Games you hate! and why...

Post by **BattleGoat** » Jun 10 2002

Well since we asked for your favourite games, I thought it only fair to give equal time to the games you hate or have extremely disappointed in.

I'll even start it off with a couple of HUGE Star Wars disappointments from LucasArts :

1) Star Wars: Force Commander (Should have been "Bug" Commander)
2) Star Wars: Rebellion (Micro Management Hell!)

I don't mean to pick on LucasArts, but I think the possibilities of the Star Wars Universe had everyone greatly anticipating these games, only to find QA almost non-existent on the first one and no real concern with the playability on the second.

The beneficial fallout from both these failures has been that LucasArts has seemed to re-focus (for the most part anyways) on the quality of their games. The "Dark Side" can never really win

_________________
David Thompson
Lead Designer / Partner
BattleGoat Studios

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: BattleGoat on 2002-06-10 08:40 ]</font>

danc · Post by **danc** » Jun 10 2002

Age of Kings. It was supposed to add a higher level of diplomacy, trade, empire building in general. They just axed all that stuff the last three months and put out a copy of Age of Empires - with some slight cosmetic changes. It they want to put out dumbed down games, that's fine. Just don't make bogus claims beforehand. The nice thing about this sort of real time game is that you can play online and finish in an evening.

Reddemon · Post by **Reddemon** » Jun 11 2002

I would have to answer this question with POR: Ruins of Myth Drannor. I waited for so long on the sequeal to come out and it turned out to be a total flop. Bugs everywhere combat it very sorry and the graphic wasnt all that great. I couldnt tell you about the story because i dropped the game after the first dungeon. The game to me didnt seem like a RPG you was limited on your chr selection the interface was screwy.

Now to another game that didnt live up to its previous name was Wizardry 8. By Sir Tec in Canada. Again that game kept me going for a whole 20 minutes before I boxed it up and put it on the dead game shelf until my next garage sale.

Just think all the time I waited for the sequeals to come out and to be let down like that is just down right cold to the consumers.

Here is another one im waiting for and hope that it isnt a big let down its called Stars!Supernova Genesis. Im just sitting and waiting

for the release date now so I can spend my money there too

Juergen · Post by **Juergen** » Jul 09 2002

Well Civ3 belongs to my biggest dissapointments ever(yes all of them).

I never had thought that this game would actually be a step back..
Well one thing is certainly not a matter of taste...multiplayer.I knew it from the beginning that they would sell multiplayer in an addon with some other civs thrown in for good measure.Multiplayer is just state of the start for todays strategy games and even if there are gamers who swear that they will never play it in MP there are enough who want to.And by not implementing MP they only made one side unhappy where both could have been happy would it have been in the box.The worst is that I am somehow convinced that could have easily put the mulitplayer in or perhaps make it available through a patch.But this way they leave barely a doubt that they wanted money badly..

The next problem may be a matter of taste but I think most share the same thoughts:
The combat system is awfull.It IS a step back,for once again can a spearman beat a tank.They said that they didnt need the concept of firepower anymore..oh well.
Granted some part of the combat system may be new but they just dont outweight the bad part.
To be fair I should mention that I have never ever been satisfied with the combat system of any civ,but I did certainly expect that it would at least be improved.

Next.Some think it works,some think it doesnt.The resource system.I think it is just too strict and unfair.Its simple: In case that some vital resource is missing you just cant build an unit,and in some cases then the game will be almost over.The resources may ne anywhere on the map and you need a certain tech level to find out where they are.The maps are random of course,along with the resources.Trying to trade the resources with the AI is also pretty useless since the AI almost sets the price for them so high that is not worth it.And besides, the AI also needs the tech level to find these resources himself to be able to trade it with you.

Granted this one is a matter of taste:
The nuke system only got away with some minor changes.They still barely do a scratch and are not worth the effort (I think).As soon as the Manhattan Project is build everyone can build nukes at once(with the resources of course).There is no MAD and that makes me mad.

Yes this is how I do see things:
I believe that they have put most of their efforts to catch the newer players.They were not really interested to give the hardcore gamers something new.I think that much complexity was sacrificed for mass appeal.I have played Alpha Centauri alot,a game which they produced before Civ3,and this game was far more complex than Civ3 so I asked myself :Why?
All in all Civ3 just not only didnt do enough to earn the 3,it was also a step back in some respects.