Reviews are often wrong: Games you wish you hadn't gotten

Ever done extensive research on a game to decide whether or not you'd like it, and then when you finally got it it turned out everything you learned was wrong (For you at least).

I ended up buying one or two games I've not really cared for simply because everyone and thier dog raved about it, except for the obvious biases. I was interested, I looked at the different reviews, and made the mistake of believing them.

One of those games for me was Guild Wars. It doesn't seem too bad, but the lag on both server side and my own was enough for me to delete it off my hardrive and frowningly put it on my shelf as a wasted $50.
Obvlously the WoW players said it sucked, but most of the reviews I read made it sound awesome - none of them seemed to mention the nearly game breaking problems it has; I guess some people are more willing to put up with it than I am.

What games have you gotten that turned out to be duds even though the rest of the world seems to think it's the greatest thing ever?



(In speaking of World of Warcraft; I wish I had never touched that game.)

Panzer Dragoon Orta

It was a quality game...just not my thing, but every website swore by it.

--Dave

One of those games for me was Guild Wars. It doesn't seem too bad, but the lag on both server side and my own was enough for me to delete it off my hardrive and frowningly put it on my shelf as a wasted $50.
Obvlously the WoW players said it sucked, but most of the reviews I read made it sound awesome - none of them seemed to mention the nearly game breaking problems it has; I guess some people are more willing to put up with it than I am.

mstc_Q

In two years, I've only had massive lag problems during festivals, and even then it's bareable - perhaps there's a problem with your firewall?

As for me, there aren't many highly reviewed games that I regretted buying.
Even Oblivion (which was totally disappointing) didn't feel like a complete waste of money.

Oblivion. I hated it on the 360. I managed to borrow the PC version from a friend of mine, gonna give it another chance with Mods, as people say it is ridiculously better with Mods installed. Lets see how this goes ..

But the 360 version was a waste of money.

[QUOTE="mstc_Q"]

One of those games for me was Guild Wars. It doesn't seem too bad, but the lag on both server side and my own was enough for me to delete it off my hardrive and frowningly put it on my shelf as a wasted $50.
Obvlously the WoW players said it sucked, but most of the reviews I read made it sound awesome - none of them seemed to mention the nearly game breaking problems it has; I guess some people are more willing to put up with it than I am.

Planeforger

In two years, I've only had massive lag problems during festivals, and even then it's bareable - perhaps there's a problem with your firewall?

As for me, there aren't many highly reviewed games that I regretted buying.
Even Oblivion (which was totally disappointing) didn't feel like a complete waste of money.

It could be the computer I was playing it on, but in either case it felt a little half baked. Besides, I didn't feel like I had that much control over my character either. I just didn't like it.

If I can't enjoy the game for more than a quarter of it, then I consider it a failure. In Guild Wars, I only got to level 8 before I was sick of it. It feels like a slowed down 3-D Diablo game without the cool jump attacks or knockback abilities; that might be why some people like it, but it's not my cup of tea.

I don't think there's ever been a game that I've been disappointed with from the review scores. I thought Eternal Sonata would be one of them as I didn't really enjoy it to begin with but when I got towards the end it suddenly turned awesome.Robot_Vampire

field commander or whatever it's called. i bought it because it was getting reviews over 8 etc with everyone saying it was as good as advance wars with better graphics etc. never have i played anything as lifeless and downright awful. it's nothing but a bad clone of advance wars with all the fun sucked out. what a waste of good money.bugsonglass

Shame, I really liked that one, especially the multiplayer. My big recent disappointment would have to be The Witcher. It's a decent game, but the combat system feels so random.

Oblivion, Shadow of the Colossus, Final Fantasy XIICanvas_Of_Flesh

SOTC didn't get good reviews... while a poor imitation of it got great reviews for nothing! And that game is...

Assassins Creed, I was going to just rent it but decided to buy it after reviews, in particular the GS review. Then it turned out to be a highly repetitive, boring adventure gamefenwickhotmail

Nothing bugged me more than 1up review when they said this is a game which you'll remember for years... I couldn't bear playing it for two hours!

Resident Evil Code Veronica. It got great reviews by GS and users alike. I played it almost all the way through and seriously wondered if the worlds most elaborate prank was pulled on me. Completely awful.garey017

Lol, well, my friends and I will rent horror movies to make fun of them all the time (Like Darkness Falls; geeze what a crappy movie, but it's great with the right group.)
Code Veronica is kind of like that. You can't help but laugh at Steve and Alfred.

http://vgp.legendaryfrog.com/movies_refecvp1_w.php

(I don't normally like Legendary Frog btw.)

The important thing for some people to remember is that reviews are done by regular gamers with their own fallible opinions. Just because you don't like a games doesn't mean it is bad, or great if you do like it.

The way to look at reviews is to find out what bugged the reviewer about the game and if it is something that would bug you then its obviously not for you. For example, every assasins creed review said its mission structure was repetitive but i could look past that cause i absolutly love the free running, that alone nearly made it my game of the year.

Sorry for the mini rant but i don't like all reviewers tarred with the same corporate shill brush

The way to look at reviews is to find out what bugged the reviewer about the game and if it is something that would bug you then its obviously not for you. For example, every assasins creed review said its mission structure was repetitive but i could look past that cause i absolutly love the free running, that alone nearly made it my game of the year.

erc500

That's a good piece of advice. Different people like different genres, so the person giving the review will most likely be swayed one way or the other by how the like the genre in general. For example, 2 games that received coveted perfect 10 scores on GS, T.H. Pro Skater 3 (PS2) and Soul Caliber (DC) I played and just wasn't crazy about, because I'm just not into fighting games or skating games. On the contrary, some adventure games get crappy scores and I like them because even the crappiest adventure game will give me some entertainment.

Metroid Prime 1 & 2. So bad/boring they literally made me sick. The only Metroid games that are any good are the old ones, seriously.

The important thing for some people to remember is that reviews are done by regular gamers with their own fallible opinions. Just because you don't like a games doesn't mean it is bad, or great if you do like it.

The way to look at reviews is to find out what bugged the reviewer about the game and if it is something that would bug you then its obviously not for you. For example, every assasins creed review said its mission structure was repetitive but i could look past that cause i absolutly love the free running, that alone nearly made it my game of the year.

Sorry for the mini rant but i don't like all reviewers tarred with the same corporate shill brush

erc500

I like Zero Punctuation, he hates everything.

I know what you're saying, but a professional review should be objective. I've seen good reviews and bad ones on this site, but this site in particular has been the best for objectivity - for the most part.

Sometimes with games like World of Warcraft stinking up the place, I think that people forget that games are supposed to be fun, and when you are objectively judging a game for a review, anything that isn't fun should hurt its score.
I agree with you though, some people just find that sort of repetitive thing - for some reason - to be fun.

Metroid Prime 1 & 2. So bad/boring they literally made me sick. The only Metroid games that are any good are the old ones, seriously.

AwakenedMaster

Ha, same as me, unfortunately. Too much backtracking and just borng gameplay

Space Bunnies Must Die!

Never again!!!

I thought I would like Halo 3, but I didn't so I just spent $60 on a game that I traded in a few days later and lost half of my money. Nothing really wrong with the game it just couldn't hold my interest for very long and the multi-player wasn't what I hoped it would be.

And my second game is actually a tie, consisting of numerous sports games that were a waste of time and money since they didn't change hardly anything from the previous year's version.

Halo 3, the reviews made it sound like a gold-plated gift from god, but it turned out to be a run of the mill shooter with a structure similar to a Michael Bay movie: big budget, big explosions, little substance.aerman176

All halo games are terribly overrated, along with COD4. Halo 1 was at least a bit more deserving, but 2 and 3? It is insane such an average series can sell so much and be so popular. More proof popularity does not always mean quality.

I didn't like Burnout Paradise nearly as much as everyone else. :? That game's a 7 in my book.

advance wars 1 for the gba this game suckspatriots2871

It actually very rare where I'll end being disappointed with a game I purchase. Usually all the big games I get live up to the reviews that I read. The last time I remember questioning my purchase of a game was when GTA: San Andres was released for the PS2. I played it for about 30 hours and just couldn't get into it. At least when I traded it in I got $35 credit for it so it wasn't a total loss.Archangel3371

You played for 30 HOURS and couldn't get into it?? Wow, you're persistent. How long would you have played if you COULD get into it?

[QUOTE="Archangel3371"]It actually very rare where I'll end being disappointed with a game I purchase. Usually all the big games I get live up to the reviews that I read. The last time I remember questioning my purchase of a game was when GTA: San Andres was released for the PS2. I played it for about 30 hours and just couldn't get into it. At least when I traded it in I got $35 credit for it so it wasn't a total loss.garey017

You played for 30 HOURS and couldn't get into it?? Wow, you're persistent. How long would you have played if you COULD get into it?

I would have definately played alot longer since it did look to be a very large game with alot of things to do. Most of those 30 hours was spent just driving around, checking out the scenery in the game, and listening to the radio.

I have discovered a startling and unusual fact from these responses.

...

...

...

...

...

People's opinions.... they differ.

I have discovered a startling and unusual fact from these responses.

...

...

...

...

...

People's opinions.... they differ.

Oilers99

Whoa, I think you may be onto something here! (seriously, if only other people realized this)

But personally, I tend to only use reviews for games I am not sure about. I don't need a review to tell me I want Lost Odyssey when I get a 360 someday. It could of scored a 1.0 on GS for all I care.

Kingdom Hearts (we two just didn't click...)

Baten Kaitos (where I learned that I hate card-based RPGs)

Tales of Symphonia (not a fan o anime, and i dont wanna make fake sandiwches. I want REAL sandwiches, dag gummit!)

Kid Icarus (pre-review: Oh, Kid Icarus is so good, oh I gotsta get it! post-review: Man, doesnt it suck without passwords? YES)

SMB3 (my brother's fault; I had the GBA version but he DLed the VC version behind my back. Grrr)

Vista (Half-Life 2 + a new laptop that has Vista pre-loaded = MASSIVE FRAMERATE ISSUES)

Use

Metacritic.com

It averages critic reviews from hundreds of sources, so you get the complete consensus.

never use 1,2 or even 5 reviews.

Kingdom Hearts II... I loved Kingdom Hearts, and the combat is more fun in 2, but apparently they fired the level and plot designers; Move from rectangular room to rectangular room, no hidden treasure, no interesting anything. The plot was really just the disney movies over again, instead of the original integrated half movie half original plots from the first.

Mario Galaxy was fine (would've waited to pay $25 for it or something). In Mario 64 and Sunshine, part of the fun was the exploration of the levels to find the specific star/shine that you're hunting. In Sunshine there were hidden shines that you had to look for (maybe in 64 too? I don't remember). There was also a sometimes-difficult 100-coin star/shine. In Galaxy, there is a "hidden" star, which is always really really easy to find. I had to search for exactly one hidden star. Also, almost all of the levels are completely linear because of the "planet-to-planet" structure. The star bits mechanics felt tacked on and worthless. The coins were only useful to get lives. To unlock the final star you must beat the exact same game twice in a row. Beyond the gravity gimmick, the only good upgrade that I saw was the addition of the challenge comets.

In recent memory:

The Witcher- The game barely runs on Vista, and yet it (and its Games for Windows badge) got an 8.5?

Bioshock- It was good, but it would have been more fun (and not to mention cheaper) to just play System Shock 2 again.

Oblivion- It doesn't count as 200+ hours of gameplay when the majority of the game is rehashed fetch quests, at least not in my book.

Call of Duty 4- The gameplay hasn't been significantly updated since MoH:AA (CoD's granddaddy), and the multiplayer can be painful at times due to some questionable gameplay decisions and glitches.

Suikoden III is one that always comes to mind. It received rave reviews from many sites and Gamespot even gave it a 9.1, which would make you think that the game overcomes any sort of JRPG cliches and delivers a solid experience that even people who aren't hardcore RPG fans would enjoy.

They mention its flaws, but everyone downplayed them. Awful battle system, terrible graphics, lame to nonexistent music, sound effects from an 80 year old foley artist with a broken microphone, and a fairly plodding story that gets sort of interesting as you progress. Yet I was under the impression that the story was so utterly amazing that it let you forgive its other flaws, or simply that the other flaws weren't huge. It's for hardcore JRPG fans only, which makes me wonder why it received such high scores.

As for Guild Wars...I've never had any lag issues and level 8 is not even close to a quarter of the game. By the time you hit level 20 you may be around a quarter through what it has to offer, since the game's focus is not on leveling. It's probably the one thing that drives regular MMORPG players nuts, since the game ignores level grinding and grinding for better items, since they don't really exist.