Topic: Games You Feel are Overrated

@CanisWolfred I hate fps games, I don't like first person view in general, but I like a lot Doom 2016. I don't like realistic games so I don't like games about war, espionage and so on and I have the feeling that games like Cod, Battlefield and so on are all the same because I don't like them, but Doom is very cool and a lot of fun. Doom have always had that fantasy, gothic and fun feeling to it.
I don't like to be scared but I like a lot both Eternal darkness and the first Alone in the dark. They weren't scary imho. I have read many Lovecraft books and I like them a lot so for me it was like... I felt right at home playing those games. I liked a lot the first Silent hill game too but I have to say that was extremely scary, I played it almost entirely with the volume very low but... I was scared, but exploring that town was so intriguing that I just couldn't stop playing the game lol

Super Mario 64. Controls terribly, camera is bad and it's not pleasant to look at at all. Revolutionary for its time, sure, but not a good experience today.

Nah. Even if I agreed with you about the quality of the game, it is waaaaaaaaaay too influential and important a game to be avoided.

That reminds me I haven't beaten OoT this year yet. Brb gonna start a new file.

Why the Switch version specifically? If you'd just said Mario Kart 8, I'd get it, as Mario Kart isn't necessarily for everyone (though it's as close as you're going to get).

Crash Bandicoot. Limited, frustrating, clunky bland game with a generic loony toon mascot character.

Mario Kart 64. It is an ok game, but i don't think it has particularly aged well.

Monster Hunter series. Controls are slow and clunky, attacks don't seem to do much damage, lousy single player.

Oh no do go on.

In the case of this thread, the textier the wall, the better.

I'm going to prepare a 20-page essay on BOTW in that case

I would definitely get the popcorn out for that one!

GTA.

Perhaps it's my age, and I'm tiring of the series in general. Perhaps it's generic twaddle hyped by the name alone. Either way, yeah. I just don't get it.

Yes. All of this. The touchy controls, awful sound, terrible combat, visiting the same worlds over and over again... No very fun for me, even back in the day.

Another one is Gravity Rush. Terrible gameplay. Atrocious combat. All style, no substance. Mediocre at best.

I think you played the wrong game, and since when is Gravity Rush overrated?

Well, he didn't say it was overrated, and this thread is about games that aren't as good as people say. Gravity Rush is one of my favorite games of all time, but I'll admit that the gravity movement and combat are difficult to figure out, and far from intuitive. If Monster Hunter hadn't proved to me that mastering a difficult control scheme was totally worth it by the time I played it, I'm not sure I would've liked it as much as I did. The story is also blatantly obtuse. It's not so much a story as it is a series of visual experiences that evoke emotions, but only barely tied together in a meaningful way. It's certainly the weakest part of the game. I always felt it tied into the "rush" part of the game - it goes by fast and might seem like a blur, but it leaves me with a sense of exhiliration and a need to dive in and experience it all over again. I guess you could compare it to a good rollercoaster - it may not be everyone's thing, but those who love it can't get enough of it.

So it's better than 95% of video game stories because it actually made you feel something, anything?

@Snaplocket Whoa whoa whoa there buddy! Comparing Devil May Cry 3 to its successors still requires some context. It's clunky compared to what exactly? There are literally 3 other games that are even remotely as deep and fast-paced in the Hack 'n' slash genre, and those are the ones you're comparing it to! Not to mention I don't recall any other action game before DMC3 having multiple combat styles (most would go for completely different characters. DMC3 had both!), so while it's regrettable that they didn't offer the ability to switch between them on the fly, it's not like they had anything else to really go off of. I mean, maybe Viewtiful Joe, whose developer now works alongside DMC's original director? But that was 2D...

I'm not trying to invalidate your criticisms, but they really come off as nitpicks. At the very least, it's clearly in the same tier as the others, and unless you want to argue that the legions of God War and Dynasty Warriors clones are better games, I don't think you've really said anything that makes it seem any worse than the praise it's gotten - after all, "not as good as Bayonetta or DMC4 pretty much sums up almost the every other action game I've played at this point. Ninja Gaiden Black is #5 on the extremely tiny peak of a mountainous genre. It's still a long way to the bottom.

Actually, I could say this about a lot of the games people have said were "terrible" - I think you guys are blowing things out of proprtion, especially in a thread like this. I find it very hard to believe that games like Super Mario 64 are some of the worst games of their kind, especially after some of the suff I've played even recently. Seriously, I just want to sit some of you guys down and force you to play Yooka-Laylee, at least the first week version I suffered through, for over 10 hours, and see if you still can tell me Super Mario 64 still has a "terrible" camera. Or play through The Last Tinker and tell me Super Mario 64's controls are sloppy. Or even play through ****ing Knack and tell me that anything in it is more memorable, well-designed, and visually appealing than 1996's Super Mario 64! Seriously, I would be amazed by any of that. There's a lot of terrible games out there, and as well as a lot of sub-par games that only barely have anything going for them, and I think it would do us all a world of good to keep that in mind when we're critical about something, especially games that get a ton of praise.

Granted, I'm still very glad I've been seeing more mature discussion here than similar threads we've had in the past, where everyone seemed to be in a competing to see how could make the most mountains out of molehills. I just hope we can keep it that way.

@CanisWolfred Yooka Laylee, even at its unpatched worst, still had a better camera than SM64. That has to one of the clunkiest and most infuriating games ever made, even if it was revolutionary at the time.

Mario 64 just gets a pass because there was nothing to even compare it to when it first came out, whereas Yooka Laylee has no excuse for its flaws.

@Snaplocket Right. Like I said, SM64 had an excuse, while Y-L doesn't. And future 3D Mario games VASTLY improved the in-game camera.

But the camera in SM64 is still worse than in almost any other game I've ever played.

I just don't see that. I must've spent at least 2 hours on the first boss in Yooka-Laylee just because the controls and camera basically made it impossible. At the very least, I can firmly say that Super Mario 64's levels were designed to accomodate for its camera, with the main exception of Rainbow Road - I had too many complaints about that level to count, though, and bad camera angles are just one of them. I certainly don't remember having any issues when I played the N64 version, and I played the NDS version first and was actively comparing the two! It always seemed to point to where I needed it to, and the only times it ever seemed to screw up was when I was trying to look for/do stuff I wasn't really supposed to e.g. go to places that I wasn't sure if I could, or jump leaps that I was probably not gonna make, or to see if there was more coins or 1-ups hidden away in places I couldn't see, which instead explained why I couldn't see them - they weren't there. There was nothing there. I wasted a 1-up.

But Yooka-Laylee? Even when the game was practically showing me what to do, I could not replicated, because absolutely everything about that game's design was sloppy! The controls, the levels, the camera - it's like they were trying to port a failed Banjo-Threeie to an engine they had never used before, while shoehorning in elements and characters that had nothing to do with what they originall designed, so in the end, nothing ever felt right or worked the way it was supposed to.