Over rated games

Originally Posted by Bombjacker

There is in Gauntlet 4 for the megadrive.

And that's another game, a clone that I don't know perhaps. There is difference between genre and clone. It's true that CE and Gauntlet are both 8 way shooters. But considering your first argument which sounds to me as -ce is in the same genre in gauntlet therefore bad- I'm pointing out that being in a same genre of a previous game doesn't make a game bad or overrated. Half Life is a FPS so is Doom. Half Life CAN be bad or overrated if the argument is good enough. Being in a same genre is not a complete argument.

From your argument about the differences between Gauntlet and CE making them uncomparable, I'm surprised you made the comparison between Shadow Dancer and Shinobi. From your reasoning: In Shadow Dancer you have a dog and therefore the tactics involved in depsatching enemies is different, and therefore makes the gameplay different.

Nope you don't think the way I do, which is OK as long as you don't take things personal.

Anyway enough of this stupid argument the forum is supposed to be about what games we thought were/are overated on the Amiga not a comparison between games thread.

Right you are

Creosote: I disagree on your disagreement about my disagreement. compare the number of entries and the complete timescale between hol and imdb.com. The difference applies to the money running on both markets and public interest. Lack of both in amiga market resulted as a non existing -mainstream- definition in amiga market. There can be hyped games before their release by the mags, that's a mistake of that specific press. You have point on LucasArts and Dune but isn't that a remote effect of the movie industry? We can't say this definition of mainstream belongs to the game media itself.

There are underground movies that can be actually good but can't meet the public because of mass produced crap aimed at people with average iq, taste, world view and education. In the amiga days, only games you couldn't instantly find in stores were local games or PD ones. This even didn't apply to my country. In Turkey, we never saw game boxes or covers or knew ANYTHING about a game before we bought them because local mags couldn't review new games as fast as foreign mags and we didn't have fast access to foreign mags either. Also there never was an official gaming market here. We used to have pirated disks copied over in shops, knowing only the name. That was just it, then we used to go home and decide if the game was good or not, in our own pirated evil will I played and loved the FRENCH version of ishar 2 I played dune without knowing anything about the novel which I read later.

[manicx]

Another overrated game that I can think of is AGONY. People say, 'exxcellent graphics', 'fantastic piano music' etc etc. The playability though is crap. I am not sure if I can classify this as a shooter...

[killergorilla]

Yeah I have to agree, it is slightly overrated. I can't stand the graphics either.

[Freakyweakywoo]

As the saying goes. One man's meat is another man's poison.

I knew some classics would come up; it’s the way it is. As for the debate. I don’t mind a little debate, but if you want to have full scale debate start a new thread.

I expect this tread is being monitored quite closely by the mods and I don’t blame them, the subject does have the potential to cause the odd crossed sword. I feel quite strongly about some of the games that have been mentioned so far, I loved them, but I was still interested to find out what it was that made them dislike my faves so much.

If we can just keep it on the topic then there won’t be any reason for this to get closed. Thanks to everyone (and I do mean everyone) who has contributed so far. If you want to keep your karma in line there is an under-rated Amiga games and also a quintessential Amiga games thread.

I started on a saying so I think I'll end on a saying. Live and let live.

[Bombjacker]

Originally posted by Burseg

But considering your first argument which sounds to me as -ce is in the same genre in gauntlet therefore bad- I'm pointing out that being in a same genre of a previous game doesn't make a game bad or overrated. Half Life is a FPS so is Doom. Half Life CAN be bad or overrated if the argument is good enough. Being in a same genre is not a complete argument.

Never said CE was bad because it is in the same genre as Gauntlet and that all games in that genre are crap or overated, or that any game from a genre is overated becasue another game following used that genre. I just think CE was an overated game, particularly in that genre and used Gauntlet as it was the first in that genre and I think better, especially considering how many years it appeared before CE. That's why a never really understood what all the fuss was about when I got to play CE. If CE was a much better game than Gauntlet and was as good as everyone at the time was claiming I wouldn't say it was overated.

Surely if games are in the same genre then previous games in that genre should be used as a benchmark. If Half-Life was raved on about like it was the best game ever when Doom was in fact much better then that would surely imply that Half-Life was overated.

I do agree that genre and clone are not entirely separable. I see them at two different points at the end of something akin to a spectrum with lots of 'grey' area in the middle. Most games of a genre will not be clones. Few games ever are as most games have quirks that make strategies etc different.

Originally posted by Burseg

In Turkey, we never saw game boxes or covers or knew ANYTHING about a game before we bought them because local mags couldn't review new games as fast as foreign mags and we didn't have fast access to foreign mags either. Also there never was an official gaming market here. We used to have pirated disks copied over in shops, knowing only the name. That was just it, then we used to go home and decide if the game was good or not, in our own pirated evil will I played and loved the FRENCH version of ishar 2 I played dune without knowing anything about the novel which I read later.

I agree. The role of expectations can play a big part on whether you think a game is good or not. Many of my favourite games on the Amiga were one's that I got hold and I hadn't read any reviews. When I first got Kick Off and Player Manager, two of my favourites I had never read any reviews and I still think they are classics. I read reviews and the hype surrounding the original Sensi Soccer claiming superiority over the Kick Off series and I was disappointed, because in my opinion it wasn't any better but worse. had I not read the hype my evaluation of the game might not be so harsh. Although already being very good at Kick Off also meant that I wasn't ever challenged by Sensi's gameplay.

Good games were always going to come up because the general consensus of crap games, would have been rated as crap in the first place.

Wrote too much, feeling sleepy....

[StarEye]

Mr Creosote: I disagree that there's no objectivity when it comes to games. Of course there is objectivity. In that case there would be no objectivity in art either. Neither is there objectivity in films nor music. In fact, I think saying there's no objectivity in games would render the word objectivity almost useless, because there is a certain objectivity in everything.

Because we all have to agree that a game with terrible graphics, worthless gameplay, incredibly low quality soundeffects and simply created just to make money is OBJECTIVILY a worse game than a game with excellent graphics (for its time), responsive controls and great soundeffects, don't we?

If objectivity didn't exist in games, then objectivity couldn't exist in sports either. No footballplayer could be better than the other. There is a certain thing called technical achievement that cannot be discussed, regardless of opinions. Either the game has responsive controls, or it doesn't. Either a game has great graphics, or it doesn't. Either a game have artistic quality or it doesn't. There are differences between games that really isn't discussable. The fact that you like it or not can be discussed, but actual true quality cannot be discussed.

[Mr Creosote]

StarEye: Sorry, but I wasn't too clear about the objectivity question before apparantely. What you said so well in your last post isn't so far away from my point of view: while there are certain 'facts' concerning games (and whatever else we're talking about), they can never automatically translate into any conclusion (which would be 'objectivity'). A fact is for example the resolution used in a game, the number of colours, background being hand-drawn and so on. However, none of these things automatically mean 'good graphics' or 'bad graphics'. That's completely subjective again, and independent from the aforementioned facts. Just an obvious example: I am aware that graphics in today's computer games are a great 'technical achievement'. All numbers (facts...) are speaking for themselves. However, I also think these graphics suck badly, for the simple reason that they're not 'art' but math - and I know many people agree with me there. However, according to your logic, such a point of view couldn't exist, because it's against the sacred objectivity.

Same goes for your second paragraph which hardly makes any sense. Accepting your premise, it's very logical, and there is no single argument against it. However, your premise is simply wrong, because you assume there is a common denominator of (for example) 'excellent graphics'. There isn't, as pointed out above.

However, I still agree with most of what you said. There is objectivity. It just doesn't go as far as you'd probably like it to be. Objectivity can only always be based on common and previously defined standards. For example, if I'm saying classical music is the best choice for a game soundtrack, a game using techno tracks objectively has bad music. Simple as that. As long as I stick to that same basis with all my judgements of game music, it's the best objectivity anyone can provide.

And..... that's why 'quality' is completely subjective in the end.


Burseg: As I said, the difference between 'mainstream' and 'underground' has certainly increased significantly in the gaming industry over the last few years. However, it's not only the media hype which 'makes mainstream'. As hinted at, it's also the way a 'product' came into existence. Was it some business people looking at the games charts, deciding genre XYZ is popular at the moment and therefore telling their programmers what to do? Or is it some guys who just thought it would be cool to make a game like ABC or one which would work like blah blah blah?

Even the availability point isn't fully true. There always were commercial games which weren't instantly available, even in a 'western' country like mine. Then there was a huge part of all games which was available through mail order only (or sometimes also in specialized stores). Last, but not least, there was the total 'mainstream': the games which everybody could pick up on every street corner.

[JohnnyWalker]

This thread has gone so far off the tracks it needs to be closed. Having a "I never liked this game" thread was a good idea in theory, but somewhere along the line someone has taken it personally and neither side will let it go.

I think Chaos Engine is a good game, nay superb game, in a completely different way than Gauntlet is. To say that CE is G clone is being very glib. G relied on fast and frantic shooting, CE relied a lot more on team work and strategy. (Before someone goes mental, I'm not saying G didn't have those things, just that CE relied on them more.)

CE's aim was to provide a well designed and very clever game that could be played in single player as well as two player without losing too much of the gameplay. That was not G's aim so I don't see how you can compare them other than a "I didn't like it" / "I liked it!".

Also, seeing how G didn't have a decent version on the Amiga the whole conversation is completely moot anyway. Is anyone really saying that Gauntlet on the Amiga was better than Chaos Engine on the Amiga? Well, actually I wouldn't be surprised seeing as it takes all sorts. But who cares?

The games that StarEye listed DEFINED the Amiga as a platform. It's like being on a Nintendo board and saying you always hated Mario. Or being on a Sega board and complaining about Sonic being overrated. Or being on a Spectum lover's board and saying that Manic Miner was crap. If you didn't like them it's sad that you missed out, the rest of us enjoyed them and StarEye's comments are valid if you put them in this context.

These aren't "just games that a lot of people liked", these are games that defined the platform while it was at the top of its game. It's a shame that more people here don't appreciate them for at least what they were: Original games we could be proud of! Not clones. Not remakes. Not sequels. And certainly not poor assed console conversions! They are games that say "Amiga".

So basically it's pointless to even argue about them, even in a thread designed to allow people say what they think.

It was a good idea, but this thread has gone bad...

@Creosote
Still I suggest you to try a different word than "mainstream". Mainstream is something that can reach your 70yr old grandmother (regardless of her response to it) I define your use of word "mainstream" as a "categorizable difference between pr efforts behind game development projects" And it's normal that I don't know much about this private stuff. Not having been grown up on a western european country, my experience from late 80s may differ from yours. I'm saying there is a "scale" difference between the game industry in 80s and movie industry making us find more proper words like "mainstr" or "mnsrm" This doesn't prevent me from seeing your point. I'm beginning to wonder, maybe things you defined in the availability part were only valid in Germany. If that's so, members in that discussion build their arguments on uncommon things that others don't even know. Problems of an international forum!

@JohnnyWalker
We're discussing amiga/retrogaming and having fun. Why should the thread be locked? Especially after you're lured into the discussion and expressed your point too

[StarEye]

Ok, let's wrap this up shall we?

Good games are good games, but there are some people that don't like them but don't call them bad. That's just plain wrong.
Objectivity and subjectivity lives hand in hand in games (a game can be good in an objective way, but wether you like it or not is subjective).
Chaos Engine is a brilliant game that you either like or don't. And it's not a clone. It's an action game.
Gauntlet is a brilliant game that you either like or don't (but not on the amiga?).

And this my friends... is a wrap up. Now let's continue listing all those superb games that you don't like, and some crap ones too that nobody liked but the press.

Originally Posted by StarEye

(but not on the amiga?).

No but there is the sequel, a faithful clone and a sequel of the clone.
There is gauntlet III too but it's a bit different.

[StarEye]

Wow, that was weird! Never knew about the Garrison games, didn't Rainbow Arts get copyright trouble when they created this near-identical clones?

[Mr Creosote]

Burseg: Of course I understand your point perfectly, too

And I agree this thread has been quite interesting so far, and it could easily continue to do so. No idea where this 'this has gone bad' interpretation comes from.

[CodyJarrett]

Originally Posted by Mr Creosote

No idea where this 'this has gone bad' interpretation comes from.

I'll close it anyway, because this is the part I really like!

(Joking)

[Mr Creosote]

Never expected anything else from you

[Freakyweakywoo]

Does this mean I get my thread back?

Sometimes the fact that a game had received so much positive press and hype just made me want to hate it, but hey that’s the way I am. I think almost every game that came out backed by a movie licence was awful, 'lets just knock out another third rate platform game and stick the movie title on the box.' That never sat well with me.

[Amiga1992]

MY GAME IS BETTER THAN YOUR GAME AND YOUR GAME IS OVERRATEDLY MORE OVERRATED THAN MY GAME!

STFU KTHBYe!

;D

[JohnnyWalker]

No idea where this 'this has gone bad' interpretation comes from.

This is nearly post number 80. The last time someone mentioned a game they thought was overrated was number 34. Over half this thread has degenerated into "I can't believe you didn't like this excellent game!" / "I can! It sucked!" / "No it didn't! How can you say that?" / "I can say what I like; it sucked ass! Ner." etc etc etc.

Or as Akira summed put it:

MY GAME IS BETTER THAN YOUR GAME AND YOUR GAME IS OVERRATEDLY MORE OVERRATED THAN MY GAME!

Not that hard to understand. Is it?

[Mr Creosote]

Just that the discussion wasn't on that level you described, but rather well-worded from all sides...