The worst games of 2010, and what will sucketh mightily in 2K11.

[Deleted1744345User]

Games that made my fail list:

 

Supreme Commander 2

 

Call of Duty: Black Ops

 

Civilization 5

 

Iron Man 2

 

Dead to Rights: Retribution

 

Lost Planet 2

--------------------------------------------

These days it seems like game companies are willing to churn out anything if it makes a quick buck. I'm getting close to being disgusted enough to abandon video games forever as I see nothing but a dark future for the industry.

[Fonger]

Games that made my fail list:

 

Civilization 5

Please do tell why - for better decision making

[Vindekarr]

Never give up.

 

I almost stopped watching a particular british TV show last year because it had gone from being the supreme #1 thriller/crime show on tv in australia, to a generic morass with all the social commentry, refferences to news only months old, and awesome suspence that had made it worth watching.

 

Then they made a new series, killed off the worst characters, and went back to the old ways. I regretted ever thinking of leaving.

 

Things change Pain, they always do. And ups n downs are restricted to just life, rollercoasters, and roads in Finland, everything has good and bad times.

 

Video gaming has had many bad spots in it's first thirty years. Good times, bad times, good devs, bad devs, good games, bad games. Every bad year simply makes the chances of a good next year a bit more likely. Dont give up on something you love just because it's not good at the present moment. Life can always surprise.

 

You giving up gaming over a bad year and bad forcast would be like me giving up riding a motorcycle simply because it rained two days in a row this week; understandable when it's cold, windy, wet, and the only joy of riding is getting off when you arrive. But when it's sunny, even running errands is worth the riding.

Edited December 11, 2010 by Vindekarr

[Deleted1744345User]

Games that made my fail list:

 

Civilization 5

Please do tell why - for better decision making

 

I thought Civ 4 was much better, but maybe because of the DLC and mods that I used. I just don't feel Civ 5 is as in-depth as the previous one, and I like games that let me micromanage. Even though I used the demo version which would have fewer features, I knew I wouldn't be satisfied so I cancelled my preorder. I hope that there will be a Civ 6 that is much better.

[Deleted1217574User]

Short list:

 

Halo: Reach

 

New Vegas (Bugs more than gameplay)

 

Mass Effect 2

 

Pretty sure that's all I got at the moment.

 

What's your problem with Reach? I thought it was pretty great.

[CommanderCrazy]

What's your problem with Reach? I thought it was pretty great.

 

The words 'Short, Repetitive and Boring' spring to mind here.

Couple that with the fact that it offers pretty much nothing new, and you have yourself a bad game.

[Vindekarr]

Exactly.

 

That's why it's here.

 

That's why ME2 is here.

 

That's why NV is here.

 

If you are going to make a sequal, atleast put the effort into making it a truesequal; bigger, longer, better, rather than a simple remake on the same engine and then demanding top dollar.

 

You've got two main options for a proper sequal.

 

You've got the Dawn Of War II route. This means you make an original game, then add onto it annualy with a large expansion pack,a dding a new race and a new campaign the length of the original game. This really works. It means that the game is regularly getting technical enhancements, that the WarHammer lore gets continualy added onto, and that after a couple of years, you've got a gargantuan Titan of a game, with more than a hundred missions, dozens of races, and near endless campaign fun.

 

But with this route, one must be careful. Because if your expansions get boring, all you end up doing is making the game bloated and slovenly. Relic, DOWII's devs, learned this the hard way with SoulStorm, an xpack even they admited was a bridge too far.

 

Or the Burnout route. Typicaly make a game, wait about 3-4 years, and in then blow the fan's minds with a new and totaly diferent game on a totaly diferent engine with little but theme and universe connecting the first and second games. This means that you get a very fresh game each time, and will continualy be technologicaly top spec.

 

But this too has risks; deviate too far and fans will hate you, not love you. Dont deviate far enough, and you do a Mass Effect, and end up with a long line of monotonous repetition. And dont take too long, or you'll do a Half Life, and leave fans waiting 8 years for a new, five minute episode that will be technologicaly primitive and lacking any fun factor.

[Arthmoor]

Gothic 4- I really have no idea what Jowood were thinking, they've dumbed it down so much that even the most fervent Gothic fan would switch it off in disgust. It makes Oblivion look deep and complex.

 

Clearly we played two entirely different Gothic 4's. While it was annoyingly short, I wouldn't call it anything close to the worst game. I certainly didn't get the vibe that they dumbed down the series or anything like that. All the other games were more or less the same setup in different locations. I'm not even a fanatic of the series. I don't even really play that many of the games that come out, most of what's out there looks like absolute trash, so... yeah. I dunno. G4 was worth the money IMO. Kept me entertained for a bit, which is what counts in the end.

[Amayakyrol]

I'm pretty sure Final Fantasy XIV takes the cake and then some.

 

Hyped to be a WoW killer and fell harder on it's face than even Aion did.

[RZ1029]

I'm pretty sure Final Fantasy XIV takes the cake and then some.

 

Hyped to be a WoW killer and fell harder on it's face than even Aion did.

 

You can't kill WoW. The undead legion of nerds would rise up from their computer chairs and take arms (mostly replica swords of their favorite WoW character which may or may not actually be sharp) against anyone foolish enough to attack WoW. Yep...

 

In all seriousness, Final Fantasy made me facedesk soooooo hard.