Games that you hate that everyone else seems to like

[Hot Heart]

While I felt a little disappointed with Reach, those criticisms could apply to most FPSs.

[Chewblaha]

While I felt a little disappointed with Reach, those criticisms could apply to most FPSs.

 

I won't say the name. Though there's one annoying asshole who was speaking in party chat once about FPS's in general, saying they're not worth to play the campaigns of because all you do is shoot to accomplish your missions. I had to listen to this shit for like 15 minutes.

Edited June 13, 2011 by Chewblaha

[Mr W Phallus]

The level design I found completely unimaginative and not at all engaging, and you did absolutely NOTHING but shoot. They didn't even make the shooting interesting by switching things up for you to shoot things differently (with the exception being the space dogfight, which was fine if not a little pedestrian itself), it was just "go here and shoot. Done? OK, move up a bit and shoot more". The fact that I've heard many call Reach the "best in the series" makes it even worse. If this is the best then I really don't want to play the rest. It's just "Space Shooter: The Game". Generic art style, generic story, generic music, generic shooting. Just generic in general. Nothing is of low quality, but Bungie made absolutely no effort in going above and beyond in any way in my opinion.

I completely stormed through the Halo: Reach campaign in a day and I can't say it left much of a lasting impression on me, having said that you seem to be overlooking some of the best point of the Halo games in general (and maybe this is just because of Reach's faults more than anything).

 

Halo has a lot of shooting, sure, but as other people have pointed out it is a first person SHOOTER. Play Mario and expect to jump about a lot, play a racing game and expect to drive a lot, play a JRPG and expect to grind a lot... and so on. Having said that, as far as first person shooters go there's more variety than you could expect from, say CoD. The fact the weaponry is sci-fi, rather than based on real contempory (or even more restrictively, historical) weapons means there is a lot of variety to the types of weaponry; from standard human ballistic weaponry to plasma weapons, the needler(s), even the unique plasma sword and gravity hammer. Already the gameplay is pretty varied compared to your usual FPS arsenal.

 

Next is the fact you didn't mention driving at all. Now I'm struggling to remember any real stand-out moments of driving in Reach (other than the space dogfight) so again it could be that it's simply not the best game to flaunt the series' strengths, but the driving in Halo has always been incredibly satisfying. Probably the best example for this would be the Halo level of Halo:CE; plenty of open space to bomb about in and relatively few enemies, the simply control scheme was a revelation the first time you got to that level. The zoo level of Halo:ODST was also particularly enjoyable, especially when you manage to do a perfect run through the whole level. And as far as driving goes there are a lot of levels throughout the Halo series where you barely (if at all) have to get out the vehicle.

 

I'm quite surprised you found the music generic, once again no particular moments in Reach come to mind, but the Halo music has always been great. From the eerie monks accompanying Halo:CE's title screen to the most epic battle music. Halo:ODST has the best example of the composer (Marty is it?) mixing things up with everything form soft jazz to a screaming guitar solo during one of the most dramatic set pieces. But you have to remember, and this goes for complaints about any aspect of Halo being generic, the first game came out 10 years ago, launched the boom of the console FPS (and of widespread console gaming in general), and is generally one of most influential games ever made. Even though you had never played a Halo game before Reach , as a 'gamer' and a frequenter of gaming sites the Halo franchise must be as familiar as, say Mario 64 is to me even though I've only ever played it myself for a couple of minutes at most. It's simply ingrained onto the collective gaming consciousness. So if Halo feels generic, how much of that is because of the influence Halo has had on gaming, and the length of time it has been around as a series? It would be like calling Star Wars generic because of all the Sci-Fi that has been influenced by it's aesthetic.

 

Finally, I get the impression you haven't played the multiplayer at all - you didn't mention it anyway - and whilst I appreciate that some people prefer playing single player to multiplayer, I think you really have to play the Halo multiplayer to understand the game's appeal. I found Halo 3 to be somewhat dissapointing; disappointing, that was, until I later got xbox live and discovered the multiplayer, which is definitely up there in my top 5 multiplayer games of all time.

 

Not really a defence of Reach, then, but the Halo series in general. I think if you really want to know what Halo is all about, you have to play the original. To be honest as the campaigns got more 'epic' they got less satisfying for me, which is one of the things I enjoyed most about Halo:ODST, it brought the action down to a much smaller, more personal scale. So I'd recommend playing Halo:CE, Halo 2 (for the parallel stories which I really enjoyed, as well as the introduction of dual wielding and plasma swords) and Halo:ODST for taking the series in interesting new directions (plus it comes with the best part of Halo 3; the multiplayer).

Edited June 14, 2011 by Mr W Phallus

[RockyRan]

I know people were eventually going to say "it's a shooter so you should expect to do shooting", which is exactly why I said it didn't make any effort in switching things up. That's what makes a good game good. Half Life 2 switches up between calm moments, shooting moments, moments of conversation that last quite a while, moments of puzzles, etc. Reach doesn't do this. It doesn't even change the level design in ways to make the shooting mechanics interesting, it's just shooting in the same way, using the same tactics, throughout the entire game. THAT'S what I mean by saying my first post. I know shooting games have shooting, so there's a reason why I brought that up

 

I realize that Reach was "awesome" for fans because it takes place at a time where all other games/books/whatever merely referenced, and thus it's brought "back to life". But here's the thing, the way in which it's presented makes for only empty fanservice that's not good from the perspective of someone who hasn't played a Halo game before. I knew only basic amounts of information from the Halo story, but all I pretty much knew was that Reach was a prequel and it was set at an important time in the series' history that's only referenced (Reach has fellen, etc.). The basic skeleton of the story for me had quite a bit of potential to be interesting and emotional, but it wasn't at all with the way it was told. Taking the story out of the Halo context made the storytelling in Reach an incredibly hollow experience, which was exactly what happened on my end.

 

The main problem I had with the storytelling is precisely because Bungie just assumed everyone already knew about everything in the story and didn't feel the need to actually tell it well. A lot of the events that happen in Reach that SHOULD be important are merely glossed over. There isn't absolutely any feeling in either the gameplay or the cutscenes that you're fighitng a losing battle (that is, no feelings of desperation and no real sense of losing the grip on the planet), you're just blandly instructed to go here and shoot that and kill them sons-of-bitches aliens. Dialog between characters is cursory and shallow, not unlike other games where the campaign's story is all but disposable. In general, it seems that Bungie didn't bother to fill in the context of that the hell is happening in the game because they just assumed that everyone who played it already knew the story and how important everything in it is. There was a distinct lack of effort in actually expressing, even on a subtle level, the importance of specific events. I know a lot of fans of the game are completely blind to this because they already know the backstory and its importance. The gaps that I'm seeing are filled for them, but that's not good storytelling I'm sorry to say. A story shouldn't look "awesome" for a fan and "careless and dull" for a newcomer. Look at Half Life 2. Valve did what Bungie and actually BUILT context around the game's setting and events, serving as more fleshed out experience for the fans and a good experience for newcomers as well. Bungie didn't seem to care at all about anyone who may have had this as their first Halo game with the way they chose to tell the story. That's mostly what I'm getting at from a story perspective.

 

Besides, in response to Chew's "play the other worse games before playing this", I don't really think that's a compliment for Reach. You're basically saying I should lower my standards because by comparison the other games are worse.

Edited June 14, 2011 by RockyRan

[Strangelove]

Have I expressed how much i dislike Just Cause 2? Cus I do.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Did you make the mistake of taking it seriously or something?

[Strangelove]

No. I made the mistake of wanting to have fun with it.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

What wasn't fun about it? At its most base level its a fun "fuck around in a sandbox" sort of game with some unique mechanics like the grappling hook and parachute.

[Thursday Next]

I think the Halo series tends to lean more heavily on its "expanded universe" than any franchise (except maybe StarWars), the stories in Halo are generally rather bland and the gameplay is one dimensional. What makes fans so absorbed in the Halo series seems to me to be all the gaps filled in by the novels, cartoons and so forth...

[Chewblaha]

No. I made the mistake of wanting to have fun with it.

 

Kinda like what I wanted to do with Shadow of the Colossus?

[Yantelope]

@Rocky: Is there a shooter you do like?

[Mr W Phallus]

The basic skeleton of the story for me had quite a bit of potential to be interesting and emotional, but it wasn't at all with the way it was told. Taking the story out of the Halo context made the storytelling in Reach an incredibly hollow experience, which was exactly what happened on my end.

 

The main problem I had with the storytelling is precisely because Bungie just assumed everyone already knew about everything in the story and didn't feel the need to actually tell it well. A lot of the events that happen in Reach that SHOULD be important are merely glossed over. There isn't absolutely any feeling in either the gameplay or the cutscenes that you're fighitng a losing battle (that is, no feelings of desperation and no real sense of losing the grip on the planet), you're just blandly instructed to go here and shoot that and kill them sons-of-bitches aliens.

I totally agree about the story, before Reach came out they built it up like they were going to really capture the gravitas of an entire planet being destroyed with the 'Remember Reach' and 'From the beginning, you know the end' slogans. When it came to the actual story there wasn't much sense of this at all.

[Yantelope]

The ending of Reach was pretty epic though. I don't really know of another game that ends like that.

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

Anything that Valve makes.

 

I dunno, I just don't enjoy any of their games.

 

I never really liked Red Dead Redemption either.

Francis gives you the evil eye.

[Mr W Phallus]

To tell the truth I didn't finish the Lone Wolf mission, it was 3am or some stupid time like that and I wanted to get to bed. :3

 

But the whole game should really have been like that mission, I wanted the game to feel hopeless and end on a downer but in the end it felt like I'd achieved too much and died saving the day.

[RockyRan]

@Rocky: Is there a shooter you do like?

 

Oh, plenty. Half Life 2, if BioShock counts as one (I do at least ), Crysis, for multiplayer TF2 can't be beat, Left 4 Dead, etc.

 

But apart from that I'm not a very shooter-heavy person. I prefer fantasy adventure games and racing way more, or if there's shooting mechanics but it's not the main emphasis of the gameplay (like Ratchet and Clank. Definitely liked A Crack in Time).

[Yantelope]

So you seem like more of a SRPG fan. Did you like Deus Ex?

 

For me most of the pull of COD and Halo is the multiplayer and the singleplayer is a good place to get your feet wet. That's probably why it seems like all you do is shoot is because mostly you're just learning to shoot. The flip side is that the controls are very tight in these kind of games. The shooting in Halo is far more enjoyable to me than the shooting in Bioshock or Mass Effect.

[RockyRan]

Yeah, I felt the shooting in BioShock was actually my least favorite part of the game. It felt floaty and disconnected. I really liked the setting, atmosphere, and exploration-heavy level design as well as the plasmid mechanic. I also really enjoyed the fact that I actually HAD health (unlike 99% of shooters that just have regenerating health). I had some complaints but overall I definitely liked it.

 

I also enjoy RPGs from time to time. I'm itching to play Deus Ex soon. I just have to find the time to play it properly

[AgamemnonV2]

Portal.

[Chewblaha]

Red Dead Redemption is an excellent sim at showing you how boring life was in the olden days.

[deathtoll]

Ppl are really hating an odd list of games.

 

My list!

 

God of War series (with a passion)

Any FF after VIII, and for that matter before VII

Assassin's Creed series

Devil May Cry series

Grand Theft Auto >2

Almost EVERY sports game

Almost EVERY racing game

Worldwide multi-player FPS! Esp the current generation FPS that roll off the production line.

Phoenix Wright series

Crysis

FarCry 1 & 2 (honestly what's up with that?)

 

I'll add more later...

[excel_excel]

 

Phoenix Wright series

 

GET OUT

 

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Basically Deathtoll doesn't like video games.

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

Ppl are really hating an odd list of games.

 

My list!

 

God of War series (with a passion)

Any FF after VIII, and for that matter before VII

Assassin's Creed series

Devil May Cry series

Grand Theft Auto >2

Almost EVERY sports game

Almost EVERY racing game

Worldwide multi-player FPS! Esp the current generation FPS that roll off the production line.

Phoenix Wright series

Crysis

FarCry 1 & 2 (honestly what's up with that?)

 

I'll add more later...

Deathtoll's collection consists of various editions of FFVII, and not much else XD

[deathtoll]

Deathtoll's collection consists of various editions of FFVII, and not much else XD

Perhaps I now need to visit a reverse thread and clarify what I DO like.

 

GET OUT

Sorry. I tired to like Phoenix, I really did. But I just kept failing and failing in the courtroom and it really frustrated me.

 

 

There's a lot of reasons why all these games series tick me off. I'll have to give a detailed hater post later.

I've written a lot of these series off because the basic gameplay mechanics/ideas really either get old or are just remade to quench the thirst of fans of the genre.