Sage Reviews – Metro: Last Light
Lotus Prince Let’s Play – Amnesia: The Dark Descent (Parts 4-6)
Lego City Undercover is AWESOME! – Episode 4
GView : Anomaly 2 Review
Tomb Raider is AWESOME! – Conclusion
Posted By AngryJoe about 1 year, 4 months ago
AJ’s Top 10 Most Disappointing Games of 2011,
While not the WORST Games, these games certainly disappointed us all.
These are Angry Joe’s Top 10 Most Disappointing Games of 2011! These were the game that were not awful, but weren’t exactly that good either, just mediocre, failing to live up to expectations. What games most disappointed you this year?
Stay tuned for the Top 10 Worst Games of the Year Next!
Follow me and my show updates on Twitter!
Fan/Like my Profile Page on the Facebooks! Pwease?
Also, Subscribe to AngryJoeShow on YouTube
but i love Jurassic park and maicel jacksin (and of the video) joe what the hell was that. i dot wan now looks creepy now …… : (
Duke Nukem Forever O.o
I’ve said it before but my most surprising game (in a good way) of the year was Saints Row 3. I hated the gameplay in the previous Saints Row games, it was so shitty after you’d been spoiled by GTA. The cars didn’t turn, the walking, shooting and everything was so awkwardly bad that it was pretty much unplayable for me. Saints Row 3 still has it’s flaws but the gameplay has definitely improved to the point that I can play it.
why doesn’t everyone let the money talk for what people want?
maybe saints row could spare some dildos for scorpion and the other mortal kombat characters…
i’d like to have one game that is good rather then ten that suck. good art takes time and the industry always rushes things to much. electronics are like music instruments or something. its a emulation sort of situation. as a dvd user i’m often repeating the same content over and over.
what i really want is a game that is going to define a time in my life and what was going on in my life. so i can remember good times and stuff when i play as well as adventure. Epic. that is important to me as a gamer and its not easy to do.
Now that I think about it,how come Red Faction Armageddon wasn’t on this list? RF: Guerrilla maybe wasn’t as great as some people made it out to be,but it was still fun. Armageddon felt like a game from the 32 bit era (specially the cheesy-as-hell dialogue). Most people called it a Dead Space ripoff but the game reminded me more of a long-forgotten PSX shooter called Broken Helix.
Trading a fairly fun open ended world for a boring ass alien shooting gallery is a big no-no and a surefire way to get your series axed.
Sad to not see UMvC3 on this list, it deserves it. Although Im sure MvC3 will be on the worst list.
neither games are bad though. They are extremely fun, much better balanced than MVC2, and had something at least resembling a story (mvc2 didnt) and when compared to street fighter IV, a massive roster. It was indeed dissapointing, with few extra modes and the arcade mode being dissapointing as shit.. but overall it’s not a BAD game at all, I love playing it. The roster is fairly well balanced, had regular patch updates and was FUN..which makes it not a BAD game… It’s just disappointing.
Note: Yes I know Phoenix was cheap, but the roster overall wasn’t that poorly balanced.
well i played none of those so yay me
Wait… not even a mention of Duke Nukem Forever?…
I’m a new viewer, can someone explain this, if there’s a reason?
Call it a hunch, but I think DNF might actually be on the worst games list, along with MindJack. Having said that, like the top ten best games list, it’s personal preferance out of all the games Joe played this year (which is why LOL is on the list despite it being roughly two years old, if not older).
Top disappointing game of the year? Skyrim. No competition there at all.
And i would pick DA2 up over Skyrim any day of the week. Thats because DA2 fixed the problems of DA:O (which sucked some major ass), while Skyrim made Elder Scrolls schoolboy fest of an rpg.
And i will repeat this for indefinite amount of times: Dragon Age brought back dragons, DA2 perfected them, Skyrim made them look like pussies.
Skyrim didn’t make the dragons look like pussies. They were treated by the common populace as being incredibly dangerous threats that would destroy whole towns and bring about the end of the world. Your character was just especially adept at killing them.
I know giants could one-shot them, but that was mechanics, not lore. The giants were balanced to be threatening to the player, to make it a really bad idea to be hit over the head by a club wielded by one of them. It just so happens that the damage scaling of the giant made them more adept dragon killers than you, because the dragon cannot avoid attacks like you can.
The more I think about it, the more I think it would be a really cool idea, and a few of you others seem to think so too given the amount of like comments I got for it.
So how about it Joe? A nice informal podcast point/counterpoint discussion between you and Sage about Saints Row the Third, I mean I know some of your contemporaries on channel awesome have had similar discussions about other things. Might be a little late for its release, but the first of Saints Row the Third DLC is right around the corner, so it might be a good time for it. That is unless the two of you are already pretty booked, I mean I know how busy you guys can get.
I’m sad to see that neither MVC3 or UMVC3 is on this list. Not because I’m sad you weren’t disappointed with it, but rather because I’m decently sure it’s going to end up on your ‘worst of’ list, where it just doesn’t belong. Disappointed with it I could understand, but worst? But then again, I’m just guessing it’ll be there, and could be totally wrong.
But on to most disappointing for me. Note that disappointing for me doesn’t mean bad, but rather just what I thought fell short of its potential.
I was disappointed with Space Marine, which was simply too short and with a crappy multiplayer. The orks were also just not orky enough. It could have been so much more than what it was.
Most disappointing for me this year would have to be Sonic Generations. Now, I loved Sonic Generations, but like Space Marine it was just way too short for the price I paid for it. I also feel as though it could have been more than what it was, included more levels instead of restricting themselves to just one per game. There also weren’t enough boss encounters featuring Classic Sonic (2 out of the game’s 6, not including the final boss, who was distinctly modern Sonic-esque anyway).
I remember playing Saints Row 2 when one of my friends got it. I played the hell outta that game and loved every SECOND of it, (with a few lovers quarrels that usually spawned over me getting ram-rodded by a gang that had reached five stars worth of pissed off). So naturally when Saints the Third was announced, I was hyped! I followed it in the magazines, watched the stuff online, and, (foolishly), pre-ordered it and was there to pick it up the day it came out. From a technical standpoint, it was worth it. Improved engine, more rewardingly complex controls, and, (in my opinion), better, more polished graphics. From an everything else standpoint… WHAT THE FUCK?! Writing? Gone. Character development? Gone. Use of celebrity talent and cameos? Wasted. And the biggest slap in the face, BESIDES killing off Gat… in the first five minutes… for NO reason), was that they gave you two endings, and still find a way to completely fuck up both one way or another. Shame on you Saints Row. Shame on you.
Oh, but great review Joe. Always love watching.
DA2 should be on the worst games list as well. I’ve never regretted buying a game so much since Empire:TW.
Rage’s last levels are by far the best, I recomend skipping out on the driving sections as much as you can and go for finishing Rage. Good list poor you having to put Sword of the stars there.
Very Good List Joe, agree with Pretty Much everything, though i never played Michael Jackson The Experience or Swords of the Star 2 (though i wanted to, but after hearing about the catastrophic Release, i decided to wait).
Well, Might as well post mine.
5) The Legend Of Zelda Skyward Sword: Let me explain.
i think this is a great Game, i really do.
But….. The BEST Zelda Ever?
i strongly disagree, but Nintendo said otherwise.
4)Assassin’s Creed Revelations: just didn’t really hooked me, the story at least, i still found exploring the city a lot of fun, oh, and it didn’t bring anything to the table.
3)RAGE: i Enjoyed the game, but….
Deep and Miningful story?
Variety?
Complete RPG/FPS Mix?
Yeah…. i’m calling BS on their ass.
2)Crysis 2: i couldn’t even play it for 2 hours.
it was very dumbed down, imo, and the Gameplay forgot it’s roots and went straight to the COD bandwagon.
1) Dragon Age 2: What can i say that hasn’t been said already?
Some say the gameplay Got More fun, i say, the gameplay was too over the top, annoying and mindless.
Some say the story was deep, i say, the story was nothing but a collection of side stories with little connection, oh, and let’s not forget retcons from Origins.
DA2 has made 80% to 90% of the “Disappointments” lists, i have seen throughout the internet.
and i think for good reason.
my only hope is that BW learns and understands what the fans want, for i love DA:O(if my avatar didn’t gave it away)
But i won’t hold my breath, if nothing happens, i’ll just consider DA:O, another Planescape Torment : a great game, that for reasons that are beyond me, never got a sequel.
Jurassic Park is one of the few TellTale games I don’t own. I expected it to be a PCA, like everything else they make. Graphics look pretty decent to me…No wait, I’m thinking of the aesthetics. The motion dos look a bit choppy.
I’ll wait till War in the North, Dead Island, & Dragon Age 2 drop to $20 then. Yeah….I had to save up for a new computer, so I didn’t get to buy any new games last year. But I have a high tolerance for disappointment.
Ubisoft fails on everything it acquires, for me anyway.
Dead Island was disappointing, Naughty Dog has stated that they are going for a more emotional zombie game with Last of Us, and there’s also Yakuza: Dead souls, I really hope these can differentiate from the normal zombie game narrative.
Eh DA2 is a guilty pleasure for me. It’s the soap opera of my collection. The dialogue is cheesy, the romances are cheesy. I know it’s flawed up to here and back. And yet I get giddy when I play it every now and then like it’s story time. Saints Row 3 was my biggest disappointment. Yes it’s a fun game but 2 is better by a milestone. Just too sad over some of the choices in story in that game. ( Johnny!!!!! )
Bioware knows they messed up big time with DA2 and have made repeated promises of fixing all of that in the next sequel. But I’m still weary. The fact that DA3 will most likely come out within the next 12 monyhs (instead of leaving it for the next gen of hardware) is kinda disappointing.
As I recall SR III was on Sage’s top 5 best games of the year.
I have the urge to see or hear a podcast session of Sage and Angry Joe sitting down together and discussing this game.
Noticed some comments about EA when It comes to Dragon Age II, and I just felt I had to say this….
It seems like anytime a mediocre or bad product gets released under the EA or Activision banner, they’re immediately to blame for the games shortcomings. True, historically quite a bit of that blame is justified.
But we often forget that the relationship between developer and publisher is a two way street. As much as we like to think that the Bobby Koticks of the world are responsible for ruining franchises all for the sake of appeasing investors. Sometimes the problems really are more on the developer end. Sometimes its creators ego, sometimes they didn’t devote as much time to project that they should. And sometimes development teams change without any involvement with the publisher whatsoever. Why? Because in long hour and often high pressure environment of video game design, some folks just get sick of working together and by the end of the project cant stand one another. And sometimes its all of the above.
In any case I don’t think that the blame for what went wrong with Dragon Age II much, or anything to do with EA’s involvement.
Wait. Is that dildo a 2 way?
Joe, everything you said about DA2 is EXACTLY how I felt about MassEffect 2. The only difference is very few people spoke ill of it (including you), which is probably why EA/Bioware thought going in the same direction for DA2 was a good idea.
As for SR3, I know exactly what you mean about the lack of substance. I couldnt figure out why they had 2 tutorial missions for each of the side missions. Why even when on my way to the final mission, I was still having to deal with hint messages explaining how to drive, messages I might add that take up damn near a 1/3 of your screen.
I loved ME2, they had an overall better game mechanically and got rid of some of the annoyances of the original, yes they removed the inventory system, which I don’t mind TBH.
The problem with the first game was that the gameplay held it back, ME2 gave us an equally strong story with better gameplay overall. Yes they removed some things, like the crappy vehicle segments (Which they fixed and added back in later) and the annoying inventory management, but they still let you customize Shepherd in terms of his armor and the guns each felt unique as opposed to “Oh this one has slightly higher DPS” and the skills (Which are still up to you to customize) were much easier to utilize in combat without having to break the flow of the game just so I could use one of them.
ZOMG!! INVENTORY MANAGEMENT IN A RPG!?!?! SAY IT AINT SO!! In otherwords, dumbed down and/or removed the RPG elements in favor of a much improved combat system that’ll appeal to a much wider audience. Now where did I just hear that? Oh yeah, in Joe’s description of DA2. The only difference here, is in ME2 it actually worked.
But the inventory management didn’t add anything to the game really (Not to mention the menus weren’t that good), it’s not as if the new gear really added anything new, just a flat upgrade to armor/dps and not much else, in DA the armor actually had more diverse bonuses along with unique items, with the third game they’re adding weapon mods back in, which I totally support because it lets me take the unique qualities of the weapons one step further by increasing accuracy, rate of fire, etc.
Also the weapons in ME2 weren’t all just the same gun with different skins, for the most part they were mechanically different from one another (For example the first assault rifle is your typical fully automatic rifle, the second is a more accurate rifle that fires in bursts, and the third is essentially a LMG).
As for the Mako sections in ME1 the main reasons I disliked them so much were that the controls were sluggish and the physics made me feel like I was driving a matchbox car rather than a big tank.
Also the story was a fitting prelude, the first one drew us in with bombast and spectacle, the second one maneuvered the pieces into place for the third act, besides I liked the idea of Shepherd going off the grid, and they introduced a likeable set of characters (I also had a chuckle at Garrus turning into what amounts to the punisher) and updated the old ones.
Equally strong story? I’d have to question that. In the first game *spoilers* you become the first human specter, track down a powerful rogue specter, learn about the reapers and defend the citadel from one. In the second one you learn that the collector’s exist, then exterminate them all. The reapers are still coming, you haven’t really made any progress about that. All in all ME2′s story felt like a little side mission while we wait for the reapers to show up in ME3.
And the gameplay changes for me felt like they oversimplified things. However I played on the PC so they probably fixed things that were wrong with the console ones. One of the things I noticed is that the mako missions for me were enjoyable, whereas my friend who had the console version hated them.
Another thing that seemed to make gameplay less fun was being an adept. In the first game you could attach mods to your gun and such. But in the second I couldn’t use any special ammo. I also didn’t feel like pausing the action was breaking the flow of the game, as it was more strategic. You would pause and tell your crew members where to move, who to concentrate on, and what skills to use. Also having to decide the appropriate time to heal instead of just waiting a few seconds to completely heal was another element of strategy I liked. Naturally I was very disappointed how ME2 removed all strategy from combat.
Inventory handling was also oversimplified. Sure comparing the stats of guns point to point is a little silly, but honestly I’d prefer that to ME2′s gun descriptions, which don’t actually tell you much about the gun (other than the heavy weapons). Sometimes they would have stats and sometimes they wouldn’t. Is this gun better than this one? What are the pros and cons? No idea. Really they could’ve fixed the inventory greatly by grouping the same items together like most RPGs and also having sorting options.
I really liked ME2 when I started out, but towards the middle and end of the game I realized I just didn’t like it as much as ME1. I didn’t care for most of the characters and it was all so formulaic. Get all the crew members. Do all the loyalty missions. Enter a room with cover you can get behind. Clear the enemies from the room. Move onto the next room. Do it again. I hate to say it but it really felt like they tried to make the game too streamlined. It makes me worried about ME3.
In relation to the article: although I never played Dragon Age, after playing the ME games I feel like the response Bioware recieved from the change from ME1 to ME2 greatly influenced how they handled Dragon Age 2.
I had a lot of fun playing Dragon Age II (I’ve had three playthroughs and I earned my first platinum trophy with the game, so it’d better have been fun!). Even so, I can understand AJ’s complaints about it. I’ve never played the 1st game (that’s soon to be rectified), so I can’t compare it to the sequel all that well. But from what I DO know of the 1st game, the sequel seems like a rather condensed product, with a limited area to explore and (my biggest complaint) level maps that are recycled over and over again. I also understand that many side missions seem like so much “janitorial work,” but I consider those missions to be useful ways to level up, or rather, ways to prepare me for the meatier sections, so they don’t bother me much.
Improved in the sequel are the ability trees which help you keep track of what are activated, sustained and passive abilities, and the graphics. Yes, the graphics, with character models with more polygons and clear textures. The textures of the world aren’t exactly eye-popping, but they’re no eyesore either, making DA2 a rather plain-looking hi-def game. At any rate, the Witcher 2 may have had many more things going for it than DA2, but I’m glad I got DA2, anyway. It showed me how more mature Western RPGs are than JRPGs while still maintaining a satisfying epic scope. A worthwhile investment!
Sword of the Stars II’s situation sounds similar to Final Fantasy XIV.
I’m surprised Marvel vs Capcom 3 isn’t in it? I wouldn’t buy it or the “Ultimate” version if the game doesn’t provide to be more than just for hardcore tournament fighters like a story mode.
Dear Angry Joe,
-Dreammirror
I am usually in agreement with you on many games you cover, and you have introduced several that I would have missed that I thank you for big time, but I do have to disagree with you on Dragon Age 2. I am a big fan of the series and have done several playthroughs of DA1, Awakening and DA2 enough to see the strengths and weaknesses of each game.
I think the main issue you had with DA2 is you choose to play as a mage, not the warrior/rogue -that made a huge difference. Your sibling -Bethany or Carver dies at the end of the intro, and is based on that choice. Bethany is very fun and enjoyable–Carver is a dick, period. Not sure why the game did that but there it is. The combat was different to get used to from da1 and awakening, but once I got used to it, much smoother. I wasnt bothered by the fact that the hero wasn’t a Grey Warden-not everything in that world has to revolve around them alone.
There were some good DLC for DA2 as well-Mark of the Assassin and Legacy were awesome! Love Felicia Day
Some of the flaws of DA2 though were annoying. I didnt like that you had no choice for race, and fewer choices for character customization. There are very few addons for DA2, unlike DA1, which I found restricting. Playing a girl toon was far more enjoyable, as your right about the guy-hes like the spitting image of Roger Rees as the Sheriff of Nottingham. There were not enough interesting female romance options if you played males-slutty pirate, underage elf, or body builder guard captain didn’t appeal to me-minor issues here I guess. The story wasn’t as world shaking as DA1 of course, but it wasn’t terrible.
In conclusion, I found playing as a girl, picking the humorous approach dialogues, to be one of the game’s strongest points-a rogue is an especially interesting class with it mix of dps, survivability and stamina. I agree that this game should have been fun for either gender and/or class, and some picks are just better than others. If you give this game another try in the future, try a warrior or rogue(esp rogue!)-I think you will have a 100% improvement on your experience with this fun game!
ps-after 3 playthroughs as mage, warrior and rogue-I would rate this game as 8/10, DA1 as 9/10 and Awakening as 7/10. Just my 2 cents.
i dont know how mvc3 didnt make this list. i dont know anything about SR but am sure that mvc3 has to be as big a letdown.
MvC3 and UMvC3 are clearly on the worst games list.
I so hope you are wrong. Both games are equally good as eachother, each with various strong points over the over (MK9 has more modes, MvC3 has a more diverse character roster). I’m going to write a massive Rant if Joe puts MvC3 on the “Worst of 2011″ list.
Welp, turns out I was half wrong.
And 9 people suck at obvious predictions.
Joe, playing your videos them sucks up all my computer’s CPU upto 100%.
Of all videos from CA/BT, this only happens when playing yours. I experienced this on 3 different dual core computers.
Please do something about your video encoding.
Do what I do. Watch it on his Youtube channel. But I do hope he is aware of this issue and is trying to resolve it.
That’s a fair list, Joe. Personally, two games come to mind as massive disappointments for 2011: Crysis 2 and Dragon Age 2. Neither game is even bad, but they both feel watered down from the originals.
Crysis 2, with the DX11 patch and high res texture pack, had some of the best visuals this year. It took several months to get those features added, but The Witcher 2 and Battlefield 3 still looked better. The plot was nearly incomprehensible and the linearity of the level design was a slight turn off. It almost felt like this could have been a sequel to some other game. Overall, the first Crysis was much better.
Your complaints for Dragon Age 2 are pretty close to mine. I don’t see how this game was getting such high scores. Everything about it felt rushed and halfhearted. I had such high hopes for this series, too. It seems the fan base is split pretty widely on it. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that the inevitable third entry will be much better, but I’m not that optimistic.
Sorry guys, but Dragon Age 2 was garbage, while the UI may have been improved everything else went downhill, one fucking city, repetitive and boring streets and outside areas, DLC announced before the game actually released and a bland story with NO GREY WARDENS was a massive failure.
I did love the look of some of the fighting animations for the 3 classes but the First Game and its DLC was much more rewarding.
Witcher 2 and Skyrim both made this game look like garbage by comparison and that is because those games had honest to god effort put into them and created rich and amazing worlds combined with incredible storytelling.
The Game enraged me as a fan of the first and I find myself siding with piracy when im forced to pay full price for this shit.
I kind of enjoyed SR3. Well i respect your opinion. Other than that little disagrement i agree with your list. (for the games on the list that i played.)
At least his points in the SR3 review were well made and completely understandable; personally I never played SR2 so I also enjoyed SR3 immensely. His Skyrim review is probably the worst one I’ve seen him do; it’s just completely gushing with a complete disregard for the numerous problems any player is forced to put up with at some point during the game. Oh well, nobody’s perfect I suppose.
Haven’t really played much of what’s on this list since I’ve seen enough reviews to know to stay away from most of them. However I did play Jurassic Park and while it did have interesting moments, it fell apart near the end not just because of the annoying gameplay and terrible framerate, but also because of the story. It felt like the writers couldn;t decide if this should follow the movie or the book in terms of theme.
Own Dragon Age 2, but with all the horror stories I’ve been hearing it’s been gathering dust as I haven’t really felt like playing it. Bioware, when people are saying Final Fantasy 13 (which I’ll admit I liked at certain points even if it was VERY flawed) was better than DA2, you know you’re doing something wrong.
Trust me, the FF franchise has a lot of apologists. DA2 was a better game than FF13 by a long stretch. It was still horrible, mind – probably moreso if you enjoyed DA1.
although i agree on most of the games in that list, i have to disagree on Dragon Age 2. it is a great game, and what i love the most is that unlike the first game the main character actually develop his or her own personalty. in the first game you just stand around like a zombi and the only time you talk is during a battle when you yell something. also, during a conversation the characters are more expressive and interesting. this game may not be as good as expected when it come’s to customizing the rest of the characters but i definitely wouldn’t put it on that list.
After you talked it up I bought Sword of the Stars II when it was on sale on Steam last week, but I have yet to play it (I want to put more time into Batman first).
Do you plan on doing a full review of the game? I know it’s been a while since release, and you released a VLog talking about the launch issues previously.
To be honest, I didn’t like Saint’s Row 2. Something about it felt. . . wrong, just the way it felt. Watching it was fun, but once I picked up the controller it wasn’t.
Also, I’m surprised Marvel Vs Capcom 3 wasn’t on the list. Which would be on mine, along with Brink and Assassin’s Creed Revelations. I’m slowly starting to have my doubts about the AC series.
Given how much Joe ranted about MVC 3, I suspect that will be on his worst list.
As I mentioned in my replies to Joe’s review of SR III I actually liked it, one of my favorite games of the year…and Joe is nuts. ;P
This was well thought out list Joe. You had good explanations to each game why they were on this list.
I disagree with Dragon Age 2. I really enjoyed it. Perhaps the story wasn’t quite as enganging as in Origins, but the improved combat and UI made up for it. I also don’t understand why the DA2 had weaker characters. I mean were Sten and Zevran any better? And I played as a mage and I didn’t mind the whiny little brother. I loved my bro and I didn’t want him to die.
I feel the same way. But I would go as far as to say, that I found the DA2 story more engaging and characters better. I would actually put Origins on my disappointing games list, as I didn’t like its characters (except for the dog and Wynne) and found the story boring. Plus the sheer amount of battles (which were rather long even on an easy setting) was tiring.
Dragon Age 2 is not a bad game per se, but it was a huge dissappointment, when you were expecting Bioware to top themselves, and realize that they had instead taken the lazy route. There’s also the problem of the lacking coherent central storyline. The game crams three storylines haphazardly together, and even though each one could have been excellent in its own right, together they’re just messy. Also, I’m not a fan of the new art style, though that obviously is a matter of taste.
Though Joe’s complaint about “forced” romances isn’t justified. Every single romance dialogue option is clearly and obviously labelled as such.
To be fair I think Joe mentioned Bioware Gave Dragon Age II a very short production cycle compared to it’s predecessor.
well said.
As did I, also I do think the brother has some right to complain considering how his life has been impacted by having 2 mages in his family (Especially considering how that all works in this universe), also no offense but Origins looks rough from a graphics perspective, at least for me, this game looks much better. That being said a bad first impression is hard to get past, I’ve had my share of games ruined because of a bad introduction and that’s probably the case here with Joe.
I’ll also say it wasn’t a huge disappointment for me either. I won’t deny its faults and it did feel like a rushed product several times, particularly with the non-existent ending. However I did enjoy the story for what it was. How many RPGS and games in general center on some entity of ultimate evil seeking to destroy the world just because it’s evil and that’s what evil things do? More than I could count I’m sure. In DA2 we have a more downplayed crisis focused on a tense situation prior established in the first game; Templars vs. Mages.
I liked the more complex nature of it because ultimately there was no real right or wrong side to it. So as I played I watched as both sides got more embroiled in their efforts to achieve what they felt as right, rational negotiations melting away as both factions gave less and less ground until ultimately and inevitably a war broke out, and as the player I was caught in the middle and forced to pick sides once the bloodshed began.
Granted it’s not everyone’s idea of a gripping story and I’m not saying it’s the best plot of the year but I do think it’s more refreshing to play a more politically driven story set in a fantasy world. Rather than the cliched plot of a single great hero saving the world from pure evil.
I have to agree with that assessment Rav3n, I can appreciate the globe-spanning epic journey to defeat the evil dudes, but I also like the idea of a smaller scale conflict pretty much made up of shades of gray, they both have their merits and I think they both deserve praise for what they got right.
I just got a kick-ass new computer so I bought Dragon Age: Origins(among other games) to mod finally and I have got to say the mods are much better then dragon age 2. The exrat missions are better then da2′s missions, Ser Gillmore is way better then all the male li in da2, and I can still be a dwarf(oh and this game has female dwarfs for fucks sake… sorry but that really pisses me off).
Haha I love how pink in the face Joe gets after he hits himself with the big purple dildo n_n
Agree with all the list but Dragon age 2.
It wasn’t so bad and not disappointing at all. It was something different and from Biowere Im alwasys expeting something different. For the first time you are not a hero without a home and a family that single handily save the world because he is the chosen like every other RPG.
And I don’t agree also on the theory that they have done it to make more cash. It was a brave and original choice to make a more believable character with a still partially living family, with a home, with people to care instead of the cliche solitary and sociopathic hero. And an anti economic one.
Call it a theory Joe, but what are the odds that Dragon Age II wasn’t done by the original studio?
Now before you all go “WHUT?!”, hear me out. We all know BioWare are doing Command & Conquer Generals 2. Except it’s not the BioWare studio we know who made Dragon Age, Mass Effect and Old Republic, but another studio with the BioWare name – BioWare Victory. Long story made short – EA have turned the BioWare name into a brand, like EA Sports. It’s entirely possible a differant BioWare to the one we know could have worked on Dragon Age II, or even the new Old Republic MMO or Mass Effect 3 (when released).
It’s a sad sign of the times, as the BioWare label is likely to get people interested in a game, only for it to turn out like Dragon Age II. Right now, I’m hoping Mass Effect 3 doesn’t go down the same path, but I would call both Dragon Age II and Command & Conquer Generals 2 a sign of things to come.
And as a result, I at least no longer recognise BioWare as a single studio. You may in the future have to research a little harder. Just a heads up.
You know what’s funny? I think your opinion of Saint’s Row 3 is pretty much similar to Johnny Gat’s opinion of what the Saints had become, serious psychopathic gangsters reduced to corporate obnoxious mockeries of their former selves. To paraphrase Killbane “****ing clowns, selling out for energy drinks”.
Surprisingly, my most disapointing game of this year was probably Alice:Madness Returns. Its not to say that the game is terrible, but it became kind of repetitive and the story sort of doesn’t make sense half the time. It was for me a bit an unnecessary sequel. Even though i had never actually play the earlier game until i purchased Madness Returns, but when i saw the earlier game via Youtube, i was really drawn to the dark themes of the game. The first game was very good despite being a rPC port to the 360,but it worked. The setting was dark and gritty, the story was simple but had a sense of depth that just cant be explain, and while the gameplay is just a simple 3rd person shooter with some platfoming, it was surprisingly very good. The sequel just turned out to be a repetive platformer with pretty weak enemies(in a sense of creativity and variety). The few things that make the game great are the characters presented within the game, the enviroments, the visual, and a surprisingly good combat system. Overall, i was proud to purchase the title for getting 2 games in 1, and that both games involve a darker twist and turn to the imaginative storytelling of Alice in Wonderland, but they aren’t games that i pick up often.
10. Yeah, that game never clicked to me. So that’s why this game will be like Kim Jong Il, so “ronery.” At the used section in the game store.
9. Heard it was disappointing, and yet, it is from what I see. Man, Heavy Rain is not just better than this, Indigo Prophecy plays better than this.
8. I knew this game was gonna be a repetitive beat ‘em up anyway, but the fact you can’t customize your mutant really hurts this game. Sorry Silicon Knights, you’re reign of mediocrity continues.
7. I never cared about the Lord of the Rings games, except for the Two Towers and Return of the King cause at least they had some depth to them.
6. Yeah Joe, looking back at it right now, this game was pretty disappointing. Truth be told, don’t bother with the end. Trust me, the finale is not worth it. id Software has disappointed me. Only thing that got me going was the AI behavior and it’s expansive world. But the characters you meet, they are there for one minute, then you never hear from them again. :\
5. Not really into these games, but they are pretty fun. I guess it’s because I’m not convinced enough to buy a Kinect, but this game definitely did not have the “oomph” this game should have. Michael Jackson probably would be pretty disappointed too, but hey, without him, there will never be another good attempt to have another him.
4. I just got this game an hour before I bought Skyrim, only because I wasn’t really convinced it was gonna be great, but mostly because of the technical difficulties it had. You’re right Joe, it’s pretty addicting, but the game really isn’t all that’s cracked up to be. Nevertheless, I actually love killing zombies like this. I guess in disappointment, it’s no wonder since it’s debut, it was mired with bugs and glitches that nearly made the game unfinishable.
3. Damn, you must have been really disappointed in this game. Not my cup of tea, but ouch.
2. From what I hear, yeah, this game is pretty tame in comparison to its predecessor. I still haven’t finished the 1st because of a certain miniboss that kicks my ass very badly. But this game does look disappointing.
1. For me, it’s exactly what I was looking for in this game: over the top, batshit insane, and completely ridiculous yet fun. And yeah, hitting people with an oversized dildo does get old. That’s why I got the Apoco-Fists! Now can punch them into oblivion. >:D But seriously, sorry you didn’t enjoy it as you did the others, but I still love this game.
For me, I could name a few:
Crysis 2: Though I only played the 360 version, I was hoping for gorgeous graphics, but it didn’t really stun me as I hoped. But I guess it is to be expected since it’s working on console graphics. Maybe if I could get a powerful enough PC, I can see differently. Other than that, the shooter just didn’t impress me that well.
Assassin’s Creed: Revelations: This game is not bad by any means because it definitely had a great conclusion, but I feel like the previous installments had a lot more going for it. After finishing the game, I don’t have any desire to keep going or so. Or maybe it’s because I didn’t like the new Tower Defense element in this game.
Red Faction: Armageddon: This game uses the GeoMod engine that lets you destroy the entire environment, but it just didn’t do anything for me in the end. I couldn’t muster up to finish the game because it was so bland, linear, and unmesmerizing.
Duke Nukem Forever could be on my disappointing list, but I definitely expected mediocrity from this overly due game. I mean come on, after over a decade of development and changing hands on studios, I knew this was gonna be a mess. A pretty damn good mess.
Damn I almost got the Jurassic Park game… Thanks Joe!
Decent list, though I would put Dragon Age II further down because I liked some of the additions.
For me the most disappointing game was probably Deus Ex: Human Revolution. The first two thirds of that, minus the boss battles, are fantastic, but then everything started feeling streamlined. The end level is horrendous, more like a FPS than what we’d played before, and the ending offers no resolution or variety.
It’s not a bad game, but because of how suddenly it loses momentum I was left feeling quite underwhelmed.
The only game I’ve played on this list is Saint’s Row : The Third. Having heard so much I’ve decided to give a try to the new one, and I kinda liked it. It was pretty fun actually.
Since they were giving Saint’s Row 2 when you owned the third, I gave it a shot as well, and while I wouldn’t say it’s THAT much better than the third, I can understand the disapointment of the fans.
I was very tempted to buy Dead Island when it came out since I’m a big fan of zombie-related stuff, but after seeing some gameplay footage and reading/viewing a lot of reviews, I’ve passed on this one and I don’t regret it. So I’ll stick to my good old Dead Rising 2.
Nice list Joe, the only game I’ve played on this list was Rage, and I guess I can agree. Not sure it was disappointing, since I pretty much knew nothing about the game before I played it(I had a chance to get it for 12 bucks off, so I ending up preordering the PC version on a whim for the most part), so there was zero hype for me.
At first in the first few hours, I was gonna give it a 9, and then an 8 as I went on, and after I beat it, and got one of the worst endings I’ve ever seen, I’d give Rage a 7 overall. If you hated the ending to Kane & Lynch 2, you will hate the ending to Rage, trust me on this.
So yeah Joe, if you continue and beat Rage, you might end up giving it a lower score.
As for Dead Island, I haven’t played it yet(Though I got a 25% off coupon for it during the Steam holidays, so I hope it will go on sale again soon)but my brother has, and he says it’s awesome, so I am looking forward to trying it out.
I’m surprised that Star Trek Online didn’t make it onto your list Joe.
That one firmly belongs into the “Worst of 2011″ list.
That was out last year
Oh derp!
I agree with most of your picks, but Saint’s Row 3 as the most disappointing game of 2011…seriously? The game is showing up on a lot of Top 10 Games of the Year, and I know people who have played the previous two and swear that The Third is far superior. To them SR3 is nothing but a fun escape to do crazy stuff in. To me the game is fun, but maybe you wanted something else from it. I guess it could just be differing expectations.
Maybe you were going in somewhat oblivious to all the press around the game. Maybe you didn’t realize that a tagline for the marketing campaign was “STRAP IT ON.” I can understand your being disappointed with it if you were expecting more of that fine balance that the first two games had. You clearly have a love of the previous two games, so I can understand why you’d not like this one as much. To me the press showed us exactly what the game was going to be and it delivered on that promise: a world of purple dildo swords and sentient toilets wielding machine guns.
To the characters of SR3 the insanity is normal, which is a key part of the joke. I really disliked some of the weird super crazy things in SR2, for example the poop truck. To me, from a story perspective, having a grounded story and then throwing in moments of complete insanity creates a very disjointed experience. GTA4 struggled with this a lot. SR3′s developers decided to separate themselves from the GTA-clone label they faced with the previous two games and in my opinion it is better for it.
To me the biggest disappointment of 2011 was Need For Speed: The Run. They failed to live up to the high standard Criterion set when it brought new life into this fading franchise in Hot Pursuit. The E3 stage demo showed an exciting chase, and they promised a story driven race across the country. What we got was a series of ‘advance 10 spots’ races and QTE style out-of-car cutscenes.
Yeah, NFS is one the most disappointing games of 2011 but allow me to disagree with your opinion of SR3. The game is much shorter than SR2, the optional activities are far less and not as fun as in its predecessors, the story is linear as hell and the character customization is not as deep.
How do all that translate in a better game than the other games of the franchise?
Once again, another really good list.
I haven’t played that many new games this year, but I’d like to give my opinion on the ones I know about on this list.
Homefront: I had heard of this game from GameInformer, and soon I saw your review of it. Only 4 hours of single player? That’s just pure laziness right there! That’s one of my main problems with generic first-person-shooters. They spend all their time on the multiplayer, then don’t put any effort into the campaign. To me they should either stick with one or the other, or put equal effort into both versions.
Jurassic Part: The Game: At first I was slightly interested in this game. I’m a HUGE Jurassic Park fan, and I had heard many good things about the company working on this game. However, after the game came out I was reading many bad reviews about how dull the game was, so I never cared about getting the game anymore. To me, the only good Jurassic Park game is Jurassic Park Operation Genesis, and that’s it.
X-Men Destiny: I’ll be honest, I don’t know a whole lot about the X-Men universe. When I was young I was pretty girly, so I never watched the X-Men. *glares at younger self* However, I would have love to be introduced to the X-Men more by playing an advanced game that including extreme character and power customization. It’s a huge shame that the game never did that. In the end, I’m glad that I never got this title.
Lord of the Rings: War in the North: Whoa…I must have missed that review. D: I don’t remember seeing your review or let’s play of this game.
Well, out of what I’ve seen here, it didn’t look like that interesting of a game. So…yeah.
RAGE: At first I was really excited for this game. The style of it looked really cool, so I was highly interested. However, one of my cousins got this game and he told me that this game is horrible and to never play it. So I didn’t.
Michael Jackson: The Experience: The Wii version is SOOOOO much better! One of my friends bought the Kinect version and was telling me how crappy it was. I told her that I wish I knew she was getting it, for I had seen Joe’s review of this failure. I mean, no Michael in a Michael Jackson game? What the hell! >_<
Dead Island: I never knew much about Dead Island. I've never even seen the trailer. I just wasn't interested in yet another game with zombies.
Sword of the Stars II: Now I know NOTHING about this series. But having a game be virtually unplayable after release is really horrid though. It's good to hear that the company is fixing it, but they should have waited until the game was ready.
Dragon Age II: I confess…I really liked this game. ^^; But I will say it was no where near as good as the original. Dragon Age Origins was such a great game, with brilliant character customization, really cool origin stories, and the epic quest were all just spectacular. Dragon Age II has a lamer character creater (No elves or dwarves? Hey! D:<), not as strong story, and lots of chore work instead of epic quests. But they did improve the combat a whole bunch, which I really liked since the combat in Dragon Age Origins was kinda dull. I still had a ton of fun playing this game, but it was not as good as the original. Hopefully Dragon Age III will surpass both games and be an epic RPG.
Saints Row: The Third: I was not too excited for this one, but that's probably because I've never played any of the games in the franchise. I just wasn't interested, and it looks like my disinterest has payed off by not buying this game.
Dragon Age 2 is actually in my Top 5 games of the year. Nevertheless was I dumbstruck the first time I played through it, because of the amount of changes it had. I completely understand someone who didn’t like it due to these changes, but it was indeed the game I played through the most of the year (3 times).
I thought a lot about why Bioware changed the type of story so much. I always got a huge “Lord of the Rings” feeling from Origins. The arch demon and the couple of good guys that go around, putting together an army of different races based on ancient contracts. So epic that you just can do it once.
So when it came to Dragon Age 2, they looked into another great franchise: The Game of Thrones. As a huge fan of the books I was almost squeeing with all the politics and family matters in this game. I loved it. Sure I hated the repeating dungeons, but overall I got a great experience based on something I love.
Nevertheless I was surpised to see all the hate the game got. Especially friends of mine hating on all the politics. But what did they want? Another blight 700 years later? Well to each his own. I for one really loved Dragon Age 2 because of my love for Game of Thrones.
BUT I call BULLSHIT on all people who hated on DA2 and are now Über-Fans of the Game of Thrones TV series. That’s just plain stupid.
I still maintain that Dragon Age 2 was an incredibly compelling character-driven story experience full of character investment, tough choices, and high stakes. I don’t see how the gameplay supposedly lacks the depth of the previous installment when you can still fine-tune your party strategy in ways not seen in other RPGs. Nothing satisfied me more than to see my party work in battles like a well-oiled machine after I spent so much consideration in their individual tactics. The only difference is that Dragon Age 2′s gameplay is faster paced and goes for a hack-and-slash approach instead of a click-and-watch-them-fight approach.
The only disappointing things I ever saw for Dragon Age 2 were how it was restricted to a city and nearby locale and a constant reuse of level designs.
The first Dragon Age was an interesting plot-driven story, whereas Dragon Age 2 was an interesting character-driven story. For me, that made the story and characters much deeper and memorable.
I’m sorry Joe but I couldn’t disagree more about Dragon Age II. Frankly I think you’ve blown the original way out of proportion, it’s a mundane, “seen it all before” story about Orc… sorry Darkspawn attacking a country with some minor political intrigue and a dull combat system that is so slow and frustrating. There’s no exploration in that game. I gave it a 7/10 after I played it, but even that might be generous at times I think.
It’s sequel’s story was far more engaging and personal, your character was an actual character, it had a deeply interesting politically driven plot that resonates brilliantly as the Mages and Templars go head to head dealing with things like terrorism, profiling and slavery all with a great true introduction to the Quinari, Dragon Age’s best race and most original contribution by far leading to what I consider to be a damn difficult and brilliant one-on-one personal battle against the Arishok. It’s combat system is faster paced and honestly more tactical even in my mind because it forces you to think on your feet and target your enemies wisely, moving around the combat arena to get into better positioning and you actually feel like you’re attacking the enemy rather than auto-attacking to victory.
You posted just before I did, and touched on a point I forgot. DAII had some rather poignant takes on tough political issues. Both mages and templars have strong arguments for their sides, and it really comes down to the player’s personal sense of ethics to choose which side is correct. Meanwhile, slavery and backhanded politics serve as complex backdrop.
DAII gets a lot of undeserved hate, IMO.
I would say that is a matter of personal opinion, I found DAII claustrophobic, whereas in Origins, it felt like you actually did something on a wider scale, as if you were the hero in an adventure the size of LOTR, and your actions had much more impact than just a single city.
The combat system is more tactical compared to what? To be honest I found the combat system in Witcher 2 more tactical and that was a straight up action-game type of system with combos and everything. On the other hand in Origins even on the normal difficulty setting you had to constantly manage your team, giving them orders, taking direct control of them and even “program” them how to react on certain occasions. On DAII even though you can do those things you really don’t have to more the majority of the game with the exception of a couple of battles (which I think were optional to be honest).
Also the characters in DAII were one dimensional. For the majority of the game none of the other characters you meet actually evolve. They stuck in their beliefs even when they are wrong and you can only choose if you will choose them over the others with different opinions. Just take a look at Deus Ex: Human Revolution for example. With the right arguments you can make even your worst enemies see things from your prospective.
But even if I agree with you on these parts what about the rest of the game? The areas you visit are bland, uninteresting with linear paths to take (even in the city in many occasions I feel like there is only one path I can take to reach a certain point on the map), and the worst part they keep repeating. For crying out loud, how many quests can you get that take place on a few square meters of land?
Also, the RPG element is seriously butchered here. You can’t equip your party with new gear, only one race and the dialogs are basically divided into three options (good, snarky and evil).
Finally the graphics are just unacceptable. Just compare this with Witcher 2 or Skyrim.
Don’t misunderstand my words, I enjoyed DA and finished it three times. But still compared to it’s predecessor and other RPGs that were released in 2011, it’s just disappointing. Not bad, just an average game, and for a Bioware title that is kind of “unacceptable”.
People like you piss me off so much.
The Warden is blank slate, a husk, that WE, as players, need to fill.
That’s how RPGs, that’s how they’ve always been, you just don’t understand that.
and i agree with txcforever, i had to think A LOT more in The Witcher 2 than i ever did in DA2, DA2 was just over the top, ridiculous and exaggerated, i could barely see my characters at times.
and no, Nightmare Doesn’t count.
i’ve played Nightmare, but the game isn’t difficult there, it’s just ridiculously cheap.
Spawning enemies out of thin air? that’s not strategic.
and then the rogues attack with an UNAVOIDABLE back flip that will not only harm you but leave you wide open?
and make every single special attack(or skills, or abilites, or however they’re called) so big that they will take almost the entire battlefield? when you’re almost always in tight corridors? and then give them the ability to kill your companions almost instantly?
i think i made my point.
The DA2 characters were very one dimensional, they barely changed, and yes, many of the ones in Origins didn’t change much, but i think it’s less likely to change in a few months(like in Origins) than Changing through the Course of 10 F*CKING YEARS.
As for the story, i could write 100 Books about how badly the DA2 story was writen, but i’ll just leave this here:
http://social.bioware.com/1370775/blog/210395/
Read and you’ll see my points.
as for your jab against Origins…. Meh, whatever, it’s an opinion, i don’t agree with it but i don’t have to.
People like him piss you off so much? Is that really necessary? What did he do to piss you off so much? If anything, I’d say through your post, you come across as far more of an unreasonable asshole than the OP. Just chill, we don’t need to get angry here over some ultimately meaningless sharing of opinions on the internet.
Well that aside, let’s see if we can dissect your points, since you claim you actually made one. The Witcher required you to think more because DA was over the top and exaggerated, and you could barely see your characters…I don’t follow, that made no sense whatsoever. Either way, I played Witcher 2, and I found its tactics to be more about reflexes than actual thinking. Not to bash on Witcher 2 or anything, as there’s nothing wrong with that approach to combat. I thought more about DA2, though, because of how you can program your party’s AI. Seriously, it does require a lot of thought, and I put together some awesome combinations that don’t make nightmare difficulty cheap. Seriously, just put in some thought and effort, and it won’t seem mindless.
As for your second point, you don’t like certain special attacks. I don’t think you quite made a point there as much as you incessantly whined. I didn’t find these mechanics troublesome.
One dimensional characters that don’t change any? Well that’s just wrong, as most (if not all) characters undergo some sort of arc, and they all have truly defining character features that extend beyond the cliche and stereotypical.
I find it funny that the post you linked to has been deleted due to inappropriate content. That doesn’t surprise me given the general behavior you exhibit in your post.
However, if you’re so convinced the story was badly written, then you have no idea how many ways stories can be told. DA2 was a very character-driven story, whereas DA1 was a plot-driven story. The sign of how effective a character-driven story is how much the characters drive the story forward. The DA2 world would not have changed had the main characters not been there to drive the story forward. DA1, on the other hand, would have continued its story whether the characters were involved or not. I could go into a lot more detail, but that I believe that general statement illustrates my point a lot more than you possibly could in your post. Keep in mind, this is not to bash on DA1′s story (it is a well-written story), it’s just to illustrate that the two games are entirely different types of stories, and that both are perfect examples of their types.
In conclusion, both your points and mine are purely subjective. The difference is, I find your points to be wholly inarticulate. Hopefully, you can approach my point of view without going into an unnecessary nerd rage.
When i say that he pisses me off, i refer to all the people who don’t like blank slates, stating that they have no personality and are dull.
thing is, you’re supposed to give them personality and depth yourself.
yet no one now seems to understand that, and it bothers me, specially because that’s how RPGs started..
No Blank Slates, and RPGs probably wouldn’t have exited.
if i came across as a nerd raged asshole, then i will apologize to him, that wasn’t my intention.
anyway.
to the rest of your points.
DA2′s over the topness has more to do with it’s visual Style(which i don’t like), but at the same time, it gets in the way, there are times where i could barely see my characters, do to so much Flash, Explosions and Blood in the screen.
I’m referring to Friendly fire.
In Nightmare, friendly fire is activated and you can’t remove it.
Now that isn’t the problem, the problem, is that the game is very cheap on Nightmare.
Like i said, unavoidable attacks by rogues, who leave you wide open, Enemies spawning out of thin air, and the fact that we are almost always on tight spaces makes the fact that the special abilites are so large a problem, because they can kill your party in a second.
What are you talking about?
i linked to a blog by someone who can explain this better than me, and it has not been deleted.
But, now that i think about, i think you need an account on that site in order for you to see it.
Some, not all.
Anders is the same whiny little at the end that he is at the beginning.
Same with Fenris, and the opinions and ideals of either don’t change in the slightest, unlike say, Leliana or Alistair(from DA:O), who you could actually help them decide their own beliefs and actitudes.
Others change only if you through a certain Path in the “Friendship/rivalry” thingy, which, IMO, is bad, because they should change at least a bit one way or the other.
As for the story, the user from the link can explain it much better than me, so, either make an account there, or…. well, do nothing.
Huh, I guess you could look at the OP’s post that way. I guess from him praising the game for having a main character who’s an actual character, you surmised he doesn’t like blank slates? I can see your logic there, but it’s kind of a stretch. But anyway, personal preference, I guess. I don’t think every RPG has to have a blank slate character in order to immerse yourself into that character. I still chose what Hawke said and did. In fact, Hawke’s personality and tone of voice change subtly depending on what kinds of answers you typically choose. On a second playthrough, you’ll find if you’re more aggressive in your responses, all of Hawke’s tones become more aggressive. I thought touches like that were genius in having a character you can immerse yourself into who has a voice and backstory.
Well, I can’t really argue against your dislike of the visual style. I liked it. If the style’s not your taste though, then I can’t say any more.
You can avoid friendly fire in nightmare if you plan your party’s AI carefully enough. I remember having an awesome system going of a mage casting AOE spells before the rest of my party gets close enough, then switching to single target spells. May not have prevented every case of friendly fire, but I dispatched so many enemies because I had a solid system that best utilized my party’s strengths.
As for rogue’s special attacks on me, well you have the entire rest of your party to rely on if you’re stunned, given that they’re planned well enough. Also, even in cramped spaces, you can tell certain party members to stay far away from the action, or to go assist another party member or something. If I remember correctly, I’d typically send my other melee fighters to go after higher ranked enemies, so if there were a bunch of lower ranked ones, I could use AOE attacks on them and none of my party members would be in the way.
Strange, I have an account there, and all I get is “adneate’s blog This post has been deleted.” I spoke too soon about the inappropriate content reason, as I mistook a button for that, but the link tells me whatever post is no longer there.
True, Anders is still whiny, but he also experiences a fall from grace, once grasping hope for the good of the downtrodden, and eventually getting fed up and snaps, taking matters into his own hands. His ideals did change. If we examine his change of ethical values alone, we see that in the beginning of the game, he holds a deontological view of ethics, and by the end of the game, he has shifted to a teleological view of ethics. It’s subtle, and I like that. In case you don’t understand what I mean, deontology basically means what’s right and wrong are based on the nature of one’s actions at the time, whereas teleology basically means what’s right and wrong are based on what the end result is. Think about that, he really does undergo that change and it is a real and valid character arc.
It’s been a while since I played, but I’m almost certain Fenris can gain a sense of absolution and renewed sense of purpose depending how you interact with him.
Aside from the characters though, I thought the politics of the game were incredibly well done. Mages are oppressed, but are too dangerous to be left to do as they please. It’s a tough moral dilemma whose side to take. Will you tell the mages their freedom must be stripped for the good of society, or will you tell the family members of the victims of blood magic and demon contracts that preserving the mages’ freedom is more important? Even when you take up one side’s cause, you still end up seeing the ugly sides of both.
Some thoughts about your choices….
9: Agreed. As a huge fan of TellTale, I found this game to be lacking in the charm and excitement of the other licensed games they’ve done, like Sam and Max and the Back to The Future Game. Jurassic Park to me felt like A movie licensed version of Heavy Rain just like you said, and while (in my opinion) Heavy Rain was enjoyable do to the fact that your skill with the qte’s effected the stoy, Jurassic Park basically WAS just a movie in game form where you just press buttons at the appropraite time to see the next scene. You know what I compare this game too? A freaking DVD game. You know, those little games that movie companies pack into a DVD that play a lot like Dragon’s Lair? That’s what I’m comparing this game too
4: I knew Dead Island was going to be a flop from the start. After watching a few gameplay trailers, Something just told me that the game was going to fail on most people expectations. It’s basically a first person game mixed with Dead Rising on a tropical setting. Also, I wanted to learn the backstory of the family in the trailer and play as them, not play as some drunken party goers.
1: I am a firm believer that comedy can work great in games and blend well with dynamic elements. Take a look at the works of Tim Schafer for example. One of his best games, Grim Fandango, had plenty of humor and comedy in it, but had a deep, enriching story that kept players interested in it for more then just the comedic value. Saints Row 2 had a perfect blend of both Action and Comedy, while Saints Row 3 took the comedy aspect and cranked it to 11 and cranked the seriousness way down. If a games gimmicks include dildo-based weaponry as it’s main joke, using Frame skipping and lag as a mechanic for a mission, and forgets that some of the best comedy can be taken from some serious moments, then the game has already failed in keeping someone like me entertained. I was shocked when I saw all the high scores for this game because it felt like the developers weren’t even trying anymore and had opted to just throw in anything they thought was hilarious. As an aspiring Game Story Writer and Designer, the plans for my game do have some moments of just completely insane comedy, but I know that if I focus solely on the Comedy, then the game will flop. If your looking for a Mature comedy game, look back at something like Conker’s Bad Fur Day. Yes, it had hilarious scences like the matrix parody, the Great Mighty Poo, and the many other referances, but it kept some serious undertones to it as well, like how Conker just wanted to go home and get some sleep while the world around him refused to let it happen. Saints Row just thinks that if it’s hilarious, it will work. Granted, I did like the scence at the beginning of the game with the guy flying through a plane while falling in mid-air, but beyond that, this game didn’t really didn’t really have anything in it that made me want to rush out and buy it.
The thing is the whole way North Korea came to power in Homefront is actually accurate. It is very similar to how Nazi Germany emerged. (IE a weakened state that became militaristic adsorbed its neighbors and invaded other countries. )
I’d just wish they had more dev time, the game felt rushed. I mean the characters were card board, the graphics sucked, and it was way to linear for a that is based on guerrilla warfare. It should have been more like Freedom Fighters/Operation Flashpoint Resistance.
Oh, and I forgot to mention that Michael Jackson the experience was probably the most annoying game to deal with. The pontential is there, dancing along to Michael Jacksons moves would be incredible… but. Ubisoft got hands of it. And the Just Dance series is (and lets be honest, Experience is just an extension of the Just Dance series), in my opinion, one of the worst video game series out there today. The whole series since the first has been stuck with awful controls that don’t ever track how you are doing well (Even worse on the wii where someone randomly flailing and waggling the wii-mote could beat someone legitmately trying to do the song.) no really consistancy with difficulty and a bare-bones, half completed feel. But the main problem is they rarely actually seem to try to fix these problems and instead just seem to rush out as many games as possible. In the last 3 months they released 4 games (Just Dance 3, Just Dance Kids 2, Abba: You can Dance! and The Black Eyed Peas Experience)
And The Black Eyed Peas Experience, which we might as well call the “Sequel” to Michael Jackson The Experience, only really just changed the menus and songs from Michael Jackson, to the Black Eyed Peas.
Trust me, we need to stop buying the Just Dance and Experience games, go support series that work like Dance Central. Do it, otherwise it won’t be long before we see “Justin Beiber: The Experience” for the Kinect, Wii and Move in our stores…
Actually suprised Marvel VS Capcom 3 didn’t make this list, considering how excited you were for it and how you weren’t impressed when it finally got released.
Unless it’s like a low number in your worsts, but I hope not. I say MVC3 it’s as good as Mortal Kombat 9, with each game having there own counterpoints to which is better (MK9 has a story mode and a challenge tower plus fun fatalities, and MVC3 has smoother, faster gameplay and a bigger character roster.)
Also going to call it, Mindjack is going to be 1 or 2 for the years worst.
Nice list, Joe. I actually agree with you completely. Homefront, Dead Island, RAGE, and Dragon Age 2, while still good games, are probably on my most disappointing for the year as well. I look forward to seeing your WORST of 2011.
So did Angry Joe already expect Duke Nukem Forever not to be good? Either way nicely explained list.
Well as Joe pointed out these are games that he was severly disappointed with that wound up being either only decent, severly flawed, and had some bad qualities but still weren’t completley terrible. You know games that range from 5-7 the medicore to pretty good range when they should of been great. I have a feeling Duke Nukem Forever is just pretty much a bad game. I also wonder if that means Marvel vs Capcom 3 is on that list as well since I remember Joe really hating parts of the game but still saying it was okay. Then again his opinion may of changed since then and then we had knews of the Marvel vs Capcom 3 Super Edition mode which may of made him dislike the original even more. Still good list here (knew Saints Row 3 would be on this list at some point) and does make me look forward to the worst list. Heh doubt there’s any game that Joe found as terrible as Sonic Free Riders though which may be one of his worse games but it’s one of his best reviews as it shows why he should keep the angry joe monkier since when he is angry he can be quite entertaining.
Say it with me Joe: “Twenty Eleven”. Two-Thousand and Eleven sounds ridiculous. Aside from that, great list.
well… it depends… anyway both are accepted.
Well, think about this.
Say “The year 1995″
Say “The year 1812″
Say “The year 2185″
Now say “The year 2012″
The 2000s were weird, “twenty oh oh” or “twenty oh five” sound weird, so we said “two thousand five” etc.
But since 2010, we can now start saying years as they always have been pronounced. Many people, like Joe, are just used to saying it “two thousand…”, but it’s time to put that mouthful behind us. I don’t know why all the thumbs down, I wasn’t insulting Joe, I even said the list was great, I’m just giving some advice for the future.
Most disappointing games I played were L.A. Noire and Shadows of the Damned. So much potential in those titles, and they turned out just… average.
Whatever happened to your purple dildo after the review, anyway? I’m sure you could auction it off on Ebay, and pay for the site for the next year or so…
If they just made Homefront into a tie in movie with the new Red Dawn remake it could have been much better game with the extra dev time. Homefront was probably the ugliest looking game I’ve ever played.