Ten most disappointing games of 2008

[Astrifer]

...Of course, spore was killed mostly by expectations, and 1/5 the game being 95% of the game

 

I agree wholeheartedly, the final game released, was most certainly not up to the hype that preceded it. Spore can be fun in so many ways but at the same time it's lacking in so many others. And it's really a pity because the overall concept of the game is extremely interesting, but at the end, it was either poorly implemented, or excessively dumbed down.

[The Green Fairy]

I would agree with all of these except number seven, but, hell, I'm a S.T.A.L.K.E.R. fan and so I guess you might not want to trust my judgment on that one. :whistling:

[space butler]

Where the hell is Far Cry 2? I know it got good reviews initially, but all the feedback from the people who actually bought the game (myself included) say otherwise. I don't play it anymore, didn't even get to halfway, it's so goddamn dull and repetitive. No SDK and non-existent support from Ubisoft killed this game.

[Zephyr2011]

Prince of Persia, wow, that revamp was terrible, I might even put it as number one and bump everything between it and spore (spore included) down a notch. That series had the most amazing ps2 game of all time (tied with KH 1 and 2 in my opinion) and then it dumbed it down so much that it just plain sucked. Spore, the issue with that was that they showed the creature editor at E3 what was it, 05??? saying that the game would be released late october that year. Stupid, aboslutely stupid, they couldn't finish it in time so they kept pushing the release date back, and back, and back! finally they released it with a much less complex and sophisticated game than it could have, and should have been. Personally I would like a remake of spore that uses more "realistic" (not play-dough, more jointed and angular than marshmellowy fluff strung together) aliens. Also more controls and options, (I kind of got sick of flying around in the same spaceship for 30 hours...) and more control over attacks etc. (instead of just charge, maybe charge center, charge to the left, charge to the right etc. to target specific areas, I dunno, just a thought) and just an over-all more indepth experience rather than the shallow glance we got in the current game. (there's an award for completing cell stage in under 5 minutes ffs!) and perhaps more rewards for developing yourself more, I really disliked how once you exited creature stage *POOF!!!* all your hard work making your creature uberly powerful went ah-bai-bai and there was no point, samething with tribe to civ, and civ to space! I'm gonna stop my rant now, I think I'm getting angsty about asking for a game for the past 3 years only to buy it and find out it was a total disapointment.

[Pirate112]

Spore

Spore

Spore

Spore

Spore

 

Need i go on?

[Halororor]

Dead Space?

Mirror's Edge?

 

Those were two of the highlights from 2008! Now tell we where is Far Cry 2, that game really sucked, so how come a few great games were on that list, yet not the biggest disappointment since Hellgate: London?

Anyway, there is no way in hell you can compare Doom 3 and Dead Space, never mind even saying Dead Space is more of the same. And Mirror's Edge wasn't that difficult, I beat it on Normal and Hard, you just have to use your brains and quick reflexes and you won't die too much.

[BlackDragon66]

I am surprised. If that was an actual unbiased list of most disappointing games in 2008 then Fallout 3 should have been pretty high on the list. As the game has a very shallow storyline with a lame ending and very little creativity, which should be a familiar trait to Beth fans (Oblivion). I have not seen a Bethesda game yet that was not released full of bugs. (sometimes gamebreaking) Bethesda has a reputation for not fixing their own mistakes through patches instead they rely on game players to do that for them. Fallout three was sloppily released with them not even taking the time to clean up the meshes and textures before releasing. Normally a modder would get slack if they released a mod with a "dirty" esm/esp. I have not seen Bethesda once release a esm that was not full of unused garbage. For the amount of money Bethesda charges for their games you would think they would give better support. Heck, their own patch caused one of their game's main functions to no longer work correctly. (V.A.T.S)

And let's not forget their latest brainstorm of integrating their DCLs into Microsoft's GFWL.

 

 

After playing Fallout 3, Mass Effect and Dead Space I can say I am satisfied with the money I spent on Dead Space and Mass Effect.( Windows edition was released on May 28, 2008)

 

But with Fallout 3 that verdict is still out to lunch.

In short

 

Fallout three = Rushed eye candy,dull game play, shallow storyline and tons of bugs and ctds.(.exe caused )

 

Dead Space = Good game play, visuals, storyline with little bugs and no ctds.

 

Mass Effect = Good storyline, game play,visuals with very few bugs and again no ctds.

 

 

Note if Bethesda were smart and lowered the price of the game to compensate for their lack of QA then less could be expected but for the price tag they fall short.

[Thor.]

Hey Dead space was an awsome game, great story line and not to mention original. It also had great replay value and trophies.

 

the worst game i have to say was Bioshock for the pc, try registering online was a pain in the ass, i gave up and took it back, even though it came out in 2007 lol. For 2008 i have to say Hellgate London, just because the way you have to register that game was also a pain in the ass.

[Kazakovich]

I think I can agree on much of the list. Not many of those games cought my eye, though, so I'm glad I did'nt have to share in the disappointment.

 

Well, Far Cry 2 might count in my case. I was quite intrigued by it when it was announced. Changing the setting from pirateland to Fictionesia, Africa was that cought my eye. Plus, getting rid of that horrible character Jack Craver (was it?) and at least trying to insert someone knew also made it a bit more interesting. But the reception... Well, I might buy it once it can be found in the sales-bin, but until then, I'd blow all my money on manapots.

 

However, to respond to an earlier post: how on earth does Fallout 3 lack creativity? I'm sorry, but... You've played the game for a minimum of ten minutes, right? Sure, it's not blowing your mind, but the creative spark is definetly there. After exploring the wasteland, finding interesting characters and sites and clever hints to trivia, I can safely say that Fallout 3 is NOT the bland, imaginationless toothpaste some hardcore fans tries to portray it as. It feels like a recycled argument that Oblivion cought, that actually did have a point. But for Fallout 3... No, not quite.

Sure, the old Fallout games are awesome, and are a joy to play even today. I'd never go cracking down on them. But Fallout 3 is definetley a worthy followup, in my opinion. Not to mention; it might introduce more people to the older games who would otherwise be scared of by the older graphics and the rabid fanbase. Hell, it made me go back to Fallout 2 again for some nostalgia.

 

It's very depressing that a developer can't experiment with a franchise and try out new, different things without catching tons of flak from fans of the earlier games, espesially in this remake, sequel-bloated day and age. :confused:

 

Oh, well, old vs new-rant aside, another game I found disappointing was Warhammer Online. Earlier this spring, I decided to check it out, since my baby, World of Warcraft, are bloated by the two expansion-packs and I was thinking of quiting at the time. But what I found in Warhammer Online was in my opinion a carbon-copy that didn't pull me in to the Warhammer world very much. It just didn't do it justice. Plus, everything felt soulless and dead, wich wasn't helped by there not being a sit, walk or reliable holster-button, wich made roleplaying awkward at best. The PvP was nice, though.

A brave attempt and a welcome case of competition in the MMO-race, but nothing for me.

[Mavrosh]

I personally like the idea behind Fallout 3. I bought it when it was brand new, I spent 50 € on it and all I got was CTDs constantly (And I am talking about an unmoded game here) and problems with saving my game. I found the human meshes terrible, the underwear, come on... there is nothing wrong with unerwear, but these have been a joke and unrealistic as well... The female body looked like the male one with boobies, I assume that Bethesda ripped the female body of the male again like they did with Oblivion... I put the game aside until first mods have been there to fix many things and make Fallout more "beautifull" in my eyes. Actually now I enjoy the game but without mods I did not at all. Another dissappointment about the game btw has been that in my country I could only get a censored version... I mean, hello, this game is rated mature and I did not have any blood or splatter... Not a single one! This is not the games falt but the one of the government here in my country... (I got another version of the game now btw... ;))

So yes, I was dissappointed by Fallout 3 but I was hoping for the mods and I was right with that. :)