Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Parsely]

I tried to like Star Ocean 4, I really did, but god that game is just so repetitive. I give it points for trying to do something different though.

Honestly the gameplay style perpetuated by Final Fantasy hasn't been compelling to me for years because so many games use it and it has just become so boring for the most part. I dunno. I definitely didn't play Legend of the Dragoon because I thought the battle system was challenging or thoughtful (defend to heal is nice, but dragoon transformations and VOLCANO are nothing that hasn't been done before). I liked it because of the story and the gorgeous pre-rendered backgrounds.

[nenjin]

People seem to hate Gauntlet (2014) since the Slayer update, but I'm still okay with it. Yeah, progression system was removed and the Wizard lost his magical bubble passive (which I truly am sad about) but the game balance is a lot better now, and it's still fun. I mean, come on - how many dungeon-crawl-hack-n-slash games out there actually encourage player skill the way Gauntlet does?

I dunno, I found the game terminally boring. It wasn't the Gauntlet I wanted. Every room was predictable and it was 99% kiting, and 1% dodging the "level mechanic." Sure that kiting required some skill but I didn't feel like there was much of a pay off for it. It's a problem when really, really old Gauntlet games feel like they have more depth and more replayability than something made in 2014. Like, I beat the game once with the Valkyrie and didn't feel like I had any other reason to play it again. Why was Death made into a "type" of level where he's a gimmick instead of just another mob that adds its dynamic to already pre-existing levels? The endless dungeon mode didn't feel like it brought anything to the table where there was no advancement within it. Where plenty of dungeon crawlers have a good meta game to keep you playing, 2014 had a token meta-game to it and its minimalism seemed intentional. Like "our game is so refined and enjoyable we don't need levels, unlocks, customization, gear or any of the other shit in aRPGs that keeps you playing." "Relics" brought nothing to the table IMO, especially when you could see all of what you can potentially use in the game right from the beginning. It reminded me strongly of Diablo 3's "Here's all the skills you'll ever possibly use. Now enjoy your mix and match you turd."

I wouldn't say I hate Gauntlet 2014. It was just something I played for 4 hours and never felt the compulsion to play again. A lot of opportunity to build a bigger, more robust game felt wasted....like they put out 2014 to test player interest in a bigger Gauntlet game.

And this is before the Slayer update....I can't even grok wtf the Slayer Update did, other than remove anything from gameplay that implied it had a development future.

[Nighthawk]

-snip-

It's not so much about replayability for me as it is gameplay. As long as the gameplay itself is fun and fair, I have a good time playing. I'd rather play a game with 4 hours of content where I'm being challenged and feeling involved than a 50-hour slog where all I have to do is spam attacks and abilities until everything in the room falls over and repeat that process hundreds of times.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

Maybe not a game that people HATE, but I loved Castlevania: Lords of Shadow. (2 was meh.)

[itisnotlogical]

Unmodded Minecraft. Not only that, unmodded Minecraft from somewhere in the beta stages. I like all the biomes and structures that have been added, and that's about the only thing I like from recent Minecraft. I liked it when combat was just a rudimentary hazard to exploration instead of absolutely required to get some of the most interesting building and crafting materials, like everything in the underwater dungeon. I don't like enchantments at all, because they're a bloody tedious grind for what is essentially a random drop.

Back in the beta (shortly after endermen were released IIRC) it felt like Minecraft had the absolute perfect balance. There were enough challenging mobs to be interesting and varied, without it becoming a tedious chore to grind enough XP for enough enchants to get the blocks you really want. It felt like a game about mining and crafting.

[Cthulhu]

Not quite a month bump, and I'm changing the prompt, I'm a terrible person.

Well, other people do hate this, but it's still very popular and well-received.  Still:  Games That Are Objectively Bad But You Still Like Them.

Fucking Blood Bowl.  I defy anyone to explain to me how Blood Bowl is a well-made game.  It's probably mostly a result of its age, there's been rule updates but I don't think anybody's seriously reimagined the core game functionality which is the problem.

Extremely dice-centric.  Yeah, you can manage the risk but the sheer anti-fun of the dice means that when everything goes your way the most you can muster is a numb "yeah, good, it's working."  Lukewarm highs and abyssal lows.

Badly balanced.  Goblins are fun and all but there are some seriously garbage teams in Blood Bowl, and meanwhile you've got wood elves prancing through the leaderboards.  People cry about clawpomb but without clawpomb to keep them honest minmaxed elf teams would sweep everything.

Degenerate tactics.  I guess this is a personal thing but I know I've heard a lot of people echo this sentiment.  Standard strategy for competitive play is mind-numbing and terrible.  It feels more like extreme contact soccer than football.  2-1 is the most boring shit in the universe and the general "hold the ball as long as you can" theme takes all the insane fun out of the setting.  It's why I usually only play with AI.

All that being said, I can't stop playing this fucking game.  I love it.  I have stockholm syndrome.  Even though I hate the competitive meta and I think it's boring as fuck, I'll probably get on FUMBBL and start playing for real before long.

And judging by the popularity of sites like FUMBBL and GW's incoming rerelease, I'm far from the only one who loves this awful broken garbage game.

Edit:  The game's at its best when it's a comedy of errors, where both teams are rolling so badly strategy becomes impossible and you can't even be mad anymore, when it turns into a tangled mess of people fumbling for the ball and tripping over their own feet.

[puke]

Games That Are Objectively Bad But You Still Like Them.

Shadowrun Online.  Or 'Chronicles, or whatever it's called.

Simple character progression, unbalanced skills, poor level design and sloppy level re-use, and really watered down tactics.

But man its fun.

maybe one of the only coop turn-tactics with persistent character progress games ever made, and I can't stop playing it.

[freeze]

I also preferred Diablo to Diablo 2. Diablo seemed to have a varied flow of play and seemed to be more-or-less fair. I mean, sure, The Butcher was too fast, but basically... Diablo two was endless eons of chasing pygmies across grass while they steadily wore down your supplies from afar, often across rivers, and it just kept at it forever. Diablo had neat "secure the first room, explore the map, hunt down the stragglers, repeat and cycled through them satisfyingly quickly. Diablo also had the pleasant side-benefit of not making the plot-critical final fight provide no corpses for those skeleton summoning spells you spent the whole game levelling and could instantly erase the entire army that you brought with you, and any golems you summoned... But then again, I consider Diablo to be a roguelike so my opinion probably doesn't count...(To my credit, I hated the 'official' definition of roguelike long before it was an issue with a million games claiming to be roguelikes because they have their encounters in a random order and don't let you save...)

Same. D2 upped the ante iwth interface improvements and expanded exploration as well as some nice static challenges. It was still possible to achieve D1 style play by being underleveled while progressing through the game.

[puke]

I also preferred Diablo to Diablo 2.

Same.

Agreed.  Ironman (or whatever it was called when you didnt cheat and only used loot that you personally found) was great fun, but so was cheating. 

I used a trainer to hack an item with huge stat buffs, but which also had a very rapid health drain.  Had to rush dungeons with my (also hacked) vampiric axe and kill things faster than my health fell.  Basically had to play on the hardest level, or there wasn't enough monster density.  Was a fun twist.

I do love me some Torchlight2, also.  The bright colored non grimdark successor to Diablo that is actually a ton of fun to play.  I think anyone who was let down by D3 would probably dig TL2.

I consider Diablo to be a roguelike

Totally was.

[Parsely]

I really love RE5. I feel like that game received way too much hate on release. The only thing about it that I think is objectively crap is that literally all of the bosses and enemies are stolen from RE4, and it didn't even steal the cool ones!

[Cthulhu]

Alright here we go, three warhammer posts in a row.  I decided to try playing a finesse team instead of being a fuckhead with cancer-trinity chaos.  The good news is the game's a lot more fun and less frustrating when your characters can walk ten feet and pick up a ball without collapsing in a pile of screaming meat, but the bad news is that the AI is clearly not designed to deal with Skaven.  Once I got wrestle on a gutter-runner it was open season.  Defensive touchdowns on turn 3 were standard gameplay.  Maybe it wasn't as obvious with chaos where everybody's the same musclebeast with the same skillset, but the AI can't prioritize positionals or figure out who to blitz so wrestlerat would just pop the ball out of their cage every time.

So I guess I gotta graduate to FUMBBL.  On the bright side I can rescind my previous rant.  It's a pretty good game, just not when you're playing a team handicapped by a ridiculous gimmick.

I don't actually have a problem with clawpomb, I think it's a necessary evil to limit minmaxing and spiralling TV, it's just not very good at winning games and it's entirely reliant on the RNG without real means to circumvent it.  You've got a high chance to kill people when they fall down, but you've got no way to make them fall down cause you were greedy and didn't take the workhorse moves like tackle and guard.

[JimboM12]

I really love RE5. I feel like that game received way too much hate on release. The only thing about it that I think is objectively crap is that literally all of the bosses and enemies are stolen from RE4, and it didn't even steal the cool ones!

I also liked RE5: I kinda liked how if you invested in armor, you didn't need anything past the stun prod. That thing was a secret game breaker. Carry a single upgraded healing item and a upgraded backup pistol and you were set for anything. I have fond memories of playing co-op with a friend and using the stun prod on entire enemy hordes while he liked using pistols. The best part was the prod prevented head centipedes from spawning.

[Parsely]

I really love RE5. I feel like that game received way too much hate on release. The only thing about it that I think is objectively crap is that literally all of the bosses and enemies are stolen from RE4, and it didn't even steal the cool ones!

I also liked RE5: I kinda liked how if you invested in armor, you didn't need anything past the stun prod. That thing was a secret game breaker. Carry a single upgraded healing item and a upgraded backup pistol and you were set for anything. I have fond memories of playing co-op with a friend and using the stun prod on entire enemy hordes while he liked using pistols. The best part was the prod prevented head centipedes from spawning.

I'm actually doing a let's play of it with GiglameshDespair, and we're playing on Professional difficulty.

[KillerFrogs]

There was a game called Natural Doctrine that was for PS3/PS4/PS Vita, and the main reason why everyone hated it is because they felt like they didn't understand the mechanics, and they would consistently get their butts kicked in the campaign. That said, once I understood it, it was one of the only SRPGs that I've played where the base gameplay loop was some of the most fun I've had from a SRPG. It's kinda silly since you can see the AI use the mechanic properly, but very few people could figure out what they were doing wrong, and it's was easy to tell who knew and who didn't in the multiplayer.

That said, it is surprisingly easy to fall into the pit that most reviewers/players did thanks to the way the mechanic was presented in the tutorial. It's a shame since it would've been an interesting improvement for SRPGs if it caught on.

[Twinwolf]

I've played that. I kind of understood the mechanics, but I found it way too hard. Maybe I should try again.