Worst Games of 2012

[BeginwiththeEnd]

We all remember the great games from last year, but which ones did you guys just completely despise or hate? Remember to respect each others opinions no matter how much you loved the game they just bashed.

WarZ: I think everyone can on how horrible this game was. Not only was it not finished, not only was it a cash-in on the better DayZ, not only did the developers ban and blackmail whoever spoke against the game, but was the very definition of a shitty Pay2Win game. I mean 4 hours to respawn or pay real money to do it immediately isn't a challenge, that's a scam.

Dragonball Z Kinect: You would think being able to recreate badass fights from the anime wouldn't be so hard, but the controls almost NEVER worked. On top of that, the game didn't even have multiplayer for a freaking 5 hour campaign. Only good thing about it is that the kamehameha worked...sorta

Amy: Don't buy this piece of shit. Just don't. It's a poor excuse for a survival horror game that is basically whole escort mission. The girl, Amy has the stupidest AI I have ever seen, like walking right into a monster like she's gonna give the guy a hug, and will walk into walls for no reason. Plus, whenever you die, the save points are so far away you can lose hours of gameplay you don't want to repeat.

 

[Stark]

X-COM: Enemy Unknown was released with so many bugs that you just had to get lucky a lot of the time... Its worth picking up assuming you read some news that they fixed them.

 

[Linkachu]

I typically don't play games that have a reputation for being shit so I'll need to focus more on my most disappointing game of 2012 verses the worst. And I know exactly which game earns this title...

Paper Mario: Sticker Star. I wanted to love it, even just like it, and when I first started up the game I was incredibly excited to dive into it. That enthusiasm quickly turned to frustration. This was a game that Nintendo hyped up for well over a year and with a few minor changes it would've been wonderful, but as it stands it's a disappointing mess of missed potential that all in all is not fun. Without going into a lengthy explanation (which I've already done elsewhere), Sticker Star is a borked game mechanically. It gives you a deeply developed and fun battle system revolving around the usage of stickers but then offers very little incentive to actually use those stickers in battle. Aside from puzzle solving, the acquiring of specific rare stickers for your museum collection, and boss battling, there may as well not be any battling in the game at all. There's no EXP earned from battling and improving your HP stat is done via finding HP+ powerups around the world. You'll earn coins from battles but you're also able to find hordes of coins outside of battles too, not to mention that they regenerate each time you leave and reenter a stage, so battle grinding for coins is wasteful and idiotic. And the Thing Stickers. Ugh. Don't even get me started on those.

At only 3 hours into the game the battles were already starting to feel like a bother moreso than meaningful gameplay. At 7 hours, I had to force myself to keep playing the game because I wanted to know more about the plot and collect more stickers for my museum. By 9 hours, I finally got fed up with being shoved into utterly pointless battles over and over again and stopped playing. Trying to skip the battles was just as irritating as actually engaging in them, and I found myself asking "Why am I playing this again?". As much as I wanted to like it, it just wasn't worth the slog of actually playing it. I just wish I'd known more about the depth of Sticker Star's shoddy game mechanics before spending $40 on it.

 

[Doctor Oak]

Given how fucking awful and bland Super Paper Mario was, I'm not in the least bit surprised that the 3DS version is as bad.

I haven't really played any terrible games in the past year, despite having bought and played a lot of them.

It'd be easier to call on my worst gaming system of the year really, as that'd be - hands down - the 3DS. Now nearly two years old, the system still has absolutely no software available for it. Nintendo's been pushing out a lot of games with Mario on the cover, but they've all been pretty awful. The most interesting first party game they've had in the wings is Luigi's Mansion, and that's still waiting for a release. Third parties have pretty much utterly avoided the system and while the promise of new Pokemon titles, new Phoenix Wright titles and, maybe one day, the Prof Layton/Phoenix Wright cross over at last, are all great things for the system's future, it's been a boring and lifeless 2012 for a system that was undoubtedly used more for playing the DS-only B/W2 than any 3DS games by any of us daft enough to have bought one before now.

Essentially, the system might as well have not even bothered existing last year. Mine certainly almost forgot it did.

 

[KoL]

Metroid Other M.

Because despite being released in 2010, its awfulness transcends time and allows it to be the worst game of 2012 as well.

 

[Fumanshu]

Normally I dont play bad games.
But there was one:
Guild Wars 2. Massive disappointment. The developers are liars too.
In their quest to make an antithesis to WoW and its clones they managed to make one of the blandest and grindiest MMO experiences out there.
"the fun doesnt start at the endgame like in other mmos, the leveling is the fun part!" was their mantra. Too bad that the leveling was boring as hell.
Combat is simplified, the leveling experience is extremely unbalanced for certain classes even though its supposed to be the main selling point and there's a general lack of contetn.
The game is called Guildwars 2 yet it features no guild vs guild feature.

 

[Coreysawrus]

I actually used my 3DS a lot last year.

I actually found 007 Legends to be quite boring and underwhelming to be honest. Luckily it wasn't mine so I didn't lose any money

 

[SineCosineTangent]

Halo 4.

Playing this game was the most disappointing part of the year. I knew it would be bad what with Master Chief fighting what are basically Bionicles, but it was just so much worse than what I thought it would be.

First off, it has QUICKTIME EVENTS. IN A HALO GAME. That's so bad I had to hold my shift key down, so you know I mean business. In fact,

Spoiler

THE "FINAL BOSS" BATTLE IS A THREE PART QUICKTIME EVENT.

Y'know, let's not even speak of the ending. It was the most confusing, fan-fiction based piece of crap I have ever seen. As a storyline expert, it was offensive. Downright offensive.

Moving from the ending, it was just a poorly done game plot in general. I mean, you start off fighting Sangheili. Didn't we make peace with them? I GUESS NOT. It's never explained, either. It's not like we're told it's a splinter cell, or that the peace had withered. We're just thrown against them like we're back in Halo 2. I'm sorry, I didn't know it was 2005 again. My bad.

Also, there are like three different and conflicting versions of Forerunner AI design/rampancy/existence.

And let's not even mention the "you have to pilot this vehicle" section where the entire environment looks the same, including the obstacles, and it's just a terrible mess of geometric shapes and gray.

TL;DR Halo 4 was a sad, sad game. I really wanted to try and like it for the sake of the series, but 343 really flew the shark on this one. I'd say that they jumped the shark, but that assumes that you land in normality again at some point, and from what I can see the Reclaimer trilogy is just going to get more and more insane from here on out.

 

[Stark]

Its even worse if you consider the multiplayer. They've ruined that entirely. All the mechanics that made Halo 2 and somewhat 3 good for competitive play they threw out the window. Total overhyped mess.

 

[Luckii]

Its even worse if you consider the multiplayer. They've ruined that entirely. All the mechanics that made Halo 2 and somewhat 3 good for competitive play they threw out the window. Total overhyped mess.

I...like Halo 4 multiplayer.

You shoot people. It is exactly the same as Halo 3, with different maps and slightly different guns. Can't you people just have fun with that?! ~~

 

[Stark]

This might help explain why.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/ ... he/c7zkdmr

 

[Doctor Oak]

That really just reads to me the same as the petulant whining over Brawl's mechanics being different from Melee's.

"Ohnoes, it's completely different now so I can't be exactly the same at this game's multiplayers for my lame dream of being a 'professional gamer' because gaming is just like a real sport, you guys".

It's a game. Just play it to enjoy it.

Similarly, it's hard to take any complaints about Halo 4's storyline seriously when the entire series is a vague pastiche of a tonne of different things in the sci-fi genre and the original trilogy was super corny and lame anyway.

I've not played Halo 4, so cannot comment on its actual gameplay, but the two biggest complaints about it in this thread are just non-issues in a game like this.

 

[Luckii]

That really just reads to me the same as the petulant whining over Brawl's mechanics being different from Melee's.

"Ohnoes, it's completely different now so I can't be exactly the same at this game's multiplayers for my lame dream of being a 'professional gamer' because gaming is just like a real sport, you guys".

It's a game. Just play it to enjoy it.

Similarly, it's hard to take any complaints about Halo 4's storyline seriously when the entire series is a vague pastiche of a tonne of different things in the sci-fi genre and the original trilogy was super corny and lame anyway.

I've not played Halo 4, so cannot comment on its actual gameplay, but the two biggest complaints about it in this thread are just non-issues in a game like this.

This, this and this again.

I really don't get where people get this enormous competetive edge from. Its a single online game. Who gives a fuck whether you win or lose. You chopped a guy in half with an energy sword whilst in mid-air. That's cool shit. Just have fun, man.

I just don't understand the complaints that different matchmaking has completely ruined the game for some people. It's still exactly the same game at heart; a big guy with a gun shooting aliens (or other big guys with guns).

 

[Stark]

They're mostly the complaints from the people who are paid to play it, so I think they have a legitimate reason to voice those concerns.

 

[Luckii]

They're mostly the complaints from the people who are paid to play it, so I think they have a legitimate reason to voice those concerns.

That gives them even less reason to complain! If someone has the good grace to pay you to do something, you shut up and do it, no questions asked. Don't go and whine about it on the internet!

 

[KoL]

What I don't get is why it's such a taboo to criticize a sequel for being worse than its immediate predecessor. Brawl was worse than Melee in many ways and judging by the comments I'm going to assume Halo 4 is considerably worse than Halo 3. If something sucks then players have every right to complain about it, especially when the prequel already did it right and the sequel saw fit to change something that didn't need fixing.

I also like how only certain games get this treatment. You didn't hear people jumping to the defense of Tekken 4 when players said it was worse than Tekken 3 did you?

 

[Fumanshu]

When a game series offers multiplayer then that multiplayer aspect should be judged too, especially compared to past entries.

A solid competetive game offers more long term enjoyment and "fun" than a shitty slapped together online mode that gets boring after a week because there's no room for improvement of personal skill or anything that indicates skill differences between players.

I just read the Halo article. I never liked halo but I understand the things he mentions.
Map control as an example is interesting. Its a core mechanic of Quake3,one of the better FPS out there.
It adds depth to the game. Not only do you shoot the other guy, you also try to maintain control over certain areas of the map to get the items that spawn there to give you an advantage. It rewards proper play and thinking ahead. Its not just shooting people, its more. Its FUN.
Its a core mechanic and makes the game more interesting. More FUN because there's more to it. Removing that for no reason and randomizing it removes FUN because it completely cuts that element from the game.
Why should anybody defend that?

Customers pay the companies for their products and if those products end up disappointing they should speak up.
How else can we make sure that we get games in the future that appeal to us?

The Devil May Cry reboot is a huge flop and I am extremely happy that fans spoke up because the way the companies treated fans and the IP was downright horrible. People spoke with their wallets and bought the HD remake of the first 3 titles instead.
Shit videogame news sites like Kotaku calling fans that complained about clear problems of the game entitled are horrible and influence the whole industry in a negative way. This also only happens with videogames.
It is our duty as customers to demand things we want from companies. We are the reason why they exist.