tbh there's a good chance that a 10/10 across-the-board game will lack personality, because it's hard to appeal to that many people will being unique or idiosyncratic.
EYE is so this, I thought going in the game would have level design but nah that game just gives up like 2 hours in and you're just in these huge ass mazes/towns on repeat it's amazing.
I love how unapologetically flawed the design is. "Oh, you think you've found a clever hidden path/some side content? Fuck you, that only works some of the time! You're now exactly where you would be if you simply went straight ahead 10 meters!"
I'd say YIIK but that's more like a strong 7/10 now so I will say Deadly Premonition. It's like... Objectively a bad game. Terrible on a technical level. A mess in terms of gameplay. Awful looking. Messy. And yet it's fascinating and captivating... And then the sequel was bad on purpose and sucked
This is "Disaster:Day of Crisis", for me.
That game is so bad, it's AMAZING.
It kept us on our toes the whole time cause we had no idea what was happening next. Lmfao
I agree! One objectively bad game that I like is hello kitty roller rescue! I'm a grownup but i still replay hello kitty roller rescue on the weekends!
Really?! It might be nostalgia talking, but it’s such a great game. I can see how it might be a hard sell to people who have not played Monster Rancher.
I did US QA for Atelier Iris 2 once upon a time. It felt dated on release, but I still fondly remember it as a cozy adventure (especially compared to the other slop we were testing at the time).
I call this phenomenon "the sauce". Sometimes a game is not a masterpiece """in the objective sense""", but it altered your brain chemistry and inserted itself into your creative DNA so you enjoy in a very personal way; to you, it has "the sauce". The secret sauce, if you will.
We talking like, the kind of games that big reviewers give that kind of score to? I remember being shocked on release that my favorite 3D arena game, Gotcha Force, got scores ranging from 3 to 7 out of 10 from places like GameSpot and IGN. I just couldn't see the flaws in it back then. It's got soul
I'm talking about games that objectively had issues in development that led to the game not being able to live up to its full potential (and not like, it needed more time for polish, like a much more serious issue)
the vast majority of AAA games have a degree of competency way above what I mean
this is why most of my (subjective) game ratings still fluctuate between 5/10 - 10/10... and my "I don't recommends" are still 6s and 5s..
I am imaginining the WHOLE spectrum of quality, and surely everything I've played is still above par, compared to asset flips and broken code interactibles
potential clickbait-y stuff aside, I still think this put things into perspective lol.
when I remember this video and vaguely watching a bit of it, I'm like "yeah, no matter how much I dislike some games I've played, they're still BETTER than this.."
ofc it's a whole other can of worms; some people might tell me "why are you not recommending this if this is a 5/10?", but for me these numbers don't directly translate to enjoyment!
I am giving benefit of the doubt of "it could be worse"; even though on a purely joy level it'd be 3/10..
This comment right here, friends. Bad isnt always /bad/. But not because its full circle, but because art and its creation is nuances and peeps are different.
Im having “name a thing” block right now. But Im a huge Godzilla fan and its a whole spectrum of bad for dif reasons but amazing
Yes. I think maturity is learning to say that you love a solid 6.5/10 movie, rather than trying to convince people that it's a 10/10 movie just because you love it.
Agreed for the longest time I would play cell shaded games. I can’t stand the art style. It’s gotten better with outlines that are much thinner and tolerable. I like hyper real graphics. I come from the original gamer generation with Atari and nes so watching graphics advance has been amazing.
Fr, the only way to escort some survivors is to kill the guards, but the gameplay is basically designed so that you cannot do that ever, so I'm stuck spamming molotovs at a crowd of guys until they die because any other attempt to fight or distract them will kill me.
Sword of the Necromancer for me personally. Cute mildly edgy roguelike (the main characters are also lesbians, which bumps it for me, especially since it's just written like it's normal (as it SHOULD be)).
It's great imo, despite the reviews claiming it's mid.
But here's what I keep saying: if it had such a profound impact on you or you loved it so much that it sticks with you long after you've finished it, then why not just say that it's a 10/10 game? Because to you it clearly is. Why do we have to pretend that there is an objective "good" or "bad"?
For any gamer - but especially if you're interested in game design - playing "bad" games will teach you more about games as a whole. What not to do, perhaps... but more importantly, why it's not a good idea, and how it could be improved.
Man, such a good statement and so true. For me, it was a tiny little game that probably nobody has ever heard of. Very serene little game, casually played. I played it during a time when my dog was sick and dying and I sat with her all day and we played. I smile Everytime I fire it up. Memories.
If you're a gamer and you want to truly understand gaming this is the truest post I've seen on here. Don't be a fan of great games. Be a fan of games. The whole spectrum. I once reviewed a 3/10 and I think about that game all the time, more than many games I reviewed way higher.
Ghost Master is a mess of a game that is buggy, doesn't look amazing and suffers from bad AI.
I love it because there is no other game like it. I will always respect a game that nails one thing completely but fumbles the rest more than one that doesn't nail anything but is okay in all regards.
But what *objective* (that is, measurable and clearly defined) metric is being used to claim that it's just okay? I love Sw/Sh too, it's probably my favorite gen since 2, and I'm gonna call it a 10/10 game because whatever "flaws" someone could point out don't make it any less amazing to me.
Comments
My taste in gaming is nothing like that of G*mers™️
That game is so bad, it's AMAZING.
It kept us on our toes the whole time cause we had no idea what was happening next. Lmfao
And the opening song?? A MASTERPIECE
https://youtu.be/-qdhp1YhIsY?feature=shared
you have not had the experience I'm talking about if you think of nintendo games when you see this, even the worst of theirs are 7/10 on the low end
then I really gotta try it, yuki naka's magnum opus
the vast majority of AAA games have a degree of competency way above what I mean
I am imaginining the WHOLE spectrum of quality, and surely everything I've played is still above par, compared to asset flips and broken code interactibles
potential clickbait-y stuff aside, I still think this put things into perspective lol.
when I remember this video and vaguely watching a bit of it, I'm like "yeah, no matter how much I dislike some games I've played, they're still BETTER than this.."
I am giving benefit of the doubt of "it could be worse"; even though on a purely joy level it'd be 3/10..
Im having “name a thing” block right now. But Im a huge Godzilla fan and its a whole spectrum of bad for dif reasons but amazing
It's great imo, despite the reviews claiming it's mid.
It’s super fun though and has local mp.
I love it because there is no other game like it. I will always respect a game that nails one thing completely but fumbles the rest more than one that doesn't nail anything but is okay in all regards.
and affinity is so much more important to me