ZeroAX wrote:Most worse game lists are stupid to begin with because they confuse badly made games (technical issues) with badly designed games (which many times include huge blockbusters that people refuse to see the flaws of).
Yeah. Repeatedly harping on how bad Superman 64, NES Dragon's Lair, etc. are seems like a waste of time. Yeah they're bad games. Because they're broken. Everyone agrees on this. "Superman 64 is a really bad game" is like saying "the sound of my dog farting is a really bad song." It's a given.
Horribly botched AAA titles are infinitely more offensive. Games like Resident Evil 5 and 6.
Though the games that personally drive me insane are the ones that (seemingly) "had potential." The ones that came from developers and people that should "know better." The worst games are the ones that truly let you down and disappoint you. For this reason I proclaim Final Fantasy XIII to be my worst game of all time.
BoneSnapDeez wrote:
Though the games that personally drive me insane are the ones that (seemingly) "had potential."
These are the ones that can be the most infuriating, but they're also the most interesting ones to break down and dissect to try and figure out what went wrong and maybe how it could've been fixed.
Those sorts of games often have very interesting development histories too.
Sonic 06. The game's design itself has nothing bad about it (it's not ground breaking either mind you, but it had the potential to be better than both Sonic Adventure games), and yet because it was obviously released earlier it gets into all worst games of all time lists.
Most broken? Yes. But I know many far higher reviewing games that are actually worse designed.
BoneSnapDeez wrote:The success of a console is determined by how much I enjoy it.
BoneSnapDeez wrote:
Yeah. Repeatedly harping on how bad Superman 64, NES Dragon's Lair, etc. are seems like a waste of time. Yeah they're bad games. Because they're broken. Everyone agrees on this. "Superman 64 is a really bad game" is like saying "the sound of my dog farting is a really bad song." It's a given.
Horribly botched AAA titles are infinitely more offensive. Games like Resident Evil 5 and 6.
I disagree with this. Titus got the Superman license and put out as crappy and cheap a product as they could to make a quick buck. It's a broken and barely fun game because the developers didn't give a shit and played their audience for fools. That is offensive to me. Is it the worst game ever? Possibly not but it is the most high profile one.
If you were doing a "Games that failed to live up to their potential list" then I would agree that Resi 5 and 6 should be on there and I would agree those games can be the most frustrating. I would never put them on a "worst games" list though because Capcom actually gave a shit when developing them. They tried to make good games but missed the mark. For my money that is much less cynical and offensive as churning out a broken, unimaginative, licensed game to con gullible consumers.
BoneSnapDeez wrote:
Yeah. Repeatedly harping on how bad Superman 64, NES Dragon's Lair, etc. are seems like a waste of time. Yeah they're bad games. Because they're broken. Everyone agrees on this. "Superman 64 is a really bad game" is like saying "the sound of my dog farting is a really bad song." It's a given.
Horribly botched AAA titles are infinitely more offensive. Games like Resident Evil 5 and 6.
I disagree with this. Titus got the Superman license and put out as crappy and cheap a product as they could to make a quick buck. It's a broken and barely fun game because the developers didn't give a shit and played their audience for fools. That is offensive to me. Is it the worst game ever? Possibly not but it is the most high profile one.
It's not really case of the developers "not giving a shit and playing the audience for fools." Developers pretty much never intentionally set out to make a shoddy product. In S64's case, a lot of the development issues came from the licensor, who apparently gave them a lot of trouble.
Ok then, I was a bit harsh. How about incompetent developer taking on a project that was far above their capabilities but knowing they could probably turn a profit off a popular license?
I'm unsure if Caen is legally unable to say what DC did to give the project so much trouble or if he has just decided to push blame onto them. He doesn't give specifics. He just keeps repeating "the licensor killed it" like a mantra.
Let's not forget Titus have a history of awful licensed games so it's not as if Superman 64 is an isolated case. Did the licensor (sic) also kill their shoddy attempts at Blues Brothers, Robocop and Dick Tracy? Or are they just a crappy developer who take work for cheaper to license cult properties hoping for moderate success from minimum effort?
BoneSnapDeez wrote:
Yeah. Repeatedly harping on how bad Superman 64, NES Dragon's Lair, etc. are seems like a waste of time. Yeah they're bad games. Because they're broken. Everyone agrees on this. "Superman 64 is a really bad game" is like saying "the sound of my dog farting is a really bad song." It's a given.
Horribly botched AAA titles are infinitely more offensive. Games like Resident Evil 5 and 6.
I disagree with this. Titus got the Superman license and put out as crappy and cheap a product as they could to make a quick buck. It's a broken and barely fun game because the developers didn't give a shit and played their audience for fools. That is offensive to me. Is it the worst game ever? Possibly not but it is the most high profile one.
It's not really case of the developers "not giving a shit and playing the audience for fools." Developers pretty much never intentionally set out to make a shoddy product. In S64's case, a lot of the development issues came from the licensor, who apparently gave them a lot of trouble.
This. No dev wants to make a bad game; it's usually either incompetence or resource/rights restrictions that make a game poor. You can make a good game out of anything (provided you take a necessary amount of creative liberties in design), so incompatible source material is not a good excuse.
I'm supposed to believe due to all the repeated slammings it gets over at NA when I was stuck there that Silent Service for the NES is a total turd.
The thing is, it's not. Every time I hear complaining about how you can't do this, or you can't do that, I wonder how many of them have ever picked up a manual for the game or a faq to realize you're doing it wrong. That Konami(Ultra) game made by Rare is actually quite excellent and not a push over either, but what throws so many people off is that you need 2 controllers to play it. The second controller allows you to blow tanks if you're sinking to rise to the surface which is a necessary bail out. You can also with that one fire the many rear torpedoes you have and also look around with binoculars to spot stuff without turning the sub (controller 1 turns the sub if you use it.) Those simple things will get your ass kicked if you play on the higher difficulties if you don't do it right. It's a fairly intense game especially if you have a couple of destroyers or kai bokan running you down and dropping charges while trying to take out some supply and troop ships.
Tanooki wrote:I'm supposed to believe due to all the repeated slammings it gets over at NA when I was stuck there that Silent Service for the NES is a total turd.
The thing is, it's not. Every time I hear complaining about how you can't do this, or you can't do that, I wonder how many of them have ever picked up a manual for the game or a faq to realize you're doing it wrong. That Konami(Ultra) game made by Rare is actually quite excellent and not a push over either, but what throws so many people off is that you need 2 controllers to play it. The second controller allows you to blow tanks if you're sinking to rise to the surface which is a necessary bail out. You can also with that one fire the many rear torpedoes you have and also look around with binoculars to spot stuff without turning the sub (controller 1 turns the sub if you use it.) Those simple things will get your ass kicked if you play on the higher difficulties if you don't do it right. It's a fairly intense game especially if you have a couple of destroyers or kai bokan running you down and dropping charges while trying to take out some supply and troop ships.
I have found that a lot of complaints people have with NES games is in direct relationship with them never seeing the actual manual. So many tidbits and tips in those that really guide you in what you need to do.
Ack wrote:I don't know, chief, the haunting feeling of lust I feel whenever I look at your avatar makes me think it's real.
-I am the idiot that likes to have fun and be happy.
