• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Don't you just hate it when some games miss thier potential?

Andrew2

Banned
Case point, but at times there were games with all these wonderful ideas; some being ground -breaking in terms of gameplay, but when it came down to the final product the game was broken. This where I bring up Sony's first attempt at a weapon fighter : Cardinal Syn.

If theres one thing could've said about Cardinal Syn, its the fact for a weapon fighter it had the ability to challenge Soul Edge as a top weapon fighter. I mean, Syn had some interesting idea never seen a fighting game -- true 3D fighting, environmental hazards that actually affected gameplay and strategy and just to name a few. When it came down to the final product however, the game suffered from broken animations not mention the fighting system itself was broken.

In the end though, its sucks that a game that had potential became a broken turd. At least PowerStone was able to pick up the pieces in some areas and fix them.

btw, if your not familiar with the game I'm talking about..

B00002STKU.01.MZZZZZZZ.jpg


Great idea, poor execution
 
Animal Crossing is my main offender for this. It would have been extremely easy for them to add in more things like a lot more house extensions, more clothing customisation, townsfolk never repeating themselves, but they dropped the ball bigtime.
 
dog$ said:
Actually I love it when games miss their potential.

Wasted money? Awesome.
I prefer it when there is no potential. No high hopes = no let downs.
*resumes game of That's So Raven*
 
Not that they're the sole reason why but publishers are mostly to blame for pushing games out before they're ready cause it beats paying for the added time and polish that would take a game from mediocre to amazing. To them it doesn't make good enough business sense and maybe the means don't really justify the ends as far as the bottom line is concerned cause there's still marketing and all these other considerations. In today's market good games don't see on merit alone, there are so many variables that a select few games are gaurenteed hits anymore and with each generation the torch is passed as well. It's sad that few devs can really afford to let games mature enough to realize the vision behind them but that's the nature of the industry as it grows and goes "pop" catering to a mass market that wants everything watered down to some extent.

It's irritating to me as a hardcore gamer who loves the challenge and art of games. Things like liscensed music and celebrity voices are insignificant to me and just add to the bloat and complexity of games while not really improving the experience in worthwhile fashion as far as I'm concerned but it might be a neccessary evil. I really wonder with next gen as budgets and dev times rise and we see consolidation as publishers take bigger risks if we'll see publishers play it safe and stay focused on copycat games and cookie cutter sequels or if they'll have to gamble and innovate and differentiate themselves from the competition in new and interesting ways to gain consumer interest, jury's still out on that one. Viva la Revolution!?!?
 
Zeo said:

Granted it was a cakewalk compared to the first but the game was as fun to play as you wanted it to be. I personally think it gets a bad rap cause it brought a lot of new stuff to the series and I had a blast playing it cause even thought I didn't have to I used Dante's abilities to their fullest and it was a lot of fun to play. It was as deep as you wanted it to be and those that simply played through it probably didn't enjoy it as much.
 
There's nothing sadder than wasted potential, when you can practically see how awesome the final product could've been if the developer had more time/money/talent to throw at it. It isn't always a matter of the final product being broken, either--it's just as tragic when I see a game like Advent Rising, which (I thought) still managed to be a great ride in spite of the glitches and the lack of polish, and think about what might have been.
 
I don't play games for their "potential." I play them because I want to be entertained, and if they do, mission accomplished
 
belgurdo said:
I don't play games for their "potential." I play them because I want to be entertained, and if they do, mission accomplished

Who does? I think we all go into a new game expecting to be entertained. That doesn't make it any less sad when a title with the potential for greatness (and no, I don't think all games have that potential) falls short of the mark for whatever reason.
 
Some of the more simple games recently don't go as far as they should have, when they should add crazy amounts of levels in there.

For example: Donkey Kong Jungle Beat, DK: King of Swing Pac 'N Roll, and Kirby: Canvas Curse. Each have a level design which is really simple, almost to the point of where you could use a "level builder" and create your own. Yet the games never try and go that extra mile and add a shit-ton of levels into it.

DKJB had, what, technically around 30 levels. I mean, you could have plenty of those jelly-levels in there.

DK King of Swing is HARD, but satisfying to finish, but there are only 20ish levels in all. The levels are SO basic, you could add 100 in there without a sweat.

Kirby again, has a basic level design, but it's all over pretty quickly. There was, like, one level that utilised wind? Keep going guys! Make 5 of them! They also seemed a little restrained since at least one section of each level had to be completable with as little ink as possible.

Pac 'N Roll is a really great, fun game, but they could do so much more. I loved that huge "slide" level [5-4 I think], and they could have easily fitted a bunch of them in there. More floating platforms, more near impossible leaps, MORE dammit!

The Ratchet & Clank series falls here too. R&C3 had one level using the "whole moon" style, and I think one Mega-Clank level. Just not using their own technology to it's fullest to fit a deadline, and that's a damn shame.
 
PRODUCT NUMBER 03.

I thought the idea for that game was awesome: dance through hords of enemies spreading destruction. The whole art, characters, enemies (their names), music style I found all really, really cool. I was prolly even one of the few that cheered the fact that they removed the silly guns.

It turns out, I just had another idea of what the game aught to be: a more free-flowing action game with lots of jumping around, huge mid-boss battles while fighting normal enemies. I was thinking more like... what's that JPN fighting game's name from KOEI again... eh... the GC version was Mystic Heroes.

Instead is was more like a puzzle action game, and I could get over the controls for the life of me.
 
Fable and Jade Empire easily fall into this category. I found both games good, but if the developers had fully realized, hell, even somewhat realized the whole good/evil dynamic it could have easily taken both games to a whole other level. Instead, both games play pretty much the same no matter how you go through it, which just cheapens the whole experience.
 
Yep. Here are some games that could've been much better then how they ended up:

-The Bouncer
-X2: Wolverine's Revenge
-Spider-man 2
 
I got the "this could easily be fixed" feeling while playing the far cry instincts demo. With some tweaks it could become one of the best xbox games. The main problem is that weapons seem too ineffective from longer distances, and too effective up close. Also they focused on making the AI sound smart rather than act smart. But it's just a demo, so hopefully their testers are telling them to fix it..
 
CrashOut...errr Crashtacular...eerr...Crashmania Sunrise...

Oh...FLAT OUT. I always forget the title. Always thought it started wiht "Crash" :P

Lots of potential...very solid in many areas...all it needed was a little guidance in terms of gameplay (track design) and controls...
 
even though I really like Silent Hill 4: The Room, it had mountains of potential (specifically if you saw that 9 minute E3 '04 trailer) that it didn't take advantage of. I wonder what the game would have been like if either- A. it was never forcefully converted into a 'SH' partway through and/or B. if the concept would have been made with Silent Hill in mind from the beginning.

Hopefully Team Silent's talents and ideas are more concentrated with the next gen Silent Hill.
 
screen01.jpg


Fun game with good core gameplay but the level design was horrible and constant loading times were annoying.
 
My vote this generation goes for Second Sight. It got neat ideas, well implemented, but the poor IA and some serious phisics problems made the experience a bit lacking. Anyway, some moments from this game are the best this generation.
 
jiggle said:
Such a nice looking game.

herdy_review_1.jpg

herdygerdy_5.jpg

gerdy_27.jpg




I dont' even remember what was bad about it now...

I think one was it had the longest load times of any game ever made i think :p but boy it sure looks nice
 
Disaster Report is a great pick. I hate when technical issues get in the way of an interesting game. Killzone is another linear shooter, but it has great artistic ideas and some neat-o levels and definitely qualifies in this discussion for me.
 
belgurdo said:
I don't play games for their "potential." I play them because I want to be entertained, and if they do, mission accomplished


Maybe it's not about our hype. I sometime feel that a game is having potential but isn't reaching it. I'm feeling this when i actually PLAY the damn game, not before.
There's many games i never questionned but it's only after playing through them all that i realised "that's it? why didn't you do X and Y?" etc.
When you truly understand the gameplay mechanics of a game, that's when you can see if it's having untapped potential imo.
 
Shenmue.

Still enjoyed it, but it was not a fraction of what I had hoped it would be. Of course, looking back, my expectations were simply unrealistic and could not possibly have been supported on the DC hardware (or any current gen machine).
 
How about every single MMO I have ever played. Each one is lacking in one key thing (usually variety or endgame), but a few could have been designed differently and would be better, in my opinion of course.
 
Himuro said:
One of the most disappointing games ever, but atleast DMC3 made up for it by the gallions, and it even tops dmc1!

Fuck yes.

Oh, and I'm surprised no one said...

B0000VSH4U.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg


A return to Sonic greatness my ass.
 
Rlan said:
Donkey Kong Jungle Beat, DK: King of Swing Pac 'N Roll, and Kirby: Canvas Curse. Each have a level design which is really simple, almost to the point of where you could use a "level builder" and create your own.
Jungle Beat didn't have simple levels. Several of them are designed for playing the entire level without breaking a combo (touching the ground). Nothing simple about that. The problem was that getting high scores wasn't in any way necessary, so a lot of people don't even bother. But that's where the game is so brilliant.

Worst missed potential for me in years:
041013184946_box%20art.jpg

It could have been fantastic without the collecting and the world switching.
 
Chalk up another vote for Disaster Report. I love the concept, but the execution was dreadful.

I also felt that Dead to Rights, despite being severely flawed, showed a lot of potential as a great action game. I was hoping that Namco Hometek would learn from their mistakes with Dead to Rights 2, but it actually managed to be a step backwards.
 
How about Geist? I always thought it sounded like a neat premise for a game, but apparently (I haven't played it yet) in execution it just ended up being completely mediocre.

I still think that concept could be turned into a very compelling game in the hands of the right developer.
 
Currently playing Rebelstar Tactical Command...

Makes me wish I was playing X-Com or JA instead. Which isn't a BAD thing, mind you... but it's just so gimped.
 
human5892 said:
How about Geist? I always thought it sounded like a neat premise for a game, but apparently (I haven't played it yet) in execution it just ended up being completely mediocre.

I still think that concept could be turned into a very compelling game in the hands of the right developer.

Yea, Geist would have been a good game with anyone competent behind it. It feels like it was made by a bad developer years ago.
 
atomsk said:
biglogo8zz.jpg


my kingdom for a steady framerate!

here's hoping 2 is an improvement.

wasn't part 2 cancelled?
Might as well start over, use this Hurricane Katrina disaster as inspiration (since 2 was originally suppose to be about a flood anyway), and make it a first-gen PS3 title. :D
 
Top Bottom