It probably doesn't qualify, but the first thing I thought of when I saw the "Must Unbelievably Awesomely Fun" (I think that's a typo, BTW. Seems like "must" should be "most") heading was Saints Row 2. I don't care if it's totally mindless: spraying sewage all over half the city and then running around flashing everyone is loads of fun.
Anyway, I should check out those three games that did get into that category out. I do play games first and foremost to be entertained, after all. So games that are described as "unbelievably awesomely fun" sound like games I want to play.
Speakercone said:
If I may ask, sir, why do you find Magicka to be crap? When you say it's nothing new, where have you seen specific design elements in it before?
Also I must point out that "it's crap" is a universal claim as to the quality of a thing. Magicka clearly isn't universally crap due to the fact that I and others enjoy it. Perhaps what you meant to say is something along the lines of "I found it to be crap", meaning that your statement is your own opinion.
*sigh*
His statement already was his own opinion. Unless the thing being discussed literally is feces, we already know that a statement claiming something to be crap is an opinion, because he can't prove that the game is crap any more than you can prove it's not crap. And we can infer from context that it's his own opinion and not somebody else's because he's the one who posted it.
Next time, just agree politely instead of trying to make everyone you disagree with post redundantly. Or at least quote people who say things like "go magika! fantastic game that feels like a steal for 10 bucks. fun as hell" and tell them to change the way they post as well (even if you agree with them), because the only difference between those two statements is one person liked the game and the other didn't. But both opinions are presented exactly the same way, and only giving the person you disagreed with grief over the way they wrote their opinion is quite unfair.