General Gaming 9 Hated Videogames That Deserve A Second Chance.

[skillzdadirecta]

 

I approve of this list 

[GameDadGrant]

Was waiting for Castlevania 64. I leave disappointed.

 

Wait, I thought people liked Splinter Cell: Blacklist?

[Keyser_Soze]

50 minutes ago, GameDadGrant said:

Wait, I thought people liked Splinter Cell: Blacklist?

 

 

It was OK but nothing compared to the holy trinity of Splinter Cell, Pandora Tomorrow and Chaos Theory also it followed up Conviction which was the worst one.

[GameDadGrant]

3 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 also it followed up Conviction which was the worst one.

I completely forgot about Conviction, LOL! 

[stepee]

what list, i don’t see a list

[cusideabelincoln]

18 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

 

It was OK but nothing compared to the holy trinity of Splinter Cell, Pandora Tomorrow and Chaos Theory also it followed up Conviction which was the worst one.

 

After playing Blacklist and then trying to go back to Chaos Theory, I was quite surprised at the difference.  The OG games, while revolutionary, are simply not as good as Blacklist.  They feel clunky and limiting, and the levels are barren in comparison.  If you're not hung up on nostalgia, Blacklist is far and away the best Splinter Cell game.

[Paperclyp]

17 minutes ago, stepee said:

what list, i don’t see a list

Yeah I’m at work and can’t watch. Would love to see a list. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

How come the list isn’t anywhere?  We need to watch a 12 minute video?

[SimpleG]

9. No Mans Sky

8. Colonial Marines Post Patch

7. Star Wars Knights Of The Old Republic 2

6 .Assassins Creed Unity

5.ME Andromeda 

4.Splinter Cell Blacklist

3.COD WW2

2.Sea Of Thieves

1.Middle Earth Shadow Of War

 

@AbsolutSurgen

@Paperclyp

@stepee

[SimpleG]

My take on the list

9. Ton of stuff added and fixed in post release patches but I still find it lack luster

8. Ive played this, and while the patch fixes the AI , its still a shit tier game.

7. Never Played

6.Its an AC game, its fine,its the Ham and cheese sandwich of the game world.

5.Looks good, story was terrible, VA was terrible .

4.Liked it

3.Its junk food in video game form.

2.Never played

1.Combat Engine is great,story is pretty middling,suffer from open world bullshit.

[Bloodporne]

19 minutes ago, SimpleG said:

9. No Mans Sky

8. Colonial Marines Post Patch

7. Star Wars Knights Of The Old Republic 2

6 .Assassins Creed Unity

5.ME Andromeda 

4.Splinter Cell Blacklist

3.COD WW2

2.Sea Of Thieves

1.Middle Earth Shadow Of War

My take:

 

9. Get fucked; charge people $60 for an early access tech demo at launch and expect to be applauded for eventually providing a good game YEARS later

8. No thanks

7. No opinion

6 .No thanks

5. No thanks

4. I actually really liked this game; not nearly as good as the original trilogy but Conviction is the real stinker

3. No thanks

2. This actually looks cool but too open and multiplayer for me to get into

1. No thanks

[Moa]

It's weird to include out of date entries in annualized franchises. Who is looking to get COD WWII or AC Unity in the year 2020? 

[XxEvil AshxX]

6. AC Unity?

No. Fuck that game. They might have fixed some bugs but the canned animations in that game were the worst since the original AC. Anyone who ever got caught in a stagger loop knows what i'm talking about.

 

The problem with Sea of Thieves is that if you're solo, GTFO.

[stepee]

I enjoyed AC Unity. Still absolutely gorgeous on PC.

[TwinIon]

I bought NMS because of the VR support, tried that for an hour or so, and then put a ton of hours into it anyways. I got it for $20 and it's great. It never entirely found it's reason for being, but it's still a unique game that has a lot to offer. It never really squared the circle of "here's an unlimited universe to explore" and "most of the real progression in the game is in building your base on one planet."

[best3444]

Most definitely Supernan 64.

[CastlevaniaNut18]

I liked AC Unity, but it’s about in the middle of the series for me. 
 

Shadow of Mordor was okay, but too repetitive without an interesting story or varied environments. 
 

I don’t care at all about the rest of that list. 

[Jason]

KOTOR 2 would have been better than the first one if Obsidian hadn't been forced to ship it literally incomplete. The high points were way higher than in the first game. Like the scene where a civil war breaks out on Onderon, and then you get inserted onto Onderon from Duxn in an old Mandalorian war droid, which causes both sides to start shooting at you in addition to each other as you're crashing down from the sky.

[Paperclyp]

KOTOR 2 in its current form is a better game than the original for my money. 
 

I think No Man’s Sky in an awesome game now and that while they deserved some backlash, the ongoing ire people hold for that game is psychotic.

 

I have not played any of the other games. 

[Bacon]

 

[LazyPiranha]

1 hour ago, Paperclyp said:

KOTOR 2 in its current form is a better game than the original for my money. 
 

I think No Man’s Sky in an awesome game now and that while they deserved some backlash, the ongoing ire people hold for that game is psychotic.

 

I have not played any of the other games. 

I don’t know if I have ire for the game, but it was total bullshit how it was marketed.  I don’t remember the exact quotes, but they did some fucking insane twisting of the English language in those interviews.  Saying that you can play the game with friends is technically true in the same way that I could play original game boy Tetris with friends, but that’s not what the question means.  It was especially crazy when they kept dancing around the question when the game was out and Sean Murray just went “lol what are the odds” when two people were on the same planet and couldn’t see each other.  NMS is like a master class in how to dig your own grave with hype.

[Paperclyp]

38 minutes ago, LazyPiranha said:

I don’t know if I have ire for the game, but it was total bullshit how it was marketed.  I don’t remember the exact quotes, but they did some fucking insane twisting of the English language in those interviews.  Saying that you can play the game with friends is technically true in the same way that I could play original game boy Tetris with friends, but that’s not what the question means.  It was especially crazy when they kept dancing around the question when the game was out and Sean Murray just went “lol what are the odds” when two people were on the same planet and couldn’t see each other.  NMS is like a master class in how to dig your own grave with hype.

I don’t disagree. 
 

I just remember casually following the game though and it’s not like the game was a big secret. People in the media had played it and could tell you what the game was. I feel like the hype was from hyperbolic previews early on and the failure by Hello Games was to reign in that hype, which is an odd thing to have to do. I mean, they want people to be hyped. 
 

Mostly I think Sean Murray seems like a genuinely passionate creator who seems to have legit regret for misleading people, and his team has turned the game into a great game. 
 

Part of it for me is I just have very little patience for people who pre order games and then whine that it didn’t live up to their expectations. With all the resources we have today, I think it’s reckless to give a company $60 in advance unless you are quite certain you know what you’re getting. Otherwise I don’t really wanna hear you blast some dev about how they lied to you. But that’s just me. 

[Paperclyp]

And then like the whole “I’m not gonna ever but that game because they lied,” thing... 

 

I think that’s an interesting thing to put your foot down on compared to what a lot of companies are doing. It just seems naive and immature. 

[ShreddieMercury]

It's certainly weird to say that there is multiplayer when there isn't, but that's from a snippet of an interview or two and to my knowledge nothing that they ever showed even had the slightest hint that No Man's Sky was a cooperative/multiplayer game.  Also, it played nearly identically to how it was presented on day one before anything else was patched in.  If you watch the first trailer, literally all of that is in the game, and just like every single other video game trailer, they put all of the interesting content all together when in reality it's not all actually present within the same few minutes of game play.  It's fine to not like it (I don't), but it definitely serves as a weird sociological experiment about how the internet is able to manifest expectations from nothing and then be disappointed when these imaginary things don't exist.

[Paperclyp]

I know I’m on to something when bacon gives me the ol’ guillotine. 

[Keyser_Soze]

8 hours ago, cusideabelincoln said:

 

After playing Blacklist and then trying to go back to Chaos Theory, I was quite surprised at the difference.  The OG games, while revolutionary, are simply not as good as Blacklist.  They feel clunky and limiting, and the levels are barren in comparison.  If you're not hung up on nostalgia, Blacklist is far and away the best Splinter Cell game.

 

I played them back to back pretty much, co-op, and I don't agree.

[Nokt]

I didn't know that KOTR 2 was really "hated".

 

Having gone back and tried to play ME: A and Sea of Thieves they are just as bad as the first time I tried to play them.

[Dre801]

If you come to terms with the fact that Andromeda's  story is utter shit, and are selective with what side quests you take on, you can enjoy it.  The combat is the best of all ME games 

[Phaseknox]

11 hours ago, Dre801 said:

If you come to terms with the fact that Andromeda's  story is utter shit, and are selective with what side quests you take on, you can enjoy it.  The combat is the best of all ME games 

I liked the story.  It's not as good as the original trilogy's, but I still found it to be entertaining. The game overall is really good IMO, and I don't get the hate for it. I know that it had a lot of issues right out of the gate, but it's a lot better now in its current post update state.

[Bloodporne]

17 hours ago, ShreddieMercuryRising said:

It's certainly weird to say that there is multiplayer when there isn't, but that's from a snippet of an interview or two and to my knowledge nothing that they ever showed even had the slightest hint that No Man's Sky was a cooperative/multiplayer game.  Also, it played nearly identically to how it was presented on day one before anything else was patched in.  If you watch the first trailer, literally all of that is in the game, and just like every single other video game trailer, they put all of the interesting content all together when in reality it's not all actually present within the same few minutes of game play.  It's fine to not like it (I don't), but it definitely serves as a weird sociological experiment about how the internet is able to manifest expectations from nothing and then be disappointed when these imaginary things don't exist.

I think it falls somewhere in the middle. NMS is an extreme example for a reason, not just people manifesting expectations out of thin air. I wasn't involved in the game's hype cycle and just got curious towards the final stages of the epic drama but from what I saw, the dev dude basically react with 'lol mayyyyybeeeeee' to a lot of questions, made overblown statements and the whole nine. People took it and ran with it imagining some unbelievable product that I think was absolutely unattainable for the team size and all but ultimately I do think that was on that dude getting insanely carried away with his own vision and I guess Sony's marketing? What I'm saying is that I have yet to see something like that with another game so it absolutely can't be a coincidence. I remember people taking it to hysterical heights on NeoGAF, so that was funny to me, but I did end up playing it not long after release at my friend's house who was super invested in it and I thought it was downright absurd that this was the finished game they'd been hyping. It felt like closer to a tech demo even than an early release title to me. It wasn't just incredibly barren and devoid of nearly everything on release but also absolutely riddled with bugs and issues that the team then didn't address for months. It'd be like if Sekiro had showed its gameplay footage only for that portion to be relegated to one-minute bits somewhere after pushing forward for two hours, of course people would feel duped. I don't get why people get invested to the point of the online outrage whatsoever but at the same time I'd never buy the game because I'm simply not that interested in it and I think the whole idea of selling now for $60 to maybe possibly, if you're lucky, get a proper finished game years later is bullshit as a consumer. But on another note, the quite literal hate people hurled at the devs was insane from what I recall, legit insane. Get the fuck off the net and stop playing video games for a while if that's your reaction.

18 hours ago, Paperclyp said:

And then like the whole “I’m not gonna ever but that game because they lied,” thing... 

 

I think that’s an interesting thing to put your foot down on compared to what a lot of companies are doing. It just seems naive and immature. 

I mean I don't know if you're specifically talking about people who went full psycho about this game or my post earlier in the thread but I just don't like supporting, what I consider, crappy products. I don't buy microtransaction-riddled games, bare-minimum content games with roadmaps or whatever they call them, cosmetic DLCs and so on and that's just a personal thing, I don't care if others do. Again, I don't know if you were referring to an opinion like mine in the first place but I don't see the naivety and/or immaturity in that if so. I just think the game was a crap product, the whole hubbub around it grade A silliness and like I said above, I strongly dislike buying into the idea of paying full price now and potentially playing a good game years later.

[Firewithin]

tried 3 times with shadow of war.  it was just not the same level as Mordor.  it was suffocating how many enemies there were and you couldn't really do anything without constantly running into packs or fighting a captain or whatever without inevitable having one or two more show up at the same time.

[CastlevaniaNut18]

2 minutes ago, Firewithin said:

tried 3 times with shadow of war.  it was just not the same level as Mordor.  it was suffocating how many enemies there were and you couldn't really do anything without constantly running into packs or fighting a captain or whatever without inevitable having one or two more show up at the same time.

Shit, reading your post, I just realized it’s the second game the list mentions. 
 

shows how dull I found it.  

[Paperclyp]

1 hour ago, Bloodporne said:

I mean I don't know if you're specifically talking about people who went full psycho about this game or my post earlier in the thread but I just don't like supporting, what I consider, crappy products. I don't buy microtransaction-riddled games, bare-minimum content games with roadmaps or whatever they call them, cosmetic DLCs and so on and that's just a personal thing, I don't care if others do. Again, I don't know if you were referring to an opinion like mine in the first place but I don't see the naivety and/or immaturity in that if so. I just think the game was a crap product, the whole hubbub around it grade A silliness and like I said above, I strongly dislike buying into the idea of paying full price now and potentially playing a good game years later.

If you don't like the game and don't wanna support it, yeah I'm not singling you out. 

 

If your attitude years after the release of the game is "yeah fuck this I'll never buy this product out of principle because they misled me," and still have a genuine level of fury, I think (the royal) you are being naive and immature and frankly to use a word I don't even really like a snowflake. 

 

Nobody has a gun to your head to buy a game full price though. My advice especially on new IPs is to know what you're buying if you're going to pay full price, and it's SO easy to do that nowadays I have zero sympathy if you didn't understand what the game actually was and yet you're mad at the developer. There are things to be legitimately angry at if you buy the game knowing what it is - crashes, save ruining bugs, whatever - but to pre order a video game for 60 dollars to then shout "this isn't what I wanted it to be!" That's on (again, the royal) you. 

 

In terms of not the royal you, I would just say I don't have a problem with you not being interested in what you feel is an incomplete experience at launch. But if the game becomes something different over the years and becomes a more fleshed out thing that you actually would like, but you won't buy it because it happened to launch in a state that you didn't like, I think that's odd and silly. 

[johnny]

Andromeda has no good characters. I don’t expect them to make every character great but we kinda got a bunch of Jacobs. So even if you put aside the bad voice acting, it’s still not interesting. I liked andromeda when I played it the first time. The second time is when I really noticed all of its problems. Also we go to a new galaxy and there’s only two new species? Come on this is MASS EFFECT. They did fix some things to make the game better like the weird facial animations. I think there are some GOOD things about the game. It’s a shame they will not get to make a sequel. With good direction and proper time they could make a good game. But BioWare seems incapable of that these days. 

[skillzdadirecta]

shadow of war is definitely a better game than mordor and I loved both. I put over a100 hours into that game. It took everything great about the first game and expanded on it. "Training" your orcs was funner than I thought it would be so was avenging other players deaths or attacking their forts and capturing/killing their orcs. Still need to finish the third and final DLC though. I get that not everything is for everybody but the whole loot crate thong with this game was totally overblown.