195 réponses à ce sujet

[FireAndBlood]

Medal of Honor Warfighter really sucked.

[Seboist]

greengoron89 wrote...

That is a sad reality about Obsidian, that - as good as there games are otherwise - they are almost always a buggy mess. It's a real shame because a lot of their stuff is pretty brilliant... just really rough around the edges.

They need to outsource their QA.

[Mr.House]

greengoron89 wrote...

That is a sad reality about Obsidian, that - as good as their games are otherwise - they are almost always a buggy mess. It's a real shame because a lot of their stuff is pretty brilliant... just really rough around the edges.

While true, there are some important tihngs never to forget with New Vegas. New Vegas was rushed(Bethesda was the publisher and they would not want another pig product competeing with their own big product) so it did not compete with Skyrim and Bethesda was the one who did the QA for NV. Now I don't want to be that guy who says get your tinfoil hat out but the fact that NV was rushed and Bethesda did do QA and NV ended up being a really buggy mess, one must look. Was that really Obsidianfault? Once you fix those bugs, NV simply plays better then FO3. Like I said, I don't want to be that guy but just food for thought. Now I don't think Bethesda failed QA on purpose(Bethesda sucks at QA afterall), but Bethesda can be blamed for rushing Obsidian when NV cleary needed more time.

Obsidian has bad luck with publishers(KOTOR 2 and NV are stunning examples), that's why I'm looking forward to PE since this will show if the buggyiness is really their fault or if it is a worse issue.

Modifié par Mr.House, 08 novembre 2013 - 12:44 .

[syllogi]

Mr.House wrote...

greengoron89 wrote...

That is a sad reality about Obsidian, that - as good as their games are otherwise - they are almost always a buggy mess. It's a real shame because a lot of their stuff is pretty brilliant... just really rough around the edges.

While true, there are some important tihngs never to forget with New Vegas. New Vegas was rushed(Bethesda was the publisher and they would not want another pig product competeing with their own big product) so it did not compete with Skyrim and Bethesda was the one who did the QA for NV. Now I don't want to be that guy who says get your tinfoil hat out but the fact that NV was rushed and Bethesda did do QA and NV ended up being a really buggy mess, one must look. Was that really Obsidianfault? Once you fix those bugs, NV simply plays better then FO3. Like I said, I don't want to be that guy but just food for thought. Now I don't think Bethesda failed QA on purpose(Bethesda sucks at QA afterall), but Bethesda can be blamed for rushing Obsidian when NV cleary needed more time.

Obsidian has bad luck with publishers(KOTOR 2 and NV are stunning examples), that's why I'm looking forward to PE since this will show if the buggyiness is really their fault or if it is a worse issue.

Yup, agreed, I have far fewer problems with FO:NV than I do with FO3 on PC, after many official and fan patches.  Other than KOTOR2, which just makes me cry, I love Obsidian, and I'm willing to overlook the rep they have for buggy games when their games have generally been more engaging and memorable than most others for me.

[ObserverStatus]

The Flying Grey Warden wrote...
 Knights of the Old Republic 2 for being rushed and needing mods in order to be good.

Uh... KotOR 1&2 are 6th gen games.

[Rusty Sandusky]

Mr.House wrote...

greengoron89 wrote...

That is a sad reality about Obsidian, that - as good as their games are otherwise - they are almost always a buggy mess. It's a real shame because a lot of their stuff is pretty brilliant... just really rough around the edges.

While true, there are some important tihngs never to forget with New Vegas. New Vegas was rushed(Bethesda was the publisher and they would not want another pig product competeing with their own big product) so it did not compete with Skyrim and Bethesda was the one who did the QA for NV. Now I don't want to be that guy who says get your tinfoil hat out but the fact that NV was rushed and Bethesda did do QA and NV ended up being a really buggy mess, one must look. Was that really Obsidianfault? Once you fix those bugs, NV simply plays better then FO3. Like I said, I don't want to be that guy but just food for thought. Now I don't think Bethesda failed QA on purpose(Bethesda sucks at QA afterall), but Bethesda can be blamed for rushing Obsidian when NV cleary needed more time.

Obsidian has bad luck with publishers(KOTOR 2 and NV are stunning examples), that's why I'm looking forward to PE since this will show if the buggyiness is really their fault or if it is a worse issue.

Do you even Alpha Protocol?

[David7204]

They have some talent. Caesar had a lot of potential as a villian.

Shame there were serious narrative shortcomings. The rampancy of Telling, not Showing. House being a pretty flimsy villain when it comes right down to it. Some gameplay faults, such as not being able to hear anyone's actual explanation for what they do unless you side with them, which is silly. A lot of questionable logistics underlying the whole scenario.

Speaking of disappointments, Lonesome Road certainly comes to mind.

I doubt they're going anywhere fast. Working on a South Park RPG game? Yeah, that's going to go places.

Modifié par David7204, 10 novembre 2013 - 05:25 .

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

David7204 wrote...

They have some talent. Caesar had a lot of potential as a villian.

Shame there were serious narrative shortcomings. The rampancy of Telling, not Showing. House being a pretty flimsy villain when it comes right down to it. Some gameplay faults, such as not being able to hear anyone's actual explanation for what they do unless you side with them, which is silly. A lot of questionable logistics underlying the whole scenario.

Speaking of disappointments, Lonesome Road certainly comes to mind.

I doubt they're going anywhere fast. Working on a South Park RPG game? Yeah, that's going to go places.

Lonesome Road is about hopelessness, misery and agony. It's quite interesting.

About main characters, they are not super villains. The limited technology and population and the hazards of the new mutated world doesn't let them to do everything they desire. So they're written properly.

About "not being able to hear anyone's actual explanation", I doubt groups and factions would trust a stranger and tell their stories to someone who would work against their interest.

Modifié par Kaiser Arian, 10 novembre 2013 - 05:36 .

[Seboist]

David7204 wrote...

They have some talent. Caesar had a lot of potential as a villian.

Shame there were serious narrative shortcomings. The rampancy of Telling, not Showing. House being a pretty flimsy villain when it comes right down to it. Some gameplay faults, such as not being able to hear anyone's actual explanation for what they do unless you side with them, which is silly. A lot of questionable logistics underlying the whole scenario.

Speaking of disappointments, Lonesome Road certainly comes to mind.

I doubt they're going anywhere fast. Working on a South Park RPG game? Yeah, that's going to go places.

Neither Caesar or House are "villains", Lol.

But you've already shown yourself to have zero credibility when it comes to this game with your claim that Mr. House has no reason to be against NCR(LOL!).

[David7204]

If Lonesome Road is supposedly about "hopelessness, misery and agony," the developers shouldn't have built up the central character as a mysterious and powerful man who has a plan to reawaken America from it's slumber...and then reveal his 'plan' is nothing more than nuking everyone. And try to obscure it with utter mountains of quasi-intellectual nonsense dressed up as wisdom.

I expected so much more from a character who speaks of 'carrying' America while it sleeps.

Modifié par David7204, 10 novembre 2013 - 05:39 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

David7204 wrote...

If Lonesome Road is supposedly about "hopelessness, misery and agony," the developers shouldn't have built up the central character as a mysterious and powerful man who has a plan to reawaken America from it's slumber...and then reveal his 'plan' is nothing more than nuking everyone. And try to obscure it with utter mountains of quasi-intellectual nonsense dressed up as wisdom.

I expected so much more from a character who speaks of 'carrying' America while it sleeps.

Oh do shut up David.

You not liking something does not make it objectively bad, usually the opposite in fact.

You've got this odd idea about what good storytelling is and you are soooo utterly determined that it is the only way.

You talk about how heroes are lonely and all that bull**** and as soon as someone provides a counter example you make a strawman and argue against that.

You're terrible at debating, rude, inconsiderate, none to bright, and worst of all utterly unwilling to broaden your horizons.

You sir are an imbecile and I wash my hands of you.

Good day.

Modifié par Grand Admiral Cheesecake, 10 novembre 2013 - 06:00 .

[Gatt9]

Most disappointing games?

1.  Dragon Age 2 - I doubt I need to elaborate

2.  Mass Effect 3 - "Your decisions matter!",  "You don't need to play multiplayer to get the best ending!",  and many more pre-release statements.  The end product was a weak TPS,  in which you needed to use only 1 gun,  all of the RPG elements didn't actually do anything,  and multiplayer was required to get the best ending.

3.  Fable 3 - Another linear game with an abysmal leveling system.  I thought Fable 2 was ok,  but Fable 3 was just horrific.

4.  Fallout 3 - Bethseda makes one game,  and one game only.  Sadly,  they tried to make Fallout a version of that game.

5.  Mass Effect 2 - An incredibly weak TPS with some of the worst AI I've seen since the 90's.  The story saved the game,  but it was still threatened by gaping plot holes and ridiculous events.  (Loot apartments as you go through the apartment district,  find looters,  and lecture them on the evils of looting?  Kick someone off a building in cold blood in front of the Paragon of Justice and she doesn't even blink?)

6.  Dead Space 2 - Nothing like buying a Collector's Edition for $80 and discovering that you can't open many of the doors you come across because you didn't buy DLC that wasn't offered on the PC,  and the port was so fantastically lazy you couldn't even change key bindings.

7.  Dead Space 3 - Didn't buy it because I could see the Dragon Age 2 treatment months before release.

8.  SimCity - I'm sure I don't need to explain this either.

9.  Diablo 3 - Another game designed around a monetization strategy.

10.  Final Fantasy 13 - One long corridor with a cutscene ever 5 battles,  and a story so bizarre and nonsensical that I never did figure out what was happening or why I should care.  I've bought some bad games,  I bought Battlecruiser 3000 AD on the day of release, I still have a copy of Masters of Orion 3 floating around,  and I consider those games substantially better than FF13.

Edit:  Special Mention - Assassin's Creed 3 - Annoying QTE's,  the world's longest tutorial/intro.  I'm sure the game had redeeming points,  but 2 hours in and I'm still playing the intro ended up boring me.

Seboist wrote...

greengoron89 wrote...

That is a sad reality about Obsidian, that - as good as there games are otherwise - they are almost always a buggy mess. It's a real shame because a lot of their stuff is pretty brilliant... just really rough around the edges.

They need to outsource their QA.

That's the problem,  their QA is outsourced.  The publishers handle the QA. 

Modifié par Gatt9, 10 novembre 2013 - 08:18 .

[billy the squid]

Dragon age 2 - crap
Mass effect 3 - SP crap (the MP was more successful, which should say something about how SP is viewed)

Sims City - crap online fiasco
Diablo - online fiasco
Rome total war 2 - utter shit and completely broken on release

[Eternal Phoenix]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

David7204 wrote...

If Lonesome Road is supposedly about "hopelessness, misery and agony," the developers shouldn't have built up the central character as a mysterious and powerful man who has a plan to reawaken America from it's slumber...and then reveal his 'plan' is nothing more than nuking everyone. And try to obscure it with utter mountains of quasi-intellectual nonsense dressed up as wisdom.

I expected so much more from a character who speaks of 'carrying' America while it sleeps.

Oh do shut up David.

You not liking something does not make it objectively bad, usually the opposite in fact.

You've got this odd idea about what good storytelling is and you are soooo utterly determined that it is the only way.

You talk about how heroes are lonely and all that bull**** and as soon as someone provides a counter example you make a strawman and argue against that.

You're terrible at debating, rude, inconsiderate, none to bright, and worst of all utterly unwilling to broaden your horizons.

You sir are an imbecile and I wash my hands of you.

Good day.

As I stated in the OP, this thread is about the games a person either thinks is one of the worst or most disappointing of the last generation. Sometimes it can be the two combined: some horrible gameplay mechanics combined with disappointment because the game was overhyped beyond belief.

Now we could all list the likes of bloody Ride to Hell here but that would get old fast. Most people choosing the "bigger" titles are doing so because they're hyped up (or were hyped up) as being perfect games and some/many (take your pick) didn't feel that way after playing them hence why they've become bigger disappointments than the likes of Ride to Hell (a game I never heard about until this topic and Angry Joe's review).

However when you get a game anointing itself as a spiritual successor, sequel or self-proclaimed king of something, and it doesn't live up to its own assumptions, and other games - that aren't hyped up as much by gaming media and fans - in the genre work better (and actually function better with the same or similar features) then it becomes a disappointment.

I'm finding the "logic" here unbelievable. There's no need to be hostile to someone having another view towards a game than you. I experienced this just because I happened to find Oblivion to be a pile of steaming smelly horse crap and because I stated my opinion afterwards in a way that wasn't objective (even though we will often do this in debate but I stated in the OP and reiterated again that it was all my opinion).

Some here have listed Too Human as their worst/disappointing game. I enjoyed Too Human (well I didn't think it was perfect but I didn't find it terribly bad either). You don't see me calling them idiots for what I can perceive as some unobjective criticism against that game (from some of its critics).

But such is the BSN.

I'm not white knighting David7204 either. Just tired of the hostility here. Although I do agree that Obsidian need to get their act together. Seriously, a South Park RPG? Who's smart idea was that? Obsidian with gameplay and technical aspects is horrible. All that's guaranteed from them is a good story at least but maybe that's because they've been working on Action-RPG's for the past few years. Hopefully Project Eternity fairs better in gameplay, what with it being isometric, because I'm really interested in that.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 10 novembre 2013 - 03:25 .

[ObserverStatus]

David7204 wrote...
If Lonesome Road is supposedly about "hopelessness, misery and agony," the developers shouldn't have built up the central character as a mysterious and powerful man who has a plan to reawaken America from it's slumber...and then reveal his 'plan' is nothing more than nuking everyone. And try to obscure it with utter mountains of quasi-intellectual nonsense dressed up as wisdom.
I expected so much more from a character who speaks of 'carrying' America while it sleeps.

The problem with Lonesome Road is that Ulysses is essentially Kreia with dreadlocks, and the expansion didn't go anyplace where Obsidian fans haven't been before.

[IllusiveManJr]

Two Worlds, Brink, Mindjack... Gross.

[Jozape]

I am not sure whether Dragon Age 2 or Alpha Protocol is worse of the games I have played. Both are among the most frustrating games I have ever played.

[IllusiveManJr]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

The worst game in the generation I've actually played would be Terminator: Salvation. I saw it for around $5, and thought I could get some easy achievements and cheap laughs out of it, so I got it.

It couldn't have been that bad... (Could it???) 

[SlottsMachine]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Am I the only person here who has played both Fallout 3 and Fallout NV for over 300 hours and experienced less than 10 game breaking bugs?

Hell, I've had to restart ME1 more times than FNV because of bugs. No lie.

I think you are doing it wrong if you've had to restart ME1 that many times. I think moreso with Fallout 3 but both it and New Vegas had a habit or freezing while loading and corrupting the autosave. Other than that neither game gave me all that much trouble, not including the first week F: NV was out though. 

Modifié par General Slotts, 11 novembre 2013 - 05:11 .