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.

 Medium of Death wrote:
I think that EA did a good job on Tiberium 3, Kanes Wrath and RA 3. The expansion to RA 3 was slight disappointing as it didn't add new unit to multiplayer. They really failed hard with Tiberium 4 as they tried to make it into DoW... terribly idea.

The worst game that I luckily didn't play was Colonial Marines. How they can still be a successful company after that shameless lie of a trailer the put out at E3 is a disgrace. Gearbox are a joke, and I will be extremely cautious about buying another game from them in the future. The hype they get after Borderlands is completely undeserved. It's an OK game, but it's hardly groundbreaking.

Not to mention it has become a complete DLC cash cow at this point.
Here, have a game of the year edition with all the DLC! What's that? The DLC we released 2 weeks after that? Offcourse you won't be getting that.

Frontier: First Encounters ranks as being both the worst and one of my favourite PC games of all time. Worst, because it was released with a number of crippling bugs. This was before the days of widespread home internet connectivity. You couldn't simply go online to get a patch. I had to write a letter to the game publishers to get them to send a patch on a floppy disk. David Braben, the father of Elite, actually took the publishers to court over the fact the game was released in such a state.

One of my favourite games in that it changed what an open ended game was and could be and opened up my eyes to what appeared to be a vast and living galaxy, along with excellent trading, combat and understated use of FMV (at a time when FMV was needlessly shoehorned into everything).

If ever a game deserves a full remake, it is First Encounters.

This one is really hard. I guess it's hard to separate "bad game" from "game I didn't like". Or the reverse...I played and enjoyed a heck of a lot of "bad" games in my day.

I think the award has to go to a stinker of a budget RTS called "empire of the ants". It was a really cool concept (ant colony RTS) that got completely ruined by a horrible interface, horrible mechanics, and a tutorial that actually shipped physically broken and un-completable so you couldn't even learn how to play.

I played it as a kid and didn't even finish the first mission because I just could not make myself enjoy it.

Rogue Warrior, Superman N64 and Dark Void... Boy these games sure... were terrible. Never play these games unless you like to torture yourself.

How'd you play Superman 64 on PC?

We could always expand to games in general.

I shall take your Superman 64 and raise you a Aquaman: Battle for Atlantis

 Melissia wrote:
How'd you play Superman 64 on PC?

By the power of an N64 emulator.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

*sigh* ... never mind...

Fire warrior *was* awesome.

Before fire warrior, Chaos Gate was the most realistic 40k video game experience we had. It was a great game, but its graphics were crappy and it was designed for windows 95. When Fire Warrior came along, we suddenly had glorious 3D Tau, Imperial Gaurd and Chaos Marines! And lasguns, pulse rifles etc.

We went from this (in its original resolution btw) :



To this:



It's all very well saying "other FPSs had better gameplay". Well yeah they probably did, but if you're a 40k nerd, the fact that it could run relatively stable was enough. The fact that it had mediocre gameplay was just a bonus though the weapon sounds were, iirc, pretty cool.

How does that Tau hold the burst cannon? I do not understan...

The same way that the guy in Doom manages to hold 9 guns.

No, it was still crap.

I wish they'd remake Chaos Gate.

I'd love a 40k game set up like XCom. Throw in the ability to put together teams with your choice of Space Marines, Guardsmen, and Sisters of Battle and that thing would be awesome. Hell the DoW2 campain was already somewhat like that.

 BrookM wrote:
Fire Warrior did have some great, hammy voice acting.

Also, there's just some warm feelings from the first time seeing a Marine with an autogun in multiplayer.

xruslanx wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

*sigh* ... never mind...

Fire warrior *was* awesome.

Before fire warrior, Chaos Gate was the most realistic 40k video game experience we had. It was a great game, but its graphics were crappy and it was designed for windows 95. When Fire Warrior came along, we suddenly had glorious 3D Tau, Imperial Gaurd and Chaos Marines! And lasguns, pulse rifles etc.

You seem to be confusing being the first big budget 40k video game to being an actual good game. Fire Warrior, as a game, was terrible. It really was. Even being a stark, raving 40k fanboy at the time didn't save Fire Warrior from being terrible. There were even better console FPS's out at the time, which was a time of terrible console FPS's.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:
I'd love a 40k game set up like XCom. Throw in the ability to put together teams with your choice of Space Marines, Guardsmen, and Sisters of Battle and that thing would be awesome. Hell the DoW2 campain was already somewhat like that.

Already been done, but only with Space Marines. Warhammer 40k Squad Command. Handheld only though, PSP and DS.

Handheld pfft. I want a real game

It honestly wasn't too bad from what I remember, it just wasn't too good either.

I think the general consensus it that while fire warrior was fun, it was still a bad game.

 Timmy149 wrote:
I think the general consensus it that while fire warrior was fun, it was still a bad game.

Actually I don't see where this bad game thing came from, I just thought it was an average game that simply had nothing really notable outside of being 40k.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Timmy149 wrote:
I think the general consensus it that while fire warrior was fun, it was still a bad game.

Actually I don't see where this bad game thing came from, I just thought it was an average game that simply had nothing really notable outside of being 40k.

In addition to being sup-par gameplay wise, the game was buggy and glitchy as hell. Things just didn't really work as intended, such as the scenario HBMC mentioned.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Timmy149 wrote:
I think the general consensus it that while fire warrior was fun, it was still a bad game.

Actually I don't see where this bad game thing came from, I just thought it was an average game that simply had nothing really notable outside of being 40k.

In addition to being sup-par gameplay wise, the game was buggy and glitchy as hell. Things just didn't really work as intended, such as the scenario HBMC mentioned.

Never had any glitches myself when I beat through it, so I guess I missed all that.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Timmy149 wrote:
I think the general consensus it that while fire warrior was fun, it was still a bad game.

Actually I don't see where this bad game thing came from, I just thought it was an average game that simply had nothing really notable outside of being 40k.

In addition to being sup-par gameplay wise, the game was buggy and glitchy as hell. Things just didn't really work as intended, such as the scenario HBMC mentioned.

Never had any glitches myself when I beat through it, so I guess I missed all that.

It was more non-optimised for certain systems, rather than a game bug.

The PC port was a disaster too, at least, the initial release was. But I think I mentioned that earlier.

It was hell downloading / installing / finding the right patches in the right order as well.

Firewarrior was pretty epicly bad. The game didn't even WORK half the time.

Army Men 2 was vomit-inducing.

 Frankenberry wrote:


Army Men 2 was vomit-inducing.

I really liked that game

World War and Toys in Space were better though.

Worst game I've played on PC? Not exactly worst, but I strongly disliked Just Cause 2...
If internet flash games count, definitely Curse of the Chocolate Fountain. Oh god.

 Shredsmore wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:


Army Men 2 was vomit-inducing.

I really liked that game

World War and Toys in Space were better though.

Worst game I've played on PC? Not exactly worst, but I strongly disliked Just Cause 2...
If internet flash games count, definitely Curse of the Chocolate Fountain. Oh god.

What did you dislike about Just Cause 2?

 LordofHats wrote:
Handheld pfft. I want a real game

Chaos Gate

It works under Vista and 7 at least if you do some tweeking.

It doesn't really work...
Still freezes and crashes a lot.
You have to save all the time.

I remember the Chaos Gate thread we had here.

Details a few of the issues with running it on newer systems.

 Palindrome wrote:

It works under Vista and 7 at least if you do some tweeking.

That's a lie. It didn't even work on the system it was designed for.

Chaos Gate was awesome, or would have been if the game didn't consistently crash or freeze at the most inopportune moments.

Or at opportune ones.