(OT) Games That Have Dissapointed You

Owlman · #1 March 7th, 2003, 08:24 PM

Disapointments:
1. Metal Gear Solid 2: Seriously, the worst story line in game history, made absolutely no sense, and you didn't even play as Solid Snake, but instead as pansy Raiden!
2. Final Fantasy 8: Seven was a master piece with possibly the best villian in Videogame history. Eight had a crappy story, lame villians, and characters no one could care about.
3. MOO3: Waited like three years for this to come out, and yeah it didn't live up to the hype. Its fun as hell, but still...
4. Farscape: Knew it would suck, but not this much!

Best:
WWE Smackdown: Shut Your Mouth! Say what you will about wrasslin' but this is one of the funest games I have ever played
2. Fallout 1&2: Beat all Final Fantasys except 6 and 7. Make a 3 damnit!

raynor · #2 March 7th, 2003, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gregebowman:
If I can get my new compouter soon, I'd like to know how these following games rate, since I've been wanting to play some of these for years, but couldn't due to hardware requirements:

Dungeon Seige
Neverwinter Nights
Rollercoaster Tycoon 2

I would recommend very strongly against Dungeon Siege. This game plays like the developer was just trying to get something out the door *before* Neverwinter Nights. The graphics are amazing. But the gameplay isn't, IMHO. I never even finished this game.

I enjoyed Neverwinter Nights and finished it. My chief complaint with the single player play for NWN is that it just gets so easy about halfway through. Even with max difficulty settings the NPC's and monsters just don't hit you very much even though their damage *is* increased. I have experimented just a very small bit with their toolset for creating new modules and was impressed with it. I think the re-playability of this game *should* be pretty high since it is so easy to create new modules.

If you check out the review of RollerCoaster Tycoon II on Gamespot.com, I think that review is right on target. There are a few enhancements to this game that might make it more appealing to someone who has never played before. But if you played the original and are looking for a successor with loads of new features and better graphics, this isn't it.

Pax · #3 March 7th, 2003, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gregebowman:

quote:
Originally posted by Pax:
What I've been grossly disappointed by:

Civ3 especially the slimeball tactic of their expansion pack!!

All I want to know is if you just want to play Civ 3: Play the World in solo mode, is it worth the price to get the new tribes and the couple of new stuff they included? I heard it's not good for multi-play, which doesn't make sense, since it was advertised for multi-players. But since I don't do multi-play, I just need to know about the solo play mode.

I wouldn't know. It won't even run on my frikkin' computer!!!

Who in the Nine Hells ever heard of an Xpac that WON'T run on all the O/S's of the BASE program ... ?!? Civ3 (base) will run on Win95 ... WTH won't the xpac ... ?!?

And, yes, I'd be getting it FOR the multiplay. That's where most games' longevity is ... playing against other human beings.

1FSTCAT · #4 March 7th, 2003, 11:22 PM

I won't list the bad games, as their are too many to list, and I prefer not to be too negative, in general.. Here's the goods!

I see a lot people exclaiming their fondness over X-Com, but no-one said anything about JAGGED ALLIANCE 2, or it's prequel.

Fallout 1 and 2, definately.

Viper Racing -- INCREDIBLY good physics, and the only game I've ever played with a truly dynamic damage modelling technique!

Grand Prix Legends -- Hard as hell, but PERFECT physics, AWESOME sense of speed.

European Air Warrior -- Excellently well-rounded gameplay. No flight simulator since has been quite as well-rounded.

Let me throw in another vote for Autoduel. This was one of my all-time Favorites, and if someone doesn't make another game based on the Car Wars series, I will totally freak out. I have a TON of ideas about a game like this, and would LOVE to exercise them!

Combat Mission : Barbarrossa to Berlin -- I can't believe more SEIV players don't know about this game. It's so appealing in similar ways. I LOVE the armor penetration modelling, it makes me ERECT.

Total Annihilation : Similar in some respects to the complexities of SEIV, you could build your empire in HUNDREDS of different ways, and each unit countered another, appropriately. PLUS -- YOU COULD LOB SEVERAL NUKES AT A TIME AT YOUR OPPONENT! WOW!!

--Ed

gregebowman · #5 March 7th, 2003, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pax:

quote:
Originally posted by gregebowman:

quote:
Originally posted by Pax:
What I've been grossly disappointed by:

Civ3 especially the slimeball tactic of their expansion pack!!

All I want to know is if you just want to play Civ 3: Play the World in solo mode, is it worth the price to get the new tribes and the couple of new stuff they included? I heard it's not good for multi-play, which doesn't make sense, since it was advertised for multi-players. But since I don't do multi-play, I just need to know about the solo play mode.
I wouldn't know. It won't even run on my frikkin' computer!!!

Who in the Nine Hells ever heard of an Xpac that WON'T run on all the O/S's of the BASE program ... ?!? Civ3 (base) will run on Win95 ... WTH won't the xpac ... ?!?

And, yes, I'd be getting it FOR the multiplay. That's where most games' longevity is ... playing against other human beings.

I know. I was so disappointed when I saw the hardware requirements for that expansion. Heck, that's more than most new games coming out. If you're going to require all that, then make Civ 4. Not require all of that stuff for a "xpac". I've never heard of that either.

sharp · #6 March 8th, 2003, 10:39 PM

Eh all you guys bashing Starcraft as a game "not for gamers" and what not... for the most part games on b.net are like that because people who suck or the "non gamers" play on massive money maps. At a pro, or even good skill level the game is VERY strategic (yes there is alot of clicking), dropping, taking cliffs, flanking, countering, intelligence etc. etc. But yea, due to MOO3, and Atrocities?? (whoever posted on MOO3 board) I'll be ordering SEIV (NEVER would have heard of it or even considered buying it if not for Atrocities) as soon as I get my refund.

Anyway on topic... disappointments:
MOO3, biggest ever
FF8, ok story, game etc. is crap
FFX, Square is moving to much for the mass market appeal (eg insanely easy and linear)
Warcraft 3... decent but it has alot of stupid flaws that could easily be fixed
Myth 3, buggy, boring... bad ai

raynor · #7 March 9th, 2003, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sharp:
Eh all you guys bashing Starcraft as a game "not for gamers" and what not... for the most part games on b.net are like that because people who suck or the "non gamers" play on massive money maps. At a pro, or even good skill level the game is VERY strategic (yes there is alot of clicking), dropping, taking cliffs, flanking, countering, intelligence etc. etc.

I still don't really understand the appeal of playing on a "money" map in which your starting base has more than sufficient resources to preclude the need to ever expand. For me, the real thrill of the game was determining where to position my forces as I expanded. If I didn't defend my expansion bases, then I wouldn't have enough resources to compete with the enemy. If I moved all my defences to the expansion base but left a hole in my defences, then the enemy might go straight for my jugular and destroy my home base. If you don't have to expand to another base, then you aren't really playing StarCraft. It was even more fun when you played with two or more players against two or more either human or AI players. Then, the enemy might combine their attack, and you had to coordinate your defence.

I *thought* WarCraft III was going to be a lot of fun. But even though they have a number of special abilities that the units automatically use, there is still a considerable amount of clicking that must be done. The game centers around your heroes that have multiple special powers that are hotkeyed as well as a half dozen inventory items that are also hot-keyed. I played through the single player campaign and then uninstalled the game. It is truly disappointing that Blizzard is now focusing their efforts on an Online Version of WarCraft instead of working on a successor to StarCraft.