Most disappointing game?

Schwoebli · Post by **Schwoebli** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:13 pm

i was joking.

here the offical site:
http://www.sacred-game.de

it's kinda like diablo(2) but it is buggy as hell (sometimes you can't finish quests, character disappears and your own summonings are attacking friendly characters. just to name a few major bugs.

)

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon Mar 15, 2004 4:35 pm

So it's a buggy non-RPG action title? Sounds...enticing.

Stilgar · Post by **Stilgar** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 6:15 am

Another title (well sort of)
Age of wonders: Shadow Magic.

Dont get me wrong it's one of the best games I ever played. Only it should have been released as an expensionset on AoW2.
It adds a few new units, a few new building and a few new races.

The interface is hardly changed, and the engine is the same. It would be a GREAT expension. But as a sequel it's only avarage.

Luis Antonio · Post by **Luis Antonio** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 6:32 am

Forgot this one...

Ladies, Gentleman and Godlings:

I've forgot to post this one back there:

DAIKATANA.

Man, this is the worst nightmare for a first person shooter player.

Old engine, that was stable, transformed i n a pit of corruption, wich locked out every 5 times I'd play, with some average graphics (they've promissed to make such a good game to see *sigh*) and bugs that still make my hair fall from my head.
I've never finished the game because of the party sistem, buggy, that caused them sidekicks to get lost on the last stages of the game, without recovering. And worst, a jump your way through game, in a First person shooter. *bleargh*. Disgusting.

And I've paid 70 bucks for the game, wich two month later was being sold for mere 25.

God, I hate this game.

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 4:42 pm

Gabe and Tycho warned me about DAIKATANA a long time ago.

Most dissapointing game would probably go to Command and Conquer - Red Alert. I beat the game in such a short time, the cut scenes wore horrible and well it wasn't much of an improvement over the first.

I liked Kotor ya bastards.

Also I would have to say Beavis and Butthead for the PC let me down.

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 4:45 pm

I kind've liked Red Alert, but thats for the alternate world it presented to us, and how it tied in Kane

IT was Red Alert 2 I wasn't very fond of.

As for Daikatana, well, just goes to show what faith in Romero led to...

Coot · Post by **Coot** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 2:55 am

I'm surprised no one mentioned IWD2.

Stilgar · Post by **Stilgar** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 3:29 am

What's wrong with IWD2?

Luis Antonio · Post by **Luis Antonio** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:24 am

Originally posted by Stilgar
What's wrong with IWD2?

AD&D 3RD EDITION

Stilgar · Post by **Stilgar** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:29 am

Kind of like the third edition rules. Somehow it let's you personalize your character more. The only thing I dont like is the multiclassing. It's very hard not to overpower it and stick with rollplaying (I dont play P&P D&D (jet) so I dont know how it is there)

I dont think 3rd editionis an improvement, it's an whole other way of playing. But have to admit I liked second edition better, cause of the third edition multiclassing.

Luis Antonio · Post by **Luis Antonio** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:33 am

@Stilgar:
I do agree. The challenge of building a good character at the beggining was lost. You could change it. I used (and do) play with a barbarian druid or barbarian bard, for spells and rage. And I gave up the game cause it was not appealing to me when I could enrage and cast 'magic missile'.

Coot · Post by **Coot** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 6:52 am

Originally posted by Stilgar
What's wrong with IWD2?

It was very much the same: hack 'n slash, and not at all in a interesting way. The story didn't grab me at all and neither did the puzzles.
It was disappointing because Bioware should have - and could have - made a better game; just look at BG, PS:T and even IWD1. I suspect they wanted to make a quick buck.
All of this is just my opinion of course... other people seem to like the game, if only for the 3e rules.

Stilgar · Post by **Stilgar** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 7:09 am

IWD(2) Isnt a Bioware game. But apart from that.
If you know what to expect (no BG, and no PST) it's a good game.

If you expect the best rollplaying experience ever. Well then you have a problem.

Luis Antonio · Post by **Luis Antonio** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 7:11 am

Stilgar, I think you will agree with me that an RPG in a Hack and Slash your Way to Victory is not an RPG, is an adventure game.

And for me, genesi's Sonic was the best adventure game I've played.

Moonbiter · Post by **Moonbiter** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 7:43 am

IWD2 was bad, because the 3rd Ed D&D rules hadn't been evolved yet, so they really aren't in the game except as a test hybrid.
I don't understand the marketing minds of some people. They could have put out endless expansion packs for the original Baldur's Gate games, buliding and expanding that world, instead they give us Icewind Dale. I mean.... What's up with that?

Nobody has mentioned Return To Krondor. *urgh*

I get heartburn just thinking about it. Was that ever a stinker.

Oh, and I'm probably offend someone, but King's Quest 5 anyone?
"Hit the flower with the donkey to open the purple couch and find the bucket of wax to grease the leaves of oak tree and release the sacred meatball..."

I just looooove stuff like that.....

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 7:58 am

Originally posted by Moonbiter
I don't understand the marketing minds of some people. They could have put out endless expansion packs for the original Baldur's Gate games, buliding and expanding that world, instead they give us Icewind Dale. I mean.... What's up with that?

The BG games were owned and created by Bioware, who sold distribution rights to Interplay. The IWD series was owned by Interplay, and created by a subsidiary of theirs, Black Isle Studios.

Luis Antonio · Post by **Luis Antonio** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:03 am

Originally posted by fable
The BG games were owned and created by Bioware, who sold distribution rights to Interplay. The IWD series was owned by Interplay, and created by a subsidiary of theirs, Black Isle Studios.

But his question makes some sense, since BG was also produced by BIsle and Wizards of the coast... There was some team work there, and Marketing should be integrated for optimal performance.

Coot · Post by **Coot** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:05 am

Originally posted by Stilgar
IWD(2) Isnt a Bioware game.

Uh... yeah. I knew that. Just testing.

But still, I didn't like the game.

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:28 am

Originally posted by Luis Antonio
But his question makes some sense, since BG was also produced by BIsle and Wizards of the coast... There was some team work there, and Marketing should be integrated for optimal performance.

Perhaps I'm missing what you're saying. Marketing was integrated with the BG series' distribution. If you're suggesting that Interplay should have spent its money on a third BG rather than a second IWD, the costs were exceptionally lower for the latter: it was done in-house, it was far less ambitious as a product, and it required less time to turnaround.

Luis Antonio · Post by **Luis Antonio** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:37 am

Originally posted by fable
If you're suggesting that Interplay should have spent its money on a third BG rather than a second IWD, the costs were exceptionally lower for the latter: it was done in-house, it was far less ambitious as a product, and it required less time to turnaround.

No, thats not what I meant, at least not at all.

I dont mean that IWD should be as BG, nor a third BG series game. BG has been finished at the right time- at the top. Is a mith.

But IWD should have been a little bit better explored in therms of focusing the story and not disappointing the standard BG player - the one who seeks excitement through adventure, combat and storyline. (keeping the client happe)

And yes, it is a far less ambitious program, for sure. But could be better, aye?