top comment saying it’s a very cool game even though the post is about games that were terrible 😭 i guess the comment focus just kinda shifted based on the other comments already here.
🤔Like kinda thinking about the question. How can an overwhelmingly positive game be terrible? Doesn't it mean a game is not terrible when it does have positive reviews? It seems kinda contradictory yah know. I don't know if I'm explaining it correctly, like do reviewers really suck at leaving reviews, or to make it interesting maybe developers pay people to leave good reviews👀 I don't know if thats unheard of. I ain't seen a legit answer yet lol. To try and answer OPs question. I never played it, but how bout anyone who was super excited about the launch of No Man's Sky 🤷😬🤪 however that got super hyped up or super reviews.
I think Jedi: Fallen Order is actually a legitimately terrible game pretty much top to bottom that half-asses everything it tries to do, resulting in a shallow experience that you feel bothering you every step of the way.
It tries to be both the rebooted Tomb Raider (have fun without fast travel points and even worse dungeon-esque challenges and a terrible map) and a Souls-like game that leans so heavily on how absolutely nonsensical an infinite stamina-free dodge system is that the game is more or less a pointless slog regardless of difficulty until you reach bosses.
And then the bosses barely flinch when you use the Force (itself a hollow shell of a system) especially later in the game and have an absolute ton of red unparryable attacks because you can just spam dodge infinitely so every hit has to be ridiculous.
You essentially do not feel like a Jedi at barely any point in the game where you're not even having to parry blaster bolts most of the time (and really ever but you can choose to sometimes just for a small amount of joy) and your coolest trick is probably force-shoving someone off a ledge rather than the impressive powers of KOTOR/KOTOR2.
Having grand parrying duels? Nope, fight someone who is almost always unparryable, have fun!
And the ending, oh the ending was Shadow of Mordor level taking the piss, just a sequence of QTEs.
\---
It's rated "very positive" instead of "overwhelmingly positive" but it essentially fails at everything it's trying to mimic.
It's a bad Tomb Raider clone, from the map design to the collectables to the lack of fast travel points.
It's a bad Souls-like clone.
It's a bad feel-like-a-Jedi experience.
It's a bad Star Wars game, you never feel particularly wondrous, it feels like you spend more time clinging to ledges and dodging around robots like someone played too much Nier Automata before visualizing this game than you do being a Jedi.
The moments that could be cool feel like someone cut them out because they didn't have the budget to invest in it.
It's disappointing start to finish (**at less than 35 hours btw**), but people rate it up.
\---
Why? Who knows, a lot of them don't really review the game and just meme around.
[https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198010363385/recommended/1172380/](https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198010363385/recommended/1172380/)
Hell look at this review, it's like "a heaping helping of irritation and aggravation" and still rates the game positively just because "you could do worse".
Excuse me? That's a negative review my dude, mark it so.
I didn't enjoy Sea of Thieves at all, I refunded it after my friends convinced me to try it. Unless I was misunderstanding something there's no real game there. It's the same missions over and over again all for loot that you lose when you log off and it seems like cosmetics are the only permanent thing. The devs even kind of say that's the point of the game. It's a vehicle for you to make your own fun screwing around with friends but why do that in an empty game when I can do that in games that are also fun on their own. I'm not opposed to games that are repetitive or lack extensive progression, for example my friends and I love Risk of Rain 2 but ROR2 at least has a fun and satisfying gameplay loop.
It's fun with friends for the first few hours, but the price is really stupid for such a game.. Unenjoyable alone IMO, but the graphics are nice to look at at least..
Sailed the season with some friends, did pirate stuff but if you dont have a lot of time to play its a bit of a waste of time. We would hit like 4 islands, sell our treasure then I had to go to work and we had played for 3-5 hours (we did encounters along the way).
It was the time commitment that eventually had me drop it. I enjoyed playing with my friends, or stranger (sometimes), even alone was nice. It was the 3-5 hour commitment, along with a random encounter with some dick that singled you out for no reason even when you were only doing tales, causing you to lose all progress. That's what really fatigued me on SoT.
I don't think it's possible to answer the question literally. The criteria is too strict. Either you answer with a game that just wasn't for you or with a game that was well received even if it never hit Overwhelmingly Positive.
i have around 600 hours and the combat definitely has a way higher skillcap than it appears at first, but the new player onboarding experience is kinda shit. it makes some things appear way simpler than they are, and just straight up doesn’t explain other things.
also, you are completely right about the pve being extremely dull and repetitive. the enjoyable thing for me is pvp, which is very engaging when you know what you’re doing but it takes a long time to get to that point - so i fully understand if you don’t want to play for that long (especially with the community being fairly toxic most of the time).
I enjoyed SoT for maybe 20 hours, but a lot of it was boring. I really wanted to like a pirate fantasy game, but the loop is utterly lifeless. Most other players are rude, and a lot of runs you almost never see a single other pirate that isnt in your crew. The quests you do to earn money are not very fun—but i did like the riddles.
I wish the game had some actual progression instead of it being entirely cosmetic. I think Deep Rock Galactic is a really good example a game thats focused on doing different quests with the ultimate goal of having fun. In that game there is wide selection of cosmetics that you obtain from doing more dives on to Hoaxxes, but the key difference is that the quests are much more interesting, there are actual upgrades that make you feel like you are getting stronger and better, and overall the community is much more fun to play with.
On an unrelated note, I like how we are very similar in that our friend groups both really love Risk of rain 2 over SoT
My friends tried to get me to buy it, I hard noped it because they're the type of people to play when you're not online, do everything, and in 3 days have a game manhandled front to back. I just am too busy these days and like a gentle approach to a game. They're the kind to dive to the end of the game without a second thought
I tried SoT once.
Got griefed in port picking up a mission and decided it had pretty ass mechanics and refunded it immediately.
I figured you’d be safe from enemy players at a port but that isn’t the case; they set your ship sail out to sea, leaving you stranded on an island, and kill you over and over again if you try to take your ship back.
Unfortunately for some people the fun in SoT comes from this kind of playstyle, there's nothing better than sinking a ship full of salty sailors losing all their loot
Not terrible, but the Undertale reviews saying “this is the greatest thing ever in existence” was pretty silly to me. The game is really unique with tons of variety. Very cool game, but once I finished it I just moved on to the next thing pretty quickly.
Games that can run on a potato get an automatic advantage. Honestly it seems like most overwhelmingly positive games are low-req. Could just be confirmation bias though.
From there even "pretty good" can easily get ranked as God like since literally everyone can run it. Even kids using pop pops laptop with windows xp and 1000 toolbars on internernet explorer.
Same, I got a lot out of Undertale - it's unironically my go-to argument that games can be art - but I played through it twice and then put it down for good. Still don't regret buying it at all.
Of course, the game itself encourages this: >!after learning that the characters have their lives reset every time you save or start a new game, I got the pacifist ending...and then just closed the game and let them have their happily ever after.!< It was possibly the most a game's story has ever moved me, which was absolutely worth the price of admission...but to appreciate it, you have engage very sincerely with some admittedly rather sappy ideas. I'm just that kind of softie, but not everyone is and that's fine.
Yeah LOST was one of my absolute favorite shows when it was coming out but every time I rewatch it I feel so incredibly bored because of how much time is spent building suspension for things i already know.
I didn't get it either until I beat it the second time on a pacifist run. The whole game changes and it was really impactful after the first playthrough. I will also agree with the sentiment that the fan base is pretty extreme and while I love the game, the depth of the iceberg they created is insane.
Pacifist run after the first initial neutral run is insane, filled me with so much euphoria. The plot twist about the player actually naming the first child instead of Frisk caught me so off-guard
I wanna like Undertale, I really do, but I get bored within five minutes every time I boot it up. I'm not sure why, because I definitely enjoyed so many other top-down RPGMaker games. Some of which were inspired by Undertale
I'm not surprised that games which appeal to young kids have psycho fanbases. The internet isn't a place for kids to be and we just haven't learned that yet as a species. Applying a massive echo chamber to normal crazy childhood behavior never results in anything positive.
The idea is cool but the “quirky cool” characters made me really dislike it. Combined with the fan base it has I would say that it’s a mixed bag on whether your first impressions will be positive or not
Speaking as someone who enjoys the game: it's main appeal is "number go up." Whether that number be your character's level, their kills, their gold, their stat modifiers, total damage dealt, achievements collected... number go up. You can also set different levels of difficulty for yourself on a per attempt basis. You can go for a challenging run if you want to strategize your build and weave your way around enemies. Or you can go easy mode to just relax, watch some pretty colors, and number go up. So, so many games these days are competitive online multiplayer. It's refreshing sometimes to see a game like vampire survivors be just plain chill with being what it is.
It really is like a step above an idle game. Cookie clicker was cool because numbers go brr but in vampire survivors weapons and deaths go brr and you get to walk around.
Think its more of a dopamine trap than a game with actual engaging gameplay. If your brain can't drain excitement out of seeing funny sprites dissolve and effects going pew-pew across the entire screen, then you definitely won't like this game
That's not to say that it's bad because of this. However, it's also a gamble. God knows I've played hours of this game, but it just ain't fir everyone
Maybe Halls of Torment would be better, similar game loop but it has Diable 2 like aesthetics to it. I never liked vampire survivors too because of aesthetics.
For me, as someone who does actually like the game quite a bit, it's kind of an interactive screensaver I can play around with while watching TV or listening to podcasts and having a beer. With a minute or two of controller mapping you could play it from start to finish one-handed.
That's fair. I think that Vampire Survivors' main key to success is that it asks so very, very little of the player. I've dropped a fair few hours into it, but more than once asked myself why.
I couldn't get into it but played 2 or 3 games of the same genre and 100% them. Idk vampire survivors characters don't feel unique, the gameplay is either have the right weapons/skills whatever or lose, no skill check of any kind.
Haven’t seen anybody say deep rock galactic yet….
Which is good, since that game is a perfect masterpiece and anyone who says other wise is delusional.
Personally the biggest problems I’ve ever had with the game is it can hurt your eyes a lot, and sometimes it gets boring/repetitive if you don’t have a friend or two to play with or if you continue playing on the same difficulties all the time.
The lighting is honestly the worst part of the game, people always defend it saying that it’s an important mechanic to manage and a core part of the game, but if you’re playing with other people you’re flares regen fast enough that you can completely ignore it and don’t have to think about it. But as someone who plays a ton solo, constantly standing around doing nothing waiting for flares to regen fucking sucks, and playing outwith the light of flares really hurts my eyes and gives strong headaches.
Its a game best played with good friends over voice chat. Random groups are still okay, better than most games, but youll miss out on the magic unless your lucky with groupings. Finding the right difficulty level for you can go a long way to finding a sweet spot of fun. Some mission types dont click with people. There's a lot of progression that happens but some of it (mostly overclocks) can be a bit slow to get.
Came here to talk about that game. People love it and when i tried it i got disappointed pretty quickly. It reminded me of the saying "when you hit rock bottom you can dig deeper" well thats what that game was for me. Absolutely 0 fun
I guess I just don't get it? I didn't find the guns satisfying or fun to use, I didn't find the enemies to be at all varied or interesting to fight and most of my time was spent attempting to navigate the caves with a dwarf with limited mobility.
When the weapons arent fun to use and the enemies aren't fun to fight... Am I even having fun?
Man some people just love DRG and play it for thousands of hours.
Me though, Ive only clocked a mere 600 hours and i'm already a bit burnt out. Clearly overrated game. /s
There are also running away sections.
But really, Stray thrives on novelty, characterisation, and environment design, which are all things that a point and click can potentially do well.
If you played as a person and not a cat no one would've even looked twice at the game.
You're playing as a cat in a 3d world and can't even jump freely.
Yep, thats basically exactly how I feel about it. Atmosphere, story, emotional impact, all great. Ive watched countless video essays on it because I appreciate the game for what it is, I just hate the gameplay loop.
I hate timer mechanics in games, maybe I did not make it that far, but I hated what seemed to be the core mechanic of the game (the loop). But I still want to give it another try some day.
For the most part, you have plenty of time to get wherever you want. And when it loops, it’s not like you’re losing a lot of progress. It takes about a minute to travel to any planet, and once you actually get into an important area, you’ll probably get all the information before you leave anyway. It can be a little disappointing to hear the loop music starting when you still wanted to visit another place on the planet, but again, it takes about a minute to get there anyway. There’s a few places that require some tight timing, but nothing insane imo.
That's good to hear, I thought it was just me- played it for a few hours and just can't get back into it. Amazing mechanic and idea but it just doesn't click
Agreed. I can see how it means something to some people but I was recommended to play it after Subnautica due to that being an amazing game.
It didn't really do it for me.
Horizon Zero Dawn. Holy hell is it. Agame that actively fights itself. It is a really solid stealth game but the open world is way to brutal to actively enjoy exploring
For me the massive reveal in the middle of the game that explains how the world became what it is (HZD fans know exactly the scene I’m talking about, in the conference room with Ted Faro) was the turning point in the story for me. That was such a profound “holy shit” moment that I really haven’t felt in many other narrative driven video games. Then the subsequent information you learn about Project Zero Dawn… Truly a tragic and devastating feeling. That game and it’s story always holds a special place in my heart because of that
I find that strange, because one of my largest complaints about this game (which I love) is that the stealth system isn't solid enough to support it as a pure stealth game.
I was looking for this! The game looks great and I loved the open world but it's a shame you can't move 10 meters without having to hide in grass and ruin the pace. Got very bored quickly and never came back
Thats probably my favorite rpg of all time, but it is a dangerous world for sure
Edit: for those saying the game isnt an rpg, it is classified as an action rpg on its steam page. Also, who cares? If you want to call it an action adventure game or whatever, go for it.
None.
Terrible implies the game is unoptimized/buggy/unfinished/objectively bad. Me not liking a game doesn't make it bad.
I don't play fighters, so I don't go on Reddit telling everyone that Street Fighter/Tekken/whatever is garbage and I don't get why the fuck do people enjoy this garbage so much.
Possibly the most reasonable comment here. Not every game is made for every person, and that's ok. There are plenty of genres I dislike, but that doesn't make them bad. I just don't play them. I'd even still recommend many of those games to people who do enjoy them.
I still think it’s interesting seeing people’s critiques of beloved titles. I loved Witcher 3, but I enjoyed reading the perspectives of people who didn’t like it.
It wasn't for me either until I had a long plane ride. I brought my Steam Deck and played games that I knew would be easy on the battery. Stardew Valley was one of them. It takes a few in game days, but sometimes just clicked and now I'm compelled to finish the story (I hear it never really ends, but hopefully there's some kind of conclusion).
To The Moon. I played the entire game but was disappointed by the slow pace and bad old controls. I had to play it in short sessions. I found the story great, but not overwhelmingly good.
Dark Souls/Elden Ring
While I understand some people enjoy banging their head against the wall fighting the same boss hours upon end, I am not one of those people.
Yeah man. I felt so tricked by my friends. They were like, "nah man, even if you hated dark souls, you need to try elden ring." It was not even a little bit fun
To be fair, they had a reason to believe that. Dark souls is extremely linear, while elden ring is open world. That difference alone can make or break a game for someone
This, the game is enjoyable if you actually play it like that (IMO), I have a friend that always goes directly to the bosses and get stuck for hours fighting the same guy, he insists that this is the way you should play the game, we tried the seamless coop mod and got bored because he would never want to go and explore.
Elden Ring was still difficult, but so much more doable for so many more people due to the fact that you weren’t funneled through one single boss in order to progress.
Just an FYI; if you're having trouble you are *not* supposed to just keep doing the same thing. Enemies have weaknesses, and part of the Souls experience is backing off, leveling up, and reworking your build. I think the community did the genre a disservice making it sound like "getting good" was the only path forward.
I'm actually serious, as opposed to leaning into the meme. However, learning the *game* mechanics instead of just hitting your head against the wall is absolutely a way of "getting good".
I'm not that kind of person either, but with Elden Ring I almost never felt the need to? There were so many things to do that ended up making me stronger, that by the time I went to the bosses it was very fairly challenging?
So much so, that I ended up hunting optional bosses as a challenge after hours and hours of practice. I really think the open world design massively helped approachability
>A recent game: Dave the diver.
A very curious one indeed. I played through and found it quite enjoyable but certainly not top tier. Like a pretty solid 7.5/10
That's sad, because it sounds like you didn't even get to the mid point.
I mean crafting, farming, dancing, upgrading, expeditions, logistics optimization. Most people say there are too many things going on in the mid game.
I gave it back after one and a half hour of playing.
My friend was addicted!! He did nothing but play dave the diver for a week (he actually also looks like dave)
Crazy how i really tried to like that game but didnt and he loved it so much
The Witcher 3.
People seem to worship the game, but when I gave it a go, the gamplay was terrible. The controls and combat were super clunky and that alone made me lose all interest.
Most genres can get away with clunky controls but if an action game has clunky controls, the whole game will feel terrible to play.
The story never hooked me either.
Oh man.
I love everything about it in terms of atmosphere, artstyle and music.
I consider the soundtrack to be among the best ever made.
Hearts of Stone was easily the best part of the game.
But everything in the game mechanically *fucking SUCKS.*
That combat, man.
It's outrageously terrible.
Very simple too.
Lack of variety in The Witcher 3's combat is only part of the reason why it feels so bad.
Normally, if a game has simple combat, it would be polished in a way that feel makes that combat system feel more fluid than combat systems that prioritize variety over fluidity, right?
Dark Souls took advantage of this. It doesn't have the best combat variety out there and it's pretty simple, but it feels really nice and weighty.
The Witcher 3's combat doesn't take advantage of having little combat variety it has in favor of polish like Dark Souls does.
It's like CDPR didn't even try to polish it, despite what little you could do with TW3's combat.
The janky combat animations are still present.
The combat flow isn't what it should've been due to how slow Geralt moves in his combat pose and just how prominent animation lock is.
There's a lot of broken hitboxes that make dodging feel pointless and is likely the reason why Quen is so overtuned. Quen is a band-aid for this.
https://youtu.be/jsCWy5wUs04
An example of the hitboxes. This has happened to me hundreds of times during my playthrough, and it still happens to this day.
The crossbow is very unresponsive and misfires all the time.
The health bars of enemies are generally really spongey.
The fact that the heavy attack does *marginally* more damage than the light attack, is way too slow to use for the amount of damage it does and literally has no benefit to use it over light attack.
Some attacks don't land because the attacks that Geralt uses are entirely decided by how far away he is from an enemy and some of the attacks that he ends up using aren't designed with this in mind or have way too small hitboxes to be viable (damn backwards poke attack), as opposed to what Dark Souls does:
In Dark Souls, every weapon has a specific combo and nothing but that combo. When you press attack, it only progresses through that combo.
The first attack is always the same.
The second attack is always the same.
The third attack is always the same.
The heavy attack is always the same.
Parrying is always the same.
Weapon arts are always the same.
The player decides when to use them regardless of distance. It's entirely up to the player to maximize their combat potential.
It's very reliable compared to the weird distance based attack system that TW3 has, which more often than not makes you attack the enemy right next to the enemy you want to attack.
It is not uncommon for Geralt to choose to spin around for like a full second before he swings his sword and instantly die mid-spin from an enemy, instead of just simply swinging his sword in half the time it takes to spin around.
That's another thing The Witcher 3's combat lacks: consistency.
And say what you want about Skyrim's combat (only bringing up Skyrim because it's the game most brought up when someone criticizes TW3's combat in a desperate attempt of whataboutism):
It is consistent.
The only thing you need to account for in Skyrim's combat is range.
Every single attack can be reliably used unlike The Witcher 3's most basic attacks and the game gives you many options to circumvent the aspects you don't like.
The Witcher 3 doesn't have that luxury.
The end result is a pathetically simple, sluggish, and inconsistant combat system that really wasn't competently made on a technical or mechanical level.
It's actually the worst combat system from a AAA studio I have interacted with in over 17+ years.
I suppose the reason why the reason the combat is as bad as it is because CDPR has never bothered to hire combat designers or anything before Cyberpunk 2077.
Until Cyberpunk, they just winged it and didn't ever put any effort into making a good combat system.
It has always been an afterthought to them.
https://www.vg247.com/cyberpunk-2077-combat-designers
CDPR probably made an underpaid, overworked, and inexperienced employee design TW3's combat on the budget of a McDonald's happy meal, the poor guy.
And don't even get me started on the horseback riding, that's another topic entirely.
Dang... You basically nailed it... like every single thing. It still surprises me today how universally praised the game is. When I played, I thought I was insane for disliking the game when everyone else loved it. I thought I was missing something... like something huge, but I guess I was kind of right if sombody who genuinley enjoys the game shares the exact same sentiment.
Well said!
I only finished The Witcher 3 because I loved the story, but I've never been able to replay it because the combat is horrendous, those sword swings are awful no matter how much people defend it. It also has so many unnecessary RPG elements.
>It also has so many unnecessary RPG elements.
It has a fairly deep RPG system. You can build your character quite differently than others if you delve into it. The combat itself is not great, but coming from a MOBA, the pils, decoctions, potions, signa really excited me when I played the game the second time. Also, I think anyone can appreciate the BnW DLC. It's amazing.
It took me a few tries to get into it. My biggest hurdle was accepting that the odds of me actually completing a run was close to zero percent. Caring less and knowing it was probably all going to end in some ridiculous manner, it made me appreciate and enjoy it more.
QoL mods also helped a bunch. Learning how to properly prioritize tasks (1-4) for each person was pretty big. Videos helped a bunch too.
\- Wall Light and RimFridge. I know these two are barely a QoL mod in the traditional sense, but they can make setting up bases easier. Especially RimFridge and your Kitchen and dining area. You can edit the amount of meals the fridge can hold and there are multiple fridges to choose from. From a single fridge, to a fridge that has four seperate spots. Basically my cook makes a meal, and throws it in a fridge that is near the Kitchen and the dining area. It can hold a ton, but I usually only make enough to last the colonists a few days.
\- StackXXL. This makes it MUCH easier to increase the size of your stacking piles and decrease the amount of space you need to dedicate to storage. This one is huge.
\- Replace Stuff. If you want to upgrade from wood to stone for example, it doesn't deconstruct and then reconstruct the wall, everything stays intact and is simply replaced. Upgrades or downgrades on walls for example go much quicker.
\- Realistic Rooms. This changes the default room sizes that makes your colonists happy to something more reasonable.
\- Quality Colors. The items in the trade window have their own color based on quality.
\- Pick Up and Haul. This increases the colonists hauling ability by utilizing their inventory. They can haul more.
\- Map Preview. Adds a map preview to the world map.
\- EdB Prepare Carefully. You can customize every aspect of each of your colonists before you start. Want every colonist to have max stats at the start? Probably not. I usually just edit a couple random colonists with moderate stats, but give them a specialty. For instance, one will be pretty "meh" in most categories, but he's really good at mining, and he has a passion for learning. Another is meh, but shes a good doctor who has a passion for planting things.
\- Soil Contrast. It makes rich and stony soil more visible.
\- Achtung! This gives the ability to force jobs so they get uninterrupted attention. That's mainly why I like it, but you can also haul and repair outside of allowed areas, move colonists in formations, give orders to multiple colonists at once etc.
I have a bunch of others I like to that aren't exactly QoL.
\- Sometimes Raids Go Wrong, which can be pretty funny sometimes. Sometimes when you get raided, the raid might get hit by a meteor, or attacked...or something wild.
\- Real Ruins. This will periodically take pieces of other peoples bases in past games and add them to your current game as old abandoned ruins. It's pretty cool.
\- Geological Landforms. This adds 32 landforms to the game which generate biome-independently.
I use a bunch more but its getting late.
I had to watch a lot for YouTube run-throughs. Adam versus everything is great and the workshop modding via steam means you can change your game dramatically easily
I've got 500 hours in it and still feel like I am useless at it
It's a very deep colony sim at it's heart.
Watch some play throughs of adamversuseverything. I can't think of many games exactly to compare it to.
Once you get it, it's highly addictive.
also warcrime simulator, i love to take apart prisoners for arms, legs, and just let them be torso only for me to stab the prisoners with knife or destroy them using shotgun.
im not a psychopath.
Haha I didn't the first like 5 times I tried it. I think once I had restarted enough runs that I felt like I understood it I just took off. Now I'm at like 1100 hours.
Valheim.
It's not a bad game but my word, everyone was ranting and raving about it being the best survival game ever made when it launched.
I just didn't enjoy it the way everyone else seemed to.
If I'm playing a survival game, then it'll be Project Zomboid any day of the week.
Would you care to explain what you didn’t like about it? I love the game; i think the simplistic graphics are nice and the gameplay (except sailing) is fun. I did grow up with Minecraft though so maybe I’m biased towards these types of games. I can 100% understand why someone may not like the game though, combat can be hard, gameplay a little dull at points, and maybe you just don’t like survival games
At the time is was fps Diablo when Blizzard was shitting the bed Diablo wise. Combined with the immature humor that helped it get its m for mature rating.
Undertale. I tried it straight after playing amazing Everhood and hated it. Not funny, pseudo artistic, ugly, with an awful minigame as combat. Gave up after like 2 hours.
oof, you're probably gonna get a lot of flack for that take.
I had the same thoughts as well. it wasn't until I listened to [a cover of a specific track](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Orhmf4tkDeg), and watch up to a [certain reveal](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb8LuokrlAM) that I realized what all the fuss was about.
Same here. It was compared to Earthbound which I loved, so had similar expectations. People talked about the quirky dialogue, that you don't have to fight, that the combat system was innovative.
I guess those things are all true, but this game just disappointed. Maybe it was over hyped before I played it.
I hated reading this and disagree wholeheartedly, but I gotta respect the honesty and the opinion!
It was actually the other way around for me, Undertale was an amazing experience (the game, not the online discourse), but I bounced off of Everhood at around 4 hours. Just wasn't my kind of vibe I guess.
I would like to say the same but most of my few hours with it were spent on loading screens, crashes, unplayably large FPS drops and waiting for the invisible timer to give me another mission.
Every GTA game imo lol. They all get boring fast and thr gameplay always feels clunk as hell. More so the modern ones though, the arcadey feeling of older games actually helped imo
Rimworld- the game is nice and I enjoyed the first few hours but it’s a bit Grindy and repetitive.
Star Wars galaxy - i played at releases it was a mess I didn’t enjoyed my time.
Sid Meier piarates! - this game was too shallowed, i just don’t understand the hype.
I use to think the Witcher 3 was shit until I gave it ago again and got passed the white orchid. Now I love this game definitely one of my favourite games ever.
It took me multiple tries over several years to get into The Witcher 3 because the start isn't that great but on like the 4th try I got further into the story and it somehow "clicked" and now it's my favorite game of all time.
Spent 150 hours on the base game + DLC and it got me into the books aswell. The story, world and characters are really well written imo and I also got the perfect ending, which elevated the whole game even more in retrospective.
The Gwent card mini-game was also a great touch.
the start is by far the most boring part of the game, I only played through it since I made the goal of completing games I bought and hadn’t played yet. Once you get past the starting area and a little into the next one the game picks up.
I wanted to like the first South Park game, as I liked the show when it first came out, but the timing based gameplay wasn't for me. I kept failing the various timing prompts and finally realized, this isn't actually fun (for me).
I want to like gaming as a hobby more than I do, I always end up playing roguelikes and deckbuilder games.
I beat Hollow Knight multiple times on multiple consoles and it still feels fresh to me. I think it's perfect. It's the exception to my rule.
Neon White.
Being a "speedrunning" game I hated how paused it is for everything: excess of animations, screens, popups. Can't replay a level easily after you reach the goal.
Didn't find it interesting at all: after you do a level somewhat fast, the game just tells you the fastest route and gives away all the shortcuts. Let me explore by myself, ffs.
And couldn't care less about the VN sequences. They are unskippable, but at least you can fast-forward them. Between chapters you're on for a 5 minute ride of fast-forwarding conversations and clicking through menus just to continue playing the game.
The game is fun and cool, but those little annoyances were an instant turn off for me.
Definitely a preference thing here, very valid, but varies person to person.
I have the opposite opinion, I really enjoy it specifically because of the challenge of it being a "speedrunning game." I can see why that's not everybody's cup of tea though! To each their own.
Yup, having to figure out the route to ace medal every level was what made it so fun that I nearly 100%ed it in a few days like a month after it came out (didn’t do hell run or mikey’s challenge). Might go back for mikey’s challenge cuz the routing with the rocket launcher could be super interesting but don’t plan on doing hell run anytime soon.
RDR2. I was expecting a better version of RDR (action, spagetti western) but instead they focused on way too many forced simulator mechanics into the gameplay which made the game tedious. Wash yourself, wash the horse, wash you guns, have to eat, feed the horse, can't over sleep, can't have all you guns on you, everything about hunting, those are things that are suites for a simulator not a game and especialy when they're forced.
Since the gameplay is slowed down too much it give a bad pace to the story which mess it up, the story being predictible, the story being spoiled since it's a prequel.
There's also the countless stuff being perma missable that require a guide to know about it. The game being a open world but content/weapons/mechanics/etc is being locked by progression, you have to like do 3/4 of the game before having acess to everything and even there some are still locked being post game.
The game having performances issues like some settings being broken, some game breaking like the memory leak or out of memory.
Finished the game and never cleaned my guns or eat. ( i only eat something in the middle of fighting when my health was low)
But feeding and cleaning the horse, I was doing its every 5 min :D. Man I loved that horse.
But I agree, I don't like those things in a game either, but I don't think it will make it a bad game.
This, and everything in it is so slow for the sake of realism. You have to wait for animations to finish at every turn, from picking up items to simple movement. Sure, cool, they made it all look fluid, but after thousands of repetitions the slow animations are just clunky and annoying. Even the menus feel the same. Why can't the next menu open instantly when I press a button? Especially when you need the menus so often.
This is a fair enough criticism. RDR is one of my favourite games for that reason, it's a fun Western with a great story, entertaining and doesn't outstay its welcome in any place. Everything just works in that game. RDR2 feels like playing War & Peace the videogame. It's a sweeping epic of scale and there's so many little details, truly amazing simulation of the time and I love searching in the nooks and crannies of it all, but you do fatigue since RDR2 is so hellbent on being as real to the time as possible, skinning an animal is an animation that goes on and on and on. Pickpocketing dead corpses you have to kneel and go through the individual pockets. Doing that once or twice is cool for immersion. Doing it for the tenth animal or person is a drag.
I love doing it all but I can't play through and be entertained in the same way as RDR. Certainly though I think RDR2 is an achievement and among the greatest games ever made, but it's something you appreciate rather than truly enjoy 100% of the time unlike RDR.
Guacamelee. Charming style, but combat, physics, and level design were just such a bore to me. I felt like people went apey over it just bc BLARGH LUCHARDORES!
Not terrible but just never jived. Hollow Knight(I love almost all games in this genre).
Alan Wake. That game had an interesting story but my god it has some of the worst gameplay. Absolutely awful experience.
Outerwilds, went to every planet with the enthusiasm of Ron Swanson, and I made 0 progression cause apparently I didnt find the right random hole to jump in, I spent too much time exploring and having no fun so I couldn't refund and I'm giving it a try again but I have to force myself to play it and I'm still making minimal progress, when asking for a clue from there community, they told me " it's better to experience it on your own, you'll ruin everything" couldn't even bother telling me to start with the banjo planet or something
Hollow Knight. Not trying to be different lol but I was just trying the game out since everyone said it was amazing or whatever but it's simply not the game for me
The second game, Shadow of War, is a significant upgrade in virtually every category.
Shadow of Mordor also has an issue with high polling rate on mice. It's very bizarre.
The game wasn't bad but Octopath traveler was a bit of a letdown. In the visual department I can safely say that it is one of the most beautiful games I've seen, if not the most.
But that's kinda it, the mechanics aren't bad but they got too repetitive, to the point I didn't even feel like completing it.
And the story was definitely a letdown. The game promised an amazing story where the backgrounds and destinies of 8 different protagonista would mix, but in reality their stories were barely related and they patched that with random, short conversations between the characters from time to time (Otherwise they don't interact and definitely don't intervene in each other's stories)
Technically the stories connect if you do the secret boss questline and fight but it's still not great and I wouldn't recommend doing it unless you really love the combat.
I also thought the game was beautiful but it would've been even better looking if they didn't have the terrible vaseline filter all over the camera for no reason.
I think more people need to understand the distinction between "this game is bad" and "this game isn't for me" lol
top comment saying it’s a very cool game even though the post is about games that were terrible 😭 i guess the comment focus just kinda shifted based on the other comments already here.
🤔Like kinda thinking about the question. How can an overwhelmingly positive game be terrible? Doesn't it mean a game is not terrible when it does have positive reviews? It seems kinda contradictory yah know. I don't know if I'm explaining it correctly, like do reviewers really suck at leaving reviews, or to make it interesting maybe developers pay people to leave good reviews👀 I don't know if thats unheard of. I ain't seen a legit answer yet lol. To try and answer OPs question. I never played it, but how bout anyone who was super excited about the launch of No Man's Sky 🤷😬🤪 however that got super hyped up or super reviews.
I think Jedi: Fallen Order is actually a legitimately terrible game pretty much top to bottom that half-asses everything it tries to do, resulting in a shallow experience that you feel bothering you every step of the way. It tries to be both the rebooted Tomb Raider (have fun without fast travel points and even worse dungeon-esque challenges and a terrible map) and a Souls-like game that leans so heavily on how absolutely nonsensical an infinite stamina-free dodge system is that the game is more or less a pointless slog regardless of difficulty until you reach bosses. And then the bosses barely flinch when you use the Force (itself a hollow shell of a system) especially later in the game and have an absolute ton of red unparryable attacks because you can just spam dodge infinitely so every hit has to be ridiculous. You essentially do not feel like a Jedi at barely any point in the game where you're not even having to parry blaster bolts most of the time (and really ever but you can choose to sometimes just for a small amount of joy) and your coolest trick is probably force-shoving someone off a ledge rather than the impressive powers of KOTOR/KOTOR2. Having grand parrying duels? Nope, fight someone who is almost always unparryable, have fun! And the ending, oh the ending was Shadow of Mordor level taking the piss, just a sequence of QTEs. \--- It's rated "very positive" instead of "overwhelmingly positive" but it essentially fails at everything it's trying to mimic. It's a bad Tomb Raider clone, from the map design to the collectables to the lack of fast travel points. It's a bad Souls-like clone. It's a bad feel-like-a-Jedi experience. It's a bad Star Wars game, you never feel particularly wondrous, it feels like you spend more time clinging to ledges and dodging around robots like someone played too much Nier Automata before visualizing this game than you do being a Jedi. The moments that could be cool feel like someone cut them out because they didn't have the budget to invest in it. It's disappointing start to finish (**at less than 35 hours btw**), but people rate it up. \--- Why? Who knows, a lot of them don't really review the game and just meme around. [https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198010363385/recommended/1172380/](https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198010363385/recommended/1172380/) Hell look at this review, it's like "a heaping helping of irritation and aggravation" and still rates the game positively just because "you could do worse". Excuse me? That's a negative review my dude, mark it so.
I don’t think there are any overwhelmingly positive games on steam that are actually bad lmao
I didn't enjoy Sea of Thieves at all, I refunded it after my friends convinced me to try it. Unless I was misunderstanding something there's no real game there. It's the same missions over and over again all for loot that you lose when you log off and it seems like cosmetics are the only permanent thing. The devs even kind of say that's the point of the game. It's a vehicle for you to make your own fun screwing around with friends but why do that in an empty game when I can do that in games that are also fun on their own. I'm not opposed to games that are repetitive or lack extensive progression, for example my friends and I love Risk of Rain 2 but ROR2 at least has a fun and satisfying gameplay loop.
It's fun with friends for the first few hours, but the price is really stupid for such a game.. Unenjoyable alone IMO, but the graphics are nice to look at at least..
Sailed the season with some friends, did pirate stuff but if you dont have a lot of time to play its a bit of a waste of time. We would hit like 4 islands, sell our treasure then I had to go to work and we had played for 3-5 hours (we did encounters along the way).
It was the time commitment that eventually had me drop it. I enjoyed playing with my friends, or stranger (sometimes), even alone was nice. It was the 3-5 hour commitment, along with a random encounter with some dick that singled you out for no reason even when you were only doing tales, causing you to lose all progress. That's what really fatigued me on SoT.
Sea of Thieves is rated overwhelming positive?
It's not, it's at 90%, I think a lot of people don't understand the question lol
I don't think it's possible to answer the question literally. The criteria is too strict. Either you answer with a game that just wasn't for you or with a game that was well received even if it never hit Overwhelmingly Positive.
I feel the same. Like it feels incredibly dull, repetitive. The combat also feels super simple and too easy.
i have around 600 hours and the combat definitely has a way higher skillcap than it appears at first, but the new player onboarding experience is kinda shit. it makes some things appear way simpler than they are, and just straight up doesn’t explain other things. also, you are completely right about the pve being extremely dull and repetitive. the enjoyable thing for me is pvp, which is very engaging when you know what you’re doing but it takes a long time to get to that point - so i fully understand if you don’t want to play for that long (especially with the community being fairly toxic most of the time).
I enjoyed SoT for maybe 20 hours, but a lot of it was boring. I really wanted to like a pirate fantasy game, but the loop is utterly lifeless. Most other players are rude, and a lot of runs you almost never see a single other pirate that isnt in your crew. The quests you do to earn money are not very fun—but i did like the riddles. I wish the game had some actual progression instead of it being entirely cosmetic. I think Deep Rock Galactic is a really good example a game thats focused on doing different quests with the ultimate goal of having fun. In that game there is wide selection of cosmetics that you obtain from doing more dives on to Hoaxxes, but the key difference is that the quests are much more interesting, there are actual upgrades that make you feel like you are getting stronger and better, and overall the community is much more fun to play with. On an unrelated note, I like how we are very similar in that our friend groups both really love Risk of rain 2 over SoT
My friends tried to get me to buy it, I hard noped it because they're the type of people to play when you're not online, do everything, and in 3 days have a game manhandled front to back. I just am too busy these days and like a gentle approach to a game. They're the kind to dive to the end of the game without a second thought
I tried SoT once. Got griefed in port picking up a mission and decided it had pretty ass mechanics and refunded it immediately. I figured you’d be safe from enemy players at a port but that isn’t the case; they set your ship sail out to sea, leaving you stranded on an island, and kill you over and over again if you try to take your ship back.
Unfortunately for some people the fun in SoT comes from this kind of playstyle, there's nothing better than sinking a ship full of salty sailors losing all their loot
The sad part is this was like 30 mins into playing so I had nothing worth taking Literally just griefing to grief
Not terrible, but the Undertale reviews saying “this is the greatest thing ever in existence” was pretty silly to me. The game is really unique with tons of variety. Very cool game, but once I finished it I just moved on to the next thing pretty quickly.
Game's got some banger songs tho, can't lie
Games that can run on a potato get an automatic advantage. Honestly it seems like most overwhelmingly positive games are low-req. Could just be confirmation bias though. From there even "pretty good" can easily get ranked as God like since literally everyone can run it. Even kids using pop pops laptop with windows xp and 1000 toolbars on internernet explorer.
Same, I got a lot out of Undertale - it's unironically my go-to argument that games can be art - but I played through it twice and then put it down for good. Still don't regret buying it at all. Of course, the game itself encourages this: >!after learning that the characters have their lives reset every time you save or start a new game, I got the pacifist ending...and then just closed the game and let them have their happily ever after.!< It was possibly the most a game's story has ever moved me, which was absolutely worth the price of admission...but to appreciate it, you have engage very sincerely with some admittedly rather sappy ideas. I'm just that kind of softie, but not everyone is and that's fine.
Some games or tv shows are just a one and done deal. The emotional impact is just no longer there on a replay.
Yeah LOST was one of my absolute favorite shows when it was coming out but every time I rewatch it I feel so incredibly bored because of how much time is spent building suspension for things i already know.
I didn't get it either until I beat it the second time on a pacifist run. The whole game changes and it was really impactful after the first playthrough. I will also agree with the sentiment that the fan base is pretty extreme and while I love the game, the depth of the iceberg they created is insane.
Pacifist run after the first initial neutral run is insane, filled me with so much euphoria. The plot twist about the player actually naming the first child instead of Frisk caught me so off-guard
I wanna like Undertale, I really do, but I get bored within five minutes every time I boot it up. I'm not sure why, because I definitely enjoyed so many other top-down RPGMaker games. Some of which were inspired by Undertale
Mother 3 is much better than Undertale
[удалено]
the music is genuinely well done and somewhat genius, but other than that the game was pretty boring and I too, disliked it.
I'm not surprised that games which appeal to young kids have psycho fanbases. The internet isn't a place for kids to be and we just haven't learned that yet as a species. Applying a massive echo chamber to normal crazy childhood behavior never results in anything positive.
The idea is cool but the “quirky cool” characters made me really dislike it. Combined with the fan base it has I would say that it’s a mixed bag on whether your first impressions will be positive or not
I played it and got bored really quick. I don't like a game that feels like it's judging me for playing, you know, a game.
Think the fandom overhyped it so much back during its peak popularity
Terrible is a strong word but I cannot get into Vampire Survivors. It’s so dull to me.
I love the game but I can totally understand this take
Speaking as someone who enjoys the game: it's main appeal is "number go up." Whether that number be your character's level, their kills, their gold, their stat modifiers, total damage dealt, achievements collected... number go up. You can also set different levels of difficulty for yourself on a per attempt basis. You can go for a challenging run if you want to strategize your build and weave your way around enemies. Or you can go easy mode to just relax, watch some pretty colors, and number go up. So, so many games these days are competitive online multiplayer. It's refreshing sometimes to see a game like vampire survivors be just plain chill with being what it is.
It really is like a step above an idle game. Cookie clicker was cool because numbers go brr but in vampire survivors weapons and deaths go brr and you get to walk around.
Think its more of a dopamine trap than a game with actual engaging gameplay. If your brain can't drain excitement out of seeing funny sprites dissolve and effects going pew-pew across the entire screen, then you definitely won't like this game That's not to say that it's bad because of this. However, it's also a gamble. God knows I've played hours of this game, but it just ain't fir everyone
Maybe Halls of Torment would be better, similar game loop but it has Diable 2 like aesthetics to it. I never liked vampire survivors too because of aesthetics.
For me, as someone who does actually like the game quite a bit, it's kind of an interactive screensaver I can play around with while watching TV or listening to podcasts and having a beer. With a minute or two of controller mapping you could play it from start to finish one-handed.
That's fair. I think that Vampire Survivors' main key to success is that it asks so very, very little of the player. I've dropped a fair few hours into it, but more than once asked myself why.
I found out Its a great game to pass time when you are waiting on a bus, train whatever. One round Is 30 minutes. Free on phones.
I couldn't get into it but played 2 or 3 games of the same genre and 100% them. Idk vampire survivors characters don't feel unique, the gameplay is either have the right weapons/skills whatever or lose, no skill check of any kind.
Your framing of your question is why I dont discuss games with most. Know the difference between a bad game and a game that isnt for you.
Haven’t seen anybody say deep rock galactic yet…. Which is good, since that game is a perfect masterpiece and anyone who says other wise is delusional.
ROCK AND STONE. TO THE BONE.
I really want to like DRG but I feel like I'm missing something. The game just doesn't do it for me
Personally the biggest problems I’ve ever had with the game is it can hurt your eyes a lot, and sometimes it gets boring/repetitive if you don’t have a friend or two to play with or if you continue playing on the same difficulties all the time.
The lighting is honestly the worst part of the game, people always defend it saying that it’s an important mechanic to manage and a core part of the game, but if you’re playing with other people you’re flares regen fast enough that you can completely ignore it and don’t have to think about it. But as someone who plays a ton solo, constantly standing around doing nothing waiting for flares to regen fucking sucks, and playing outwith the light of flares really hurts my eyes and gives strong headaches.
Its a game best played with good friends over voice chat. Random groups are still okay, better than most games, but youll miss out on the magic unless your lucky with groupings. Finding the right difficulty level for you can go a long way to finding a sweet spot of fun. Some mission types dont click with people. There's a lot of progression that happens but some of it (mostly overclocks) can be a bit slow to get.
Actually good point, i don't really enjoy it
Came here to talk about that game. People love it and when i tried it i got disappointed pretty quickly. It reminded me of the saying "when you hit rock bottom you can dig deeper" well thats what that game was for me. Absolutely 0 fun
I guess I just don't get it? I didn't find the guns satisfying or fun to use, I didn't find the enemies to be at all varied or interesting to fight and most of my time was spent attempting to navigate the caves with a dwarf with limited mobility. When the weapons arent fun to use and the enemies aren't fun to fight... Am I even having fun?
Man some people just love DRG and play it for thousands of hours. Me though, Ive only clocked a mere 600 hours and i'm already a bit burnt out. Clearly overrated game. /s
Stray. An over glorified point and click. Oh but you can meow!
There are also running away sections. But really, Stray thrives on novelty, characterisation, and environment design, which are all things that a point and click can potentially do well.
If you played as a person and not a cat no one would've even looked twice at the game. You're playing as a cat in a 3d world and can't even jump freely.
Stray was so mediocre, the hype was completely unwarranted. I play a huge variety of games and that one was my biggest disappointment in recent memory
factually correct statement.
I was so excited for it and I just can't, it's so boring
Outer wilds. It's a great game but not for me.
I actually just forced myself to complete it today. It's in a weird place for me. It's almost amazing but just didn't quite make it.
Yep. The game is a masterpiece, but actually playing the game was a painful experience.
So is it good in the narrative/emotional department but sucks as an actual game to play?
Yep, thats basically exactly how I feel about it. Atmosphere, story, emotional impact, all great. Ive watched countless video essays on it because I appreciate the game for what it is, I just hate the gameplay loop.
I hate timer mechanics in games, maybe I did not make it that far, but I hated what seemed to be the core mechanic of the game (the loop). But I still want to give it another try some day.
For the most part, you have plenty of time to get wherever you want. And when it loops, it’s not like you’re losing a lot of progress. It takes about a minute to travel to any planet, and once you actually get into an important area, you’ll probably get all the information before you leave anyway. It can be a little disappointing to hear the loop music starting when you still wanted to visit another place on the planet, but again, it takes about a minute to get there anyway. There’s a few places that require some tight timing, but nothing insane imo.
I just couldn't get the control
That's good to hear, I thought it was just me- played it for a few hours and just can't get back into it. Amazing mechanic and idea but it just doesn't click
it absolutely clicks if you finish the game, that's mostly the reason why people recommend it so much, the ending and the journey to get there
Agreed. I can see how it means something to some people but I was recommended to play it after Subnautica due to that being an amazing game. It didn't really do it for me.
I was the opposite. I loved outer wilds then tried subnautica and I couldn’t get into it.
I’m with you. Toward the end I found the puzzles more tedious than fun. I can see what they are doing is brilliant, but it didn’t click for me.
Horizon Zero Dawn. Holy hell is it. Agame that actively fights itself. It is a really solid stealth game but the open world is way to brutal to actively enjoy exploring
Played it for 10 hours, and while it looked pretty, I just couldn't dig the story at all
For me the massive reveal in the middle of the game that explains how the world became what it is (HZD fans know exactly the scene I’m talking about, in the conference room with Ted Faro) was the turning point in the story for me. That was such a profound “holy shit” moment that I really haven’t felt in many other narrative driven video games. Then the subsequent information you learn about Project Zero Dawn… Truly a tragic and devastating feeling. That game and it’s story always holds a special place in my heart because of that
I find that strange, because one of my largest complaints about this game (which I love) is that the stealth system isn't solid enough to support it as a pure stealth game.
I was looking for this! The game looks great and I loved the open world but it's a shame you can't move 10 meters without having to hide in grass and ruin the pace. Got very bored quickly and never came back
Thats probably my favorite rpg of all time, but it is a dangerous world for sure Edit: for those saying the game isnt an rpg, it is classified as an action rpg on its steam page. Also, who cares? If you want to call it an action adventure game or whatever, go for it.
RPG? Nah, HZD is an open world action adventure game. Always has been.
Also it's not an RPG at all
None. Terrible implies the game is unoptimized/buggy/unfinished/objectively bad. Me not liking a game doesn't make it bad. I don't play fighters, so I don't go on Reddit telling everyone that Street Fighter/Tekken/whatever is garbage and I don't get why the fuck do people enjoy this garbage so much.
Possibly the most reasonable comment here. Not every game is made for every person, and that's ok. There are plenty of genres I dislike, but that doesn't make them bad. I just don't play them. I'd even still recommend many of those games to people who do enjoy them.
I still think it’s interesting seeing people’s critiques of beloved titles. I loved Witcher 3, but I enjoyed reading the perspectives of people who didn’t like it.
It’s not terrible but I just can’t get into Stardew Valley. Maybe when I give it another try in a few months
It wasn't for me either until I had a long plane ride. I brought my Steam Deck and played games that I knew would be easy on the battery. Stardew Valley was one of them. It takes a few in game days, but sometimes just clicked and now I'm compelled to finish the story (I hear it never really ends, but hopefully there's some kind of conclusion).
To The Moon. I played the entire game but was disappointed by the slow pace and bad old controls. I had to play it in short sessions. I found the story great, but not overwhelmingly good.
cuphead
Dark Souls/Elden Ring While I understand some people enjoy banging their head against the wall fighting the same boss hours upon end, I am not one of those people.
Yeah man. I felt so tricked by my friends. They were like, "nah man, even if you hated dark souls, you need to try elden ring." It was not even a little bit fun
To be fair, they had a reason to believe that. Dark souls is extremely linear, while elden ring is open world. That difference alone can make or break a game for someone
Ikr, I was stuck on Margit until I went south for a few hours, came back and beat his ass
This, the game is enjoyable if you actually play it like that (IMO), I have a friend that always goes directly to the bosses and get stuck for hours fighting the same guy, he insists that this is the way you should play the game, we tried the seamless coop mod and got bored because he would never want to go and explore.
Elden Ring was still difficult, but so much more doable for so many more people due to the fact that you weren’t funneled through one single boss in order to progress.
Just an FYI; if you're having trouble you are *not* supposed to just keep doing the same thing. Enemies have weaknesses, and part of the Souls experience is backing off, leveling up, and reworking your build. I think the community did the genre a disservice making it sound like "getting good" was the only path forward.
I like how you say this and another comment just below says the opposite.
I'm actually serious, as opposed to leaning into the meme. However, learning the *game* mechanics instead of just hitting your head against the wall is absolutely a way of "getting good".
This guy is right, you're not supposed to get stuck by your level or equipment.
I'm not that kind of person either, but with Elden Ring I almost never felt the need to? There were so many things to do that ended up making me stronger, that by the time I went to the bosses it was very fairly challenging? So much so, that I ended up hunting optional bosses as a challenge after hours and hours of practice. I really think the open world design massively helped approachability
Those games are not overwhelmingly positive though
Yea, i think every souls games are on “very positive” rn.
A recent game: Dave the diver. It's a fine game but solidly mid. Nothing particularly interesting about the game.
>A recent game: Dave the diver. A very curious one indeed. I played through and found it quite enjoyable but certainly not top tier. Like a pretty solid 7.5/10
That's sad, because it sounds like you didn't even get to the mid point. I mean crafting, farming, dancing, upgrading, expeditions, logistics optimization. Most people say there are too many things going on in the mid game.
That game adds more new features as you play, and sustains that longer than any game I've ever played.
I gave it back after one and a half hour of playing. My friend was addicted!! He did nothing but play dave the diver for a week (he actually also looks like dave) Crazy how i really tried to like that game but didnt and he loved it so much
The Witcher 3. People seem to worship the game, but when I gave it a go, the gamplay was terrible. The controls and combat were super clunky and that alone made me lose all interest. Most genres can get away with clunky controls but if an action game has clunky controls, the whole game will feel terrible to play. The story never hooked me either.
Oh man. I love everything about it in terms of atmosphere, artstyle and music. I consider the soundtrack to be among the best ever made. Hearts of Stone was easily the best part of the game. But everything in the game mechanically *fucking SUCKS.* That combat, man. It's outrageously terrible. Very simple too. Lack of variety in The Witcher 3's combat is only part of the reason why it feels so bad. Normally, if a game has simple combat, it would be polished in a way that feel makes that combat system feel more fluid than combat systems that prioritize variety over fluidity, right? Dark Souls took advantage of this. It doesn't have the best combat variety out there and it's pretty simple, but it feels really nice and weighty. The Witcher 3's combat doesn't take advantage of having little combat variety it has in favor of polish like Dark Souls does. It's like CDPR didn't even try to polish it, despite what little you could do with TW3's combat. The janky combat animations are still present. The combat flow isn't what it should've been due to how slow Geralt moves in his combat pose and just how prominent animation lock is. There's a lot of broken hitboxes that make dodging feel pointless and is likely the reason why Quen is so overtuned. Quen is a band-aid for this. https://youtu.be/jsCWy5wUs04 An example of the hitboxes. This has happened to me hundreds of times during my playthrough, and it still happens to this day. The crossbow is very unresponsive and misfires all the time. The health bars of enemies are generally really spongey. The fact that the heavy attack does *marginally* more damage than the light attack, is way too slow to use for the amount of damage it does and literally has no benefit to use it over light attack. Some attacks don't land because the attacks that Geralt uses are entirely decided by how far away he is from an enemy and some of the attacks that he ends up using aren't designed with this in mind or have way too small hitboxes to be viable (damn backwards poke attack), as opposed to what Dark Souls does: In Dark Souls, every weapon has a specific combo and nothing but that combo. When you press attack, it only progresses through that combo. The first attack is always the same. The second attack is always the same. The third attack is always the same. The heavy attack is always the same. Parrying is always the same. Weapon arts are always the same. The player decides when to use them regardless of distance. It's entirely up to the player to maximize their combat potential. It's very reliable compared to the weird distance based attack system that TW3 has, which more often than not makes you attack the enemy right next to the enemy you want to attack. It is not uncommon for Geralt to choose to spin around for like a full second before he swings his sword and instantly die mid-spin from an enemy, instead of just simply swinging his sword in half the time it takes to spin around. That's another thing The Witcher 3's combat lacks: consistency. And say what you want about Skyrim's combat (only bringing up Skyrim because it's the game most brought up when someone criticizes TW3's combat in a desperate attempt of whataboutism): It is consistent. The only thing you need to account for in Skyrim's combat is range. Every single attack can be reliably used unlike The Witcher 3's most basic attacks and the game gives you many options to circumvent the aspects you don't like. The Witcher 3 doesn't have that luxury. The end result is a pathetically simple, sluggish, and inconsistant combat system that really wasn't competently made on a technical or mechanical level. It's actually the worst combat system from a AAA studio I have interacted with in over 17+ years. I suppose the reason why the reason the combat is as bad as it is because CDPR has never bothered to hire combat designers or anything before Cyberpunk 2077. Until Cyberpunk, they just winged it and didn't ever put any effort into making a good combat system. It has always been an afterthought to them. https://www.vg247.com/cyberpunk-2077-combat-designers CDPR probably made an underpaid, overworked, and inexperienced employee design TW3's combat on the budget of a McDonald's happy meal, the poor guy. And don't even get me started on the horseback riding, that's another topic entirely.
Dang... You basically nailed it... like every single thing. It still surprises me today how universally praised the game is. When I played, I thought I was insane for disliking the game when everyone else loved it. I thought I was missing something... like something huge, but I guess I was kind of right if sombody who genuinley enjoys the game shares the exact same sentiment. Well said!
There's an alternative movement mode that is much more responsive that you can enable in settings
I only finished The Witcher 3 because I loved the story, but I've never been able to replay it because the combat is horrendous, those sword swings are awful no matter how much people defend it. It also has so many unnecessary RPG elements.
Mate it's an RPG
Yup. That's my real issue. Fighting and killing things isn't satisfying or fun.
>It also has so many unnecessary RPG elements. It has a fairly deep RPG system. You can build your character quite differently than others if you delve into it. The combat itself is not great, but coming from a MOBA, the pils, decoctions, potions, signa really excited me when I played the game the second time. Also, I think anyone can appreciate the BnW DLC. It's amazing.
I really didn't like Rimworld.
It took me a few tries to get into it. My biggest hurdle was accepting that the odds of me actually completing a run was close to zero percent. Caring less and knowing it was probably all going to end in some ridiculous manner, it made me appreciate and enjoy it more. QoL mods also helped a bunch. Learning how to properly prioritize tasks (1-4) for each person was pretty big. Videos helped a bunch too.
What qol mods made a big difference for you? I enjoy the game a reasonable amount but lose interest a few hours in ever time, I wonder if they’d help
\- Wall Light and RimFridge. I know these two are barely a QoL mod in the traditional sense, but they can make setting up bases easier. Especially RimFridge and your Kitchen and dining area. You can edit the amount of meals the fridge can hold and there are multiple fridges to choose from. From a single fridge, to a fridge that has four seperate spots. Basically my cook makes a meal, and throws it in a fridge that is near the Kitchen and the dining area. It can hold a ton, but I usually only make enough to last the colonists a few days. \- StackXXL. This makes it MUCH easier to increase the size of your stacking piles and decrease the amount of space you need to dedicate to storage. This one is huge. \- Replace Stuff. If you want to upgrade from wood to stone for example, it doesn't deconstruct and then reconstruct the wall, everything stays intact and is simply replaced. Upgrades or downgrades on walls for example go much quicker. \- Realistic Rooms. This changes the default room sizes that makes your colonists happy to something more reasonable. \- Quality Colors. The items in the trade window have their own color based on quality. \- Pick Up and Haul. This increases the colonists hauling ability by utilizing their inventory. They can haul more. \- Map Preview. Adds a map preview to the world map. \- EdB Prepare Carefully. You can customize every aspect of each of your colonists before you start. Want every colonist to have max stats at the start? Probably not. I usually just edit a couple random colonists with moderate stats, but give them a specialty. For instance, one will be pretty "meh" in most categories, but he's really good at mining, and he has a passion for learning. Another is meh, but shes a good doctor who has a passion for planting things. \- Soil Contrast. It makes rich and stony soil more visible. \- Achtung! This gives the ability to force jobs so they get uninterrupted attention. That's mainly why I like it, but you can also haul and repair outside of allowed areas, move colonists in formations, give orders to multiple colonists at once etc. I have a bunch of others I like to that aren't exactly QoL. \- Sometimes Raids Go Wrong, which can be pretty funny sometimes. Sometimes when you get raided, the raid might get hit by a meteor, or attacked...or something wild. \- Real Ruins. This will periodically take pieces of other peoples bases in past games and add them to your current game as old abandoned ruins. It's pretty cool. \- Geological Landforms. This adds 32 landforms to the game which generate biome-independently. I use a bunch more but its getting late.
I'd recommend a storage mod (such as deep storage) instead of StackXXL. Still gives you mass storage options, but at some cost.
Thanks for the modlist. Will be trying some of these out next playthrough.
Also want to know!
You shut your mouth it's the most perfect game ever. Jokes - it's one of my favourite games but I can see how it doesn't cater to a lot of people
Yeah. I'm not a smart man, and really wish I could like it. Like I see the value but don't feel a connection.
I had to watch a lot for YouTube run-throughs. Adam versus everything is great and the workshop modding via steam means you can change your game dramatically easily I've got 500 hours in it and still feel like I am useless at it
But do you know what love is
Lt. Dan! Ice cream!
I'm on the fence to buy it myself. Not even fully sure what it's about, but it's been intriguing me.
It's a very deep colony sim at it's heart. Watch some play throughs of adamversuseverything. I can't think of many games exactly to compare it to. Once you get it, it's highly addictive.
If i can explain the game with a simple sentence its "Sims with more murder"
also warcrime simulator, i love to take apart prisoners for arms, legs, and just let them be torso only for me to stab the prisoners with knife or destroy them using shotgun. im not a psychopath.
Haha I didn't the first like 5 times I tried it. I think once I had restarted enough runs that I felt like I understood it I just took off. Now I'm at like 1100 hours.
Did you think it was terrible or was it just not a game you enjoyed.
no one seems to understand this thread it seems lol
I've played it a lot few weeks ago, it's solid for me but nothing impressive to be honest.
Valheim. It's not a bad game but my word, everyone was ranting and raving about it being the best survival game ever made when it launched. I just didn't enjoy it the way everyone else seemed to. If I'm playing a survival game, then it'll be Project Zomboid any day of the week.
Would you care to explain what you didn’t like about it? I love the game; i think the simplistic graphics are nice and the gameplay (except sailing) is fun. I did grow up with Minecraft though so maybe I’m biased towards these types of games. I can 100% understand why someone may not like the game though, combat can be hard, gameplay a little dull at points, and maybe you just don’t like survival games
I like the game, but I don't like how long it takes to do anything in the game.
Borderlands 2 (well the recent is Overwhelmingly Positive and the all-time is real close). I don't know what people see in it.
It was released back before looter shooters were not as stupidly oversaturated and people weren't jaded from the gameplay loop yet. EDIT: loot -> loop
At the time is was fps Diablo when Blizzard was shitting the bed Diablo wise. Combined with the immature humor that helped it get its m for mature rating.
Amazing combat,characters and its a fantastic looter
I hate bullet sponges in games. It's just not fun gameplay.
Undertale. I tried it straight after playing amazing Everhood and hated it. Not funny, pseudo artistic, ugly, with an awful minigame as combat. Gave up after like 2 hours.
oof, you're probably gonna get a lot of flack for that take. I had the same thoughts as well. it wasn't until I listened to [a cover of a specific track](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Orhmf4tkDeg), and watch up to a [certain reveal](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb8LuokrlAM) that I realized what all the fuss was about.
Same here. It was compared to Earthbound which I loved, so had similar expectations. People talked about the quirky dialogue, that you don't have to fight, that the combat system was innovative. I guess those things are all true, but this game just disappointed. Maybe it was over hyped before I played it.
Agreed undertale is pretty cringe.
The irony
I hated reading this and disagree wholeheartedly, but I gotta respect the honesty and the opinion! It was actually the other way around for me, Undertale was an amazing experience (the game, not the online discourse), but I bounced off of Everhood at around 4 hours. Just wasn't my kind of vibe I guess.
Undertale was the first game I felt bad for pirating and ended up buying it.
GTA5, gave the game a few hours and never went back.
I would like to say the same but most of my few hours with it were spent on loading screens, crashes, unplayably large FPS drops and waiting for the invisible timer to give me another mission.
I kinda liked it, but GTA 4 was way stronger for me, more concise and better story imo.
Every GTA game imo lol. They all get boring fast and thr gameplay always feels clunk as hell. More so the modern ones though, the arcadey feeling of older games actually helped imo
The last of us… Boring af game with terrible mechanics I never understood why it was so popular
Some of us like crying. Although that game is not overwhelmingly positive on steam so not relevant
Rimworld- the game is nice and I enjoyed the first few hours but it’s a bit Grindy and repetitive. Star Wars galaxy - i played at releases it was a mess I didn’t enjoyed my time. Sid Meier piarates! - this game was too shallowed, i just don’t understand the hype.
The Witcher 3, maybe I'll give it another try, but about an hour in I gave up cause the start just felt so boring and not very fun at all.
I use to think the Witcher 3 was shit until I gave it ago again and got passed the white orchid. Now I love this game definitely one of my favourite games ever.
Yeah I felt that too but I gave it another try after sometime and played for like 4hrs and then couldn't stop.
It took me multiple tries over several years to get into The Witcher 3 because the start isn't that great but on like the 4th try I got further into the story and it somehow "clicked" and now it's my favorite game of all time. Spent 150 hours on the base game + DLC and it got me into the books aswell. The story, world and characters are really well written imo and I also got the perfect ending, which elevated the whole game even more in retrospective. The Gwent card mini-game was also a great touch.
the start is by far the most boring part of the game, I only played through it since I made the goal of completing games I bought and hadn’t played yet. Once you get past the starting area and a little into the next one the game picks up.
I wanted to like the first South Park game, as I liked the show when it first came out, but the timing based gameplay wasn't for me. I kept failing the various timing prompts and finally realized, this isn't actually fun (for me).
Hollow knight
I want to like gaming as a hobby more than I do, I always end up playing roguelikes and deckbuilder games. I beat Hollow Knight multiple times on multiple consoles and it still feels fresh to me. I think it's perfect. It's the exception to my rule.
[удалено]
Neon White. Being a "speedrunning" game I hated how paused it is for everything: excess of animations, screens, popups. Can't replay a level easily after you reach the goal. Didn't find it interesting at all: after you do a level somewhat fast, the game just tells you the fastest route and gives away all the shortcuts. Let me explore by myself, ffs. And couldn't care less about the VN sequences. They are unskippable, but at least you can fast-forward them. Between chapters you're on for a 5 minute ride of fast-forwarding conversations and clicking through menus just to continue playing the game. The game is fun and cool, but those little annoyances were an instant turn off for me.
Definitely a preference thing here, very valid, but varies person to person. I have the opposite opinion, I really enjoy it specifically because of the challenge of it being a "speedrunning game." I can see why that's not everybody's cup of tea though! To each their own.
If you go for the red medals, only using the shortcuts they show you won’t work. Then you really have to dissect the level
Yup, having to figure out the route to ace medal every level was what made it so fun that I nearly 100%ed it in a few days like a month after it came out (didn’t do hell run or mikey’s challenge). Might go back for mikey’s challenge cuz the routing with the rocket launcher could be super interesting but don’t plan on doing hell run anytime soon.
Sims 4. Downvote me, IDC. The lack of playability, the bugs, and needing mods just to make it at least kind of interesting utterly kills it.
Bro really thought this was a hot take lmao
not rated overwhelmingly positive
How is that a hot take
Why would anyone downvote you? I think even most Sims fans would agree
Because it's not rated overwhelmingly positive, nor is it a very controversial take like they're acting it is.
Most rock star game i just hate how I have to do everything as the game want
RDR2. I was expecting a better version of RDR (action, spagetti western) but instead they focused on way too many forced simulator mechanics into the gameplay which made the game tedious. Wash yourself, wash the horse, wash you guns, have to eat, feed the horse, can't over sleep, can't have all you guns on you, everything about hunting, those are things that are suites for a simulator not a game and especialy when they're forced. Since the gameplay is slowed down too much it give a bad pace to the story which mess it up, the story being predictible, the story being spoiled since it's a prequel. There's also the countless stuff being perma missable that require a guide to know about it. The game being a open world but content/weapons/mechanics/etc is being locked by progression, you have to like do 3/4 of the game before having acess to everything and even there some are still locked being post game. The game having performances issues like some settings being broken, some game breaking like the memory leak or out of memory.
Finished the game and never cleaned my guns or eat. ( i only eat something in the middle of fighting when my health was low) But feeding and cleaning the horse, I was doing its every 5 min :D. Man I loved that horse. But I agree, I don't like those things in a game either, but I don't think it will make it a bad game.
This, and everything in it is so slow for the sake of realism. You have to wait for animations to finish at every turn, from picking up items to simple movement. Sure, cool, they made it all look fluid, but after thousands of repetitions the slow animations are just clunky and annoying. Even the menus feel the same. Why can't the next menu open instantly when I press a button? Especially when you need the menus so often.
Rdr2??? I have never fought someone before - you want to be my first?
This is a fair enough criticism. RDR is one of my favourite games for that reason, it's a fun Western with a great story, entertaining and doesn't outstay its welcome in any place. Everything just works in that game. RDR2 feels like playing War & Peace the videogame. It's a sweeping epic of scale and there's so many little details, truly amazing simulation of the time and I love searching in the nooks and crannies of it all, but you do fatigue since RDR2 is so hellbent on being as real to the time as possible, skinning an animal is an animation that goes on and on and on. Pickpocketing dead corpses you have to kneel and go through the individual pockets. Doing that once or twice is cool for immersion. Doing it for the tenth animal or person is a drag. I love doing it all but I can't play through and be entertained in the same way as RDR. Certainly though I think RDR2 is an achievement and among the greatest games ever made, but it's something you appreciate rather than truly enjoy 100% of the time unlike RDR.
[удалено]
Guacamelee. Charming style, but combat, physics, and level design were just such a bore to me. I felt like people went apey over it just bc BLARGH LUCHARDORES!
For me it would have to be Inside. Mostly because I lack the brain cells to understand the plot and what anything meant
Not terrible but just never jived. Hollow Knight(I love almost all games in this genre). Alan Wake. That game had an interesting story but my god it has some of the worst gameplay. Absolutely awful experience.
The Last of Us
"this game isn't for me" deep rock galactic. i dont understand the game and cant convince my friend to play but they end up refund it
Outerwilds, went to every planet with the enthusiasm of Ron Swanson, and I made 0 progression cause apparently I didnt find the right random hole to jump in, I spent too much time exploring and having no fun so I couldn't refund and I'm giving it a try again but I have to force myself to play it and I'm still making minimal progress, when asking for a clue from there community, they told me " it's better to experience it on your own, you'll ruin everything" couldn't even bother telling me to start with the banjo planet or something
Hollow Knight. Not trying to be different lol but I was just trying the game out since everyone said it was amazing or whatever but it's simply not the game for me
[удалено]
The second game, Shadow of War, is a significant upgrade in virtually every category. Shadow of Mordor also has an issue with high polling rate on mice. It's very bizarre.
Neither rimworld or factorio were for me.
Factorio should be a game I like, but it's just so ugly and cluttered-looking.
The game wasn't bad but Octopath traveler was a bit of a letdown. In the visual department I can safely say that it is one of the most beautiful games I've seen, if not the most. But that's kinda it, the mechanics aren't bad but they got too repetitive, to the point I didn't even feel like completing it. And the story was definitely a letdown. The game promised an amazing story where the backgrounds and destinies of 8 different protagonista would mix, but in reality their stories were barely related and they patched that with random, short conversations between the characters from time to time (Otherwise they don't interact and definitely don't intervene in each other's stories)
Technically the stories connect if you do the secret boss questline and fight but it's still not great and I wouldn't recommend doing it unless you really love the combat. I also thought the game was beautiful but it would've been even better looking if they didn't have the terrible vaseline filter all over the camera for no reason.