Jump to content

Home

5 Biggest Gaming Disappointments of 2003


txa1265

Recommended Posts

Originally posted by STTCT

The 5 Things that Piss me off

 

 

1. The dely of games coming to PC and going straight to XBOX first. AKA KOTOR!

 

2. That SWG costs $15 FREAKIN Dollars a month

 

3. JA's HONOR CODE on some servers (won't name names)

 

4. More and More games are being Rushed to PC without working out the bugs - do they even test these things?

 

5. Can't think of anything...off hand.

 

Does is piss you off not being able to think of anyting? :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Originally posted by txa1265

I don't know where Chase is located, but I got it (RtCW) for Christmas ... in 2001! US release was November 2001, heck even the Mac was out in 2002.

 

Mike

 

I'm thinking that Chase is refering to the Enemy Territory free expansion that came out in early summer. Seriously though, its a FREE game, how can one be disappointed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by IG-64

maybe there's a reason for it to be free :p

 

Nah its a great game, maybe because its multiplayer only. And theres only about 5 maps so it gets repetitive. Why pay £20 (or however many $s) for a game like that when you pay the same for a big xp pack (like NWN:HotU).

 

But then I spose why pay for The Sims or JA??:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by ZBomber

4. The Sims - WHy do I keep buying these?

 

So many people bought the original sims, and now EA just go:

"Hey! We can put a new object on a disk and sell it for $20!"

And we all fall for it.

 

They're a waste of money. I stopped buying them after House Party. That was when the greatness of The Sims died.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Excelsion

So many people bought the original sims, and now EA just go:

"Hey! We can put a new object on a disk and sell it for $20!"

And we all fall for it.

 

They're a waste of money. I stopped buying them after House Party. That was when the greatness of The Sims died.

 

I have all the PC ones except House Part, Making Magic, and Sims 2. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi. My name is CapN', and I'm a Sims junky. I've bought all those damned things. I dunno why, I hardly play it...The real kick in the pants is now they're making Sims 2. Imagine if they go ape**** with expansion packs for that thing too...Gawd...might as well take up a real addiciton like heroin if they do. It might be cheaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. All these freaking RUSHED GAMES. Personally, I cheer every time a game is delayed. It means it will be better! (Generally, at least ^_~)

 

2. Star Was Galaxies. Never actually got this, but I'm bitching about the amount of money they want for what by all accounts is a very-unfinished game.

 

3. Enter the Matrix. Loved the game, but it could have been so, so much better. See number 1.

 

4. Jedi Academy...because I never got the chance to get it! Hehe. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Excelsion

I just need to add one more major disappointment.

 

- Gamespots choice to make some GC game 'Game of the Year 2003'. They made The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker game of the year. What is this world coming to?

 

No...NO!! NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Legend of Zelda:The Wind Waker was a very good game IMHO.

The Sims is fun, but EA Games squelches the franchise for everything it's worth...like grape jam...

 

I thought Enter the Matrix was fun, until you beat it and did the hacking program(which I am proud to say I did all on my own :D ), then it just got pretty tiring(SP?).

 

And to all of you people bitchin about games with bad graphics, you guys are really odd. All that matters to me is the gameplay :cool:

 

 

Also, in all this time that Galaxies has been out, they finally got their first Jedi. Someone unlocked the force for their character.

(read in recent Game Informer)

 

My two cents...NOW WHERES MY LEPRECHAUN :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by IG-64

Never heard of it :confused:

Never heard of Neverwinter Nights? It is a pretty popular RPG for PC (& Mac & Linux) which came out for PC in 2002, and Mac/Linux in 2003.

 

It has had two official expansion packs - Shadows of Undrentide this summer, and Hordes of the Underdark came out (in the US) on December 2nd. HotU lets you *start* at level 15.

 

Fun stuff.

 

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indiana Jones and the Emperor's Tomb: 2/3 of this game were GREAT! Amazing, if a wee bit too inspired by Tomb Raider. BUT: The last couple of levels sucked! They were such a pain in the ass, and totally unlike anything that went before (it became more like a Mario game) that I pretty much gave up without ever finishing it... I was so bummed out... :(

 

Freelancer: No joystick control for a space flight sim? WTF?!? :rolleyes: It might have been an OK game otherwise, (though no Freespace.) Enough said about that...

 

KOTOR: Amazing game,.. but "turn-based" combat in a video game still bites.

 

Halo (PC): Good,.. but not really up to all the hype,.. and a lot of the levels were SOOOO repetitive that it started to feel like an endurance test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Half-Life 2 delayed.

I'm about to kill someone if I don't get to play this game soon! ARGGHHHH!!!

 

2. KotOR bugs.

Ok, the game is seriously awesome, and is my favourite game of 2003 by far, but the bugs are pissing me off.

 

3. JA dark/light ending.

Same thing, just more enemies. Very dissapointing.

 

4. Still no Duke Nukem Forever.

See ^Half-Life 2^.

 

5. The continued Xbox bashing.

Why does everyone keep bashing the Xbox? I simply don't understand it. It's an awesome console and we have loads of great games to come in 2004. GO XBOX!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oooh...another thread to rant in. Er...hmmm...been doing too much of that lately, but I'll bite anyway...

 

1. The 'streamlining' and 'shortening' of games.

 

First of all, the arguments of other people on the net has finally managed to convince me that this doesn't necessarily have much to do with consoles at all. Many people perceive it as 'dumbing down to fit the console', but I no longer think that argument is valid. Look at games like Knights Of The Old Republic. Has anyone really, seriously claimed that it was 'dumbed down'? Of course, the interface was optimised for both platforms on which it was released - which is as it should be - but in terms of game depth and even interface depth, it outshines a lot of PC only game developments in recent years.

 

Of course the console has limitations - limited number of buttons, limited memory, etc., but there are ways to work around these obstacles. You can produce relatively large levels. You can have complex interfaces, and depth to gameplay. So there must be another reason why this is happening that is not entirely related to console limitations. I think it is partly down to perceptions of publishers - that they actually view the console market as being 'dumbed down', and thereby force developers to make products that match such thinking.

 

The argument for shortening games is usually that they want the maximum number of purchasers to complete a title - apparently not many people are willing (or perhaps able) to finish a game that might take 30-40 hours. We're told this...but I've never seen any actual proof of this claim. No statistics. Perhaps this is the case...I don't know. However, does that production of longer games should cease entirely? I think not. I prefer a longer game to a short one. I consider an average game length to be about 25 hours. 5-10 hours is simply far too short, and usually ends up heavily scripted and very linear to boot - which may lead to an intense game experience, but for me it's over before I can properly get my teeth into it.

 

This kind of mentality is driving games to become less than they could be. Their potential is being stifled. Less is not more. Stripping out features, gameplay elements, and formulas that you enjoyed in previous games is not 'innovation' but regression, which will eventually lead to stagnation.

 

Cross-platform development can work, if executed properly, and that means taking into consideration each individual platform and optimising the game (including it's control and interface systems) to make them platform-centric. The modern PC is usually a more powerful system than a console, and so games should play to it's strengths. The game may be the same on different platforms - but on a PC, for example, it should have higher res textures, more details, more seamless levels (if possible).

 

I just feel like giving a large part of the gaming industry a kick up the backside, a wake up call, and make them chant 'Less is NOT more' a hundred times a day. A sequel should build on the strengths of it's predecessor - and it should address the weaknesses. This is not accomplished by removing game features altogether. Deus Ex: Invisible War may be my key disappointment in this regard this year - but by no means the only title. Unreal 2 was also a huge disappointment as a sequel - and I cannot imagine what possessed Monolith to deliver up Contract J.A.C.K. Jedi Academy and Dungeon Siege: Legends of Aranna seem like masterworks in comparison.

 

At a time when the average age of gamers is actually rising - I'd quote statistics if I could find them, but I know I've read it a few times in different places - and their expectations based on previous games is increasing, it seems almost ludicrous the route that some of the publisher/development houses are taking. Some of them seem to be trying to take niche market products into the mainstream, and they do this by 'simplifying' or even 'quakifying' them, if you like. Regurgitated sports titles always seem to sell a great deal...but games like NOLF and Deus Ex didn't sell anywhere near as well, in spite of critical acclaim. Yet by trying to make these franchises more 'mainstream' the resulting sequels/expansions become something far less than their predecessors. Leave us with the niche markets, so those looking for long and complex games can still have their fill from the gaming cup.

 

2. Bugs in games.

 

No game will ever be perfect these days. As more factors are introduced, more things are likely to go wrong. As more hardware and associated drivers become available, compatibility obviously becomes more difficult, unless you are designing solely for consoles. However, these things aside - why are so many games released with 'show-stopping' bugs? DX:IW is probably the worst culprit I've seen released this year that suffers from show-stopping bugs. Random crashes to desktop, falling through the maps into oblivion, infolink messages that sometimes don't shut off, and prevent you from going to the next level - these are not minor bugs, and you have to start asking what the QA team was actually doing.

 

I won't expect bug free products in future - that would be unrealistic - but major flaws should never get past a rigorous testing program, and I think a greater emphasis needs to be placed on Quality Assurance in the future. It's no fun having to download or wait for a 30Mb+ patch just to get your game working, and it should no longer be acceptable. Part of the blame has to lie with the engine providers - there should be more safeguards and robust code built into the underlying engine to prevent the possibility of 'falling through scenery' etc. Most of the blame lies with the developers and QA departments, however. Products should be optimised for their intended platform, and given a thorough play-testing from start to finish several times over by 'reckless' gamers to ensure stability. By reckless gamers, I mean those who will try anything in a game world - those who actively seek to find ways to break a game, to climb out of the maps, etc.

 

3. Game balance and decisions.

 

Some titles have been released in recent years that have had considerable promise during development, only to prove disappointing on release. The demos have flagged up flaws in the execution of certain elements - not bugs, but conscious design decisions that sometimes seem strange or downright silly. DX:IW suffered from quite a few of these...but so did other games like Chrome and New World Order. Games that mess too much with basic things like the feel of movement (New World Order), or give enemies unrealistic marksmanship (100% accuracy in Chrome). Things like Unified Ammo in DX:IW...well, it's going back to the days of Wolfenstein 3D.

 

So I wish some developers would simply take a large step back sometimes, and take a good, hard, long look at how their games are actually performing, and whether some of those decisions are actually assisting gameplay. If they're just trying to be 'different', then in my book that's not a good enough excuse. If I can play a game that has solid movement and control in the game world, and feels right, why do some other games fly in the face of this and either make it too complicated, or make it feel out of synch with you, as the player? Walking in Unreal 2 felt like inching your way forward, any kind of movement in New World Order (I only tried trhe demo) just felt jerky and weird, and other games give you a 'floaty' feel. I just wish there were some kind of common standards that could be applied. I mean...if you can't get the basics right, then what hope is there for the rest of the game?

 

****

 

I could go on to list disappointing games, etc., but I've already touched on some, and the issues I discussed are my main gripes with the industry as a whole at the moment.

 

I just hope that things will improve in 2004.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Mary Kate and Ashley: Double Date. No bikini contests, whats up with that.

 

2. Full Throttle 2. CANCELED. Whats up with that, ive been waiting for a sequel for like 7 years now, even longer i think. And the dude at LUcas Arts says, o woops we screwed up. Sorry for the inconvenience. I mean geez, they can make powerpuff girls games but no Full Throttle 2. Its a travesty people, lets rebel. :urpdude:.

 

And im really tired and hungry, so i can think of anymore, for the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by leXX

1. Half-Life 2 delayed.

I'm about to kill someone if I don't get to play this game soon! ARGGHHHH!!!

... that's funny, I don't think of myself as *too* cynical, but I see HL2 as the PR move #1 of 2003.

 

4. Still no Duke Nukem Forever.

See ^Half-Life 2^.

As I recall each year at this time - my wife 'pre-ordered' Duke Nukem Forever and ObiWan for PC four years ago. She was thrilled - I'm such a pain to buy for, and to have $100 well spent so early ... but then ...

5. The continued Xbox bashing.

Why does everyone keep bashing the Xbox? I simply don't understand it. It's an awesome console and we have loads of great games to come in 2004. GO XBOX!

I see a few things personally:

- As a gamer, I don't dislike the XBox. Great system, great games, great for console players.

- As a parent of young kids, I try to manage their gaming time productively. Santa brought a GameCube this year, which has tons of good kids and family games. In terms of young kids, I see the XBox about as productive as the Playboy channel ... just inappropriate. Doesn't mean inappropriate for everyone, just something I don't want in my house.

- As a PC gamer, I see the XBox in direct competition with the PC for titles and developer mind-share. Halo is the infamous example. For this year I look at DX:IW and XIII as two games whose PC versions show heavy non-PC influence. Is any of this the fault of the XBox? No.

 

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by StormHammer

Oooh...another thread to rant in. Er...hmmm...been doing too much of that lately, but I'll bite anyway...

I was hoping you would ;)

 

I have to re-reread and then reply. Nice post ... glad to see we still agree on so much in 2004 :D

 

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...