Gaming Dissapointments

Call Me Jimmy

corcaigh07 wrote: »

Driv3r, dera lord i should have seen it coming yet, such a bad game. even more crazy is the fact that i beat it, think i remember just shooting the last boss in the head without him realising, lamest last boss of all time! awful!!!

hah I remember that!

Tyranax

noodler wrote: »

Still arcadey? When did it start being arcadey in your opinion?

With PES 2008. This year is not that much of an improvement. FIFA may have it's flaws but it's still at least an approximation of the game. PES has been garbage the last two years in my opinion.

Thought of other disappointments:

Saints Row 2: Yeah, you see it's all well and good to ape GTA and be more arcadey. But when you have no depth in comparison to GTA you just look like what you are, a shallow thief.

Tekken 4: An abomination. Thankfully rectified with Tekken 5.

RichTea

ReacherCreature wrote: »

The Madden games after 2007. Dreadful.

In what way?

TheDoc

Halo 3
Never played the previous two, and came into this game expecting to have the most out of this world fun ever experienced, I nearly expected for an olive drabbed spartan to reach out and give me a hand job by the amount this was hyped. Average shooter at best : /

GTAIV
I dont know exactly what it was, but i just lost interest in it. Completely stopped playing it about half way through.

PES08 and 09
Dropped the ball with this, literally. I'm not converted to Fifa, the online lag problems was a joke.

Gears of war 2
Liked the original, ok story but felt dramatic and epic. Similar to the sequel, but one of the main story lines, Dom and his wife, ended abruptly and stupidly and leads me to believe Dom is a ****ing machine. Also about half way through I got the sense I was being setup for a third, which is the case.

Online play is still ****e, utter tripe, ****e connections, ****e players, completely underpowered guns and its always a shotgun race...crap.

humanji

MGS4 is the winner for me. Interactive movies went out in the early 90's and for good reason!

Bioshock was also a bit disappointing. It was a good game, but I had hoped for so much more.

The same can be said for Fallout 3. I love the game, but it's not a proper Fallout game. It lacks everything that made the originals great.

Limbo of The Lost. Granted I doubt many expected much from it, but my god was it terrible.

And Return To Castle Wolfenstien. It could of been good if they hadn't put in the supernatural bits.

mayordenis

Tyranax wrote: »

Saints Row 2: Yeah, you see it's all well and good to ape GTA and be more arcadey. But when you have no depth in comparison to GTA you just look like what you are, a shallow thief.

Nonsense - it's just fun game - but it's like saying Die Hard and Lethal Weapon and any other film of a similar ilk are ripping each other off.

There similar but if you play the game at all you'll realise that ripping off does not come in the equation.

For my money it's more fun too.

Soby

+1 for Halo 3..Couldnt get into it at all..

Far Cry 2 was as everyone knows at this stage..Amazing graphics just too damm repetitive.


And dunno how many will agree with me but Mass Effect..I just couldnt get into that game either.Dunno what it is about it i dont like..I think its maybe cause i choose to train in a sniper rifle which is kinda is useless at the start of the game as the assualt rifle and shotgun woulda helped...

Sarky

Serves you right for thinking snipers are cool and trendy.

I was all set to claim Mass Effect as a truly epic game tonight, as I was starting to REALLY get into it, and then an hour ago I finished it. The ending really lacked punch, it was certainly not the bang to which I had expected it to build up. If I had to choose a concussive sound effect to describe the ending, I think "Poot" would be more suitable.

Just as it really hits its stride it ends, and unsatisfyingly. That's disappointment right there. Doubly so because it was doing so well up to then.

Tyranax

mayordenis wrote: »

Nonsense - it's just fun game - but it's like saying Die Hard and Lethal Weapon and any other film of a similar ilk are ripping each other off.

There similar but if you play the game at all you'll realise that ripping off does not come in the equation.

For my money it's more fun too.

Perhaps I should clarify my comment. I meant that Saints Row 2 was copying GTA: San Andreas, not GTA IV. I have Saints Row 2, and I have even finished the story mode on it. Perhaps calling it a "shallow thief" was a bit strong, but certainly playing the game I felt that in feel it was trying to ape GTA: SA. I despair a little when I hear people proclaim it to be things like "the game GTA IV should have been." To me, Saints Row 2 is hoplessly shallow (that accusation still stands for me). Yeah, you can customise your cars/clothes/crib. So.What. That doesn't impress me. The level of customisation is hardly deep. No weapons skills to improve, a few modified fighting styles...is this it? Are people still impressed by wandering around a sandbox game and blowing a few things up? Speaking of blowing things up, I was not impressed by the physics engine in SR 2, if felt very loose and willowy. Let me phrase this a different way. Is Saints Row 2 better than GTA: San Andreas, or hell, even GTA: Vice City? I feel that it isn't, it doesn't do anything different or better to those games in my view. And it burns me up to see it acclaimed for slapping a fresh coat of paint and some shiny new graphics to those games and get lauded to high heaven for it.

With GTA IV there was a deliberate shift towards a more realistic, grounded feel. I heard a comparison that said it was a bit like GTA III in it's style and setting, and that feels apt to me. People might have qualms about that but that's taste, a point I won't argue. GTA IV has it's faults, namely the glaring inconsistency in Nico in cutscenes and dialogue between his reluctance and distaste for his violent lifestyle, and his murderous exploits, and cheery attitude to robbing a bank, "for money", being the excuse for these. But in terms of atmosphere and in trying something different, I feel that GTA IV is to be applauded. Saints Row 2 is an unwelcome regression to the past in my opinion.

TinCool

Tyranax wrote: »

But in terms of atmosphere and in trying something different, I feel that GTA IV is to be applauded. Saints Row 2 is an unwelcome regression to the past in my opinion.

+ 1

I loved GTA IV (PS3) and played it through to completion. I am considering replaying it through again as I enjoyed it so much. I bought Saints Row II, played it for a few evenings and couldn't get in to it at all. In my eyes, it's a big pile of poo. The feel of the cars and even the missions themselves are cr@p.

CiDeRmAn

One of my biggest disappointments was the lack of much to complain about, I think 2008 was one of the best gaming years ever for me, I bought some awesome games for nearly every format I own, I even got a few more consoles for my collection and, from my perspective, there was precious little of a ****e nature, aside from FarCry2, that popped up on the horizon.
If anything, the only gripe I really have is, at the beginning of 2009, I have too many games to play, not enough time to get to them all!

Kiith

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

One of my biggest disappointments was the lack of much to complain about, I think 2008 was one of the best gaming years ever for me, I bought some awesome games for nearly every format I own, I even got a few more consoles for my collection and, from my perspective, there was precious little of a ****e nature, aside from FarCry2, that popped up on the horizon.
If anything, the only gripe I really have is, at the beginning of 2009, I have too many games to play, not enough time to get to them all!

Its been a tough year, hasnt it

Sephiroth_dude

call of duty world at war was pretty bad

docdolittle

The worst imo was Gears of War 2, I was expecting so much out of it, pre-booked the special edition and all that jazz. I got it, Played it all that day and night and felt oddly dissapionted So I took it online... Then I thought it was a piece of crap. It took ages to load even 1 game. On the upside horde was brilliant, hope they bring that into the 3rd one

Chumpski

Broken Sword 3 was a let down for me. The story and dialogue and characters were great in 1 and 2 but were all very disappointing in 3. I didn't mind the new control scheme so much.

Final Fantasy 12 was disappointing. I loved 7, 8, 9 and 10. I just didn't get 12 at all. The story was poor or it was judging from the first 4 hours where i stopped playing. The combat system didnt grab me at all. I stopped because i thought that its not worth investing 50+ hours of your life on a game i wasn't enjoying.

MGS 4 from last year was a little disappointing.

noodler

Chumpski wrote: »

Broken Sword 3 was a let down for me. The story and dialogue and characters were great in 1 and 2 but were all very disappointing in 3. I didn't mind the new control scheme so much.

Final Fantasy 12 was disappointing. I loved 7, 8, 9 and 10. I just didn't get 12 at all. The story was poor or it was judging from the first 4 hours where i stopped playing. The combat system didnt grab me at all. I stopped because i thought that its not worth investing 50+ hours of your life on a game i wasn't enjoying.

MGS 4 from last year was a little disappointing.

Many would agree with you but there are so many quality games I would have missed out on if I had given up based on a disappointing first 4 hours.

Chumpski

Yeah, i agree about giving a game a fair chance. For example i first played Okami about 2 years ago a few months after it was released. I played 2 hours and i thought it was boring enough and didn't touch it again till a few weeks back. I just had to give it a fair go since everbody who has, raves about it. So i did and i am delighted i did.

To be honest though i think that 4 hours is a pretty big investment of time especially since I don't have as much time to play all the games i want as i did a few years back. So if it seems that it will be 5-10 hours of a slog before you really start to get the rewards back then generally i will stop. Theres a pile of other games that don't require that sort of investment. Maybe those games won't have the same sort of payback as 12 too!

At the same time FF 12 is so different to the others. Im half way through FF 4 on the DS and i'm enjoying that way more than 12.

noodler: You said earlier you were disappointed in Dark Chronicle yeah? I actually got that recently and was thinking of playing it soon. How was it disappointing?

Retr0gamer

Chumpski wrote: »

noodler: You said earlier you were disappointed in Dark Chronicle yeah? I actually got that recently and was thinking of playing it soon. How was it disappointing?

I'd like to know as well. Was thinking about giving it a good blast soon since I loved everything else Level 5 have done. Want to know if it's worth my while.

noodler

Chumpski wrote: »

Yeah, i agree about giving a game a fair chance. For example i first played Okami about 2 years ago a few months after it was released. I played 2 hours and i thought it was boring enough and didn't touch it again till a few weeks back. I just had to give it a fair go since everbody who has, raves about it. So i did and i am delighted i did.

To be honest though i think that 4 hours is a pretty big investment of time especially since I don't have as much time to play all the games i want as i did a few years back. So if it seems that it will be 5-10 hours of a slog before you really start to get the rewards back then generally i will stop. Theres a pile of other games that don't require that sort of investment. Maybe those games won't have the same sort of payback as 12 too!

At the same time FF 12 is so different to the others. Im half way through FF 4 on the DS and i'm enjoying that way more than 12.

noodler: You said earlier you were disappointed in Dark Chronicle yeah? I actually got that recently and was thinking of playing it soon. How was it disappointing?

I liked 12's gameplay, thought it was satisfying and a welcome change. The boss battles/hunts were also some of the most challenging in FF games for years (I mean trying to take down White Mousse-is he the one in the sewers?-when he first becomes available is an epic challenge).

I guess the 4 hours plus thing is a toughy-on one hand you may say that for a long game it'll be like 'oh well theres still hours and hours for it to impress me' whereas with a short game you could just as easily say 'sure I'm halfway there at this stage'.

Dark Chronicle, It was always there in the reviews section of PSM3 for years and I will always remember the words "debatably better than FFX". Now I haven't come close to completing it I have gotten to a certain point in the game where there is a major tactical chnage in the gameplay and it bored/confused the hell out of me.

You may have heard this already but some of the Dungeons are just so repetitive. I mean you go through like 10 stages in say a forest-they are all nearly identical and you can't just run thorugh because the exit in every dungeon 'stage' is locked and to find the key you have to find which enemy is carrying it and so you have to pretty much kill them all (the enemies are laid out about the screen in a FF12 kind of way).


Oh yeah, you have to keep repairing whatever weapon you use which is tedious, also upgrading your weapons is so tedious also. You use items to do it but not in their original form-you have to 'distil' an item and then you can use it to upgrad a weapon but the whole process is extremely tedious.

Did I mention tedious btw?

I really would love for you to pick it up and love it and then convince me to pick it up again though! As I said I am only about 6 or 7 hours in I reckon.

The story was a little intriguing (theres time-traveling) but I though the voice acting was pretty bad, but maybe thats because I played DQVIII first. By comparison to that game, everything feels clumsy and repetitive and tedious.

Sorry to keep using the same word.


EDIT: And I know Level 5 don't have the same budget as Square but it is hard to believe htis game and FFX were released around the same time.

Chumpski

Cheers. It sounds like its not worth the effort which is a shame. I played about a half an hour of it when i bought it and it looked very promising. Maybe i would be better off playing and finishing some of the other ps2 games on my list:pac:.

noodler

I was hoping you'd shrug off what I said and play it anyway tbh!

I had a good year of doing that, got through Silent Hill 2, DQVIII, KH 1 and 2 and started at least tried DC.

EDIT: I still have a copy of Rogue Galaxy I bought pre-owned from a game up North only to bring it home and find it wouldn't work. I was so disappointed-it looked far more interesting than DC.

armour87

In a way, every GTA since GTA3 has been slightly dissapointing. A lot of the Resident Evil series is brown. Biggest dissapointment? Don't know, I don't seem to buy bad games, Fallout 3's ending ?

Fnz

Destruction Derby 2.

Bought it the day it came out (£50? £60?) after it getting great reviews. That's a game that doesn't play by its own, damn rules. Sure, racing mode may have been tedious - one slip up and you might as well just drive backwards into oncoming cars because you are not going to win. The huge jumps, celebrated by the reviewers for their exhilarating jumpy-ness were not without issue. When you're vehicle lands it will, seemingly, randomly funk-your-schnitt-up by putting you into a undeserved slide. Really though, worst of all, when in the crazy, free for all that is the Destruction Derby Bowl there are certain minimum standards that should be maintained. You have to trust that, when sacrificing your hood integrity ("blowing" your radiator or what-have-you) by slamming into a rival, hitting him just right and sending him into a glorious 720° spin, you have to trust... that it will at least register. Alas no. No points, but at least it leaves your vehicle more crippled than it was before you attempted the manoeuvre. Yay!

I call BS on that game - BS and shenanigans! :pac:

Chumpski wrote: »

Broken Sword 3 was a let down for me. The story and dialogue and characters were great in 1 and 2 but were all very disappointing in 3.

Agree with Broken Sword 3 - couldn't be bothered playing past the first hour or two.

Retr0gamer

Fnz wrote: »

Destruction Derby 2.

How dare you, I loved that game. It was a massive improvement on the original.

Chumpski

noodler wrote: »

I was hoping you'd shrug off what I said and play it anyway tbh!

I had a good year of doing that, got through Silent Hill 2, DQVIII, KH 1 and 2 and started at least tried DC.

EDIT: I still have a copy of Rogue Galaxy I bought pre-owned from a game up North only to bring it home and find it wouldn't work. I was so disappointed-it looked far more interesting than DC.

Well... tedious dungeons and levelling up turn me off really. Dark Chronicle sounds interesting and different to your average RPG with the city building sections. And i like that the combat is real time. I still might give it a shot but not for a while cos i'm almost after 2 long games (GTA 4 and Okami) and i'd like to play a few short ones now for a change.

Fair play for playing those 3-4 RPGs this year. KH 1 and 2, especially 1 is a good example of getting a great game with a bit of preserverance for a few hours!

noodler

Chumpski wrote: »

Well... tedious dungeons and levelling up turn me off really. Dark Chronicle sounds interesting and different to your average RPG with the city building sections. And i like that the combat is real time. I still might give it a shot but not for a while cos i'm almost after 2 long games (GTA 4 and Okami) and i'd like to play a few short ones now for a change.

Fair play for playing those 3-4 RPGs this year. KH 1 and 2, especially 1 is a good example of getting a great game with a bit of preserverance for a few hours!

The planet building thing was the bit the tactical gameplay change I was alluring to!

I thank Retro and GP for encouraging me to keep going with KH1 after the tripe of the first few hours. Couldn't complain after I got to HB. What a song/moment with Beast!

When was Okami released over here? I'll add it to the list.

Chumpski

2006, yeah well worth playing!

Retr0gamer

I'll try and return the favour by sticking out the first few stinking hours of Kingdom Hearts 2

I think Suikoden V was the worst for having a poor start. The first 5 hours were pretty bad. It was just you as the prince of a country going about fulfilling some ambassador work with a pretty shallow and unoriginal plot going on. Stuck it out because I loved the series so much. Really glad I did. There's a plot twist that really shakes things up and the rest of the game is RPG bliss.

Fnz

Retr0gamer wrote: »

How dare you, I loved that game. It was a massive improvement on the original.

I'm here to rattle some cages!

You didn't have similar issues, then? I found the 'failure to register my super-sweet 720s' bug, unforgivable.

I was disappointed. It even dropped the original's system-link multiplayer.

CapRooney

halo 3 - what a pile of crap. should have been called hype 3. totally dissapointed with it. looks like a slight improvemnet on halo 2

gears of war 2 - again i was so pumped for this when i saw the ign video preview and after it i was so dissapointed. was basically gears 1.5 imo