By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Most hyped game that dissappointed ?

HoloDust said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

Perhaps you are right.  Perhaps The Elder Scrolls games are neither popular nor influential.  To me it appears it has been fairly influential.

TES is both popular and influential, but most of it comes from Skyrim. You were talking about Morrowind specifically, and Bethesda pretty much ditched core RPG market in favor of progressively more mainstream experience after it (though, Morrowind was already somewhat toned down compared to Daggerfall). But, as I said, Morrowind was not the first, whole TES started as Bethesda's take on Ultima Underworld - both Arena and Daggerfall were there for anyone interested to play them, and people played them - they ruined nothing, they were just successors to different take on RPGs that existed even back in 80s...maybe you just missed them, or you were not interested in them, there was so many ways and attempts to convert tabletop RPG experience to video games (and none quite succeeded).

Personally, from that period, I'd take Might&Magic over any TES, but I knew lot of folks who were hardcore Daggerfall fans.

I was saying that I played Morrowind and didn't like it, but TES is even worse now because it is more popular.  Basically the rest of what you are saying is irrelevant to what I was originally saying.  We are talking past each other.



Around the Network
Shiken said:
God of War was AMAZING! Haters gonna hate!

In any case, Red Dead Redemption 2 is THE MOST overhyped shiney turd this generation.

I agree on both sentences, man.

The hype level for GoW wasn't that intense at all. Many people were not too optimistic by then (including me). While the final product may not have been so good to some people, treat is as a super hyped game is inaccurate. People are confusing things, it's one thing to disagree with overall opinion of the press about a game, it's another to say it was overhyped prior to it's release. Unless of course, we're talking about personal feelings about games, which I don't think it's the case here.

About RDR2, it was one of the most hyped games ever and in the end, it was just RDR1 with better visuals, larger map and a supremely boring and long tutorial. And let's not forget of how boring Arthur Morgan was as a character.

Would I be exagerating if I included Tes: Skyrim as brutaly overhyped game? Super hyped prior to launch, universally praised by the press, shallow in the end.



Kingdom Hearts 2 and Halo 4.



The_Liquid_Laser said:
HoloDust said:

TES is both popular and influential, but most of it comes from Skyrim. You were talking about Morrowind specifically, and Bethesda pretty much ditched core RPG market in favor of progressively more mainstream experience after it (though, Morrowind was already somewhat toned down compared to Daggerfall). But, as I said, Morrowind was not the first, whole TES started as Bethesda's take on Ultima Underworld - both Arena and Daggerfall were there for anyone interested to play them, and people played them - they ruined nothing, they were just successors to different take on RPGs that existed even back in 80s...maybe you just missed them, or you were not interested in them, there was so many ways and attempts to convert tabletop RPG experience to video games (and none quite succeeded).

Personally, from that period, I'd take Might&Magic over any TES, but I knew lot of folks who were hardcore Daggerfall fans.

I was saying that I played Morrowind and didn't like it, but TES is even worse now because it is more popular.  Basically the rest of what you are saying is irrelevant to what I was originally saying.  We are talking past each other.

This is what you said:

The_Liquid_Laser said:

Morrowind.  There used to be a time when I liked every RPG I played.  There was no distinction between Western and Japanese.  They were all good.  If they got advertised and reviewed well, then I was going to enjoy it.  The crappy ones were intentionally downplayed, so I could avoid them.  Then Morrowind came along.  What a piece of total trash.  This games takes everything I like about RPGs and gets rid of it.  Fun leveling?  Gone.  An engrossing story?  Gone.  A party to control?  Gone.  Explicit goals?  Gone.  This game is just not fun in any way.  I didn't know people could systematically destroy a whole genre like this.

The worst part of all of this is actually the gaslighting.  I still hear people to this day trying to convince me that these are good games.  No, they aren't!  I've played them, and I know they suck!  Morrowind is probably the worst, because it's turned into Skyrim love.  I look at the reviews for Skyrim, "This game is great.  It's just like Morrowind."  Dammit!  So many people think Elder Scrolls are good games.  They have been gaslighted.  (At least this is how it feels to me.)  It sucks, because these games sell, and so more sucky games end up getting made.  Zelda actually got a course correction with Breath of the Wild, but Elder Scrolls and 3D Mario are still being made unchecked.  And these games end up influencing other games, so in the end there are fewer games out there which I actually like playing.  It sucks.

And I say horseshit to that, and explained you why - Morrowind was not the first, TES was not the first and just because you've missed the whole branch of video RPG development doesn't make the whole genre destroyed by one game.



COKTOE said:
DonFerrari said:

Haven't heard of the cheats at the time, well finishing on Crushing was very hard. I liked the combat though even if I prefer the ones in PS3;

I was playing it in 2017, and clearly remember the guide saying the player could use cheats, like infinite ammo, and special "one shot" weapons. Or someting like that. Soooo, I just went to the same guide, and it's been updated.

It says "5/10 difficulty if you have the Digital version/do everything legit but 2.5/10 if you have the retail version and use the many available exploits"....So apparently the digital version is different. That's insane. Very weird. I've never seen a difference in trophies between digital and physical, ever.

I have the physical ( and digital too actually ), but whatever. Doubt I'll be going back to get the plat.

From what I remember the infinite ammo and the like works similar to the previous uncharted games you can only use them on the difficult you have already beaten. The only "cheat" I used was on the last boss to do a "flaweless" fight required for one trophy (that was on chapter select, easy, after doing everything else on the game).

But if there was differences between versions that is bizarre (perhaps that had to do with updates and the digital it already being installed while the retail you could ignore).

NightlyPoe said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

I know you may find this hard to believe.  I don't live on the internet.  I don't know what a lot of these internet tropes are.

Regardless, you're repeating the tropes.  Maybe it started started at the lunch table at school or whatever, but the lazy digs remain the same.

I know one handle is for the D-pad and the other is for the stick.  It still looks like you need three hands.

Oh, I see.  So your complaint is aesthetics.  Even though you specifically said that it was a problem that you didn't have three hands.

You're backtracking.  And, regardless, complaining about aesthetics doesn't help out your case.

And the controller really does suck balls.  It's the worst controller I've ever actually used.  You may love it.  Fine.  I hate it.  And this all goes back to Mario 64, which is a game I really, really hate.  I can't separate Mario 64 from the controller.  The game seems made to showcase the controller.  I hate the game and I hate the controller.

Oh, and admitted bias that has nothing to do with the controller.  Okay then.

DonFerrari said:

Yep it is strange to need two different holding on a controller, like you can't use d-pad and analog at same time? Crazy, and Sony robbed the idea of putting a stick on the controller... why didn't they put another prong as well?

Can't say I'm sure what point you're making.

That it isn't pratical to not be able to use analog stick and the d-pad "at once" like we do with any controller today.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
HoloDust said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

I was saying that I played Morrowind and didn't like it, but TES is even worse now because it is more popular.  Basically the rest of what you are saying is irrelevant to what I was originally saying.  We are talking past each other.

This is what you said:

And I say horseshit to that, and explained you why - Morrowind was not the first, TES was not the first and just because you've missed the whole branch of video RPG development doesn't make the whole genre destroyed by one game.

Morrowind was not the first TES game, but I've played a lot of RPGs that have come before it and none of them suck so hard as TES.  It's not like Ultima or Wizardry or D&D or any of the other popular older series.  TES is entirely responsible for their own brand of suck.

Last edited by The_Liquid_Laser - on 09 June 2020

Killzone 2.

The hype train for it was monstrous, it was built up as the ultimate killer app that would set a new standard for first person shooters.

Then it released, and it was thoroughly mediocre. The devs' attempts to simulate the character's weight and momentum just made it feel like I was controlling an obese drunkard, the admittedly impressive graphics technology was wasted on endless grey and brown industrial areas, the characters and story were horrid, and the gameplay a bland laundry list of first person shooter cliches.

Thankfully it's sequel was excellent and improved just about everything wrong with 2.



curl-6 said:

Killzone 2.

The hype train for it was monstrous, it was built up as the ultimate killer app that would set a new standard for first person shooters.

Then it released, and it was thoroughly mediocre. The devs' attempts to simulate the character's weight and momentum just made it feel like I was controlling an obese drunkard, the admittedly impressive graphics technology was wasted on endless grey and brown industrial areas, the characters and story were horrid, and the gameplay a bland laundry list of first person shooter cliches.

Thankfully it's sequel was excellent and improved just about everything wrong with 2.

Really? to me kz2 is the most atmospheric shooter ever, well at that time anyway. From the pacing to the graphics, played it in one playthrough and loved it, found it very immersive, as though i was there. 



KratosLives said:
curl-6 said:

Killzone 2.

The hype train for it was monstrous, it was built up as the ultimate killer app that would set a new standard for first person shooters.

Then it released, and it was thoroughly mediocre. The devs' attempts to simulate the character's weight and momentum just made it feel like I was controlling an obese drunkard, the admittedly impressive graphics technology was wasted on endless grey and brown industrial areas, the characters and story were horrid, and the gameplay a bland laundry list of first person shooter cliches.

Thankfully it's sequel was excellent and improved just about everything wrong with 2.

Really? to me kz2 is the most atmospheric shooter ever, well at that time anyway. From the pacing to the graphics, played it in one playthrough and loved it, found it very immersive, as though i was there. 

Yeah really, for all the reasons I listed. It did have a strong atmosphere, I will give it that, but the actual process of playing it felt like a chore to me.

Killzone 3 in my opinion is how 2 should've been; more varied in visuals and gameplay, and much more responsive controls.



curl-6 said:
KratosLives said:

Really? to me kz2 is the most atmospheric shooter ever, well at that time anyway. From the pacing to the graphics, played it in one playthrough and loved it, found it very immersive, as though i was there. 

Yeah really, for all the reasons I listed. It did have a strong atmosphere, I will give it that, but the actual process of playing it felt like a chore to me.

Killzone 3 in my opinion is how 2 should've been; more varied in visuals and gameplay, and much more responsive controls.

I generally don't like fps, but enjoyed KZ2 (not much KZ3) and though KZSF was good enough. Perhaps it was due to the story.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."