Cult classics (or "underrated games") that you found underwhelming.

[Ratty]

Then there's Eternal Darkness...I didn't like Eternal Darkness. I made it through a couple of levels and, saw a few of the more interesting sanity effects but it just couldn't stay interested long enough to want to see it through to the...midpoint.

I couldn't get into Killer 7 either but honestly, I only gave it about 2 hours. I may like it if I gave it more time but I had other things to play at the time.

I've watched a full Let's Play of Eternal Darkness, and clearly I'm not going to have the same experience as playing it; but it feels like there's a lot implied complexity that didn't quite work out. Insanity effects really are a bit tame compared to the mindfuck some make it out to be. But then again the kind of mindfuck I'm thinking of would probably make quite an annoying and tiresome game, but one that specifically I would love.

I'd say the biggest problem with Eternal Darkness for me is that it's not scary, at all.
By halfway into the game you can usually just walk around in one of many empty and completely safe rooms to refill your mana, then cast HP and sanity healing spells until you're completely healed. Then there's the lack of tank controls and the focus on melee weapons. Which means you can run circles around most enemies and there's almost no concern about conserving ammo, which makes the zombies a joke.

Plus it becomes evident pretty quickly that the "play as different characters" gimmick is really just an excuse for them to re-use the same 4 or so levels upwards of 3 times each with small aesthetic changes.
I think the game earned its reputation because in 2002 most people still hadn't heard of Lovecraft's work, and this pastiche on the Cthulhu Mythos blew people's minds.

PS- I should probably mention that, while I generally consider myself a fan of them, I don't find Lovecraft's works very scary either. Because a lot of the horror is based on the protagonist going "Oh God! On a cosmic scale mankind and all its works are meaningless!" Which is something I accepted a long time ago as an existential nihilist.

 

[RJ 17]

If you're playing an "underrated" game and you find it to be "underwhelming"....doesn't that mean that it's "spot-on rated" for lack of a better term?

Sorry, I'm just having trouble getting what you're looking here. "Games that most people think are crap and you think they're crap too"?

I can't fathom how people are so afraid of anything telling them they aren't perfect little snowflakes or giving them the opportunity to prove it to themselves and pat themselves on the back that it somehow becomes someone else's "fault".

Welcome to Today's Society! Where a couple years ago a youth soccer league in Ottawa implemented a rule stating that if your team is winning by 5 points you automatically forfeit the game! And don't worry, we've stopped using red ink to grade homework and tests in school because red apparently hurts the child's precious little feelings...even though "You're a fucking moron, Timmy, 2+2 doesn't equal 22" reads the same in both red and purple. Thanks for stopping by! Oh! And don't forget to pick up your participation trophy just for showing up!

 

[Uriel_Hayabusa]

If you're playing an "underrated" game and you find it to be "underwhelming"....doesn't that mean that it's "spot-on rated" for lack of a better term?

Sorry, I'm just having trouble getting what you're looking here.

I thought I'd made it clear enough in my opening post but I'll try again:

I'm referring to games that don't sell particularly well and aren't very popular but nonetheless have small(er), extremely devoted fanbases that love to proselytize about their (supposed) greatness.

To make a movie director analogy: Edgar Wright's movies don't perform nearly as well at the box-office as, say, Michael Bay's; but go on the right internet forums and you'll find people talking about how awesome Wright's movies are and how they should be much more popular. Edgar Wright's fans would, in this context, call his work "underrated".

 

[veloper]

If you're playing an "underrated" game and you find it to be "underwhelming"....doesn't that mean that it's "spot-on rated" for lack of a better term?

Sorry, I'm just having trouble getting what you're looking here.

I thought I'd made it clear enough in my opening post but I'll try again:

I'm referring to games that don't sell particularly well and aren't very popular but nonetheless have small(er), extremely devoted fanbases that love to proselytize about their (supposed) greatness.

To make a movie director analogy: Edgar Wright's movies don't perform nearly as well at the box-office as, say, Michael Bay's; but go on the right internet forums and you'll find people talking about how awesome Wright's movies are and how they should be much more popular. Edgar Wright's fans would, in this context, call his work "underrated".

The word "ignored" fits better.

Apart from Alpha Protocol, the games mentioned here sofar as "cult classics", all received very favorable ratings from the small critics and mainstream reviewers alike.
It's just that the consumers didn't go out and by these games in droves, despite all the game mag recommendations.

Cult classics: possibly overrated and largely ignored.

I get what you mean through, but I just love to be that guy.

 

[Batou667]

I'm so cynical that I rarely fall for hype and, if anything, tend to be pleasantly surprised by games.

One "cult classic" that I was sure I'd like, but didn't, was Scott Pilgrim vs The World: The Game. I'm too old to find pseudo-16 bit graphics novel (anybody who describes that game as having "8-bit graphics!" needs to seriously brush up on their game history) and not enough of a hipster to sit there clapping my hands in glee at the nonsensical plot. The combat was dull and sluggish, all the enemies health bars were twice as long as they ought to be, and the game just spectacularly failed to "capture" me. Meh.

I didn't much like the film either, so that's two for two.

 

[SKBPinkie]

90% of these cult classic titles have terrible / subpar gameplay.

So pretty much all of them are boring to me. Except that the writing, characters, and stories are pretty good. But in that case, I'd rather watch a playthrough of one of them on YouTube, instead of having to slog through awful gameplay.

 

[maconlon439]

My Brother once got me the game The Longest Journey: Dreamfall and I thought it was Okay. I got The Longest Journey afterwards because I heard many good things about it and I hate having played part 2 without part 1. Both games were good but underwhelming. Nowhere near worth the amount of praise I got from the adventure gaming community.

 

[Nazulu]

Unfortunately I have to say Morrowind. I really wanted to like it, I really did. The slow movement and remembering which is where and where is what didn't bother me (probably because I heard before hand), and even getting killed by the first enemy I ran into and constantly attacked by cliff racers after didn't tick me off.

No, it was that the game felt uneventful and that all the quests just seemed like chores with no imagination really in it. I'm sure there are much better ones that were lying around somewhere or come in later, but I just couldn't push myself to continue any further. It had all my optimism but managed to suck it away.

So I reckon Skyrim is the best in the series now I've played them all, but that doesn't mean it does not have many problems up the ass!

 

[regalphantom]

The Disgaea games. They weren't bad, but they aren't worth the praise some people give them. I feel like they are trying to hard to be 'weird and funny' and it feels more forced than organic, and its far too grindy for the sake of being grindy.