A game that everybody else loves, but you hate? (Witcher 2)

[mohit9206]

for example, me and Witcher 2.

I don't want to start a flamewar or such, but why do people love this game? I played the first 2-3 hours of the game, but I can't continue because I think it isn't very good.

First, the voice-acting and facial-animations aren't very good. I don't know if I am just used to better facial expressions in some other games (Walking Dead, Mass Effect), but it looks like every characters face is made of stone when they are talking. I also don't like Geralds generic voice-acting or how Tris sounds like somebody who lives in California. It just takes me out of the experience.

Also, I feel like the conversations aren't fluid. There is a part in the game where you are trying to save a man from being executed and the conversation-system (+facial-animations+voice-acting) made it feel super awkward. Then the scene had an even more awkward QTE-fight. After that scene I stopped playing the game.

Then there are the menus that feel overly complicated. Maybe I'm just new to pc-gaming, but why does changing armor or making a potion need to be so hard? The combat isn't so good also.

I would like to hear of a game that you hated, but everybody else loved.

I completely agree with you on Witcher 2 on every point you made.These are the exact reasons even i stopped playing Witcher 2 after 2-3 hours for the exact same reasons as you.
Also original Bioshock i found to be boring and stopped playing about a third into the game.

 

[Alarien]

The Witcher 2 is high on my list as well. The combat is mildly improved from 1, but, whereas 1's combat relied on a crappy timed click system... that worked... 2 relies too heavily on a potion system that is unintuitive and frankly, kinda broken. Why does Geralt have to meditate out of combat to drink a potion? Why do those potions feel necessary to the combat, but last a very short time? Are we supposed to predict all combat and just randomly drink potions "ahead of time?" Also, the start of Witcher 1 was a lot more interesting than 2. AS some of the others here indicate, 2's story starts off very very poorly. If I have to wait several hours into a game to get enough interest to be motivated to continue, that's bad.

So, here's a list with some comments:

*Halo: Ultimate generic FPS shooter with bland, derivative story and characters (but at least it had Cortana).
*Half-Life: Very competent. Good polish and FPS mechanics. Boring as hell. I just can't be bothered to care about anyone. I am still baffled by the amount of love for Alyx out there.
*Uncharted 1: I once wrote a rant about this game that ended up being about 10 pages in Word. That said, I kinda am ok with Nathan Drake, himself, but the baffling blonde, Sully and pretty much every other character drove me nuts. The game has comparably poor shooter mechanics to other cover-based shooters, but insists on being far more "shitty Gears of War" than "competent Tomb Raider Knockoff." The first game also has some fairly blatant racist overtones and finally ends up with zombie nazi/conquistadors. Sorry, terrible game, and that's before you get to the jet ski sequences, which are some of the worst, most random things I have ever played. (Uncharted 2 was a pretty decent improvement in many respects).
*GTA IV: Wow, I cannot think of a worst cast of characters in a game. GTA has never had "good guys" but, just wow. From a just plain scumbag main character to his downright hate-worthy irritating "friends," and the whole "hey, wanna take me bowling aspect?" Wow. It's a shame. The world-design and driving mechanics were solid, but the weapon/melee combat was awful, but the game also insisted on forcing the weapons through overly scripted events. I will never get over shooting out a guy's tires before engaging the chase portion of his mission and his tires automatically re-inflate. Baloney.

 

[Worgen]

I love the concept of Witcher games but for the life of me, I can't get into them, but Cdprojekt is awesome so I'll support them.

Games I hate that seem to get love are Starcraft/warcraft 2, they both have a really similar feel so I classify them together. Even back when I was a blizzad fan I didn't like those games. I tried getting into starcraft pretty hard, but nothing in the game did it for me. I hated the feel of the games, the story's were meh, and the sense of scale was horrible. The only thing I liked about either one were the cinematics.

 

[MCerberus]

Final Fantasy. Pretty much all of the ones I've played. The amount of fluff and BS turn it into a slog. It seems the games are paced so that everyone will be happy their favorite fan-fic character gets enough screen time.

In a similar vein: MGS. I wasn't in on the ground floor, and now it just looks like bad games wrapped around an earth-shattering load of self-indulgence.

 

[leodetroit]

Ok, I just realized how stupid it was saying that mass effect has good facial-animation...

 

[Tono Makt]

First Person Shooters in general are games that are extremely popular but I come close to hating. The only exception I can think of is Team Fortress 2, and only because I managed to find an awesome server to play on for a few years and the "story" in the game is hilarious to me.

Other than that, I've never enjoyed FPS's. I sometimes do hate them when they interfere in games I like (Mass Effect and the "Optional Multiplayer Mode"), but most of the time I just ignore them.

 

[Imre Csete]

Interesting complaints.

I really think you need to approach games from different angles; like what did the developers want to make and what does this game provide I might like, instead of "Cool, I like FPS/RPG/Sci-fi games, let's play it!". Might spare yourself some trouble.

For example (regarding the FTL complaint above), roguelike games heavily luck dependant? That's the whole point of the sub-genre. Your idea of misery is another one's fun.

 

[Silvanus]

FFX-X2, why does anyone like those stupid games, bad art design, stupid characters an interesting story bogged down by very dumb troupes and plot point, the sphere grid is busywork.
Uh!

I may love FFX, but the Sphere Grid is a bloody chore, you're right.


OT: I'm not really sure how people feel, generally, about Limbo... but I remember the initial reaction being warm, and I found that game to be a frustrating pile.

 

[Pebkio]

Fallout New Vegas.

A desert is a poor substitute for an apocolyptic wasteland and I friggin' hate deserts. And I hate cowboy crap to boot. The story might've been interesting and the factions might've been varied but I couldn't take any more of the game past the southern junction with giant ants bit because it was the same spaghetti-western bullshit everywhere I went.

 

[Whispering Cynic]

Minecraft... to be honest I don't really hate it, I just don't see the point in bothering myself with it. I tried playing the game a few times when the world first became infatuated with it, but it seemed to be just a pointless timesink with no real purpose. And while I see the appeal of being able to build practically anything, what puts me off is the fact that my creations would always be made of fugly pixelated blocks, which I simply don't find visually appealing.

Oh, wait, FTL. Fuck this game with a rusty razor wire wrapped pole. A game governed by a random number generator which can (and will) gleefully undo all your efforts no matter how good your strategy is, is an abomination. And its creators should be fed to the Wraith. I can't believe I actually considered buying it at one point. My eternal thanks to a friend who showed me this shite for what it really is.

 

[Dr.Awkward]

Fallout New Vegas.

I tried to play it. One thing that stands out is a consistent problem I have with Obisidian games: They can't keep me engaged after the introduction. It's like they can't be bothered to make an in-game climatic event at the beginning that I can be part of.

I'll be honest - I did enter the series with Fallout 3, but in the end, Beth did do some things much better than Obsidian. Even though it basically didn't let a player develop their own background (a complaint I've seen many players make), but the Vault 101 escape helped set the pace of the game, and afterwards encouraged you to go and explore. What New Vegas did was start you in the lazy town of Goodsprings, where you felt that you had some obligation to help them out.

...And then the situation with the Powder Gangers happened. If anything this was poorly executed - If you wanted any help, (and you did feel like you needed it,) good luck if you didn't focus on Speech, because otherwise you were on your own. (In fact, it showed how shallow and poorly engaging a stat check can be!) At least in Fallout 3, most of the missions you took gave you a feeling you could go it alone, and even then, if you needed help, at least it considered offering multiple options based on skills, even if it was a sacrifice of restriction in favor of character flexibility.

And, well... I'm going to say one thing. I liked Fallout 3's guns. Most of them felt artistically consistent; Obsidian went and ignored this little "fix", and brought in a few modern guns with Pictinny rails, which just doesn't feel consistent with the Fallout theme. Say what you want about Obisidian being "the guys who made Fallout", but take a moment and reconsider which roster of guns actually fit the world of Fallout better as a whole.

 

[Lygus]

for example, me and Witcher 2.

I don't want to start a flamewar or such, but why do people love this game? I played the first 2-3 hours of the game, but I can't continue because I think it isn't very good.

First, the voice-acting and facial-animations aren't very good. I don't know if I am just used to better facial expressions in some other games (Walking Dead, Mass Effect), but it looks like every characters face is made of stone when they are talking. I also don't like Geralds generic voice-acting or how Tris sounds like somebody who lives in California. It just takes me out of the experience.

Also, I feel like the conversations aren't fluid. There is a part in the game where you are trying to save a man from being executed and the conversation-system (+facial-animations+voice-acting) made it feel super awkward. Then the scene had an even more awkward QTE-fight. After that scene I stopped playing the game.

Then there are the menus that feel overly complicated. Maybe I'm just new to pc-gaming, but why does changing armor or making a potion need to be so hard? The combat isn't so good also.

I would like to hear of a game that you hated, but everybody else loved.

"Not very good" voice-acting? It's one of the best I've ever witnessed in 15+ years of gaming. Your standarts, mister, are too high. Make sure you compare the voice-acting with similar RPGs to TW2 - Skyrim and such, where the amount of dialogs is similar or even smaller.

Tris' CA-like voice? Your opinion. People who've never heard a person from CA in reality won't understand this very subjective "argument".

No true RPG has cutscene quality of a action- RPG/title. Don't expect too much, as this is a lot of work for the devs.

Combat? Try Combat Rebalance 2 mod created by one of the TW2 devs. It'll make things fluid and much more enjoyable.

TW2 has multiple flaws (quest marking system, stock combat, etc.) but it has so many positives that they severely outweight the negatives.

 

[Resetti's_Replicas]

Psychonauts. The mechanics are just so-so, and being able to only equip 3 powers at once was bloody annoying. Camera angles were some of the worst I'd ever had to deal with, as was aiming. The boss battle with Linda was extremely clunky, as was the Nightmare in the Milkman level. Raz is a borderline Mary Sue - unbelievably good at everything, unreactive to the bizarre stuff happening around him, and shallow as a dried-up lake.

 

[VodkaKnight]

Bioshock Infinite.
Obnoxious protagonist, predictable plot ending and twists, easily broken gameplay, most upgrades for vigors are either FAR too contextual or outright useless, and the weapons are standard at BEST.
No explanation for the presence of Vigors, how they work, why they need salts to function, or why they're better than Plasmids over 50 years before Plasmids were created, and why Columbia is so racist, though modern with gender politics.
Constantly recycled enemies, none of which use Vigors to any real extent, all enemies are standard regardless, with nearly all of them weak to the same Vigors (Undertow, Shock Jockey, and Charge).
The game is TOO EASY as well, even on the Hard difficulty.

 

[prpshrt]

Last of us. I dislike zombie games. Also Last of Us was also really cliched

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

I hate everything you love.

"But-"

EVERYTHING.

"But what about-"

EVERY. THING.

 

[Hero of Lime]

I won't say I hate these games, because they have good points or fairly large fan bases. For me it is Portal and Final Fantasy X. I don't hate Portal, I like the puzzles a lot, but I don't hold it to the high standard most other people do.

As for Final Fantasy X, I know it isn't the most popular in the series, but I tried to play it, but I found it boring and slow, and I usually have good patience for a slow RPG. Also the characters weren't very gripping to me, which I have heard is a strong point of the game.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

KOTOR. Not even a bad game, just undeserving of its cult like following, and its lofty placement in many "best of" lists. The combat engine was abysmal, the characters ranged from affable to dubious, there were numerous incidences of atrocious plot armor that destroyed the immersion, constantly recycling the same 2-3 lines of alien dialogue got old minutes in, and the much ballyhooed twist ending was M. Night Shyamalan quality hoodwinkery.

Just a rough, rough effort, more reminiscent of flawed but enjoyable titles like Jade Empire, Dragon Age 2, or Alpha Protocol than the RPG titans it often finds itself rubbing elbows with when people ruminate about their favorite games.