Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Spore was a huge letdown.

Hellgate: London was AWESOME (sans a few small things) before the live servers were shut down. Don't you just love paying $50 for an online game just to see its online support go POOF in under a year?

nectarprime wrote:Spore was a huge letdown.

QFT. Though at least there are a number of mods out there that fill in some of the gaps in content.

Metroid: Other M.

Forget the drama over the storyline, it still played like crap and felt nothing like Metroid. On more objective grounds, it was slammed by the critics (In the only way critics can slam a critically hyped game that's not beyond Godawful, gently), had relatively poor sales even for a Metroid game, and there was an easily found game-breaking glitch in the second-most linear Metroid game ever.

Fear 3 for me

They gave that game so much hype and promise but they completely ruined the story, their wasn't an ounce of horror like the first and the expansions had. With the addition of paxton fettels ghost being super OP the campaign wasn't fun the least bit. The only good thing about that game was the multiplayer which i believe was their main goal instead of the campaign.

I was hot for Tabula Rasa ... then Litigation happened D8

I like how tame I am with games

I suppose for me its Red Faction: Armageddon. After playing Guerrilla and enjoying it I was interested in the new game to see what it was like. Not full-blown hype but enough to peak my interest. Reading reviews and general comments of how bad it is, I let it go.

So far the only game I've been stoked up for was Space Marine, and for all its problems it's pretty good I would think.

Warhammer Online.

Dragon Age Origins

Wasn't really hyped for it, but a year after it came out I heard nothing but absolute greatness from this game, so I bought it for $60 on Steam... a YEAR after it came out... moving on:

First thing I noticed is none of my tactics worked because my teammates are inherently stupid. Suicidal in fact.
The amount of micro managing is absolutely insane. Why should I have to specify when exactly to use potions? Hey gak, if you're dying fething heal yourself.
The gameover screens taunted me by saying "Be more tactical!!"
Hey Bioware, I gotta response for ya: MAKE A BETTER fething GAME.

Seriously, did the donkey-caves programming this pile of dog gak play Star Ocean 2? THAT had a tactic system FAR SUPERIOR to this game that was made nearly 15 years later.

Managing your team's tactics is cool, but there's a difference between tactics AND HOLDING THEIR fething HANDS!!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Molten Butter wrote:Metroid: Other M.

Forget the drama over the storyline, it still played like crap and felt nothing like Metroid. On more objective grounds, it was slammed by the critics (In the only way critics can slam a critically hyped game that's not beyond Godawful, gently), had relatively poor sales even for a Metroid game, and there was an easily found game-breaking glitch in the second-most linear Metroid game ever.

Yes, ESPECIALLY since this game was developed by TEAM fething NINJA!! You'd expect a fun and engaging challenge but what you get is a game that holds your hand the whole way through.
The game insults my intelligence as well as Samus's.

They really dropped the fething ball with this rancid game.
Don't even get me started with Adam. So much potential.... such a weak, WEAK delivery. Good fething job.

Half Life 2: Episode 3.

Because it's going to fail. There's absolutely no way they can justify the obscene delays and still release an episode length game. It's become "Half Life 3 is being developed or bust" for me.

Yes, I'm bitter.

DickBandit wrote:Don't even get me started with Adam. So much potential.... such a weak, WEAK delivery. Good fething job.

I liked Adam more when he was a glorified Hal 9000. At least then he had a reason for having the personality of a toaster.

Polvilhovoador wrote:Warhammer Online.

Well imo 90% off MMOs arent that good as they're hyped

Cant wait to see DMO tank

And plus Warhammer Fantasy Video Games in recent times also arent that good. Mark of Chaos is just ugh, the Total War mod is more engaging!

Polvilhovoador wrote:Warhammer Online.

How did Warhammer Online fail? It's been going on for 3 years? If you're comparing it to WoW, that' stupid. WoW dominates the western market. WHO is a good game. It's just not popular.

New Vegas still boggles me as to how people don't think it's Fallout 3: This Time It's in a Different City but Still the Same Game.
Brink was absolutely terrible and died within days of release.
APB was hyped as the true GTA MMO, and it wasn't.
Star Trek and WAR looked awesome, and then weren't.
Fable 2 and FFXIII also come to mind, now that I think about it.
Medal of Honor was a poor excuse for a game, at least in the fact that it's almost exactly like BFBC2 in every way.
Bioshock 2 was a letdown. The Big Daddy suit never really comes into play and it's essential Bioshock 1 but YOU CAN USE PLASMIDS AND GUNS AT ONCE OMAIGOD.
Black Ops had a good campaign but its multiplayer is just as unbalanced as any of them. And yes, CoD4 is unbalanced.

Amaya wrote: It's just not popular.

And not particularly successful. Don't take it too hard. Most MMO's aren't.

Amaya wrote:

Polvilhovoador wrote:Warhammer Online.

How did Warhammer Online fail? It's been going on for 3 years? If you're comparing it to WoW, that' stupid. WoW dominates the western market. WHO is a good game. It's just not popular.

Just because an MMO is still there, doesnt mean its good (hell I bet star wars galaxies is still running, why you ruin us SOE?)

kenshin620 wrote:

Amaya wrote:

Polvilhovoador wrote:Warhammer Online.

How did Warhammer Online fail? It's been going on for 3 years? If you're comparing it to WoW, that' stupid. WoW dominates the western market. WHO is a good game. It's just not popular.

Just because an MMO is still there, doesnt mean its good (hell I bet star wars galaxies is still running, why you ruin us SOE?)

Actually SW: Galaxies is closing. And yes, Warhammer is one of the better MMOs out there. The only reason I don't play it is because all MMOs take too much of an investment and I'm not repeating WoW.

Warhammer, Age of Conan, and LotR Online are all good MMOs. Together they probably have half (if that) of WoW's subscription base. They're still successful. WoW is just a phenomenon. No one could have predicted that it blow up the genre the way it did.

kenshin620 wrote:

Amaya wrote:

Polvilhovoador wrote:Warhammer Online.

How did Warhammer Online fail? It's been going on for 3 years? If you're comparing it to WoW, that' stupid. WoW dominates the western market. WHO is a good game. It's just not popular.

Just because an MMO is still there, doesnt mean its good (hell I bet star wars galaxies is still running, why you ruin us SOE?)

I'd say SOE saw success. Sure it was really a reskin of of Everquest but but Galaxies must be what, nearly a decade old now? And its only ending because of the upcoming release of TOR. I'd say Galaxies has done well for itself.

Age of Conan and LotR obviously weren't good enough for a Pay-2-play model and were forced to go F2P. That's not really a sign of success.

LordofHats wrote:

kenshin620 wrote:

Amaya wrote:

Polvilhovoador wrote:Warhammer Online.

How did Warhammer Online fail? It's been going on for 3 years? If you're comparing it to WoW, that' stupid. WoW dominates the western market. WHO is a good game. It's just not popular.

Just because an MMO is still there, doesnt mean its good (hell I bet star wars galaxies is still running, why you ruin us SOE?)

I'd say SOE saw success. Sure it was really a reskin of of Everquest but but Galaxies must be what, nearly a decade old now? And its only ending because of the upcoming release of TOR. I'd say Galaxies has done well for itself.

Age of Conan and LotR obviously weren't good enough for a Pay-2-play model and were forced to go F2P. That's not really a sign of success.

I love half truths. You know WoW went F2P as well?

Yes, Age of Conan has F2P material and you can only access about 1/100th of the game world. It's basically the same as WoW's trial (now F2P) accounts that can only level up to 20.

LotR is different. I haven't touched it since 2008, so I am by no means up to date with current game. Apparently it uses a tier system now and limits your access to content based on that. Free gets some stuff, Premium gets more, ViP gets to eat the bloody cake.

Amaya wrote:I love half truths. You know WoW went F2P as well?

Really? Me too!

WoW went pseudo-F2P to retain its user base because its just getting old. Conan did it because it never made it far from launch. Neither did LotR. Tabula Rasa and APB are extreme cases of dead on arrival. Warhammer Online started suffering within a year of release. WoW is not an anomaly. Usually 1 MMO comes out to dominate the field. Ultima Online (EDIT: tbh they kind of had it easy), Everquest, WoW. That, and the MMORPG is just a tough genre. Most games that enter it fail.

WoW f2p? A free trial is not f2p....

nectarprime wrote:WoW f2p? A free trial is not f2p....

You can play free until level 20. That's not a trial. You can play as much as you want, creating as many characters as you want, for free, up until level 20, where you can't go any further.

Do any of you remember Sin? Heh heh.



Anyway, I have a funny story about Daikatana. Friend of mine walked into an EB and found a copy of the official strategy guide for Daikatana. Don't know if it was a Prima book, but whatever, there it was, sitting on the shelf. Keep in mind that this is years after Daikatana's release, so we're talking major old stock here.

Anyway, he picks it up and checks the back. Huge tear across the back cover - the thing's almost torn in two - and a price tag of, no joke, $1.

So he takes it to the counter and the guy is kinda confused by the purchase. My friend asks if it's $1 because of the tear, the guy says he didn't know the tear was even there, and that no it's not $1 because of the damage, it's $1 because it's a strategy guide for Daikatana.

Yes, he bought it. It was too funny not to.

How about Ninja Gaiden II? I loved the first one, but man the second one was a stinker.

Also if you buy into the hype, the game will always fail in your eyes. I see a lot of hate for Fable, but if you didn't read up on the game and what it was supposed to be, you might have liked it better. I wasn't keeping up with upcomming games back when Fable was released. When I got the game and played it, I loved it.


Also, I will say this: Final Fantasy XIII was a failure for me. It could have been so much better.

Lord Scythican wrote:I see a lot of hate for Fable, but if you didn't read up on the game and what it was supposed to be, you might have liked it better.

It's a lesson in not promising features you never intended to deliver.

LordofHats wrote:

Lord Scythican wrote:I see a lot of hate for Fable, but if you didn't read up on the game and what it was supposed to be, you might have liked it better.

It's a lesson in not promising features you never intended to deliver.

Lol, Peter Molyneux. If you read up on the game to see what it's supposed to be you will be tremendously let down. Take everything about future Fable games with a mountain of salt.

Amaya wrote:

Polvilhovoador wrote:Warhammer Online.

How did Warhammer Online fail? It's been going on for 3 years? If you're comparing it to WoW, that' stupid. WoW dominates the western market. WHO is a good game. It's just not popular.

Not comparing to WoW at all!
IMO the game just failed to deliver. They promised large scale pvp but whenever more than 40 people gathered the game lagged to hell and sometimes even crashed!
Not to mention other issues such as Bright Wizards, scenario grinding, boooring pve, useless healers and from what I heard, nowadays there a huge problem with high end gear, where people with full set can kill an entire warband if he has minimum support.

Fable 3 promised way too much then left out a real campaign (i finished it in 3 or 4 hours and i was playing slowly)

Killzone 1 (bad, but I still like it)

Rogue Squadron III

MAG

Fire Warrior (also liked, but terrible)

oh, and Ico...I'm sorry, but that was soooooo boring

mega_bassist wrote:Rogue Squadron III

There ain't not Rogue Squadron like the first Rogue Squadron. One of two games I literally played to death (The cartridge stopped working). I managed to get all the gold medals in the game save one

Wedge just wouldn't let me save him fast enough

Rogue Squadron 2 had only like what, ten missions and nowhere near the variety, and then III had those silly foot missions. I liked the walker missions though.

Polvilhovoador wrote:

Amaya wrote:

Polvilhovoador wrote:Warhammer Online.

How did Warhammer Online fail? It's been going on for 3 years? If you're comparing it to WoW, that' stupid. WoW dominates the western market. WHO is a good game. It's just not popular.

Not comparing to WoW at all!
IMO the game just failed to deliver. They promised large scale pvp but whenever more than 40 people gathered the game lagged to hell and sometimes even crashed!
Not to mention other issues such as Bright Wizards, scenario grinding, boooring pve, useless healers and from what I heard, nowadays there a huge problem with high end gear, where people with full set can kill an entire warband if he has minimum support.

Also their predicted subs prior to release, and the fall off rate due to the massive issues it had at launch, not just minor things, game breaking stuff, helped to kill all the hype it had amassed. Of course I should have realised it was going to 'not be as expected' when the admitted they needed to cut classes and cities.

Also its spent two and a bit of those three years on life support. I seriously fear for its future if The Old Republic proves popular, EA will drop it like a stone.

mega_bassist wrote:

Rogue Squadron III

The single player was boring with those walking missions but the coop was awesome! Nintendo could learn from them and make co-op Star Fox someday