The bad 'uns - January 6th, 2002 - Drew Cosner
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of the participants and the moderator, and do not neccessarily reflect those of the GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. I hate when I accidentally eat an entire stick of butter. Don't say we didn't warn you.
I figured I could just show up for this thing completely unprepared and, working under pressure, come up with a swell idea for an intro upon which I could extemporize for several paragraphs. That didn't happen. Sorry.
Yeah, that makes sense... |
To me two titles stand out as most disappointing in 2001. These two games aren't bad by any means; quite the contrary the are very well made games and I liked them to a certain extent but on the other hand they did not surpass or meet my expectations.
The first would have to be Silent Hill 2. Not really being a fan of the horror genre I was skeptical about picking it up but after reading numerous reviews including one from your site I went ahead. Maybe it was the small variety of enemies or the idiotic requests that plague many horror games but SH2 did not impress me like I was hoping. I'm still waiting for a horror game that has a believable premise and can still pull off the creep factor.
The other game that bothered me was Grand Turismo 3. At first it was a whole lot of fun. The graphics were wonderful, the soundtrack respectable, and it was pretty easy to pick up, at first. I guess it was about 10 races in that I became frustrated. I am not very educated of cars and the fact that no where in the instruction book or in the game does it explain anything about how to go about upgrading your car and so forth really bothered me. It seemed to me to be a game made for and only the car elitist instead of the casual gamer wanting a racer. I have little respect for games the require lots of studying of how to work the game instead of being simple with room for mastery.
Both of these games were very good games but in the end I really felt like there were better games to spend my time with.
-Matt K.
|
Silent Hill 2 was definitely one of the more popularly railed against titles. In many respects, I agree; I was hoping for a truly chilling next-gen experience, but SH2 struck me as a tad too much of the same-old. I would've been impressed so long as the puzzles were at least more logical and relevant this time around, but such was not the case; they were as asinine and out-of-place as ever.
What's more, some of the ways the game let you know where you were to head to next were equally ludicrous. I remember at one point a corpse had a note or something like that telling me where I should head. I fear the evil powers that are capable of knowing not only when I'll stumble across a particular corpse, but also where the next step in my quest lies upon doing so.
As for Gran Turismo 3, I'm also with you, but only because that series has proven not to be my bag. For me it's more of a "donut simulator," since I can't take a single corner without going into one.
Swamped! |
Drew,
I'm afraid to say it, but I don't have a favorite five; nor do I a hated
five. I do, however, come with a question: a few months ago, the GIA started
coverage on a little Playstation2 role playing sequel called Jade Cocoon 2.
You explained about how your main character (Kahu) would die unless he finds
four elemental orbs--it appeared as if you were actually going to cover the
latter of the original sleeper hit.
Then nothing.
The game has been out a few days, yet nothing to be heard about it on the
Gaming Intelligence Agency. To sum up: Do you have any idea when we shall see
if Jade Cocoon 2 reaches the GIA's standards of good?
-Lee, still sniffing Lulu's panties. [Dude. -Ed.]
|
The staff is swamped with reviews right now, so I can't really give you an exact date, or much of a prediction for that matter. The best answer I can give you is "sometime soon." The woes of being a group of college students and other societal bottom-dwellers.
Fashion-conscious |
I was going to buy one of those sexy GIA shirts but then I realized...my wardrobe looks bad enough already. Har har har.
Jigsaw
|
It's cool; the shirt would've clashed with all of your rainbow-colored halter-tops and neon-pink running shorts, anyhow.
Luigi gets no love
|
Drew--
The single biggest compliment I can give to the gaming industry this year
is to say that I'm at a loss as to how to answer this question-- not because
there were so many disappointments, but because there were so few. If
anything, 2001 was the year of "Games That Surprised The Hell Out Of Me",
like Ico and FFX, and GTA3 for so many other people. But, that's not today's
topic.
So-- on to my biggest disappointments, assuming that you mean this topic
not to be specific to games that GIA covers.
First up is Oni for PlayStation 2. I first heard about this in 1999 and
had been salivating over it ever since-- an anime-styled full-on action
game, with guns, fighting moves, and even anime cutscenes designed by the
folks who did Bubblegum Crisis and Tenchi Muyo... and all this delivered to
us from the folks who brought us the awesome story-driven action games now
known as the Marathon Trilogy. Well, after nearly endless delays, it arrived
on PC, Mac, and PlayStation 2, and the general reaction was lukewarm. I
didn't share many of the problems with it that others did-- control,
difficulty-- but the level design sucked, the storyline wasn't that good and
neither were the graphics. The fighting system is still extremely good,
making this a pretty good game. But it should have been great.
Next up we have Guilty Gear X, also for PlayStation 2. It's a fighter.
It's a very pretty fighter. I'd heard so many good things about it that I
just had to pick it up when it came out here for PS2. Let me tell you, don't
be fooled by this game's immensely good looks; Guilty Gear may have X but it
certainly doesn't have any 'D'. This is the most offense-oriented fighter
I've ever played. Strategy is an unwelcome guest at this most obnoxious
party.
Finally we have Luigi's Mansion for the Nintendo GameCube. The one, the
only GameCube launch platformer from the world of Mario; expectations were
high. Mine weren't so high, since this never really claimed to be the
shining platformer that Mario 64 was, but even so, this game was terrible.
The gameplay bored me to tears, the graphics paled in comparison to some of
the other GC launch titles, and the music is utterly horrible. I wasn't
surprised when it ended as quickly as it did, considering the total lack of
effort that seems to have gone into this one. I advise new GameCube owners
to instead pick up the far superior Super Smash Bros. Melee.
-Nij
My life is twenty-four hours a day.
|
I don't share your adament hatred for Luigi's Mansion, but I do agree it was disappointing not to have a true Mario title ready for the GameCube's launch. Nintendo's 16- and 64-bit launches both had amazing, amazing Mario titles, making it easy for me to justify picking up the systems despite their late arrival on the market.
I see two possibilities: Perhaps Nintendo was so concerned with getting the GameCube onto the market in a (relatively) timely fashion, waiting around for Mario Sunshine to complete wasn't an option. Either that or Miyamoto's ideas for Mario Sunshine are so revolutionary that the development cycle has taken longer than expected. Either explanation is par for the course when it comes to Nintendo, but I'm definitely pulling for the latter. In fact, now that I think about it, I suppose a combination of both explanations is possible.
Ruining a Perfectly Good Game |
Drew, He who is wise enough to put HM : STH on his top 5 games of the year.
Out of the things I've bought, my biggest letdown is....
Hoshigami : Running Blue Earth. Where did it go so VERY, VERY wrong? It started out as an homage to all the greatest Strategy RPGs of the PSOne generation, and ended up as a game I may have nightmares about even after playing for only a few hours. The Session system is too damned hard to set up and the way the RAP system works is absurd. Sure, you can move halfway across the screen OR attack, but not both if you want to be able to do something again before the enemy does. The menu systems are confusing, very few things are really actually explained in the manual or the in game tutorials, and when they are, you'd have to be a human calculator to figure it all out. I was REALLY looking forward to this game, and ended up wishing I hadn't. Actually, the GIA's review of it pretty much echoes my disgust.
Runner up : Golden Sun for the GBA. What can I say, it just doesn't appeal to me for some reason. And this is coming from a very dedicated Shining Series fan, so...
Honorable mention : The GBA itself. Great idea, poorly implemented. Hopefully the "N" will buy out the patent for one of those double-up LED things that college students make in their own spare time, and put them on all future GBAs. That alone would probably make it my favorite new gaming system.
Out of the things I've rented, my biggest letdown is...
Okage : Shadow King. Oh my freaking god, this game is BAD. Not just bad, but really bad. The kind of BAD that reminds one of Beyond the Beyond. Sure, the story and characters are cute, but that doesn't make up for even half of the game's shortcomings. I'm not even sure why they didn't put in random encounters instead of those enemies you can see, because it is damned near impossible to avoid them for more than ten to fifteen steps at a time... and I do have enough gaming skills to actually get 200 dodges in the Thunder Plains, so it can't just be me. Plus, having the main character die in the first "real" boss fight and not being able to revive him with the tag-along in your party... well, that's just very disappointing.
Runner up : Ephemeral Fantasia, which, honestly, I expected to be bad. Renting = GOOD. Game = DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT WASTING $4 RENTING IT.
Out of the things I can't afford (time or money), my biggest letdown is...
Gamecube. It looks stunningly cute. No "real" RPGs yet, though those Pikmin do call me, verily. And the monkeys in balls. Not to mention the fact that I've played SSB Melee and it is fantastic fun. Not to mention the fact that the most "perfect" version of PSO v2 seems to be coming to this platform before it hits Xbox and/or PC sometime early next year.
Runner up : Arc the Lad Collection. For two reasons. One, I can't shell out $80 for a game (er, games) I won't have the time to play. Two, in typical WD fashion, it is not out yet.
Caio, Drew.
~arc
|
I just thought it fun to print this letter because so many people gave poor Zak a hard time for his Hoshigami review. It was the usual "you didn't enjoy the game because you're too stupid to play it right" crap. I think I should just code a hate-mail generator to save people time.
I can see it now: You feel the reviewer was incorrect in his review because: (Choose all that apply.)
A.) He's too stupid to enjoy the game properly.
B.) He's gay. And possibly retarded. But probably gay.
C.) He didn't finish the game. Or if he didn't, he probably should've played through it several more times because you only really appreciate what an awesome game it is until you've played it at least 3 times.
Maybe I'll actually do that one of these days.
If you can't trust the guys at PA, who can you trust? |
Drew:
Fine, I'll come out and say what none of you ("you" collectively referring to the crowd of onlookers, not you, you. but maybe you
too. in fact, how about that. you too, Drew) pansies will. I'm gonna say it and you're gonna like it, because in your hearts, you
know I'm right.
Halo sucked.
"Knee-jerk anti-Xbox reactionary!" they're all yelling. Wrong. Let's just go down the list. First, no first-person shooter should be
played with a console controller, or the Xbox controller either for that matter. Second, I think our pals at Penny Arcade said it
best when they noted that it appears the levels were all cleverly designed to thwart attackers with death-by-boredom by virtue of
sheer. mind-numbing. repetition. Third, there is no third.
Halo is definitely an okay game. It's okay in the same sense that, you know, Fantavision is okay. But the Second Coming of Christ
was pushed back four months to get this game done. And it really is just okay. I don't think this is a matter of lowered
expectations. I expected Devil May Cry to rock my face so hard that I got motion sickness, and it did! Halo? I've had strong breezes
rock my face harder.
Anyway, in conclusion, Grand Theft Auto III is great because you can ride in the back of a truck and shoot people for ten, fifteen
minutes before the cops finally get you.
-Ian, but not of the "P." variety
|
I'd point to Perfect Dark, Goldeneye, and even Red Faction as examples of games that use a console controller perfectly well, but point taken. If the guys at Penny Arcade are saying a game sucks, I trust them far more than any media outlet at this point. Not because I'm trying to be indie, but because I trust other bitter, cynical dorks more than I do the type of people enthusiastic enough about games to write about them for a living. Enthusiasm makes my flesh crawl. It's like two steps away from "happiness" and "good will."
Cameo made by Sonic himself! |
Mr. Cosner,
Let's get right to it. My top 5 disappointments in 2001 are:
5. Metal Gear Solid 2: Yep, I'm one of the bazillions of people who were
disappointed with this game. I liked what was there, for the most part. My
problem was that the game world just felt too small once you left the tanker,
and that ending... well, when your hero isn't the least bit suspicious of
someone like Rose after all that had transpired just minutes before, I have
to become annoyed. So good in some areas, but so utterly lacking in others.
4. Ephemeral Fantasia: What a mess. This is one title that I should have
waited until the reviews came out before I bought it. The concept is good --
I mean, Majora's Mask pulled off this Groundhog's Day device with such
finesse, it could be done again, right? It just didn't happen here. The
maps were an absolute mess with seemingly arbitrary elevations in place. The
main character was limp, and the battles were nothing I hadn't seen before.
3. Luigi's Mansion: I can't remember the last time I've been so bored by a
Nintendo first-party title. Painfully unfun after the first half-hour. At
least it had pretty graphics, right?
2. Sonic Adventure 2: Sonic is fun. Sonic runs at breakneck speeds through
strange obstacles and saves the day. Unfortunately, there isn't much Sonic
in this game. Trudging through the other levels to get to Sonic was a chore
I'd have rather not had to go through.
1. Devil May Cry: Why is this game so loved? All of the style and "attitude"
in the world doesn't make a game any good. Oddly placed cameras that often
didn't let you see doors or the monsters you were battling, repetitive
battles that were necessary to obtain power-ups so that you could survive
even MORE repetitive battles later on, and environments that just weren't
interesting enough to hold my attention all make this game the biggest
disappointment of the year.
-Some Random Jerk
|
Not much for me to add here; moving along.
Sons of Irony |
Drew,
My biggest disappointment this year, beyond all doubts is Metal Gear Solid 2.
I was going to write a big, long, drawn out letter on why it disappointed me, but I'll put it this way:
Everyone talks way too damn much. It goes beyond a lot of dialouge to the point of sounding like each main character was on the couch of a psychiatrist during the mission, talking about every problem they've had since childhood. They talk too much, and their talking interrupts the game flow too much to the point of frustration.
-Mike Drucker
|
And so, the people spoke, and lo, their complaints were in unison. I like to get two people who disliked MGS2 and put one on each side of me, so when they talk about why they didn't like the game, it sounds like it's in stereo.
You're entitled to your (wrong) opinion |
The game I'd have to nominate as the biggest disappointment of 2001
would have to be the one and only GTA3. Yup. That's right. You heard
me. But before putting that itching trigger finger of yours to good
use, as I'm sure a good number of you are yearning to do, keep in mind
that I'm NOT calling it a bad game. Just that it didn't live up to the hype.
My primary complaint is it's so called "non linearity." Sure, there are
scads of things to do. I'll admit that. Play taxi driver, grab a car
and run over pedestrians... the list goes on and on. But what's the
point when most, if not all those things are so utterly repetitive? I
have yet to play the game through, so I suppose it might not be fair for
me to judge, but in what I have played of it, nearly everything in the
game has revolved around driving to place X to pick up person Y, then
topping it off with a trip to location Z. And this applies not just to
the central missions, but many of the mini-games and side missions, too.
While there are some truly cool events that really let your bad self
run wild, those squarely fall into the category of exceptions to the
rule. The routine elements of city life, too, such as aforementioned
carjackings and pedestrian slaughter, while definitely amusing, and
which prove highly absorbent to time, get old fast once the novelty has
worn off.
And that really seems to be what the game is, at it's core. A novelty.
It deserves recognition for it's uniqueness, it's nearly unprecedented
approach to the world of gaming, but it simply lacks the qualities
needed to keep that approach entertaining.
Well, at least that's what I got out of it. Given the near orgy of
glowing reviews and such surrounding the game, most of which seem to
imply it makes sex feel like shooting yourself in the forehead with a
nail gun, I suppose I'm probably missing something big. But until I
find this elusive element, whatever it might be, this is the story I'm
sticking with.
-Seth
|
Actually, you are missing something big, and if you haven't played many of the missions, you're right: you're not in a position to talk. People are heralding the game for its non-linearity not only because you can run around wreaking havoc as you so see fit, but also because the gameplay itself becomes extremely non-linear as you progress. Some of the initial missions are, as you assert, simplistic, but these are just training you for things to come. In later missions, you're presented with a simple goal, and it's up to you to decide how best to accomplish it. There's no "right" method, as is the case in just about every other game to date. Me and a friend who also picked up the game found ourselves coming up with wildly different solutions to the exact same missions. The result is that when you do pull off a particularly tough mission, you feel all the more self-satisfied since it was your method that paid off.
The things you mention, like car-jackings, do lose their humor over time, but that's beside the point; they exist as the building blocks upon which your solutions to the game's puzzles are based. Mario can jump, your character in GTA3 can rip off vehicles; there needs to be a basic repertoire of manuevers to craft a game. I guess what I'm trying to say is this: while these elements are unique, I'd certainly not pass them off as gimicks. Calling one of the first true implementations of non-linearity a "gimick" is like saying that the persistent scrolling in Super Mario Bros. was a gimick. GTA3 is a new take on gaming, and if you don't dig that, fine. Just don't call it no gimick, I says.
And just to end on one final, bitter note, there's a big difference between tons of great reviews and "hype." GTA3 came out of nowhere to enamour reviewers and gamers. It wasn't exactly being fawned all-over and written up as the savior of gaming previous to its release.
Closing comments:
What, topic time again? Okay, here goes: who, in your opinion, was the hottest game character of the year? I'm always glad to encourage geeky obsession over fictional beings, as you well know. This discussion is open to the members of both sexes, although both sides have to agree not to get to creepy about it. I doubt that urging on my part will be heeded, but just send Erin your thoughts, anyway.
-Drew Cosner
|
|
|
|