Games you consider overrated

[Unchained_M]

Final Fantasy 7, Newer Castlevanias, Call of Chuthulu Dark Corners of the Earth, Mw3 or BF3... The list goes on.

 

[LookingGlass]

Modern RPGs. I have so much more fun (and for so much longer) with the isometric-era classics than any of the "3D-era" RPGs, with the lone exception of Morrowind. And that's a nostalgia-free view, because I've played the older RPGs recently and for the first time.

I can understand the progression to the more accessible RPGs we have today though. A game like say, Arcanum, isn't going to sell a ton of units. It just isn't for everyone. But if it's for you, you fucking love it.


Also, if Skyward Sword doesn't get really good, really fast, it's shooting to the top of this list. So many good reviews, including 9.5s and 10s, and it's far and away the worst Zelda game I've played so far, a couple of hours in.

 

[JasonBurnout16]

Half-Life 2. I know alot people like it (I?m getting pretty tired of constantly hearing people whining about valve not making Half-life 3) but I just vehemently hated it when I played it.

Yer I'm playing through it at the moment, and while it's a good game I'm not getting why so many people are so hung up over it. Solid game, but nothing special.

Bioshock as well, to a certain extent. While I really enjoyed bioshock and it is easily one of the best games I have played, people seem to put it forth as some sort of messiah of gaming, while totally overlooking it's flaws.

 

[Avalanche91]

Skyrim (personally I am not fond of any bethesda game)
Final Fantasy
Dragon Age 2
GTA IV (San Andreas was awesome though)
Half Life, Halo, Call of Duty (I'm just not fond of shooters I guess)
and much to my own disappointment Zelda Skyward Sword.

 

[370999]

Fallout: New Vegas.

I suppose it's an acquired taste, but that game was just plain old depressing, boring and bugged as anything.

Can I ask you what you mean by depressing? Like not reaching your expectations or the world being bleak?

 

[DoctorObviously]

Trine: I absolutely hate this f*cking game. I'm sorry, but an action game with puzzles? Fine.
A 2D platformer with puzzles WITH physics? F*CK THAT.

Magicka: I have no problem with friendly fire. I do have a problem when the game is designed I can only complete it with 'friends'.

Dragon Age: Origins: I have a review on GameSpot somewhere but I can't seem to find it right now. Anyways, I hated it.

GTA IV: Same.

 

[mayney93]

half life, its just not that good, half life 2 especially, thought it was pretty meh tbh

 

[Neaco]

Halo.

The story and gameplay just feel generic, there's nothing that sets it apart from the next Space Marine FPS.

i think the part that sets it apart was when there were no other Space Marine FPS games available ie When it was released.

 

[TerribleAssassin]

Halo.

The story and gameplay just feel generic, there's nothing that sets it apart from the next Space Marine FPS.

i think the part that sets it apart was when there were no other Space Marine FPS games available ie When it was released.

Yes, but now there are loads of them and there's nothing majorly outstanding from them all.

 

[Treblaine]

I presume you object to other emotional manipulation by works of fiction? Do you not like any drama or tension in games, books and film? Would it be better if the Little Sisters were replaced with just something like emotionally neutral like a ball of light. yet at the same time it has to have meaning that Little Sisters supposedly lack.

So it has to be meaningful yet without much emotional significance.

As you can see, you can't get away with dissing my favourite game without your logic being challenged, you are contradicting yourself or asking for a game of cold rational significance.

I don't object to emotional manipulation. I don't like it when it's so obvious. I don't like it when they use little kids or cute animals that most people are obviously going to care about. I also don't like it when you're given a choice between two extreme options of either saving her or killing her.

I would have preferred it if either you were asked to care about characters that have a bit more development so you like them because of their personality or their backstory instead of just their appearance, or if the choices you were given concerning the characters weren't so extreme. How about making the Little Sisters look more like mutated monsters and less like little girls so that your attachment to them is more based on their backstory and development rather than physical appearance? How about instead of immediately having to choose between either saving or killing the first Little Sister you meet, you have a choice of either curing her or keeping her that way so they could gather more ADAM for you? How about adding some elements to give more credence to Atlas's assertion that the Little Sisters aren't really humans anymore?

And how did I "diss" your favorite game?

There is A LOT in between Blade Runner and the worst sci-fi. It is't really saying much to say that it's too much to say it's up there with Blade Runner. It's like saying "Well, it's not Citizen Kane".

Except the whole point of this topic is about games that people think are overrated. If everyone else thinks that this game is as great as Blade Runner and I don't, then that means I think it's overrated. If every critic gives a game a 10/10 and I think it deserves a 9/10 then that means I think it's overrated.

"I didn't do that for my complaints against..."

So far you've hardly even complained, you've just stated and reaffirmed your personal opinion... for all it is worth.

I'm not expecting an essay, 5 or 6 bullet points would do with brief issues. If you can't even do that I'd have to wonder if you have any genuine criticisms to give or if Bioshock and other games simply aren't to your personal tastes. I mean I don't like girly rom-com but they aren't exactly targeted at me, maybe if Fallout 3 and bioshock aren't your think maybe this is like selling NASCAR to a Formula 1 fan

So you don't judge games based on personal opinion? You have carefully standardized measures and operationalized terms with which to weigh the worthiness of a game objectively? You use the scientific method to judge a game and submit it for peer review?

Of course, my complaints are based on personal opinion. I don't like it when a story uses such transparent methods to manipulate me emotionally but I'm sure there are plenty of people who don't mind. After all, movies like "Patch Adams" and "Avatar" have done extremely well in the box office.

The move toward more realism and a more serious(depressing) story in GTA IV created too much of a disconnect with the previous GTA games for me to like it as much as the other games. The "heaviness" of the controls compared to previous games also hurt my enjoyment.

FO3 abandoning the more realistic and logical elements of the franchise in favor of the wackier elements made it much less of a Fallout game to me. Sure it was still fun, but it lacked the substance of previous games.

In the case of GTA IV and FO3, it's not a matter of selling NASCAR to a Formula 1 fan since they're the ones who changed the formula from previous games. It's more like if NASCAR suddenly became Formula 1 for no reason and they expected their former fans to just follow along.

Ok, but you forgot the third option: leave them. Don't either Rescue or Harvest any Little Sisters. You have that option but you'll have to scrape by on very few plasmids, the few you get for free. I have seen speedruns of bioshock where no little-sisters are harvested nor rescued.

And what would you propose as a middle ground between either greedily taking all the Adam and killing them or taking a little and saving them. Many choices DO boil down to such an extreme binary decision in REAL life. Buy or sell. Run or fight. Invest or spend.

Look, with such a free game as Bioshock where you can run around and look anywhere most of the time you can't afford to be subtle, it has to be obvious and added to that it is profound and iconic.

"How about making the Little Sisters look more like mutated monsters"

They hardly look like Shirley Temple as it is, is it that they look in ANY way like a little girl that is the problem? If it was an ewok that tried to tell you its life story and connect with you in a one-sided conversation that is just obtuse and ineffective. The whole game of bioshock is violently killing men and women, the Little Sisters have to be something the average person would instantly connect with as vulnerable. A child is that but not a lovely child, but a creepy zombie one, so it's not THAT obvious.

Also the little sisters are part of the artistic vision of juxtaposition; a little girl escorted by a walking tank resembling a giant armoured diving suit is part of the Rapture vision, it is totally consistent and if you don't like that that's like objecting to Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks being cast in a romantic-comedy... maybe you just shouldn't be watching a romantic comedy. Maybe you shouldn't be playing Bioshock.


"How about adding some elements to give more credence to Atlas's assertion that the Little Sisters aren't really humans anymore?"

Uhh, because there ISN'T ANY more creedence to the assertion they aren't human any more! I hope you have finished Bioshock and you know the whole deal with Atlas, then you'll understand why he says what he says, you are told everything about the Little Sisters and it's up to you decide what to do and ultimately there is no ambiguity, they ARE little children its just others may like to delude themselves otherwise for personal gain.

"you have a choice of either curing her or keeping her that way so they could gather more ADAM for you?"

Pay ATTENTION when you play these games! Number 1, Little Sisters will only gather Adam for their Big Daddies, they are psychologically programmed to be that way, they will not collect Adam for Jack. Number 2, this IS done in the Sequel, Bioshock 2, as you actually play as a Big Daddy so this is possible.

If every critic gives a game a 10/10 and I think it deserves a 9/10 then that means I think it's overrated.

You don't seem to understand statistics, as critics are never that consistent, even if the average score rounds up to 10/10 a significant proportion will still give it a 9/10 and some even give it an 8/10, a personal 9/10 score would be well within the range that found the average. Individual scores are worthless anyway, only in aggregate because of personal inaccuracy in quantifying their judgement of a game, and THEN said metascore is only worth anything RELATIVE to other games and it doesn't mean anything about its true reception, only the overall reception of a minority of people; games journalists.

"So you don't judge games based on personal opinion?"

I did not say that.

I say you SHOULD judge based on personal opinion but that MUST be backed up with reason to let us know if your opinion is a genuine criticism or if it comes from prejudice. If a food critics says "I hated the dessert" but failed to clarify that they don't like ANY ice cream which was the desert then it's quite a worthless opinion as it says nothing about the quality of the food, just the critic's personal tastes. Or something like saying an ice cream is too creamy when the entire point of ice-cream is to be creamy and most people order it for that.

You still need to clarify your opinions of Bioshock to give them any weight.

One thing that would help is instead of moaning about what you don't like tell me what you like. If you say Top-down RPG games with very deep character c

"It's more like if NASCAR suddenly became Formula 1 for no reason and they expected their former fans to just follow along."

So you've pretty much admitted it is a NASCAR vs Formula 1 type of difference in taste but you are putting the blame on the developers for changing with the sequels rather than just appreciating each game by itself for what it IS... rather than what you want it to be. Looking at the games for what they actually are, are they really over-rated?

Bioshock is what it is, most of the "it's over-rated" accusations I hear come from those who have the idea that Bioshock should be something that it simply is not and never intended to be.

 

[Raika]

Catherine comes immediately to mind for being a poorly written, poorly designed puzzle game that proves once again that Japan just hates women(shocker). Another equally execrable, equally Japanese, equally overpraised monstrosity would be the absolutely horrendous, unforgivable hellscape that was The World Ends with You, which I consider to be the worst game of this generation by a considerable margin and, notably, is headlined by the single worst video game character of all time. There's also The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword to consider; it's just kind of sad to see slobbering Nintendo fanboys chomping at the bit to defend something like this.

That's just from recent memory, though. My pick for the most overrated game of all time is Final Fantasy VI, a slightly above-average game with a fan base consisting almost exclusively of people who try to pitch it by explaining why its successor, Final Fantasy VII, is the worst game ever made. This leads me to believe that the vast majority(or at least the vocal majority) of the Final Fantasy VI fan base is comprised of "noncomformist" little kids who will oppose anything that they think is popular, because they want to look cool to their friends on the internet.


Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't say what you wanted me to say, did I? Let me rectify that.


*ahem*


OMG CALL OF DTUY IZ SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OVERRTED OMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMG IM THE ONLY PRSON WHO DSNT THNKI ITS DA BETS GAEM EVRR!!!111!1!1!1!

 

[USSR]

Mostly Half-Life.
I just don't understand the mass amounts of love |:

 

[Iwata]

Freelancer.

I'm still fairly certain the main reason people gush over this massive letdown of a game is because they don't know it's a sequel to a much, MUCH better game, Starlancer.

 

[AgentNein]

oops, double post.

 

[AgentNein]

*snip*

This is a thread specifically made for people to share what games they think are overrated. Lord knows threads like annoy the crap out of me. The negativity and the trolls baiting...

BUT I mean, that's the thread. That's the nature of this thread. He doesn't think Bioshock was all it was cracked up to be. Hell, I agree. There was for one, a lot of big talk about this whole morality system with the little sisters, but in the end it's fairly boring the way it's implemented. You can tell me that the real world has binary choice making all the time, or how there's not really much room with the little sisters for anything other than a binary choice, but I'll still think that it was weak sauce. Black and white choices in gaming has been done to death, and when the game actually rewards you in equal measure for either choice (albeit with the altruistic choice having a delayed reward) then there's no weight to it at all.

I would've actually liked it if you were heavily penalized for not harvesting. For one, it would be a difficulty control emerging organically from the game. For two, it would add real temptation to make the 'wrong' choice. I had no temptation to harvest cuz I realized pretty quickly that I'd be hooked up sooner or later for saving them. But if the game was getting harder and harder to get through? Yeah I'd definitely be tempted to follow the dark side. That'd be interesting for me, because it would actually mirror why people make such choices in the real world a lot of the time. Because the 'wrong' choice may give you an easier road than the 'right' choice.

This isn't even mentioning the whole respawn mechanic which broke the game for me. Completely ruined the tension of preparing and implementing a blitz on big daddys when I realized I'd be spawned again with no real penalty, and having to manually load my last save every time I died (cuz that's how I wanted to play) was a chore.

But blah blah, I digress. The point is this guy is using this thread as it was intended. He's backing up his issues with the game, whether you find his backup valid or not. Maybe you simply shouldn't wander into one of these threads if criticism of one of your favorite games would bother you so much?

 

[Jazoni89]

One Word...

Minecraft

Seriously, what the hell is up with the popularity of this game, it perplexes me, it really does.

It has ugly and lazy graphics, and I'm not what you call a graphic whore, I still play early psone games.

It has the worst example of skinner's box Gameplay ever (which boils down to pretty much, mine this, and that, and build stuff), and considering how many people bash World of Warcraft for that sort of thing, it's ridiculous, because at least that game has an objective and goals to aspire to. What are you going to do with your spiral tower you made that took you forever to build, nothing that's what.

The guy who made it (Notch) is a complete and utter tool, and he has pretty much abandoned updating it in favour for another crappy game. If it had a few more updates to improve the half finished game mechanics, I might of bought the game.

 

[KingofMadCows]

Ok, but you forgot the third option: leave them. Don't either Rescue or Harvest any Little Sisters. You have that option but you'll have to scrape by on very few plasmids, the few you get for free. I have seen speedruns of bioshock where no little-sisters are harvested nor rescued.

And what would you propose as a middle ground between either greedily taking all the Adam and killing them or taking a little and saving them. Many choices DO boil down to such an extreme binary decision in REAL life. Buy or sell. Run or fight. Invest or spend.

Look, with such a free game as Bioshock where you can run around and look anywhere most of the time you can't afford to be subtle, it has to be obvious and added to that it is profound and iconic.

"How about making the Little Sisters look more like mutated monsters"

http://images.wikia.com/bioshock/images/c/cd/BS2LittleSister.jpeg

They hardly look like Shirley Temple as it is, is it that they look in ANY way like a little girl that is the problem? If it was an ewok that tried to tell you its life story and connect with you in a one-sided conversation that is just obtuse and ineffective. The whole game of bioshock is violently killing men and women, the Little Sisters have to be something the average person would instantly connect with as vulnerable. A child is that but not a lovely child, but a creepy zombie one, so it's not THAT obvious.

Also the little sisters are part of the artistic vision of juxtaposition; a little girl escorted by a walking tank resembling a giant armoured diving suit is part of the Rapture vision, it is totally consistent and if you don't like that that's like objecting to Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks being cast in a romantic-comedy... maybe you just shouldn't be watching a romantic comedy. Maybe you shouldn't be playing Bioshock.


"How about adding some elements to give more credence to Atlas's assertion that the Little Sisters aren't really humans anymore?"

Uhh, because there ISN'T ANY more creedence to the assertion they aren't human any more! I hope you have finished Bioshock and you know the whole deal with Atlas, then you'll understand why he says what he says, you are told everything about the Little Sisters and it's up to you decide what to do and ultimately there is no ambiguity, they ARE little children its just others may like to delude themselves otherwise for personal gain.

"you have a choice of either curing her or keeping her that way so they could gather more ADAM for you?"

Pay ATTENTION when you play these games! Number 1, Little Sisters will only gather Adam for their Big Daddies, they are psychologically programmed to be that way, they will not collect Adam for Jack. Number 2, this IS done in the Sequel, Bioshock 2, as you actually play as a Big Daddy so this is possible.

If every critic gives a game a 10/10 and I think it deserves a 9/10 then that means I think it's overrated.

You don't seem to understand statistics, as critics are never that consistent, even if the average score rounds up to 10/10 a significant proportion will still give it a 9/10 and some even give it an 8/10, a personal 9/10 score would be well within the range that found the average. Individual scores are worthless anyway, only in aggregate because of personal inaccuracy in quantifying their judgement of a game, and THEN said metascore is only worth anything RELATIVE to other games and it doesn't mean anything about its true reception, only the overall reception of a minority of people; games journalists.

"So you don't judge games based on personal opinion?"

I did not say that.

I say you SHOULD judge based on personal opinion but that MUST be backed up with reason to let us know if your opinion is a genuine criticism or if it comes from prejudice. If a food critics says "I hated the dessert" but failed to clarify that they don't like ANY ice cream which was the desert then it's quite a worthless opinion as it says nothing about the quality of the food, just the critic's personal tastes. Or something like saying an ice cream is too creamy when the entire point of ice-cream is to be creamy and most people order it for that.

You still need to clarify your opinions of Bioshock to give them any weight.

One thing that would help is instead of moaning about what you don't like tell me what you like. If you say Top-down RPG games with very deep character c

"It's more like if NASCAR suddenly became Formula 1 for no reason and they expected their former fans to just follow along."

So you've pretty much admitted it is a NASCAR vs Formula 1 type of difference in taste but you are putting the blame on the developers for changing with the sequels rather than just appreciating each game by itself for what it IS... rather than what you want it to be. Looking at the games for what they actually are, are they really over-rated?

Bioshock is what it is, most of the "it's over-rated" accusations I hear come from those who have the idea that Bioshock should be something that it simply is not and never intended to be.

OK, you're just twisting my arguments and focusing on the little details rather than the basic reasoning behind what I'm saying.

I've played BioShock and I know the story, I understand why you can't let the Little Sisters harvest ADAM for you and I know that Atlas is the main villain, but that's not the point. The point is that the story could have been written in such a way where you are offered less extreme choices concerning what to do with the Little Sisters. They could have also written Atlas in such a way that his lies are less transparent.

Also, you keep making false dichotomy fallacies. Just because the Little Sisters is not more adorable than Bambi, Woodstock, Winnie the Pooh, Nemo, and Tweety put together does not mean they're suddenly horrifying to look at. They may not be on the level of Kirby or Yoshi but they're at least the equivalent of Sackboy or Nordom. Just because I want characters that I can connect with because of their personality or backstory does not mean I want to hear a ten minute monologue about a character's life story.

And yes, there are many extreme choices in real life but how can you possibly compare buying something and not buying something to killing someone and not killing someone? That's an obvious false equivalence fallacy.

And you're completely missing the point of the thread. This is a thread about games that people think are overrated. Do you know what that word means? It does not necessarily mean games that everyone else likes but you hate. It could simply mean games that everyone else loves but you like a bit less.

Notice how I never actually said that I dislike or hate BioShock, Fallout 3, and GTA IV. I like those games. I like BioShock for its gameplay, atmosphere, fun weapons, and interesting enemies. However, I do not find the story to be as good as other people say it is and that is why I think it's overrated.

As for appreciating a game for what the developers intended it to be, how is the audience supposed to know what exactly the developers intended the game to be, especially if it deviates from previous games in the franchise? If Terminator 5 was made into a crime drama, are you going to be able to appreciate it for what the director intended it to be and completely ignore previous movies in the franchise? And how do you know any problem in a game, with the exception of glitches and bugs, wasn't the intention of the developer? The controls are terrible? Well, that's what the developer intended and if you can't appreciate that kind of control, maybe the game isn't for you. This comedic film wasn't funny? Well, that's what the director intended and if you don't get that kind of humor, then the movie isn't for you. Is there any time when "Looking at the games for what they actually are, are they really over-rated?" can't be used as an excuse for problems in a game?

 

[Gitty101]

Battlefield series - it can be fun at times but there is nothing that I'd call truly spectacular when compared to all the other 'realistic military shooters' out there. Actually, add all the COD titles past World at War to the list as well, just to be fair.

 

[Treblaine]

*snip*

This is a thread specifically made for people to share what games they think are overrated. Lord knows threads like annoy the crap out of me. The negativity and the trolls baiting...

BUT I mean, that's the thread. That's the nature of this thread. He doesn't think Bioshock was all it was cracked up to be. Hell, I agree. There was for one, a lot of big talk about this whole morality system with the little sisters, but in the end it's fairly boring the way it's implemented. You can tell me that the real world has binary choice making all the time, or how there's not really much room with the little sisters for anything other than a binary choice, but I'll still think that it was weak sauce. Black and white choices in gaming has been done to death, and when the game actually rewards you in equal measure for either choice (albeit with the altruistic choice having a delayed reward) then there's no weight to it at all.

I would've actually liked it if you were heavily penalized for not harvesting. For one, it would be a difficulty control emerging organically from the game. For two, it would add real temptation to make the 'wrong' choice. I had no temptation to harvest cuz I realized pretty quickly that I'd be hooked up sooner or later for saving them. But if the game was getting harder and harder to get through? Yeah I'd definitely be tempted to follow the dark side. That'd be interesting for me, because it would actually mirror why people make such choices in the real world a lot of the time. Because the 'wrong' choice may give you an easier road than the 'right' choice.

This isn't even mentioning the whole respawn mechanic which broke the game for me. Completely ruined the tension of preparing and implementing a blitz on big daddys when I realized I'd be spawned again with no real penalty, and having to manually load my last save every time I died (cuz that's how I wanted to play) was a chore.

But blah blah, I digress. The point is this guy is using this thread as it was intended. He's backing up his issues with the game, whether you find his backup valid or not. Maybe you simply shouldn't wander into one of these threads if criticism of one of your favorite games would bother you so much?

Hey I'm not saying he can't share his opinion, I'm just saying he SHOULD elaborate on his opinion to give it any kind of discussion value.

It's nice to speculate on what would have worked better... but what if the developer didn't feel like hugely punishing the player FOR NOT BEING A CHILD MURDERER! The game is EXTREMELY hard without the ADAM you get from rescuing just a few little sisters, maybe Ken Levine didn't want to have said about him "Hey, you made that game where you are FORCED to kill children". Doesn't that kind of support objectivism? That it is right and proper to be selfish?

Being FORCED to harvest the little sisters because the game is just too hard, that isn't a moral choice. You aren't trying to balance your greed against your empathy. You are just trying to survive. And greed, the selfishness for personal excellence, that DEFINES objectivism! What could be a more poignant example of selfishness than to kill a child not for survival but to simply be better.

The lesson with the little sisters is the folly of Objectivism's selfish ideal, that empathy and altruism need not lead to ruin but can be rewarded and you will find yourself doing almost as well but have a greater non-material reward. The decisions DO have weight but they are not weighted in loot and material gain, but in emotional significance.

That's why I think a lot of people may say Bioshock is over-rated, they are simply under-appreciating the significance of the aspects of it. I think part of that is the ending, the ending could have reaffirmed this point but it kinda failed in that.

PS; complaining about vita-chambers is like complaining about inverted look or aim assist; you can turn it off in the option menu. I kept it on simply because it sped up loading after dying.

 

[AgentNein]

PS; complaining about vita-chambers is like complaining about inverted look or aim assist; you can turn it off in the option menu. I kept it on simply because it sped up loading after dying.

Seriously? I had no idea I could turn that crap off. Wow.

You do make some good points here, never saw the Little Sister thing in that light.