[Jony]

Originally Posted by Zack

That just reminded me about Saturday, when my Mom, dad, and I were in Best Buy. I was in the computer game section, looking for Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, when my Mom showed me a copy of Leisure Suit Larry: Magnum Cum Laude. But, I said no thanks, because of some bad reviews I read on the Internet. Looking back, I don't regret making that decision, and I'm glad about that.

Sorry if this is off-topic, though. I didn't play many games last year, so I can't figure out if there were any that I played that were bad.

P.S. PC Gamer didn't like the game in their holiday game issue last year. In fact, I think they gave it a pretty low score.

Don't knock it before you try it....download the demo first.

[Royal Fool]

Worst game? Hmm... I'd have to choose one from the games I personally played of course, and I'm leaning strongly towards Armies of Exigo from Electronic Arts and the upstart developer Black Hole Games.

Crap. Words cannot describe how disappointed I was with that game. It copies so many things from Warcraft, StarCraft and Command & Conquer (Although more from the first two) that it borders on the sacriligious.

Three factions: Empire, Beastmen and some other strange race that I forgot the name of (And whose campaign I never bothered to even unlock, I had uninstalled the game before I reached that point in the game). The humans are like the humans from Warcraft III (Surprise!), the beastmen are like the orcs from Warcraft III (Whoa, another surprise!) and the, err, alien race are a sort of zerg hybrids with an elven twist.

Okay, obviously the developers had some inspiration from other games in the genre, and that is certainly not a bad thing. It's expected that people imitate each other, that's the basis of art. However, Armies of Exigo goes a step beyond that; they manage to directly rip stuff straight from Blizzard's games. The peasants with their lowly farmer accents? Check. Brutal orcs with 'primitive' technology? Check. The usual harvesting of the very usual materials? Check. Unit rushes? Check. It's pretty mundane, really.

Then there's the gimm-... sorry, "selling point": Battle and build bases underground as well as on the surface. Sounds cool, but the two sides of the maps are very much identical in the way they function: Both have materials to harvest, both allow for bases and neither of them have any specific unique traits that the other has not. The underground maps are not with the same layout as the surface, which calls for a little strategy here and there and allows for special attacks, but other than that it's very much the same. And no, this feature is not particularly new, I remember playing a demo of some obscure mech-strategy game three years ago that had whole three layers on each map: Underground, surface and skies. Take that, Armies of Exigo.

Also, the food chain of units in the game makes it easy for players to waste resources. Higher-tier units crush those who are lower than them, even if they are outnumbered. This was emphasized immediately in the second human mission where you're warned that the beastmen have ogres and will attack soon. So I build 5-6 soldiers and receive the backup of elven archers. The ogre attacks and completely wipes out my units. How very fair.

Long post, but I felt like ranting. As you can tell, I don't like the game.

[simpson_yellow]

Hmmm, I only just bought a new rig and haven't really played enough 2004 releases to nominate a worst one. I've completed HL2, and am trying to complete Myst IV and Deus Ex: IW (that was 2004, right?) but failing to find the time due to an unfortunate addiction to HL2 deathmatch. I've also played Beyond Good and Evil and Max Payne 2, but I think they were '03 releases.

i.e. haven't played any recent games that I'd consider remotely bad.

Worst game I played this year was The Longest Journey (I finally sat down and completed it after shelving it a couple of years ago). Not that I'm saying it was an awful game. It was just the worst of a pretty good bunch of games that I played. Just didn't do it for me. Didn't particularly like the characters, dialogue, or puzzles. The story wasn't enough to hold it together for me.

This thread reminds me - I must get a copy of Big Rigs given it's so cheap now . I remember reading the reviews on its release and wanting it for the novelty value (if it was available for a suitably cheap-ass price of course).

[pleto4_ryan]

I only disliked one game before, "Atlantis 2",
2004 has brought 3 more games to my dislike list...

Syberia 2
Pirates!
Doom 3

[JHousequake]

Didn't purchase a lot of games this year (Only three.) but from what I got...

The worst game is Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude. I'm sure I mentioned what I disliked about this. Basically it's the fault of lazy designers who think they can replace gameplay with vulgarity. Didn't work.

And the most overhyped game of the year was probably GTA: San Andreas on the PS2. I once posted here that Vice City was the best game of the year when that was released and I still stand by it but San Andreas is sort of a let down in the sense that it dosen't feel fresh. The maps look uglier and gimmicks like changing your hairstyle and going to the gym weren't all that inspired. "But Housequake, there's the jetpack!" Yeah but that wasn't enough kids.

So this leaves us with DOOM3 which I didn't find all that spectactular outside of the awesome graphic engine and atmosphere. It's much more entertaining than the other two titles.

[C_Knight]

I thought Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne was very disapointing with it's half-assed generic battle system, the pokemon-esque monster recruitment, ugly graphics, and worst of all the unnessarily hard difficulty. Many times I just wanted to just go through with it and complete it, but getting pwned by an almost unbeatable boss who can actively perform an action four times before you do, or even worse getting turned to stone by a regular enemy really makes it hard for you to want to continue. If the main character dies, it's over.. It really helps when half the enemies are capable of inflicting auto-death attacks or turning you into stone....

[Manhunter71]

Hehe I didnt play any bad games at all in 2004, and the reason for this is that before I spend my hard-earned money on a game I read as many reviews as I can find, I read forum posts and look at screenshots!
I really couldn't live with myself if I spent over ÂŁ30 on a game that turned out to be rubbish

[Stalker]

Originally Posted by C_Knight

I thought Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne was very disapointing with it's half-assed generic battle system, the pokemon-esque monster recruitment, ugly graphics, and worst of all the unnessarily hard difficulty. Many times I just wanted to just go through with it and complete it, but getting pwned by an almost unbeatable boss who can actively perform an action four times before you do, or even worse getting turned to stone by a regular enemy really makes it hard for you to want to continue. If the main character dies, it's over.. It really helps when half the enemies are capable of inflicting auto-death attacks or turning you into stone....

Actually... did you ever play a game from the Shin Megami Tensei series before? They have always been about collecting spirits in one for or the other, and all of them were really hard.

I myself thought it was nice for a change to play an RPG again where I die from time to time... not counting optional bosses or failing timed "escape"-scenes, I think I died like three times max in most other RPGs during the last... I dunno, five years?

Originally Posted by JHousequake

And the most overhyped game of the year was probably GTA: San Andreas on the PS2. I once posted here that Vice City was the best game of the year when that was released and I still stand by it but San Andreas is sort of a let down in the sense that it dosen't feel fresh. The maps look uglier and gimmicks like changing your hairstyle and going to the gym weren't all that inspired. "But Housequake, there's the jetpack!" Yeah but that wasn't enough kids.

What is it with GTA? There's such a wide variety of opinions regarding game preference for this series (even though they all play the gaddamn same!).

"I loved GTA3, hated Vice City, and also loved San Andreas!"

"Well, I hated GTA3, loved Vice City, and hated San Andreas!"

"Oh, I hated the first two, but I luuuuurrrv San Andreas!"

[ConcreteRancor]

Originally Posted by BigRobot

What is it with GTA? There's such a wide variety of opinions regarding game preference for this series (even though they all play the gaddamn same!).

"I loved GTA3, hated Vice City, and also loved San Andreas!"

"Well, I hated GTA3, loved Vice City, and hated San Andreas!"

"Oh, I hated the first two, but I luuuuurrrv San Andreas!"

How about mine?

"I loved GTA3, loved Vice City, and can't wait until San Andreas comes out for PC so I can buy that too!"

[C_Knight]

Originally Posted by Stalker

Actually... did you ever play a game from the Shin Megami Tensei series before? They have always been about collecting spirits in one for or the other, and all of them were really hard.

I myself thought it was nice for a change to play an RPG again where I die from time to time... not counting optional bosses or failing timed "escape"-scenes, I think I died like three times max in most other RPGs during the last... I dunno, five years?

I played Persona 2 before, but I can't remember much about it. I appreciate challenges but this can really get on your nerves. I think I'll enjoy DDS better since it's a more traditional RPG with "human" characters