-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Name a good game with "bad" gameplay
- Thread starter Raziel
- Start date
Killer 7 is the first game that springs to mind.
I think there was a lot of potential in the Night Trap style, monitor and alter events idea, but they never played well and were far too punishing.
You want a movie Choose Your Own Adventure that's replayable with different outcomes, you instead get every wrong decision leading you to failure because it would take a hell of a lot of work to do it right, and you there's no fingers to bookmark the choice pages.
Alpha Protocol would have done it perfectly if they didn't make you slog through the action sections.
I think there was a lot of potential in the Night Trap style, monitor and alter events idea, but they never played well and were far too punishing.
You want a movie Choose Your Own Adventure that's replayable with different outcomes, you instead get every wrong decision leading you to failure because it would take a hell of a lot of work to do it right, and you there's no fingers to bookmark the choice pages.
Alpha Protocol would have done it perfectly if they didn't make you slog through the action sections.
theignoramus
Member
lol, Mass Effect 1. Forgot about that. 360 version is a technical nightmare with shitty gameplay mechanics, but the story and characters are alot more interesting than anything in ME2.
Why would you do that?
Member
They made a PC version of this?! I only played the N64 version...Lijik said:
It features some weird controls, a sometimes janky as fuck camera, and the objectives can sometimes be next to impossible to figure out. However as a psychonauts-esque adventure-platformer with a quirky cast, I had an overall great time with it. The final level is pretty fucking bad though.
But you're right, though.
I feel this way about a lot of Sega-made dreamcast games actually.Htown said:
Chu Chu Rocket and Jet Set Radio are the first ones to spring to mind that aren't "bad".
They did, it was unique for streaming everything off the disc as an anti-piracy measure. It also didn't suffer from the crashes that the n64 version occasionally did.Why would you do that? said:
blame space
Banned
i think "good" and "bad" are just really horrible descriptors, especially for video games.
R
Retro_
Unconfirmed Member
Read the topic title and Suda 51 popped into my head immediately
ULTROS! said:
Not exactly sure how characters in FFVII qualify as unique and ones in FFVIII don't. The use of individual limit break systems make both casts unique in that sense, but the Materia and Junction systems still allow party members to be largely interchangeable otherwise.
Furthermore, more focus on making characters in FFIX unique didn't help to make everyone useful, nor did it fix the fundamental flaws of the combat system itself.
Neon_Icarus
Member
Fragile, and most survival horror games.
Foliorum Viridum
Banned
Metal Gear Solid 1-3 are great games with shit gameplay.
Metal Gear Solid 4 is a shit game with great gameplay. :lol
Metal Gear Solid 4 is a shit game with great gameplay. :lol
disappeared
Banned
blame space said:
I'd agree with this.
I think some people have different interpretations of what they consider 'gameplay'. For example, watching a cutscene in a Final Fantasy game probably wouldn't be considered 'gameplay' by most people, I dont think. Accessing in-game menus to sort through inventory probably isn't in most people's definitions of 'gameplay' either.blame space said:
Jive Turkey
Unconfirmed Member
You can laugh all you want it doesn't diminish my argument in the slightest nor does it make you look any more intelligent. A game is defined my the game itself. Story, writing, music, art, and everything else are frosting.Foxtastical said:
But hey don't let the very definition of something get in the way of your views. Considering the time it took you to go from zero to jackass I doubt you will.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
I love Shenmue... but Shenmue.
The main controls are sloppy 32-bit era adventure junk. It plays better as a fighting game with adventure elements added in. A simplified fighter, but a fighter.
To be perfectly honest it's obvious the game had absolutely no focus from the outset. It's a bunch of elements thrown together, some better then others and a huge budget.
I loved it, but there are very apparent flaws. Voice acting is just the most obvious flaw.:lol
Still it's one of my favorite games out there just because of how beautiful the art is. How much time went into just making it work is apparent.
But it is a flawed game, as every game is.
The main controls are sloppy 32-bit era adventure junk. It plays better as a fighting game with adventure elements added in. A simplified fighter, but a fighter.
To be perfectly honest it's obvious the game had absolutely no focus from the outset. It's a bunch of elements thrown together, some better then others and a huge budget.
I loved it, but there are very apparent flaws. Voice acting is just the most obvious flaw.:lol
Still it's one of my favorite games out there just because of how beautiful the art is. How much time went into just making it work is apparent.
But it is a flawed game, as every game is.
That's not a definition. If you enjoy a game you've enjoyed it, period. And you can enjoy a game on other merits than the raw gameplay. I know I have.Jive Turkey said:
(Though I can only think of one example, as a rule it's gameplay I get the enjoyment from. Btw, Dreamfall sucks.)
disappeared
Banned
:lol
Deadly Premonition and Killer7 are the main things that come to mind. Both are games I played primarily for atmosphere and plot. Deadly Premonition's gameplay is especially horrendous. Not sure why I bothered going back through every nightmare area to get all the trading cards and weapons.
Games can be good for a lot of reasons. Gameplay (by which I mean the actions and systems involved in player-controlled sections of the game) is not always the only reason why a game is good, and even a good gameplay system can be enhanced significantly by presentational aspects. There's surprisingly little dividing Deadly Premonition's shooting gameplay from RE4, for instance, but one is significantly better than the other. Is it just the smoother controls, melee attack options, and improved enemy variety that set RE4 apart? Or is it the much more refined systems of enemy animation, graphical feedback, and violent death?
Deadly Premonition doesn't play well, but if I hadn't spent a lot of time in that town completing sidequests and interacting with the quirky cast, I wouldn't have been quite as invested as I was in unraveling the bizarre supernatural murder mystery at the heart of the game's plot. Or how York's monologue's while driving made me like him more as a character. So despite how poor much of the game was, Deadly Premonition is still one of my most memorable games from this year.
Doesn't mean that I can't enjoy games for their gameplay, or that it isn't important (Bayonetta and Super Meat Boy are also some of my favorites from this year, after all), but there are many things that can make a game worth playing.
Games can be good for a lot of reasons. Gameplay (by which I mean the actions and systems involved in player-controlled sections of the game) is not always the only reason why a game is good, and even a good gameplay system can be enhanced significantly by presentational aspects. There's surprisingly little dividing Deadly Premonition's shooting gameplay from RE4, for instance, but one is significantly better than the other. Is it just the smoother controls, melee attack options, and improved enemy variety that set RE4 apart? Or is it the much more refined systems of enemy animation, graphical feedback, and violent death?
Deadly Premonition doesn't play well, but if I hadn't spent a lot of time in that town completing sidequests and interacting with the quirky cast, I wouldn't have been quite as invested as I was in unraveling the bizarre supernatural murder mystery at the heart of the game's plot. Or how York's monologue's while driving made me like him more as a character. So despite how poor much of the game was, Deadly Premonition is still one of my most memorable games from this year.
Doesn't mean that I can't enjoy games for their gameplay, or that it isn't important (Bayonetta and Super Meat Boy are also some of my favorites from this year, after all), but there are many things that can make a game worth playing.
blame space
Banned
what's the sole example?peakish said:
Pinko Marx
Banned
The main gameplay is pretty fucking horrible and tedious. But everything else is done so well that I was able to look past the BORING ass gameplay and enjoy it.
No, the actual gameplay is also superior in Mass Effect - not just the story.
The more open and expansive levels, less focus on constant combat and the greater importance of RPG elements like inventory, all made the actual game playing of Mass Effect better than Mass Effect 2.
If I wanted to play Gears of War, I would.
The more open and expansive levels, less focus on constant combat and the greater importance of RPG elements like inventory, all made the actual game playing of Mass Effect better than Mass Effect 2.
If I wanted to play Gears of War, I would.
Rahxephon91
Banned
Metal Gear Solid games do not have bad gameplay. How dare you people think that!
Anyway, my choice is Resident Evil 5. In this day and age the controls have been surpassed also it seems the game just dosen't know what it wants to be. You have the bad co-op, the half assed cover system, the enemies with guns in a game that shouldn't have them, and the non existent survival horror elements. Outside of the great graphics, the game is just incredibly bad for AAA game. Yet, I still enjoy it.
Anyway, my choice is Resident Evil 5. In this day and age the controls have been surpassed also it seems the game just dosen't know what it wants to be. You have the bad co-op, the half assed cover system, the enemies with guns in a game that shouldn't have them, and the non existent survival horror elements. Outside of the great graphics, the game is just incredibly bad for AAA game. Yet, I still enjoy it.
blame space
Banned
oh sorry, boarding from iPod and didn't feel like going back to double check. Killer7 intruiged me but I stopped playing a few hours in.. liked the atmosphere and look of the game a lot, but it just didn't hook me.. I'd probably buy an XBLA or PSN port and give it another shot.peakish said:
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
If we define "gameplay" to be the core mechanics of a video game, stripped of all other extraneous dressing then I can see how someone can like a game even if they don't care for the gameplay. Peggle is basically a pachinko machine that has won GOTY awards. It it impossible to die in Kirby's Epic Yarn but it received perfect scores. That's because the extraneous dressing was very well done and made the game entertaining even though the mechanics are not deep or particularly engaging on their own.blame space said:
Random rewards can also make uninteresting, repetitive actions compelling. It's the driver behind the popularity of many MMOs, roguelikes, bad games with easy achievements and slot machines.
storafötter
Member
Silent Hill fits very well. The controls are annoying and I don't like the puzzles much. It is mostly the story, atmosphere, music and characters that drives me in these games. I think it is a bit silly to think its impossible to enjoy games even if you don't like the objectives or the way they control. If a game has a big emphasis on many other things than how it controls and objectives, gameplay isn't the only valuable factor. As an example, a fighting game that has bad gameplay will be a bad game no matter what, because most of the draw and basis of playing it lies in the gameplay than story/characters/music/atmosphere/narration.
Likewise it is hard for me to enjoy an adventure game if the story/characters aren't interesting, because most of the time the puzzles are terrible and mostly trial and error.
Likewise it is hard for me to enjoy an adventure game if the story/characters aren't interesting, because most of the time the puzzles are terrible and mostly trial and error.
nincompoop
Banned
...No?Prophet Steve said:
By "technically solid" I mean the other aspects of the game's design work well (for the most part), but its camera fails at the most basic level by failing to provide a view which will even allow you to take advantage of its otherwise solid mechanics the majority of the time. I didn't mean "technologically advanced" or anything to do with graphics.
Anasui Kishibe
Banned
so basically, story driven games
D
Deleted member 13876
Unconfirmed Member
Fimbulvetr said:
And people berated immediately me for responding in similar fashion to this guy a single time.
tomjenkins
Neo Member
Simpsons: Road Rage was clunky, the graphics were terrible, and glitches abound but I'll be goddamned if I didn't play that game 24/7
Augemitbutter
Member
nincompoop said:
I played this for the first time recently... as technically solid as the game is, the camera is so unfathomably bad that it sucks most of the life out of the gameplay.
yes, sigma is better.
Rollo Lawson
Banned
Shinjitsu said:
if you dont get the concept, you can always just move on to another thread.
i mean, come on. self righteousness really doesnt help you here. it makes you high for a while but your problems are still there when you come down
Nuclear Muffin
Banned
Shenmue I and II
GillianSeed79
Member
Sub_Level said:
I kind of agree with this. I loved MGS3 the best because it got to the point where I could stealth kill 90 percent of the enemies in the game. It was very satisfying if you knew how to play well.
MGS1 was great, as it was essentially a 3-D remake if you will of the old 8-bit Metal Gear games. MGS2 was also pretty fun.
But, for the life of me I couldn't get MGS4 stealth system. Even with active camo it felt too easy to be spotted. That and the game featured a giant weapons shop that basically encouraged you not to go the stealth route.