Who has disappointed you this gen?

-Poliphony Digital. GT5 took forever to make, and still felt rushed. Good game but :/
And the loading times...dear lord the loading times.

-Blizzard kinda fucked up the Starcraft lore with the shitty story they came up for WOL.

-Nintendo by not doing an account based system for the Wii. Pretty dumb

-Capcom. Almost everything they do these days.


Derrick01 said:
It's depressing because indie games are just as terrible as the big budget casual fests I complain about, only at least those have some production values behind them.
Click to expand...

I dont think i have ever seen you write anything positive about...anything...ever.

You deserve jett's tag, in bold text. Damn
 
Microsoft started this gen very strongly on the games front and then they completely forgot that and moved to Kinect and services. I guess that was their strategy from the very beginning but I was still disappointed.
 
Glass Rebel said:
I haven't even played CS since 1.6 (so I'd actually welcome it) but that's what it basically boils down for most of the fanbase, whether it does for you or not. From my experience anyway.
Click to expand...

The game is nothing like 1.6 though. It's like Source but even easier and shittier, which is a feat in itself considering how bad Source is.
 
Glass Rebel said:
It's depressing because money is getting pumped into non-stop explosion-fests with $200m marketing instead of ambitious, genre-bending projects. There's nothing wrong with indie games this generation, in fact, I'm glad for them. But if someone told me in 2002 that 10 years later the majority of shooters would be hand-holdy corridor shooting galleries I wouldn't have believed him. It's okay to enjoy "stupid" games, I do myself, but in my eyes gameplay has taken a significant step backwards since last generation (with some exceptions of course).
Click to expand...
Why not? What's so different now compared to 2002 except that now far more games are released? I remember playing corridor shooters on friggin PS1.

@topic: Some gamers: The past years have been the best in gaming and still some people are complaining... Dumbed down... My ass...
 
corkscrewblow said:
The game is nothing like 1.6 though. It's like Source but even easier and shittier, which is a feat in itself considering how bad Source is.
Click to expand...

Are we having a misunderstanding? I'm not saying it is, I'm saying that a lot of people wanted it to be like 1.6 and that's why these people think it's shitty. Not saying you do btw.

TheExorzist said:
Why not? What's so different now compared to 2002 except that now far more games are released? I remember playing corridor shooters on friggin PS1.

@topic: Some gamers: The past years have been the best in gaming and still some people are complaining... Dumbed down... My ass...
Click to expand...

I remember playing Half-Life, Delta Force 2, GoldenEye and Perfect Dark, dunno what you were doing back then.

Most gamers these days couldn't even finish the first Doom because it actually involves more than going in a straight line.
 
Glass Rebel said:
I remember playing Half-Life, Delta Force 2, GoldenEye and Perfect Dark, dunno what you were doing back then.

Most gamers these days couldn't even finish the first Doom because it actually involves more than going in a straight line.
Click to expand...
Half Life: 1998
Delta Force 2: 1998
Golden Eye:1997
Perfect Dark: 2000

Weren't we talking about 2002? You're a funny guy. Also, Half Life (and I'm sure PD and GoldenEye too) was a corridor shooter. A damn good one but still....
Oh, and Doom did sell well over XBLA as far as I know.
 
Heh, Half-Life 1 (and 2) was more simplistic and cinematic oriented than vast majority of modern shooters. Funny how people never had a problem with that series.
 
Microsoft

As someone who had an original Xbox, enjoyed Blink the Time Sweeper, and was looking forward to Rare's upcoming titles...

I was just floored with disappoint from the 360.
 
szaromir said:
Heh, Half-Life 1 (and 2) was more simplistic and cinematic oriented than vast majority of modern shooters. Funny how people never had a problem with that series.
Click to expand...
I assume it's because Half Life is very specific and only people who acutally like it also play it.
Judging from the hate that Call of Duty, Gears of War, Uncharted... you name them... get I assume also people who don't like em play these games.

What's most funny about it is that people fail to realize that even back when Half Life was released there weren't any alternatives for it.
 
TheExorzist said:
Half Life: 1998
Delta Force 2: 1998
Golden Eye:1997
Perfect Dark: 2000

Weren't we talking about 2002? You're a funny guy. Also, Half Life (and I'm sure PD and GoldenEye too) was a corridor shooter. A damn good one but still....
Oh, and Doom did sell well over XBLA as far as I know.
Click to expand...

I didn't get a PC until 2001 and you were talking about PS1 but ok :) No One Lives Forever 2, Serious Sam, Ghost Recon, Metroid Prime and Raven Shield were released around that time too. There are shooters from this gen that I genuinely like and I even get some enjoyment from Call of Duty but it's hardly where I expected the genre to be when I first got into it. In many ways it feels like a stand-still and even a step back sometimes.

And btw. Half-Life, PD and GoldenEye are hardly corridor shooters just because they're set in facilities. Go to gamefaqs and check some maps if you need to be reminded how PD's levels looked like.

szaromir said:
Heh, Half-Life 1 (and 2) was more simplistic and cinematic oriented than vast majority of modern shooters. Funny how people never had a problem with that series.
Click to expand...

Cinematic, yes. Simplistic? In what way? Certainly not level design. Ravenholm alone has more interesting level-progression than most modern shooters.
 
Normally i would say that Konami and Square-Enix have disappointed me the most this gen, but then i come to think of it...these companies are just led by incompetent people...

No, the biggest letdown by far for me is Atlus. Where the fuck is my Persona 5, Megami Tensei 4 or a new Digital Devil Saga? What the hell has Atlus R&D1 been doing in the last 3 years?
 
Glass Rebel said:
Cinematic, yes. Simplistic? In what way? Certainly not level design. Ravenholm alone has more interesting level-progression than most modern shooters.
Click to expand...
You can't be serious. HL's level design is very straightforward. No vast open spaces, no branching, impossible to get lost, impossible to choose a different path. You basically push forward all the time.
 
Nintendo for making a shitty console with a shitty controller.
MS and Sony for following in Nintendo's shitty footsteps with their shitty motion shit.

Kojima Productions for mustering a single MGS entry.
Square Enix for failing to release Versus XIII yet.
Team ICO for failing to release The Last Guardian yet.

In general I'd say Japan has disappointed me. Other than Platinum Games, they're more or less worthless.
 
szaromir said:
You can't be serious. HL's level design is very straightforward. No vast open spaces, no branching, impossible to get lost, impossible to choose a different path. You basically push forward all the time.
Click to expand...

It's in the execution. Half-Life levels may be like tubes but unlike CoD they're twisted, have obstacles, puzzles...

Where Call of Duty says "shoot that thing to proceed" Half-Life says nothing but expects you to find a crate to put under a floating seesaw, find a duct that leads to a hidden path, go up a story to traverse a fence etc. It's a perfect example of interesting linear level-design.
 
Those 'puzzles' amount to the same thing every time. How many times do you have to place those big circular wood things in toxic liquid to walk over? How many times do you have to stand and wait as an impossibly slow lift moves?

Those things are HL2's design at it's worst. At it's best it's appearing to provide various roots but encourages you strongly enough to take the only feasible one that it creates the sense of choice.
 
Glass Rebel said:
It's in the execution. Half-Life levels may be like tubes but unlike CoD they're twisted, have obstacles, puzzles...

Where Call of Duty says "shoot that thing to proceed" Half-Life says nothing but expects you to find a crate to put under a floating seesaw, find a duct that leads to a hidden path, go up a story to traverse a fence etc. It's a perfect example of interesting linear level-design.
Click to expand...
Problem is, there's nothing interesting about those activities. I'm equally bored by COD and Half-Life (neither of which I played since 2007).
StuBurns said:
Those 'puzzles' amount to the same thing every time. How many times do you have to place those big circular wood things in toxic liquid to walk over? How many times do you have to stand and wait as an impossibly slow lift moves?

Those things are HL2's design at it's worst. At it's best it's appearing to provide various roots but encourages you strongly enough to take the only feasible one that it creates the sense of choice.
Click to expand...
Yes, pretty much.
 
StuBurns said:
Those 'puzzles' amount to the same thing every time. How many times do you have to place those big circular wood things in toxic liquid to walk over? How many times do you have to stand and wait as an impossibly slow lift moves?

Those things are HL2's design at it's worst. At it's best it's appearing to provide various roots but encourages you strongly enough to take the only feasible one that it creates the sense of choice.
Click to expand...

See Stuburns, I don't agree with this at all. It never felt repetitive to me so unless I'm misremembering repeated playthroughs must be clouding your judgement. For a game that didn't focus on puzzles Half-Life 2 and especially Half-Life 1 did an extremely good job of using them as a diversion from the shooting gameplay. HL to me is a game about maneuvering through the world in a realistic way using what's around you. It is a very guided experience, making it less impressive the second time, but it always feels very natural and well-paced (when you're actually on foot).

szaromir said:
Problem is, there's nothing interesting about those activities. I'm equally bored by COD and Half-Life (neither of which I played since 2007).
Click to expand...

So you've resorted to "boring" now? Because it's certainly not simpler than CoD.
 
1. Namco - The company that once stuck everything but the kitchen sink into their games as unlockables, now releases games that don't even have the simple standard modes of their past titles.

No one has disappointed me more than Namco this gen. DLC has ruined them.

2. EA - A real shame that the company that's been so anti-consumer this gen, is also publishing the best games I've ever seen from them. I've purchased more EA games this gen than every past gen combined.

3. Bethesda - Is it really that difficult to release a decent PS3 version of your games?
 
corkscrewblow said:
Microsoft: Kinect is a disaster. Their first party games are a disaster.
Click to expand...

For whom? Are you one of those who think the lack of new First party hardcore games are directly related to the Kinect? I'm pretty sure MS was cleaning first party up, re-organizing, before they even knew Kinect would be a hit. Otherwise, it's given the 360 a 2nd wind, and hardcore games are still coming to the 360, and XLBA is flying to new heights. Who cares of those games are also on other platforms?
 
Glass Rebel said:
See Stuburns, I don't agree with this at all. It never felt repetitive to me so unless I'm misremembering repeated playthroughs must be clouding your judgement. For a game that didn't focus on puzzles Half-Life 2 and especially Half-Life 1 did an extremely good job of using them as a diversion from the shooting gameplay. HL to me is a game about maneuvering through the world in a realistic way using what's around you. It is a very guided experience, making it less impressive the second time, but it always feels very natural and well-paced (when you're actually on foot).

So you've resorted to "boring" now? Because it's certainly not simpler than CoD.
Click to expand...
Yes, I resorted to boring. There's nothing interesting or challenging about those activities/"puzzles" you're describing (most of the time it's pull that lever/push those crates), they're supposed to be a very simple diversion from very simplistic combat and nothing more. That's why I'm always stunned when people bash COD for its simplicity but give Half-Life a free pass, though I'm indifferent to either series and have no intention of playing them ever again.
 
Well, for one HL has no replenishing health. That alone made Singularity a much better experience and is one of the reasons why I love F.E.A.R.
 
Konami - where the fuck is Suikoden and Kojima only made 1 game for consoles so far

Square - FFXIII wasnt good, and where is Kingdom Hearts 3, and all the other JRPGs they usually make

RARE - Perfect Dark wasnt good, and where is Banjo 3, Killer Instinct and with XBLA they could have made a new Battletoads

Polyphonic - only one GT this gen and it didnt even live up to expectations

Team ICO - not even one game released yet
 
I've been thinking about this for a while.

I keep going back to Sony.

Reason being that most titles are platform agnostic now or so, it seems. They lost their edge with all the exclusives they had with the previous two Playstation consoles (they also introduced from my memory many or at least more new franchises). The nearly non-existence of new franchises on the Playstation 3 this generation that *I was* interested in and enjoyed was close to zero. Only 1 I can think of is
Uncharted
and although it was fun for a play through I don't see myself playing it again. For me the only edge Sony had this generation was
Blu-ray
.

I never considered an Xbox. I don't care about online and I tried multiple times, over and over to get into Gears of War and Halo, but it is not my thing. I don't enjoy those games. They do have other good games I do enjoy, but not enough to get me to spend money to purchase the console first. Some better single player, non-first or third person shooters, non-online games would have pushed me over the edge though.

I was most satisfied with my Wii (Multiple Mario games without water guns, a new Zelda, Kirby Epic Yarn, and Donkey Kong Country Returns) and PC this generation (Steam). I am currently in love with my 3DS (portable Ocarina of Time, Kid Icarus, Sonic Generations).

Don't want to disappoint, but these are my thoughts. Not trying to start any wars here.

Edit:

Also, I forgot to mention Square. Does anything need to be said about why? It's been repeated in previous posts over and over.
 
MercuryLS said:
Team ICO:
Bought a PS3 for their next game....that may never come.
Click to expand...


For real. I'm probably the most hardcore Team Ico apologist you'll meet, but if it's an absolute no show at this year's E3... I don't know, man. This gen is wrapping up, and their last game was seven years ago. Jesus, Fumito... actually creating a new species of bird-cat hybrid would have taken less time.
 
For me Nintendo is high up on my disappointment list. The Wii was the wrong system for me filled with too many games I couldn't care about and the controller just never early felt right for me. And the way Nintendo handled the 3ds at lunch and for most of its first year really turned me off the device. And that's before adding the whole region locking the 3ds to the mix. I really want to like them, and still love the Zelda games, but I just can't find myself interested in most Nintendo games now with this generations output. At least for me that's how I feel about it. I would rather it be the other way around.

I'm also kinda dissapointment in the second half of the Xbox 360s time and the way Microsoft positioned it as the device it now is. It's a great strategy for them and I know has to be right for them, but the focus on more casual experiences, kinect, and multimedia aspects of the system isnt what I want right now.

Maybe I'm just too picky in what I want though when I look at it. My dissapointments aren't too high on any company though, even those stated above.
 
Until about two years back, I was most dissapointed with Nintendo. I just kept coming back to the same thought: "What the FUCK have they done?"

But yeah, I gave the Wii another chance. I brought these games:

- Mario Galaxy
- Mario Galaxy 2
- Wario Land
- Donkey Kong Country
- GoldenEye 007
- Zelda Skyward Sword
- Xenoblade
- Kirby: Return to Dreamland
- New Super Mario Bros Wii
- Metroid Prime: Trilogy
- Sin and Punishment 2
- Super Smash Bros: Brawl
- Mario Kart Wii

Now, those are obviously all Nintendo published games (apart from Goldeneye, but even that was published in collaboration with Nintendo). No third party games in sight - this highlights Nintendo's fatal flaw, as well as their greatest asset. Every single one of those 13 games is EASILY a 9/10 at least, with Xenoblade as an obvious exception, which happens to be on a tier so high that not even a giant like stephen merchant could reach it, considering it's my favourite game of all time.

Am I glad I brought the Wii? Well, yes! It's given me some of the best games I have ever played. I'm dissapointed in Nintendo's failure to gain third party support.

In a way, the Wii fits right in with the N64 for myself. Worth it just for the INCREDIBLE first/second party games. Everything else? Yeahh, well...
 
Blizzard.

From best developer featuring Starcraft, diablo1/2, warcraft, WoW

to Diablo 3, Starcraft, WoW.

If next diablo will be same as D3 i won't buy it.
 
MrVargas said:
Square!!! The difference in their software from the PS1 era to now is worlds apart.
Click to expand...

There is no SquareSoft anymore. It's SqureEnix. Or should we say Enix only since they did buy Squaresoft and they kept Square in title as token for fans.

Since bankrupcy of square they did not release anything stellar from JRPG perspective.

Yes i know many liked FFXII but it wasn't so good for many.
 
Sakurai

(dont have a 3DS)

Brawl was a solid game, but Sakurai's mentality about deliberately trying to make the game less competitive is ass backwards. Way to punish your biggest and most passionate fans.
 
Nintendo for their entire business strategy these days. I can easily envision the next 20 years of Nintendo gaming consisting of the same ancient IPs and games. I just want them to make new franchises with new characters and put their best teams behind it. And I wish they'd become a hardware company again and make a cutting edge machine. Just care.

Microsoft for pricing their accessories so high that I felt bad about even purchasing an extra controller.
 
How can Nintendo have disappointed you - I mean really? Are you really that much of a hive-mind "hardcore" troll that you ignored the fact that Wii was home to some of the best entries in the Zelda and Mario franchises, as well as classic revivals like Punchout!! and Sin & Punishment? How about the best JRPG of the generation, Xenoblade? How about quirky sleeper hits like Excitebots, or the revival of the 2D platformer on home consoles? It had all of the games of Gamecube and then some. Just because they also made Wii Sports and Wii Fit does not mean that they forgot about you.
 
woahjeez said:
How can Nintendo have disappointed you - I mean really? Are you really that much of a hive-mind "hardcore" troll that you ignored the fact that Wii was home to some of the best entries in the Zelda and Mario franchises, as well as classic revivals like Punchout!! and Sin & Punishment? How about the best JRPG of the generation, Xenoblade? How about quirky sleeper hits like Excitebots, or the revival of the 2D platformer on home consoles? It had all of the games of Gamecube and then some. Just because they also made Wii Sports and Wii Fit does not mean that they forgot about you.
Click to expand...

Reading my post above would probably give you some insight. Did you read it? Because from your post, it doesn't seem like you did.
 
woahjeez said:
How can Nintendo have disappointed you - I mean really? Are you really that much of a hive-mind "hardcore" troll that you ignored the fact that Wii was home to some of the best entries in the Zelda and Mario franchises, as well as classic revivals like Punchout!! and Sin & Punishment? How about the best JRPG of the generation, Xenoblade? How about quirky sleeper hits like Excitebots, or the revival of the 2D platformer on home consoles? It had all of the games of Gamecube and then some. Just because they also made Wii Sports and Wii Fit does not mean that they forgot about you.
Click to expand...

It may be hard for you to believe, but some people will never like/support motion controls. Some of these people probably like Nintendo games too, thus many disappointed.
 
richisawesome said:
Reading my post above would probably give you some insight. Did you read it? Because from your post, it doesn't seem like you did.
Click to expand...

I wasn't replying to you specifically, I was replying to the general disdain for Nintendo I have seen throughout this thread. Also, many of their games don't even require motion controls, and I'd go as far as to say Wario Ware, Mario Kart, Excitebots, Skyward Sword and Sin & Punishment were improved by them. Many other franchises weren't even effected by them - in fact I struggle to think of an example where I was like, "Damn, these motion controls are really souring my experience with this game!"
 
I love this gen, but I think in the console space Japan has been a letdown. Outside of the Mario Galaxy games and Vanquish I've been underwhelmed. I used to love JRPGs, but I can't even stomach them anymore. At this point it's almost a self fulfilling prophecy because I'm avoiding games made by Japanese studios. It's kinda sad.
 
Square Enix - nuff said

Konami - MGS4 had its moments but was ultimately considered a disappointment for the series. Silent Hill was ruined. Where the fuck is Gradius VI?


Started good but got bad

Capcom - Started with great new properties like Dead Rising, classic games like Mega Man 9, Street Fighter IV brought fighting back..... But later, RE5 turned out to be meh, games farmed out to American devs, they fucking murdered Megaman, and whored out their fighters with small revisions (90s-style all over again).
 
szaromir said:
You can't be serious. HL's level design is very straightforward. No vast open spaces, no branching, impossible to get lost, impossible to choose a different path. You basically push forward all the time.
Click to expand...
The first time I finished Half Life, I was excited to go back and take all of the alternate paths I had passed up on, and was shocked when I realized there weren't any. That's an impressive trick. (And later I got to play Deus Ex, where it isn't a trick.)
 
Most if not all japanese devs, Konami and Square in particular.
If it weren't for Microsoft, Sony would be just as lazy as those clowns.
So we all gotta thank MS for steeping into this industry to knock some sense into Sony.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Now that Nintendo has an 8th-gen+ (8.5th gen?) performance level console, do you expect they will scale up their game budgets to match it?
2
73
1K
Ozzie666 replied
Metroid Dread lttp kindda disappointed
LTTP  2
76
3K
gunstarhero replied
Playing at 40hz is garbage. Who started this shit?
2 3 4
153
7K
LavitzSlambert replied
What are your top 3 (non-cross gen) PS5/XSX games this gen?
46
2K
FubukiJ replied
Who Are You!? - Official Trailer
Trailer Indie 
3
472
Cakeboxer replied
Top Bottom