Same as title. Games that at least tried to bring something new to the table but was still bad overall? First game that fits this description that comes to mind is Spyro Enter the Dragonfly. Yeah, it was glitchy and unfinished and what not but at the same time it was the first Spyro game with multiple breath types at your disposal at all times, something that wasn't the case with the PS1 entries that came before it.
Promote this post
Neverdead, a game with some fun mechanics that involves ripping off limbs or head and using them to solve puzzles or beat bosses, but a mix of bad controls, cheap enemies/bosses and a poorly implemented skill system practically made it a chore to play, let alone finish. At the very least, the game was either rushed out, or nobody at Konami/Rebellion cared about it, and only released it as a budget title. (In retrospect, this game should've been a red flag that Konami was going down the shitter)
Just stop worrying, and love the bomb.
There are a few games that have you control a character whose job it is to safely lead another total moron character to a goal, while everything in the universe would prefer you didn't. Mario and Wario, Spunky's Dangerous Day, Marsupilami and the mercifully unreleased Baby's Day Out all had this concept. It is an interesting idea but not particularly fun, at least not that I recall. They tend to leave me hating the fool I am leading more than the hazards I am trying to get them past.
Note that three are licensed titles and the Mario game was developed by Game Freak. It might seem like a way to avoid putting a popular character into a situation where they have to beat up enemies a lot, but in fact there is little shortage of violence.
Krusty's Super Fun House is similar, but you are SUPPOSED to hate the rats you are guiding and that is more about making a plan and implementing it than micromanaging someone who doesn't pay attention where they are going.
At 6/29/17 06:10 AM, BronzeHeart92 wrote: Same as title. Games that at least tried to bring something new to the table but was still bad overall? First game that fits this description that comes to mind is Spyro Enter the Dragonfly. Yeah, it was glitchy and unfinished and what not but at the same time it was the first Spyro game with multiple breath types at your disposal at all times, something that wasn't the case with the PS1 entries that came before it.
Promote this post
Didn't Drakan did the different breath type mechanic first in '99? You could ride on a red dragon, and you actually collect new abilities at your disposal... While riding a dwegin.
Anyways, Turok Evolution had it's own gravity gun, 2 years before Half-Life 2 did. Used to play the shit outta this, and fling my foes 200ft into the air.
Time to bust a move and get it started. Time's wastin'.
-Mace 2.0
At 6/30/17 12:38 PM, Mace121 wrote:At 6/29/17 06:10 AM, BronzeHeart92 wrote:Didn't Drakan did the different breath type mechanic first in '99? You could ride on a red dragon, and you actually collect new abilities at your disposal... While riding a dwegin.
I said it was the first Spyro game with different breath types.
Alone in the Dark 5 is basically this idea taken up to 11.
It had really impressive fire physics for the time, where nearly anything was flammable. You could pick up a chair, catch the end on fire and then swing or throw that at an enemy. Or you could get a bottle of alcohol, pour it on the ground to make a trail and then light it to burn something else from a distance.
Similarly you could puncture the gas tank on a car, drive it for a bit to leave a trail of fuel, light the trail and watch the car go up in flames.
When you're actually in a car nearly every part of it is interactive as well, you can open the sun visors where occasionally you'll find the keys (otherwise you can hotwire it, but risk setting off an alarm to alert enemies), you can open the glove box where you'll sometimes find some useful items. Usually you won't find anything and there's no reason to really have that functionality in the game, but the fact they put it in and let the player find a reason is what's so commendable. That's the way more developers should be thinking.
It had a realistic and immersive real-time inventory system where your character could only carry objects he can physically store in his jacket, and if you're in a tight spot you might have to clumsily go through your pockets or any nearby bins and macguyver yourself a solution. It had a crafting system years before such things became ubiquitous and trite, an this one was only limited by your imagination. There were obvious ones like a cloth + alcohol for a molotov cocktail, but it didn't limit or suggest what you could make, it was all up to the player's intuition.
So you could use a lighter + an aerosol can as a flamethrower, but then you could also tape the lighter to the can and that had the same effect while freeing your other hand, so maybe you could douse an enemy with something flammable before setting them alight. You could tape that aerosol can to a wall as a trap and then shoot it once you've lured an enemy close, or make a bomb and then tape a box of ammo to it so they explode and send bullets flying everywhere.
You could also just tape a glowstick and alcohol together. Why? There's no reason, but it doesn't matter, the point is that you can. There's no streamlined menu where you click the thing you want and the corresponding items vanish from your stockpile. It's entirely up to you as the player, to figure out what random shit you can throw together into a weapon. There's no limits.
You could also just pour petrol all over you handgun bullets to make powerful ""fire bullets"" as if that's not the most retarded idea you've ever heard. And it's all in this very overly serious horror game.
It's all fantastic mechanics and the game completely sucks. It's one of my least favourite games of last gen, but I still love everything they tried to do.
At 6/29/17 10:46 PM, bimshwel wrote: There are a few games that have you control a character whose job it is to safely lead another total moron character to a goal, while everything in the universe would prefer you didn't. Mario and Wario, Spunky's Dangerous Day, Marsupilami and the mercifully unreleased Baby's Day Out all had this concept. It is an interesting idea but not particularly fun, at least not that I recall. They tend to leave me hating the fool I am leading more than the hazards I am trying to get them past.
Note that three are licensed titles and the Mario game was developed by Game Freak. It might seem like a way to avoid putting a popular character into a situation where they have to beat up enemies a lot, but in fact there is little shortage of violence.
Krusty's Super Fun House is similar, but you are SUPPOSED to hate the rats you are guiding and that is more about making a plan and implementing it than micromanaging someone who doesn't pay attention where they are going.
There is such a game that was bad but I had quite fun playing it: Pac-Man 2 - the new adventures.
You control pac-man with a slingshot and his yellow pellet, plus you can give him indications were to look. Seems quite boring, but in reality I had much fun because of the open environment and exploration you could lead pac-man to. Also to pass some obstacles you had to make him angry or happy and this was kind of fun
Another game in the title category:
Silver (1999) PC, Infogrames Action-RPG
This game was very good for me, but somehow almost nobody knows it, leading me to suspect that it was poor reviewed.
One of the game mechanics is that you can swing your sword using your mouse like some sort of gesture detecting device, so the swings will change basing on the direction of the mouse movement. Also it has a smooth leveling up system that is very close to the story deveopment, so you just have to follow the story and don't need to go level up before progressing. It also has some really nice magic powers based on elements and magic items, some of which are secrets, some interesting party characters and so on.
I never played Silver but I did like the Pacman game, to a degree. Pacman has more personality when being a frustrating idiot and there are only a few places where screwing up will get you sent back a long way. Also, there are mercifully no "lives," which really do not belong in non-action games, if they belong anywhere.
Streets of SimCity.
It was the first ever, open-world, 3D driving game that actually let you drive around in the SimCity 2000 cities you have built!
Unfortunately, the car physics are shit, and a lot of the bugs are game-breaking too.
But hey, at least it has an awesome soundtrack, and it helped pave (pun) the way for GTA III.
A truly prophetic sig...
Devil's Third. Its this poorly reviewed TPS only exclusive to the Wii U that nobody's ever heard about, but it wanted to mix melee combat with third/first person shooting. It controlled fine but you could cheese some/most of the boss fights with the pump action shotgun, enemies die extremely fast with most guns that the melee system feels almost pointless at times, enemy AI is lackluster, there's little to no variety in handling melee weapons, soundtrack save for a few tracks was forgettable, and most damning of all was that the levels were set up for a basic TPS instead of a jumping around ninja shooter that it wants to be, though that was largely how the multiplayer turned out.
The multiplayer was genuinely fun since you went up against human opponents that were fast and would flank you from a distance or would strike at you from several feet in the air with melee weapons since the levels allowed for it, and there was clan battles where you can modify existing maps to control areas. But the main problem was that the multiplayer was completely dead, deader than Battleborn, and the framerate drops like crazy on the rare instance thaf 16 players were on.
Devil's Third just reaked of a game that was stuck in development hell because thats what it was. Its development was in shambles as soon as THQ died and it switched to numerous engines, likely being remade at one point on a platform that couldnt supoort Unreal engine 3 at all. It has good ideas but poor execution.
Bubsy, he made Fall Damage in a 2d jump and run :)
