Poorly Reviewed Games You Enjoyed

[The_Echo]

The Sly series gets mediocre reviews and I mostly adore it.

Sly... gets... mediocre reviews? Thieves in Time has the lowest Metacritic aggregate of the series, 75. (Personally, I think Honor Among Thieves better fits that score.)

People love Sly.

OT: I haven't enjoyed a poorly reviewed game. Generally, there's a reason they're reviewed poorly.

That said, Dirge of Cerberus got middling scores, but I thought it was pretty good. In the middle of replaying it after six or seven years, so maybe my opinion will change. But so far, I'm still digging it.

There's also Crash Bandicoot: The Wrath of Cortex, which I by no means think is a good game... but it's not bad either. (It's better than Spyro: Enter the Dragonfly, at least. Not that that's a big accomplishment.)

 

[Mrkillhappy]

Duke Nukem Forever, Bullet Witch and Postal 2 all incredibly buggy but I did enjoy them alot, okay BW wasn't buggy but clearly an orginal xbox title.

Hyperdimension Neptunia, possibly the strangest JRPG I've ever played... And I've played a lot of those.

Almost forgot this one, 1 of the few RPG's I actually enjoyed.

Same here I found the quirky nature of Hyperdimension entertaining. I also didn't hate Duke Nukem Forever though I don't really think of the game as being good but more entertainingly bad. Other games I liked were reservoir dogs though that was mostly due to my enjoyment for the movie.

 

[TaintedSaint]

Alpha Protocol was really good, fuck the haters.

Indeed Sir, that game was so underrated. I would love to see another crack at it but that will never happen.

 

[KOMega]

The reviews of Resonance of Fate were kinda all over the place.
Decided to buy it and play it anyways and I love it!
I think it's eaten up 100 hours by now according to the game timer.

 

[conmag9]

I see many people disliking Final Fantasy X, but I still consider it a personal favorite. Probably THE favorite, actually. Something about it...

 

[Valkrex]

Splatterhouse 2010.

I LOVED this game. It was a fun brawler, really stupid sense of humor, completely over-the-top gore, an amazing heavy-metal soundtrack that fit the game perfectly, and some EXTREMELY fun boss battles. For fans of the original, Biggy Man makes an appearance, and the fight against him is freaking EPIC! Sure the graphics were cell-shaded (like that matters), the load times were obnoxious, the first level kind of sucked, and the side-scrolling sections could be irritating, but I had a TON of fun with this game.

Not only did the game have a decent length for a brawler, took me about 9 hours first time through, it has a new-game+ option for those who want it, a good number of bonus challenge arenas, and you could unlock and play the original 3 sidescrolling Splatterhouse games.


Sure it had its issues, but it did NOT deserve the 4/10 that most reviewers gave it. I'd give it around a 7 or an 8 for a good time, a somewhat wacky pair of main characters, a story and feel that didn't take itself too seriously, a fantastic soundtrack, and some of the craziest gore ever.

 

[Brogan Cordova]

Fortune Street for the Wii.

Despite its flaws, it's the best Monopoly game ever released. Every previous Monopoly game has stayed as true to the original board game rules as possible, keeping the board square and the prices/rent/building costs set in stone. Fortune Street, however, takes full advantage of the fact it's a video game with multiple board shapes (and shifting ones too), the prices are digital and allow you to choose exactly how much to invest in each property, and all sorts of stuff like that.

On top of that, it offers other ways to acquire someone's property other than trading; if you land on it you can pay 5 times its value to forcedly buy it out and make it your own. It's a heavy hit, but it can help if you really need it. No more is your sole option to try and persuade players to trade properties with you or try to appeal to the AI. But you can if you want to.

And the AI are some of the most brutally challenging I've ever seen in a board game, in a good way. You really do feel like you've accomplished something every time you win.

Downsides: False advertising: in single-player and online multiplayer you are forced to play as your Mii, which you can customize with a large selection of outfits (most based on Dragon Quest and Mario). You can only play DQ and Mario characters in offline multiplayer. Another is Wii's ever-problematic online multiplayer, with very few people in North America to play with (though there is an international option) and it kicks EVERYONE out of a game the moment just one of them loses their connection.

Still, absolutely worth it for board game fans, and a must-have for Monopoly die-hards.

 

[Chryphex]

Legendary... If anyone even remembers it.

 

[Valkrex]

Legendary... If anyone even remembers it.

Ya know, I got that on a steam sale for a dollar. I still haven't touched it though seeing as I finally got into Dark Souls and that's been eating my life. I did see that Legendary got completely pasted by critics. Was that because it was a genuinely bad game, or was it because it was an FPS that wasn't Call of Duty?


captcha: easy as cake.


If only...

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Someone already mentioned it, but I really liked the Splatterhouse reboot. Yes, the game had some major bugs and the load times were atrocious, but I thought it was inspired how the game took a sort of H.P. Lovecraft (and specifically 'Re-animator') direction, and I loved having a action/adventure game where the emphasis is on hand to hand combat and insane brutality instead of weapons. Plus I loved how Rick got covered in blood during battles, just looked savage.

Second would be Dante's Inferno. Yes, it needed some play-testing and the last 3rd of the game was nowhere near as good as the first third (I'm looking at you 8th circle), but I thought they did an incredible job depicting Dante's Aligheri's version of hell, I liked the "Holy vs. Unholy" skill tree thing (and I liked the fact that you had to carefully choose your upgrades because there was no way you could max out all of them on a single playthrough), and I thought the game did a good job creating an atmosphere of "you are in a place where there is no hope and your chance of success is slim", while in, say, God of War, I never felt like Kratos might not succeed.

 

[Valkrex]

Someone already mentioned it, but I really liked the Splatterhouse reboot. Yes, the game had some major bugs and the load times were atrocious, but I thought it was inspired how the game took a sort of H.P. Lovecraft (and specifically 'Re-animator') direction, and I loved having a action/adventure game where the emphasis is on hand to hand combat and insane brutality instead of weapons. Plus I loved how Rick got covered in blood during battles, just looked savage.

Second would be Dante's Inferno. Yes, it needed some play-testing and the last 3rd of the game was nowhere near as good as the first third (I'm looking at you 8th circle), but I thought they did an incredible job depicting Dante's Aligheri's version of hell, I liked the "Holy vs. Unholy" skill tree thing (and I liked the fact that you had to carefully choose your upgrades because there was no way you could max out all of them on a single playthrough), and I thought the game did a good job creating an atmosphere of "you are in a place where there is no hope and your chance of success is slim", while in, say, God of War, I never felt like Kratos might not succeed.

Oh man, I completely forgot about Inferno. That game was a BLAST, and the visuals and atmosphere were great.

 

[Valkrex]

I am going to get sooooooo much flak for this.
Metroid Other M is one of my favorite games of all time. The game was thoroughly fun from start to finish, with a great and fluid combat system, epic boss battles, and fun environments. I enjoyed the story and found myself keep playing just to see the next twist and turn it was going to take. I also though Samus's characterization of a bounty hunter who has suffered from some emotional trauma from the events in her life to be very original and infinitely more interesting than just another action hero in power armor. The music was great and the atmosphere was very appropriate to the setting. It got me into the Metroid series, something every game of the Prime trilogy failed to do so.
Now it does have its flaws. I do agree Samus's voice actress needed work on her delivery and the switching perspective thing was annoying. But this was the first game in a while to be so much fun and interest me in the game's story and messages behind said stories than any game in recent memory.
Now let the hateful comments commence.

In terms of its gameplay I really liked Other M. To me the story, while it has some great ideas, REALLY messed up the game's potential. I understand that they wanted Samus to remain a bad-ass, wile also making her look more human.However, having a complete mental breakdown during the Ridley fight... good god. If it was the first time she'd seen him since her home was destroyed, then I could understand the freak out. But seeing as this takes place after Super Metroid, and she's killed him at least 6 times before hand... just no. That incident, coupled with countless others really ruined the story for me.

Gameplay was great, but the story really killed it for me.

As for the Prime Trilogy, those are some of my favorite games of all time, though I can definitely understand the immersion problem there.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

Alone in the Dark 2008. As a survival horror game it was what Resident Evil forgot it was. No. It played like Resident Evil never progress into an action title, but instead grew into a better survival horror game. It also features one of the best Lovecraftian stories ever told in a video game. Period.

That game was the shit, and its inventory system was innovative as fuck.

 

[TehCookie]

Every JRPG ever. If I remember correctly Game Informer gave Catherine a 6, and I love that game. Also Duke Nukem Forever, which was hated for being too old and cliche. I don't pay attention to reviews since a lot of the games I like review poorly while the next generic AAA game gets 10/10.

At least they give an honest review in the case of a Compile Heart, Gust, ect. game. You know money isn't inflating the score.

As a fan of those games, I like them to be judged by people who actually like/are knowledgeable about the genre rather than reviewers who complain about turn based combat and feminine protags.

 

[The White Hunter]

The Sly series gets mediocre reviews and I mostly adore it.

Sly... gets... mediocre reviews? Thieves in Time has the lowest Metacritic aggregate of the series, 75. (Personally, I think Honor Among Thieves better fits that score.)

People love Sly.

OT: I haven't enjoyed a poorly reviewed game. Generally, there's a reason they're reviewed poorly.

That said, Dirge of Cerberus got middling scores, but I thought it was pretty good. In the middle of replaying it after six or seven years, so maybe my opinion will change. But so far, I'm still digging it.

There's also Crash Bandicoot: The Wrath of Cortex, which I by no means think is a good game... but it's not bad either. (It's better than Spyro: Enter the Dragonfly, at least. Not that that's a big accomplishment.)

I know people love Sly, and here when the PS2 titles were knew they got a fair share of 6's for whatever reason. I can see why, the games are kinda buggy and often very easy. I do enjoy them a lot though.

Dirge of Cerberus is on the guilty pleasures list fo rme, I can see how it's terrible, I can see how a glitch that maxes out your level after the first stage is bad, but there's something weirdly fun about it.

The Crash game you mentioned, is that the first PS2 one? That isn't a bad game at all, it's not great but it's far from bad. Uninspired would be how I'd describe it. Enter The Dragonfly was just awful.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Every JRPG ever. If I remember correctly Game Informer gave Catherine a 6, and I love that game. Also Duke Nukem Forever, which was hated for being too old and cliche. I don't pay attention to reviews since a lot of the games I like review poorly while the next generic AAA game gets 10/10.

At least they give an honest review in the case of a Compile Heart, Gust, ect. game. You know money isn't inflating the score.

As a fan of those games, I like them to be judged by people who actually like/are knowledgeable about the genre rather than reviewers who complain about turn based combat and feminine protags.

I only trust a couple of reviewers/sites for them myself. RPG Fan usually gives the games a fair shake. The bigger publications do tend to be suspect.

 

[DarkRyter]

Shadow the Hedgehog was pretty fun.

 

[Zeckt]

I found Duke nukem forever to be decent and worth 2 playthroughs, and I am one of 2 people that bought the single player dlc and found out that that was particularly good.

I would honestly be surprised if anyone other then me here has played the DNF dlc ...

 

[Eggsnham]

Well, FarCry 3 might count for this.

Despite getting generally positive feedback from reviewers, there were still a lot of people who consistently shat upon it for various reason; some reasons more valid than others.

Still, I thought it was pretty goddamn awesome. If I can sneak up and into an enemy stronghold, stab a guy in the neck, and then release a starving and deadly tiger to wreak havoc on said enemies, then I generally consider it to be good.

It had relatively little replay value and the online was a flop, but I still had a great time playing through it.