10 most disappointing games of 2008

[TomChick]

The following aren't necessarily terrible games. In fact, some of them I quite liked. But all of them should have been considerably better than they actually are.

Read the list here (http://fidgit.com/archives/2008/12/10-most-disappointing-games-of.php)....

[Rock8man]

Wow, I've only played one game on that list. I guess there were so many good releases this year that I haven't trickled down past the cream of the crop to the more disappointing releases.

The one game I have played on that list is Civilization Revolution, which I loved. It's a valid point about the AI, but it hasn't really dampened my enjoyment of the game yet.

What's also been interesting about that game is my brother's response. My brother used to be a pretty gung-ho PC gamer back in his college days. He used to play a lot of Descent in the computer labs, as well as games like Civilization, Doom, Star Control 2, the Might and Magic games, etc. And then slowly, he kind of gave up on gaming little by little until the 360 came out, and XBLA releases like Catan and full releases like Medal of Honor Airborne and Civilization Revolution have rekindled his love of gaming. Civilization Revolution is the first game in which he's earned 975 Gamerscore, and he continues to play the game beyond that too. So I'm pretty appreciate of the game for getting my brother back heavily into gaming again.

[mok]

I agree Civ Rev seemed like it was lacking.

How close was Warhammer Online to making this list?

[Hugin]

I don't know how you define disappointing vs overrated, I look forward to that other list.

I'd take out Motorstorm Pacific Rift and replace it with Spore. M:PR I think is a meaningful improvement over the original game in just about every way and loads of fun.

Also, after Killer 7, I don't know why anyone had anything besides positive stylistic expectations for No More Heroes.

Maybe it'll show up in Overrated, but for profile and expectations vs results, I think GTA4 was a real letdown.

[TomChick]

Mok, Warhammer Online was nowhere near to making the list of disappointing games! I had a great time with it, although I barely made it into the mid-game and wouldn't have the foggiest idea about how the end-game turned out. From peeking into the thread here from time to time, it seems like it doesn't hold up for lots of folks. Which is a shame, because I think Mythic did a great job with the early hook.

Hugin, don't make me turn this into a thread about the brilliance of Killer 7 in every way except for gameplay. Because I will totally do that.

-Tom

[Hugin]

Hugin, don't make me turn this into a thread about the brilliance of Killer 7 in every way except for gameplay. Because I will totally do that.

-Tom

Much like I feel Tim Burton is brilliant so long as you keep him far away from anything resembling an action sequence, I think Suda 51 should be off doing awesome things that don't relate to games. Or maybe he should just be some other game designer's art director.

[BDGE]

I'd also like to hear more about Motorstorm, cause I totally adore Pacific Rift. Going for golds as a completist can be infuriating with punishing AI and hefty slalom gate requirements for certain events, but that's about the only issue I can think up.

I'd probably nominate Resistance 2, or that $15 Ratchet 'barely a game' download expansion in its place.

[Bahimiron]

Who is more likely to demand Tom's head on a pike, Motorstorm fans or No More Heroes fans?

Aw, who am I kidding.

Tom, watch out for dudes in slightly-too-tight anime shirts! They want to hurt you!

[jellyfish]

How can Spore not be in this list?

[TomChick]

Here's more on MotorStorm (http://www.crispygamer.com/gamereviews/2008-10-30/motorstorm-pacific-rift-ps3.aspx), but in a nutshell: it's too easy to fail your way out of love with it. And considering the first game had the same problem, and so many racing games since then have addressed the problem (oh how I love Midnight Club and GRID!), I'm really disappointed Evolution Studios didn't take a more accessible approach.

-Tom

[TomChick]

How can Spore not be in this list?

Although I didn't care for it, I was not in the least bit disappointed in Spore. In fact, it was pretty much exactly what I figured it would be. :)

-Tom

[BDGE]

Here's more on MotorStorm (http://www.crispygamer.com/gamereviews/2008-10-30/motorstorm-pacific-rift-ps3.aspx), but in a nutshell: it's too easy to fail your way out of love with it. And considering the first game had the same problem, and so many racing games since then have addressed the problem (oh how I love Midnight Club and GRID!), I'm really disappointed Evolution Studios didn't take a more accessible approach.

-Tom

Yea it can get really frustrating. I'm smitten by the physics and core racing philosophy enough to be a total masochist, and in that regard it is identical to the first game. Honestly though, if it weren't for this franchise and Uncharted, my PS3 would be a massive doorstop.

[Joe O'Malley]

You know, I'm happy I didn't play any of these. Ten years ago I had time to endure and sympathize. Not any more. Sad to see about Civ, especially. That's generally been one of my favorite series.

[lesslucid]

In principle, simpler mechanics should result in stronger AI. But Civ:Rev seems to go in the opposite direction, coupling its simplified mechanics with a dumb AI that maintains the difficulty at higher levels with the most outrageous cheating since the very first Civ. A little more of the Stardock philosophy would have given this title huge replay value, but as it stands I think it can only hold your interest until the players gets a sense of just how cheap and tacky your opposition is. Definitely disappointing.

[MSUSteve]

CivRev is definitely one of my most played games of the year, but I agree it has some big flaws in AI. Particularly irritating is the co-operative multiplayer. I wish there was some other way to win besides a military victory. My brother and I played through many co-op scenarios and it always turned out the same way. At least in the single player game you can legitimately get a tech, economic, or cultural victory, though you'll always need some military component to beat back the sometimes bizarrely aggressive AI.

[Mike O'Malley]

No Spore, at least for the gameplay?

Crom, strong in his mountain, laughs at your "moribund franchise".

[aphoristic gamer]

I liked Motorstorm 2 far more than the first one, loved No More Heroes and Siren Blood Curse Too. And I thought Haze was somewhat of an enjoyable romp, even if it devolved into a pretty generic scripted FPS.

[Tim James]

I loved Clear Sky but it probably belongs on that list (damn console journalists!) Was anyone honestly anticipating Red Alert 3 enough to be disappointed by it?

[Rock8man]

I loved Clear Sky but it probably belongs on that list (damn console journalists!) Was anyone honestly anticipating Red Alert 3 enough to be disappointed by it?

Yes, I loved Red Alert 1 and 2, and was really disappointed in 3 after playing the beta. If they hadn't released a beta, I probably would have bought the full game and would have been disappointed in the full game instead.

[Chuck]

....Hugin, don't make me turn this into a thread about the brilliance of Killer 7 in every way except for gameplay. Because I will totally do that.

-Tom


Yeah, because gameplay isn't much of a factor when rating a ......game. I bought that POS because of all the talk around here. What a mistake.

[Rock8man]

Yeah, because gameplay isn't much of a factor when rating a ......game. I bought that POS because of all the talk around here. What a mistake.

Same here Chuck. Not that I felt any animosity towards Tom because of it though. He made it abundantly clear in his review in CGM that one had to look past the gameplay, but I just didn't realize the scope of that statement. In instances like that, I really envy game reviewers, since if it was my job to play a game, I'd be much more likely to soldier through gameplay flaws.

[Chuck]

Same here Chuck. Not that I felt any animosity towards Tom because of it though. He made it abundantly clear in his review in CGM that one had to look past the gameplay, but I just didn't realize the scope of that statement. In instances like that, I really envy game reviewers, since if it was my job to play a game, I'd be much more likely to soldier through gameplay flaws.

I have nothing but respect and creepy devotion to Mr. Chick and the words he writes, but I've been burned a couple of times by his reviews (or maybe the notion that whatever he likes, I'll like.) Killer 7 killed me with it's long-ass load times and lack of good gameplay.

[unbongwah]

Of that list, I played AoC (which I liked but only enough to play for a month), tried NMH (good news: more like a real game than K7! bad news: still not a lot of fun to play), finished Too Human (for nebulous reasons I'm still struggling to fathom), passed on RA3 based on Tom's reviews (super-fast + uber-micro = FAIL), bought a copy of Haze for 10 bucks I haven't opened, and just Gameflyed but haven't had a chance to try Mercs 2 (though the demo underwhelmed me).

[BDGE]

Oh and sucks about RA3 comments. I'm still kinda looking forward to playing it since I dug BFME2 and C&C3. Also I am dying to see the acting cheese.

What is the problem there?

[LesJarvis]

I haven't felt buyer's remorse like Mercenaries 2 gave me a since I bought The Sims Online.

[Lizard_King]

That reminds me, I haven't thought of Killer 7 in months. Its nightmare logic was wrapped in an easily navigable shooter in order to make you a victim of one of the best videogame stories written. The only thing that could make it better for me is porting it to the Wii (instead of a sequel to NMH, which I did not enjoy) and turning the slight difficulty curve into a headshot fest like RE4:Wii. Plus, that would take advantage of the Gamecube version's much faster load times.

Also, there's a difference between not liking a game and proclaiming it a piece of shit because you're not the target audience.

[Cubit]

Oh and sucks about RA3 comments. I'm still kinda looking forward to playing it since I dug BFME2 and C&C3. Also I am dying to see the acting cheese.

Still look forward to playing it. Its a good game. If you liked C&C 3 and the previous command and conquer games, and don't mind that there are no massive formula changes, you'll eat this one up. Music is especially top notch, as well as the cut scenes.

[Rock8man]

Oh and sucks about RA3 comments. I'm still kinda looking forward to playing it since I dug BFME2 and C&C3. Also I am dying to see the acting cheese.

What is the problem there?

The main problem is that it combines the fast-paced combat and quirky units (good things) of the Red Alert series with tons of micromanagement (bad thing). Every single unit has some kind of special ability that has to be micromanaged.

[NowhereDan]

No Alone in the Dark?

[Lynxara]

I presume Alone in the Dark would only count had Tom expected it to be good to begin with, and I'm not sure anyone really did.

I quite like the list as it stands: a rogue's gallery of overhyped titles that were okay, but received coverage from major outlets as if they were something quite a bit more.

[BDGE]

Yea I tried the demo recently and liked the wackiness of the units, but managing the special powers got a bit tedious. For instance, why couldn't the bears auto-use their 'roar' power when near enemies? Just seems so strange to force me to manually turn on that ability within a fight.

Still, I don't want to dismiss the game yet.

[Rock8man]

For me personally, the biggest disappointment of 2008 was LittleBigPlanet. But not everyone will feel that way about the game. It's an interesting game that has some interesting design decisions that might not bother some people, but will bother others. It's also a game that is probably a lot more enjoyable in Co-op. Unfortunately, I don't know anyone willing to play same-screen Co-op with me, since they don't like the look of the game, and none of my friends in Seattle or elsewhere have a PS3, so it's a dubious proposition to try to convince them to get a $400 console based on a game they might not even enjoy. The game is still more fun for me in Co-op when played with strangers over PSN, but playing with strangers is rarely in the same league as playing with someone you know.

So perhaps I'm unable to give LittleBigPlanet a fair shake because of the lack of popularity of the PS3. I really wish the game had come out for the 360 or Wii instead.

[Brendan]

The following aren't necessarily terrible games. In fact, some of them I quite liked. But all of them should have been considerably better than they actually are.

I don't want to Sol up the thread but Spore fits this description for a lot of people.

It isn't a bad little game, but a lot of people were expecting something a little bit more substantial.

[MSUSteve]

I don't think you're off about LBP Rock8. You make a good argument. I can't speak about the retail version of LBP, but I did cancel my preorder after playing the beta. To me the idea of LBP was more interesting than actually playing it. I've yet to pick it up, though I do plan on getting it at some point. I just realized that after playing the beta for a single night and never again, I just wasn't excited enough about the game to drop $60 on it in this crowded holiday season.

[aphoristic gamer]

What's everyone's beef with No More Heroes? The boss battles were all extremely good. The levels preceding them allowed for some nice beat 'em up portions, and were very inventive at times. The story was cool and didn't take itself seriously. I had nothing against the mini-games you had to play continuously to make money since they were so mundane that they were hilarious (picking up trash, mowing lawns, filling up gas tanks...). Hell I even liked the repetitive enemies and one-liners, it seems that even those were utterly generic as some sort of tongue-in-cheek. I didn't want it to end!

One of the best games of 2008 for me that's for sure, and still the only Wii game I liked.

[Lynxara]

What's everyone's beef with No More Heroes?

That you have to use the word "repetitive" in describing aspects of the game is probably at the root of the problem.

[JetLagger]

How can Spore not be in this list?

I don't want to Sol up the thread but Spore fits this description for a lot of people.

It isn't a bad little game, but a lot of people were expecting something a little bit more substantial.


If I were a wagering man, I'd put some money down that Spore may end up on tomorrows list. "The 10 most overrated games of 2008"

Spore, charming and entertaining but not all that and a bag of chips.

-Tim

[MSUSteve]

If I were a wagering man, I'd put some money down that Spore may end up on tomorrows list. "The 10 most overrated games of 2008"

Spore, charming and entertaining but not all that and a bag of chips.

-Tim
If I may be so bold, I'd also posit that GTAIV and MGS4 should end up on the most overrated games of 2008 list. Both are good games, but I don't think either deserved the level of adulation that they received.

[gordonrumble]

Interesting list.

If I were to add one game, I'd add GTA4. It just wasn't much fun.

[Pogo]

Taking bets on Tom's list of "Most Overrated Games of 2008" released tomorrow!

I'm going to throw in
Spore
Prince of Persia (doubtful as it appears to have a generally good reception)
Mirror's Edge
Assassin's Creed
World at War
Grand Theft Auto IV
Metal Gear Solid 4
Soulcalibur IV
Dead Space

I think a bunch of those I might be confusing with "over-hyped" and not necessarily overrated, though.
edit: I see someone started off suggestion making with "Spore" above. I didn't see that before I made this post but I'm in agreement, obviously.

[Andrew Mayer]

Mercs 2 wasn't disappointing for me.

It was a gorgeous mess; a delicious meal in a dirty kitchen.

[MSUSteve]

I think Dead Space's reviews and reception were both pretty spot on. It surely didn't receive the gushy insanity that GTAIV, MGS4, and to a lesser extent, Spore did.

[Tim James]

We need a top ten retrospective on Tom Chick list posts.

The Too Human one probably takes the top spot.

[Pogo]

I think Dead Space's reviews and reception were both pretty spot on. It surely didn't receive the gushy insanity that GTAIV, MGS4, and to a lesser extent, Spore did.

Yeah I was stretching with that.

It's a pretty damn hard list to make. I imagine Tom has played a lot more games, and seen their reviews, than I have, so I'm interested to see what he comes up with considering some of the stuff in the current list.

[theborbes]

Spore and Mirror's Edge belong on that list

[Cubit]

Spore and Mirror's Edge belong on that list

Mirror's Edge might have been a little hyped before released, but its not exactly overrated. Metacritic score is a 79, and most reviews criticized and praised it pretty accurately, imo.

[Rock8man]

Supreme Commander

Supreme Commander on the PC came out in February 2007. The expansion was released in November 2007. The only SupCom release in 2008 was the 360 version, which rated a 56/100 on metacritic, so I doubt it'll make the list of "most overrated" titles of 2008. :)

[NuclearWinter]

Spore, Mercs 2, Too Human and Far Cry 2 would be my most disappointing of the year.

[MSUSteve]

Spore, Mercs 2, Too Human and Far Cry 2 would be my most disappointing of the year.
Far Cry 2, really? I'd be interested in why you were disappointed. Far Cry 2 exceeded my expectations. I ended up liking the game a lot more than I expected.

[Pogo]

Supreme Commander on the PC came out in February 2007. The expansion was released in November 2007. The only SupCom release in 2008 was the 360 version, which rated a 56/100 on metacritic, so I doubt it'll make the list of "most overrated" titles of 2008. :)

Oops. I was looking at a 2008 release of games and that did ring a bell with me but I didn't actually check to make sure. I have a bad mental timeline. Thanks.

[Shieldwolf]

I'd like to point out that an ad for Mirror's edge follows the list of 10 is that just coincidence?

[NuclearWinter]

Far Cry 2, really? I'd be interested in why you were disappointed. Far Cry 2 exceeded my expectations. I ended up liking the game a lot more than I expected.

I had a love/hate relationship going on with Far Cry 2 at the start, but soon came to the realisation that I was mostly just wanting to love it. I kind of felt like I saw everything the game had to offer within the first two hours and after that it was becoming a drag with the fast respawns, lousy AI and lack of variety in missions. Along with a whole bunch of smaller things that bugged me. I probably built my expectations up too high after the E3 showing (and Tom's "next step in the evolution of first-person shooters" review), but ultimately I felt unsatisfied and haven't had any desire to play since shortly after my post in the main impressions thread.

I'm not a wumpus-like hater or anything, the game did have some good things going on; I just didn't enjoy it enough for me to consider it worth the purchase. I'd love to see more games in the same setting though.

[BobJustBob]

Pretty good list, though I disagree with Mercs 2. It had some minor issues but overall it was a lot of fun (take that!) and it felt like the developers really wanted me to have fun (and another one!) whereas other big games like GTA4 and Fallout 3 felt designed by rote with little regard for the player's experience.

[zengonzo]

I think more than anything those checkpoints put a big hurting to the experience, slowing it down tremendously.

I don't even want them removed entirely - maybe if they were more randomly staffed, or easier to blow through with a full-health vehicle .. Hell, I dunno', I LOVE Far Cry 2, but the checkpoints as they stand just bog me down.

[Tim James]

I had a love/hate relationship going on with Far Cry 2 at the start, but soon came to the realisation that I was mostly just wanting to love it. I kind of felt like I saw everything the game had to offer within the first two hours and after that it was becoming a drag with the fast respawns, lousy AI and lack of variety in missions. Along with a whole bunch of smaller things that bugged me. I probably built my expectations up too high after the E3 showing (and Tom's "next step in the evolution of first-person shooters" review), but ultimately I felt unsatisfied and haven't had any desire to play since shortly after my post in the main impressions thread.

I'm not a wumpus-like hater or anything, the game did have some good things going on; I just didn't enjoy it enough for me to consider it worth the purchase. I'd love to see more games in the same setting though.It wasn't worth the $40 purchase for me, but I would've been glad to pick it up for one of the big sales we've seen in the last few weeks. I'm disappointed because it would be unbelievably fantastic if it were a hardcore PC-centric shooter (real faction wars, more wide-open areas, etc.), but even at $40, I'm at 60% of the game I'm finally in sync with it and really enjoying it for what it is.

Crap, this should probably go in another thread, huh?

[Preachy Preach]

I'd definitely say Mirrors Edge should be on the disappointing games list - it's so nearly there, but lacks that extra month or so's polishing and thorough clear-sighted review that would have made it great - placing the checkpoints more efficiently, tweaking some of the jumps, making the wall-walking mechanics more transparent and better situated (just about every time you need to do it seems to be over an instant-death fall with a checkpoint located miles back. Not enjoyable.)

Also, when you create a unique look to your game world, populating it with cookie cutter game plot 32. Not great.

[mittens]

It wasn't worth the $40 purchase for me, but I would've been glad to pick it up for one of the big sales we've seen in the last few weeks. I'm disappointed because it would be unbelievably fantastic if it were a hardcore PC-centric shooter (real faction wars, more wide-open areas, etc.), but even at $40, I'm at 60% of the game I'm finally in sync with it and really enjoying it for what it is.
On the other side of the spectrum, Far Cry 2 is my Game of the Year.

[Juffo-Wup]

Taking bets on Tom's list of "Most Overrated Games of 2008" released tomorrow!

I'm going to throw in
...
Soulcalibur IV
...


Disagree. Grotesque over-boobage aside, Soul Calibur 4 is a great fighter. The characters are well balanced and the changes made to the system is generally good (Critical finish, in particular, is excellent.) I think it gets a bad name from the people playing it online, where the game's shitty netcode makes blocking slow moves on reaction very difficult and skews character balance.

My suggestion for most the overrated game of 2008 is Sins of a Solar Empire. It had severe balance issues, weak AI and, for being such a long game to finish, it didn't have much depth. Group of friends and I bought it on day 1, and we were all dissapointed pretty quickly.

[wumpus]

Tom's "[Far Cry 2 is the] next step in the evolution of first-person shooters" review
If so, they should stop making first person shooters, stat.

I think I see where they were trying to go with FC2, and the world was beautiful, but the execution was painfully bad. It's the first person shooter for people who don't like first person shooters. It's more like Grand Theft Auto 4, I suppose, where the FPS stuff is tacked on after the fact.

[Funkman]

If so, they should stop making first person shooters, stat.

I think I see where they were trying to go with FC2, and the world was beautiful, but the execution was painfully bad. It's the first person shooter for people who don't like first person shooters. It's more like Grand Theft Auto 4, I suppose, where the FPS stuff is tacked on after the fact.

Just so I'm sure, when you say FC2.. you mean Far Cry 2? Really? The FPS stuff was tacked on?

[Robert Sharp]

GTA4 is easily my choice for overrated game of the year. The way people around here were talking about it, I thought it was the be all of the video game world. I played it for probably 10 hours, maybe more, trying to like it. I failed.

[mittens]

I think I see where they were trying to go with FC2, and the world was beautiful, but the execution was painfully bad. It's the first person shooter for people who don't like first person shooters. It's more like Grand Theft Auto 4, I suppose, where the FPS stuff is tacked on after the fact.
I don't think I could disagree with you more. How did the FPS stuff feel "tacked on?"

[wumpus]

In my opinion, combat is the core of any FPS, and that's where FC2 goes horribly off the rails. There are other places, but that's the main one. I can forgive a lot if the combat is engaging.

So yes, I am referring to the actual combat against the People's Infinitely Respawning Dumb Clone Army.

That is, after you spend 10 minutes driving around to actually get to the actual mission combat, with several respawning checkpoints in between.

[Naeblis]

My list, no order in particular

Spore
Far Cry 2 (i almost wrote a book about all the problems in another forum, i won't repeat again)
Assasins Creed
Red alert 3 (still, the campaign is fairly entertaining)
Stalker Clear Sky
NFS Undercover (not that i hoped for an excellent racing game)
Mercenaries 2 (i sill had fun, but it could be so much better)
GTA4
and... Left 4 Dead. Yep people. It's a great game for a week, after that i was totally sick of the same shit over and over.

[EvilIdler]

FPS stuff tacked on in an FPS? Wow, glad I didn't buy it.

I only played Age of Conan on this list. I expected nothing, with it being a FunCom game and all, and I got..nothing. Lovely use of shaders (not overuse, like most of today's plastic-shiny games), big environments, but far too much disk space spent on that size world, and not a lot to do. Somebody ought to teach them about texture and sound compression. And Fun.

[Pogo]

and... Left 4 Dead. Yep people. It's a great game for a week, after that i was totally sick of the same shit over and over.

I wonder how long you played Diablo 2.

[MSUSteve]

The combat in Far Cry 2 is rock solid. The aiming works well, the enemies are reasonably smart, and the guns all act as one would expect. There are definitely problems with FC2, but the core combat mechanics aren't among them in my mind.

[Quitch]

Oh and sucks about RA3 comments. I'm still kinda looking forward to playing it since I dug BFME2 and C&C3. Also I am dying to see the acting cheese.

What is the problem there?

Red Alert 3 is Command & Conquer 3 with more micro since every unit has an ability. If you liked C&C 3 in skirmish/multiplayer then you'll like it here too, though the AI is still rubbish.

For me the let down is the campaign. In C&C3 I felt like the events of the game were building up to bigger events, more important decisions. The campaign area moved every four or five missions and the terrain changes gave a real sense of progression, especially when you moved into the Tiberium fields later. Finally, the Scrin really mixed things up when they joined and felt genuinely alien. Hell, I even got to make decisions during my final mission as GDI which would affect (in a minor way) the outcome of the game! All in all the campaign gets a thumbs up from me, barring some lack lustre GDI FMV (WTF was Grace Park doing there for starters?).

In RA3 the campaign is a disjointed series of missions which bear little relevance to one another, a serious threat in one mission is a defeated foe two missions later. I don't feel like what I'm doing has any relation to anything, and the characters in the FMV don't stick around long enough to develop or even to grow on you.

Finally, the Red Alert 3 units simply don't have the presence of their C&C3 counter-parts.

RA3 just felt... off.

I'd like to say the co-op saves it, but while I haven't played it with another human yet (this is for after Christmas) the majority of the missions are too easy because all three campaigns are equal in size and a large chunk of each is easing you into the faction or messing around with puzzle commando missions.

[StGabe]

My list:

1. Spore
2. Assasin's Creed
3. GTA IV
4. No More Heroes

Pretty short because I tend to filter a lot and I don't buy a lot of games. These are the ones that snuck through. All would make my list for overhyped except No More Heroes (although it was a bit overhyped *here* which is what made me make the mistake of buying it in the first place).

[Naeblis]

I wonder how long you played Diablo 2.

i didn't finished it. I played it with a necromancer around 3/4 of the game, normal difficulty.

[Funkula]

I didn't get disappointed very much this year. The only two games I can think of that did disappoint me were Spore and Warhammer. I managed to avoid Spore thanks to the DRM convincing me not to buy it (which from everything I heard about the gameplay was the right choice for me, since I was one of the people who wanted a ridiculous-scope evolution sim, with the focus on the pre-sentient stages), but I shelled out for the collectors edition of WAR, only to get bored with the game within a month due to the slow leveling and the lack of fun things to do solo. On the other hand, while those were the only two games that disappointed me, they were HUGE disappointments.

[Dave Long]

Gran Turismo 5 Prologue is by far the most disappointing for me.

I expected them to get online racing right, because while they had no experience with it, it's exactly what GT should be about, hard fought competition on a simulation-style racing level.

As soon as I started racing online and getting bumped out of the way GT-style in every race with no penalty applied to players that did it, I knew they screwed the pooch in a legendary way.

Fortunately they still have until the "real GT5" to fix it.

It's so pretty too, especially from inside the car.

[Naeblis]

I didn't get disappointed very much this year.

Just yersterday i was thinking along the same lines, i don't know if 2007 has been a "weak" year, but at least 2007 was better. Stalker, The Witcher, ET Quake Wars, Portal, TF2 and Ep 2, Bioshock, Crysis, CoH OF, World in Conflict and surely more i don't remember right now.

[Coca Cola Zero]

Assassin's Creed isn't a 2008 game, you bimbos.

[TomChick]

Assassin's Creed isn't a 2008 game, you bimbos.It is for the PC, which is how a lot of folks here probably played it.

-Tom

[Coca Cola Zero]

The most disappointing game for me this year by far is The Force Unleashed. That game should have kicked major ass and was very meh. GTA4 is probably second. Unlike TFU, I actually enjoyed GTA4, but as others have mentioned here and in other places, I felt like they threw out way too much of the gameplay in order for the game to seem more serious. Number 3 is probably Bionic Commando Rearmed. I loved the original Bionic Commando back in the day but this game proved you should be really careful about doing a huge graphical update to an old game while keeping the old school mechanics, because the grappling just felt like shit given how good the game looked combined with how ubiquitous decent physics are these days... I'm still looking forward to the full 3D BC game though.

[Coca Cola Zero]

It is for the PC, which is how a lot of folks here probably played it.


oh... well, of course the PC version is disappointing, given that PC gaming is full-on d0med.. what did they expect?

[TomChick]

Unfortunately, I don't know anyone willing to play same-screen Co-op with me, since they don't like the look of [Little Big Planet]...

What the hell kind of cold-hearted hard-assed people do you hang out with, Mr. 8-man? How on earth could anyone not like the look of Little Big Planet? That's the best thing it's got going for itself!

-Tom

[Funkula]

I guess I should include The Force Unleashed too, since it was one I was anticipating early in its development, but ended up being so underwhelmed I didn't even consider buying it.

[TomChick]

I don't want to Sol up the thread but Spore fits this description for a lot of people.

It isn't a bad little game, but a lot of people were expecting something a little bit more substantial.

We can have more talk of Spore soon, but anyone taken in by the hype for Spore got exactly what he or she deserved. :) It was what it was, and I fail to see how it could have ever been any more than that.

-Tom

[TomChick]

What's everyone's beef with No More Heroes? The boss battles were all extremely good. The levels preceding them allowed for some nice beat 'em up portions, and were very inventive at times. The story was cool and didn't take itself seriously. I had nothing against the mini-games you had to play continuously to make money since they were so mundane that they were hilarious (picking up trash, mowing lawns, filling up gas tanks...). Hell I even liked the repetitive enemies and one-liners, it seems that even those were utterly generic as some sort of tongue-in-cheek. I didn't want it to end!

One of the best games of 2008 for me that's for sure, and still the only Wii game I liked.

Here's more on No More Heroes (http://www.crispygamer.com/gamereviews/2008-02-20/no-more-heroes-wii.aspx), but I was really hoping that Suda 51 would have made it a more satisfying game. Barring that, I was hoping he would have lived up to the awesomeness of Killer 7's story, meta-jokes, characters, and just plain creepiness. Instead, I got a lame overworld and a lot of sneering about otaku. :(

-Tom

[Doug Erickson]

Remove RA3, and put Prince of Persia in its place. Boom!

Edit: I don't see GTA4 on that list.

[TomChick]

I think I see where they were trying to go with FC2, and the world was beautiful, but the execution was painfully bad. It's the first person shooter for people who don't like first person shooters. It's more like Grand Theft Auto 4, I suppose, where the FPS stuff is tacked on after the fact.

Hmm, why don't you come back and try again once you've actually played the game?

-Tom

[Troy S Goodfellow]

It was what it was, and I fail to see how it could have ever been any more than that.

Yep, and this was enough for me and a lot of other people. It's a neat little toy set that is almost as interesting for its technical elegance as it is for the creativity it has unleashed. It's a nice little irony that it stops being captivating the closer it gets to being a game.

I'll have my own year end list thing with a disappointment or two, but Spore was pretty good. It didn't change the world as a game, and will probably not have the staying power of The Sims. It might fit as overrated, but most of that overrating was before the game was even out.

Troy

[TomChick]

My list, no order in particular
...NFS Undercover (not that i hoped for an excellent racing game)


Man, that thing was terrible. Easily one of the worst racing games I've had the misfortune to play in years. The Need for Speed license has the stink of bad games all over it.

-Tom

[MrAngryFace]

This seems more like a list of games DEVs hoped would turn out better.
I have to second titles like GTA4 and PoP.

Red Alert 3 is an easy wounded animal to put down thanks to the negative reaction over EA's utterly obnoxious 5 installs then you gotta call us and share your blood type protection.

Mercs 2 is ACTUALLY a pretty solid game.

Who gave a crap about Haze? Seriously.

[Doug Erickson]

Yeah, Mercs 2 was a lot of fun, even if it was really rough around the edges. Great co-op implementation, and things blew up nice in it. ALSO EASY ACHIEVEMENTS. I wouldn't color it as a disappointment; it was merely unpolished. GTA4, on the other hand, was an ACTUAL disappointment, especially when stacked up against Saints Row 2 -- in fact, GTA4's polish only made the whole experience even more depressing.

[MrAngryFace]

I think for things to be a big disappointment there needs to be some sort of anticipation. Anyone anticipating Haze was clearly high on Game Fuel.

[Doug Erickson]

Believe it or not, the PS3 fanboys were really anticipating it on account of it a) being a PS3 exclusive; and b) being the first next-gen effort from the Timesplitters developers. Did I mention it was OMG PS3 X-CLUSIVE???? GAF called it a "Halo killer" before they even knew the title.

[Pogo]

I think for things to be a big disappointment there needs to be some sort of anticipation. Anyone anticipating Haze was clearly high on Game Fuel.

While nothing about the pre-release hype screamed innovation, it was the fact that it was made by the developers of Timesplitters that had many people excited for a new FPS from them.

[Thrag]

I found Spore massively disappointing not because I was expecting the world from it, but because every space phase game I tried quickly became ruined by the game ending crash when zooming out of your home world bug. After about a month they still hadn't patched the game and I just gave up playing. I didn't feel like removing and replacing every defense turret on my home world after each visit (the only workaround I knew of for the bug). Does anyone know if they ever patched that problem successfully?

[MrAngryFace]

While nothing about the pre-release hype screamed innovation, it was the fact that it was made by the developers of Timesplitters that had many people excited for a new FPS from them.


I'd be excited for a new Timesplitters FPS from them.

[Pumpkinhead]

I would replace Civ Rev with Guitar Hero World Tour. Personally Civ Rev took me by surprise as being a good console adaptation of a classic game. By the time I found out the AI was that bad I had already gotten more than my money's worth out of the game. In fact I still play the DS version quite a bit on the train.

GH:WT took something Harmonix did a year before and with a few exceptions regressed in every way. The music studio is a waste of time. The drum mechanics are a step back from rock band. There is no dynamic world tour mode. The vocals are nearly broken. I could go on and on.

#1 on my list for most overrated games of the year would be Resistance 2. Looking at the meta-critic score you would think it is one of the top shooters of the year. Yet it is far from that.

[wumpus]

Hmm, why don't you come back and try again once you've actually played the game?
Four hours of Far Cry 2 was enough for me. There's something about utterly generic combat against painfully bad, infinitely respawning AI that I can't quite muster any enthusiasm for. It was one endless respawning checkpoint after another.

Based on the Far Cry 2 thread, supposedly the ending is really bad, too, even for people who liked the game.

[copeknight]

I spent tons of hours with Civ Rev. In the end, it just made me go back to Civ IV, but I feel I got my money's worth. Spore, though, was a huge disappointment to me--and the disappointment had nothing at all to do with DRM. Although, I agree with Tom that I'm not really surprised. It met my fears instead of my hopes. But I was still saddened.

[Equis]

Four hours of Far Cry 2 was enough for me. There's something about utterly generic combat against painfully bad, infinitely respawning AI that I can't quite muster any enthusiasm for. It was one endless respawning checkpoint after another.

It's kinda how I feel about your arguments against Far Cry 2 and GH:WT. Once I've read one post, I find it hard to muster any enthusiasm for your actual concerns. It's one endless respawning whine after another.

Still, in the disappointing Category

1> Fable II (wish there was more point to the game)
2> Dead Space (RE5 in space is all well and good, but I was hoping for at least a SS2 level atmosphere)
3> Warhammer Online (I expected it to grab and hold me longer than it had)
4> GTA4 (gorgeous world, shame about the gameplay. Also, stupid cellphone)
5> Far Cry 2 (The ending really really sucked.)

[quatoria]

I can certainly agree about the number one slot. Haze got the lowest score of anything I reviewed this year, and it's without question my largest disappointment. Aside from being a horrible shooter, all the screechy political bullshit of the message was delivered in an unbelievably tone deaf manner. Not a single redeeming quality to be found.

[wumpus]

your arguments against Far Cry 2
It seems the people who enjoyed FC2 treated it like a sandbox / exploring game, where the combat was secondary to the, uh, "experience".

FC2 does have nice environments, but man, commuting to and from the action and playing Where's Waldo in DirectX 10 bores me to tears. This would be somewhat forgivable if the action was, y'know, more than fighting endless, dumb-as-bricks respawning hordes.

[Thrag]

It seems the people who enjoyed FC2 treated it like a sandbox / exploring game, where the combat was secondary to the, uh, "experience".

Your impressions are rather backwards. It's the combat that makes the game fun. The FPS elements were six kinds of awesome, it was the RPG elements left something to be desired. The ending and the general lack of a cohesive narrative with compelling choices is the game's flaw, not the awesome, dynamic, emergent combat that you didn't really experience while lost in the tutorial for a few hours.

It seems some people who tried to rush from one mission to another initially got frustrated because of all the random combat in between the mission content combat (a complaint I personally can't help but think of as "there's too much combat in this combat game, and this water is much too wet"). People who didn't try to rush through the game, or stopped trying to rush through, ended up enjoying the game a lot for the excellent gunfights in an open immersive environment.

[Squee]

Wow, I've only played one game on that list.
And I've played none of them. I'll consider that a win.

[jfletch]

Three games for me which were quite disappointing this year:

Guitar Hero World Tour: Pumpkinhead sums it up. Neversoft just isn't even close to Harmonix's level. Not entirely surprising (I wouldn't expect Harmonix to make a better skateboarding game than Tony Hawk... well okay maybe Proving Ground), but still. I admit my perception was colored by the Game Informer preview that treated GHWT like the real revolutionary music game.

Gears of War 2: The multiplayer is a mess. It's full of exploits, and matchmaking sucks. Even post-patch. The singleplayer is good but the SOS as the first one.

Warhammer Online: bought it the week it came out. Had a great time on Tier 1. left for a few weeks to cram for my actuarial exam, come back, and every area was deserted. Siege warfare in T2 was a mess. I had a good time in the scenarios I played, but I can do much the same in TF2 or CoD4/WaW for the price of admission.

[Tim James]

It seems some people who tried to rush from one mission to another initially got frustrated because of all the random combat in between the mission content combat (a complaint I personally can't help but think of as "there's too much combat in this combat game, and this water is much too wet"). People who didn't try to rush through the game, or stopped trying to rush through, ended up enjoying the game a lot for the excellent gunfights in an open immersive environment.Yup, something definitely clicked for me in Far Cry 2, but it didn't happen until hour 10 or so probably. It's like a good popcorn movie now.

[Rob_Merritt]

My 10 disappointing games of 2008 probably will look like this:

Spore
The Witcher
Bully (PC)
Braid
Hinterland
insecticide part 1
Mr. Driller Online
Lego Indiana Jones
Assassin Creed
Soul Calibur 4

Though I'm not sure about that last 2.

[malkav11]

I have trouble seeing how anyone could have had high expectations for The Force Unleashed. Don't get me wrong, I don't think it was ever fated to be awful or anything like that, but the franchise has a decidedly uneven track record, particularly for action games. The only Star Wars games I've ever unreservedly enjoyed are the two KOTORs. So it was very much a wait-and-see sort of game for me. As it turns out, it's not that great. Oh well.

Mercs 2 and Too Human are the ones off that list I agree with. Neither is what I'd describe as an awful game (though I know some of you would disagree, especially in the case of Too Human). But Mercs 2, as fun and explosion-filled as it is still lacks an indefinable quality that the original had. Maybe it's just polish. And Too Human wasn't anywhere near as awesome as I would have expected from Silicon Knights, especially given the premise and the stuff they were talking about before release.

[Funkula]

I have trouble seeing how anyone could have had high expectations for The Force Unleashed. Don't get me wrong, I don't think it was ever fated to be awful or anything like that, but the franchise has a decidedly uneven track record, particularly for action games. The only Star Wars games I've ever unreservedly enjoyed are the two KOTORs. So it was very much a wait-and-see sort of game for me. As it turns out, it's not that great. Oh well.

Because it was pitched as "Psi-Ops with Jedi," and that's fucking awesome. Psi-Ops was a neglected gem, and if it had had a pseudo-sequel with a better story and setting, that would have been phenomenal. The Euphoria engine also sounded like it would lend itself well to the game.

And yeah, there was always a significant chance that it could turn out as it did, simply because there have been so many Star Wars duds. But it had the potential to be up there with KOTOR, which most of their games haven't had the ambition to even try to achieve.

[Pogo]

I'd be excited for a new Timesplitters FPS from them.

Ditto, and they should get back to that.

[Gordon Cameron]

Uneven is hard to define, but any franchise that produced Jedi Knight and Jedi Outcast (two of the best action games I've played) might earn some high expectations. Of course X-Wing/Tie Fighter are considered by many to be classics as well, though I haven't played them.

Star Wars has a pretty good gaming track record as movie franchises go, I'd say.

[malkav11]

Jedi Outcast had some great levels but a) was made by people that weren't anywhere near Force Unleashed and b) was kind of a slog until you got your lightsaber and some force powers. I happen to think it's the best non-KOTOR game the franchise has produced so far, so I think uneven is fair. This is, after all, also the franchise that produced things like Episode 1 Pod Racer.

[MrAngryFace]

I have trouble seeing how anyone could have had high expectations for The Force Unleashed. Don't get me wrong, I don't think it was ever fated to be awful or anything like that, but the franchise has a decidedly uneven track record, particularly for action games. The only Star Wars games I've ever unreservedly enjoyed are the two KOTORs. So it was very much a wait-and-see sort of game for me. As it turns out, it's not that great. Oh well.

Mercs 2 and Too Human are the ones off that list I agree with. Neither is what I'd describe as an awful game (though I know some of you would disagree, especially in the case of Too Human). But Mercs 2, as fun and explosion-filled as it is still lacks an indefinable quality that the original had. Maybe it's just polish. And Too Human wasn't anywhere near as awesome as I would have expected from Silicon Knights, especially given the premise and the stuff they were talking about before release.

..but MOST disappointing game? I mean lets be real here. Undershooting expectations and being THE MOST DISAPPOINTING are ways apart.

[Bill Dungsroman]

My 10 disappointing games of 2008 probably will look like this:

Spore
The Witcher
Bully (PC)
Braid
Hinterland
insecticide part 1
Mr. Driller Online
Lego Indiana Jones
Assassin Creed
Soul Calibur 4

Though I'm not sure about that last 2.

Then why the hell are they on there? And seriously, The Witcher?

[Luke M]

I have trouble seeing how anyone could have had high expectations for The Force Unleashed. Don't get me wrong, I don't think it was ever fated to be awful or anything like that, but the franchise has a decidedly uneven track record, particularly for action games. The only Star Wars games I've ever unreservedly enjoyed are the two KOTORs. So it was very much a wait-and-see sort of game for me. As it turns out, it's not that great. Oh well.

The Force Unleashed pick surprises me, too. Disappointment requires anticipation, and why would you anticipate a game from a developer that hasn't delivered a great game in a long time? The best game LucasArt's internal dev team delivered this decade is that Rainbow Six light Episode 3 game, which isn't saying much. Sure, TFU tech demo was great and the production values and pre-release trailers are top-notch, but Lucasarts doesn't currently have the talent it takes to make great games.

All great Star Wars games from at least the past decade were developed by external developers.

[Luke M]

We can have more talk of Spore soon, but anyone taken in by the hype for Spore got exactly what he or she deserved. :)

Like you? :)

http://fidgit.com/archives/2008/05/2008-the-five-worth-waiting-fo.php

[TomChick]

Good find, Luke! Man, that takes me back...

But I'm not sure that was me getting taken in by the hype as being curious to see what Soren Johnson was going to do. And I was dead-on in that Spore was different!

-Tom

P.S. Plus, I even had a disclaimer in small print.

[wumpus]

the game's flaw, not the awesome, dynamic, emergent combat that you didn't really experience while lost in the tutorial for a few hours.
Well, I've played pretty much every first person shooter ever made (on PC) since Wolf3D, and I vehemently disagree that Far Cry 2 had "awesome, dynamic, emergent combat". I think certain people really get off on the sandbox aspect of the game and are willing to overlook dull as chalk AI (times a zillion respawns) and generic, unremarkable gunplay.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[Rob_Merritt]

Then why the hell are they on there? And seriously, The Witcher?

I'm going to do a write up at the end of the year. I get at least 4 more games I want to play before finalizing any end of the year lists.

[Telefrog]

I'll add my voice to the throng pushing for Spore to be on this list.

[Rimbo]

Spore should be on this one, too.

[The Bitter Cynic]

Sadly, I vote for Spore to be on the list also.

[Pogo]

The lists are out. You don't just change a fucking list!!

[AndrewM]

I agree with Tom regarding Spore. It was about exactly what I thought it would be. Reading the (mis)expectations that people had for Spore here at Qt3 was pretty amazing to me. People read all sorts of things into the game. Perfectly belongs on the overrated list. I guess if you were one of those who bought into the hype it might be placed differently for you. :)

[Drastic]

I'm with the folks who weren't disappointed by Spore. Aside from the theoretical sense that every game is disappointing that it wasn't better in some way, I suppose.

Similarly, I wasn't disappointed by Mercs 2. I expected a lot of things to go boom, with a silly story as an excuse for having lots of things go boom, and it delivered that.

[Naeblis]

I didn't have any great hype or special expectations with Spore. And still it was a disappointment. Even if i didn't hope for anything great, it still was a mediocre game.

[BobJustBob]

Spore is definitely one of the best games of the year.

[Pogo]

Oh shit here we go.

[Cubit]

i heart bob

[Gordon Cameron]

Then why the hell are they on there? And seriously, The Witcher?

Why the hell do you view every statement of uncertainty and equivocation as an invitation to be a prick? This kind of thread is supposed to be a conversation, not a point-scoring pissing match.

[Rimbo]

it's just bill being bill

[Doug Erickson]

Why the hell do you view every statement of uncertainty and equivocation as an invitation to be a prick? This kind of thread is supposed to be a conversation, not a point-scoring pissing match.

At the risk of going meta: when did this forum get so prissy? I'll take Bill's in-your-face bombast over the passive-aggressive snark that passes for negativity around here.

[Ergo]

I was completely underwhelmed by Spore and I went out of my way to avoid reading the advance hype of the game. It just wasn't all that fun.

[Coca Cola Zero]

I'd put Witcher on my most overrated list but not most disappointing. I only got it because it came with my last videocard purchase and while the game wasn't that highly rated by the general population, it was pretty talked up here on Qt3 and unlike most of you I found it to be pretty blah.

[roguefrog]

The Witcher was last year, and was in my top 5 of 2007.

[Rob_Merritt]

The Witcher was last year, and was in my top 5 of 2007.

Then the Witcher EE then. A lot of us didn't get it till the latest release.

[Bill Dungsroman]

Why the hell do you view every statement of uncertainty and equivocation as an invitation to be a prick? This kind of thread is supposed to be a conversation, not a point-scoring pissing match.

Fuck you, Gordon. Who asked you? Where are you getting this retarded subtext? If Rob really doesn't know what his list is, then that list isn't much good, is it? And I'd like to know why he felt let down by The Witcher, because I haven't gotten back to it yet since the Extended Edition came out. I'd also like to know just how long and wide that stick up your ass is. Any help there?

[Funkula]

At the risk of going meta: when did this forum get so prissy? I'll take Bill's in-your-face bombast over the passive-aggressive snark that passes for negativity around here.

Shh. It's Humorless Dick Re-Integration Week!

[malkav11]

..but MOST disappointing game? I mean lets be real here. Undershooting expectations and being THE MOST DISAPPOINTING are ways apart.

Yes, most disappointing. I can't think of any other games this year that disappointed me more. Mostly, I didn't have expectations. In a few cases my expectations were met, and in a couple, exceeded. It's not exactly a high bar, but that's what happens when you deliberately avoid previews like I do.

[Misguided]

It's interesting. I absolutely adored Mass Effect. It was a complete thrill ride for me, and I would number it among my top 10 games if I assembled a list. Perhaps this is because I never played any of the other Bioware RPG titles, so the formula didn't seem so overused to me.

This kind of begs the question of what role bias should play in reviews. All to often it seems that reviews dismiss games because they weren't what the reviewer wanted, rather than what the game happens to be. It makes more sense in the context of Tom's list where he is clearly indicating that a game like GTA IV is a really good game, but that it was a disappointment to him on a personal level because he saw, despite the level of quality put into it, how it might have been better.

Kudos to Tom for being able to separate the two--what a game is and what it might have been--something I wish more reviewers had the ability to do.

[Andrew Mayer]

This kind of begs the question of what role bias should play in reviews. All to often it seems that reviews dismiss games because they weren't what the reviewer wanted, rather than what the game happens to be. It makes more sense in the context of Tom's list where he is clearly indicating that a game like GTA IV is a really good game, but that it was a disappointment to him on a personal level because he saw, despite the level of quality put into it, how it might have been better.

I think the answer is that it's incumbent on the reviewer to deconstruct their responses in a way that you can understand.

If, for example, I know that Tom loves Eve of Destruction, and I think it was poorly produced and executed, then at the very least I need to understand what he likes about it so I can carry my understanding of his bias forward into his other reviews and adjust my responses accordingly.

[Misguided]

I think the answer is that it's incumbent on the reviewer to deconstruct their responses in a way that you can understand.

If, for example, I know that Tom loves Eve of Destruction, and I think it was poorly produced and executed, then at the very least I need to understand what he likes about it so I can carry my understanding of his bias forward into his other reviews and adjust my responses accordingly.

Precisely, I just wished that happened more often. I want to know what a reviewer did or did not like about a particular game, because often those things may be quite different than my likes or dislikes.

[ShyGuy]

What, no Prince of Persia?

[Bahimiron]

Four posts and all four (http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/search.php?searchid=1488230) have been about how much you hate Prince of Persia.

I'd call VM, but I don't know what the hell he'd be marketing for.

Unless Ubi is doing some kind of devious reverse psychology/all-pub-is-good-pub thing!

[ShyGuy]

Four posts and all four (http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/search.php?searchid=1488230) have been about how much you hate Prince of Persia.

I'd call VM, but I don't know what the hell he'd be marketing for.

Unless Ubi is doing some kind of devious reverse psychology/all-pub-is-good-pub thing!

Yet you've read all four posts! :)

I was really hoping that game would be decent because I really liked SoT and the series was a nice change from the twitch FPSers and MMORPGs currently dominating game sales. Ubi just ruined the latest installment of PoP, and while it may be because they were pumping resources into FC2, I think they should catch bad press about it.

[zengonzo]

Unless Ubi is doing some kind of devious reverse psychology/all-pub-is-good-pub thing!

Backbacklash seems to be an effective marketing tool of late.

[jellyfish]

Wired published their list of most disappointing games.
The #1 on their list...
Spore.
http://blog.wired.com/games/2008/12/disappointing-g.html

[Malcolm Tucker]

Civ Rev was shit. When it came out and everyone on here was going on about it, I thought I'd lost my mind. Small, ugly, unambitious, cumbersome and slow.

[Chuck]

Avernum 5 didn't do it for me, or any of the Avernums, for that matter. Why doesn't Mr. Vogel use walking animation in the Avernums when he has used it for years in the Geneforges? It really kills the game for me when I see the whole party shuffle around like that.

Also, I feel I wasted good money on Armeggedon Empires. Ever hear of a tutorial? Christ, that game was obtuse.

And I'm still waiting to like Fallout 3. Could someone mod out the turn-based combat, sprinkle more ammo around and let us play it as it should have been: Oblivion with guns.

(Insert picture of Colbert doing his gimme hand)

[Desslock]

Could someone mod out the turn-based combat, sprinkle more ammo around and let us play it as it should have been: Oblivion with guns.

That's STALKER

[Quitch]

Also, I feel I wasted good money on Armeggedon Empires. Ever hear of a tutorial? Christ, that game was obtuse.

It had one, in the manual.

[Luke M]

And I'm still waiting to like Fallout 3. Could someone mod out the turn-based combat, sprinkle more ammo around and let us play it as it should have been: Oblivion with guns.

If you're not finding enough ammo, you're not doing enough room-to-room exploration. Which is what you're supposed to do, even though it will quickly exhaust the game for you because the limited color palette, geometry, and selection of items makes this process tedious. I've never seen such a small selection of crate types placed in such great quantities across such a massive environment. You'd better get opening if you want to shoot those guns.

[Problematique]

Some of the comments left on the article are just weird.

[malkav11]

You know, having actually played most of The Force Unleashed now, I was pleasantly surprised. People were describing some sort of broken, janky mess only worthwhile for the plot. Meanwhile, what I've actually been playing is a gorgeous, fun little brawler with nifty Force powers and cool (if QTEed) cutscenes involved in finishing bosses and minibosses. One with terrible targetting, admittedly, but the only point in the game where I've found that genuinely upsetting was the fight against that dinky Jedi in the junk temple. (Waaaaay too much scenery accidentally targetted instead of him.) Meanwhile, I found the story threadbare and pedestrian.