II, Titan Quest, TF2, Medieval 2 Total War, Dragon Age, Neverwinter Nights II, Portal, Borderlands, Bioshock, NFS: Shift, Star Wars Ep.1 Podracer, Mount & Blade, Supcom, Age of Mythology, Sins of a Solar Empire, Half Life 2 and Resident Evil IV & V. Oh, and Trespasser, that was epic.
     
    Last edited: 17 Nov 2010
    boiled_elephant likes this.
  9. Zurechial

    Zurechial Elitist

    Joined:
    21 Mar 2007
    Posts:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    99
    I agree with pretty much all of that. :)

    I sometimes go back and play Oblivion (because of the the things they got right with it) only to come to the same unsatisfying conclusion after a short while.
    Bethesda RPGs are seriously and fundamentally flawed and they rely far too much on a big world that is nowhere near as emergent or immersive as Bethesda seems to think.

    Also, the shift to spoken dialogue in Oblivion (instead of the walls of text in Morrowind) was completely hamstrung by having only about 3-4 voice actors for each gender. You'd think Bethesda could hire a few more voice actors so that every character doesn't sound just like the guy down the street from him.
    Fallout 3 suffers from the very same and in fact uses the very same voice-actors. I found myself thinking "Oh it's Glarthir and/or generic wussy elf guy" or "Oh, this guy is a male redguard." frequently while playing FO3 because of it.

    I feel that if the voice-acting is going to be so limited (and frequently just bad) then they'd be better off with Morrowind's walls of text. Somehow a load of text feels like much less of an immersion-killer.
    Maybe they should spend less money on people like Liam Neeson, Sean Behan and Patrick Stewart for the 'star' characters (who usually amount to little in the actual gameplay) and more on the NPCs that the player interacts with much, much more often.

    If Morrowind could get Oblivion's melee combat (or something better) and its graphics/physics engine it would easily be my choice between the two every time.
     
  10. itisme

    itisme This may or may not be important.

    Joined:
    17 Nov 2010
    Posts:
    15
    Likes Received:
    1
    Any Sims except Sim City. The way I see it is, if you want to enjoy real life, spend the $50 to get a popular person to teach you how to be social. I mean really, you don't see good books where nothing out of the ordinary happens. "Real life" movies gross horribly, why the heck would a real life imitating game do well. This is less of a rant against the game, and more one against humanity. There is no doubt that Sims has done well, but I find this sad.
     
  11. Yslen

    Yslen Lord of the Twenty-Seventh Circle

    Joined:
    3 Mar 2010
    Posts:
    1,966
    Likes Received:
    48
    http://morroblivion.com/

    I might actually give that mod a try at some point, when it's a bit more complete.

    There are some great details in Elder Scrolls games, such as the books, some of which contain excellent short stories. I remember reading "The Real Barenziah" in Morrowind, then later on actually meeting Barenziah herself and being able to ask her questions about her life.

    That is just one of many brilliant off-the-beaten-track experiences offered by Morrowind. I can't think of a single thing that comes close in Oblivion.

    @itisme: the only reason I ever play the sims is to design houses and so on. I'm yet to discover a game or program that works as well as a "Grand Designs Simulator". I suppose most people buy it for the same reasons they watch Big Brother and X-Factor (or whatever it's called).
     
  12. Zurechial

    Zurechial Elitist

    Joined:
    21 Mar 2007
    Posts:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    99
    I saw that mod a long time ago and was eagerly watching it for a while but it doesn't seem to be moving at much of a pace. They've made some breakthroughs in loading the world and NPCs, but without quests, dialogue or functional gameplay it's not much more than a proof of concept. A very impressive one, albeit.

    Hopefully their goal will be realised eventually, but they've been working on it a long time and it could be a long way off still. :(

    However, if/when they actually pull it off I'll be over the moon. Morrowind's content in Oblivion's engine would just be fantastic.
     
  13. Furymouse

    Furymouse Like connect 4 in dagger terms

    Joined:
    4 Feb 2004
    Posts:
    621
    Likes Received:
    22
    Modern Warfare. The moment I knew who the target was on the sniper mission, I took as much time as I could to prove the game wrong, and indeed kill him. Needless to say the bullet took the oddest curve.....

    After I "failed" to kill him I finished the game but had no desire to play again or move on to the next one.
     
  14. mikemorton

    mikemorton Member

    Joined:
    5 Nov 2010
    Posts:
    745
    Likes Received:
    15
    You obviously didn't take the Coriolis effect into account! :D

    Personally, I thought the Pripyat level was one of the best.

    My most hated?

    Super Marios Bros 3 - because it's so damned hard.

    But it's also one of my most loved, despite that.
     
  15. boiled_elephant

    boiled_elephant Whitelist Bit-Tech in your adblock!

    Joined:
    14 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    5,944
    Likes Received:
    444
    How long has it been since someone mentioned Far Cry 2? Over five posts, good! Time to mention it again.

    The most frustrating thing about it is that it could've been genuinely good, it has loads of the components of a great game but was utterly crippled.

    On a more general point, it makes me wonder: how much of beta testing is focused on bug fixing and technical stuff, and how much on gameplay experience? I think this is where a lot of games developers fall flat on their faces. So many of them, I can only conclude they must not beta test the long-term gameplay reaction at all. Give any player Far Cry 2 and they'd identify the main problems within 5 hours of play. But not if you're only testing isolated segments for glitches.

    This was valve's triumph with Half-Life 2. People are often unable to pinpoint exactly what Half-Life 2 has that works so well - it just seems highly intuitive and fluid in a way that so many games aren't. The reason is simply that they tested gameplay reactions extensively and rigorously tuned the game according to how players felt about it section by section, rather than just ironing out the obvious bugs and throwing it at the market.

    edit -
    I know I'm late (been away from the forums for a while) but this is absolutely spot-on.
     
    Last edited: 19 Nov 2010
  16. Ravenheart

    Ravenheart New Member

    Joined:
    3 Oct 2009
    Posts:
    762
    Likes Received:
    14
    Right now my most hated game is Fallout New Vegas because they right royally messed it up, the worst/buggiest/pathetic excuse for a game in it's current form I've ever had the misfortune of playing!

    When/If they ever release the 'COMPREHENSIVE' whose your daddy patch then I'll go back to it but right now I'm not/I refuse to play a game that crashes more times than a serial drunk driver!
     
    Last edited: 20 Nov 2010
  17. Yslen

    Yslen Lord of the Twenty-Seventh Circle

    Joined:
    3 Mar 2010
    Posts:
    1,966
    Likes Received:
    48
    Yeah, I'm actually considering trying Fallout: NV on account of the hardcore mode, which sounds more my cup of tea (as a STALKER fan). Given the reports of bugginess from you and about a million other people though I'm going to hold off until the price drops some more. It's already available for under £16 so presumably come January/February I'll be able to pick it up for under a tenner, plus they MIGHT have fixed some bugs by then...
     
  18. Cool_CR

    Cool_CR New Member

    Joined:
    3 Oct 2009
    Posts:
    66
    Likes Received:
    1
    Very big guilty secret i really never got into Half Life I have the whole set HL1, Blue, Opposing, HL2, (EP1, EP2 i have never even installed these) and i have put in less than 5 hours (at least 10 seperate attempts to start HL1 & 2 and like them but sigh no luck)total i just cannot get into them I also put in less than 5 hours into Stalker its so bad i just cannot summon the energy to play them.
    Warhammer online im a big warhammer fan but again i found excuses not to play it Bloodbowl and Kings Bounty are also finding hard to give them time of day.

    But i played Halo3 and Reach (Even ODST) plus both Crysis games all the way through i also played Dragon age and all its expantions + Dawn of war all of them + SC1 & 2, Mass effect 1 & 2 with a few compleations Guild wars sunk a huge chunk of time in there so i dont get it im a gamer so i have to like them right its so messed up.

    O i got X3 Reunion and Terran Conflict + Dues EX 1&2 for 7 pounds i hope it will be money well spent but so far im not impressed with X3.
     
  19. Ravenheart

    Ravenheart New Member

    Joined:
    3 Oct 2009
    Posts:
    762
    Likes Received:
    14
    Absolutely the stupidest thing I've ever read, games aren't just meant to be played with other people! I never play multiplayer Solitaire with my other half or Capture The Flag Freecell!

    But on a more serious note, there are loads of games that are brilliant to play on your own, like Fallout 3/Fallout: New Vegas <--- when they fix the game crashing constantly bug!!!

    Plus a ton of other games that I won't mention apart from Crysis, Far Cry, GTA IV, Most Final Fantasy games amongst others...
     
  20. roarke80

    roarke80 New Member

    Joined:
    18 Nov 2010
    Posts:
    24
    Likes Received:
    1
    Any MMO that requires me to join guilds / groups / parties / gangs of teenagers in order to progress any further.
     
    boiled_elephant likes this.

Share This Page