What's the worst game of this decade in your opinion?

37 minutes ago, seed said:

^ You know, parts of that huge wall of text remind me of some disturbingly childish and entitled behavior I have seen elsewhere.

 

Basically, how some people enjoyed NFS: Payback. A small but extremely vocal group proceeded to directly attack the people who genuinely enjoyed the game and "how the state of the franchise was so dire because of people who bought junk like that". Yeah, how do people fucking dare to enjoy something someone else does not, we should order their execution.

 

By the way, no, this was NOT supposed to be directed to any participant to this discussion, it's just something that came to my mind and I am glad no one is resorting to childish behavior and calling people who enjoyed something they did not "morons" or much worse. I'm glad we can all agree to disagree when that's the case :) .

 

 

That's actually not a good comparison.

 

I remember reading that Romero expressed disappointment and disapproval for that ad, which was the result of the poor thinking of marketing team I think? That ad was never supposed to exist, and he didn't come up with the idea either.

Certainly. I am not going to call anyone who dislikes a Bioshock or an Alien moronic - Because that's their perjorative. However, i am going to raise a stink if you are going to give such titles absolute markers such as ''Worst game of the decade'' and ''Geniunely a bad product''.

As a relative marker, Both games have their own flaws. But calling them absolutely the worst of a decade, that's just hyperbole, honestly.

Regarding the comparison: I agree, its not the best of comparisons. I was just trying to strengthen the impression that Orion's development woes can be traced back to the mind of a single developer whose morals aren't the same as the vast amount of developers in this industry.

4 minutes ago, hybridial said:

 

They are bad products. Anyone who says they aren't is wrong. If you don't agree, fine, but I don't care, because you are wrong.

 

I am glad that you chose to strengthen your argument with an absolute standpoint: ''They are wrong, because i say they are. And you say they aren't, so you are wrong.''

That's both not conductive to the discussion and it would make a scene if you now would claim objectivity because of it. So i hope you won't.

However if we're just getting into those games being bad, oh yeah, oh yeah they're bad, and believe it or not

I'm not gonna be very perturbed by a random guy on the internet saying my judgements are invalid without giving a single reason for it. A lot of people like Twilight, people often like trash. And hell on Infinite at least I'm far from the only person who thinks its not good at the very least.

Except i gave a list of geniunely (as in, objectively) bad games and based on that i called your point to the stand. I also argued that a game like BI may not play up to your expectations based on the prior entries, and is thus ''disappointing''. Which is a perfectly valid stance to have. But to then go on and say its ''the worst game of the decade'', that is an absolute marker, not a relative one.

This is why i presented a list of geniunely bad games. To highlight that disappointment in a game does not objectively mean the game is the worst in 10 years. Hence hyperbole and a you thing. Because you subjectively feel the game is the worst - That does not mean it objectively is.

I'm only responding to you @Redneckerz with the same level of respect you're treating me, ie not very much, as I feel your arguments have been dismissive and don't even try to engage with the substance of the things I've said. 

But I consider this forum to be a happy place so rather than continue down that road I want to ask you this. My position is what it is with a lot of consideration, it doesn't come from "oh, I just dislike them". And as I said game of the decade is fluff but the real thing is my belief in them being bad because I do, 100% believe that and I gave, in relatively brief fashion admittedly, some of my reasons for that. If you want to discuss it more, respectfully, I'm okay with that, but I'd rather have a discussion about it with mutual respect for our positions than a childish argument. So I'll say sorry for the above comment, and I'd like to hear what you liked about the two games, or if not that what about them makes you think they're not bad products. All I ask is you give a bit more thought to what I have to say to which I can go into more detail if you want. 

26 minutes ago, hybridial said:

I'm only responding to you @Redneckerz with the same level of respect you're treating me, ie not very much, as I feel your arguments have been dismissive and don't even try to engage with the substance of the things I've said. 

 

But I consider this forum to be a happy place so rather than continue down that road I want to ask you this. My position is what it is with a lot of consideration, it doesn't come from "oh, I just dislike them". And as I said game of the decade is fluff but the real thing is my belief in them being bad because I do, 100% believe that and I gave, in relatively brief fashion admittedly, some of my reasons for that. If you want to discuss it more, respectfully, I'm okay with that, but I'd rather have a discussion about it with mutual respect for our positions than a childish argument. So I'll say sorry for the above comment, and I'd like to hear what you liked about the two games, or if not that what about them makes you think they're not bad products. All I ask is you give a bit more thought to what I have to say to which I can go into more detail if you want. 

It is unfortunate that you feel that way. I do try to recognize your POV and respect how you arrive at your conclusion. My port of call is simply explaining that its a subjective conclusion, and that calling it as strongly as you do is akin to hyperbole, because well, that's what it is.

Saying its a you problem is not disrespectful in intent: It is said because its your own, subjective view over a game, not that its a geniunely bad title. You may believe its the worst game of the decade, but that does not mean it objectively is. This is what i am trying to get across, and why a definitive marker with such severity is a bad omen.

Look at the list of games i have produced. What do you think? You feel Bioshock on a objective level can be placed inbetween them?

I will say that Bioshock Infinite definitely played up to host a story that is more philosophical in nature and at times, political aswell. I do not want to envoke Gamergate here, but i do remember that the background of Infinite was mentioned as an example of how titles try to depict political colour. Regardless of how one feels about that commentary, it can be said that Infinite went astray from its predecessors. In a way that was a necessity because another underwater Bioshock may have felt ''samey''. But the more political tones of the game could have been more subdued. As a philosophical narrative, Infinite is an interesting case, but if the game would have wanted to share that in full, it should have been more puzzle like, such as The Talos Principle or even The Stanley Parable.

These mechanisms may or may not have been executed less flawlessly, but at the same time Infinite could be respected for attempting to put such topics in a rather mainstream videogame. Certainly the game was recognized for putting it out there, so by that standard, i would not argue that the game is objectively bad. But subjectively, so on a person per person basis, it might have been a disappointment, for which i gave one possible reason in the alinea above.

A friend of mine did once talk about the concept of how things are judged in whether they are bad or good, and that there are a few categories of that. There's technical competence, there's artistic competence, and of course there's the surrounding factors which will always cloud objectivity to a degree. And talking about things that are clearly technically incompetent, which for games mean broken low effort pieces of trash, just isn't very interesting, as such pieces are seen for what they are right away and are quickly forgotten. More interesting are games that pass that level of technical competence but still completely fail at what they intended to do. 

What I will give A:I and B:I is that to a certain extent they are technically competent. Except in games design. And they are artistically incompetent, about as artistically incompetent as one can get. Their stories inherently don't work, they have multiple logical fallacies and plot holes, and in both cases have endings which beggar belief. I'm not interested in the fact that Infinite just brought up some philosophical or political points because I believe I said exactly this in the Steam review for the game I made right after playing it, it doesn't say anything. It doesn't do anything with any of that stuff. From a writing perspective it's pretense, and that is something I genuinely loathe. Maybe its because I'm not the average person who turns on a game, I don't look to make judgements that way but I read a lot, I love stories, and what I got here offended me.  Like as a game I would call Bioshock Infinite inept but as a story experience I call it disgusting. 

Alien isolation is more simple than that, its just not a particularly good story, but then nothing in the Aliens series has been since Aliens. If the game itself had worked it'd be more forgiveable, but as a game it doesn't work at all, unless your idea of a good game is 90% padding and 10% a badly made version of a stalker horror game. I acknowledge that the game had a tonne of effort put into its fluff, into the visuals and the style of it, and that's cool... but you guys forgot to make a game. And that is a pretty major problem. 

Take your pick from FNAF and the metric shit-ton of half-assed sequels / spinoffs it spawned. Nothing fun about clicking, waiting, clicking, waiting, hoping RNG decides to not screw you sideways and spare your eardrums the sound of nails on a chalkboard.

11 minutes ago, hybridial said:

A friend of mine did once talk about the concept of how things are judged in whether they are bad or good, and that there are a few categories of that. There's technical competence, there's artistic competence, and of course there's the surrounding factors which will always cloud objectivity to a degree. And talking about things that are clearly technically incompetent, which for games mean broken low effort pieces of trash, just isn't very interesting, as such pieces are seen for what they are right away and are quickly forgotten. More interesting are games that pass that level of technical competence but still completely fail at what they intended to do. 

 

What I will give A:I and B:I is that to a certain extent they are technically competent. Except in games design. And they are artistically incompetent, about as artistically incompetent as one can get. Their stories inherently don't work, they have multiple logical fallacies and plot holes, and in both cases have endings which beggar belief. I'm not interested in the fact that Infinite just brought up some philosophical or political points because I believe I said exactly this in the Steam review for the game I made right after playing it, it doesn't say anything. It doesn't do anything with any of that stuff. From a writing perspective it's pretense, and that is something I genuinely loathe. Maybe its because I'm not the average person who turns on a game, I don't look to make judgements that way but I read a lot, I love stories, and what I got here offended me.  Like as a game I would call Bioshock Infinite inept but as a story experience I call it disgusting. 

 

Alien isolation is more simple than that, its just not a particularly good story, but then nothing in the Aliens series has been since Aliens. If the game itself had worked it'd be more forgiveable, but as a game it doesn't work at all, unless your idea of a good game is 90% padding and 10% a badly made version of a stalker horror game. I acknowledge that the game had a tonne of effort put into its fluff, into the visuals and the style of it, and that's cool... but you guys forgot to make a game. And that is a pretty major problem. 

 

Compare this detailed analysis with your first two contributions:

17 hours ago, hybridial said:

Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock Infinite. 

....

 

Bioshock Infinite.    

17 hours ago, hybridial said:

 

It is an extremely boring game, but thats considering only the gameplay. If you actually consider the story, its reprehensible, its just most people probably do the sane thing and not think about it.

 

I unfortunately want to be a writer more than anything, its my calling and that means I have certain sensibilities and I think about things and that game was so botched that I just have such sheer disdain for it.

 

Alien Isolation might be a runner up because when a AAA horror game is such a complete joke that's objectively worse in every way than a SNES horror game (Clock Tower) then that's pretty bad. And it was intended to be that way, at least Colonial Marines only failed due to the poor execution, and to me thats worrying because it seems most people struggled to see through how shallow and broken it was. 

Can you see the difference?

Well I did go more into detail in following posts in my defence, but fair enough. :D

(I don't think you can be the worst game of the decade just by being terrible, or by spawning a competitive genre or harmless subculture that other people don't approve of; I think it has to either be attempting to reverse what's good about games and be big budget enough to succeed or it should be repellant to you and those around you!)

on a personal level I couldn't stand Kingdom Come: Deliverance - its monarchy fandom and attempts to define manliness felt awful, it made me think rpgcodex had designed a game. I kinda hope realistic fantasy grimness goes away too. we all know who gets off on these miserable scenarios.

on a fan-of-gaming level I thought Terminator: Resistance stood out as terrible - it seemed like it was trying to push open world first-person rpglite stuff back in the direction of the previous decade.

1 minute ago, yakfak said:

on a personal level I couldn't stand Kingdom Come: Deliverance - its monarchy fandom and attempts to define manliness felt awful, it made me think rpgcodex had designed a game. I kinda hope realistic fantasy grimness goes away too. we all know who gets off on these miserable scenarios.

I haven't played the game at all but this is an interesting observation about it. 

Though that said I do like that sub genre of fantasy to an extent, and I think you're being a little unfair by saying that like all of that only applies to one way of thinking. I've read plenty books in that sub genre that are... well I'll say reflective, as I think other words that come to mind are buzz words that are fast losing their meaning. 

Like one I'm reading right now is The Traitor God by Cameron Johnston which is a lot like a fantasy noir, and in terms of its themes its like most noir fiction I've come across, which is generally critical of a lot of the injustices in life. Gritty fantasy I think has a purpose that is best exemplified in personal stories, I kind of prefer that sort of thing to something like Lord of the Rings, which well, was a very conservative work. 

5 hours ago, Phobus said:

Like, loads of people don't like DNF, but aside from the turret sections I enjoyed it quite a lot, and the DLC, which I tried last year and ended up beating in just two long sittings, is excellent (probably because there's no turret section!).

I agree with this. I was looking forward to DNF but had very low expectations as I knew this wouldn't be a super-mega-kickass-it has Duke, so it must be good-GOTY material as most people thought it would be after more than a decade of development hell.

Definitely not the worst game of the decade contender. It had Duke's personality, weapons, enemies & memorable map design that had more than two colors slapped to it. Hell, the section where you get shrunk & you fight a regular enemy as a boss, was very cool.

Of course it was plagued by, at the time, standard CoD mechanics, like regen health, two weapon limit (later updated to four), sprinting that makes Duke pant faster than an obese man taking one step in a day & turret sections (the worst one is at the Duke's burger).

DLC was great too, even better in some areas. The atmosphere at that Burning Bush brothel with music playing in the background was so good. Shocked me legit the first time I was there.

Maximum Carnage.   All that damn marketing, a soundtrack by Green Jellö/Green Jelly, and they botched it.   Really substandard street brawler and they made it only one player.    It might have been $60 brand new.   People that bought it for that must have been really pissed!   At least Acclaim didn't slap an identical version in a 32X cart for $70 which they did do with another otherwise good game that they downgraded a lot from the arcade (WWF Wrestlemania the Arcade Game).

1 hour ago, JustCallMeKaito said:

Take your pick from FNAF and the metric shit-ton of half-assed sequels / spinoffs it spawned. Nothing fun about clicking, waiting, clicking, waiting, hoping RNG decides to not screw you sideways and spare your eardrums the sound of nails on a chalkboard.

Now, I haven't played any of the games, and I know about the fandom's reputation, but it seems to me you are being a bit unfair on your criticisms. First of all, your perspective on the gameplay is overly simplified. You understand that the same "cliclk, wait, click" thing can be said for literally almost, if not all, PC games in existence? And about the randomness factor, again, I haven't played any of the games, but from what I know about the games, it seems there are a lot of visual and audio cues to help protect you from the enemies. And even if it has got some RNG factor, what is the problem? It seperates the players who memorize from the ones that are good.

Tony Hawk Pro Skater 5 

Star Wars Battlefront. What an over-hyped sack of poo.

I suspected that this thread would become "list popular games you dont like" thread, but I'll bite

For me it has to be Duke Nukem Forever or Battlefield: Hardline

5 hours ago, hybridial said:

They are bad products. Anyone who says they aren't is wrong. If you don't agree, fine, but I don't care, because you are wrong. 

 

Nice opinion, here's mine.

I adore Bioshock Infinite, it was a step up Bioshock 1 and 2 gameplay wise though the story may not be as good as the BS1.

Aliens Isolation was one of the best horror games i played in a long while and this is from someone who played RE2 countless times.

But again just like your statement its all an opinion.

13 minutes ago, jazzmaster9 said:

Nice opinion, here's mine.

 

I adore Bioshock Infinite, it was a step up Bioshock 1 and 2 gameplay wise though the story may not be as good as the BS1.

 

Aliens Isolation was one of the best horror games i played in a long while and this is from someone who played RE2 countless times.

 

But again just like your statement its all an opinion.

So here's a question to you; how on earth was Bioshock Infinite's gameplay better than Bioshock 1 and 2s? I wouldn't say it was award winning in those games but at least it felt like a designed whole, where things like Plasmids, the weapon arsenal, the enemies and the various systems in play all had a purpose, and in Infinite they slashed away elements of it, copypasted things without reason, cut down on enemy variance and did nothing to improve things like the AI, and added terrible ideas like weapon carry limits and limited weapon upgrades which just encourage never using most of the arsenal. I do not believe there is a single objective thing in Infinite's favour when it comes to its gameplay, and my opinion has this thing called "Reasons" and I'm pretty interested in hearing yours after that statement. 

As for Alien Isolation, it conned you into thinking there was any substance to the game, but there isn't if you even just peek behind the curtains and actually critique it. And yeah, sorry but though I love RE2, it's not really a game to mention if your trying to flash cred that you know something about horror games. All I'll say is I've played a lot over the years, it was always a genre I was pretty passionately into, and Alien Isolation completely failed in every sense that mattered, and I would posit to you that if you went back and replayed it, it may very well not hold up. Things that lack substance usually don't. 

3 hours ago, NoahRules said:

Tony Hawk Pro Skater 5 

See, now this is an answer that makes sense to me. It's amazing how much that once-beloved series has fallen from grace. 

1 hour ago, hybridial said:

As for Alien Isolation, it conned you into thinking there was any substance to the game, but there isn't if you even just peek behind the curtains and actually critique it. And yeah, sorry but though I love RE2, it's not really a game to mention if your trying to flash cred that you know something about horror games. All I'll say is I've played a lot over the years, it was always a genre I was pretty passionately into, and Alien Isolation completely failed in every sense that mattered, and I would posit to you that if you went back and replayed it, it may very well not hold up. Things that lack substance usually don't. 

 

My good fellow, I implore you not to mistake my humble request as an attempt to denigrate your splendour or boundless wisdom, but, it should please me extensively if you were to provide some measure of illumination into that prodigious theory of the game's shortcomings which found its genesis within the opalescent lake that is your knowledge of the "horror game". Which, I must say, is surely unparraleled by those of any who reside within this plane or any of the spheres beyond.

I do not expect that we, possessed of diminished faculties as we are, so as to be "conned into thinking there was any substance", have the faintest hope of gleaning aught of your true meaning. However, it would "tickle me pink", as it were, all the same, if you would be so gracious as to humour me in this smallest regard.

Yours faithfully

~D.

🙄

CoD: Infinite Warfare from '16 could be a (dis)honorable mention.

3 minutes ago, Cell said:

CoD: Infinite Warfare from '16 could be a (dis)honorable mention.

well, i mean it wasn't THAT bad, there are far worse games out there

man, this is honestly a really hard question to answer, since different games can be disappointing to others in varying ways. Context contribute some, and I don't think asset flips and shovelware garbage on steam counts. These games suck and are occasionally outright unplayable, but you weren't gonna play them in the first place. Really, what's worse, a kid playing with unity who delivers a game that's unplayable, or an established professional development studio that delivers a game that's unplayable. I don't want to excuse Steam for allowing illegal or unplayable games on their platform, but when it's just 1 or 2 guys trying to make a quick buck, that scarsely qualifies as "Worst of the Decade" material.

I don't want to just say forbnite, because while I hate what the game is, there's a new game that gets super popular every few years at this rate. Had the decade magically ended a few years ago, it might have been DayZ or a zombie game everyone was getting annoyed by. Earlier, it might have been FNAF, even earlier, it might have been Minecraft. Just saying Forbnite for me at least would be a recentism bias, since I remember things like FNAF being just as annoying (though come to think of it, the ridiculous commericalism of Fortnite is probably higher than games like FNAF...) Something like Duke Nukem Forever might count, but a lot of the big disappointment only really comes from the big duke nukem fans, those outside the community only saw a generally unremarkable game.

When it comes to my mind, there's a few contenders. No Man's Sky, for being waaay overhyped despite underdelivering horribly, Star Wars Battlefront 2 for literally starting a huge shakedown in the game industry of consumer-unfriendly "surprise mechanics", and Fallout 76, for being a game developed and published by a major publisher who only manages to make the game worse and worse given time. At the same time, all of these happened in the latter half of the decade. I don't want to imagine that 2010-2015 are magical times where there were no bad games, but I'm also having trouble thinking of any right now... FO76 definitely has a lot of recentism bias, but the fact that there's a new issue or bug almost every week at this point, combined with the fact that one of the longest lived publishers behind it, makes it a fair contender in my book.

@xdarkmasterx - when I go as far to say what I did, I know that people will say I'm full of shit. I'm actually okay with that. I know, still, I am calling what I believe I see. I mean, what other term would I use when a game is built so much on its surface elements that it can flash and dazzle someone, but there is no substance underneath, and people miss that. 

Yeah, it's a cheap out, but this video covers it. Everything it says to me is correct. I'm fine with moving on though. Just that's how I see the game, you see it differently, that's okay. 

I still haven't seen any "but this is WHY it's good" from anybody though, which makes the criticisms of what I'm saying look questionable to me. 

CoD: IW actually had a really decent multiplayer experience. Game only got bad reception because the fanbase wanted a less futuristic setting.

12 minutes ago, hybridial said:

@xdarkmasterx - when I go as far to say what I did, I know that people will say I'm full of shit. I'm actually okay with that. I know, still, I am calling what I believe I see. I mean, what other term would I use when a game is built so much on its surface elements that it can flash and dazzle someone, but there is no substance underneath, and people miss that. 

 

 

Yeah, it's a cheap out, but this video covers it. Everything it says to me is correct. I'm fine with moving on though. Just that's how I see the game, you see it differently, that's okay. 

 

I still haven't seen any "but this is WHY it's good" from anybody though, which makes the criticisms of what I'm saying look questionable to me. 

i think that video was excessively nit-picky, and they didn't take into account that certian concessions to gameplay needs to be made. ii dont think its a perfect game by any stretch of the imagination, and i do agree with them in the barest sense that certain things did nothing for the game. however, the video fixates on those issues to a ludicrous degree. take the "minigames" for example, while i do think there could have been less of them, they clearly aren't meant to be a challenge in and of themselves, but to serve as a buffer to slow the player down and give the enemies a chance to catch up with them, which can be particularly dangerous in the case of the randomized puzzle terminals. That aside, the "puzzles" are very quick to complete and fairly sparse if you aren't looking for secrets. Complaining that you spend "all your time" doing them would be like complaining that you spend "all your time" opening doors and riding lifts in Doom (i.e; bullshit)

I could go on and on about this review, but i'll leave it at that, and as for the reason i enjoy the game: it's the randomness and basic stealth mechanics that do it for me. The alien's "dynamic" behaviour has the potential to create quite interesting and unexpected gameplay predicaments, especially if you're trying to make it through the levels quickly, and using all tools to your disposal (making noise to lead it away, stunlocking him with shotgun, running around obstacles to lose him etc.). of course, you could always hide in the closet or vent for hours until he leaves, just as you can hide in a corner in Thief, wait for the guards to walk past and knock him with the blackjack, but who wants to play like that? that's boring XD

@xdarkmasterx

My experience of playing the game though was it really was that bad, that most of the time you really are doing nothing in the game, and it felt that way to me because the games I have played that are like Alien Isolation, are not padded out to be 20 hours long. Now it sounds like you liked the general idea of the stalker survival horror, and I absolutely love some of those. You might want to look at the Clock Tower series which originated the idea, Resident Evil 3 borrowed quite a lot from them, Haunting Ground is a Clock Tower game in all but name, and the Siren series (though the original game is ah, cruel and unusual, the PS3 remake was a tonne more accessible and very fun) and then most recently, Remothered: Tormented Fathers. 

Remothered is a bit rough, and its clearly an indy passion project that does a pretty solid impersonation of a AA game. It has its own issues, but I would call it infinitely better than Alien Isolation. I even thought as a stealth game specifically, it was above average, and it relied a bit more on stealth than those others I mentioned, whereas Alien isolation was just bad. 

2 hours ago, hybridial said:

 

So here's a question to you; how on earth was Bioshock Infinite's gameplay better than Bioshock 1 and 2s? I wouldn't say it was award winning in those games but at least it felt like a designed whole, where things like Plasmids, the weapon arsenal, the enemies and the various systems in play all had a purpose, and in Infinite they slashed away elements of it, copypasted things without reason, cut down on enemy variance and did nothing to improve things like the AI, and added terrible ideas like weapon carry limits and limited weapon upgrades which just encourage never using most of the arsenal. I do not believe there is a single objective thing in Infinite's favour when it comes to its gameplay, and my opinion has this thing called "Reasons" and I'm pretty interested in hearing yours after that statement. 

 

As for Alien Isolation, it conned you into thinking there was any substance to the game, but there isn't if you even just peek behind the curtains and actually critique it. And yeah, sorry but though I love RE2, it's not really a game to mention if your trying to flash cred that you know something about horror games. All I'll say is I've played a lot over the years, it was always a genre I was pretty passionately into, and Alien Isolation completely failed in every sense that mattered, and I would posit to you that if you went back and replayed it, it may very well not hold up. Things that lack substance usually don't. 

 

Okay play along.

What i like about Infinites gameplay is the shooting, Bioshock 1-2 has the System Shock clunk where aiming the gun is a bit jerky.

Infinite has more of a Medal of Honor, Call of Duty 2 feel to it. Plus love the skyhooks.

Aliens Isolation i cant really say anything other than i enjoyed it, even though it scared the shit out if me, and there games FAR WORSE than that. I would glady replay it again.

And no im not trying to flash my Horror Game cred because i can't possibly be as wise as you Great Sage. You know all and we are just pesants

But again im just stating my opinion...Which is subjective... Except for mine which is 100% correct

I played all of Bioshock Infinite and I believe that clunkiness in the shooting mechanics was still like 90% present. I haven't played Medal of Honor since the PS1 days or any CoD so I can't comment how it compares to those but I felt it was still very, very similar to Bioshock 1 and 2. 

But we can't both be right, we can however interpret things differently. And I stand, and always will stand, with the interpretations I've laid out, however... yeah I have been a bit of a dick in places socially so I'm definitely going to say sorry for that and leave the argument on these games there. 

22 hours ago, hybridial said:

 

As for Alien Isolation, it conned you into thinking there was any substance to the game, but there isn't if you even just peek behind the curtains and actually critique it. And yeah, sorry but though I love RE2, it's not really a game to mention if your trying to flash cred that you know something about horror games. All I'll say is I've played a lot over the years, it was always a genre I was pretty passionately into, and Alien Isolation completely failed in every sense that mattered, and I would posit to you that if you went back and replayed it, it may very well not hold up. Things that lack substance usually don't. 

 

Woah!! Hold on just a minute. Alien isolation is the greatest horror game of this generation. No other horror game can possibly match the tension and dread that game forces upon you and not just the first play through but multiple plays after. The aliens unpredictable nature alone warrants this. Other horror games on the second and third run lose this to varying degrees because you know what's coming,its the same deal each time. Alien Isolation does not have this issue.

No substance? really? Ive played through it 7-8 times and it holds up trust me. A game like Resident Evil VII for all of its glory failed to keep me entertained for a second run.

You can take any and all of the P.T. clones like 'layers of fear' etc and none of them hold a candle to Alien Isolation. I've played horror games since the mid 90's and I've been there through 'D' the original Resi to Silent Hill to the Clock Tower series to Dead Space ...... I could go on. Alien Isolation is up there with the VERY best.

The atmosphere , sound (which won a BAFTA) and variety of gameplay each time nails it.

I'm curious , did you even finish it?

I also like Alien Isolation very much (I have the PS3 version) and I really can't complain about this very well done game. I'm a big Alien fan and I waited for such a game ever since. It was probably made by Alien fans as you can tell from all those authentic textures, original sound effects and music. Kudos to SEGA. I played every damn Alien game that came out and most of them sucked. Alien Isolation can surely be done better, but it definitely doesn't deserve being placed here as "worst", and it's miles away from "worst of the decade". 

But what about Sleeping Dogs? I recently bought a used copy of that game and that one doesn't seem to be very convincing to me. I finished it within four days- The main story is OK and so is your main character Wei Shen but that game annoyed me badly. The GPS system is utterly crap, you can't zoom in your map closely enough, no cars can be "tuned" or painted individually, there are no planes or choppers, your money is almost useless, clothing  =who cares, I barely notice any effects on my outfits and most of the sidequest are dumb as a lump of cheese. When I compare that game with GTA or Saints Row, it'll lose immediately.