The 5 Most Dissapointing Games of 2011

[vrbtny]

Apologies for the clone-thread. After posting this thread a user linked me to the original thread. I apologize for this oversight, I honestly don't know how that thread escaped me.... might have had something to do with all the wine during Christmas lunch. But this post does contain my thoughts on the subject, so please read it. Of course, feel free to rage at me for copying someone-elses thread. It would only be just.


5 : Homefront

Homefront could have been something. Homefront could have been awesome. Homefront could have been the Red Dawn of videogames. Instead, we got a insanely frustrating, cut-price Call of Duty : Apocalype Edition. The hideously short, 5-hour campaign could have been amazing. It could have spun a epic tale of surviving in a richly-painted post-invasion American, populated by charimastic survivors who each had individual tales to tell. Instead, we got a John Connor as played by Van Kilmer clone, a generic white chick, and any black Sergeant as seen in every movie since Predator.

4 : A Game of Thrones : Genesis

The idea of a Rome : Total War-esque game set in the vast lands of A Song Of Ice And Fire had the potential to be amazing. Epic and sweeping as the first three-and-a-half books of the book series. The lands of A Song Of Ice And Fire are as big, and as detailed as J.R.R Tolkiens Lord of the Rings, and there is no place finer to set a world-sweeping strategy game.

Now, if the game had been done by the team behind the Total War and Medieval series, the game would have no doubt been awesome. Unfortunately, the game was not made by that team.

The game was littered with bugs, glitches, and poor design choices. Battle should be epic and sweeping, instead they are not. They are one of the infinately most frustrating and unfulfilling battles ever to exist in a strategy game.

3 : Duke Nukem Forever

The reason that this game does not chalk in at number one is that I really was not surprised by how bad this game was. What surprised me more was that people were genuinely expecting this game to be good. How can a game, which has suffered so many publisher, developer and engine changes as Duke Nukem Forever ever be good? Despite the fact that this game had been in development for 12 years, in reality it must have only had a year at most to full develop on the latest engine.

Duke Nukem Forever's flaws cannot solely be blamed on the engine change. The script could have been updated fully at least once since 1999. Instead we are left with a script riddled with politically incorrect jokes and crassness which would suit the 1990's, but no the modern world. The only way you can tell this game is at all released in the 21st century is the regenerating health, 2-weapon limit which in enforced throughout the game, in direct contrast to the tone of the game and its heritage. Along with a couple of jokes which are supposed to poke fun at the gaming culture since the turn of the century. Just a shame the jokes are not funny.

2 : Rage

Rage was a game with promise and pedigree. It was made by id software, the development team who crafted gaming as we know it today. The problem that Rage seems to suffer from is that id software seem very reluctant to leave the gameplay of the original quake behind. As a result Rage has health packs....and regenerating health. Which is incredibly incongurous. The only game that I have ever seen the dual health system implemented is Metro 2033 and it was damn weird in that game too. Id software have also failed to keep up-to-date with the storytelling side of gaming in the last 20 years.

Rage's story was a insane disappointment. It was unoroginal, and told very poorly, with barely any memorable events. I can always remember playing Fallout 3 and emerging from the vault for the first time, blinking in the sunlight. Then I saw the landscape which spread out before me and I remember saying, ?Holy Shit. This is Epic.? Rage fails to have any moments like that. It fails to make anything memorable.

What made Rage a real dissapointment though, was the hideous bugs and glitches which the game shipped with. A lot of PC games could hardly play the game when it was released, and the subsequent patches healed some of the problems, it still prevented from making the game cream-smooth.

When it worked though, Id's much trumpeted MegaTextures failed to deliver on their many promises. It looked like any other game, nothing special where there really should have been.

1 : Dragon Age II

Dragon Age : Origins was a epic game. And I utilize that word in its proper use. Dragon Age : Origins was a epic, sweeping game. Accompanied by a epic, sweeping story. Which let you go off and explore the world, venturing around cities and into dungeons, clubbing orcs and stabbing goblins. Gathering a squad of fantasy charters which were a mix between familiarly-generic and wonderfully original. Each with deep back stories and much characterization. All topped off with a titanic encounter with Dragon.

Dragon Age II gave us none of the above. The story was patchy and dull, which stuttered and stopped. Nothing memorable, nothing which hadn't been done before. None of the story flowed, and randomly skipped years whenever the story might have got interesting. The characters were all-right, but none as deep or as memorable as the ones from Dragon Age : Origins.

The game felt lazy and rushed, with as much time saved by the developers as they could. No engine change, nothing changed. All the character customisation was near identical, and the graphics showed no improvement.

Dragon Age II had the heritage and the developer to be amazing. Hell, it should have been amazing. It wasn't, I don't know why. I don't know why it was rushed out before it was a proper game, maybe it was something to do with EA being the publisher. I don't know, but something made it suck when it shouldn't have. For that, Dragon Age II is awarded the most dissapointing game of 2011

 

[vrbtny]

I was thinking about doing a top 5 surprises of 2011. But seeing as no one commented on this, I won't.

 

[manonfire11]

Your post is relativity true, however, Brink was the game I was most excited for this year. And it sucked. Mainly because the game's campaign was too short, had a generic story and generic characters and felt too much like multiplayer in which it encouraged experiences that were not scripted and just happened, and that does not work for a game that is 100% percent linear. Also the auto-freerun button was weird and happened to suck just as much as the same thing in the AC series, and the multiplayer maps were boring and uninspired!
EDIT: Please do your top five surprises.

 

[Valagetti]

5. Warhammer Space Marine... just don't go there
4. Homefront, it promised me a good story from the writers and then I remembered they never wrote a script for a game.
3. El Shaddia, another reason why trying to get into Japanese games is hopeless for me.
2. Duke Nuk'em Forever, needs no explanation
1. Skyrim, Bhaa burned, na its Portal 2, bhaa burned again, this is getting sad! Na its Rage because the stupid didn't even bloody work!

 

[Smooth Operator]

I would pretty much copy paste your list there OP.
And slide in L.A. Noire, yes they made a good movie... but where the fuck did you leave the game.

There are probably a whole bunch of worse titles but those I just don't pick up, or forget when I put them away.

 

[vrbtny]

I would pretty much copy paste your list there OP.
And slide in L.A. Noire, yes they made a good movie... but where the fuck did you leave the game.

There are probably a whole bunch of worse titles but those I just don't pick up, or forget when I put them away.

You know, i was going to do L.A Noire. Then I took it out after I realized that I had never played it >.< The general feeling i got from that game was that it was a disappointment, mainly for two reasons.

1) Insipired Idea. Hence lots of hype about it.
2) Soooo much build-up. A game could not have as many press-releases and statements mad about it and live up to expectations.

Your post is relativity true, however, Brink was the game I was most excited for this year. And it sucked. Mainly because the game's campaign was too short, had a generic story and generic characters and felt too much like multiplayer in which it encouraged experiences that were not scripted and just happened, and that does not work for a game that is 100% percent linear. Also the auto-freerun button was weird and happened to suck just as much as the same thing in the AC series, and the multiplayer maps were boring and uninspired!

Dammit! I was so close to putting it in my review. Then I left it out because I had never played it. This annoys me even more than the last one as I just bought brink off of Steam in the winters sale.

Darnit >.<

 

[Nomanslander]

Oh, I especially hated Rage personally with a passion. Such a bland worthless experience I had the misfortune of experiencing.

I love how the developers trumpeted that game around like it would be second coming of Doom, and John Carmack seems so assured what he had there was a certified winner, and how the game was just forgotten in a week almost.

Id is just full of washed up has beens trying really hard to pretend like they still matter. So full of little talent now it makes me sometimes wonder if it wasn't John Romero that made it all happen back in the day, of course later went on to shoot himself in the foot with a grenade launcher that was the exploits of Ion Storm.

Who knows, Id probably should give John a second chance now that he's had enough time to learn some humility after working under a rock for the last 15 years...lol

 

[vrbtny]

Oh, I especially hated Rage personally with a passion. Such a bland worthless experience I had the misfortune of experiencing.

I love how the developers trumpeted that game around like it would be second coming of Doom, and John Carmack seems so assured what he had there was a certified winner, and how the game was just forgotten in a week almost.

Id is just full of washed up has beens trying really hard to pretend like they still matter. So full of little talent now it makes me sometimes wonder if it wasn't John Romero that made it all happen back in the day, of course later went on to shoot himself in the foot with a grenade launcher that was the exploits of Ion Storm.

Who knows, Id probably should give John a second chance now that he's had enough time to learn some humility after working under a rock for the last 15 years...lol

Being a little hard on id aren't you? I mean, yeah, the game did suck, but it did have some good things about it. Like the animation is amazing, the way that it flows and is incredibly realistic.

Although I still found the game a hideous let-down, hence the game being in my top 5 disappointing games.

 

[DustyDrB]

I didn't play play a game that I thought was bad this year (I like Dragon Age 2 quite a bit), but I can give my five most disappointing aspects of different games (note that I actually like all these games):

5. Alice: Madness Returns - The Music. It seemed like the perfect game for a memorable and distinctive soundtrack, but it turned out to be quite the opposite. This demented version of Wonderland was given a rather ho-hum score.

4. Dragon Age 2 - The Third Act. Like I said, I enjoyed the game overall, but the third act was pretty bad. I loved political and Qunari focused storylines, but the Mage's Circle vs Templar plot was clumsy. Where some choices of Hawke's mattered in Act 2, Act 3 is a runaway train. It has its destination and will go there despite what the player does. Some characters suddenly become cartoon character villains, and we are unable to do anything about a certain party member who is obviously scheming something terrible.

3. LA Noire - The Lack of Noir. I'm a big Raymond Chandler fan, and a fan of noir in general. LA Noire is not noir. It's a detective story, sure. And it tells a larger story through series of smaller ones. But it lacks most of the aesthetics of noir fiction. It really feels more like Dragnet.

2. Deus Ex: Human Revolution - The Bosses. This is the only black mark on Human Revolution in my mind. The clunky boss battles just did not fit the game. Again, these were just examples of cartoon character villains, a jarring presence in a game full of moral ambiguity. In execution, they also didn't fit. I found the bosses rather easy (stun gun ftw!), but they did force the player into one style of play: Direct combat. You can't even sneak up behind them and try a takedown (it backfires badly).

1. Skyrim - The Followers. You can recruit a number of different companions in Skyrim, but they all have the same problem: There's almost nothing to them. They help you kill and carry things. They might give you a short fetch quest. After that, they just follow you around, spit out the same lines over and over, and provide some use in combat (or not. They often are a hindrance to stealthy characters or ranged casters). This was a massive disappointment for me after New Vegas' fully fleshed-out cast of companions, who all had an emotional storyline of their own.

 

[Mace Tulio]

Considering it's potential, Brink was a steaming pile of shit. It was easily the biggest disappointment of the year for me.

 

[demotion1]

That is very harsh on DAO2. Yes it was worse than expected, it was also a very polished and FUN game. How can it be a disapointment and be a lot of fun at the same time? We should judge games based on how fun they are not on how many features we like.

And i hope Dragon Age 3 is more like Dragon Age 1 than Dragon Age 2, which was a step in the wrong direction.

My biggest disapointment this year was: From Dust.

 

[Scars Unseen]

I just can't bring myself to be negative this year. I spent my money judiciously and enjoyed every game I bought. 2011 was a great year.

 

[VondeVon]

Hmm, for me there's only the big three. Skyrim, AC:R and Skyward Sword.

 

[Sarge034]

There is another thread asking almost the same thing, but it has a poll and doesn't put a limit on how many you can name. Just FYI.

Copypasta commencing....


We had some awesome games this year, but we also had some really bad games too.

These are just the bad games I have played, which is why Duke Nukem is not on the list. You know what...

Honorable mention- Duke Nukem

1) Dragon Age 2- Loved the fleshed out companions and the new combat, I did not enjoy the same three dungeons, weak story, the character redesigns, and setting the game up in chapters format.

2) Brink- Innovative and interesting, but the friendly AI gets dumber while the enemy AI gets smarter, the multiplayer is the single player campaign with more people, and it had a weak story.

3) Deus Ex: Human Revolution- It was spot on with the ethical quandaries, the question of morality of augmentation, and the social upset that would occur due to trans humanism. I think it was too short, the voice acting was poor, and the story boiled down to literally push one of these four buttons to end the game.

4) Battlefield 3- Really everything in the campaign was done in the COD series already. See the zero punctuation review to understand. The multiplayer is way slow and once snipers lock down your spawn you might as well leave the server. Also, why the lag when I want to move my soldier? I will move the stick and half a second later the soldier responds.

5) COD: Modern Warfare 3- Single player held its own, I wish spec ops allowed more than two people, but the multiplayer... Balance, this game has none.

6) Rage- This game had sooo much potential. The physics and AI were amazing. Shoot a standing enemy in the knee and they would fall over. Shoot a running enemy in the knee and they would fall and slide in the direction they were moving. They would dodge duck dip dive and dodge. However, the story was slow and short. The multiplayer consisted of a two player spec ops like set of missions, and a set of racing modes. Really ID? No TDM or anything?

... end copypasta.

I forgot to include Home Front because I honestly couldn't remember if it had come out this year. I agree with the OP. It had potential to be an amazing, gripping story but they squandered the opportunity.

 

[Superior Mind]

Homefront would have been epic if it took a guerrilla kind of approach to defending one's homeland, (think Marsden's "Tomorrow" series.) I'm still waiting a game like this where one uses innovation and stealth to basically make pin-pricks against an overwhelming force. Developers seem to think this would be boring, I'd consider it damn exciting.

 

[Gaiseric]

I didn't play any of those...

My biggest disappointments:

1. Deus Ex: HR - Mostly just the bosses and the ending. I liked everything else, but the crappy ending kinda kills it for me.

2. Skyrim - For having such framerate issues I had to abandon it.

3. Mass Effect 2(PS3) - Boring guns/gear(this means lots to me in an RPG) and stiff combat. I think I let the hype get to me a bit so that's my bad.

4. Red Faction: Armageddon - For ruining one of my favorite franchises.

5. Killzone 3 - They could have had a much better story to compliment the setting. And I would have liked to see them build on the idea they had in 2 were not all the Helghast are baddies(the civilian on the train). Perhaps even seeing an ISA unit being overrun until a bunch of Helghast with blue glowing eyes shore up the defenses(that's just my personal fantasy though).

 

[Gaiseric]

Homefront would have been epic if it took a guerrilla kind of approach to defending one's homeland, (think Marsden's "Tomorrow" series.) I'm still waiting a game like this where one uses innovation and stealth to basically make pin-pricks against an overwhelming force. Developers seem to think this would be boring, I'd consider it damn exciting.

That sounds like quite a bit of fun to me. Kinda reminds me of Freedom Fighters just stealthy instead of shoot everyone in the face.

 

[DaSpoony]

My most disappointing game was Ratchet and Clank: All 4 One

I doubt most people on the Escapist actually give a damn about the R&C series, but to me, this was a huge let down. Don't get me wrong, it looked awful from the second it was announced, but somehow, it managed to go downhill from there...