Jumper - Being hooked on gamerscore really makes you play bad games

*bows head in shame*

All three Brad Stallion Games.

-----------------------------------------------------
Beyond this line it cannot get any lower.

It wasn't that hard to unite Scotland, a bit more to invade England itself. The problem was computer trade AI - it was completely bonkers. More likely than not, it went out fully laden with spears to a town that has a lot of spears and came back with no profit and the plague. The computer starved to death in a matter of months, because some idiotic protocol figured that one province can supply all'a Scotland and they just have to trade spears for food. All of them. And of course the bugs... well, once you had three full armies of elite ax-men (about two hours of game time), you just vent berserk in the direction you picked and that was it. Defeat a clan, save their economy, recruit every loafer and give him a spear (feck there sure are a lot of spears laying around, can't figure out why??). Go on suicide raids with them until they learn to stop being retarded and then give them an axe. Bug 'un. Rinse, repeat, that's it.

Anyway, yeah, the game would be awesome if they just fixed the AI and some really nasty bugs.

Trying to remember, reaching for memories.

But no... I don't think I've ever finished a bad game. I'm more of the sort that has trouble finishing good games, or even installing them or giving them a fair chance.

Fable? But it wasn't a bad game and most critics loved it. :/

Guess the closest thing would be one or the other of Neverwinter Nights fan made modules. And even there I gave up if the going was bad, so I never finished anything truly dismal...

Going by professional critic score aggregates, probably Clay Fighter 63⅓, Chameleon Twist probably comes in close as well, although I'm not even sure if I beat it or not. It just suddenly ended as I recall.

Worst game I've finished in my own opinion was probably Mr Robot. So overrated.

40 Winks. Only because my younger cousins couldn't finish even one level and figured watching me play it is just as good as beating it themselves. It's a pretty generic platformer for the PS1 with some of the most horrible controls ever. I don't know what exactly it is about them but after 30 minutes of playing that game gives you a rather painful case of dual thumb-ache.

Hey, Clayfighter was SUPPOSED to suck, though. That was the point of the game...I mean, seriously, where else can you play a claymation Chinese waiter who shouts "PUPU PLATTAH!" Or a sumo santa clause? Or a the crazed wraith ghosty thing who made loud cartoony exclamations that would have made the Wicked Witch of the West cringe? Actually, now that I think about it...didn't Boogerman make an appearance as well?

I believe playing with a group of friends can turn ANY game into an awsome game

Oh yeah, now I remember.

Space Siege.

It's not that it was truly horrible or anything, but didn't really offer anything either.
Just clickety click click through the levels until you reach the ending.
Had it been much longer I'd have given up. Shortness FTW.

This one. Soooo bad.

http://www.mobygames.com/game/shellshock

Druid from Sir-Tech wasn't all that good either. Blair Witch 3 was a letdown after the first couple. Phantasmagoria was poor in my opinion.

Spoilers coming.

Most hated of all time is Haven on PS2. Pretty, but relentlessly difficult platforming, with long frustrating flight sequences toward the end where you search for human-sized landmarks on planet-sized planets. And I got through it anyway. For all your hard work, a person betrays you, another person coming to save you gets killed, you're left hanging from a wall next to his body, the bad guy is triumphant, and there was never a sequel to finish the story. It's like Empire Strikes Back if Leia betrayed Han and Luke ended the movie dangling from the weathervane. With no sequel.

But there's a bonus ending available if you complete 6 more platforming levels that are harder than the rest of the game put together. They are impossible to locate without hours of flying, even when you know where they are. I finished them. The bonus ending is the normal ending with an extra paragraph of text telling you you finished for real and asking for story ideas for the sequel.

Easy: Phantasmagoria. It had no redeeming features at all:

- it was short as hell
- the acting was atrocious
- the puzzles were laughable (usually: go to room X and watch cut scene)
- the story was a joke
- there was constant disc swapping meaning you were afraid to examine anything because it might mean you had to swap discs and there were SEVEN of them!

Sure, you have worse games - especially early FMV games that limited your choice between "do this or this" and had even worse FMV, but I never finished those. This game was so short, it was impossible not to finish it.

Good thing I bought Under A Killing Moon before Phantasmagoria or I may have been put off FMV games for life.

Yeah, I played Phantasmagoria 2 through first, and that was pretty damn bad, I think it was the b00bs half way through that kept me going
I think I mainly played the first one to see if the well endowed main character got nekkid in that too*
I was amazed at how little, poor quality video they could fit on a disk in those days - go applied mathematics with the compression improvements!



* SPOILERS:


She doesn't!

And yet Phantasmagoria 2 is 10 times better than the first one :p Go figure how bad the original was ...

Turns out that I've finished at least one game that has a lower MetaScore (71) than Red Faction.

Post Mortem wasn't all bad, but it was seriously flawed. There were a few ways to solve puzzles, but it almost never made any difference which path you chose. I think the developers spent so much time creating alternative solutions that they didn't have time to think of the plot, which was interesting in the beginning and got pretty bad towards the end. The game was also seriously short, probably due to the same reason. The sound acting was mediocre at best and the cutscenes felt too scripted; gesturing characters may've been cool in 2002, but I bet it still got pretty tiring to see them do the same performance over and over again every time the camera angle changed.

The sequel, thankfully, carries a different name (Still Life), possibly preventing people from thinking that playing Post Mortem is a necessity to understand what's going on. Still Life is flawed too, but it's still so much better that I haven't sold it away and that I think it really is a Good Old Game.

Don't really have the time to go through my library and cross-reference games to scores, but I imagine it's Gothic 3. I remember it getting like a 40% in PCG, and though I do like the game, it certainly deserves that score from a purely technical point of view. Game was near-unplayable on release.