Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

4. Assassin's Creed - I think this has more to do with oversaturation than anything. Had they stopped at Assassin's Creed II, and then followed up with Assassin's Creed III, it'd be a tight, compact, well told trilogy. But instead, they released two pseudo sequels to Assassin's Creed II in rapid fire, which overall taken as the Assassin's Creed II trilogy may have told a compelling story, but each game failed to progress the gameplay and instead felt like episodic content at a full $60 price tag.

Assassin's Creed and Assassin's Creed II were fine games with okay mechanics, a fun open world to traverse, and they looked great. They were also tedious, overlong, full of filler, had convoluted and poorly told stories, and hit or miss modern day sequences.

The episodic sequels continued the story of Assassin's Creed II. Perhaps unnecessarily so. Concepts brought into the episodes was hit or miss. The games had an exciting cat and mouse multiplayer mode, but shockingly dull vehicle sequences, quick time events, and even tower defense for some reason. After the content dump that occurred, they began teasing that Assassin's Creed III was finally a real, full sequel made by the A Team at Ubisoft Entertainment. Which is a retroactive way of admitting Assassin's Creed: Revelations and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood were less than spectacular, but hey buy this one because it's going to be what you thought those games would be.

3. Halo - Don't get me wrong, Halo: Combat Evolved was a revolution when it first came out on the Xbox. It essentially launched Microsoft's first console into the mainstream, and forever changed first person shooter mechanics. And the sequel, Halo 2, was also pretty great and further cemented the foundation for Xbox Live, and led to modern console online gaming. That deserves some major credit. But a formula became apparent. Silent generic soldier protagonist #725 would wake up, do some tests to configure the controls and would instantly be dumped into a fight against generic aliens known as The Covenant. And at the exact halfway point of the game, the player would begin on a long quiet corridor section, where predictably some sort of virus appears, only instead of the tired cliche of zombies, Halo uses The Flood, a zombie like parasite that has some sort of hive mind sentience, but for all intents and purposes, it's zombies. Then you fight them, the Covenant reenter the plot, the Flood and Covenant clash and Master Chief passes through this battle, then finally he detonates a Halo ring. Which is a confusing and generic plot device which seems to be whatever the writers want it to be. In one game it's a weapon, the next it's a tool, the next it's a religion. Whatever Bungie needed at that time, they stuffed the Halo rings into it. It's like Nanomachines in Metal Gear Solid or The Force in Star Wars. Need an answer? Just throw in a Halo ring and shrug.

By Halo 3 the formula was firmly in place. But the rise of Call of Duty also occurred with Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. First Person Shooter mechanics had again evolved, and Halo 3 was the first game to show it's age. Left trigger had become the "look down the sights" button, but Halo kept it as the "throw a grenade" button. Most guns in Halo 3 had no sights to look down. These may seem like a small control difference, but at the time it was a massive fossil in the genre. Halo 3: ODST was an interesting experiment, but ultimately just that. A short, slight, downloadable experiment. And seemingly as an apology for their experiment, Halo: Reach came out and became the most formulaic title in the entire series.

Halo 4 could be a breath of fresh air, with a new studio in 343 Industries taking over for Bungie. The game looks impressive graphically, and has a new alien race, although surely the Covenant play a large role. But clearly this game won't be the zeitgeist phenomenon it was. It won't push the genre ahead. It won't lead the charge. It will simply be an iteration on a popular franchise.

2. Call of Duty - No, I'm not going to be that guy. Call of Duty is a great franchise, that first set an amazing standard with Call of Duty, then became a benchmark game in the current gen's hardware development. The franchise has played a larger role in the lives of both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 than I think anyone is willing to admit. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare changed gaming forever. And up until a major rift within Activision, Infinity Ward was consistently innovating and pushing the medium forward with their Modern Warfare series. But during the production of Modern Warfare 2, trouble began between creative and business, and the minds at Infinity Ward were attacked and ousted from the company. Treyarch, the B Team which filled off years with standard but passable entries in the overall franchise, took over and accepted the larger role in the company. They're the one's using the old tech. Infinity Ward, the one that finished Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, isn't even close to the same developer. They're Infinity Ward in name only. Treyarch was always the company using the Infinity Ward engine and model, but simply plunked down a new setting (usually World War II), and characters. Now that Infinity Ward is no more, realistically, Treyarch has no one to hide behind. They can't ride the coattails of more creative developers. And now that they must lead the way into the future, you can see how they're doing it. By not doing. Old graphics, tired gameplay, hallway shooting, frivolous story. Sure, Call of Duty: Black Ops II looks to be somewhat unique. But considering the model has existed since 2007, a few tweaks don't make an old dog new. The tiredness of the franchise, and the community backlash comes from Activision's hatchet job of what was a great development team.

But no matter how you slice it, there is a new Call of Duty every October, and it's not nearly as good as sales would suggest.

1. God of War - I know I'm going to offend some here. God of War to me, is as tired as Call of Duty, if not more. Three games with no true innovation other than graphics and a raging hard on for gore. Two handheld spin offs with the same lack of innovation and same raging boner. And now God of War: Ascension, a game nobody asked for, that takes the incredibly dated isometric camera, button mashing combat, health orbs, and quick time events into the future. Were you dying for another prequel that tells the uninteresting story of the uninteresting Kratos, yet again? We know how he got his markings, scars, whiteness, chains, anger, death, rebirth, vengeance, more anger, but this time... you get to do it again. Ascension (taking the new approach of not calling an unnecessary sequel "4" but instead slapping on a colon followed by a random word; see Gears of War: Judgment) looks to tell the already told story of an angry Kratos before he finally killed everyone. The game will no doubt star an angry Kratos killing everyone. But before he killed those guys, and after he killed those guys. The story really needed to be told. The world was waiting to find out how he killed these guys, before those guys, and after those guys.

But it's not all old. Sure, the camera is still isometric, because it's 2002 apparently, and sure the combat is still stilted and mashy, and sure there is still a goofy quick time event to finish off every enemy, but hey did we mention Kratos has a bracelet that can rebuild broken buildings? See? NEW! SHINY! Buy us! We have multiplayer!

God of War: Ascension's redeeming quality may be as a tech demo for the final years of the PS3, but little else. It's a game no one asked for, and it's just a way to cash out before the next gen, and a full God of War game graces the launch, or shortly thereafter. Surely Gears of War 4 will look to do the same.

#1 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

4. Assassin's Creed - I think this has more to do with oversaturation than anything. Had they stopped at Assassin's Creed II, and then followed up with Assassin's Creed III, it'd be a tight, compact, well told trilogy. But instead, they released two pseudo sequels to Assassin's Creed II in rapid fire, which overall taken as the Assassin's Creed II trilogy may have told a compelling story, but each game failed to progress the gameplay and instead felt like episodic content at a full $60 price tag.

Assassin's Creed and Assassin's Creed II were fine games with okay mechanics, a fun open world to traverse, and they looked great. They were also tedious, overlong, full of filler, had convoluted and poorly told stories, and hit or miss modern day sequences.

The episodic sequels continued the story of Assassin's Creed II. Perhaps unnecessarily so. Concepts brought into the episodes was hit or miss. The games had an exciting cat and mouse multiplayer mode, but shockingly dull vehicle sequences, quick time events, and even tower defense for some reason. After the content dump that occurred, they began teasing that Assassin's Creed III was finally a real, full sequel made by the A Team at Ubisoft Entertainment. Which is a retroactive way of admitting Assassin's Creed: Revelations and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood were less than spectacular, but hey buy this one because it's going to be what you thought those games would be.

3. Halo - Don't get me wrong, Halo: Combat Evolved was a revolution when it first came out on the Xbox. It essentially launched Microsoft's first console into the mainstream, and forever changed first person shooter mechanics. And the sequel, Halo 2, was also pretty great and further cemented the foundation for Xbox Live, and led to modern console online gaming. That deserves some major credit. But a formula became apparent. Silent generic soldier protagonist #725 would wake up, do some tests to configure the controls and would instantly be dumped into a fight against generic aliens known as The Covenant. And at the exact halfway point of the game, the player would begin on a long quiet corridor section, where predictably some sort of virus appears, only instead of the tired cliche of zombies, Halo uses The Flood, a zombie like parasite that has some sort of hive mind sentience, but for all intents and purposes, it's zombies. Then you fight them, the Covenant reenter the plot, the Flood and Covenant clash and Master Chief passes through this battle, then finally he detonates a Halo ring. Which is a confusing and generic plot device which seems to be whatever the writers want it to be. In one game it's a weapon, the next it's a tool, the next it's a religion. Whatever Bungie needed at that time, they stuffed the Halo rings into it. It's like Nanomachines in Metal Gear Solid or The Force in Star Wars. Need an answer? Just throw in a Halo ring and shrug.

By Halo 3 the formula was firmly in place. But the rise of Call of Duty also occurred with Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. First Person Shooter mechanics had again evolved, and Halo 3 was the first game to show it's age. Left trigger had become the "look down the sights" button, but Halo kept it as the "throw a grenade" button. Most guns in Halo 3 had no sights to look down. These may seem like a small control difference, but at the time it was a massive fossil in the genre. Halo 3: ODST was an interesting experiment, but ultimately just that. A short, slight, downloadable experiment. And seemingly as an apology for their experiment, Halo: Reach came out and became the most formulaic title in the entire series.

Halo 4 could be a breath of fresh air, with a new studio in 343 Industries taking over for Bungie. The game looks impressive graphically, and has a new alien race, although surely the Covenant play a large role. But clearly this game won't be the zeitgeist phenomenon it was. It won't push the genre ahead. It won't lead the charge. It will simply be an iteration on a popular franchise.

2. Call of Duty - No, I'm not going to be that guy. Call of Duty is a great franchise, that first set an amazing standard with Call of Duty, then became a benchmark game in the current gen's hardware development. The franchise has played a larger role in the lives of both the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 than I think anyone is willing to admit. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare changed gaming forever. And up until a major rift within Activision, Infinity Ward was consistently innovating and pushing the medium forward with their Modern Warfare series. But during the production of Modern Warfare 2, trouble began between creative and business, and the minds at Infinity Ward were attacked and ousted from the company. Treyarch, the B Team which filled off years with standard but passable entries in the overall franchise, took over and accepted the larger role in the company. They're the one's using the old tech. Infinity Ward, the one that finished Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, isn't even close to the same developer. They're Infinity Ward in name only. Treyarch was always the company using the Infinity Ward engine and model, but simply plunked down a new setting (usually World War II), and characters. Now that Infinity Ward is no more, realistically, Treyarch has no one to hide behind. They can't ride the coattails of more creative developers. And now that they must lead the way into the future, you can see how they're doing it. By not doing. Old graphics, tired gameplay, hallway shooting, frivolous story. Sure, Call of Duty: Black Ops II looks to be somewhat unique. But considering the model has existed since 2007, a few tweaks don't make an old dog new. The tiredness of the franchise, and the community backlash comes from Activision's hatchet job of what was a great development team.

But no matter how you slice it, there is a new Call of Duty every October, and it's not nearly as good as sales would suggest.

1. God of War - I know I'm going to offend some here. God of War to me, is as tired as Call of Duty, if not more. Three games with no true innovation other than graphics and a raging hard on for gore. Two handheld spin offs with the same lack of innovation and same raging boner. And now God of War: Ascension, a game nobody asked for, that takes the incredibly dated isometric camera, button mashing combat, health orbs, and quick time events into the future. Were you dying for another prequel that tells the uninteresting story of the uninteresting Kratos, yet again? We know how he got his markings, scars, whiteness, chains, anger, death, rebirth, vengeance, more anger, but this time... you get to do it again. Ascension (taking the new approach of not calling an unnecessary sequel "4" but instead slapping on a colon followed by a random word; see Gears of War: Judgment) looks to tell the already told story of an angry Kratos before he finally killed everyone. The game will no doubt star an angry Kratos killing everyone. But before he killed those guys, and after he killed those guys. The story really needed to be told. The world was waiting to find out how he killed these guys, before those guys, and after those guys.

But it's not all old. Sure, the camera is still isometric, because it's 2002 apparently, and sure the combat is still stilted and mashy, and sure there is still a goofy quick time event to finish off every enemy, but hey did we mention Kratos has a bracelet that can rebuild broken buildings? See? NEW! SHINY! Buy us! We have multiplayer!

God of War: Ascension's redeeming quality may be as a tech demo for the final years of the PS3, but little else. It's a game no one asked for, and it's just a way to cash out before the next gen, and a full God of War game graces the launch, or shortly thereafter. Surely Gears of War 4 will look to do the same.

#2 Posted by TheHumanDove (2523 posts) -

I was going to say shut your whore mouth, but nah. Everything appears to be in order here.

#3 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18954 posts) -

You feel the need to blog about games you think are overrated why? Name your favorite 3 franchises so I can tell you why they're overrated. It can be done to literally any game, because they all have repetition and rehashed mechanics one way or another.

@ERoBB said:

1. God of War - I know I'm going to offend some here.

No, these are video games, people who might get offended by you calling a video game overrated do not deserve your consideration.

#4 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

@AhmadMetallic: And who are you to say I'm wrong in any way?

We're all just people talking here.

#5 Posted by N7 (3595 posts) -

I'm not so sure a game can be overrated if people keep buying it, or enjoying it.

#6 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

@N7 said:

I'm not so sure a game can be overrated if people keep buying it, or enjoying it.

How do you figure that? If a game is rated higher in public opinion or consciousness or any regard, than a person thinks it should be, then that person feels it is overrated.

#7 Posted by Anund (925 posts) -

I was with you until God of War. I do wish they had stopped at 3 though, I don't see the need for a fourth one at all.

#8 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

Pong was overrated, it was the same thing over and over again. 
Pacman. wooo boy.  
 
I could keep going, but it doesn't make your opinion invalid. 
Opinions can't be invalid (well, except maybe on Giant Bomb)

Online
#9 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

@ZeForgotten: You're totally right about opinions. If someone wants to say Pong is overrated, I say they should. Discussion is always a good thing. Unless of course someone says Morrowind is overrated. In which case they need to get beat down.

#10 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18954 posts) -

@ERoBB said:

@AhmadMetallic: And who are you to say I'm wrong in any way?

Where did I say you're wrong? I said the whole 'overrated' discussion doesn't warrant a blog because every popular franchise is overrated.

#11 Posted by N7 (3595 posts) -
@ERoBB said:

@N7 said:

I'm not so sure a game can be overrated if people keep buying it, or enjoying it.

How do you figure that? If a game is rated higher in public opinion or consciousness or any regard, than a person thinks it should be, then that person feels it is overrated.

There's a difference between having a negative opinion of something and that something being overrated.
 
I do not like Halo. I think it's dumb. Does that mean I should think it's overrated by default, even though I know a trillion billion people buy it and enjoy it every time one comes out? I don't think so.
 
The fans like it, the critics even like it, so my opinion on the matter is pretty pointless. It's a whisper in the wind.
#12 Posted by MikeGosot (3227 posts) -
@ERoBB said:

@ZeForgotten: You're totally right about opinions. If someone wants to say Pong is overrated, I say they should. Discussion is always a good thing. Unless of course someone says Morrowind is overrated. In which case they need to get beat down.

...Now i dunno if i should say that i think The Elder Scrolls series is overrated.
#13 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -
@ERoBB: But Morrowind is overra...'gets beat down'  
'wakes up' and so is Oblivion! at least it was untill the only other good quest line (aside from the Thieves Guild and Dark Brotherhood stuff) came out (Knights of the Nine)'gets beat down again but then someone puts 500 bucks in my pocket for actually being right'
Online
#14 Posted by Dagbiker (6978 posts) -

I totally agree, I would have also accepted

  • Mario
  • Uncharted
  • Gears of War
  • Dead Space
#15 Posted by Bwast (1342 posts) -

This is a 12 year old's thread dressed in adult language. I have the same reaction to both: utter annoyance.

#16 Posted by N7 (3595 posts) -
@Dagbiker said:

I totally agree, I would have also accepted

  • Mario
  • Uncharted
  • Gears of War
  • Dead Space
  • Legend Of Zelda
  • Metroid Prime
  • Pokemon
  • Saints Row
#17 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

lol, Oblivion and Skyrim have definitely become, dare I say, overrated. The more fans they got, the more they stripped away and streamlined. But Morrowind will always be amazing.

To those two or so of you simply taking issue with the word overrated, and none of the actual opinions I wrote, I dunno, take it for what you will. I'd never claim my opinion as fact. But these are the four franchises benefiting from what I perceive as a "rating" the actual games don't warrant.

#18 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

@Bwast: That would make me a twelve year old in a big boy's college educated body. So I'm pretty much living out 'Big'? Sweet.

#19 Posted by Mystyr_E (1196 posts) -

@N7 said:

@Dagbiker said:

I totally agree, I would have also accepted

  • Mario
  • Uncharted
  • Gears of War
  • Dead Space
  • Legend Of Zelda
  • Metroid Prime
  • Pokemon
  • Saints Row

I'd suggest you leave now before limbs start flying

#20 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

I thought about Mario and other Nintendo "franchises" but I'm not even sure Mario, Zelda, Metroid are franchises. They're more like genres with multiple mini-franchises existing under the same umbrella. Kind of mind boggling to try to judge using modern criteria. I guess Nintendo just is what it is and can't be judged like other companies.

#21 Posted by rb_man (451 posts) -

Am I the only one thinking these games are more oversaturated the overrated?

#22 Edited by PSNgamesun (411 posts) -

I kinda agree except GOW I love that series. Another thing tho is that I rarely hear people claiming COD(even tho it sales like hotcakes) as the greatest or anything like that n the same goes 4 GOW.

#23 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

@rb_man said:

Am I the only one thinking these games are more oversaturated the overrated?

But note I'm talking about the franchises as a whole, and not any individual games. So I'm more speaking to the health and "rating" of the entire series, which oversaturation definitely takes away from.

#24 Edited by Jace (1094 posts) -

@ERoBB: I disagree with points 3 and 4. Halo has had a nice hiatus and a total paradigm shift in production. And to say that Brotherhood didn't add anything interesting to the AC franchise is just...well, wrong.

#25 Posted by PSNgamesun (411 posts) -

So I wouldn't call them overrated and 2 me GOD series is underrated lol

#26 Posted by N7 (3595 posts) -
@PSNgamesun said:
I kinda agree except GOW I love that series. Another thing tho is that I rarely hear people claiming COD(even tho it sales like hotcakes) as the greatest or anything like that n the same goes 4 GOW.
They don't really have to be the greatest. They are both great games and they both have a dedicated fanbase.
#27 Posted by rb_man (451 posts) -

@ERoBB said:

@rb_man said:

Am I the only one thinking these games are more oversaturated the overrated?

But note I'm talking about the franchises as a whole, and not any individual games. So I'm more speaking to the health and "rating" of the entire series, which oversaturation definitely takes away from.

I was talking about the franchises as a whole. I guess I should have said franchises instead of games.

#28 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

@Jace said:

@ERoBB: I disagree with points 3 and 4. Halo has had a nice hiatus and a total paradigm shift in production. And to say that Brotherhood didn't add anything interesting to the AC franchise is just...well, wrong.

I noted the things Brotherhood and Revelations "added", but adding content, some of which is good, some of which is gimmicky is something expansion packs do. And if we're willing to call those games expansion packs for ACII, I'm all for it. But as full releases, those have to be viewed as pretty disappointing. Listening to most podcasts, even the Giantbombcast, guys talk about abandoning the series altogether until ACIII, just because these games were getting pumped out too fast. That's surely a negative quality.

#29 Posted by ExplodeMode (852 posts) -

I'm not ready to jump on GoW just yet. I feel like this next game is their chance to do something great other than graphics or scale. To me, they deserve one last shot and so far we know of adding an MP mode that actually looks kind of cool. If this one is the same old thing and feels stale, then I'm with you. This next GoW is the one that makes or breaks the franchise in my eyes.

#30 Posted by stise (89 posts) -

Come on man.

#31 Posted by pyromagnestir (4327 posts) -

The problem with any "thing X" is overrated discussion is that it isn't much of a discussion. You say it is, someone else says it isn't, you snap that that's only their opinion and it can't invalidate your opinion, they agree and throw that back at you, and ultimately nothing ever comes out of it, except maybe someone feeling insulted you said you think something they like is overrated, thereby implying they are mindless sheep incapable of seeing the "truth" that you can. It's pointless, perhaps even more so than a lot of the pointless discussions that happen here.

Eh. Whatever.

#32 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

@ExplodeMode said:

I'm not ready to jump on GoW just yet. I feel like this next game is their chance to do something great other than graphics or scale. To me, they deserve one last shot and so far we know of adding an MP mode that actually looks kind of cool. If this one is the same old thing and feels stale, then I'm with you. This next GoW is the one that makes or breaks the franchise in my eyes.

It's early yet. Ascension may be great, and prove skeptics wrong. Who knows? But there's five games on PSN right now, with a sixth coming next year. I just wished they'd held off for some type of God of War 4, maybe with a new character, or just something drastically different.

#33 Posted by RUDEMIESTER (56 posts) -
  • Battlefield
  • Elder Scrolls
  • Street Fighter
#34 Posted by iAmJohn (6128 posts) -
#35 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

@pyromagnestir said:

The problem with any "thing X" is overrated discussion is that it isn't much of a discussion. You say it is, someone else says it isn't, you snap that that's only their opinion and it can't invalidate your opinion, they agree and throw that back at you, and ultimately nothing ever comes out of it, except maybe someone feeling insulted you said you think something they like is overrated, thereby implying they are mindless sheep incapable of seeing the "truth" that you can. It's pointless, perhaps even more so than a lot of the pointless discussions that happen here.

Eh. Whatever.

That's not really limited to "overrated?" discussions. You're describing any opinion driven topic. Take it with a grain of salt. Dispute me, agree with me, or pass me off as just some idiot, and don't bother. All are valid.

#36 Posted by ChuckDeNomolos (72 posts) -

While I disagree on a few points, the one thing I disagree with the most is the lack of Final Fantasy being on this list.

#37 Posted by BestUsernameEver (4825 posts) -

@ERoBB: Great list, nothing at add, just all the games I would have chosen.

#38 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

@ChuckDeNomolos said:

While I disagree on a few points, the one thing I disagree with the most is the lack of Final Fantasy being on this list.

Final Fantasy is definitely in a bad way lately, but I don't see many people rating it very highly. If people went crazy over XIII-2, I'd call it overrated. But I think everyone rates that franchise about what it deserves.

#39 Edited by Dexter_Morgan_ (314 posts) -

How exactly is COD overrated? Last I checked everyone pretty much hates that series or has something bad to say about it.....

#40 Posted by BestUsernameEver (4825 posts) -

@Mystyr_E said:

@N7 said:

@Dagbiker said:

I totally agree, I would have also accepted

  • Mario
  • Uncharted
  • Gears of War
  • Dead Space
  • Legend Of Zelda
  • Metroid Prime
  • Pokemon
  • Saints Row

I'd suggest you leave now before limbs start flying

  • Rhythm heaven
  • Bayonetta
  • The elder scrolls
  • Jet grind radio
#41 Posted by rb_man (451 posts) -

@iAmJohn said:

@ERoBB said:

After the content dump that occurred, they began teasing that Assassin's Creed III was finally a real, full sequel made by the A Team at Ubisoft Entertainment. Which is a retroactive way of admitting Assassin's Creed: Revelations and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood were less than spectacular, but hey buy this one because it's going to be what you thought those games would be.

In what universe is Brotherhood not the best one? That's, like, the commonly held opinion by everyone.

Really? I always thought people thought that 1/2 was the best. Well to each is own.

#42 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

@rb_man said:

@iAmJohn said:

@ERoBB said:

After the content dump that occurred, they began teasing that Assassin's Creed III was finally a real, full sequel made by the A Team at Ubisoft Entertainment. Which is a retroactive way of admitting Assassin's Creed: Revelations and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood were less than spectacular, but hey buy this one because it's going to be what you thought those games would be.

In what universe is Brotherhood not the best one? That's, like, the commonly held opinion by everyone.

Really? I always thought people thought that 1/2 was the best. Well to each is own.

Yeah. I think this is the first time I've ever seen someone say Brotherhood was the best.

#43 Posted by BestUsernameEver (4825 posts) -

@rb_man said:

Am I the only one thinking these games are more oversaturated the overrated?

Pretty sure at least Halo and god of war are the epitome of blockbuster, wait at midnight to pick up games. And I straight up don't get the appeal of either.

#44 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

@Dexter_Morgan_ said:

How exactly is COD overrated? Last I checked everyone pretty much hates that series or has something bad to say about it.....

Sales, review scores, public opinion outside of us snarky internet types. Lame Call of Duty hate comments aside, that franchise is still a highly rated behemoth.

#45 Posted by BestUsernameEver (4825 posts) -

@RUDEMIESTER said:

  • Battlefield
  • Elder Scrolls
  • Street Fighter
  • Diablo 3
  • LA Noire
  • Fable (the series)
#46 Posted by ERoBB (160 posts) -

Fable is definitely a good one.

#47 Posted by CJduke (794 posts) -

@ERoBB said:

@rb_man said:

@iAmJohn said:

@ERoBB said:

After the content dump that occurred, they began teasing that Assassin's Creed III was finally a real, full sequel made by the A Team at Ubisoft Entertainment. Which is a retroactive way of admitting Assassin's Creed: Revelations and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood were less than spectacular, but hey buy this one because it's going to be what you thought those games would be.

In what universe is Brotherhood not the best one? That's, like, the commonly held opinion by everyone.

Really? I always thought people thought that 1/2 was the best. Well to each is own.

Yeah. I think this is the first time I've ever seen someone say Brotherhood was the best.

Really? Because I'm pretty sure Ryan has said about 100 times he thinks Brotherhood is the best one -_-

Also looking at the comments just proves how silly this entire discussion is. Might as well just say every video game invented is overrated and move on, not much to discuss.

#48 Posted by tescovee (361 posts) -

@N7 said:

+1

"Nostalgia is a seductive liar"

#49 Edited by connerthekewlkid (1844 posts) -

i like mainstream because hating mainstream is to mainstream

#50 Posted by PSNgamesun (411 posts) -

@N7: yeah both are good games but i say greatest as a hyperbole, also every game that is relatively good will have a fan-base but games that could be considered over rated at least to me have to reach out side of their fan base example being the Mass Effect series( which i love). The 1st one got its core fans but then the 2nd one exceeded that and got way more fans and it became a game known to most of the communities in gaming thus becoming a game that most people will put as one of the all time greats; putting it in a conversation of 'is it over rated" cause so many people say its the greatest or its untouchable. Thats when a game should be in question not when just its core fan base says its awesome like GOD. well thats my feeling