Games you really wanted to like, but no matter what, you couldn't/didn't
Haru17 last edited by Haru17
Sorry for the wall of text, I'm just that salty. "I have opinions on game design."
I beat both Xenoblade Chronicles and The Witcher 3, and firmly believe the the stories (and especially side quests) for both are still just kinda bad. I've played other "revered" RPGs that I was just never into before and subtly liked them, if not made peace with their existances. This was not the case for Xenophobia Chronicles and The Witcher 3: Wild (but not too wild because succubi are people too) Hunt. Chronicles in particular always felt like World of Warcraft, but after I had caught onto the number-raising formula and grown sick of it. And people call Kingdoms of Amalur a singleplayer MMO, sheesh!
While the story, world, and combat for both games bugged me, what really killed it for me was the worlds. Xenoblade's world just felt like a grind through a bunch of trash mobs and fetch quests. I didn't feel any connection to the flat areas with other flat areas stacked on top of them. That's not verticality, that's just fall damage. With The Witcher, I thought it had a lot of good spots, but was just wrong-headed in a lot of its design. I liked all of the dungeons I went to, but that totaled 5 just caverns over the course of the whole game (that was sidequests too). Open world RPGs like Skyrim (and I'm going to use this comparison a lot, so grab your Beth-hating caps and get ready to #cringe) have literal depth to them. As in dungeons, everywhere. It's not engaging to simply run through trees, swamps, and waters, I need that sweet, sweet level-design. But seriously it is that kind of light platforming and terrain variation that spices up a dull combat system 50+ hours in.
And the segmented map is just a bad idea. Yes, yes, lore, Tolkenian maps—whatever! None of that matters in a game. Imagine how much cooler Dragon Age Inquisition would have been if that game was all on one continuous map. It doesn't even compare. Just look at Zelda: Is it splitting up it's open world into three different loading zones, and then several practically impassible bodies of water within that, or is all contiguous, like they are in Elder Scrolls? Look at WoW devlogs about the failings of the Cataclysm expansion, which split up its new lands in 6 different areas across the world, 3 of which had to be loaded into.
Finally—and this one might ruffle some feathers—2D Zeldas. Ever since I was 8 and I got into Zelda with the Gamecube Collector's Edition disc, I have moved the cursor past Zelda 1, past The Adventure of Link, and onto Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, or even the Wind Waker demo. I love those later three games, and Twilight Princess. 3D Zelda is my favorite series hands-down, I've just never found the same appeal in the 2D games. Since then I've beaten The Minish Cap, Four Swords Adventures, Phantom Hourglass, Spirit Tracks, A Link Between Worlds, and tried to get into A Link to the Past, the original Four Swords, and Link's Awakening (so don't say I didn't try! Because I did! Swear to god...).
I gotta tell you... I just think they're bad Zelda games, guys. The combat and stories are obviously less ambitious, and, without those 3D environments and puzzles... I just can't do it. I can't like them as "Zelda games." Honestly, their temples feel closer to Pokemon Gyms than Zelda dungeons. That's why I troll about A Link to the Past: Not because I think it's "a bad Zelda game," but because I think it's on par in the subseries of 2D "Zelda" games that will never reach the height of the 3D Zelda games. #Slight
jipostus last edited by
First Witcher game got me so frustrated with combat, that I didn't even touch Witcher series until much later, jumped straight to 3, only to get let down by the combat once more, at least it didn't make the entire game unplayable, like the first game.
El Shmiablo Banned last edited by
I felt the same way OP feels about FFXIII, but with X. I actually DID swear off FF games after playing the garbage fire that was X, and ironically it was XIII that brought me back.
Inustar last edited by
So it had to be said by someone I guess...
No Man's Sky.
It was a let down, not because of hype, but because it wasn't fun after a few hours, and didn't look that great either. Not to mention some crashing and bad ship combat.
It's actually the only game I have ever bought that I regret immensely.
Im a bit boring.. but going to agree with OP. I tried again and again to like FF XIII. In the end Lightning were cool, but the rest of the character I felt more annoyed by than excited to follow. The linear maps made me feel cramped in and the story didn't really motivate me to keep on going. I made it until close to the end, but there were other games that popped up and caught my attention. Please let FF XV be amazing.
bard91 last edited by
Ni No Kuni I honestly think there's some sort of mass delusion when it comes to this game, it is SOOOOOOOOOOOO BAAAAAAAAAAAD!!!!!!!!!!!
It's not bad, it's just painfully mediocre. It basically has all the things you'd think you'd love like an overworld (traveling on land, water and air with hiddean areas on the map), a pokemon/dragon quest/etc. styled monster team, a big and dramatic story, you play as a wizard with tons of spells, alchemy, a casino, etc. but you quickly realize that almost none of it is well executed.
The characters are bland, the script is nothing special, the combat system is clunky, the pacing is off and the list goes on.
There wasn't anything that frustrated me like very bad game design, having to replay huge segments, game breaking bugs or anything... but after a while you just become bored.
Hopefully the devs learned a bunch from making NNK and make NNK2 into the game first one should've been.
I guess I can agree that the game for the most part is not broken, with the very important exception of combat. The practically nonexistent allied AI and the mechanics that you had to control the party made the game much harder that it should be a lot of times, and that had really damaged my impressions of the game.
I do hope that NNK2 is better, but I'm not expecting much.
matt last edited by
Ocarina of Time. It's regarded as a masterpiece and one of the best games of all time. But it's pretty boring to me and I have some issues with their game design. Not to say I don't like it. I just don't love it like I was expecting to. It's a one and done for me.
On the other end of the spectrum for games I didn't think I would like but ended up loving is Sleeping Dogs. Got it for free through Xbox Games with Gold. I tried to love the True Crime LA but the gameplay was not good. This one totally caught me by surprise.
Faaip last edited by Faaip
I usually really try to get into the games I buy but there have been a few instances where I just can't like them. I usually can't pinpoint a specific issue with a game but I just lose the will to continue playing, here's a few instances.
Assassin's Creed 2, 3 Brotherhood - I know 2 is considered one of the better games, but I just couldn't get through it, then for some reason I bought 2 more and the same thing happened. Something about the gameplay just doesn't pull me in and I guess 1 was unique enough for me to finish it when it was released.
Dead Space 2 - This one is a mystery to me, I loved the first and had a lot of fun playing 2 but after a couple attempts, I just haven't finished it. Maybe I need to try again.
Fallout New Vegas - I've tried this one 2 or 3 times.. I think I beat the main quest line once but I really haven't spent much time in this game and I'm not sure why. I loved 3 and had fun playing 4 and saw just about everything in those games but for some reason New Vegas just didn't do it for me.
frasafrase last edited by frasafrase
Souls/borne series. Even lump Nioh in there after trying the alpha/beta. "It's supposed to be hard", "It teaches you to be a better gamer". While I can respect the game design (and I hope other devs learn from it), I was never the gamer that wants to push through the impassable wall. Maybe I've played too much of games like Diablo and Destiny where you feel like the most powerful person in the room, but I think its goes deeper.
I like the mixing of players in ways where there are the experienced people who know the in's and out's along with players who just play a game at face-value (And its fun to be on both sides of the coin). But with the souls series, it seems like just to beat the game you have to become "hardcore". Maybe that's a good thing, forcing people into dedication, but it turns me away.
ACardAttack last edited by
Super Metroid, wanted to like this game, but Samus controls horribly, she is both clunky and floaty at the same time
Souls Series not enough story for me to interest me
Brannox last edited by
@El-Shmiablo You know, I feel the exact opposite. X is my second favorite of the series. Great to see diversity here!
Skippersa last edited by
Souls series for me, bought Dark Souls 3 as my first souls game. Parts of the game I really enjoy, but not enough for me to finish it.
Dice_for_Death_ last edited by
@bard91 Okay. Maybe it's me, but I feel I need the rules to have a grasp of my in-game limitations, or to know wherein my in-game imagination can roam within. That explanation doesn't feel terribly sensible, but I feel the lack of rules turns me off... It's like, let's make rule discussion intrinsic to gameplay, and... ? I swear, I'm trying to give Fiasco a chance, but maybe it's all that chatter that turns me off. Perhaps my reclusive, shy tendencies turn me off to this game. But, thanks for your thoughts nonetheless.
David Restrepo last edited by
I hate Tales of Symphonia. I got the Tales of Symphonia Chronicles on PS3 after playing multiple tales games and hearing Symphonia was the most revered. I completed it because I tend to give games a fair chance and I will complete all games unless there is a progression roadblock like I'm stuck and guides don't help or I can't be bothered to look up guides every 10 seconds for a crap game.
Anyways, I didn't really like the Symphonia characters anywhere near as much as characters in other entries of the franchise, but the real killers are its outdated combat and the pacing. The game is one of the older games and so it was before the introduction of fully 3D movement and it just looks stupid and feels limited having these 3D dungeons and 3D environments and 3D everything only to be limited to a 2D perspective for combat.
The pacing was also complete trash. At least 3-5 times throughout the game, the story telegraphs "hey, we're building up to a climax and we're about to be done here", then pulls a lot twist out of its ass just to extend the length of the game. It would have been frustrating enough if it was only once, but it happened a minimum of 3 times and I was sick and tired of having a build-up to a faux-ending. Such a repetitive experience. I don't understand how people like this one more than Tales of Vesperia or Tales of The Abyss
bosstier last edited by
Man, I am going to get a lot of hate probably, but:
Ocarina of Time
I tried to, I really did. But at that time halfway through the game I completely lost interest in it. Despite finding the beginning to be good the game never felt magical to me. Instead, Soul Reaver was the Action Adventure I really lost myself in.
Red Dead Redemption
After GTA 2, San Andreas was the last Rockstar game to truly excite me. I have accepted that but I really really wanted to like RDR and I just didn't.
I never got to play it when it came out so I got the PS3 version. It just feels so archaic it's unbelievable. I forced myself 7 hours into it but then I realized I was working on and not enjoying the game.
Mbun last edited by
The Uncharted Series
A long time ago, around when Uncharted 2 was blowing up in popularity I believe but maybe before that I decided I should give the first Uncharted game a chance and see if it deserved the popularity surrounding it. While I initially kind of liked it, the game mechanics just felt really rough and not all there. All the shooting sequences also really brought me out of it, and I think I dropped the game in some basement full of enemies cause I was so bored out of my mind of shooting generic dudes over and over.
Fast forward to Uncharted 4 release. Okay, I have to give this series a second chance. Everyone is losing their damn minds over this thing. Pop it in. Give it a go. Wow. Wow. It looks nice, but the gameplay is so incredibly dumbed down that it's just go from point A to point B, shoot yet more generic dudes, climb ledges that pretend to crumble but don't until you actually get off them, and watch enemy AI plummet while you stealth through sections effortlessly taking guys out who are way more formidable strangely if you're instead in a gunfight with them.
The locations are cool yes. I liked the general story. Best part of the game was hunting the little bonus trinkets in each area down and reading the lore on them. The gameplay however is just so incredibly lacking over other platforming exploration games that I couldn't enjoy it as a whole. The combat isn't satisfying at all. Every time the game presented a beautiful or fun scripted moment, as soon as I'd start to enjoy it, Nathan Drake would chime in with some "whoa, did you see that!" or "whew, that was close" comment to completely shatter the fourth wall like some smug dev nod of how proud they were over something that completely ruined the moment.
I know if I had played Uncharted 2 and 3 the context would've made the scenes in Uncharted 4 all the more important, but I also don't think any video game should lean as heavily on the story for a player's enjoyment of the game as Uncharted 4 does. It's fine for movies, but half the fun of playing a video game is playing the video game, not the video game playing you, not being lead along and tricked into thinking you're doing well at something when the level of challenge is actually quite shallow once you take away the smoke and mirrors. I get that it's supposed to be an easily accessible feel good adventure that anyone can get into. They went for mass appeal. It's just sad that this means a game can't be challenging and rewarding for experienced gamers. Oh well, at least the multiplayer makes up for pretty much all my gripes with the single player and is extremely fun and unique.
So yea, I wanted to like the Uncharted Series, but I guess the single player story is just not for me. I've been spoiled on series like Prince of Persia that just do it better. They might not be as graphically impressive. Certain entries like Warrior Within are even glitchy, but the control of the plaforming and combat is always in your hands. When something cool happens, it's because you did that cool thing, not because it was a scripted sequence where a wall breaks the moment you climb off of it.
Brannox last edited by
@ErbenSebastian As a Kingdom Hearts fan, there's no hate from me! It didn't click for you, and while I'm bummed that it didn't, you gave it a legitimate shot. 7 hours isn't nothing to sneeze at. Granted, its better not to force yourself to go through a game if you're not feeling (hence my original post for this thread), but if you gave it to at least Traverse Town or Wonderland, that's a fair enough amount of time for you to say: Nope, not for me.
@Mbun As an Uncharted fan, I enjoyed reading your critiques! As I just said about KH, at least you gave it a shot. UC 4 is in my top 5 games of all time because of one of your main points: Story emphasis. To your other points, I agree the controls are not the best, the crumbling ledges do become tiresome, and challenge isn't there if you don't cap it. Which I would like to ask: What difficulty did you play on? I went for the lower ones for my first run-through to enjoy the game, not the combat, and I feel that if it was higher, then there would've been greater hurdles to overcome, but because there is much less combat in 4 than any other, I didn't think it would matter. I remember Mr. Hinck expressing his distaste in Uncharted as a whole, but played 4 on Explorer difficulty and enjoyed it. Maybe difficulty selection played a tiny part in your dissatisfaction? Either way, it didn't work out and I love the fact that there are differing views on games that we enjoy/dislike.
Mbun last edited by
@Brannox I just went with Moderate. As far as difficulty goes, the firefights seemed set at a level that seemed about right. Afraid if I went higher I'd just have lots of die in one shot moments, and I would've had even less fun with it. On the other hand, if pumping the difficulty settings up made the enemy AI for stealth sections less forgiving, then that's something worth looking into since it felt so disproportionally easy by comparison to firefight AI. I usually start most games on whatever Normal is and only pump it up if Normal feels like it's actually Easy.
Guest last edited by
Star Ocean 5 and Final Fantasy Type 0.
Wanted to love them, had been eagerly awaiting them both. But too many technical/mechanical issues ruined it for me, and SO5 just felt so empty and soul-less compared to other JRPGs, let alone other SO games.
Haru17 last edited by
@ZyloWolfBane But is that really wanting to like something, or is it wanting that thing to have been a better form of itself?