• 80 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by jakob187 (21640 posts) -

If there is one thing that stands true about 2012, it is that retail triple-A games raised the ire of many gamers. Going to your local store or going online and throwing down $60 (or whatever your local currency translates to) to pick up a hotly anticipated game just to end the experience with a frown on your face is something that no gamer wants to endure. Unfortunately, it happens every year, and this year was no different.

Recently, the Giant Bomb community had an opportunity to vote for what they believed was the most disappointing game release of 2012. Within that voting process, one thing became certainly prevalent: people are sick of broken games from big publishers that should have been better, especially given their previous iterations. Particularly, it would seem that many of the games people were disappointed with are divisible by the number "three", which is something of an odd occurrence. Now that the voting is essentially done, let's take a look at just what the community felt was the most disappointing game of 2012.

Loose Stragglers

There was a number of games voted on that only received a handful of votes (usually less than three overall votes). Many of these games had a lot of woes groaned about them, ranging from general boredom to just generally not being a solid game overall. That list of games includes:

These games needed to at least be mentioned, despite their minority stance within the general voting process. Why? It should always be noted that people will have different opinions, and sometimes those opinions are slightly different than the overall flock. Personally, I can vouch that I felt at least four of those games were personally disappointing to me in some way.

The Third Most Disappointing Game...

Resident Evil 6 was a game that, upon the release of its initial trailer and first impressions from the press, seemed like they were getting back to some of what people loved about earlier games. While the franchise has constantly drawn criticism from many fans after a certain period (most notably from Resident Evil 4 onward), there have still arguably been saving graces with the releases. Resident Evil 6 did seem like a "middle of nowhere" announcement to a lot of people, and in a year where three Resident Evil games saw release on various platforms (Operation Raccoon City and Revelations were the other two), the road to release for the new proper-numbered entry in the core franchise seemed to get more and more lackluster. Upon release, the general consensus from both players and the press was overwhelming: Resident Evil 6 was essentially a pile of unnecessary shit that should be avoided at all costs. From its action-oriented gameplay to uninteresting story and clunky controls, it epitomized bad game design through every pore of its body. The public spoke and thus the fate of Resident Evil 6 was decided.

The Second Most Disappointing Game...

"...there's a difference between a failure and a fiasco. A failure is simply the non-presence of success. Any fool can accomplish failure. But a fiasco...A fiasco is a disaster of mythic proportions. A fiasco is a folktale told to others that makes other people feel more alive because it didn't happened to them."

Every time someone mentions the words "Mass Effect 3", the words of Drew Baylor ring through my head. As if BioWare didn't already have it hard enough with Star Wars: The Old Republic within the subsequent months after its launch, it also ended up causing two of the largest controversies of the year in the video game industry. The fervor was high for the release of Mass Effect 3, and when it finally came out, the cries of the internet became quickly apparent as people finished out the franchise. Many asked how a monolith of sci-fi epic proportions that offered so much ambition in storytelling over the course of five years could flounder and mishandle a finale so poorly. For those who don't know what we are talking about, the ending to Mass Effect 3 caused an uproar amongst the Mass Effect community, all but crying for the heads of those responsible for the making of the game. By the time the credits on the game were rolling, it felt more like reading an obituary than a list of people who worked on the game. Players felt that their choices over the course of three games meant literally nothing by the time that they reached the "pick A/B/C"-style ending. BioWare's reaction to this was not only a little lacking (it took them close to a week to respond to the fans), but it was alarming and surprising as well: they planned on releasing free DLC for the players that would expand on the overall story and elements in order to give the ending a little more logic and overall sense. This became a controversy within the gaming press, as they viewed it as a weakness on the artistic capabilities of BioWare, a piece of reactionary game design to try and cull the controversy rather than sticking to their guns and standing by what they created. It pretty much sealed the fate for Mass Effect 3 being considered a fiasco in the lexicon of gaming history. However, after the release of DLC, it seems that there are audiences that have found the game to be a very good finale to the franchise with some flaws inherent to the idea of "moral choice player-authored storytelling".

Only time will tell how Mass Effect 3 is viewed in the grand scheme of things, but for the year of its release, Mass Effect 3 remains disappointing to many.

The Most Disappointing Game of the Year...

With almost 35% of the votes (by comparison, Mass Effect 3 garnered only 18%), it seems the jury is out for Assassin's Creed III: how the hell did you get to this point? A promising franchise that became a little sluggish by the time the third Assassin's Creed II came out (yes, Revelations, you were boring as shit), the third proper installment in the franchise saw a change of time period and scenery with the Revolutionary War. We were also put into the shoes of a new character, a native American assassin by the name of Connor. The gameplay was expanded upon, the story promised to be huge, and the overall experience...ended up being broken, filled with bugs, and generally boring to many players. What took a year of hype fell apart so quickly upon release. The multiplayer seems like it has had generally positive things spoken about it beyond the expected complaints of hacking, exploitation, and lag. However, the idea that a game that has been years in the making was released in such a massive unfinished state...to the point that a massive patch for just the single player game within days of release seemed to offer fixes for almost every single quest in the game...is nigh inexcusable.

What seems more disappointing about the game is how Assassin's Creed III leaves people hanging by the end of their adventure. It's one thing to leave people on a cliffhanger like you would find in Assassin's Creed II or Brotherhood, making people say "WHAT THE FUCK?" and then clamor for the release of the next game. It's another to...I mean, are we saying that this is the "end" of a "trilogy"? Are we saying that there is a way to continue this? It's just mind-boggling all together, and it's absolutely insane that this is the way that Ubisoft felt it should end. Could they pull a Brotherhood/Revelations scenario and release some sidesteps in order to lead somewhere else? If anything, with as much ire was drawn around the ending of Mass Effect 3, it feels like the ending to Assassin's Creed III is just...BONKERS! It's not a good bonkers either, but rather than "I don't know what the fuck is going on what the hell am I seeing right now I feel fucking shitty right now" kind of ending.

Either way you chop it, Assassin's Creed III has helped define what seems to be an ever-increasing level of disappointment among gamers in the world of triple-A studio releases. Hopefully, we will start seeing a turnaround on this soon...but let's be honest: that's probably not going to happen ever.

#1 Edited by jakob187 (21640 posts) -

If there is one thing that stands true about 2012, it is that retail triple-A games raised the ire of many gamers. Going to your local store or going online and throwing down $60 (or whatever your local currency translates to) to pick up a hotly anticipated game just to end the experience with a frown on your face is something that no gamer wants to endure. Unfortunately, it happens every year, and this year was no different.

Recently, the Giant Bomb community had an opportunity to vote for what they believed was the most disappointing game release of 2012. Within that voting process, one thing became certainly prevalent: people are sick of broken games from big publishers that should have been better, especially given their previous iterations. Particularly, it would seem that many of the games people were disappointed with are divisible by the number "three", which is something of an odd occurrence. Now that the voting is essentially done, let's take a look at just what the community felt was the most disappointing game of 2012.

Loose Stragglers

There was a number of games voted on that only received a handful of votes (usually less than three overall votes). Many of these games had a lot of woes groaned about them, ranging from general boredom to just generally not being a solid game overall. That list of games includes:

These games needed to at least be mentioned, despite their minority stance within the general voting process. Why? It should always be noted that people will have different opinions, and sometimes those opinions are slightly different than the overall flock. Personally, I can vouch that I felt at least four of those games were personally disappointing to me in some way.

The Third Most Disappointing Game...

Resident Evil 6 was a game that, upon the release of its initial trailer and first impressions from the press, seemed like they were getting back to some of what people loved about earlier games. While the franchise has constantly drawn criticism from many fans after a certain period (most notably from Resident Evil 4 onward), there have still arguably been saving graces with the releases. Resident Evil 6 did seem like a "middle of nowhere" announcement to a lot of people, and in a year where three Resident Evil games saw release on various platforms (Operation Raccoon City and Revelations were the other two), the road to release for the new proper-numbered entry in the core franchise seemed to get more and more lackluster. Upon release, the general consensus from both players and the press was overwhelming: Resident Evil 6 was essentially a pile of unnecessary shit that should be avoided at all costs. From its action-oriented gameplay to uninteresting story and clunky controls, it epitomized bad game design through every pore of its body. The public spoke and thus the fate of Resident Evil 6 was decided.

The Second Most Disappointing Game...

"...there's a difference between a failure and a fiasco. A failure is simply the non-presence of success. Any fool can accomplish failure. But a fiasco...A fiasco is a disaster of mythic proportions. A fiasco is a folktale told to others that makes other people feel more alive because it didn't happened to them."

Every time someone mentions the words "Mass Effect 3", the words of Drew Baylor ring through my head. As if BioWare didn't already have it hard enough with Star Wars: The Old Republic within the subsequent months after its launch, it also ended up causing two of the largest controversies of the year in the video game industry. The fervor was high for the release of Mass Effect 3, and when it finally came out, the cries of the internet became quickly apparent as people finished out the franchise. Many asked how a monolith of sci-fi epic proportions that offered so much ambition in storytelling over the course of five years could flounder and mishandle a finale so poorly. For those who don't know what we are talking about, the ending to Mass Effect 3 caused an uproar amongst the Mass Effect community, all but crying for the heads of those responsible for the making of the game. By the time the credits on the game were rolling, it felt more like reading an obituary than a list of people who worked on the game. Players felt that their choices over the course of three games meant literally nothing by the time that they reached the "pick A/B/C"-style ending. BioWare's reaction to this was not only a little lacking (it took them close to a week to respond to the fans), but it was alarming and surprising as well: they planned on releasing free DLC for the players that would expand on the overall story and elements in order to give the ending a little more logic and overall sense. This became a controversy within the gaming press, as they viewed it as a weakness on the artistic capabilities of BioWare, a piece of reactionary game design to try and cull the controversy rather than sticking to their guns and standing by what they created. It pretty much sealed the fate for Mass Effect 3 being considered a fiasco in the lexicon of gaming history. However, after the release of DLC, it seems that there are audiences that have found the game to be a very good finale to the franchise with some flaws inherent to the idea of "moral choice player-authored storytelling".

Only time will tell how Mass Effect 3 is viewed in the grand scheme of things, but for the year of its release, Mass Effect 3 remains disappointing to many.

The Most Disappointing Game of the Year...

With almost 35% of the votes (by comparison, Mass Effect 3 garnered only 18%), it seems the jury is out for Assassin's Creed III: how the hell did you get to this point? A promising franchise that became a little sluggish by the time the third Assassin's Creed II came out (yes, Revelations, you were boring as shit), the third proper installment in the franchise saw a change of time period and scenery with the Revolutionary War. We were also put into the shoes of a new character, a native American assassin by the name of Connor. The gameplay was expanded upon, the story promised to be huge, and the overall experience...ended up being broken, filled with bugs, and generally boring to many players. What took a year of hype fell apart so quickly upon release. The multiplayer seems like it has had generally positive things spoken about it beyond the expected complaints of hacking, exploitation, and lag. However, the idea that a game that has been years in the making was released in such a massive unfinished state...to the point that a massive patch for just the single player game within days of release seemed to offer fixes for almost every single quest in the game...is nigh inexcusable.

What seems more disappointing about the game is how Assassin's Creed III leaves people hanging by the end of their adventure. It's one thing to leave people on a cliffhanger like you would find in Assassin's Creed II or Brotherhood, making people say "WHAT THE FUCK?" and then clamor for the release of the next game. It's another to...I mean, are we saying that this is the "end" of a "trilogy"? Are we saying that there is a way to continue this? It's just mind-boggling all together, and it's absolutely insane that this is the way that Ubisoft felt it should end. Could they pull a Brotherhood/Revelations scenario and release some sidesteps in order to lead somewhere else? If anything, with as much ire was drawn around the ending of Mass Effect 3, it feels like the ending to Assassin's Creed III is just...BONKERS! It's not a good bonkers either, but rather than "I don't know what the fuck is going on what the hell am I seeing right now I feel fucking shitty right now" kind of ending.

Either way you chop it, Assassin's Creed III has helped define what seems to be an ever-increasing level of disappointment among gamers in the world of triple-A studio releases. Hopefully, we will start seeing a turnaround on this soon...but let's be honest: that's probably not going to happen ever.

#2 Posted by Demoskinos (14519 posts) -

Oh god like everything they said about AC3 is exactly why I give no shits about the series anymore. They are WAY WAY more concerned with shitting out games every year than crafting the story in a way that is best for the fiction and services player investment Honestly we talk about the yearly grind and cycle and products that keep getting shat out every year the Assassins Creed series defines that for me like even more so than Call of Duty because honestly does anyone ever have expectations for a CoD narrative? They set up something special with the AC franchise especially with the larger promises they set up with AC2 and then just proceeded to take a big old shit on it.

#3 Posted by Oldirtybearon (4515 posts) -

@Demoskinos said:

Oh god like everything they said about AC3 is exactly why I give no shits about the series anymore. They are WAY WAY more concerned with shitting out games every year than crafting the story in a way that is best for the fiction and services player investment Honestly we talk about the yearly grind and cycle and products that keep getting shat out every year the Assassins Creed series defines that for me like even more so than Call of Duty because honestly does anyone ever have expectations for a CoD narrative? They set up something special with the AC franchise especially with the larger promises they set up with AC2 and then just proceeded to take a big old shit on it.

The warning bells should've been ringing with Patrice Desilets left Ubisoft. He had been with that company for a long time and was responsible for the Prince of Persia revival on the PS2. Assassin's Creed was his baby conceptually, and he was the main force behind that game. When a guy like that leaves, it should let you know you're doing something very wrong.

I'm with you at this point, though. The way AC3 wrapped up effectively killed my interest in any further installments.

#4 Posted by ImmortalSaiyan (4674 posts) -

I just wanna say that the issues with Assassin's Creed 3 go far deeper than bugs and a bad ending.

#5 Edited by Demoskinos (14519 posts) -

@Oldirtybearon: My arc with the AC franchise went from having a mediocre time with the first game then I played AC2 and it didn't catch me but then after brotherhood came out I got excited bought AC2 and brotherhood the same night. Spent the next 2-4 weeks doing EVERYTHING in both games all those goddamn feathers and flags... leveling up to 50 in Multi-player like I was PUMPED. Then I thought that possibly I just needed a break and I'd play Revelations later and then hearing all the stuff about AC3 just absolutely makes me not only not want to play the game but just actively wants to make me not talk about and just forget it exists. Its just that goddamn disappointing to me.

#6 Posted by jakob187 (21640 posts) -

@ImmortalSaiyan: I can understand that, but the whole thing was getting a bit long. lol Those were the two big things I could find among many of the comments left within the voting thread, so they are the two that I focused on.

I included the link for the voting thread so people can see how all these decision unfolded.

#7 Posted by Shady (503 posts) -

I hope Alex Hutchinson keeps his stupid mouth shut now though I doubt it since he'll feel vindicated by Metacritic when it's pointed out to him that fans were less than enthusiastic about AC3.

#8 Posted by Yummylee (21204 posts) -

Ha, this is exactly in line with the GB award.

Online
#9 Posted by project343 (2809 posts) -

One of the biggest knocks against AC3 for the Bombcast crew was the 'retconning' of AC:B's plot twist. While AC3 certainly has quite a few flaws (poor narrative, poor mission design, irrelevant systems for systems' sake), I figure I should make the point that Lucy's allegiance was identified within Brotherhood. It was not retconned. It was hinted at throughout the whole game (albeit in cryptic locations) and the plot twist cinematic is pretty explicit about it as well.

In either case, I'm playing game right now (Sequence 9) and I've only encountered frivolous and inconsequential bugs (got stuck in a mountain for doing some rather creative jumping, couple NPCs disappearing in streets). I still think the core gameplay is spectacular, the hunting stuff is great, and the ship combat is incredibly visceral. For me, it's a better game than Revelations. A lot of Revelations was outright painful to go through: it wasn't just uninspired and boring, it was something I actively did not enjoy. With AC3, the game is more of the same Brotherhood-caliber gameplay--without the annoyances of Revelations--that unfortunately has a host of uninspired singleplayer missions.

My own personal list:

Winner: Fez

Runners up: Diablo 3, Resident Evil 6

I get it. The ARG stuff is unexpected and neat. But honestly, I was expecting a really solid puzzle platformer akin to Braid. And on that promise, the game entirely failed to deliver compelling puzzles. The world also felt so disconnected, illogical and is presented poorly via that shitty-ass map. This category is a promise vs. expectation weighing, and in that sense, the I feel lied to with Fez's outward appearance.

#10 Posted by jakob187 (21640 posts) -

@project343: If I remember correctly, Lucy's alignment was actually straight-up said in Revelations DLC. Can't remember because I was more bored to tears by Revelations than ever engaged in what it presented. Goddamn, that game was a lump of shit.

#11 Posted by Little_Socrates (5675 posts) -

Okay. I know I voted for Far Cry 3 when we voted. I actually still feel that way, because it's the only game I can quote as excessively disappointing in comparison to my pre-release hype and also my in-game hype. And Dust was my runner-up for similar reasons. Both squandered their back thirds in a massive way, despite fantastic beginnings, and Far Cry 3 legitimately spoiled the two best moments in the story.

But OH MAN. I just played some Assassin's Creed III for the first time today, and that game is HELLA BORING. I hope that Haytham stuff is only being praised for his character, 'cause it was some of the most middling experience I've had with a game this year. Holy COW. I did not like that game for the two-or-three hours I played it. I'll probably play more, but considering this is the only part of this game's story people seem to like, it is sincerely a disappointing finale for the series.

Not to mention the ending, which I heard on today's GOTY podcast for Most Disappointing Game, and OH MAN, Assassin's Creed seems dead to me.

#12 Posted by spilledmilkfactory (1820 posts) -

I thought Mass Effect 3 and Assassin's Creed 3 were both fine. Although the endings of both, and the beginning 5 - 7 hours of Assassin's Creed, majorly suck.

#13 Posted by abomunist (116 posts) -

I want more Assasin's Creed for one reason only: a simulated historical environment. I don't care about any single plot point in the whole series. It's been plainly apparent to me that the connecting narrative excuse to run around in historical environments would be some shit-out hodgepodge of melodramatic bullshit since the first game. The plot of AC has never interested me beyond whatever historical drama I was caught up in. And even then, story lines weren't particularly strong.

I want more interesting depictions of human history in games. Gaming has always straddled the line between fantasy and simulation, and I think historical settings, under the pretense of being somehow 'realistically simulated,' really engage my sense of wonder about how wide and deep the human experience can be. AC3 was a good experience for me. I live in Connecticut, which basically straddles the land between New York and Boston. The depiction of the area is video gamey as hell in AC3, but satisfyingly accurate in little ways, mostly architecturally. I drive past structures that were built in that time period, like this one. The house on the left is where Silas Deane and George Washington planned the seige of Yorktown. I pass it every day.

A next-gen, really worked on version of AC would be incredible to see. And important to me. History is interesting. I want to see more of it.

And I am willing to put up with whatever crap pseudodrama gets smeared all over it to see something interesting.

So, after getting that off my chest, fuck Dishonored.

#14 Posted by jakob187 (21640 posts) -

@Little_Socrates: Yeah. That ending... Goddamn, that's fucking stupid.

#15 Posted by HerbieBug (4194 posts) -

@jakob187 said:

Either way you chop it, Assassin's Creed III has helped define what seems to be an ever-increasing level of disappointment among gamers in the world of triple-A studio releases. Hopefully, we will start seeing a turnaround on this soon...but let's be honest: that's probably not going to happen ever.

It will if the big studio big budget games stop being profitable.

#16 Posted by CornBREDX (4754 posts) -

Yep. Completely agree.

#17 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -
#18 Posted by wumbo3000 (932 posts) -

Eh. I liked Assassin's Creed III. The actual murdering of fools probably was at its finest in AC III. The biggest problem I had with the game was Connor himself. What a boring, lifeless, and completely unlikable protagonist. Such a fall off from the charming mother fucker that is Ezio.

#19 Posted by spankingaddict (2655 posts) -

AC3 is right !

#20 Posted by Hunter5024 (5508 posts) -

Soul Calibur 5 was my most disappointing game. Not that I expected it to be amazing or anything, but I definitely thought a Tekken 3 style jump had a lot of potential, and could easily fix the problems that series has. Instead I legitimately feel like they ruined the franchise. I have no idea what they could do for the next Soul Calibur game that wouldn't exacerbate all the problems that series has developed.

@Demoskinos: But with the whole Animus thing allowing them to tell stories from the perspective of so many different characters doesn't that give them kind of a perfect set up for annual sequels in a narrative sense? I definitely feel like its yearly entries harmed the gameplay, and the visuals, but I don't feel like the problems with their story can actually be blamed on their release schedule, that was just bad writing.

#21 Posted by L44 (548 posts) -

@ZeForgotten: HEATHEN.

#22 Posted by hollitz (1397 posts) -

AC3 was disappointing, but nothing in recent memories holds a candle to Mass Effect 3. Like Jeff said, it wasn't even the ending per say, it was just the culmination of everyone's stories that was just completely devoid of satisfaction. The entire game is designed around rendering the choices you made in the previous 2 games useless. Which was just insulting. Thought the rachni queen was a big deal? Nah, there's just mecha rachni. Saved the queen? Number that doesn't make any real difference in the third game increases slightly.

Not saying that AC3's story wasn't a mess. (And holy fuck WHO DESIGNED THOSE MENUS? I refuse to believe that anyone who has ever played a video game before even looked at those before the product shipped.) It was just that the promise of Mass Effect 3 was sooo much more because of the player agency in the previous 2. And if you're going to drop this example of how to completely fuck up a player-choice driven game the SAME year as The Walking Dead? You deserve all the backlash you get.

I'm done with that series, and frankly, done with Bioware at this point. Unless they are going to make another old school PC RPG like Dragon Age Origins again. Then I'm down. But they just do not have my trust anymore. Another AC game I'd play, because I actually enjoy the game mechanics. And while ME2 and 3 are leagues ahead of the abysmal gameplay in ME1, there's nothing about the playing of those games that I find the least bit enjoyable.

#23 Posted by me3639 (1711 posts) -

Seriously, how is there not a Nintendo game on that list?

#24 Posted by DonPixel (2585 posts) -

IMO it was between AC3 and Kingdoms of Amalur. As much as I'm not enjoying AC3 at all.. I would've choose Kingdoms of Amalur.. what a total freaking chore was to play that game.

#25 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11419 posts) -

@me3639 said:

Seriously, how is there not a Nintendo game on that list?

Name a Nintendo game that came out this year that people had high hopes for. So far, all I can think of is Paper Mario Sticker Star and Nintendo's continued disservice to the first two Paper Mario games, and even then I wouldn't necessarily put it in the same league as those top three.

#26 Posted by FancySoapsMan (5797 posts) -

Not surprised to see ACIII taking the number 1 spot.

fuck, what a boring game.

#27 Posted by Atlas (2428 posts) -

I was actually really ahead of the curve when it came to being bored by Assassin's Creed; despite really liking the first game and loving the second one, I just couldn't bring myself to get through Brotherhood, despite hearing about all the ways that they improved on their systems and mechanics. I bought Revelations optimistically, thinking that I would get through Brotherhood and try to play Revelations before AC3 came out. I didn't like the annual release of AC games, but I thought that a shift in era, a new character, and it being a numbered sequel would make AC3 the next must-play game in the franchise, and it would be worth playing Revelations to close Ezio's story and set things up for the third/fifth game in the series. The pre-release and E3 hype suggested that AC3 was going to be one of the best games of the year.

And now...I will eventually play Brotherhood when I want to do some assassinating again, but it will be probably be a standalone experience. Based on the reviews and opinions from the fanbase, I'll probably flip Revelations on eBay and never buy AC3. I felt like I fooled myself into believing in the potential of AC3 without considering the reality of a studio pumping out another game in the annual franchise without the original creative lead at the helm. I could look past the issues and still be excited if the problem with AC3 was that it didn't wrap up the story and Desmond's arc in a convincing way - that was never why I liked these games - but hearing that it's just boring to play and the mission structure is tedious and frustrating makes me want to stay as far away from it as possible.

#28 Posted by JoeyRavn (4946 posts) -

AC3 is a disappointing game, no doubt about it. The series has been running out of steam for some time now, but at least I had fun playing it. Darksiders II was, for me, a total drag. Everything that had made the first game so go was dumbed down, and stupid, pointless gameplay mechanics (like the leveling system or the loot) were introduced. The story is completely devoid of any relevance, and the exploration is utterly futile, since there is nothing really worth exploring. The world feels empty and dead (no pun intended).

I can settle for AC3 being the Most Disappointing Game of 2012 on a general scale, but, personally, nothing tops Darksiders II in terms of falling from grace.

#29 Edited by Cloudenvy (5891 posts) -

My personal one is probably The Walking Dead. After everyone talking about how amazingly emotional it is and how it's a triumph for interactive storytelling it really got my hopes up...But after finishing episode 3 last night I mostly just want to quit while I'm ahead, it's been a super mediocre experience so far and I thought episode 3 was a major step down. It was predictable, as was episode 2 but that was at least exciting, and it feels like Telltale trying to use cheap tricks to get me to feel all sad inside. Not only that but the majority of the interesting characters also disappeared and I'm left with characters I don't really care about one bit.

I guess this is just one of those times where I have to be left out of the circlejerking despite how much I want to participate in it!

PS. Please don't kill me.

#30 Posted by matti00 (668 posts) -

@ZeForgotten said:

I'm guessing the community haven't "played" the game "Hold W To Move Foward While Fuck-All Happens For About 30 Minutes"?

Was that disappointing though? I got exactly what I expected and was looking for from that game and enjoyed my time with it. Worth my time and £1.50 of my money, and a couple of mentions of my home town.

#31 Edited by ArtisanBreads (3720 posts) -

Yeah it is AC III and it's not even a bad game. But it was by far the game I was most looking forward to and it didn't live up to that overall, even though there are amazing parts to the game. I'm really hopeful that AC III-2 is a much better game.@Hunter5024 said:

@Demoskinos: But with the whole Animus thing allowing them to tell stories from the perspective of so many different characters doesn't that give them kind of a perfect set up for annual sequels in a narrative sense? I definitely feel like its yearly entries harmed the gameplay, and the visuals, but I don't feel like the problems with their story can actually be blamed on their release schedule, that was just bad writing.

Eh I completely disagree. I think Desmond's stuff got stretched a bit but I don't even think that's bad, and I think gameplay greatly improved over the games. Especially AC II -> Brotherhood.

To me, AC III's issues had nothing to do with that. I feel like it was too many features without focus into a whole, which is probably a result of Ubisofts way of putting so many studios on a single game. I guess that could be said to be tangled up in the AC yearly release thing in a way but this did have a longer development. A huge error was making it so that there is so little to do in the wilderness even though that's the best area of the game. They whittled down options in cities for accuracy but then left them as the activity hubs. That was a huge mistake.

I hope a new iteration brings focus.

#32 Posted by Phatmac (5720 posts) -

ME3 was incredibly disappointing due to my love for the franchise. After ME3 I don't want anything to do with Mass Effect. They fucked it up. AC3 is a decent game that is incredibly ambitious.

#33 Posted by GetEveryone (4455 posts) -

Christ, the internet depresses me.

#34 Posted by Hunter5024 (5508 posts) -

@Cloudenvy said:

My personal one is probably The Walking Dead. After everyone talking about how amazingly emotional it is and how it's a triumph for interactive storytelling it really got my hopes up...But after finishing episode 3 last night I mostly just want to quit while I'm ahead, it's been a super mediocre experience so far and I thought episode 3 was a major step down. It was predictable, as was episode 2 but that was at least exciting, and it feels like Telltale trying to use cheap tricks to get me to feel all sad inside. Not only that but the majority of the interesting characters also disappeared and I'm left with characters I don't really care about one bit.

I guess this is just one of those times where I have to be left out of the circlejerking despite how much I want to participate in it!

PS. Please don't kill me.

I'm still debating how high up on my list it's going to be, and it will definitely be high, but I totally agree with your sentiments.

I can't speak for Doug, but I thought the Carley death was a really great moment when it happened, but the more I thought about it the more crappy it felt. Her character still had potential, and I feel like they sacrificed that because they didn't want to have to keep writing around the decision from the end of episode 1. Between her, Lilly, Duck, and Katjaa I think they just realized they bit off more than they could chew and killed a lot of story potential in favor of cleansing the palette.

I find it strange that people are holding up episode 3 as the best, because if they had kept the narrative design of 2 throughout the game this would be my game of the year, and it's ultimately the story turns in episode 3 that are causing me to question what's going to top my list. Still, you should beat it. Episode 5 is half as long as the others, so you're like 70% of the way through the game, and the ending is pretty good.

#35 Posted by david3cm (635 posts) -

I don't think Revelations was boring as shit, I thought it was fun.

#36 Posted by Mezmero (1767 posts) -

Yeah I only started AC3 like a week ago and I was already disappointed. It was such a technical mess on 360 and not really fun to play. I felt the exact same way when I didn't finish Revelations. This is becoming a great franchise for gamefly users like myself. I'll probably send it back and look up the ending online. As disappointed as I have been with it I was rather surprised when the Bomb Squad gained consensus on it in the most recent podcast. Sometimes these guys are so in tune with their audience it's scary.

#37 Posted by BaconGames (3280 posts) -

@GetEveryone said:

Christ, the internet depresses me.

What's worse is why I continue to click on these threads knowing I won't get anything out of them. At the same time, it's categories like these that reward the after the fact player because they can come in and temper expectations to still see for themselves and enjoy it for what it is. ME3 is toxic and at this point opinions literally mean nothing to me about it, and AC:III is a surprise but enough of a change that I want to see it for myself anyway.

As far as games that I was actually disappointed by, I thought Dustforce was a let down after hearing Patrick say it controlled and played on the level of something like a SMB, which I feel it did not and the design was internally conflicted between the awesome feeling of running smoothly and putting needlessly difficult obstacles in your way.

#38 Posted by Hailinel (23680 posts) -

@me3639 said:

Seriously, how is there not a Nintendo game on that list?

That would require him to both play and be disappointed by a Nintendo game. Either he didn't play any, or he did play some and wasn't disappointed by them. (The latter is possible. Trust me, I know this. I played a number of Nintendo games this year and wasn't disappointed by any of them.)

#39 Posted by Brainling (31 posts) -

People need to separate "most disappointing" and "worst" in their head.

I think Mass Effect 3 is great example here. It's a great freakin' game, but for many people the ending was a major disappointment. It's still absolutely worth playing through, and as the GB guys pointed out, with all the DLC and edited endings in play, is a magnificent experience.

That release ending was absolutely disappointing though.

#40 Edited by Brainling (31 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@me3639 said:

Seriously, how is there not a Nintendo game on that list?

That would require him to both play and be disappointed by a Nintendo game. Either he didn't play any, or he did play some and wasn't disappointed by them. (The latter is possible. Trust me, I know this. I played a number of Nintendo games this year and wasn't disappointed by any of them.)

Is Skyword Sword a 2012 game or a 2011 game? If it's 2012, I'll offer up Skyward Sword.

Again, make that huge differentiation between "bad" and "disappointing". Skyward Sword is a good Zelda game, but it was so horribly formulaic as to be droll. In my head, this is how design meetings for Skyward Sword went: Take a bit of Ocarina and just a dash of Twilight Princess, add a smidgen of Wind Waker and a healthy dose of Link to the Past. Season with Majora's Mask to taste, and viola, Skyward Sword.

It was a good Zelda game...but I expected more from the follow up to Twilight Princess, and was left disappointed.

#41 Posted by Hailinel (23680 posts) -

@Brainling: That came out last year.

#42 Edited by Bobby_The_Great (1002 posts) -

I liked AC3, a lot. The multiplayer was fun, and running around the wilderness is a blast. Sure the story and the missions structure are wonky, but I still enjoyed it.

Also, this who post is not reading as "disappointing," it's reading as worst.

#43 Posted by darkcargio (72 posts) -

Good list. SInce the Mass effect 3 fiasco I do not preorder games anymore.

#44 Posted by big_jon (5707 posts) -

Not sure a I have one, I was disappointed with aspects of Halo 4 and Mass Effect 3 but still enjoyed them so.

#45 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

Soul Calibur 5 was my most disappointing game. Not that I expected it to be amazing or anything, but I definitely thought a Tekken 3 style jump had a lot of potential, and could easily fix the problems that series has. Instead I legitimately feel like they ruined the franchise. I have no idea what they could do for the next Soul Calibur game that wouldn't exacerbate all the problems that series has developed.

@Demoskinos: But with the whole Animus thing allowing them to tell stories from the perspective of so many different characters doesn't that give them kind of a perfect set up for annual sequels in a narrative sense? I definitely feel like its yearly entries harmed the gameplay, and the visuals, but I don't feel like the problems with their story can actually be blamed on their release schedule, that was just bad writing.

The weirdest thing about Soul Calibur is how I cannot for the life of me put my finger on why it sucks now. Somehow... somewhere... it just got cheap. Soul Blade was amazing. Soul Calibur was amazing. Then with Soul Calibur 2, for me, it just lost the plot.

#46 Posted by TheUnsavedHero (1255 posts) -

As of December 30th, 2012. I have finished ME3 with the DLC and had the Brad Shoemaker experience. The way it should be experienced is with DLC. (From Ashes and Leviathan SHOULD BE FREE!!!). Without it, I can see how it would be a massive let down. I loved it and also kinda bummed out that it was released without the key story beats that would've made sense to A LOT of the story.

As a quick aside, I didn't see Syndicate on here which surprises me. I'm not saying I hate it because I had a lot of fun with that game, but I do seem to remember that a lot of people were raising a big stink over it not being a "true Syndicate game/experience". While there is something to be said about sticking to ones' roots, the same could be said for changing up the formula. Starbreeze generally does the FPS genre well and I was glad to see them put this out.

#47 Edited by videogamesarenotart (121 posts) -

The AC franchise went down the rabbit hole after the main character killed the pope at the vatican then proceeded to talk with an ancient alien about magic golden balls.

Seriously, if anyone was hyped about the story of AC 3 you were just delusional.

My recommendation for most disappointing game is Diablo 3. Just after release the developers incorporated Nephalem Valor and completely removed the drop rate from Bosses. This changed the way the entire game was played and was a cheap way to force all players farm entire areas rather than do boss runs which is what Diablo 2 was all about. Diablo 2 was simply a classic and blizzard completely ruined the franchise in one fell swoop. This was worse than any sort of Mass Effect skittles ending. Everyone hating on Mass effect completely forgot somehow that Deus Ex was EVEN WORSE with its ending, it was a singular station with 3 buttons and each button was the different ending. Hate on Mass Effect all you want, but Deus Ex did it worse and yet still was praised.

And the hate for Mass Effect's cash shop? Did everyone just completely forget about Diablo 3's real money auction house? The developers increased the difficulty, lowered the drop rates, and raised the health of all enemies in order to extend the life of the game and artificially inflate the value of rare drops.

You can say Mass effect 3 right now has been patched and fixed with DLC and such, but even still to this day the devs of Diablo 3 are running around like chickens with their heads cut off. They just recently put out a statement over the fact that they still have not incorporated PVP.

This is a core feature they promised at launch.

#48 Posted by jakob187 (21640 posts) -

@JazGalaxy said:

@Hunter5024 said:

Soul Calibur 5 was my most disappointing game. Not that I expected it to be amazing or anything, but I definitely thought a Tekken 3 style jump had a lot of potential, and could easily fix the problems that series has. Instead I legitimately feel like they ruined the franchise. I have no idea what they could do for the next Soul Calibur game that wouldn't exacerbate all the problems that series has developed.

@Demoskinos: But with the whole Animus thing allowing them to tell stories from the perspective of so many different characters doesn't that give them kind of a perfect set up for annual sequels in a narrative sense? I definitely feel like its yearly entries harmed the gameplay, and the visuals, but I don't feel like the problems with their story can actually be blamed on their release schedule, that was just bad writing.

The weirdest thing about Soul Calibur is how I cannot for the life of me put my finger on why it sucks now. Somehow... somewhere... it just got cheap. Soul Blade was amazing. Soul Calibur was amazing. Then with Soul Calibur 2, for me, it just lost the plot.

Can I say that I thoroughly disagree that Soul Calibur V sucks...and will go so far as to say that it's the first Soul game I've enjoyed since Soul Edge/Soul Blade?

I'm going to go ahead and say that now.

#49 Posted by Hunter5024 (5508 posts) -

@jakob187: Only if you agree the story mode is at least atrocious.

#50 Posted by ImmortalSaiyan (4674 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

@jakob187: Only if you agree the story mode is at least atrocious.

The story mode is awful but i think t he gameplay easily makes up for it. The best Soul Calibur sense 2. I felt adding all the new characters and the addition of meter, super and ex moves made the game fresh again. Plus the new way Gi was handled and quick side steps.