D(LC)elightful Treats 05-20-12: Pinball, Supervillains, & Robots
Mother 3 on Consumerism, Art, and Death: “Strange. Funny. Heartrending.”
Kusoge Club – Deadliest Warrior Legends
Hard Corner: BERSERK special
Sage Reviews: Max Payne 3
Posted By AngryJoe about 4 months, 1 week ago
These are the games that caused the MOST ANGER!
This is it! The Top 10 WORST Games of 2011! These are the games that pissed me the most off this year! What about you?
Follow me and my show updates on Twitter!
Fan/Like my Profile Page on the Facebooks! Pwease?
Also, Subscribe to AngryJoeShow on YouTube
Brink wasn’t rushed, Splash Damage just sucks.
Their design choices were fundamentally flawed like
Lots of appearance customization to mimic TF2, completely missing the point that selling hats is what made TF2′s f2p model profitable, and class abilities, weapons, level design, balance and polish are more important than changing the appearance of a character you’ll never see.
1) trying to copy TF2 but adding Iron Sights so you can’t run and gun,
2) no 1hks (even sniped headshots),
3) light body types don’t move fast enough nor have the mobility of a Scout nor are levels designed to give them routes quicker to theri goals and needing to stand still to complete objectives makes their speed irrelevant.
4) Heavy bodies are too slow to be useful so both body parts aren’t upgrades or viable options.
5) The spy class is useless as their disguising requires killing an enemy first, hoping no other enemies are around while you diguise, having limited time before the body disappears before you can disugise, and attacking an enemy means you’ve to repeat the process.
6) Almost every mission has an NPC you have to escort.
7) You have to double-tap enemies so combat is a cluster-fuck where folks who got dropped on then drop whoever shot them.
but i love marvel vs capcom 3 and ultimate but it is a disappointing game real no fare the ending store fael but i hop thel get it rate this time i hop
Too bad that AJ didnt have enough mental health to know that the douche we used as a player character actually was possesed by a evil force (Minjacked if you will) and doesnt remember anything at all, not even what the fuck he has been doing during the time you play as him
After watching Yahtzee’s top 5 best and worst of 2011. I must ask Joe one more thing. Do you have any complaints about Activision’s and EA’s marketing schemes? Any at all?
Oh, 100th comment as well, how divine…
to be honest, I wouldn’t mind seeing what Joe thinks of Activision and the (in)famous Call of Duty.
especially, especially, especially, especially, especially, especially, especially, especially, especially!!!
Come on Angry Joe seriously? Sometimes I think you should read the newspaper a bit more and play games a bit less. “VS” means “VERSUS” not “VERSE” as any 6 year old could tell you.
No Alpha Protocol? Thought that had a pretty bad review.
Alpha Protocol was 2010.
I don’t understand why you guys are even debating about Marvel vs Capcom 3.
It was pratically the Call of Duty to Capcom’s fighters.
Sure the fighting was fun but that’s where you start from for a fighter. Any other area it either suffered or lacked in (read: didn’t have). The AI was “Call of Duty” god awful which eliminates arcade mode (and training mode) and we already know the online was terrible.
So repeating what Joe said: IT’S BAREBONES.
Say what you will about COD, but every installment at least puts effort into their single player campaign, which they really don’t have to do, considering most people who buy the game will never play it.
Not saying that I think MVC3 should have a better single player campaign (Fighting games’ storyline psh). But adding any kind of extra content beyond the minimum fighting game requirements, Arcade mode, Versus mode, and Online Mode, would have been appreciated.
I love the sarcasm in this response.
Well glad to see at least one reviewing calling out the cash grabs for what they are and pointing out legitimately poorly made games rather than ones they didn’t like because it’s a game they’d never play on their own time since it’s a genre or style they don’t enjoy in the first place. I still kinda laugh at the people that bought MVC3. You knew they were gonna pump out an “upgrade” in less than a year; that’s what Capcom does. And I’ll bet that there’s yet another upgrade sometime in 2012. Enjoy your $50 development releases.
Also, who wants to take bets that FF13-2 will be on the 2012 list?
I agree to your opinion about the business strategy of CAPCOM. Although I purchased DMC3 SE version and satisfied with the deal, to think about it now I got robbed by the company at the time. Despite what I said, I think CAPCOM was relatively generous at the time. Upgraded games had more content than what is being released nowadays. DMC3 SE has Arena mode and additional playable character with new sets of moves. This is probably why I felt good when I bought it.
What I think happened is that CAPCOM thought making less effort is OK because a product like DMC3 SE sold well. Production values of their games are getting lower these days (except for Bayonetta)
Good thing there wee so many good games in 2011 to counterbalance these,otherwise Joe might’ve died of Anger septicemia.
I think next year you shouldn’t count movie license games on the list. Of course they’re going to be bad, and no one in the right mind would choose to play them (which is also why it’s so fun seeing you play them
).
Not true my friend. Whilst widely regarded that most Licensed Video Game Movies suck. There are always exceptions to the rule. If it wasn’t for Goldeneye 007 on the N64, todays FPS market might never have taken off.
I don’t know about that. Goldeneye, by all accounts, was a kick-butt game back in the day. But around that time, I was playing other FPS’s, some of which I’m sure would have kept the FPS genre alive (I was particularly a fan of the Dark Forces: Jedi Knight series).
Not only that, but there are some people who wish the FPS would die out.
Im going to openly disagree with you about Goldeneye. Yes, it was a good game but the FPS genre on the PC WAS going strong thanks to titles like Quake, Duke Nukem 3D and like someone else mentioned Jedi Knight.
Yes it was all strong and grand on the PC, but FPS could have never kicked off on Consoles if it wasn’t for Goldeneye getting the controls for it right.
The sad thing about Mindjack is there was potential for something really good there, as the basic concept seems to be adding something genuinely new and innovative. That’s what makes it so frustrating compared to a simply badly executed generic shooter.
I think there was potential for a good game with Man vs Wild as well. With more polish, and maybe a little more to do, it could have been a decent title.
Duke Nukem was just screwed going in. Hopefully after pushing out that turd the franchise can finally move on and maybe make something decent.
10. Yeah, very little surprise that most movie tie-in games would be awful, this being no exception.
9. See above.
8. Never did own it, but from what I saw of the game, yes, quite a squandered opportunity here…
7. Not the absolute worst out there, but the constant delays and perfectionisms that resulted in the legendary development hell (with almost all of the game’s content attributed to 3D Realms) have taken its toll. It may be infuriating about what the end product was like, but more than that it is a rather sad and disappointing closure to the legendary vaporware status, which resulted in something (from what I see) barely more functional than Daikatana and lacking much of the oldschool charm of DN3D. With Gearbox now holding the IP, I’m quite certain there will be a much better Duke Nukem game on the line in the foreseeable future.
6. Now this is just sad. I’d place this higher (perhaps DNF should have been too), and of course I am further infuriated with the game after watching Extra Credits absolutely rip it apart for more than what has been brought up from what I saw of it. And of course with Ubisoft delaying the PC port a couple months, nobody bothered as soon as the news broke out and the developers didn’t care (I checked the Steam “Top Sellers” list close to the time it was released, so I know; hell I didn’t even see it in the top ten, and if it did show up in the top 20, it all but vanished after a couple days at most)
5. Egads! IIRC, the release of Street Fighter IV editions were spaced out even further than this. And of course, Capcom’s business practices weren’t admirable, but the situation here won’t make it quite this bad… but still, a downgrade in many respects from MvC2 is bound to severely disappoint.
4. The fact you cross streams without repercussion is the least of its worries…
3. Wait, what? This game exists?!
2. It’s sad to see the quality of the Harry Potter games fall down. Granted I’ve never played anything in that franchise since the PC version of Chamber of Secrets, but from what I see, the first game was competent but linear, while the second game pretty much improved the gameplay in almost every way (including the fact there is actually freedom of exploration in CoS). And for the final game: Gears of Wands? Yep, it’s no wonder the studio who made Deathly Hallows 1+2 closed now…
1. Eugh! I don’t know how anyone can manage to pull off a horrid game, but they did it. Indeed (with apologies to Yahtzee) it’s “fucking fucking fucking fucking bad bad bad bad! Don’t don’t don’t don’t play it!”
It is certainly amusing to see that Angry Joe’s opinion of MVC3 has angered quite a few people here. I for one agree that it belongs on this list though if it were my own list both versions would be included. Sorry but in my opinion,Capcom dropped the ball big time with the latest entry to the Marvel Vs Capcom series. It’s only fun for a few weeks at best with not much else in terms of extras. Not to mention it was dumbed down and matches don’t last as long as in MVC2 with X-factor.
King Of Fighters XIII and MK9 both brought their A-game and are fighting games I will play for much longer. They prove that story does matters and can be implemented in a fighting game successfully.
Back then at least Capcom had the filmsy excuse that there was no DLC and internet,but now their business practices need to change or else they might as well join Acclaim and the other companies who left us.
Thank the heavens I never got into Street Fighter and with their 1 billion versions.
I am a bit shocked though DNF wasn’t any higher.
Overall I can agree with all of the entries and why you picked them.
Well hey now KOF 13 is great and all but it’s really just an improvement of KOF12. Which is kinda similar to MVC3 and UMVC3.
The difference though is that KOF had the decency to wait a couple years to release the better version. That and the awesome HD sprites.
Not really. KOF12 was a disaster with missing moves,5 stages,NO final boss and a bunch of missing material. At least MVC3 as much as I hate it came complete. I still can’t believe Angry Joe praised it but then again he admitted to not being a fan.
Most of all why are there fans still defending Marvel vs Capcom 3? Makes no sense to me. Whatever.
Looks like a good portion of the commentators missed the ” ‘s ” after AJ in the title.
Man vs Wild the game lol
Like others have said, I think MvC3 would have been more appropriate on the Top 10 Dissapointing Games list. Lazy content aside, at least the core experience is fun.
Though to be fair, yes, regular MvC3 is now obsolete. I guess for that reason alone I can at least see where you’re coming from by including it on this list.
We are talking about Worst Games of 2011 here. Not Worst Handling of Games by producers in 2011. It’s quite well agreed that MvC3 would make most people most disappointing lists. But to put on the worst just because a sequel came out 9 months later seems unfair when everything else is on the list for being horrible games you shouldn’t even touch with a 10 foot pole.
Now, if we are going to rate a list by Bad Company moves. Then we should also take into account stuff like bad ports (Brink) terrible launch day releases with games being full of bugs initially (Magicka, Sword of the Stars 2) pre-order DLC that should already be on the disc (Way too many games to list) and my favourite chestnut, yearly releases. Widely debatable issues. Essentially what MvC3 is guilty of to a greater degree, but to compensate only asks $40 because of it. And I’ve seen plenty more yearly releases that have made even less changes between games yet still expect you to pay full price for it, and then some extra if you want everything from last years addition. Dance Games and Shooting Games seem to be the biggest offender of yearly releases. I’ve already mentioned prime time offender Call Of Duty which Activision are now rolling out in yearly packages of $60 and announcing next years sequel on the same day as the game gets released.
Fun thing I noticed with Dance Central. The difference between Dance Central 1 and 2 is 11 months, and if you pay full $60 price then an import cost of $5, more than the cost of the original game, you too can make your original Dance Central game that isn’t even a year old and didn’t have multiplayer when it should have had in the first place obsolete! So with the same logic Angry Joe put to MvC3. Would you list Dance Central as one of the worst games of 2010? Would Angry Joe put it as a year worst if the first game was released in January and the second in December?
No, because as we all well know there are far worse dancing games out there, plus much worse games in other genre’s as well. This is a list for the worst games of 2011, the games that you would never enjoy playing at all and wish to throw into the nearest volcano or hurricane for you. And there are plenty more much worse games out there that Joe’s have let slide by out of what he has reviewed in the last year.
I think he’s more pissed off about how MvC seems to have gotten the bare minimum of effort put into it to make a working product, it’s has like 2 modes compared to SFIV which had a lot more to offer with regards to number of modes/content, than they have the balls to release a MvC3.5 within a year that basically adds features they could have easily included in the original release (Or added post-release as free DLC), not only that, but they’ve decided “Oh did you give us 60$ for MvC3, well f**k you because you NEED to get the new version to get everything, including basic balance changes!”, personally I didn’t buy MvC3, I’ve just been spending my money elsewhere, I believe he has a right to put any game he chooses on his list even if I disagree to an extent, look at my previous post concerning brink to see what I mean.
MVC3 did not belong here. It was too well designed and fun to play to be classified as a bad game. It’s not so much that you thought it was one of the worst, but rather the position you gave it. I’m sorry, it was not worse than any of the games you listed before it, especially no.10 and no.9. To put it below those is just insulting, especially when you stated good things about it, where you had absolutely nothing good to say about any of the others except maybe Brink, but even then you only complimented the visuals.
I’m sorry you didn’t like it, Joe, but even though this is what -you- considered to be the top 10 worst games of 2011, you still need to be aware that you’re trying to be a professional reviewer. While your honesty and freedom from restrictions that other reviewers have makes you a good person to follow, you need to learn the difference between what is actually bad, and what you personally did not like.
Professional reviewing is all about opinions, these lists are no different.
So it’s really moreso in the minds eye as to what the is the worst game of the year, depends on the criteria by the reviewer.
I have to partly agree with Robert on this: some of these reviews and lists are opinion and should be taken as such.
However, opinion should be based on some objectifiable criteria, and not merely whether a reviewer liked it or not.
That said, Joe does have some objectifiable criteria here: one of his chief criteria for a game is the value you get from it. Is it worth the actual money you plop down on the counter to pay for it?
In the case of MvC3, he called it: MvC3 was a half-assed thrown-together game meant to capitalize on fanboys being willing to dish out the bucks. He also called the fact that they were already planning to release an updated version of it mere months after its initial release, and that they were intending to charge full price for the updated version. In other words, you spend $60 on MvC3, and just a few months later, plop down another $60 for the exact same game but with some updates and features that should have been included with the original. If you bought both, Capcom is now sitting in their corporate offices with your $120, laughing their faces off at you because you fell for it. And they knew you would.
Bottom line: this is how Capcom does business. They rerelease all their games in new updated versions every few months just to squeeze a few extra bucks out of suckers who are willing to flush their money down the drain on a few added features every now and then. We saw it happen with the Street Fighter 2 series back in the 90s, and now we’re seeing it with MvC3 20 years later.
Don’t get me wrong: I have no problem with a franchise having some new content or updates. I strongly suspect that Skyrim – my second favorite game this year – to have some updates by this time next year in the form of a GOTY edition. They always do. But Skyrim was at least a complete game in and of itself, and the additional features of the GOTY edition will most likely be available as separate downloads. It’s not as though they released an incomplete game just so they could milk me for an extra $60 for a more complete version.
MvC3 was an incomplete game, and Capcom released it incomplete because they knew they could trick fanboys into spending another $60 to get UMvC3. This is why AJ put it on this list: he knew this was going to happen.
First off: UMVC3 was $40, not $60. If they had released all of the stuff that was in UMVC3 as DLC to MVC3, it would have cost far more than $40. Of course, you could still argue that the game should have included all of that content from the start, but the rebalancing that also came with the updated game would have never happened, just because I don’t really think Japanese developers are in the habit of producing patches to their games.
Second, I agree that every review has some sort of opinion behind it, but putting MVC3 ahead of two movie license titles and Brink was uncalled for. MVC3′s game play was still solid and enjoyable when you got down to it, which those three games cannot say for themselves (Though I understand Brink has gotten better since its release)
Then they should have released MvC3 at $40 and UMvC3 at $60. And maybe had a single download pack in which you got everything that was missing from MvC3.
$100, $120 – it still means Capcom got way more money from their customers than they really deserved.
UMvC3 was the game that should have been released as MvC3, maybe minus a handful of characters, which could have been available as DLC.
Wait, how would it have cost MORE by being DLC? If anything it would cost LESS because you wouldn’t be paying for the part of the game you already own.
The idea is using Angry Joe’s considered fair costing for DLC characters costing $5 each (what Mortal Kombat and MvC3 sold DLC Characters for) Since there are 12 characters in Ultimate, that would be $5 * 12 = $60 for characters alone, and that’s not including anything else, so in theory, UMvC3 is by far the cheaper deal.
Really I think Capcom should have released the original in November this year and the sequel in August next year. Just the simple sign of “New year, new game” would have appeased many people. Because there are plenty of game series out there that abuse the “12 months or less sequel that take the last game and improve on it, instead of taking 2 years of development to have one good complete game in the first place”
Also I laugh at the guy who said the prices should be switched around. No one would want to pay more for a game that they have already played with a few upgrades and actually costs more than the original version as well. If Capcom did that they would have no defenders for what they did. But since there seems to be a majority of people (Not just me) saying that MvC3 shouldn’t be on the list, you should be able to guess that Capcom did something right and develop a good game. Outside of maybe Brink no other game on the list is being disputed for it’s position on this list.
Why don’t you try rereading my post before you keel over from lack of breath. You might note that I said that the first game should have been $40 and the second $60. And I stand by that: the first wasn’t worth more than $40 at release. I also said that they should have offered the additional content – that is, essentially an upgrade from MvC3 to UMvC3 – as DLC. Heck, charge more than $20 if you like – I’m sure some fans wouldn’t mind paying a little extra to play the game before the completed version comes out.
And just because there are one or two fanboys out there in a rage because Joe dared to call Capcom to the carpet for their greedy business practices – for releasing essentially an incomplete game so they could turn around and sell the completed version to them again – does not mean that I should concede that the first was a good game. The fact that it’s on this list, and that there are several others who defend Joe’s reason for putting it here, should be an indicator to you of that fact.
But subjective opinions aside, the objective, undeniable reality is that with MvC3, Capcom sold an incomplete game. A fighting game in this era – and one from Capcom at that! – should never have been released this woefully lacking to start with.
This is a response to tragicguineapig, dunno if it’s actually gonna show up under his post or not.
First, try not to be so obnoxious with your argument. Calling us fanboys who are raging at joe isn’t a way to civilly discuss this. My ‘rage’ could better be put as mild annoyance, enough to make me want to comment. In the end, he’s a guy whose opinion I respect, but in this case I disagree with. Though, you could just be peeved at the other guy saying he was laughing at you, which I admit is also in bad form.
Look, I’m not a capcom fanboy, despite what you might think. I just really enjoyed MVC3, but I also acknowledge that it had a lot of flaws. I contest its placing on this list simply because I don’t believe it’s a worse game than Thor or Green Lantern. If we’re using the same criteria here for judging the games – that they’re money grabs that were rushed out the door – then Thor and Green Lantern also fall under that. Except that they were less fun to play with poorer graphics and more shallow gameplay.
But you could make the argument that this video isn’t which games are the worst of 2011, but rather which ones just made Joe the angriest. A fair point, he does say that at the beginning, in which case I could not contest the ranking of any game on this list. They’re simply the top 10 games that made Joe the angriest, and I have no place telling him one game made him less angry than another.
But the video isn’t called ‘Top 10 Games that Made Joe Angriest in 2011′, it’s called the top 10 WORST of 2011. Unless he means to imply that the games which made him angriest are objectively also the worst, which is an arrogant claim to make.
This is also why I took issue with his Mortal Kombat review. For the most part, I felt that review was just comparing it to MVC3 and saying how much better it was, rather than judging it on its own merits. I do not believe that’s something a guy who’s trying to be professional in his reviews should do. I do, however, respect his opinion that he enjoyed MK more than MVC3, and concede that it did indeed have more content.
Finally, for what it’s worth (and I’m not helping my ‘not a capcom fanboy’ defense here, but whatever), but Capcom did say that they didn’t intend for UMVC3 to come out as a separate stand-alone, and they also said that they never intend to do that again, as they understand it makes people angry and shakes the faith their customers have in them. Are either of those things true? I don’t know, but it is worth mentioning in the context of this discussion.
I do have something to say on the MvC3 topic. Just because a game is a “bad investment” doesnt make it a “bad game”. Yeah it featured a poorly implemented spectator mode, but again, that alone doesnt make it a bad game. Does it handle poorly? Is the single player one giant fit of gamerage because of how OP the AI is? Is the graphics engine bad, is it unsmooth or bad animations? Does the online lag? Is the online unplayable in any way? Putting the price issue aside for a second, is the game not fun to play? These are the things that make a bad game bad, not the feeling of not getting enough content for its asking price. That makes the company bad, not the game. At worst it belonged on your Most Disappointing games list.
Sword of the Stars 2 on the other hand, from everything you said about it, THAT game should have been on your Worst Game of the year list. You didnt have a single positive thing to say about because all the bugs and glitches made the game unplayable. However I know you’ll check in on the game to see how the fixes progress and you’ll probably fill us in when everything gets fixed. HOWEVER, let me ask you this, over the past year, have you checked in on Mindjack? Have they fixed the bugs? If not, great, then it deserves the #1 spot. But if they have, then youre basing your opinion off year old information that is no longer correct.
Dont be that guy Joe. Dont take two equally flawed games and hold one up on a higher pedestal simply because you want that game to succeed more. We already have many other reviewers and websites doing that and its an insult to the gaming community. Id like to think you you respect us too much; the gaming community as a whole to be that guy. So dont be.
I stopped watching when you said “Does the Green Lantern at least fly? NO!”, only to show a flying sequence.
WTF Joe?
I believe he was referring to the ability to fly when YOU want to fly, not when the game says “ok flying section time”.
Everything on the list Make such sense. I do want to say something on my on comment. I know people would hate me or whatever. But to me. I like Brink. Of course its not the best game ever nor is it that great. but Its a potential If Done Right. but man….mindjack…. I was so thinking it would be good, then I saw your review… Great list. Lets hope 2012 is better.
What a collection of abysmal games. MindJack looks bad enough to cause permanent brain damage.
Mindjack totally deserves the no.1 spot and I can’t imagine what crossed the minds of the people who made this piece of crap. I don’t know who to blame here; The publisher Square Enix (The king of pretentious incompetent Wangst) or the developer Feelplus (who helped Develop Lost Odyssey alongside Mistwalker). But either way everyone who worked on this turd should be ashamed of themselves, though in Square’s case I don’t think they know what the words ‘shame’ and ‘humility’ means.
I personally liked Lost Oddesy, I can see how it might not be everyone’s cup of tea, but I enjoyed the old-school mechanics and found the universe interesting, also I will admit to being a SquareEnix apologist, but they’re probably guilty of being drawn in with an interesting premise and releasing a haphazardly produced game so I don’t think the blame fall solely on their shoulders (They really should have pushed back the release just so they could produce something halfway resembling a good game)
I didn’t insult Lost Odyssey (I haven’t played it), I merely pointed that game out in case anybody didn’t know who Feelplus were.
As for Square Enix, I can understand defending something you like and trying to justify them but after getting ripped off with FF10-2, FF12, all the pointless Kingdom Hearts Spinoffs and the final nail in the coffin of my tolerance of SE; FF13. It would take a lot of of work to get me buying any game with their name on it again.
I liked FFXII, it’s actually one of my favorite games in the series, the setting was cool and the characters were for the most part likeable, and the battle system was actually really good (One of my favorites TBH). The plot was good as well, maybe not the best, but I was never angry at it for being stupid like say VIII’s.
If you wanted a better example of a poorly executed game made by square that I think most everyone would agree on, just look at FFXIV, they had a fairly good MMO out on the market with XI (Wasn’t a WoW-killer, but it had it’s fans), but they decided to completely ignore it when making XVI, and what they ended up with was easily one of the most inept MMOs ever put to market.
You silly console players giving brink so much hate.
The only fps i enjoyed more than brink this year is probably the newest tribes. But that can’t be compared really …
The 3rd Birthday. That is all.
AJ I’m surprised you didn’t include Saints Row the 3rd in your list
It’s already peaking at no.1 in his “Top 10 Most Disappointing Games of 2011″.
IF I understand correctly, his basic philosophy was that the “Disappointments” list was to include those games he anticipated would be good but weren’t, whereas the “Worst” list was those games that totally pissed him off. I notice that he doesn’t really rate the “Worst” according to the ratings he actually gave them, but seems to have rated them according to how much they pissed him off.
From a technical standpoint SR3 was a well-made game that had serious flaws when compared to it’s predecessor, especially considering how good the original game was.
Angry Joe’s Worst List just came out? Wow, it feels like my birthday!
It’s so much fun listening to AJ talk about any given year’s worst games. This is when he truly lives up to his name (not that his good reviews are without merit). Since the Angry Video Game Nerd only looks at nostalgic games, AJ can come in and pick up the slack!
His choice for #1 is especially worthy of its rank. Hell, I should have seen it coming: A game with a boss that only shoots the ground, and one of the most unreal cut-scenes you’ll ever see in games (besides the one with the massive ship in Metal Gear Solid 4). I wonder if you can even get hurt by sliding into the boss’ line of fire.
Btw, I’m sending you a copy of Captain America… the game!!!
personally i think brink miss marketed as a parcore/shooter while it was just a teambased shooter with alot of movement.
and it didn’t help that the game was broken on realise day. i think brink was just hade bad timeing to be coming out
I don’t know what is happen… but this is an “expecially” good series of videos Joe!!!
I dont have a Worst List… as i invest much time in review watching I rarely found myself playing a bad game. Also thx to you Joe and the Blistered thumbs team
I think that MVC3 should had been on #10 instead of being #5. Yes it was bare bones and yes it was disapointing to get UMVC3 so soon but that dosen’t make MCV3 a bad game. It was fun as long as it did last.
And remember, you had to pay 60 dollars for it! Nope, You don’t make something that stripped and charge it for 60 BUCKS!
And it was still a good game to play. Plus they can still play it if they want to. No one is forcing you to upgrade to the next version just because it’s been released. Honestly I feel more sorry for those people who wasted $60 on stuff like Call of Juarez and Duke Nukem Forever. Those games were terribly bad that you couldn’t get any enjoyment out of. Duke Nukem Forever still wants you to plonk down an extra $10 for DLC that doesn’t even fix any of the games major issues. You can find places that sell the full game cheaper than the DLC now.
I still find the U / MvC3 to be more so disappointing than anything else. But I’m fine with it being on this list.
To copy/paste some of what I said on the other video on UMVC3 and MVC3:
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.
honestly, i found worse games on the “most disappointing” list, and that’s by Joe’s own facts of how a great game was released very incomplete with glitches and all kinds of issues..so by his own facts, one of the top 10 “most disappointing” games, was WORSE than the disappointing game that is on the top 10 “worst” games. Fail.
Well comparing the roster to SF4 doesn’t really make sense since SF4 is 1 on 1 and MVC3 is 3 on 3. If you’re trying to compare them it would make slightly more sense to divide the MVC3 roster by 3 giving you 12 fighters. But that doesn’t actually make sense either since it kind of implies that all the characters are the same and can be melted together like that.
But I don’t necessarily think the problem with MVC3 was just its small roster, it was more because of how quick the fights were in addition to the small roster. The fights in MVC2 were probably about the same length, but the amount of characters never made it feel repetitive. When I played MVC3 with a friend, after a few rounds we felt like we’d played as everyone. I know fighting games aren’t about playing as new characters you’re unfamiliar with (far from it), but something about MVC3 made it feel like there just wasn’t enough.
My worst game of the year was your number 9, Thor, awful, just awful. It’s one of those super super rare games I’d give the lowest score possible to.
I’ve also played Man. Vs Wild, and I didn’t think it was so bad, maybe a 5, though I only rented it.
I also own DNF, Mindjack, and COJ: The Cartel, but haven’t played them yet. I seem to enjoy trying out games that got terrible reviews, to see if they really are that bad imo.
I didn’t pay more then 10 bucks for them though.
HOLD IT! Now I agree that Marvel Vs Capcom 3 was a bare bones experience and the fact that they released a new game in the same year making the first one obsolete…but to tell you the truth, I have been playing UMVC3 more than MK9. Call it personal taste and one’s opinion but listen, CAPCOM SCREWED UP GET OVER IT! I respect in Joe in his belief of the game being a cash cow but to call it one of the worst games is too much.
You want to know a game with that had bare minimum…SKYRIM…WATERED DOWN UI, UNRELATABLE NPCS, GLITCHES UP THE WAZOO, AND DEBATABLE GAMEPLAY…and you know what, I STILL LOVE IT. You want to know what community got fucked, PS3 owners like me who had to deal with constant slow downs and game freezes.
Joe, I love you and your show. You make me happy even though your angry. However, when say things like this it makes you fans either angry or become your mindless drones. Bottom line: Marvel vs. Capcom 3 is one of the funnest games I played all year, Disappointing? Yes. UMVC3 a cash cow? Yes. Does the decision make it the worst game? No. Should the decision make it the worst game? NEEEEEEEEEEVERRRRRRRRRRRRR! IS JOE VARGAS ONE OF THE MOST AWESOME GUYS ON THE INTERNET? HELLS YEAH
Thing is, he didn’t say UMVC3 was the worst, he said MVC3.
Which is still shocking because Duke Nukem Forever, a game that was in development for an even longer time and had absolutely no redeeming values at all in gameplay, not to mention horrible graphics, story and load times is, according to Angry Joe, a better game to play.
I agreed whit this list but there a comment that personaly make me angry: Gotham City Imposter , a bad idea?! I am sorry, but, I play the Beta and this game is a very solid FPS and is a lot of fun to play.Becide that, neet list !
That line from call of Jaruez that joe asked ” who writes this?” ( apart from the mother fuckin part ) is from the Bible, so the people who wrote it were Bronze age nomads from Palestine.
No wonder it seemed out of place in the game.
I’m no expert on games like these, so I can’t judge your opinion on the worst games, (I’d say you’re more of an expert on the matter than anyone else here leaving comments). That being said, I did agree with your list. Loved #3 in particular, those Let’s Plays are hilarious, do you intend to do more? Or is it honestly that bad? XD
Oh boy, here we go. Joe, I had to pause the video after #5 because you made me angry. I have to sit here for a minute to collect my thoughts….
1. You’re telling me that a competent fighting game is worse than 2 movie tie-in games and one of the most insulting/offensive FPS to ever be released(Call of Juarez: The Cartel)?
2. I don’t know what is with this site and getting away with bashing Capcom for business practices they have been exercising for OVER TWENTY YEARS. You want an example of releases closer together than MvC3 > UMvC3? Fine….
Street Fighter 3: The New Generation – February 4th, 1997
Street Fighter 3: Second Impact – October 30th 1997
Oh look at that, barely 10 months apart. That was 14 years ago. You want more? Okay….
Street Fighter 2: Championship Edition – April 1992
Street Fighter 2: Hyper Fighting – December 1992
EIGHT MONTHS Joe. You, and everyone else who complains about Capcom doing this seem to think they haven’t done this before, but they have. But no, this time was too much for the internet. That’s what pisses me off Joe. You let Capcom do this for 20 years, but this is one time too much? I don’t buy it at all.
Now that I’ve said this, I will be labelled as a Capcom sheep willing to defend them no matter how shady their business tactics seem. I’m sure that those who despise Capcom and accept Joe’s opinion as their gospel will do their part to hide this comment. You know what, go ahead, it only makes me want to come back to this site less and less.
1. Yeah I wouldn’t say that it belongs in the worst games. It fits in more with most disappointing.
2. “I don’t know what is with this site and getting away with bashing Capcom for business practices they have been exercising for OVER TWENTY YEARS. ”
- So just because they’ve gotten away with it before we should let them keep getting away with it? You realize that is a terrible reason to let anyone do anything right?
Then you list a bunch of games that they rereleased in a short time span.
Street fighter 2? That was really the first time we had ever seen a game get “updated”, meanwhile arcades are actually still relevant. People meet with their friends and say “Hey have you seen the newest SF game?” reply, “There’s a NEW one? WHOA!”
Streetfighter 3? The year is 1997. Arcades still exist but not as many. The internet exists, but Google does not. Nobody knows how to navigate the internet. You still get the same result as the first time. People meeting and talking about the newest game. But by now the hardcore fighting game scene has grown, so mostly the people who talk about it are the ones who pay attention.
SF4. 2008. Video game arcades are a rarity. Home consoles are now where the money is made. This is the early-mid stage of our current generation of games. Everyone is still debating about dlc and how it will cause everyone to sell incomplete games. Now when SF4 came out, everyone went, “WHOA ANOTHER STREETFIGHTER? My god, how long has it been? Welcome back old friend.” Then when SSF4 was announced, “Oh… Still up to the same old tricks huh capcom? I thought with dlc being a thing now you would’ve gone with that. Alas, I can’t blame you entirely. I should’ve known as that’s happened to every SF game since 2. Fool me twice I suppose”.
MVC3. 2011. This is the mid-late stage of our current generation of games. Most people have a good understanding of how DLC should be handled; buy a worthwile game, get extra content to prolong your enjoyment of that game. Capcom announces MVC3 coming out.
“Holy shit! I loved MVC2! That game was so awesome. I’m sure MVC3 will be equally so! But wait… I’m still a little cautious after SF4… But hey I mean maybe capcom has changed! I mean they did do SSF4:AE right? So they know now that they can update their games via dlc. Plus they never updated a VS title unless it was a port! SURELY THIS TIME WILL BE DIFFERENT”
And then the consumer learned that this time was no different. And neither will the next time, unless he does something about it.
Do you see now? I don’t really blame capcom for pulling this again since it’s obviously a smart business move. Get your customers to pay 100$ for the full game. It’s been shown to work so why wouldn’t they do it? But I kinda think they might’ve gone too far on MVC3, or too soon. The arrival of UMVC3 so soon after MVC3 seems to have caught a bigger backlash than the one from SF4 to SSF4 or to AE. While I don’t doubt that UMVC3 sold well or whatever (Phoenix Wright and Strider were the selling points for a lot of people), I feel like if they try to do it again they probably won’t sell as well, or will see a backlash even nastier than the last. Though, I’m sure SFxT will sell like mad.
Hey Joe you called it in your review. Mindjack, worst game of 2011.
Luckily i managed to dodge most of those. I only actually bought DNF and thought it was okay. I guess part of that was because I was lucky enough to pick the superior PC version. I almost liked it, altogether thought it was extremely mediocre but i can fully appreciate why others hate the game.
A couple of minor errors first.
– Duke Nukem Forever took 13 years to make, not 11.
– Ghostbusters: The Video Game came out in 2009, not 2010
Other than those errors, given your experiences with the games I understand your list. Personally I would not say MvC3 is one of the worst games of 2011, though i can easily see it being one of your worst games. As someone who played a tonne of SSF4, i don’t understand your hating the lack of a tournament mode. If you have 7 other people who want to see who’s the best, then sure I can see some appeal. To me it was always another matchmaking type that offered no real use for what I wanted out of the game. Having to wait for the other fights in SSF4′s tournament mode to finish before you can fight always killed whatever competitive mood i was in.
As to movie or licensed games you need to remember that these games were made for next to nothing in terms of development costs, and are a marketing expense from the license. They are made as advertising tools, akin to action figures or other tie-in media. These games are usually developed in a time that is far below a full dev cycle, and it shows. I’m not trying to defend them, I’m just saying their quality is a product of the situation they are made under, that being a situation no game should be made under.
If the license holders actually gave a crap about the quality of the games they’d sink more money into them, but as it stands they are just released as a gimmick, usually so parents will buy them for their kids. Games like Arkham Asylum prove you can make good licensed games if you take the time and respect the source, but when you try to extend a 2 hour movie with around 30 minutes of action and maybe 4 locations to a 6+ hour action game your product will show how much crap is being made up.
Arkham Asylum, as well as its sequel, differ from other typical license games in that, rather than being based on a theater-released film, it’s based on the long-running comic series. The difference comes from the fact that, if a game is to be tied to a film, they have to rush the production to get the game into stores before the film’s release date, so people will buy it out then.
But with the Arkham series, the writers, production staff, actors, developers, and programmers could put as much time and energy into the games as they felt necessary to produce a great product. And it worked.
At least that’s my theory.
There is one thing I hated about Arkham City: having to fly through all those green rings. Does anyone remember the abomination known as Superman 64?
*Finally catches his breath after laughing so hard for 30 straight minutes*
I wish I knew what the exact word is to describe the sheer enjoyment of seeing you get so pissed off at these games, but I think it somehow relates to schadenfreud.
An excellent list, and I gotta say that I COMPLETELY understand your reasoning for including MvC3 on this list. And for those who don’t get what I mean, I’ll elaborate:
Marvel Vs. Capcom 3 is a good game. However, it’s a good game that was missing a lot of the good things that its sister games, like Street Fighter IV, had. Joe had griped about the issues with online versus and tournament play which weren’t really issues with Street Fighter IV, back when it first came out in 2009.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_Fighter_IV
Then these issues and more were fixed with Ultimate Marvel Vs. Capcom 3. More characters, issues resolved, and a lot more spit and polish to really beef up the game. BUT, and here’s the big “but”, it was released IN THE SAME YEAR MVC3 WAS! When Super Street Fighter IV was released, it was over a year after the initial launch of SFIV. They had added new characters, made tweaks, and upon release, reviewers admitted that enough content had been added or changed to make the game merit it’s own release.
NOT THE CASE with UMvC3!
With UMvC3, a lot of the stuff that was added was stuff that SHOULD have been there in the FIRST PLACE! Super Street Fighter IV was made because of fan demand and because they incubated it properly. UMvC3 is what MvC3 SHOULD have been! Instead of having us buy MvC3, they should have just incubated it longer, and release it as UMvC3!
THEY MADE MVC3 OBSOLETE IN THE SAME YEAR IT WAS RELEASED, AND NOT MORE THAN A YEAR AFTER IT HIT THE SHELVES!
It’s on this worst game list instead of the disappointing games list NOT because the first game WAS a disappointment, but because Capcom pulled the dick move of releasing a PROPER version less than a year later! Basically, you paid full retail price to play a BETA VERSION OF MARVEL VS. CAPCOM 3!
DICK MOVE CAPCOM! DICK MOVE!
If Capcom hadn’t released UMvC3 so soon after the release of MvC3, then MvC3 would likely have just been somewhere on the disappointment list.
And if I’m wrong, Joe can gladly correct me. But this is what I understand after watching his reviews and from my experience with the game.
Shoot, I was going to talk more about Mindjack and how hilarious that video was, but I got so caught up in the whole MvC3 thing! DAMN!
EDIT: *Sees Joe’s comment below*
I had a feeling that was why.
That should still earn it a place in the most disappointing list though. Duke Nukem Forever and Brink honestly feels like an Alpha version of the game in comparison. Yet according to Angry Joe, they are better games than it. Yes it’s a bad move of Capcom to release a sequel so soon. But they at least released a good game. Unlike many many many MANY companies that released bad games this year that will forever remain bad.
I wouldn’t call it a “Sequel” though. UMvC3 doesn’t deserve that kind of a label. UMvC3 is the “Gone Gold” edition of MvC3. When they went from SFIV to SSFIV, they actually tweaked the engine and modified it enough to accompany all the new characters, new modes, and all the other good stuff.
MvC3′s engine as far as I can tell was left untouched. Just new characters, the modes it should have had from the beginning, and then some.
UMvC3 is NOT a sequel. It’s the game we were supposed to get in the first place! And because Capcom essentially TRICKED the consumer into spending money on BOTH games, then for that, the Corporate Commanders at Capcom deserve their own little space in Hell for this.
This is beyond disappointment, this is being given the finger and having it shoved so far up your butt that it comes out your mouth.
Also, you asked “Does that make the other Call of Duty games obsolete?”
And my answer is a resounding YES!
You’ve been misinformed. There are universal changes to the system. Characters have been rebalanced. Some got new movesets. X-Factor got an overhaul. Glitches were fixed. Pretty much the same as SSF4. Then you’ve got the 12 new characters, old characters respond to the new characters (For example, Hulk gets Phoenix Wright confused with Jean Grey since they are both called Phoenix. All the avengers have differing opinions on Hawkeye and Chris is suprised he is fighting against a Heavily Armed Woodland Creature otherwise known as Rocket Raccoon, just to name a few examples.) and the new modes like Galactus Mode and Heroes VS Heralds, plus the overhaul done to Online to make it good (Since Online in the first really was it’s only downfall. But Local Multiplayer is fine and I don’t believe a game should be called year worst just because it’s online component isn’t good. Otherwise Brawl would be ranked as the worst games on the wii because it’s netcode is awful.)
As for the Call of Duty I glad you agree. Yearly installments in general shouldn’t be done. Call of Duty normally has terribly written single player story campaigns that everyone who plays the game really only plays it for the multiplayer. And every 12 months Activision releases a new game that takes last years multiplayer and just upgrades it. It doesn’t even do it in one clean swoop, expecting you to pay extra money if you want to play on the maps from the previous games as DLC. Arguably charging more than $60 for the full experience (In comparison, UMvC3 only asks for $40). And you can’t go back the previous game for it’s Online Multiplayer because everyone has moved on and it has become obselete. It’s a terrible business practises that has sadly become the norm for many online shooters these days. And it isn’t stopping soon. Activision normally announces there is a sequel in the works to be released next year normally 1-2 week after the games initial sales list has come in. (Except this year, where the CEO Announced a sequel to the game on Launch Day!)
Now, if Joe had reviewed Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 this year. For the same reasons that it too will essentially be obsolete in a years time. Would it make it on his Worst games of the year list?
Worst games I played this year: Venetica & Knights Contract. Total suckage.
I kind of liked Venetica…its average as all hell, but it’s worth a playthrough at least as an RPG.
Nice list, Joe. As much as it pains us to see you suffer, it’s still very entertaining to watch you play these crappy games, whether by review or let’s play. Although, MvC3 seems to be the black sheep on your list. While I haven’t (and don’t plan to) played the game, it certainly doesn’t seem like it would be worse than movie licensed games. To tell you the truth I actually expected this to be in your top 10 disappointing games of 2011. I hope your planning on doing a most anticipated of 2012!
Your worst game of the year was not a surprise, but I wished that the movie-licensed games were placed higher on the list and games like Brink and Duke Nukem were lower. I wouldn’t say MVC 3 was bad; disappointing at the very least, but not a terrible game.
Ok Joe, thumbs down for putting MvC3 at 5th, You are just plain wrong here. You are honestly saying it’s worse than Call of Juarez the Cartel? No. I’d put it as one of my favourite fighters this year. I say it’s better than Mortal Kombat. MvC3, outside of online, has pretty much all you need for a fighting game. A Massive Roster of characters. With some VARIETY in it, Old Favourites like Ryu, Wolverine, Spider-Man. Magneto, and Brand New highly requested characters Like Thor, Dante, Amaterasu and Deadpool. Not to mention a wide vareity of different playstyles between all characters. And yes, Mega Man isn’t in, Gambit isn’t in. Whine whine whine. At least Capcom is trying to add new characters to it’s game. Unlike Mortal Kombat which added 1 new character to the universe. And that’s just a cyber version of a pre-existing character anyway.
Not to mention despite Mortal Kombat having a pretty visual story, it’s still botches it with horrible writing. That scene with Syndel killing off half the cast? Kills whatever enjoyment you have with it. Who cares what achievements the characters have made, what obstacles they have clear, what troubles they have overcome. They are now dead dead dead and not going to be doing anything about it. And then right at the end you force me to fight a cheap as hell boss with a character I don’t even like and barely know how to play. HATE!
How would you suggest MvC3 even do a story mode? It’s 3vs3 fighting all the time. That means 6 characters all at once. From a gameplay perspective it would be even worse. Being forced to use 3 characters together. Maybe the Avengers could work and the Darkstalkers. But it’s not fun being forced to use pre-determined characters, with all the combinations in the game. It’s much more fun to just play as the characters you want to play as and experiment how you can arrange your team to get them to work well.
Also I debate your issue of redundancy. You still have the game right? You can still pop it in, load it up (game has really good loading times compared to Mortal Kombat by the way.) select your characters and start fighting pretty much instantly. If Mortal Kombat 9 got, lets say a Game of the Year addition that contains all the DLC characters and patches 9 months after the game got released. Does that make the original one redundant as well? I guess it would. Isn’t that right? If I were to buy a Pre-owned copy of Mortal Kombat just because its cheaper I guess it would be redundant if I then went and brought the Game of the Year edition. Actually it would be even more redundant due to the game having that blasted Online Pass on it! I’d have to pay extra just to even play it, which is pretty much the only thing Mortal Kombat is better on. Mortal Kombat also had Pre-order DLC that I had to pay extra for to unlock at a later date with those extra costumes and Klassic Fatalities. I just think that if there’s any bad-practises that should be thrown away, Online Passes should be one of the top ones!
And the Krypt mode (AKA, Glorified Shop mode) just adds more tediousness to the processes. It’s a random guess to see what you get from it. Contains stuff like Sound Test items that should have been opened in the first place. And then codes for Fatalities and Various game mods that people already have uploaded on line. And if you are going to do it legitimately and not search up these codes. Good luck going through the whole Krypt just to get the Alternative Costume for the character you use because it’s mixed up with the Artwork and Concept Sketches and you have no clue or indication what you are buying. MvC3 has it simple and easy. Beat that characters arcade to unlock there stuff. Simple done. Music opened from the start. Alternative colours opened from the start. CG renders unlock by beating Arcade Mode with that character. Not confusing at all.
Now to be fair, MvC3 online is pretty bad, Lobbies just weren’t good not being able to see what was going on in the fight. Lack of tournaments weren’t good and the search system needed rewriting. Part of the reason why UMvC3 was made was to fix those problems (Although Tournament mode still isn’t in.) Once I got into a match though (Not easy though considering I’m in Europe and there just less players in general.) I never experienced any lag though.
And Mortal Kombat does have it’s good points. The Violence is back and arguably better than ever. It’s back to 2D fighting instead of the worse 3D Fighters we had to suffer through (Espicially MK vs DC, one of the worst fighters I’ve ever played, and they somehow screwed up a game with BATMAN in it, thankfully it was only a year until we got one of the best Batman games of all time.) and it does have all the favourites (although that’s it. One new character and a guest fighter if you got the PS3 version. 360 doesn’t get squat. You want a guest fighter, pay for the DLC.) and despite how flawed the story is, it does make an effort. I say both games are as good as eachother. Each with their own strong points and weak points. I advise you at least try both and see which one you preferred, not listen to Joe and assume one is clearly superior than the other, of course. Get UMvC3 and the soon to be released Complete DLC version of Mortal Kombat.
So yes, you may have your disagreements with MvC3. But you really should have put it on your Most Disappointing list. Maybe a high number. But no way should it be on the worst of the year, it’s no way near as bad Call of Juarez or Ghostbusters or Any of the Movie games. I would have put X-Men Destiny on year worst instead. Soo much pontential and it misses the mark by a long shot. Not to mention some of the worst gameplay and graphics of the year as well.
MvC3 is now obsolete. While its core may be fine though woefully barebones, its worthless now after a few short months after release. It earns its #5 spot easily.
Does that make all the previous Call of Duty games obsolete as well then? Or any yearly installment games for that matter. There isn’t that much difference between 9 and 12.
I’m not understanding your reply here or at less context wise.
Well to put it in another example. Key games in Kingdom Hearts normally gets a Final Mix in Japan 9-12 months after the original game gets released. It’s essentially the same game just with a few new cutscenes, new boss fights, some new boss fights and normally a teaser for the next game in the series. Now. you go out there, and say that since a Final Mix version is out there. The Original Kingdom Hearts is therfore redundant and one of the worst games of the year because it is redundant. I dare you.
The CoD example is a bad example (even though I understand what you are trying to say). If you wanted to make a point for MvC3 using CoD, then it would be like this: “Imagine getting a new Call of Duty game were you can only play free for all. Then 3 months later you hear that a new stand alone version of the same game is getting released with all the modes and a couple of new weapons with the same price”.
As for MK9 even if you don’t like the fighting system, the amount of care and work that was put into it was just unbelievable. A decent roster, a story mode, tag team mode (you know the mode Namco passes as a new game with Tekken Tag Tournament). challenge tower, and a great online service were you can easily create your own tournaments or just watch other players do their “thang”. Again if you dont like the fight system that’s fine, but belittling the content of the game in an attempt to make MvC3 look better is a lost cause if you ask me.
Yes. Yes it does. Call of Duty is a terrible franchise. Bland environments, generic gameplay, recycled cliche war stories, and the same damned thing released annually. Capcom, and Call of Duty, can suck it.
Just a heads up: February to October isn’t a few short months. That’s most of the year.
ROFLMAO, this is the funnest and saddest post I’ve ever seen, LOL :3
No, that would actually be this shit post of yours not contributing anything productive to the discussion.. as always
I think the biggest reason MvC3 can be considered obsolete is because after UMvC3 was released, the original was basically abondoned. Those who bought the original aren’t able to play with those who have Ultimate, and I don’t have the game so I can’t be entirely sure, but judging from Angry Joe’s UMvC3 interview, all the tweaks and balancing put in the new version, aren’t going to be carried into the original version. Maybe they did, maybe they didn’t, I don’t know, but from the view of an outsider looking in, it still seems like this was a slap to the face to those who bought the original.
Yeah, it is obsolete, but that doesn’t make it a bad game.. just because there is a better product on market does not mean that the original is automatically unplayable garbage.
If MK9 did a GOTY edition, the original would not be obsolete. You would still be able to play online with the people that bought the GOTY edition, and have the OPTION of spending $5-$20 to download the any of the DLC characters you want as opposed to being forced to to spend $40 for a brand new game. Without getting into an argument, I completely disagree with comments about the story mode in MK9. It was extremely well done and is really the first fighting game ever to have a compelling story worth experiencing.
I’d have to say the PC version of brink was pretty enjoyable, is it going to set the world on fire, no, but it was fun, most of the issues you experienced were because of the half-assed port to the Xbox, I personally had no problem with the interface because it told me what I needed to know, personally I wouldn’t put it on my top 10 best games list, but I don’t think it deserves to be on top 10 worst list either. I do have to agree on the rest though
“I don’t know what is happen”
I still can’t believe how somebody translated this line, passed it to a synchro studio and somebody had to vocalise it and no one even thought about correcting it.
Personally, I thought that they did that on purpose. The voice actor clearly speaks with an accent (middle-eastern or some-such), so I assumed that english wasn’t his first language. Maybe I’m giving them too much credit, though. Who knows.
Given that entire line of dialogue sounds like a stereotypical Asian guy speaking “Engrish”, I kind of wonder if that was intentionally put in there.
No big surprises on this list, and there isn’t much i can disagree on. You did your job. Im sorry that that involve playing theese shity games tough.
10. Movie Licensed games… why am I not suprised. Green Lantern especially.
9. Again, Movie Licensed games. Why do so many of them have to suck. There are good ones, like Scott Pilgrim, but no, we have to get shitty movie game after shitty movie game
8. Brink is TF2 with Parkour done badly. No story, no good graphics, flawed gameplay, that’s all.
7. Wow… I’m suprised this wasn’t higher up on the list
6. Perfect example of how NOT to do a sequal
5. I would say 6 and 7 are worst than this, but yeah, while the fighting is good, EVERYTHING ELSE SUCKS! There are much better fighters out there
4. I knew I’d be seeing this after the BT LP of this
3. Worse than Movie Licensed games… it’s TV LICENSED GAMES! These games are FAR worse than movie licensed. I should know, I’ve played a few. Never! Again!
2. Harry Potter and Shitty Railshooters! My sister owns the previous harry potter games, and they are MUCH better than Deathly Hollows
1. Mindjack was pure and utter shit. Example of good concept gone horribly, horribly wrong. I knew this game would suck, and when I saw the high reviews from other people when this game first came out, I cried a little to see how many game reviewers sold out to this. This further cemented that people like the ones here in Blistered Thumbs are the only people I could trust with game reviews.
Thank you for the list Joe, and why a few certain developers need to pull their heads out of their ass and GIVE TWO SHITS ABOUT THE FINAL PRODUCT