Red alert. Got it in a threepack with gettysburg! which was a great game, the battle system was even better than Shogun's. The other game was Jane's fleet command, which is runner up for worst...still I only waste 5$.
Printable View
Red alert. Got it in a threepack with gettysburg! which was a great game, the battle system was even better than Shogun's. The other game was Jane's fleet command, which is runner up for worst...still I only waste 5$.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Accounting Troll
If my memory serves me correctley Call to power wasn't done by sid Meier. I think what happened was the publishers wanted to to take the name and create there own civ and sid meier wanted to keep it and make his own with a new publisher. As a comprimise they created two seperate civ's (with sid meiers becoming civ 3).
*the reason may of been different but i know that sid meier had nothing to do with the call to power series*
The worst game i purchased was Anno 1503. couldn't get my head round it at all.
call to power sucked. so i gave it to a friend
Emporer: Battle for Dune ~ Repetitive, boring, slow frame rates. Yuck!
Freelancer ~ So much potential wasted, because of keeping to deadlines and release dates.
Adidas Power Soccer ~ Possibly the worst football game ever. Unbeatable goalkeepers who saved everything unless you did an *Adidas Power Shot*. Says it all.
Sasaki Kojiro,
Granted, Janes Fleet Command lacks depth, but if it's definitely worth a few bucks just to fart around with.
In M:TW I get to pillage and loot France from stem to stern. In IL2-Sturmovik, I get to down their air force. In Janes Fleet Command, I get to sink their navy.
You just gotta love it. ~:cheers:
Civ 3 is awesome!!!!
It is just sooo much better than that pile of sh*t civ 2.
But the worst game is War and Peace.
agreed on worst game war and peace but efrem, civ 2 was pretty good iirc
my choice is the same as simon appleton's. i had high hopes for 'napoleon 1813'. had to buy it from overseas i think, when it first came up, and it was just unplayable.
that was when my gaming views changed from 'let them get the game out as quickly as possible and they can patch it later' to 'let them take as long as they need to get the thing right in the first place.' i was young and foolish then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Divine Wind
that was one of the most strategically diverse RTS games ever made. certainly it was not repetitive in competitive online matches, because you had to adapt to your enemy or lose.
if you had slow frame rates then it's either because your system is unable to handle it due to obsolete hardware you have, or because you had the landscape/shadow details set too high - which tend to lag any system for some reason. but turning those down should have solved any frame rate problems.
MOO3 or heroes of might and magic 4. Both overhyped and no where near as good as their predecessors (which I loved).
Hi Navaros. When it was first released i didnt have a reliable internet connection so unfortunatly i never got the chance to play online. Perhaps that might have been more interesting than the single player game, which is where my disappointment lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Navaros
The AI is pretty poor and seem to just charge straight at your base rather than try to sneek in other ways, and actually make the game challenging. Also the missions are extremely repetitive with destroy the enemies standard base in this area. Gah! I want something a little different for my money! If all the missions are like that i may as well just play a quick battle. Theres not much difference ~:(
Im not sure about the frame rates problem i had. At the time i had an excellent PC, with top notch graphics card etc. I dont think i had the landscape details on high, as ive always fiddled around with these before to make games run slightly better. Perhaps i missed something.
Overall remember this is the worst games youve ever bought thread and not the worst game ever thread ~;) Ive bought a lot of games over the years and im one of these people that generally read a lot into the game before i buy it. So dont take my list too seriously as i definitely would not consider this an awful game. Just one that didnt fufill all my expectations ~:)
Now im going to install it again and give the multiplayer a go!
:bow:
Worst game I bought was Throne of Darkness. You all probably haven't even heard of it. It's a Diablo clone in Japanese style. I played it for one day, then removed it from my hd. It has 2 inches of dust on the manual (and I love reading manuals.. so this is saying a lot ~;))
Then again, it only cost 5 euro, but still, a waste is a waste.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Divine Wind
hey man, i agree with you that the SP portion sucks. that game was never a good SP game. it was all about MP
unfortunately, no one has been playing that game online for the last 2 years or so. little by little, everyone stopped playing after EA permanently abandoned the game with the bugs/AI deficiencies still intact, until eventually no one was left playing the game online.
i've heard that EA recently shutdown the WOL service, so it's not like you could play even if you wanted to. ~:dizzy:
it was a great multiplayer game in it's time, albeit with several unfair bugs that tipped the gameplay advantage to certain Houses.
unfortunately it's time is now dead. ~:(
I played Throne of Darkness. I rather liked it, except the final area and last boss. I liked the way you could customise your gear and the way useless bits of armour and old weapons could be broken down and put towards new, better gear. I also liked the way you always had access to the blacksmith so you didn't have to run/town portal every time your inventory filled up.
It's far from the best I've ever played but I've definitely played worse. I finished it then shelved it and never thought about playing it again.
I remember it. The novelty of the keeper being knocked into the goal by a power shot wore off after a week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divine Wind
The runners-up
Worms Armageddon - Worms 2 was fun and addictive. Worms Armageddon was tiresome and not really much fun.
Railroad Tycoon 2 - The original is a gaming classic, the sequel was beer and pretzels greed.
Sim City 3000 - ugh
The winner is
Ultima Ascension - or how to make an bug filled adventure game with systems requirements that will be available in 5 years time and then market it as a role playing game.
Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance. Pure trash, its the only game I've ever sold.
I liked Dark Alliance and its sequel.Quote:
Originally Posted by DisruptorX
What about it did you not like?
Qilue: i agree that worms armaggedon wasn't as great as Worms 2 or Worms 1.
1)Firstly the gameplay, it was horribly boring. Don't get me wrong, I love action, but it has to be done right, a la Dynasty Warriors 2/3. This game had my mind wandering constantly, as it was not being used. I actively wished for the game to end already. At least it was only rental length, though that means that it was even more of a rip off.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tuffen
2) The use of "Baldur's Gate" in the title. The game had nothing to do with said games. Baldur's Gate was an acceptable rpg, and BG II is one of the top 10 pc rpgs ever. Using the license to help sell a gauntlet clone is unnacceptable.
Well, my biggest mistakes were C&C Tiberian Sun, Heroes 4, and Heroes of Might and Magic 4. All of these should follow the wonderful line of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." How could they make such baaaaad games after having so much success in the past? It is infuriating how mass marketing can ruin games. Evidently corporate high-ups do not learn from the past very well, because games like these that can ruin a franchise are still being released today. :wall:
Is everybody paying attention?Quote:
Originally Posted by KillerKadugen
~;)
A.
Oh, by the way, my pick: Entente