I often disagree with gaming sites like this one. I don't often
complain, because game reviewing is subjective, and the only time I have complained is if a game that is flawed in so many different was gets a 10... However, there are a lot of games that get high marks or are widely adored that I don't think deserve that praise. Here are 10 of them.
Number ten on this list is a controversial pick, and a hard one, since I quite like this game. However, the ratings this game received made it out to be nearly floorless. The game was met with univesal acclaim for it's unique theme's and setting, which it deserves. However, this game is still immensely flawed. The shooting mechanic's are iffy, and the pacing is all over the place. Pacing is a key aspect of all videogames, especially story driven ones. The "Critically Acclaimed Story" takes the saw approach: Shit story, pile on suspense, and add a twist at the end. The gameplay basically consists of the player walking for a bit, shooting people, then running into a collapsed or closed door, and collecting stuff to help open it. What the game has going for it is the writing, something that it pulls off remarkably well. However, that alone isn't enough for the game to receive the incredibly strong praise it received.
9. GTA IV:
I seem to be the only one who remembers when Grand Theft Auto was a stupidly fun satire of Suburban America, where sexual innuendo, outlandish weapons and vehicles were what the series was all about. Grand Theft Auto remembers the satirical aspect, but somehow misses the whole "fun" aspect. The game is overwhelming sombre, even though half the time it can't decide what tone it wants to have. Some of the cutscenes are whacky and hilarious, and some completely contradict the tone. 90 percent of the missions seem to be about delivering stuff, and when the game finally does give you a fun mission, you have your fucking cousin call to ask if you want to play darts.
8. Uncharted 3:
Here is a seriously flawed game that received a perfect 10 in many gaming publications, including IGN, OPSM etc.
Now while I get that a 10 doesn't neccessarily signify perfection, it does signify the pinnacle of gaming. Uncharted 3 is far from the pinnacle of gaming. It has a substandard plot, even by video game standards, with some admittedly interesting characters, humorous lines and amazing set pieces. But the actual game part is lacking. The gunplay feels terrible and unresponsive, the climbing is incredibly linear, and you often can't tell which bit of scenery you can and can't climb. The hand to hand combat is punch until he does, then counter with no real challenge... until the end where the difficulty is all about you having a picture perfect memory of where all the enemies are... Seriously? This is the pinnacle of gaming? This is a fucking grade c film pretending to be a game. And the only reason it got such good reviews is because it's a console exclusive.
7: Halo Reach:
Speaking of exclusives titles that fanboys will cum over now matter how ballocks they are: Halo Reach. Now, every criticism I have aimed at this game I could aim at the series as a whole, but the first two games were actually innovative, the first game showing us how console shooters can be done, and the second game for really bringing online multiplayer to consoles. After that... well the series doesn't have that much going for it. It still clings to the archaic designs of the original, with similar controls and philosophies (you know gun sights? Yeah, they are useful...). However, Halo is often highly regarded for it's story, which is also not very good. But my major problem with this game, is that it has terrible pacing. In the first level you're thrown into massive fire fight after massive firefight. Give us a few enemies to pick off before we start getting swarmed, Halo!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This game series continues to get covered in gamers collective jizz when really, it's nothing more than elementary sci fi plot with terrible pacing and decent gunplay. It also gets an extremely dishonorable mention for popularising the regenerating health mechanic, which is the second worst decision ever.
6. World of Warcraft:
With the amount of people who bang on about this game you'd think it was actually decent. The gameplay is dreadfully dull, and nowhere is this more apparent than the combat. You take it in turns hitting the other person till one of them falls over. There's no skill or strategy involved. The game world is tedious, and it often feels more like a secod job than a game. I guess a lot of fault lies in the genre, but still, this is a game that damn sure does not deserve the amount of praise it gets.
5. Gears of War:
Remember when action games were adrenaline filled fun? Remember you'd be running around, guns blazing, bullets flying thick and fast from everywhere, and you had to think on your feet? Well, those days are gone, due to this game. After gears of war introduced the cover mechanic, fast, frantic shooting action was a relic of the past. Instead, we sat behind walls, while the enemies sat behind walls, and we each waited for the other to stick their heads up in a retarded game of whack a mole. The biggest gimmick of gears of war: The chainsaw lancer, is rendered all but useless due to the fact that you're rarely close enough to an enemy to use it unless you're playing in easy difficulty. However, my main gripe with this is that it's bland. Sure, some of the set pieces are great, but once you get past that, it's a kind of samey game with lots of samey coloured environments.
4. Assassin's Creed (series):
The first Assassin's Creed game was incredibly overhyped, so when it turned out to be a lackluster game, a fair few people were understandably disappointed. Sure, the climbing and exploring fun, and the swordplay was ok, but the game got too repetitive too fast, and never quite delivered on all of it's problems. Then the second game came out, and changed all of that. It was actually a good game, everything the first game promised to be. Sure, it took out some good elements from the first game, like studying your victim, but it was still an enjoyable action game. Then something terrible happened. The game caught "Activision fever" wherein they would recreate the same game every year and expect us to fork out cash for it. The kept the same characters, timeline, moves, etc. and the only thing that really changed were small details like graphics, or the additiion of extra henchmen or silly minigames. Yet reviewers and the masses still adore these titles for some reason. Like call of duty, one of these games is amazing, and the rest are copies trying to replicate it's success. Assassin's Creed 2 is like Diablo, and the rest of the games are like torchlight. Except the first one, which is like Fate.
3. Mass Effect (Series):
When Mass Effect first came along, it was an interesting little hybrid of rpg and gears of war clone. It was like KOTOR and GOW had a baby, and the baby mostly took after the fathers side, because the gunplay was pretty appalling, while the story and roleplaying side of things were good. When Mass Effect 2 came along, KOTOR must have run off with another woman and abandoned him, because almost all the RPG elements were abandoned, and the series turned into a GOW clone with a text based adventure attached. That's ok though, because the story was still ok, right? Out came Mass Effect 3, which furthered the GOW clone motiff with text adventure, but they forgot to make the one thing the series had going for it at this point: Story, a valid concern. You see kids, the thing about stories is that it's the end that sticks in your mind, and with an ending like this, it stuck in your mind, but for all the wrong reasons. Now, I don't mind that, I certainly wasn't going to be an entitled little bitch and protest. What I dislike about the game is how acclaimed it is: Simply for the story. The shooting is shit house, and the choices are forced illusions. Sure the universe is expansive and cool and all, but this is a game, not a movie, something that critics these days seem to forget.
2. The Elder's Scrolls:
Skyrim: Continuing in the Bethesda tradition, this is a fantasy RPG that offers an immensely immersive world, that is truly immense in size. However, that's all it really nails. The exploration is great, sure, but the combat is atrocious, the quests are repetitive and the story boring pathetic shit. And I haven't even touched the bit about this game being a broken sordid mess of bugs and glitches. This is ok on the glorious pc, where you can mod the shit out of this game so that it looks like bethesda never ever touched it, but on consoles it's a different story. I first played this game on my PS3, and it was ok to begin with. However, after about 10 hours, the game began to run like a slideshow, all the time. I couldn't access quests, or finish the main questline. It was a nightmare. Anyway, my point is that a completely broken game, with shithouse mechanics should excused because it does one thing well, especially when other games, such as Alpha Protocol, get scorned by critics for having the same problems.
1. Call of Duty:
"Clap clap for captain obvious. How did we know you were going to choose Call of Duty, the most reviled game among console gamers?" You say. Well, while it is an obvious choice, I am putting it here for another reason. This game gets slandered too much. While I agree making the same game over and over again is wrong, and the business ethic's of Activision are atrocious, like Assassin's Creed, if you only play one of these games, it's ok. Actually, it's brilliant. These are some of the best shooters on the market. Ok, that's because the vast majority of shooters are shit enough to make this vile piece of mundane shit look good... ok, I can't do it. I'm a follower. I hate this game as much as you do. Don't judge me. These games are shit.
So there you have it. My top 10 list. If you feel the need to voice your opinions, please fuck off and remember that your opinions are wrong.
LOOK WHO CAME: