Speaking of games LRR did an LP of, there's one they played called Cursed Crusade for the PS3. Seemed pretty terrible. With checkpoints too far and few between and combat quickly becoming a massive slogfest, every death became almost tear inducing for me and I wasn't even playing it. Not only that, but it has one of the most disappointing endings I've ever seenLizmichi said:
Recommend me some REALLY BAD games.
- Thread starter scorptatious
- Start date
Just spend a couple months only playing Steam Early Access games and do not read anything but the title before deciding to play them. You may run across a hidden gem that's worth $60 but I really really doubt it as in by the time you are done experimenting you will stick to re-runs of Gilligan's island as your only source of entertainment beyond watching your front lawn grow and how many times your drool dripped while watching the lawn.
Oh I have. In fact, I have played the game before, but I've only beaten Sonic's story.Ieyke said:
Anyway, I like a lot of the suggestions. Gonna be tough to choose out of all of them. Thanks guys.
Dragon Ball Z: Ultimate Tenkaichi
Two Worlds
Resident Evil: Operation Racoon City
Red Steel
Devil May Cry 2
Just a few, not sure if anyone's mentioned those.
Two Worlds
Resident Evil: Operation Racoon City
Red Steel
Devil May Cry 2
Just a few, not sure if anyone's mentioned those.
Jumper. The movie tie-in game. That game truly sucked. On the plus side though, it's good for earning easy achievement points.
Too bad you dont have a 360 or I'd recommend "too human." That game is like AIDS and Cancer had a baby and named it "The Holocaust II." I'm sure any given movie tie in game will be worse than most games that are... you know... first and foremost games. Anything on a nintendo console not made by nintendo generally won't be good. Red Steel for the wii is one thing that comes to mind as really fucking bad since that was the big launch title that had everyone psyched to use the wiimote as a sword or gun and set the stage for the ensuing disappointment that the wii as a whole would continue to bring.
I don't find Infestation: Survivor Stories being that that bad anymore. At launch? Oh, absolutely. Today? Ehh...it's...passable. Just barely though. The game functions just fine, it's just...bland. Anything that is bad about the game doesn't even remotely compare with how bad that...other game was.Happiness Assassin said:
Well, I haven't bitched about Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness recently.
The absolute nadir of the series. It is layered with terrible controls, poor story, inane grimdark tone and stupid moments, like "increasing strength" by moving a large box so you can jump a bit further.
http://i.imgur.com/pJufP.gif
It is the gaming equivalent of this gif.
The absolute nadir of the series. It is layered with terrible controls, poor story, inane grimdark tone and stupid moments, like "increasing strength" by moving a large box so you can jump a bit further.
http://i.imgur.com/pJufP.gif
It is the gaming equivalent of this gif.
I'd say anything by Phoenix Games would work, TC, if what Caddicarus said about Dalmations 3 was right. (And he was!)
See for yourself [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKZQb-jH-7A]
See for yourself [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKZQb-jH-7A]
If you want a taste of bad gaming through history.
Play Duke Nukem Forever.
It will teach you the value of both modern an old school gameplay techniques, by completely fucking both of them up.
For example the non-lethal mine field type puzzle. In an old school game, you have to trade bullets for health.
With regenerating health you can just wait.
Your bullets are finite and valuable since you only have two weapons now.
End result you spend minutes sitting around like a putz watching a red screen.
From this you learn the calculus of a puzzle in a shooter, what situations a regenerating health system is less useful for, and that Gear Box are a bunch of ass holes who cannot make games that don't have the words Borderlands in them.
Play Duke Nukem Forever.
It will teach you the value of both modern an old school gameplay techniques, by completely fucking both of them up.
For example the non-lethal mine field type puzzle. In an old school game, you have to trade bullets for health.
With regenerating health you can just wait.
Your bullets are finite and valuable since you only have two weapons now.
End result you spend minutes sitting around like a putz watching a red screen.
From this you learn the calculus of a puzzle in a shooter, what situations a regenerating health system is less useful for, and that Gear Box are a bunch of ass holes who cannot make games that don't have the words Borderlands in them.
The Gameplay is GoodDexterity said:
The Story is Bad
Thus it is a Bad game. I cannot even finish the game because of the story. I returned L.A Noire because of its story. Story is just as important.
I tend to stay away from games that are generally considered to be broken or have a bad reputation, but Hopkins FBI is typically listed as one of the worst examples of the graphic adventure genre.
I absolutely disagree. Look at Bioshock the first one not Infinite cause I don't care much for Infinite. Bioshock the first game had Good Gameplay, but it also had a Good Story. There was no low quality in the first Bioshock game, it balanced good story and good gameplay out very well.Dexterity said:
I come from a RPG background, and to say that games without story is the basic build of a video game is wrong. RPGs aren't really RPGs without a story.
I play for story. Halo the first and second game, good story, good gameplay. I play for both. And I will look for both as a quality.
God of War good gameplay and good story. No lack of quality in the game.
So if a game has a bad story, and good gameplay then its still a bad game.
My counter argument is Story and Good Gameplay is what makes a game good.Dexterity said:
The reason why I liked Bioshock. Was not just because of the gameplay. It was because of the story. To this day is how you do a story in a FPS. An unexpected plot twist "Would you kindly" Something I hadn't even conceived or thought of. The story was unique, dark, and was rich with something I hadn't seen to this day. The gameplay was fun, but I remember the game because of the story.
The reason why I liked Halo. Was not just because of the gameplay. Again another game who went with an innovative story for its time. Especially in Halo 2. What I liked the most about Halo 2 was a game that finally took an FPS and went with the Alien's perspective, the aliens side of the story. That is unique.
Your argument was that if developers focused on better story in their games, that the quality of the games would be lowered. My counter argument was that there are games out there that balance story and gameplay.
There is a game I like, its called Jericho. A lot of people hate it because they said the game mechanics were clunky and crappy. I liked Jericho because once again it took the FPS genre into a unique genre. And it was a unique, interesting story, and take on the horror survival genre. Which is dead in the water.
The reason why I like F.E.A.R. is because of the story that haunts you throughout the game.
Good Story and Good Gameplay make a good game
Good Story and Bad Gameplay is a decent game [cause I liked Jericho and apparently it had bad gameplay]
Bad Story and Good Gameplay is a bad game
Bad Story and Bad Gameplay is a bad game
Wii port of Alone in the Dark.
...not much I can say about it, apart from it being the Wii port of the underwhelming Alone in the Dark.
Gesturing with the wiimote to open your big flasher's mac and thus access your inventory is a highlight. As are the sub N64 textures.
...not much I can say about it, apart from it being the Wii port of the underwhelming Alone in the Dark.
Gesturing with the wiimote to open your big flasher's mac and thus access your inventory is a highlight. As are the sub N64 textures.