The critics were wrong- this game rocks

[J T]

I like to read what game critics have to say, but they can miss the mark sometimes. I want to know what games you like that the critics just dismissed. This is your chance to defend the games you like that got crapped on, and perhaps point the rest of us in the direction of some underappreciated gems to look into.

To keep a standard for "doing poorly" with critics, please stick to games that have a metacritic rating under 75 (yellow and red colored ones) where you think it should have had a score at least 15 points higher. To make it easy, you can sort games by rank and browse the ones below the cutoff.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/

[Mathius]

Ok, so what game do you think rocks?

[J T]

Ok, to start off with one example, there is Shinobi for the PS2. This game came out in 2002 and got a metacritic rating of 71. Ouch. I think it easily deserves 86, and maybe higher.

Shinobi was a great series of games in the arcade and on Genesis. When it finally turned 3D and made its way to the Playstation 2, it was if everyone had decided that anything Sega wasn't cool anymore and they weren't going to support it. I've heard some people speculate that Shinobi was rated unfairly solely because the critics just didn't have enough skill to enjoy it. This is potentially true. Shinobi is a hard game and that is something many of the critics complain about.

Critics also complained that it stuck too close to its 2D roots in terms of gameplay. Perhaps this was a valid critique back in 2002 when people really wanted to see the new PS2 blow everything out of the water with new interactive 3D worlds, extended dialogue, etc. But now that we are used to good looking 3D games, sandbox environments, and everything else, Shinobi feels like a refreshing trip back to the simpler structure and higher difficulty of the games of old, but wrapped up in a lovely 3D package. The graphics are gorgeous, the music is great, and the play control is spot on. Shinobi laid the ground work for the Ninja Gaiden games that started to come out on X-box 2 years later to rave reviews. I give Shinobi my full recommendation. The critics didn't get it at the time.


Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFAEWrzJt3o

[tcpballa93]

While I haven't played the fill game, the demo for wanted weapons of fate is a lot of fun. It plays like gears of war, but you can curve bullets, pull off matrix like moves etc. It is just plain fun.

[Reverend]

Barnyard Blast: Swine of The Night

The game is flawed, but immensely fun. Plus, the humor is top-notch. I laughed during every cutscene

[dedalusdedalus]

i've always had a warm spot in my heart for the punisher (ps2), which got an aggregated rating of 68 on metacritic.

this pretty much cuts against the entire grain of my gaming DNA. i generally shun FPS and 3rd person shooters, plus i stay far far away from games with licensed IP.

so what does the punisher have going for it? it's got a surprisingly good story for a 3rd person shooter (i think it was scripted by garth ennis), it nails the look/feel/tone of the punisher, and the game mechanics are accessible to people who aren't 3rd person shooter buffs.

[RyaNtheSlayA]

When I clicked the Metacritic link Wolfenstein came up so thats what i'm assuming is the game you think needed to score higher.

78 is good, I don't get why people think below 80 is bad.

Anyway I think it deserves a 60-80% anyway, I didn't think it was all that fun. I was really hoping that it would flush out the story of Wolfenstein, Spear of Destiny, and Return to Castle Wolfenstein but I haven't seen mention of it going with the story at all. Which bums me out, it still may have a good story, but I really wanted to see some follow up to the brilliant RTCW. So I may buy it, if somebody can confirm that it is a sequel to RTCW in story, if not I will probably wait until its dirt cheap in 5 years. Which works for me, its been about 6 years since RTCW and Enemy Territory stormed into my home and made sweet gaming love with my senses, and it will continue to do so for another several years.

[RadarScope1]

Ok, to start off with one example, there is Shinobi for the PS2. This game came out in 2002 and got a metacritic rating of 71. Ouch. I think it easily deserves 86, and maybe higher.

Shinobi was a great series of games in the arcade and on Genesis. When it finally turned 3D and made its way to the Playstation 2, it was if everyone had decided that anything Sega wasn't cool anymore and they weren't going to support it. I've heard some people speculate that Shinobi was rated unfairly solely because the critics just didn't have enough skill to enjoy it. This is potentially true. Shinobi is a hard game and that is something many of the critics complain about.

Critics also complained that it stuck too close to its 2D roots in terms of gameplay. Perhaps this was a valid critique back in 2002 when people really wanted to see the new PS2 blow everything out of the water with new interactive 3D worlds, extended dialogue, etc. But now that we are used to good looking 3D games, sandbox environments, and everything else, Shinobi feels like a refreshing trip back to the simpler structure and higher difficulty of the games of old, but wrapped up in a lovely 3D package. The graphics are gorgeous, the music is great, and the play control is spot on. Shinobi laid the ground work for the Ninja Gaiden games that started to come out on X-box 2 years later to rave reviews. I give Shinobi my full recommendation. The critics didn't get it at the time.


Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFAEWrzJt3o

I really need to check this out.

[nickfil]

Ok, to start off with one example, there is Shinobi for the PS2. This game came out in 2002 and got a metacritic rating of 71. Ouch. I think it easily deserves 86, and maybe higher.
Shinobi was a great series of games in the arcade and on Genesis. When it finally turned 3D and made its way to the Playstation 2, it was if everyone had decided that anything Sega wasn't cool anymore and they weren't going to support it.
Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFAEWrzJt3o

really? Played the first couple levels and got really really bored. NG is the better game by leaps and bounds. in my opinion of course.

I really liked dark sector. People had a bit hate on for it because it plays a lot like gears of war. Then, before the game even comes out, the internet collectively decides to pan it. Hate hype killed that game.

[(-_-)]

Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex for ps2 is one of my favourite games. It has incredibly stupid AI and it may not be super innovative, but everything else was really solid about it. The guns were fun to use, explosions were awesome, melee was satisfying, and jumping is different than any other game I've played. You react to how you jump towards walls, so if you launch yourself towards a wall and jump off, it feels like your character is actually exerting some effort to do so. It's hard to explain unless you play it. There was also one button dedicated for dodging, but it resulted in a cinematic shot of some ludicrous acrobatics move that didn't really dodge anything so much as it just looking awesome. It even had a very fun four player death match as well. I'd give it at least a 7.5 as it is a lot more solid than higher rated third person shooters I've played. Metacritic has it at 66. Plus the game can be picked up at electronics boutique for 4.99.