darthdevidem01 on 19 April 2009
5 BIGGEST GAME FAILS 1ST QUARTER ‘09
You've been there before. After waiting months for an eagerly anticipated release a game arrives only to bitterly disappoint. These deceiving '09 titles don't deserve your hard earned money.
Posted by Kory Baldwin on Apr 19, 2009 11:30 (2 hours ago)
It may be hard to believe, but 2009 is already one quarter past. With titles like Resident Evil 5, Killzone 2, Halo Wars, Madworld and Guitar Hero Metallica now available, 2009 has seen great releases that bode well for the rest of the year. However, with three months worth of game releases there have also been the inevitable let-downs that mar the overall gaming lineup.
Games are expensive and time consuming. As a consumer you deserve the best for the money you work so hard for—especially in the current economic climate. With that in mind, I have compiled a short list of games that looked promising and generated a lot of gamer attention, but ultimately proved unworthy of your cash. I’m not saying that the titles selected are horrible, because many of these games have garnered a loyal fan base and do offer a good time. Instead, the point of the article is to illustrate that although the games selected look interesting, the average gamer with the average gaming budget may wish to look elsewhere to get the most for his or her money.
Afro Samurai, Namco Bandai – 1/27/2009
Afro Samurai had a lot going for it. With a unique, crisp, cartoonish visual style, an intriguing plot of revenge and the voice-work of Samuel L. Jackson, the title was a shoe in for gamer attention. Sadly, a remarkable range of design issues turned the action brawler into a true gaming letdown. To start, the camera was difficult to master and often caused the player to miss the action. Honestly, few things are more frustrating than controlling your character when he is no longer on screen. Second, checkpoints were poorly placed and dying at the wrong time often forced you to retread over fifteen minutes of game you had already beaten. Third, the game could be completed, even with the poor checkpoint system, in about six hours. With a price tag of U.S. $60, that is literally paying ten dollars an hour to play a game that gives you almost no incentive to play through again. Considering that some games—Fallout 3, Killzone 2, Call of Duty, GTA and more—offer dozens and even hundreds of hours of play time for the exact same amount of money, Afro Samurai doesn’t measure up.
To finish this one up, Samuel L. Jackson did provide some of the most quality and fun video game voice work I have ever heard. Sadly, with the above flaws in mind, Afro Samurai is worth a rental at best.
Metacritic Average(s): 360 = 64, PS3 = 62
Dead Rising: Chop Till You Drop, Capcom – 2/24/2009
Chop Till You Drop was supposed to be a port—conversion, to use a less ugly word—of the critical and commercial Xbox 360 hit Dead Rising. The final result was more of a spin-off than conversion, and the platform change was unkind to the game. The first problem, not surprisingly, was the graphical hit the title took moving from Microsoft’s 360 to Nintendo’s underpowered Wii. The main draw of the 360 original was the insane amount of undead on screen at all times. The Wii version features notably less zombies and the visuals of the game overall do not compare to the Xbox iteration in any way. In fact, even for a Wii game, Chop Till You Drop is a visual disappointment. Even worse than the game’s sub-par visuals was the story. Supposedly made as a commentary on American consumerism, the title forgets its campy roots and actually thinks of itself as a serious philosophical endeavor. Give me a break. Finally, boasting horrible dialogue, from both a writing and delivery perspective, as well as stiff animations, the game is an overall underperformer.
It is always a sad event when a great game on one platform is ruined on another. Dead Rising was one of the best reasons to buy an Xbox 360 early in the console’s life cycle. Halfway through the Wii’s life, Chop Till You Drop offers no purchase incentive to Wii or potential Wii owners at all. What was Capcom thinking?
Metacritic Average(s): 62
Stormrise, Sega 3/24/2009
Stormrise was supposed to revolutionize Real Time Strategy gaming by taking the camera from its traditional position above the battlefield and placing it on the front lines for a more immersive wartime experience. The game also featured a new Whip Select control system designed specifically to make playing on a console easy and intuitive, something that has proven difficult for RTS titles in the past. Although these new ideas sounded exciting and made fans of the genre drool with expectation, both failed. First off, the camera was positioned too low for a game that features towering cityscapes. Based directly on the perspective of the unit currently highlighted, you often could not see into the distance without objects getting in the way if your units were on the ground. Worse, the Whip Select system worked fine when commanding a few units, but trying to command an army proved almost impossible. You see, the system worked by highlighting your units and allowing you to ‘whip’ to them by simply moving the right control stick over the desired icon and letting go. With a few icons the process of control is easy. Finding the desired troops when there are literally hundreds of icons all over the screen is a complicated mess. Even assigning certain units to the dpad offered little relief.
When the two ideas designed to attract gamers to your title turn out to be the reasons nobody would want to play, the game is a failure. Sorry for that one, Sega. We love and respect your long history, but Stormrise was doomed from conception.
Metacritic Average(s): PS3 = 50, 360 & PC = 49
Lord of the Rings: Conquest, Electronic Arts, 1/13/2009
Lord of the Rings: Conquest was anticipated by fans of the books, films, and other officially licensed games since its announcement in May 2008. Even better, the game was being developed by Pandemic, creators of the now iconic Battlefront series. On paper the game had everything going for it a fan could ask ever for: an awesome license based on one of the most recognized stories ever told, gameplay taken from one of last generation’s most enjoyable series, and—oh joy of joys—online enabled battles! Yes, you could now duke it out LOTR style with your frienemies, right on the battlefield, just as you always dreamed.
The game came out in January and had to ruin everything. The title was redundant. Every fighting class and race used the exact same three buttons for combat rendering control of the game a never-changing monotony. Worse, the combat itself was poorly implemented. The characters would act out every button press without exception, so in the heat of battle your commands would end up ahead of the character on screen. Instead of cutting out certain presses and following your commands immediately you would find yourself waiting for your on-screen avatar to finish up what you had said to do two to three seconds before. Finally, the game featured crappy texture work and rough character models. What could have been one of the best LOTR gaming experiences ended up mediocre and fans of the series may never forgive.
Metacritic Average(s): PC = 57, 360 = 55, PS3 = 54
Fallout 3: The Pitt (Expansion), Bethesda Softworks, 3/24/2009
Yes, I know this is a controversial pick and many of you will soundly disagree. Yes, I am well aware that Fallout 3 was awesome because I loved it too. Regardless of all of these things, The Pitt DLC available for the PC and 360 versions of Fallout 3 was one of the biggest gaming disappointments I have ever personally experienced.
Let me set the tone before continuing. After playing through the linear—and therefore rather disappointing—Operation Anchorage, I was eager for a Fallout DLC experience in line with the title’s open world style. The Pitt was supposedly the answer to my prayers. Another barren city in a new locale with new characters, plot lines and enemies? Yes please!
When the day finally came that I could download The Pitt I was ecstatic, only to be disappointed within minutes of starting the game. The following is a paragraph taken right out of my Pitt review: “To start off with, you will immediately notice hitching and frame-rate problems not present in the main game. Sadly, things only get worse. Screen tearing will plague your view several times a minute and audio problems will be a common occurrence. Worst of all, the expansion runs so poorly on Xbox 360—which is ridiculous, the console is more than powerful enough to handle the action on screen—that I actually had to restart my console TWICE during my time with the add-on. Yes, I said twice. The game froze completely on me two different times.”
Even worse than The Pitt’s technical problems was the save system. After reaching certain points of decision in the storyline, up to an hour of saves would be immediately erased. Unless you wanted to replay over an hour of what you had already done it was impossible to go back and take a different course of action. To this day I do not understand Bethesda’s reasoning in taking away my ability to make different decisions in a game supposedly designed to respond to your choices as a player. With numerous visual and audio bugs, a poor save system, and Xbox 360 freezing issues, Fallout 3’s The Pitt has been one of 2009’s biggest gaming let downs. Such a disappointment is made all the worse considering that Fallout 3 was hands down one of the best titles of 2008.
Metacritic Average(s): PC = 76, 360 = 75
There you have it folks. Feel free to politely disagree, we are all entitled to our respective opinions. This list is simply a presentation of new games that I recommend you avoid as a video game journalist. Let me know of any other first quarter 2009 releases you feel should have been included.
___________________________________
Interesting list
Fallout 3 : The Pitt.....I feel shouldn't be in there
the rest....hmmmm.....seem fine!
