Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Is there a game that was so horrible that you were like "why the hell does this exist?"

Stupid @ss Deadly Premonition.

Road to hell and damnation.

Eh, Road to Hell was needed, it just wasn't wanted.

Rogue Warrior

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Eh, Road to Hell was needed, it just wasn't wanted.

I guess if they actually finished making the game.

Mass Effect 3

CoD xD

The Force Unleashed 2, Batman: Arkham Origins.

Arkham Origins wasn't bad... It just didn't completely reinvent the wheel like the others, and not all games necessarily need to do that to be worthwhile. If you're mentioning it here because of its early release bugs, then see Assassin's Creed Unity and list that too.

Well, it wasn't bad but the game didn't need to exist. It didn't bring anything to the series.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
The Force Unleashed 2, Batman: Arkham Origins. You didn't like TFU 2?

Damn, I really enjoyed it. Better gameplay then the first game.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
Arkham Origins wasn't bad... It just didn't completely reinvent the wheel like the others, and not all games necessarily need to do that to be worthwhile. If you're mentioning it here because of its early release bugs, then see Assassin's Creed Unity and list that too. It wasn't that bad, but it pales in comparison to Asylum and City. I just didn't a enjoy it that much, and like Smasadian said, it didn't add much to the overall lore of the Arkham games. Some things I liked (or even loved) about Origins, though, was Troy's Joker and Harley's/Joker's first meeting. The latter was particularly incredible, in my opinion.
Originally posted by Jmanghan
You didn't like TFU 2?

Damn, I really enjoyed it. Better gameplay then the first game. The gameplay was better, yeah, but the story was boring to me.

Yeah, the story sucked. But the content, characters, everything was pretty good.

Originally posted by Smasandian
. It didn't bring anything to the series.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
It just didn't completely reinvent the wheel like the others, and not all games necessarily need to do that to be worthwhile.:

Dating sims?

If we're talking really bad games, pretty much any third party NES game that didn't have the seal of approval (Think Bible Games.)

http://i.imgur.com/GHnMSuIm.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/6dduzbK.jpg

Don't hate on my man Cory wtf dude

Originally posted by cdtm
Dating sims?

If we're talking really bad games, pretty much any third party NES game that didn't have the seal of approval (Think Bible Games.)

Why shouldn't dating sims as a whole exist?

Originally posted by |King Joker|
The Force Unleashed 2, Batman: Arkham Origins.

Why you gotta hate on Arkham Origins? If any game shouldn't exist for being a rehash, it's Battlefield: Hardline. Origins at least had a ton of new stuff to make up for the AC layout. Hardline just has cops and robbers in maps similar to Battlefield 4's.

Superman 64.

/thread.

Originally posted by Impediment
Superman 64.

/thread.
Were you one of the unfortunate that bought the game?

Originally posted by Lek Kuen
Why shouldn't dating sims as a whole exist?

They're the Choose Your Own Adventure of games.

Basically just light novels, more then anything.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Well, it wasn't bad but the game didn't need to exist. It didn't bring anything to the series.


Well it gave us the Bane that we should have had in the first two games.

Originally posted by KCJ506
Well it gave us the Bane that we should have had in the first two games.

And crime scene reconstructions. And new enemy types. And new gadgets (though some were rehashes of older ones).

I don't mind people saying the game isn't the leap forward that city was, but it still contributed at least a little to the series.

It's a mediocre game that puts a stain on the Arkham franchise, in my opinion. Mediocrity isn't worth my time, and I expected Origins to be at least in the same ballpark of quality Asylum and City were in. But again, that's just me. If you enjoyed it, that's awesome.

I think mediocre is a harsh term, tbh. Its not on the level of City and Asylum, sure, but given how good those games were, I don't think that's necessarily indicative of it being shit.

Originally posted by cdtm
They're the Choose Your Own Adventure of games.

Basically just light novels, more then anything.

A lot of those games have actual stats and crossover into management sims. Some dating sims are very simple yes, but it is a pretty diverse genre with some using mechanics from other genres such as puzzles or even fighting systems on occasion.

More importantly though, why does a genre not being your style mean it shouldn't exist?


When I think of something that shouldn't have been made it's things with legit problems or basically scams and shit.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I think mediocre is a harsh term, tbh. Its not on the level of City and Asylum, sure, but given how good those games were, I don't think that's necessarily indicative of it being shit. I didn't say it was 'shit'. But the story was just pretty bad overall, the new gameplay features don't make up for the lack of a good story, in my opinion.

It's story was better than Arkham City at least. That game had the weakest story out of the three games IMO. It was mainly a glorified 'chase/track-down story', One that's been done at least a thousand times in the Batman comics and done less contrived too.

Batman has to find Catwoman for information
Batman has to find Joker just because he took a pot shot at Catwoman with a gun
Batman has to find Mr. Freeze for finding Joker's cure
Batman has to find Penguin for finding Freeze's suit
Batman has to find Ra's Al Ghul for finding an enzyme in his blood
Batman has to find Joker again for taking the cure
Batman has to stop Hugo Strange and stop Protocol 10
Batman has to find Joker again for taking Talia

Almost none of this has ANYTHING to do with the Arkham City situation or Strange foreshadowed "Protocol 10", or the hierarchy among criminals and gang bosses.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
I didn't say it was 'shit'. But the story was just pretty bad overall, the new gameplay features don't make up for the lack of a good story, in my opinion.

I was just using the word to exaggerate.

I thought the story was fine, tbh. Not as good as Asylum or City, but still decent. If you don't, fair enough.

Originally posted by KCJ506
It's story was better than Arkham City at least. That game had the weakest story out of the three games IMO. It was mainly a glorified 'chase/track-down story', One that's been done at least a thousand times in the Batman comics and done less contrived too.

Batman has to find Catwoman for information
Batman has to find Joker just because he took a pot shot at Catwoman with a gun
Batman has to find Mr. Freeze for finding Joker's cure
Batman has to find Penguin for finding Freeze's suit
Batman has to find Ra's Al Ghul for finding an enzyme in his blood
Batman has to find Joker again for taking the cure
Batman has to stop Hugo Strange and stop Protocol 10
Batman has to find Joker again for taking Talia

Almost none of this has ANYTHING to do with the Arkham City situation or Strange foreshadowed "Protocol 10", or the hierarchy among criminals and gang bosses.

mmm

Well, shit

https://neversaynever0304.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/disgust_707676_1567263.gif

Originally posted by KCJ506
It's story was better than Arkham City at least. That game had the weakest story out of the three games IMO. It was mainly a glorified 'chase/track-down story', One that's been done at least a thousand times in the Batman comics and done less contrived too.

Batman has to find Catwoman for information
Batman has to find Joker just because he took a pot shot at Catwoman with a gun
Batman has to find Mr. Freeze for finding Joker's cure
Batman has to find Penguin for finding Freeze's suit
Batman has to find Ra's Al Ghul for finding an enzyme in his blood
Batman has to find Joker again for taking the cure
Batman has to stop Hugo Strange and stop Protocol 10
Batman has to find Joker again for taking Talia

Almost none of this has ANYTHING to do with the Arkham City situation or Strange foreshadowed "Protocol 10", or the hierarchy among criminals and gang bosses.

I disagree, but my question to you is... What would have been your alternative?

Originally posted by Spawningpool
Were you one of the unfortunate that bought the game?

I was 19 in 1999 and received it as a gift.

The horror!

Originally posted by -Pr-
I disagree, but my question to you is... What would have been your alternative?

For the story to focus more on Hugo Strange instead of Batman getting poisoned and trying to find a cure. The main reason Batman even got himself sent to Arkham City was to take down Strange and prevent this mysterious "Protocol 10" from happening. Yet for some reason he totally goes after Joker ( whose in prison with rules so "technically" is doing nothing wrong whatsoever ) because he fired a bullet at Catwoman. So what? It's the Joker. It's what he does. Wouldn't taking down Strange be on a higher list for just this once? Once Batman started the go after the Joker, the Protocol 10 stuff became irrelevant until near the end of the story.

As I said Arkham City was a "chase/track down story". Joker needs a cure for the disease he has. Which is again totally unrelated to any Protocol 10 sub-plot and is basically there to kill the time.. and of course Mr. Freeze has it. Who was coincidentally just kidnapped by Penguin, who then coincidentally needs a enzyme that only Ra's Al Ghul has, coincidentally one of his ninjas is sitting nearby in Penguin's display case.

I could go on, but the message should be clear. There was nothing really extraordinary about Arkham City's story at all. Yes, the idea of prison built between Gotham were the inmates are allowed to tear each other apart.. is nothing short of genius. But it's never used for the story. The idea that Batman has to chase a cure because he got poisoned, is one the laziest and forgettable premises for a Batman story there is. That's the main story of Arkham City.

Originally posted by Impediment
I was 19 in 1999 and received it as a gift.

The horror!
My condolences

Arkham Knight. 313

Oh, and EA's Battlefront.

http://oyster.ignimgs.com/mediawiki/apis.ign.com/gears-of-war-project/thumb/6/60/Thumb.jpg/468px-Thumb.jpg

Yep! Could of been released as DLC. Judgement Day kind of put a stain on the really good trilogy.

I did like doing the extra challenges you came across in the levels, Rather then just move forward to the next area.

I didn't really get into that much....

I remember hearing it was a cool mechanic but nothing to make a new game about.

Oh well, let's see what happens with Gears 4.

I might of mentioned but Arkham Origins is not a game we needed.

Hitman Absolution just so the latest movie didn't have something to mimic and make worse.

So you've actually seen the latest movie?....and not basing your opinion off what RT says.

Originally posted by Smasandian
I might of mentioned but Arkham Origins is not a game we needed.
Maybe, maybe not. Still better than Arkham Knight though.

Originally posted by Kazenji
So you've actually seen the latest movie?....and not basing your opinion off what RT says.

I said I saw it. My post is right above yours in the reboot thread

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
Maybe, maybe not. Still better than Arkham Knight though.

Ewww, not a chance.

Arkham Origins was a great game. estahuh

Hey, I like it. But I think it's a stretch saying it's as good as Knight, never mind better.

I was more responding to the idea that it shouldn't exist.

I always took this as a game that didn't need to be made. Not that it was crap or not.

Superman 64 is one of the worst games to be made but there wasn't a huge amount of superhero games released on the 64 so I can understand the idea of somebody making one. It just happened to be shit.

Arkham Origins was an adequete game but it's a carbon copy of the first two and Arkham Knight was being developed. It's a cash grab. I rather have that money for development put into Arkham Knight. It doesn't need to exist.

I'll take something that played off the formula of what's still considered the best game of the series (Arkham City) over taking away a good chunk of what people liked about Arkham in the first place in favor of driving the batmobile and having boring repetitive tank battles over fun unique bosses.

A cash grab would be more like Knight's $40 season pass.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
I'll take something that played off the formula of what's still considered the best game of the series (Arkham City) over taking away a good chunk of what people liked about Arkham in the first place in favor of driving the batmobile and having boring repetitive tank battles over fun unique bosses.

A cash grab would be more like Knight's $40 season pass.



Seriously, something that's a copy of a great game...... is still a great game. Origins issues were mostly that it was rougher than City in terms of combat. Just frustrating things like inputs misfiring and the challenges being super dumb. Also no Riddles.

I really liked the story. It was better than City's, which I felt was pretty slapdash.

Originally posted by Smasandian
I always took this as a game that didn't need to be made. Not that it was crap or not.

Superman 64 is one of the worst games to be made but there wasn't a huge amount of superhero games released on the 64 so I can understand the idea of somebody making one. It just happened to be shit.

Arkham Origins was an adequete game but it's a carbon copy of the first two and Arkham Knight was being developed. It's a cash grab. I rather have that money for development put into Arkham Knight. It doesn't need to exist.

Maybe, but to me there's a difference between needing to be made and whether it should be made or not.

I'm happy Origins was made, personally.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
I'll take something that played off the formula of what's still considered the best game of the series (Arkham City) over taking away a good chunk of what people liked about Arkham in the first place in favor of driving the batmobile and having boring repetitive tank battles over fun unique bosses.

A cash grab would be more like Knight's $40 season pass.

I still consider Knight the better game, but that's me I guess.

I think Arkham Origins gets a lot of undeserved flak. The biggest problem it had was that it had so many glitches at launch. Such as the game freezing. But most of those have been patched since then. Beyond that, I found it a perfectly cromulent game. The gameplay was virtually identical to City, so no, it wasn't innovative. But no less fun.

It had a FAR superior version of Bane, in both looks and story. Origins' Bane felt like a primary mastermind and a threat, whereas Asylum/City's Bane was... more of a sub-boss/side-quest lunkhead. I think Origins' Bane was the best portrayal of him outside the comics. Furthermore, it introduced a lot of new villains to the franchise and gave some obscure ones exposure, without over-using most of the already established ones.

And speaking of Bane, it's actually kind of funny how WBM gets a lot of flak for Origins, but they managed to do villains like him and Deathstroke justice compared to how Rocksteady handled them. Slade's appearance in Knight was just insulting.

All and all, Origins wasn't a bad game, freezing problems not withstanding. It's DLC story was also much better than the one in City's. And now people can't go around saying it's not canon as not only has Rocksteady said that they consider it canon, but Knight also makes some references to Origins.

Hell, even Scarecrow in Knight at the end was anticlimactic as the final main villain, much as I liked him for most of the game... Slade's execution was just insult to injury. Makes me glad they didn't include Bane again to make another joke out of at least.

Half of the Call of Duty games

90% of Sports games

Duke Nukem Forever

MindJack and Ride to Hell: Retribution.

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Half of the Call of Duty games

90% of Sports games

Duke Nukem Forever People like sports games. COD has overstayed its welcome. Duke Nukem Forever looks pretty fun to me, even if it plays pretty bad, watched Tobuscus play it back in the day and it looked epic.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
EA's Battlefront.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
People like sports games. COD has overstayed its welcome. Duke Nukem Forever looks pretty fun to me, even if it plays pretty bad, watched Tobuscus play it back in the day and it looked epic.


I like Sports games too but there is absolutely no need to have a new one every year. More often than not each new Sports game ends up losing more good features and aspects than they introduce. I completely understand it from a business standpoint but i rarely meet any sports fan that enjoys paying $60 a year for the same exact game and experience.

Somewhere along the lines, during the past decade, Call of Duty adopted the similar ethics as, Sports games. I enjoy Call of Duty games and i hate to single the franchise out for manufacturing what is essentially the same game each year. I know that most franchises do this and have done it since the beginning of gaming. However, i'm using COD as an example to embody all of the franchises that have similar marketing tactics and development ethics. I usually tend to give COD a pass because i enjoy playing single player campaigns but somewhere along the line the single player campaigns became lackluster and sometimes even disappointing. When you consider this along with a multiplayer that is nothing more than new maps it's hard to accept that you're paying $60 for something that should and could have been a $20 DLC.
Again, i do enjoy Call of duty and i'm not criticizing the game play but rather the necessity of one to two new games every year. NHL 14 played well and looked nice but did it accomplish or offer anything that 13 didn't? No, it didn't.

As for Duke Nukem forever...,the game is bad and was a waste of resources. I'm not questioning whether or not these games are fun. If you want to have a good time with something, you're going to. I can find a way to have a good time while playing with a bucket of Sh*t but that doesn't mean i want to pay $60 to do so.

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
I like Sports games too but there is absolutely no need to have a new one every year. More often than not each new Sports game ends up losing more good features and aspects than they introduce. I completely understand it from a business standpoint but i rarely meet any sports fan that enjoys paying $60 a year for the same exact game and experience.

Somewhere along the lines, during the past decade, Call of Duty adopted the similar ethics as, Sports games. I enjoy Call of Duty games and i hate to single the franchise out for manufacturing what is essentially the same game each year. I know that most franchises do this and have done it since the beginning of gaming. However, i'm using COD as an example to embody all of the franchises that have similar marketing tactics and development ethics. I usually tend to give COD a pass because i enjoy playing single player campaigns but somewhere along the line the single player campaigns became lackluster and sometimes even disappointing. When you consider this along with a multiplayer that is nothing more than new maps it's hard to accept that you're paying $60 for something that should and could have been a $20 DLC.
Again, i do enjoy Call of duty and i'm not criticizing the game play but rather the necessity of one to two new games every year. NHL 14 played well and looked nice but did it accomplish or offer anything that 13 didn't? No, it didn't.

As for Duke Nukem forever...,the game is bad and was a waste of resources. I'm not questioning whether or not these games are fun. If you want to have a good time with something, you're going to. I can find a way to have a good time while playing with a bucket of Sh*t but that doesn't mean i want to pay $60 to do so. Good Thing DNF is only $4 then, eh?

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Good Thing DNF is only $4 then, eh?

Yeah, but compare it with the prize of that enjoyable bucket of sh_t.

I know the game plays bad, but watch someone play it and don't get hyped, its impossible.

The Wolf Among Us was.. OK... Not great, I mostly played it for the fights.

I forgot to say this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_aXcH1zDEE

If you're playing a telltale game for "the fights" you're shopping wrong

Originally posted by Quincy
If you're playing a telltale game for "the fights" you're shopping wrong

Oh, no, I love TWD and the Game of Thrones games to death, and the Tales of the Borderlands was hilarious and had some cool moments.

However, The Wolf Among Us... eh...


I never caught on very well and my decisions didn't affext my game as well as they could.

The story was really weird and uninteresting and I didn't care for it.

The only times I felt bad during the game was when Vivienne died.

The SNES Lemmings game.

Beyond: Two Souls.

It's pretty much a movie. You don't even need to do anything.

Roflmao has anyone heard of a game called Godai elemental force... no? Well consider yourself extremely lucky

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Beyond: Two Souls.

It's pretty much a movie. You don't even need to do anything.

Most of their games are like that

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Good Thing DNF is only $4 then, eh?

I didn't find DNF "THAT" bad but hey each to their own.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
People like sports games. COD has overstayed its welcome. Duke Nukem Forever looks pretty fun to me, even if it plays pretty bad, watched Tobuscus play it back in the day and it looked epic.
eh the only call of dutys i actully like are mw3 and black ops 1 and 2

Shame the Duke Nukem Forever that we got didn't look like this one

TDlB2P1leRM

Yeah, that would of been good if it was released in 2001 but who knows if the game even resembled that.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Yeah, that would of been good if it was released in 2001 but who knows if the game even resembled that.

Felt like Gearbox butchered it with what 3D Realms handed over to them


last i heard they're working on concepts for a new game & are looking for another studio to help them with it..........ugh, Didn't learn from Aliens: Colonial Marines did we Mr Pitchford

http://venturebeat.com/2015/07/15/gearbox-wants-to-make-a-new-duke-nukem-game-with-a-little-help/

I guess.

It's hard to say because we don't know if the actual stuff was shit. It's well known that videos like that are put together so it's not really indicitive if any of it was quality content....