8 of the Most Overrated Video Game Franchises Ever
- Thread starter n0e
- Start date
May I ask exactly what the point of this list was? Seems like it was made to shit on popular series more than anything else.
Oh boy...
1) I disagree. I only played the original trilogy, but I always preferred Mortal Kombat to Street Fighter. I found the controls much more intuitive, I preferred the more 'gritty' aesthetic, and even then, the lore far more interesting. But regardless, I'd put Soul Calibur above both of them.
2) I've never got the sense of Gears of War being "overrated" - if anything, it seems to have been a punching bag. But, regardless, I quite like the gameplay. The plot, while nothing special, is still populated by characters that bounce off each other excellently. Multiplayer is still a blast, especially Horde Mode. Gears, above all else, has still remained fun. Also helps that it has very strong EU content.
3) Can't really comment - only ever played the first Fable, found it to be "meh."
4) Can't really comment, only ever played the first game. Read quite a few of the novels and saw the movie, but they didn't really sell me. So, I would agree that Assassin's Creed is oversaturated, but I can't comment if it's overrated.
5) Never played
6) Can't comment, like the RTS games, don't enjoy WoW. But thanks to EU material and sites like Wowpedia, I've been able to remain invested in the lore, so there is that.
7) Similar to Assassin's Creed, only ever played two CoD games, so I can't comment if it's "overrated," but would agree that it's "oversaturated."
8) Well, to each their own - I have high regard for the Halo series. My top ten FPS list is populated with them. I think the main reason is that Halo manages to balance the two schools of FPS thought (mobility vs. cover) excellently, and couples it with an engaging universe with an engaging plot and somewhat engaging characters. Like Gears, the EU also helps.
1) I disagree. I only played the original trilogy, but I always preferred Mortal Kombat to Street Fighter. I found the controls much more intuitive, I preferred the more 'gritty' aesthetic, and even then, the lore far more interesting. But regardless, I'd put Soul Calibur above both of them.
2) I've never got the sense of Gears of War being "overrated" - if anything, it seems to have been a punching bag. But, regardless, I quite like the gameplay. The plot, while nothing special, is still populated by characters that bounce off each other excellently. Multiplayer is still a blast, especially Horde Mode. Gears, above all else, has still remained fun. Also helps that it has very strong EU content.
3) Can't really comment - only ever played the first Fable, found it to be "meh."
4) Can't really comment, only ever played the first game. Read quite a few of the novels and saw the movie, but they didn't really sell me. So, I would agree that Assassin's Creed is oversaturated, but I can't comment if it's overrated.
5) Never played
6) Can't comment, like the RTS games, don't enjoy WoW. But thanks to EU material and sites like Wowpedia, I've been able to remain invested in the lore, so there is that.
7) Similar to Assassin's Creed, only ever played two CoD games, so I can't comment if it's "overrated," but would agree that it's "oversaturated."
8) Well, to each their own - I have high regard for the Halo series. My top ten FPS list is populated with them. I think the main reason is that Halo manages to balance the two schools of FPS thought (mobility vs. cover) excellently, and couples it with an engaging universe with an engaging plot and somewhat engaging characters. Like Gears, the EU also helps.
Might I suggest that the title be changed to "Franchises That Have Lost Their Way"? I say this because, reading some of the choices, it sounds very much like these games were good once, but have since slipped and fallen in the mud. I really only got the feeling that Halo and Gears of War were overrated in your eyes, Mr. Mills. Everything else seemed more like, "It was good once, but now they've lost the magic." Especially the Warcraft entry.
But! As for the Halo thing, I can explain why I love it. It was the first FPS I ever played, and that is not because it the was first one I had access to. No, I didn't get on the Halo train until it had been out for a long time, and then I only tried it on a whim.
And what stuck with me was the fact that I wasn't alone. I wasn't a one-man killing machine (okay, yes I was, but in a different way) mowing down enemies all by myself. I had fellow soldiers fighting with me. I didn't land and storm a beach by myself. I was part of a landing assault. Did I take point and get the most kills? Of course, but I wasn't doing it alone. That is what made me love Halo, because I found no interest in The Doom Guy or Duke because they were by themselves. Halo made me feel like I was part of something, and it was the only game at the time that did that, so that's why I loved it.
But! As for the Halo thing, I can explain why I love it. It was the first FPS I ever played, and that is not because it the was first one I had access to. No, I didn't get on the Halo train until it had been out for a long time, and then I only tried it on a whim.
And what stuck with me was the fact that I wasn't alone. I wasn't a one-man killing machine (okay, yes I was, but in a different way) mowing down enemies all by myself. I had fellow soldiers fighting with me. I didn't land and storm a beach by myself. I was part of a landing assault. Did I take point and get the most kills? Of course, but I wasn't doing it alone. That is what made me love Halo, because I found no interest in The Doom Guy or Duke because they were by themselves. Halo made me feel like I was part of something, and it was the only game at the time that did that, so that's why I loved it.
What the original Halo had on everything else in the genre was a few things:
[ul]
[li]One of the smartest health systems around. Where earlier shooters used purely health packs, and later shooters used purely regenerating health, Halo was unique in that it used both, fused together in a way to create a good balance that worked well on any difficulty level.[/li]
[li]Really, really good level design. While there's no question that it wasn't perfect ("The Library" was unequivocally bad), overall it was far above average. Both in general and especially at its very best, its levels, in both single- and multiplayer modes, tended to be better than any other game out at the time. "The Silent Cartographer" continues to be brought up in conversations about level design as a pretty much unmatched example of doing it very right, even sixteen years later.[/li]
[li]Mixing features. Halo wasn't the first game with vehicles, or a carry limit on weapons with swapping between only two, or large, open levels, but it was the first game to have all of these features together in one game. In that sense, it was kind of a "best of" compilation of great features that many games would only have one or two of.[/li]
[li]Amazing music. I don't need to explain this one.[/li]
[li]A really strong personality. Halo is not content just to tell a story. It sees fit to litter its world with memorable little details. The enemies have their little quips. The grunts are a ton of fun. Even the AI behavior has personality, with enemies behaving more cowardly or aggressively depending on what type of enemy they are. It makes the world feel more alive than virtually any other game available at the time.[/li]
[li]Sheer polish. Halo doesn't just have a lot of stuff. It has almost exclusively good stuff. Even if there is no single *wow* new feature, no one giant, stand-out innovation to point at and say "this is what makes the game special", it gets all the little things right.[footnote]Except "The Library". Seriously, screw that level.[/footnote] You would never know, to play it, just how short its dev cycle was.[/li]
[/ul]
It's true the franchise has gone downhill, particularly since 343 Industries took it over. But the first one was revolutionary, not for any one big reason, but for a dozen small reasons. It's easy to look back on it now and not realize how important it was, but it standardized so much of what we take for granted in the genre today. Compare it against the best shooters of the time, Perfect Dark, GoldenEye 007, Quake III Arena, Starsiege: Tribes, System Shock 2, and even Half-Life, and it blows them all out of the water, despite doing almost nothing that at least one of those games hadn't done already. It didn't need to add anything new to a genre. It needed to combine a ton of things other games had already done, but do them all better, and that's just what it did.
P.S. Thanks
P.P.S. Can someone explain to me how Destiny turned out so reeky? I would've thought that having so much of the old Halo: Combat Evolved through Reach team would've led to pure magic, but at its best it feels like a half-hearted Halo clone and at its worst a bland grindfest. Seriously, Bungie, y'all can do better.
https://www.destinypedia.com/Destiny#RevisionsCovarr said:
There's your explanation for the story issues, given the rehaul. As for gameplay, I'd attribute it to a combination of Activision and Bungie's inexperience with the MMO genre.
...what?
It seems like whoever wrote that didn't even see the last three MK games and still thinks they are the same as PS2 days, despite the fact that that combat system got the boot back in 2008 in favor of the more traditional 2D gameplay reminiscent of the 16-bit days.
And they misspelled "Tekken".
And the screenshot is from the mobile version of MKX, not from the actual game.
And yeah, me and my chums, we all vastly prefered (and still do) MK to SF because MK was more fast, furious and fun.
I played some of the first Halo, and all of Halo 3 single player games. After I finished Halo 3, I was "Meh." I also played the first Assassins Creed game, didn't like that either, found it dull.
Putting aside for a moment that this was almost certainly geared from the get-go to drum up controversy and generate "discussion" by taking a swing at enough popular series that someone was certain to take offense, this writing... hurts me.
We have weirdly constructed and punctuated statements such as
Maybe "I've been playing World of Warcraft steadily since its first release?" If that's what was meant of course. I'm still really not sure!
And then there's the just plain goofy, like
I was just ranting in another topic about professional publications that think that spell-checking software and self-review is enough, but I have to ask at this point: is there ANYONE left at the Escapist who proofreads copy before it hits the site?
We have weirdly constructed and punctuated statements such as
and
and
Then there's the all-but-unparsable, such as:
"I've played a Warcraft game"? Sooooo... You've played Warcraft III, and World of Warcraft? Doesn't sound quite so impressive. What else...? Peggle: Warcraft Edition (a thing I didn't even know existed until I looked it up)? Maybe Hearthstone, if you want to extend it to games that are tangentially related by world and character, if not by name?
Maybe "I've been playing World of Warcraft steadily since its first release?" If that's what was meant of course. I'm still really not sure!
And then there's the just plain goofy, like
...Because the real problem with the Fable series is its inability to be passed like a baton between racers.
I was just ranting in another topic about professional publications that think that spell-checking software and self-review is enough, but I have to ask at this point: is there ANYONE left at the Escapist who proofreads copy before it hits the site?
This isn't a good idea for a listicle. It is only really good for poking hornets nests. Can't tell if intentional or just out of ideas.
I came to question fables "relayability" but someone beat me too it.
This article felt thrown together last minute while hungover.
Im not much of a halo player but like it or not Halo changed the game and cemented FPS games on consoles. It was highly polished, the charecters were likable, the world felt alive and the different AI for different aliens.
It changed how fps were played. Before it was about mouse skill, think quake or UT. You would circle strafe shooting until one player died. Halo was about timing and reflexes, strafe in and out of cover snap shotting.
Thats why Halo is seen as a big deal.
It also stripped weapon selection down from having to cycle through 10 weapons on a controller to having 3 easily accessed.
This article felt thrown together last minute while hungover.
Im not much of a halo player but like it or not Halo changed the game and cemented FPS games on consoles. It was highly polished, the charecters were likable, the world felt alive and the different AI for different aliens.
It changed how fps were played. Before it was about mouse skill, think quake or UT. You would circle strafe shooting until one player died. Halo was about timing and reflexes, strafe in and out of cover snap shotting.
Thats why Halo is seen as a big deal.
It also stripped weapon selection down from having to cycle through 10 weapons on a controller to having 3 easily accessed.
Here's the thing with FRANCHISES...they are pretty much ALL overrated.
This just sort of happens after enough installments.
Resident Evil belongs on this list.
Silent Hill belongs on this list.
Mario belongs on this list.
Zelda belongs on this list.
Final Fantasy belongs on this list.
Metal Gear Solid belongs on this list.
NHL/Madden/Fifa, etc all belong on this list.
Very few franchises stay consistently good WHILE remaining FRESH, FUN and INTERESTING.
The franchises that have the best chance of NOT being overrated are those with only 2 or 3 installments to their name. Assuming 2 games even counts as a franchise
Trying to list franchises that aren't overrated would be a challenge.
- Half-life 1&2 belong assuming two games make a franchise as both titles push the envelop in its field.
- Warcraft probably also belong here, going from various RTS's that felt different enough from one another into an MMO and then into a card game. All successful and reasonably varied.
I'm struggling to think what else without heavy justification. Mass Effect might belong but 3rd installment is rough and it was very well received critically so I think there's a lot of room for debate there.
This just sort of happens after enough installments.
Resident Evil belongs on this list.
Silent Hill belongs on this list.
Mario belongs on this list.
Zelda belongs on this list.
Final Fantasy belongs on this list.
Metal Gear Solid belongs on this list.
NHL/Madden/Fifa, etc all belong on this list.
Very few franchises stay consistently good WHILE remaining FRESH, FUN and INTERESTING.
The franchises that have the best chance of NOT being overrated are those with only 2 or 3 installments to their name. Assuming 2 games even counts as a franchise
Trying to list franchises that aren't overrated would be a challenge.
- Half-life 1&2 belong assuming two games make a franchise as both titles push the envelop in its field.
- Warcraft probably also belong here, going from various RTS's that felt different enough from one another into an MMO and then into a card game. All successful and reasonably varied.
I'm struggling to think what else without heavy justification. Mass Effect might belong but 3rd installment is rough and it was very well received critically so I think there's a lot of room for debate there.
While most of these franshises are beaten into mediocre sequel after sequel, calling them overrated is unprofessional.
You're writing an article, not a random comment on a random forum (in which it is stil childish, but atleast it doesn't undermine the position of a writer).
You're writing an article, not a random comment on a random forum (in which it is stil childish, but atleast it doesn't undermine the position of a writer).
I think the writer misunderstands what "overrated" means. Fable isn't overrated. It was over-hyped and fell on its face rather quickly as a franchise and is now dead. The only good example of "overrated" on this list would be Assassin's Creed. Cause I don't think that series was ever that good (except for maybe 4.)