Highly rated games you have been dissapointed with

Jordan 199

CruelCoin wrote: »

The big baddie (pagan) is nowhere to be seen for the majority of the game.

He is also a boring individual. Not a patch on Vaas/Buck/Hoyt from FC3.

Mal-Adjusted

Please don't lynch me but.....
Half_Life 2
What's that, you have a physics engine? Why are you interrupting this great driving segment every ten minutes with it!?
The gravity gun gets old fast
Why are all these people talking to me as if they know me? i'm pretty sure i never met any of them in Black Mesa. Why does nobody point out that in these long, drawn out dialogue scenes, I don't verbally respond or acknowledge them in any way? Who thought it would be a good idea to try to build an epic, serious story around a guy who can't interact with any other character?
Does anybody really care if this is the same crowbar from the first game? How did this guy get it anyway?
Ravenholm is boring.

SeantheMan

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Please don't lynch me but.....
Half_Life 2
What's that, you have a physics engine? Why are you interrupting this great driving segment every ten minutes with it!?
The gravity gun gets old fast
Why are all these people talking to me as if they know me? i'm pretty sure i never met any of them in Black Mesa. Why does nobody point out that in these long, drawn out dialogue scenes, I don't verbally respond or acknowledge them in any way? Who thought it would be a good idea to try to build an epic, serious story around a guy who can't interact with any other character?
Does anybody really care if this is the same crowbar from the first game? How did this guy get it anyway?
Ravenholm is boring.

Are you looking at it from playing it recently in 2015, or from when it first came out back in 2004.

They physics engine was unlike anything people had seen before, it was great.

Also, he doesn't speak in the first game, so why would he be speaking in the 2nd.
You have games like Fallout and Skyrim and countless others where you character doesn't talk

But everyone is entitled to their own opinion

humanji

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Please don't lynch me but.....
Half_Life 2
What's that, you have a physics engine? Why are you interrupting this great driving segment every ten minutes with it!?
The gravity gun gets old fast
Why are all these people talking to me as if they know me? i'm pretty sure i never met any of them in Black Mesa. Why does nobody point out that in these long, drawn out dialogue scenes, I don't verbally respond or acknowledge them in any way? Who thought it would be a good idea to try to build an epic, serious story around a guy who can't interact with any other character?
Does anybody really care if this is the same crowbar from the first game? How did this guy get it anyway?
Ravenholm is boring.

I thought it was fairly dodgy too. It didn't help that it was the Steam launch game and took longer to install than to play through. It wasn't until Episode 2 that I actually enjoyed any of the HL2 games. I'd played the leaked alpha and there was loads of awesome things in there that simply wasn't used in the final product. The physics was brilliant but they only used it for seesaw puzzles. The plot was badly put together and the levels were just "Go to A then B then C, then we'll shout some exposition at you and then you go off on your journey again". I felt it was a real step down in how HL1 made you feel that at nearly every moment you were driving the story, not just spectating.

Winston Payne

I played Half Life 2 in 2005 and thought it was ok, nothing more. The idea that it would get the kind of reputation it enjoys now would have been laughable and depressing to me at the time. The game did more for the structure of games than the gameplay itself if you get me. The direction of where the player should look using environmental factors like light for example.



I found Metal Slug 3 to be very, very meh. Visuals are ok, but the game feels stodgy and stiff, without having the weight of action to compensate. Poor soundtrack too.

Sieghardt

Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons

people raved about what an amazing game this is and it was like 2 hours long with no real gameplay and I dont buy that it was a deeply emotional experience

K.O.Kiki

Sieghardt wrote: »

Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons

people raved about what an amazing game this is and it was like 2 hours long with no real gameplay and I dont buy that it was a deeply emotional experience

Can you please check your pulse, because I'm 100% certain you're dead inside.

Q_Ball

Batman Arkham Knight.

It just hasn't grabbed me the way the two previous games did. Especially since I found out there's a "true" ending so I've avoided completing it (I'm at the part where

you have to either give the utility belt up to save robin and gordon or...not give it up and not save them?

) until I've done all the riddler stuff which I can't bring myself to spend a whole deal of time doing.

There's one particular trophy that involves a race that has to be started by driving the batmobile around the lighthouse and jumping on to the roof of the next building. That's going to be annoying if I don't do it first time...

Connavar

Q_Ball wrote: »

Batman Arkham Knight.

It just hasn't grabbed me the way the two previous games did. Especially since I found out there's a "true" ending so I've avoided completing it (I'm at the part where

you have to either give the utility belt up to save robin and gordon or...not give it up and not save them?

) until I've done all the riddler stuff which I can't bring myself to spend a whole deal of time doing.

There's one particular trophy that involves a race that has to be started by driving the batmobile around the lighthouse and jumping on to the roof of the next building. That's going to be annoying if I don't do it first time...

I just finished all the rest of the missions and watched the final video on youtube. Couldn't be arsed with all those trophies

aaronjumper

Splinter Cell: Blacklist.
Just cannot get into it for some reason, I have enjoyed all the ones that I have played to date, including Conviction which broke away from the core game.
I can't even put my finger on why I don't enjoy it, I'm just disappointed with it for some reason.

Sieghardt

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

Can you please check your pulse, because I'm 100% certain you're dead inside.

Character death is the cheapest way to attempt an emotional response and it's especially meaningless because you know next to nothing about the characters. You might as well be getting teary over mario losing a life

Mike Litoris

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Please don't lynch me but.....
Half_Life 2
What's that, you have a physics engine? Why are you interrupting this great driving segment every ten minutes with it!?
The gravity gun gets old fast
Why are all these people talking to me as if they know me? i'm pretty sure i never met any of them in Black Mesa. Why does nobody point out that in these long, drawn out dialogue scenes, I don't verbally respond or acknowledge them in any way? Who thought it would be a good idea to try to build an epic, serious story around a guy who can't interact with any other character?
Does anybody really care if this is the same crowbar from the first game? How did this guy get it anyway?
Ravenholm is boring.

Yeah, I wasn't that impressed with it. Half life was the first game I got for my first PC. It blew me away. Half Life 2 was a long time coming but it felt like the makers went for style over substance. It was way too short too.

Of recent games, Forza 5 was a massive let down, they took away a lot of what made 4 so good.

Pillars of Eternity was another big let down. Waited a long time for this and it started out well but it just became boring as hell.

IvoryTower

counterstrike


I don't get it really. Like if it was on console would people actually still buy it? It seems like a freeware game compared to the FPS's on consoles. Is it cause it's cheap and lots of people play it?

K.O.Kiki

IvoryTower wrote: »

counterstrike


I don't get it really. Like if it was on console would people actually still buy it? It seems like a freeware game compared to the FPS's on consoles. Is it cause it's cheap and lots of people play it?

I don't usually get all PCMASTERRACE, but... :mad::mad::mad:

Connavar

IvoryTower wrote: »

counterstrike


I don't get it really. Like if it was on console would people actually still buy it? It seems like a freeware game compared to the FPS's on consoles. Is it cause it's cheap and lots of people play it?

Why do you think its like freeware?
I couldn't see it doing well on consoles as I don't think the shooting engine would suit controllers(I don't see this as a negative as its designed for PC)
It sells well for a number of reasons, its tactical, well enough balanced, requires skill, can run on a large range of machine specs and cheapness probably plays its part too

IvoryTower

As in it feels small, looks average or dated. There doesn't appear to be much to it. Feck all game modes(about 5?), 2 of which just seemed like a fun distraction for an hour before going back to the main ones. Most of the games are over really quickly so didn't really get any sense of accomplishment when you won cause you're playing so many so quickly!

Retr0gamer

IvoryTower wrote: »

counterstrike


I don't get it really. Like if it was on console would people actually still buy it? It seems like a freeware game compared to the FPS's on consoles. Is it cause it's cheap and lots of people play it?

Counterstrike looked crappy and cheap on launch. It kind of took off though because of the huge amount of skill needed to do well in the game so it really hit the e-sports crowd. Also at the time there was nothing else like it in multiplayer where previously everything was a Quake still fast paced rocket fest. It would never really work on console either, it's a bit like Quake 3 or Unreal Tournament which are just too fast paced for a joypad. A lot of the PC crowd still gravitate towards it because stuff like Call of Duty has basically turned into CS for babies. Also a freeware mod really needs to be spectacularly good to breakout in the way CS and DotA did and it's a rare occurence, it's not just because it was free.

It's definitely not for everyone and by everyone I mean anyone that doesn't want to dedicate their life to it.

TerrorFirmer

I do own CS: GO but I don't really like it either. I don't think it's bad at all but it's just not for me.

Back when CS1.6 was massive, I preferred playing mods like Day of Defeat, which incidentally was another amazing mod turned commercial.

I don't get how you could say it couldn't work on consoles, as CS: GO is on the 360 for the past few years and CS was on the original Xbox as well.

Haven't played CS GO on the Xbox but Counterstrike on the original Xbox was very good.

it's a bit like Quake 3 or Unreal Tournament which are just too fast paced for a joypad.

They were also both on Dreamcast and PS2, and they were OK adaptions that played decently on the PS2 but the Dreamcast versions were far better.

Yhere's a game called Crossfire which is basically the highest grossing F2P game worldwide, it brought in nearly a billion dollars last year. It looks horrendously dated but it's got decent gameplay and it runs on absolutely all kinds of PCs, which is critically important for markets like China. It's very similar to CS1.6.

They also get Call of Duty free in Asia, F2P Call of Duty Online, has the best maps from the MW games! The market over that side is just insane.

Mike Litoris

Yep, I never understood the CS hype either. I was pretty disappointed the first time I played it but I did come from playing Enemy Territory which was a lot more involving. I think that was free to play too. It was bundled with Return to Castle Wolfenstein when it came out.

TerrorFirmer

RTCW was originally it's own game in single and multiplayer, and Enemy Territory was meant to be an expansion pack but ended up as a multiplayer standalone.

Played a lot of RTCW online, that beach invasion map was just all kinds of amazing.

AdamD

CS is great if you enjoy games with a huge learning curve. If you want a pick up and play game it'll be a nightmare

Corvo

Don't play CS (not a member of the PC Clan) but watch it all the time being played competitively.

It looks fantastic, but as said, very difficult and it's obvious players have put huge hours into it

Captain Chaos

aaronjumper wrote: »

Splinter Cell: Blacklist.
Just cannot get into it for some reason, I have enjoyed all the ones that I have played to date, including Conviction which broke away from the core game.
I can't even put my finger on why I don't enjoy it, I'm just disappointed with it for some reason.

Blacklist is not highly rated at all and is a disappointment to every Splinter Cell fan out there. It's because Blacklist is a reboot with Michael Ironside gone.

Arytonblue

I know it has a huge amount of detractors but the Fable series has been given some bewildering high praise from gaming 'journalists' (regularly scoring in the 8's and 9's) whilst delivering remarkably average, underwhelming games. All of the series' titles had the exact same problems that were never addressed or improved on, awful combat(magic>>>>>>>>>>>anything else), fairly woeful AI, pathetically childish attempts at humour (that somehow got worse as the games went on), no meaningful NPC interactions (dialogue? LOL), as black and white a 'choice' system that would make even Bioware retch, overly linear game-world (no sense of adventure), putrid attempts at any real RPG elements and almost the exact same dull as fúcking dishwater story for every title. I did like the artistic style of the games and the whole family dynamic (despite it being ultimately pointless) but everything was just so......meh.

F3 took the proverbial biscuit with it's oh so original story of evil king brother-> realise magical powers-> gather support for revolution-> become king, and then throws in this cheap twist of him being evil for a reason, gives you these inane desicions to pad the game further were you either act as a gentle, kind-hearted and loving monarch that blatantly ignores the coming threat of black goo invasion (with an arbitrary figure of gold needed to defeat said goo) or you act like an utter cúnt to your people, installing brothels instead of orphanages and destroying the environment for money, all for the greater good of not having everyone suffer a horrific gooey death. There was absolutely no middle ground with this amateurish 'morality' system, and the whole story reads like a 9 year old's doodling on a desk. Couple all this with the continued guff of Peter Molineux who never seems to know when to shut up and stop promising things that won't be in his game whilst continuously verbally shítting on the previous title to drum up hype for the new one (see Jim Sterlings' great video on this.) He clearly has real passion for gaming and has made some great titles with Bullfrog but his venture into the fantasy RPG genre was just terrible.

/rant

Hank Scorpio

Unreal Tournament

The original was a fantastic game, imo one of the best of all time. It has a massive learning curve with fair fast paced gameplay. Every iteration since has gotten worse, the skill element and soul have been sucked out it. 2k4 was still a good game in it's own right but UT3 was dreadful. UT4 alpha plays even worse than UT3, it amazes me how they managed to mess it up so badly

aaronjumper

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Blacklist is not highly rated at all and is a disappointment to every Splinter Cell fan out there. It's because Blacklist is a reboot with Michael Ironside gone.

Overall it received pretty good reviews from a lot of people only the new voice actor, rushed ending and graphics being criticized.
A disappointment to Splinter Cell fans sure, a disappointment in general, not really.

Eurogamer: 8/10
Game informer: 9/10
IGN: 9.2/10
Joystiq: 5 stars
Videogamer.com: 8/10

Just to name a few with a lot of other reviews giving it between 4 and 5 stars.

EDIT: Not meaning to come across as snarky, apologies, just had people talking to me while I was typing and I'm bad at multitasking.

tok9

I'm only playing some Blacklist now and I really like it although I haven't played that much of the rest of the series.

SeantheMan

I think it's the worst so far.
Might get lynched here...but I'm not enjoying the 'FREEDOM' between missions.
I don't want to choose what mission to do next, or do a little sidequest for a team member...I don't care about them really.
Am I buying all the right upgrades, am I not ? Should I be playing these 'sidequests' for more money to unlock more stuff ?

I'd rather it be like the old one, where they just drove the story on and kept you locked in with it.
I used to follow the story and would really enjoy it.

Now with taking a break here and there and sidequests and all this wandering around your Base of Operations in the sky I do lose track of what's going on...thus lose a bit of interest...and so I don't care for or remember the main story all that well.

Also, being able to to just Kill 3 people from the get-go is a joke ! Splinter cell is more a 'Mark+press Action button' than a stealth game these days

Baron McBoomBoom

Each and every COD since modern warfare

Dard23

On Blacklist, is it just me or are the save points ridiculously far apart! Like I had to replay the same stupid mission ten times because I kept alerting the security guards. I just got bored in the end.