From recent memory?
Witcher 3: People kept (and still keep) saying how great this game is, etc. I tried to get into it a couple of times only to drop it after some hours. Don't like how the combat feels, don't like how it feels to navigate the menus. The world is alright. But it just feels cumbersome to play (for me).
Red Dead Redemption 2: I am usually a fan of Rockstar Games' releases. However, I think that Red Dead Redemption 2 might be the worst open-world 'game' I have played because the game feels like it had two directors: One who wanted to have this cool, living simulation of a world and the other who wanted to make a cinematic story. Both couldn't agree on anything so the producer stepped in and decided on the worst compromises he could. That's how the game feels to me. The missions are actively fighting against the open-world and the open-world doesn't particularly care for the missions.
The Outer Worlds: I had somewhat high expectations because it was a new RPG from Tim Cain and Leonard Boyarsky. And it is frustrating because I could see that there were cool decisions beneath all the budget constraints. But that game really could've used a higher budget. One could see that there were many things they just couldn't really follow through with because they had limited resources. And it is a bit baffling to me that they went ahead with them anyway... Maybe they should've made an isometric RPG instead, using the Pillars of Eternity 2 tech.
Divinity: Original Sin 2: I get why people hailing this game as the best one of the "CRPG Renaissance". I do think the combat system is great. I do think that this is a good take on a modernized Ultima. But godfucking damn, man. The writing and the world building was just unbearable to me, so much so that I dropped the game. That's why I eagerly wait for the completion of Baldur's Gate III (I don't support early access business models) as it seems exactly what I am looking for.
Final Fantasy XV: I am a Final Fantasy fan. I even like the FF 13 games. But that game felt like a clusterfuck of ideas that where thrown together without following through with them. The story has a lot of plot holes, the combat system is "on the verge" of feeling great and fun but without "getting there"; it's just not fun to press a button and receive feedback from the game, which should be important in an action-based combat system IMHO. The world is looking cool but it's boring. The disjointed writing also didn't really help matters when it comes to get the player to care about the characters. Ardyn's motivations don't seem strong enough for me that he went through all of this effort. Luna was advertised as a central character but only shows up a couple of times, even though she is one of the main motivations of Noctis. Noctis' interactions and dialog with his companions all felt very forced and unnatural to me. Soundtrack was fucking banging, though.
Iron Harvest: I am an RTS gamer at heart. I grew up with RTS games (and strategy games at large). It's what I would play if I had to choose only one genre. And I also love mechs, especially Battletech. So I was pretty excited for Iron Harvest; I mean, it's Company of Heroes in WWI with mechs. How fucking cool is that? However, they never achieved the snappiness and the flow of the Company of Heroes games. Iron Harvest feels slow and janky in comparison. The mechs are cool but not really as central to the game as advertised. The campaign is alright, in fact one of the better ones in recent times. The maps are boring. And I would have loved to be able to zoom out more. The issues with the camera I had could've been easily solved by just letting me zoom out a bit more, so I don't have to deal with it that much; never had that problem with Company of Heroes. The game is also not well readable at certain times; Company of Heroes managed to get that right as well, even though it had the same color palette of various gray and brown colors, I always knew (or at least I had the feeling that I knew) what was going on.
