Hating games for the sake of hating them

[Kitsune Sniper]

I've been getting quite a few comments on my Bad Boys Miami Takedown videos on Youtube lately, but one of them kinda... bugged me.

One month ago, someone asked me this:
How would you rate this game on a scale of 0-10? I've only heard bad things about this game, but I loved the bad boy movies and am thinking about getting this.

So I answered honestly:
Probably a 7.

YES, a 7.

Having grown up in the NES era, I know what a truly bad game is. And this is not even close to the tripe that LJN put out. It's playable, it's beatable, the graphics ain't that bad, the music is passable, and there's destructible environments.

And just now... I got this as a reply to that comment:
What can I say, poor you. This game deserves 0/10.

People need to understand we ain't going to buy shit games... we want quality, not unfinished crappy results

Well, I kinda got angry, and posted this:
Have you played this game? Or are you just bashing the game because everyone else did?

I bought this game because I heard it was total crap, and it wasn't. It borrows a lot of things from other games but it does what it does just well enough to be tolerable. I was pleasantly surprised by what I found.

Also, and so people hate me, I liked this game 10 times more than RED DEAD REDEMPTION, which I found neat but the controls and aiming mechanism were HORRIBLE.

And I know, it's Youtube comments, and some people there don't post much of anything worth paying attention to, but it really did bug me. This is a game that has been painted as almost the Antichrist of the PS2 library, and it's not even that bad of a damn game!

Why do people act like that? What makes them... hate a game before even bothering to play it? Dammit, it's just so damn frustrating.

Edit: I know this is in Classic Gaming, and that I'm talking about a PS2 game. But this kind of behavior is quite common with 8 and 16 bit games, so I figured it would be better here.

[dayzed4life]

I haven't played Bad Boys before but I do know exactly what your talking about. In comments on youtube (and some other places) it seems everyone just jumps on the +1 bandwagon depending on what everyone else is posting. I actually like to go on and listen to people do acoustic covers of songs on there and it's the same thing. A few people either bash it or loved it and most other people agree. No one has their own opinion anymore it seems.

Edit: I just realized my post had absolutely nothing to do with games as you were saying but I still thought it fit here.

[Aussie2B]

Your score and comments are incongruous, though. If you'd describe all the elements in the game as tolerable/passable, then it should get a 5 out of 10 tops. A 7 suggests that it's a fairly good game. I mean there are only two points separating that and the greatest games ever made (those that would earn 10/10). By your scale, you're giving 6 points to describe varying levels of awfulness and only 3 to describe everything that is better than mediocre. You can't apply the grade school scale of judging competency (where only being half successful is still a failure) to assessing the quality of games.

[RASK1904]

I've been caught doing the oppisite. A new game comes out. From a popular franchise. Endless hype! And the sheep love it and say it's the best ever. Usaully I'm the only one saying what about this or this (parts that suck) and I get alot of shit for it. I just think the buzz and the fact that everyone just spent 50+$ on the new game of their favorite franchise has got them saying it's the greatest ever. No one wants to admit the game kinda sucks. So I do. And I get hell. I say wait a year or two when the hype dies down and you will see. I don't unerstand.

[kupomogli]

Castlevania 2 and Fester's Quest. Games James has reviewed as bad games. After the AVGN reviews, you see nothing but hate for these games. Both games are extremely well made and really good games.

What about games getting praise solely based on what they've heard from others. Or based on their rarity?

Rondo of Blood, Final Fantasy 3, Tales of Phantasia. Three games that were never released in the US officially and were so hyped up by word of mouth, then I've seen a lot of people say they really don't like the games much and were disappointed after they were finally released. With a lot of other people saying they bought DXC for SotN anyways(which I bought it for Rondo and the remake, but I don't think it's the best game in the series like you may have heard so long ago.)

Then there's people who praise games because companies release them. Atlus anyone?

I've also heard about people bashing Bad Boys. I was once going to rent it but that's the reason I didn't.

[Arkhan]

I think everyone hates Hydlide for the sake of hating it.

:(



I don't really hate any games, as weird as that sounds. Except car games. But I dont hate them, I just dont like car games. Sometimes a car game shows up that I enjoy like Motoroader, and Twisted Metal. :)

[BobaFettHotep]

i liked Hydlide

[BeaglePuss]

You can find a complete licensed NES set just 20 feet from where I am sitting. Of all the games found in the library, I dislike Hylide the most without question.

With that being said, I think Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hide rules! I also enjoy Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm St., Time Lord, and Jaws. All games that get their share of hate, but there are far worse titles out there.


i liked Hydlide

[Kitsune Sniper]

Your score and comments are incongruous, though. If you'd describe all the elements in the game as tolerable/passable, then it should get a 5 out of 10 tops. A 7 suggests that it's a fairly good game. I mean there are only two points separating that and the greatest games ever made (those that would earn 10/10). By your scale, you're giving 6 points to describe varying levels of awfulness and only 3 to describe everything that is better than mediocre. You can't apply the grade school scale of judging competency (where only being half successful is still a failure) to assessing the quality of games.

Have you ever considered the fact that I really don't know of any games that would get a 10? :P

If something gets a 5, it does not mean it's a bad game. So many reviewers and magazines think of 5 as "bad" but it's just... you know, average. I expected something like a 4 or a 3 out of Bad Boys (bad but not as bad as everyone said) and got something much better. It doesn't have any game-stopping bugs, and other than the graphics and cheap AI (if you don't know how to handle it) there really isn't that much wrong with the game.

And I say this as someone who thinks the Bad Boys movies are a waste of film!

[Shadow Kisuragi]

I purchase horrible games because I want to see how horrible they are. Most of the time, they're just average games and I end up enjoying them. People expect AAA blockbusters from everything they pick up these days, and if something isn't perfect or a multi-million selling blockbuster, they hate it.

Examples from x360:
BulletWitch
Cyberball 2072 (I know, retro, but still...horrible metacritic for x360)
Jumper
Rocky and Bullwinkle
Sonic the Hedgehog

Games that deserved the title:
Vampire Rain (could this have even been a PS2 release?!)

[Aussie2B]

Have you ever considered the fact that I really don't know of any games that would get a 10? :P

If something gets a 5, it does not mean it's a bad game. So many reviewers and magazines think of 5 as "bad" but it's just... you know, average. I expected something like a 4 or a 3 out of Bad Boys (bad but not as bad as everyone said) and got something much better. It doesn't have any game-stopping bugs, and other than the graphics and cheap AI (if you don't know how to handle it) there really isn't that much wrong with the game.

That's exactly what I was saying. You describe the game as not having anything wrong about it, but not having any remarkable traits either. That would place it square at the mediocre 5 spot. Unless you think the game is above average, in which case you're not doing a great job selling the game by calling it "tolerable" and "passable". :P

[Kitsune Sniper]

That's exactly what I was saying. You describe the game as not having anything wrong about it, but not having any remarkable traits either. That would place it square at the mediocre 5 spot. Unless you think the game is above average, in which case you're not doing a great job selling the game by calling it "tolerable" and "passable". :P

Tomato tomahtoe. :P

[exit]

I like the play a bad game every once in a while and sometimes I actually find things I like about them, other times I can see exactly why people dislike it. If I hear a game is bad and it comes from what I consider reliable sources, then I wait until I see it drop to a price that I feel comfortable with. I never straight up say that a game is horrible tho unless I've played the Demo or actual game, I just say that I've heard it's horrible.


I think everyone hates Hydlide for the sake of hating it.

I actually enjoyed Hydlide when I played it and I was surprised to see how much people had it out for that game, now I wonder how many people who despise that game actually sat down and played it.

[RARusk]

I hate Carmen SanDiego. I truly do.

However, there's a caveat.

I used to do gametesting for Broderbund Software long ago and I got stuck on the Carmen SanDiego series most of the time I was there. I got to hate those games real fast.

Even to this day I still hate the bitch.

And I do have one interesting story concerning Carmen.

One day I saw one of the lead techs showing off a new Carmen SanDiego game to a couple of visitors. I looked at the game and said "Another Carmen SanDiego game? Why don't you just put a bullet in my head?" and walked off.

A couple of weeks later I was listening to somebody talk about a tester who said something about "put a bullet in my head?" I distinctly remember saying that so I listened more closely.

I then found out that the two visitors who were looking at the new CS game were none other than Gene Portwood and Lauren Elliott, two of the people who CREATED Carmen SanDiego. As I heard that I thought "SHIT!"

But apparently they had a laugh over my comment. Thank God they had a sense of humor.....

[Diatribal Deity]

There is an ongoing debate about the game Deadly Premonition just released for the Xbox 360 at $19.99. The majority of people who have actually played it, have acknowledged it is actually pretty good especially at its price point. Others who have not, dismiss it as a throwaway title.

I for one like to draw my own opinion about games similar to movies. As much of the time, even though I might not totally love all aspects of it, I can usually find something I do enjoy, relate to, or am willing to tolerate.

It is pointless to try and convince others (especially if narrowminded, immature, or cattle). Share your view and if they don't appreciate it, move on and ignore them unless they present a valid specific argument or point.

[Gameguy]

Does anybody else like Bebe's Kids for the SNES? I do, it's nowhere near as bad as everyone makes it out to be. I didn't think I would like it, I sure didn't like the movie it was based on, but the game was pretty decent overall.

[Kitsune Sniper]

Does anybody else like Bebe's Kids for the SNES? I do, it's nowhere near as bad as everyone makes it out to be. I didn't think I would like it, I sure didn't like the movie it was based on, but the game was pretty decent overall.

I played it years back, and didn't like it very much. The Nostalgia Critic mentioned its worst point - the timer. That game should have never had a timer to begin with. I never made it to the haunted house, but I'm glad I never did.

[Gameguy]

I played it years back, and didn't like it very much. The Nostalgia Critic mentioned its worst point - the timer. That game should have never had a timer to begin with. I never made it to the haunted house, but I'm glad I never did.
I'll have to watch his review to see what he means. Most people can't seem to get past the haunted house level, but I got through it the first time. I haven't read the manual, though I do have a complete copy. You don't have to defeat every enemy, just defeat enough to get the screen to scroll forward. There's also certain moves that defeat enemies fairly fast, regular punches won't get you far. Did you play it on a console or just an emulator?

[Kitsune Sniper]

I'll have to watch his review to see what he means. Most people can't seem to get past the haunted house level, but I got through it the first time. I haven't read the manual, though I do have a complete copy. You don't have to defeat every enemy, just defeat enough to get the screen to scroll forward. There's also certain moves that defeat enemies fairly fast, regular punches won't get you far. Did you play it on a console or just an emulator?

He had an issue with the timer going out during the haunted house level. It always seemed to run out before he made it to the end, and he always got randomly thrown back to the beginning of the level for making wrong turns. It wasn't pretty.

I played it on an emulator, not a console, and I was aware of the strong attack back then. So I didn't hate it because others hated it, I hated it because the game was bad.

[Fuyukaze]

Fighting stupidity in the youtube comments is alot like sniffing paint thinner. Doesnt matter how fun it sounds, eventualy it'll kill you.

[Gameguy]

He had an issue with the timer going out during the haunted house level. It always seemed to run out before he made it to the end, and he always got randomly thrown back to the beginning of the level for making wrong turns. It wasn't pretty.

I played it on an emulator, not a console, and I was aware of the strong attack back then. So I didn't hate it because others hated it, I hated it because the game was bad.
I wouldn't be able to play it using a keyboard, with a controller you need to press one of the triggers and an action button at the same time which would be hard to do using a keyboard and emulator. Admittedly the controls aren't that good and it took maybe 10-20 minutes for me to get used to them, I died several times during the first level and had to restart the game. Once I got used to them it wasn't that bad and got through most of the levels pretty easily. There's a few different attacks too, I just tried the different ones I could figure out until one worked well for me.

For the haunted house, I got sent back to the beginning a few times but I still never ran out of time. I figured out how to get through it and then it was easy. At the most, there's two different doors/paths to choose from per room(not counting the one you just came in from). You just have to look at the thermometer while choosing doors. If you go through a door and the thermometer is red, you're going the right way. If you go through a door and it's not red anymore, just go through the same door you just came out of and you'll be back where you just came from, pick the other door(the only one left that you haven't gone through yet) and you'll be going the right way again. You can explore different paths to get different items, but I wouldn't bother as it's really a waste of time to do that. Overall it's a pretty easy level, way easier than the souvenir shop where you have to break glassware before they hit the ground, I died several times during that level.

[Zoltor]

I only hate on games that I've played or games that are so blatenly bad, that pretty much most of the horrid game mechanics/flawed coding are easily seen in a gameplay video.

On top of that, while AVGN does make some good points within games of question(aka the Simon's Quest day/night BS, that is indeed annoying as hell), I do not agree on all the games he says sucks(although almost everyone he does review, really does suck ass), like Simon's Quest, Festers Quest, and TMNT 1 were all pretty good games.

PS. Every thing AVGN says about Hydlide, and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are pretty much dead on though(yes, not only did I play both games in the past, but I beat them. My legendary rep dictated I had to beat Hydlide, and there was no way in hell, I was gonna allow such a POS like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde get the best of me, It's that bad).

His statement about imagine picking this up, and expecting it to be as good as Zelda, definitely hit home. I felt like someone stabbed me in the chest when he said that(talk about salt in a open wound).

Needless to say, I don't jump on a this sucks bandwagon, infact usually I'm getting flamed for going against the crowd, by saying a game sucks(generally a game that has nothing going for it, but graphics), I'm old school, we actually know what good games are, It's sad most new school gamers don't, so they like anything that is shinning(You can polish shit, but it doesn't change the fact, It's still shit).

[InsaneDavid]

That's why point scales and number ratings are stupid. Besides being inconsistent with the majority of the rest of most reviews, people tend to look at that number and nothing else.


Bunch of stuff about Broderbund...

All that time playing Carmen Sandiego games and you still can't spell the title right?

[Icarus Moonsight]

Apologists vs Bashers... FIGHT!

No matter what, it's going to end with a Babality. LOL

I can't believe that both Hydlide and Bad Boyz have their fluffers. O_O

[Ackman]

Fighting stupidity in the youtube comments is alot like sniffing paint thinner. Doesnt matter how fun it sounds, eventualy it'll kill you.

This x100

Yup you usually have to make up you own mind about games I find most of the time. Esp since we know that the gamer press review system is broken, the sheeple comment is exactly right, hype at the moment seems to be a very powerful force in the gaming marketing department....

I'm sorry but GTA4, Bioshock, COD MW2 and Fallout 3 are hardly the best games ever, but hype, hype, hype, hype. Not even top 20 material imho.

I found a lot of fun games get beaten with a stick because the "graphix sux" mentality of snot nosed reviewers of today, you should see how they rate classic releases on Wii and Xbox, It make me want to punch them in the neck, they don't know jack about fun gameplay, that is what is most important to me, not immersion and graphics.

Anyway all that said I now have irresistible urge to try out Bad Boys Miami Takedown, if this game sucks, I'm coming over to your house for reparations Kitsune Sniper.

[buzz_n64]

I love
nes
Super Mario Bros. 2
Time Lord

xbox
crash: wrath of cortex
wwf raw

[Graham Mitchell]

I think that, in general, there's a huge amount of subjectivity involved in gaming preferences. People regularly bash stuff on DP that I really like. People are constantly ripping on Bioshock and Fallout 3, for example. For the life of me, I can't see why anyone who appreciates well-made games wouldn't like these. But that's the subjectivity component. People just like what they like. People who share my tastes in games tend to be a rarity for whatever reason. I used to get all butt-hurt about it (look at some of my posts from 5 or 6 years ago and it'll be obvious) but I'm pretty over it at this point.

However, Kitsune, in response to your OP--odds are that the people leaving those posts are either under 12 or have a pervasive developmental disorder. Either way, you're not dealing with a fully-developed brain their so it's best to just assume that their opinion is invalid. It would probably not be very PC to go writing that all over your YouTube comments, but it's likely the case.

[Aussie2B]

To reply to the general concept of the topic since I didn't before, people bashing games/systems just because of what they've heard is one of my pet peeves. The Internet can be like one big game of Telephone, where a message gets passed on endlessly, getting more and more corrupted, growing farther and farther from its original source, and becomes so prevalent that it's taken as gospel. I mean, outside of communities like this, how many people that bash E.T. have even played it? Or even played an Atari 2600? How many people a decade ago were saying that Deadly Towers was the worst NES game ever just because Seanbaby said so? How many people these days spout off opinions they pulled from the AVGN? And sometimes it's the little details that irk me rather than a general opinion on a game, like how everyone believes that the original Japanese version of Star Ocean 3 is horribly glitchy to the point of being unplayable when that's not only completely untrue but the people stating this "information" have probably never touched an imported video game in their lives. Or other people stating that the Virtual Boy has no good games and causes eye pain to everyone that plays it, as if that's fact, when they've never even seen a Virtual Boy in person.

But some others in this topic have brought up some good points on the flip side. Some people swoon over games they've never even played just because they have some sort of "legendary" reputation. Then you got the people that have their opinions swayed on games they have played by hype and the newness of a game, when six months ever they'll totally forget about the existence of it or that they were proclaiming "best game ever!"

Moral of the story? People can be idiots in how they shape their opinions, despite that all it takes is just sitting down with a game and playing the damn thing.

[Ed Oscuro]

Aussie2B, why can't somebody use the 70% = not very good, 50% = fail school system for grades? I think some review systems have used it in fact (though they went with the more well-known A to F system).

Anyway, my super-super secret hobby is putting on a bandana and posting garbage Youtube comments with an invisible account that strew confusion amongst evildoers and the unsuspecting.

"What evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows!"

[Icarus Moonsight]

That way, you're giving more resolution to degrees of bad than the good... And that's not how these things present. Most broken games are broken in one or a few key fundamentals. A masterpiece has to get so much more right... Most of the details have to hold up to a high standard, while also acing the basics.

[Ed Oscuro]

That's a good insight. I suppose it comes down to what the reviewer if focused on. Ed's Stinking Garbage Games Emporium would probably make use of more degrees of badness than Classics Transcending Time, wouldn't you say?

[Aussie2B]

Aussie2B, why can't somebody use the 70% = not very good, 50% = fail school system for grades? I think some review systems have used it in fact (though they went with the more well-known A to F system).

Because it's stupid and illogical, as I explained above. Even though it only leads to confusion, an A to F system is okay because it's the same as a 5 point/star scale, where C/3 is the middle ground and you have two points on either side of it for bad and good games. It's when the school system is applied to 10 point or 100 point scales everything goes awry. Like I said, in school, if you only learn half of the material, you're still failing and have done poorly. Students are judged on competency, and in our society, we need people who have better competency levels than 50%. How are students going to get through life if they can only master 50% of what's thrown at them? If you have a job and you can only do 50% of your tasks or only perform your tasks at 50% of the quality that your boss demands, you're going to get fired. And even if you can do 75%, that's still pretty so-so.

But games are not being graded on competency. If a game is half successful, half unsuccessful, then that's all it is, period. That means it's mediocre. Like I said before, it's completely illogical to assign 6 points to describe varying degrees of awfulness. Who cares if a game is a 2 or a 6 if they're both terrible? And then you're only granted 7-10 to describe games that range all the way from mediocre to the best games ever made, with only two points separating those far ends of the spectrum. Nothing about that makes sense at all. Any critic worth his salt would use a balanced scale.

[Arkhan]

PS. Every thing AVGN says about Hydlide, and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde are pretty much dead on though(yes, not only did I play both games in the past, but I beat them. My legendary rep dictated I had to beat Hydlide, and there was no way in hell, I was gonna allow such a POS like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde get the best of me, It's that bad).

His statement about imagine picking this up, and expecting it to be as good as Zelda, definitely hit home. I felt like someone stabbed me in the chest when he said that(talk about salt in a open wound).


AVGN screwed up his Hydlide review.

1) the "save" / "load" is a volatile RAM save. example: SAVE before you fight the dragon. If you die, restart the game and go to LOAD. You're back at the dragon. It doesn't have anything to do with the password. The password is for when you're turning the game off to go do something else. Beats the battery backed ram being wiped out because of a power outtage or flickering. Hell the passwords not even long :) too bad its not as easy as keyboard entry on MSX/PC-88 though.

2) It predates Zelda so why compare? Its like comparing a sharp stick to a sword and going LOL SWORD BETTER. Duh. But before the invention of swords, the sharp stick was damn good. and TBH, Zelda 1 on NES isn't a masterpiece. 2 was better. 1 is just as vague as Hydlide as far as puzzles go. The only difference is more dungeons, more items to use, and bosses. It had better have all that for being newer than Hydlide. Zelda is just as repetitive. More distractions maybe... but cmon, every dungeon is the same thing: get keys, get map, get compass, get treasure, kill thing, get triforce piece. Rinse/Repeat.

3) What in the original release era of Hydlide was there to compare to? Hydlide even predates Ys. The "active RPG" system as we know it , and as far as I know, was all because of Hydlide. Probably why it's regarded as a classic series in Japan. We owe Hydlide some respect.

The western world looks at Hydlide in the wrong light. and what's so BAD about the game anyways. The music is probably the worst part. Remove that, and what's the big disaster? The manual spells the game out, and with a bit of thinking, the game is toddler-level in difficulty. especially if you know that certain terrain drains your health while traveling it. You'll no longer go WHY DID I DIE FROM WALKING AROUND IN THE CEMETERY. THIS GAMES RETARDED.

The grinding in the game isn't even that bad if you know how to fight. Walk to the east a few screens to where there are two slimes next to the river. Run behind them and press attack when you're about to contact the enemy. Repeat til you stop getting XP, and go repeat the process with a different monster. Ropers for example. The common problem people have is they run around in attack mode and get knicked in the side/rear by a monster and die. If you ran around swinging a sword at nothing while running past monsters, I'm sure they'd do the same thing in real life.

Case in point for Hydlide: After the AVGN reviewed Hydlide, I went back and loaded up the MSX2 version (its got purdy colors). 2 hours later I beat the game. The MSX version doesn't even have spells either. Only the NES one does, so sheeeesh, way to complain about getting extras!

and out of curiosity, what legendary rep are you talking about? If its so legendary how come you have to keep pointing it out. I also think it may not be as legendary as you keep touting.....I'm assuming you didn't finish Hydlide 2 and 3? :)

Not to toot my own horn here but ah... I completed every RPG on the NES be it first person or overhead.. and don't get me started on CRPGs. my point is: you'll find theres plenty of thorough RPG fanatics who have conquered the same, and possibly more than either of us. Don't ever hear about their legendary reps...

[Rob2600]

Actually, Hydlide is pretty horrible. A bad game is a bad game, no matter when it was released.

Tag Team Wrestling was one of the first wrestling games on the NES, so in a way, it broke new ground...but it was still a piece of garbage, even back then.

[Zoltor]

To Arkhan: Omg you really want me to make a Hydlide tyhread, don't you.

Lol yea I cought that mistake, however It's a semi mistake really, because to really get the updated password(atleast on the NES version), you really do need to hit save first if I recall, the password doesn't auto update, as you do things, but yet, yea you can load from new game after death(which is why I said he was only pretty much dead on with the review).

Well before I do that, yes it should be compared to Zelda especially in that era of gaming. Hell, did anyone even know what a vic 88 was back then or what the differances was between US/JP versions(and all the stuff we think about today when talking about a game or company), hell no, infact It's down right safe to assume people didn't have one thought of where it was developed or was it ported or not.

2nd seeing how Zelda is one of the earliest "NES" games, and Hydlide came after the fact, yes people played Hydlide after Zelda, in almost every case (atleast in the US), so yes people have every right to compare the two.

3rd, what the hell are you talking about? While I agree Zelda 2 was great(It's easily one of my favorites, if not my favorite), don't even try to downplay the original Zelda, It's pretty damn ground breaking, amazing(atleast with in its genre).

If you're gonna add something to the game, implement it correctly lol, AVGN wasn't joking around when noting the spell setup(it really is annoying to use on the spot), trust me, it would be better off without the spells at all, that's how porly they "tacked" on the system(I always thought the spell system was an after thought, but you could never be sure with games back then).

Yes I know games with even more grind to it, but the differance is, all the other games out there with a bunch of grinding(Look at Crystalis, before you can start climbing mt Sierra for instance, that takes a godly amount of ginding, but the game is awesome, so it really Isn't that bad a thing), are downright amazing games, so people actually welcome the grind, but in Hydlide, you just want the suffering to end.

Well perhaps I could've used another word I suppose"creed"(but in this situation each works works as good as the other), which dictates that I destroy any RPG or RPG variant I ever play, and while Hydlide plays like an Action/Adventure game, that damn game has a lv system, so technically It's a Action/RPG.

I personally didn't find it to be "that" hard of a game(hmm, is that what's considered a hard game, Zelda alone was atleast 3 times harder, and that's not even counting the 2nd quest, which is alot harder then then first quest), and anyway once you beat DW2, Faria, Wizardry 1, 2, and such, nothing can be considered hard anymore, so Hydlide being supposedly hard has nothing to do with why I hate that game.


PS. Don't make me do it, I'm warning you, I'll post a Hydlide review/thread. Oh dear, I already posted more then I was gonna(damn, almost turned this thread into a review lol), the post is twice as big as it was gonna be.

To protect this thread from being insanely derailed, I will not reply to anymore Hydlide posts in "this thread".

[Arkhan]

why is it horrible? Noone ever answers this. They just say its horrible and don't explain.

It wasn't deemed horrible when it debuted on computers for the first time. Hell it was so well received that they made two more.

http://www.flyingomelette.com/reviews/nes/hydlide.html

Half that review is a case of "RTFM", and I think the other half is bias'd low scoring based off sucking at the game.

there's way too much of that afoot.



Well before I do that, yes it should be compared to Zelda especially in that era of gaming. Hell, did anyone even know what a vic 88 was back then or what the differances was between US/JP versions(and all the stuff we think about today when talking about a game or company), hell no, infact It's down right safe to assume people didn't have one thought of where it was developed or was it ported or not.


What is a vic 88. Go ahead and compare it to Zelda. They're not the same style of game. You dont have XP, or stats in Zelda. :) Hydlide is a CRPG which draws some roots from the then popular Ultima games (Pre Exodus). Ultima != Zelda either. Unless you reaaaallllly want to say Ultima I and II are comparable to Zelda because they're both action RPGs.



2nd seeing how Zelda is one of the earliest "NES" games, and Hydlide came after the fact, yes people played Hydlide after Zelda, in almost every case (atleast in the US), so yes people have every right to compare the two.

Hydlide came out in '85 for the original audience. The Famicom release came out <1 month after Zelda on NES. Us westernfolk didn't get the game til 3 years later. We have a skewed image of the game. Rather than understand it as a game from BEFORE Zelda and seeing Zelda as a "spiritual upgrade", we see it as a second rate knock off. I bet if you were a budding Japanese gamer back in 85 and played Hydlide for the first time, you would have loved it. Kind of like how people love Adventure for Atari even though there aint alot goin on for that game.



3rd, what the hell are you talking about? While I agree Zelda 2 was great(It's easily one of my favorites, if not my favorite), don't even try to downplay the original Zelda, It's pretty damn ground breaking, amazing(atleast with in its genre).

Ground breaking? Eh. Computer games broke that ground first. It didn't really "break" ground either. What did it do? Added a health bar and slide down menu? The rest of it wasn't exactly unheard of other than in the console world.



If you're gonna add something to the game, implement it correctly lol, AVGN wasn't joking around when noting the spell setup(it really is annoying to use on the spot), trust me, it would be better off without the spells at all, that's how porly they "tacked" on the system(I always thought the spell system was an after thought, but you could never be sure with games back then).

Trust you? Why? The spells serve specific purposes. Fire burns the bush, wave kills the two wizards, turn spins monsters around. They aren't hard to use man.

Outside of wave/fire you can beat the game without the spells. Though some of them make the game even more easy.



Yes I know games with even more grind to it, but the differance is, all the other games out there with a bunch of grinding(Look at Crystalis, before you can start climbing mt Sierra for instance, that takes a godly amount of ginding, but the game is awesome, so it really Isn't that bad a thing), are downright amazing games, so people actually welcome the grind, but in Hydlide, you just want the suffering to end.

What suffering? Christ! Hydlide takes 2 hours to finish. Its not even a grind. I'd rather "grind" to max level in Hydlide than grind in Dragon Quest 1 between two towns.



Well perhaps I could've used another word I suppose"creed"(but in this situation each works works as good as the other), which dictates that I destroy any RPG or RPG variant I ever play, and while Hydlide plays like an Action/Adventure game, that damn game has a lv system, so technically It's a Action/RPG.

Its an Active RPG. T&E Soft said so.
Destroying RPGs is a western thing. You're supposed to either enjoy the game, or find a different one. If you don't like Hydlide, OK. If you "destroy" it while hating it, you have no right to complain about the game. Noone forced you to play a game you don't like.



I personally didn't find it to be "that" hard of a game(hmm, is that what's considered a hard game, Zelda alone was atleast 3 times harder, and that's not even counting the 2nd quest, which is alot harder then then first quest), and anyway once you beat DW2, Faria, Wizardry 1, 2, and such, nothing can be considered hard anymore, so Hydlide being supposedly hard has nothing to do with why I hate that game.

It wasn't supposed to be a hard game. I think the only people who think its hard are the bargain bin shoppers than didn't get a manual. Its supposed to be a pokey little adventure game with some riddles, some action, and some fun.



PS. Don't make me do it, I'm warning you, I'll post a Hydlide review/thread. Oh dear, I already posted more then I was gonna(damn, almost turned this thread into a review lol), the post is twice as big as it was gonna be.

To protect this thread from being insanely derailed, I will not reply to anymore Hydlide posts in "this thread".

Go ahead and make a Hydlide thread. Im sure by the end of it alot of people will come to respect the Hydlide.

[pseudonym]

I have to agree with Rob2600 on this one. I'm pretty lenient on bad games but I just couldn't enjoy this game.

I never liked Hydlide because of the poor sound, poor graphics for 1989 (yeah I know it was released in Jp in 1985 or so; still why does the stat bar/etc take up a huge chunk of the screen), obtuse gameplay (hey, let's make it so you have to run directly into monsters to kill them, or they might kill you, depending on how you approached it). The last time I tried I ended up playing it for a couple of hours and then I turned it off, shaking my head.

[Arkhan]

Obtuse ?

euhhh.

You run into the sides or rear of the enemy while holding attack down, or from the front if you are strong enough. If you aren't, let go of attack and run around the monster.

It's hardly any different than Ys. Why don't people shoot Ys combat down.

You get a defense mode in Hydlide. There's MORE to it.

The sound is the only real strike it gets, mostly for the music. The SFX are bearable.

The stat bar is a style thing. Alot of CRPGs do that.

http://lairware.com/ultima3/img/u3screen7.jpg

see

hell games like Dragon Slayer 6, and Vay used this kinda deal too.

[Kitsune Sniper]

It's hardly any different than Ys. Why don't people shoot Ys combat down.

I will readily admit that both Ys and Ys II were revolutionary games.

But the attacks are crap. And I did play Ys I on the Master System. :P

[Arkhan]

anyone who says Hydlides battle system is trash and then praises Ys' system, is a shmoe.

[kupomogli]

Ys on the Master System sucks. I originally played it(emulated of course,) on the TG16CD and enjoyed it. When recently playing Ys on the Master System, the game is absolutely terrible.

The grinding isn't bad on the PCE version, but I won't ever play the Master system game again. 200 exp to get to level two(I think.) An hour of grinding for a single level. That's nice. Once you get to level two the next level is even more ridiculous. Also on the PCE version the dogs at the very beginning of the game can be killed on the first level, while you can't damage them and also killed in a single hit on the Master System version.

Anyways. I've never played any of the other Hydlide games, but I like the first one. I'll agree the music is terrible, which is why someone should make a hack that changes the music from that of the Hydlide music to Ys First Step Towards Wars. If this hack is ever made someone tell me.

*edit*

I've only got to level two on the Master System version. I pretty much gave up on trying to get any decent length into the game.

[Garry Silljo]

anyone who says Hydlides battle system is trash and then praises Ys' system, is a shmoe.

If it makes you feel better I don't like attacking in Ys' either. I hate the "run into an enemy and maybe they die ... maybe you do" way of fighting.

[Orion Pimpdaddy]

If you want to get people to bash a game, simpy tell an urban legend about unsold cartridges being buried in the desert. People wil instantly say, "man, if that game was buried as trash as this unproven story says, it must have been bad."

[Famidrive-16]

Fighting stupidity in the youtube comments is alot like sniffing paint thinner. Doesnt matter how fun it sounds, eventualy it'll kill you.

yeah, this. there's still guys to this day replying to some hasty comment I made on a video a couple years back.

[Game Freak]

i don't hate games because they have already been hated. In fact, i buy every video game I can find that the AVGN reviewed for the sole purpose of being able to play it myself...TMNT, Fester's Quest and Back to the Future aren't NEARLY as bad as they sound, and i detest him for badmouthing The Addams Family and Haunted House (two very good games that I already had at his time of review.) Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is mediocre at most...but I agree with a couple of his reviews, like Top Gun, Home Alone, Friday the 13th, Dick Tracy and Rambo.

Back To The Future is honestly probably one of my favorite games on the NES...

[MarioMania]

What's your yutube link Kitsune??

[Icarus Moonsight]

http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z230/Acidic_Pain/Clipboard02.jpg

Then the Golem snapped FF7's back in half, and the Dragon took a giant dump on Bad Boyz... Mr. Mouse was last seen, entering Hydlide's partially exposed butthole.

[Richter Belmount]

anyone who says Hydlides battle system is trash and then praises Ys' system, is a shmoe.

Ooooo Drama is afoot! I cant wait for the outcome of this : )

[T2KFreeker]

Man, I hear you on the hating a game just to hate it. I'm a Jaguar fan, so I get to see quite a bit of that. Not that the Jaguar doesn't have bad games, but the minute I start talking about the Jaguar or a game on the Jaguar, the general consensus I get is bitching about the control pad, which really isn't that bad in the first place, and complaibts as the game must suck just because it was on the Jaguar. Very sad indeed as there are some really well made games on the system. I feel your pain though.

[Kitsune Sniper]

Man, I hear you on the hating a game just to hate it. I'm a Jaguar fan, so I get to see quite a bit of that. Not that the Jaguar doesn't have bad games, but the minute I start talking about the Jaguar or a game on the Jaguar, the general consensus I get is bitching about the control pad, which really isn't that bad in the first place, and complaibts as the game must suck just because it was on the Jaguar. Very sad indeed as there are some really well made games on the system. I feel your pain though.

I've played that fighting game with the Scotsman that shoots fire from his crotch.

Other than that? The system seems cool to me, though I've never played the other games. At least I don't think I have.

MarioMania: My Youtube account is Foxhack.

[ryborg]

MarioMania: My Youtube account is Foxhack.

Link for the lazy. (http://www.youtube.com/user/Foxhack)

Honestly, as long as they're not being disruptive and/or just making up facts, why does it matter if a stranger on the internet disagrees with an opinion, regardless of their reasons?

ARGHHHH I HATE HOW YOU HATE SOMETHING

[tomaitheous]

Your score and comments are incongruous, though. If you'd describe all the elements in the game as tolerable/passable, then it should get a 5 out of 10 tops. A 7 suggests that it's a fairly good game. I mean there are only two points separating that and the greatest games ever made (those that would earn 10/10). By your scale, you're giving 6 points to describe varying levels of awfulness and only 3 to describe everything that is better than mediocre. You can't apply the grade school scale of judging competency (where only being half successful is still a failure) to assessing the quality of games.

Says the guy with the Chulip avatar pic :D

[Steve W]

Man, I hear you on the hating a game just to hate it. I'm a Jaguar fan, so I get to see quite a bit of that. Not that the Jaguar doesn't have bad games, but the minute I start talking about the Jaguar or a game on the Jaguar, the general consensus I get is bitching about the control pad, which really isn't that bad in the first place, and complaibts as the game must suck just because it was on the Jaguar. Very sad indeed as there are some really well made games on the system. I feel your pain though.

As another Jag fan, I've been through all that too. When the Jaguar came out, I had gotten bored with my Amiga, Genesis and TurboGrafx-16, and so the Jag and the Lynx became my primary game consoles for a few years. I'd pay $50 for a game, and so I'd play it because I didn't have a wealth of other options. Games like Highlander, which GamePro essentially took a dump on and gave it a miserable review, were fun for me once I took the time to figure out how to control that stupid kid, learn to fight, and learn how to advance in the game. Time wasn't something the GamePro reviewer was going to give it. There were a lot of really good Jaguar games that magazine reviewers didn't score all that well because they've got a backlog of heavily hyped games from major advertisers they'd rather get into.

Reviews have to be taken with a grain of salt. Games are like vegetables. Not everyone is going to like the same thing. And vegetables are a lot like video games in that prejudices are developed early on about different genres and consoles, and they're hard to shake off later in life without direct experience. I like broccoli. You tell that to some people and they'll say "broccoli sucks!" Ask them if they've ever eaten broccoli, and they'll inevitably say something like "of course not, because broccoli sucks". It's something they heard about on the playground at school, and other's opinions cloud their own thoughts about the subject. They'll let others make up their minds for them without ever gaining any knowledge for themselves first hand. People are stupid by nature, they'll happily short-cut something to save themselves time. "The CD-i sucked! The Jaguar had shitty controllers! [Insert most recent game on the market here] is the best game that has ever or will ever be made!"

[Nophix]

I had a response similar to the one the OP had, on my original gaming blog, when I reviewed 50 Cent: Blood Money for the 360. I gave it a 6.5 as well, where people were tearing it apart.

My opinion was that it did so many things on a decent level, that it turned into a fun game. It didn't have a deep storyline, but it was a great game for sitting down and mindlessly blowing things up. What's wrong with games like that? I don't always want the star treatment in a game. Sometimes I just want to make things explode, and not have to focus on anything. I mean, if the controls work well, the graphics are decent, and the game isn't glitching every 10 feet(cough: Sacred 2: cough), then it should at least get a 6.

Some people just have to agree with the masses so they can feel cool.

[BetaWolf47]

The original message bothers me more than anything. Game ratings are so skewed and messed up it's not even funny. People grade 7 as "passable", 8 as "average", 9 as "good", and 10 as "great". So basically, we have 3 scores that say "play it!" and 6 scores that say "terrible." I don't think that's how a scale works. The middle score is supposed to be average. I pity the person who thinks that any game that scores a 5 - 7.9 at a review site is complete garbage.

[Aussie2B]

The funny thing is that I've been flamed over "hating" games before when all I gave them was a 4/10. Sure, that isn't a good score, but that's only a bit below average for crying out loud. If 4 = "hate", how could 1-3 possibly be below that? Do I have to track down the developers and murder them one by one to give a game a 1/10?

[Kitsune Sniper]

The original message bothers me more than anything. Game ratings are so skewed and messed up it's not even funny. People grade 7 as "passable", 8 as "average", 9 as "good", and 10 as "great". So basically, we have 3 scores that say "play it!" and 6 scores that say "terrible." I don't think that's how a scale works. The middle score is supposed to be average. I pity the person who thinks that any game that scores a 5 - 7.9 at a review site is complete garbage.

So uh. My opinion bothers you?

I'm not a journalist, so I have no real way of grading something. I have no system. I just blurted out an answer way back when.

I no longer give numbers to games, I just say "It's good / It's bad, and this is why."

[Steven]

I don't think I've hated on a game for the sake of hating them since I was a kid, lol, when I had a prejudice against all RPGs. I thought they were boring, a waste of time and uninteresting. Only years and years later did I find out how wrong I was.

Dunno how this topic turned into a ratings rant/debate, but it's simple for me. My view is games that score 5/10 is average, not an "F" as in 50% grade

7/10 to me means it's pretty good but with flaws.

Simple enough.

[Arkhan]

http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/nes/review/563423.html

WOO!!! ratings.

[Kitsune Sniper]

Yes, but that's GameFAQs. If you thought Youtube comments were bad...

[Robocop2]

The original message bothers me more than anything. Game ratings are so skewed and messed up it's not even funny. People grade 7 as "passable", 8 as "average", 9 as "good", and 10 as "great". So basically, we have 3 scores that say "play it!" and 6 scores that say "terrible." I don't think that's how a scale works. The middle score is supposed to be average. I pity the person who thinks that any game that scores a 5 - 7.9 at a review site is complete garbage.

I agree with what you're saying. The problem is that a 1-10 scoring system is far too broad a range in my opinion. How many reviews do you see that don't score a game somewhere above 7? I see relatively few below that line. It makes it hard for people to think of anything below that magic number as playable in the least because 7 is the new 5 in a sense; at least in review world. Really to properly utilize a 1-10 scoring system 5 should be middle of the road as previously stated. Problem is; it seldom is used that way with 5 being used for borderline "don't purchase this game at all bad"

Its not like being average is a bad thing, there are a ton of average games out there that are entertaining and not at all broken. Its just that people freak out when a game dips below that magic number if you let reviews tell you what to buy. If you already have your mind made up it might sway you some if they make light of a glaring issue but otherwise, you're probably going to buy it either way.

[Berserker]

I see numbered rating systems for video games as little more than obstacles that people have to overcome in order to answer the question they're actually thinking about, which is "Should I play this game? Should I buy this game?"

So when people argue about how to make a better numbered rating system, to me it's like they're arguing about how to make a better roadblock. Yes, you could invest all kinds of thought and effort into trying to make a better roadblock, or you could simply answer the question people are actually thinking about without assigning arbitrary numbers to everything.

[kupomogli]

Five point scale > 10 point scale.

[Arkhan]

I prefer the "fuck the ratings, Ill try it myself" scale.

[InsaneDavid]

I no longer give numbers to games, I just say "It's good / It's bad, and this is why."

And you will find that's a much better way to do things. :)

[Aussie2B]

I'll always forego a score if I have the option to. Not only are the systems all screwy so people interpret scores differently, but they also encourage people to just look at a score and not even read a review. If I go to the trouble to write a review that I feel is insightful and entertaining, the last thing I want is someone to only look at my score.

But 5 point systems are pretty good because they're balanced more so than an even point scale and you can break it down to simply terrible/bad/average/good/great. Then you don't have to rack your brain over what's the difference between a 2 and a 3 or a 7 and an 8.

[Icarus Moonsight]

Rating systems are difficult, because it's an attempt to fit subjective quantification and analysis into an objective scale. It takes a great deal of talent, skill and thought to do it well. No rating system will ever replace personal evaluation though. It's best use, is for users to get a general feel for which titles they should focus their own investment of time on. After that, things are sure to get muddy, if not outright contentious.

My thoughts on a decent 10 scale; (top/bottom of levels is variable by game type/genre and by person)

avoid: plague = 1-2
stale, doesn't excel in any way (rent/borrow at best) = 2-3
fun for a couple hours, but never again (rent / borrow) = 3-4
decent all-round, worth having around... barely (own worthy, but only on the cheap) = 4-5
solid title (own worthy) = 5-7
exceptional title (preorder or buy early, if warranted by taste) = 7-8
Heavy hitter (preorder/buy is universally recommended) = 8-9
Masterpiece/Killer App (DO WANT!) = 10

Say you love shmups, and dislike FPS. Then even the worst shmup could fall into the 3-4 where others may place it 1-2. On the reverse in this case a middle of road FPS that others feel at a 4-5 wouldn't even register to you, so it falls into 1-2 or 2-3 at best.

I basically look at games individually in relation to how much/frequently I want to play it and how that qualifier makes in a rational and logical means to either; rent-borrow, buy used/cheap or buy close to launch/preorder. Resources of time and money are limited. Ratings can help you save and better utilize both.

Problems with a 5 scale is loss of resolution. If they do .5s then it's a ten scale anyway.

[Az]

Yes, but that's GameFAQs. If you thought Youtube comments were bad...

Many years ago I was browsing Gamefaqs for some information on God knows what, and stumbled across the message board for the game called "25 to Life", prior to it's release.

Now maybe it was ostrich syndrome since I've been a frequent Gamefaqs visitor basically since it first started, and I was somehow subconsciously avoiding the game-specific boards since their merge with Gamespot.

What I found was copied and pasted to a text file for safekeeping on my computer for years to come, and it always is uplifting when I come across it. There's much, much more than this, but I'm glad I finally found some use for these amazing comments....

And on the subject of game hating:

From: CripKenzo | Posted: 1/17/2006 5:47:18 PM | Message Detail
IGN gave this game a 3.0 for this game please i'm still gonna get this game even they tied me to a semi truck and drowned me in a ocean i'm still buying this game anyway

From: CripKenzo | Posted: 1/17/2006 6:06:39 PM | Message Detail
For real i'm black and i use slang all the time i like ign but man they truly hate this game but i'm still getting this game

[Icarus Moonsight]

GameFAQs has whole cadres of Apologists and Bashers doing reviews. If a game gets some 9s or a 10, you best be sure that there will be a 3 review posted within the week. Same the other way, except it's a 12 year old brat White Knighting the game they got for their birthday. Since their birthday gift absolutely can not suck. They won't allow it. LOL

[Aussie2B]

In concept, that's a good thing. No game is going to be good/bad to every last person on Earth. If the majority of the opinions appear to be skewing in one direction, then it's a great thing to see someone with a different outlook share his or her thoughts.

But that's only if they gave a game a fair shake in the first place. If they're blind fanboys or raging anti-fanboys, it's all for naught.

[Icarus Moonsight]

I've seen few that had anything valid to say to justify a wild divergence on GameFAQs. They have a format, and most of them don't even follow it. Anyone that does follow format, seemingly were absent from school when they covered average/medians. Example: 8,8,7, 5 and 6 = overall 4

[Arasoi]

We live in a magical time where every classic game system is emulated to a high degree of accuracy, high enough to where no one should have any excuses on the try before you buy mentality for classic games. Moral objection? Try it, delete it, make a decision.

If it's a new game, and you want to make a decision at least read reviews actively and objectively, and read more than one. Rent the game too, it's not expensive. Most of us aren't kids anymore hanging on the word of Gamepro and EGM for a purchasing decision. Don't fall into the bandwagoner's trap.

"Supposedly" bad games that I think are enjoyable: Rocky Rodent, Castlevania 2, Dracula XX (dracula X SNES), Robocop, Burning Fight, TMNT1 NES, Roger Rabbit, etc..

[Steven]

"Supposedly" bad games that I think are enjoyable: Rocky Rodent, Castlevania 2, Dracula XX (dracula X SNES), Robocop, Burning Fight, TMNT1 NES, Roger Rabbit, etc..


I like Rocky Rodent too. GameFan and EGM scored it both well, but it does seem to have negative reviews most elsewhere. Game's hard, but oddly fun.

As for reviews, I think without question one oughta read them with a grain of salt. Me personally, very rarely do I base a purchase on a review. In fact, I rarely read reviews before buying/playing a game. I know what concepts interest me most, so I buy it if I think I might like it. I play it first before reading someone else's take on it. To me reviews are fun for comparing your feelings to that of the writer's. Most people use it to gauge purchases, I have always used them as post-comparison type deals. I like to form my own opinion of a game first, then read someone else's. I find that to be highly enjoyable.

[sidnotcrazy]

We live in a magical time where every classic game system is emulated to a high degree of accuracy, high enough to where no one should have any excuses on the try before you buy mentality for classic games. Moral objection? Try it, delete it, make a decision.


i agree completely, but I wonder if the real reason people do this is because its 'hip' to hate on games. I love E.T. for the 2600, and hear a lot of hate, when I try to discuss what they didn't like about the game play I quickly find out they never even gave it a chance, if they even played it at all.

[Arkhan]

when I try to discuss what they didn't like about the game play I quickly find out they never even gave it a chance, if they even played it at all.

me too.

lots of rabid fanboys with retro nintendo sweatbands and tshirts going LOL ET IS GAY WHAT A GIANT WASTE OF BITS LELELELE

9 times out of 10 , they've never even played the game, and have probably never touched a 2600.


Its cool to be OMG RETRO GAEMS. Lots of people do this to be cool, not because they know what in the hell they're going on about.