Games that are unplayable

[quote name='eldad9'][quote name='deathcabforcutie']tilt and tumble was an extremely fun game.. i didnt find it unplayable at all..[/quote]

Ever tried it with a gameboy player?[/quote]

That would make for quite a funny tech support call. "Yeah I was playing kirby tiltntumble on my gameboy player and my gamecube jsut froze up" I wonder what they would say, I mean its even their game so its not like they could say you were misusing anything. Hmm maybe I should find out...
 
I really, really want to say Orphen for the PS2. But I actually finished it, so I guess I can't. No matter how much you enjoy spiting your friends, this game is not worth it. It's not worth anything. Try to avoid getting it on unprotected skin; I think it can give you typhoid fever.
 
No One Lives Forever - ps2
I'm only playing it because I feel obligated to myself for having bought it. I heard good things about the PC version so I thought the PS2 version wouldn't be that bad but, the load times after failing a mission are horrendously long asp. for a game that doesn't even really surpass Goldeneye in the graphics department. One mission frustrated me to the point where I moved on to playing Spider-Man 2 and I rarely play more than 1 game at a time. I chalk it up to bad programming/porting because the story ain't bad but this version is very flawed.
That an RE1. I didn't really play it when it originally came out, but I tried to play it and it's to clunky and slow.
 
BATMAN DARK TOMORROW. That game was so bad I seriously considered getting in my car and going to Bellevue, WA (home of Kemco USA) and becoming violent. Only payed five dollars for the game, just wanted revenge for my suffering through the first few levels of the game.
 
I fail to see how Silent Hill 2 and Oddworld: Abe's Oddessey are "unplayable", but to each his own.

No, if you want a truly unplayable game, play Back to the Future for the NES. Game Genie or no Game Genie, I don't think anyone has gotten past the first level. Marty McFly just can't withstand the barrage of musical notes, bees, stray dogs and potholes that infest the streets of his town. If there's a level that has the Time Machine, or 1955, for that matter, I haven't seen it.

That, and some of the old games on Activision Anthology seem impossible. The F-16 flight game I've never been able to figure out, as I've always crashed. And the Space Shuttle game...I think I just held a button and completed it. Not impossible, but I don't know how the hell I did it.
 
On a similar note, I remember Back to the Future 2 & 3 (yes, both combined into one game) for the NES... I remember getting to 3 somehow, but the game just didn't make sense to me at the time. I should locate the ROM and see if I can figure it out better now...

I'm surprised no one's mentioned Rise of the Robots. I can't wait for some developer to get the "Genius" idea to port that to the GBA.

Hm... I picked up Crimson Sea during the Circuit City sale... it's not terrible, per se, but to fit the topic, the camera has a lot of problems in tighter areas, and when the character pivots/turns (so you do a lot of strafing to avoid headaches), and the 180 degree turnaround move only works if you're at a dead stop, which gives the enemy time to catch up and attack you in the meantime... I'll give it more of a shot at some point later, so it's not that terrible, but it certainly could have used some refinement, which I heard the sequel did receive.

Oh, and I picked up MM7 during the same CC sale... MAN do they move slow in that game... x_x The intro level is you plodding through with the brand new character (Axl) very, very slowly through a hallway while getting attacked by generic bots while the "Select Button" icon constantly goes off (requiring you to either ignore it or stop what you're doing to hear an inane hint), not to mention the traps that are based on your slow speed, that even the NES Megaman could've outrun easily. :p
 
Back in 2001 when I was working for TechTV/Extended Play, a couple of Nintendo's PR folks stopped by our offices to demo a couple games, one of which was a prerelease version of Kirby Tilt & Tumble. They used an adaptor very much like the Super Gameboy but went into the N64. As impressed as we were with the game, we did have a big laugh over using the N64 for the game.
 
Personally, I found many 8-bit sports games unplayable, especially golf games that couldn't tell you how far away your were from the hole when putting.
 
The most Unplayable game I've played, and one of the worst games ever, is Captain America and the Avengers for the SNES. I loved the arcade game on which it was based, but the home version was HORRIBLE. I waited so long for this game to come out. Luckily, I rented it first. For some odd reason, the Genesis version was quite good.

Though I never played it, Mortal Kombat Advance is supposedly so bug - ridden it is unplayable, and has the review scores to prove it.

I must also add the final level of Brute Force. While the rest of the game is pretty good, particularly with multiple players, the final level has you facing off against an enemy whose shield makes him invincible. You have to destroy the shield generators to disable the shield. The problem is, some of them are so well hidden that I spent over an hour looking for the final one, and never did find it.
 
The original Silent Hill was a nightmare for me. The one-two punch of bad graphics and the 'eternal darkness' of the game just made it a hassle to deal with it's plodding controls and finding items with the limited range of a small light.
 
[quote name='JSweeney']
After all, the question of this thread was about what games are not even worth finishing to you.

Funny, that isn't what the topic says... it says "Games that are unplayable".
That sort of title is reserved mostly for games that are either so illconcieved or bug ridden that it is not physically or technologically possible to play the game. You not being able to muster up the desire to doesn't mean a game is unplayable.[/quote]
You're an idiot. Go back and read the first post by Fatesealer, the person that created this thread. He clearly said "where you never care if you see the ending". He also lists two games that he felt weren't worth finishing, but could be finished if he wanted. Maybe you should make sure that what you're going to say is true next time before you say it, instead of just assuming things.
 
[quote name='digioverload'][quote name='JSweeney']
After all, the question of this thread was about what games are not even worth finishing to you.

Funny, that isn't what the topic says... it says "Games that are unplayable".
That sort of title is reserved mostly for games that are either so illconcieved or bug ridden that it is not physically or technologically possible to play the game. You not being able to muster up the desire to doesn't mean a game is unplayable.[/quote]
You're an idiot. Go back and read the first post by Fatesealer, the person that created this thread. He clearly said "where you never care if you see the ending". He also lists two games that he felt weren't worth finishing, but could be finished if he wanted. Maybe you should make sure that what you're going to say is true next time before you say it, instead of just assuming things.[/quote]

Wait a minute. Let me get this straight....
you came back to a topic that's been dead for a couple of days just to call me an idiot? What good does that do? I mean, first of all, it's rather vulgar and unecessary, with the personal attack and all.
But to resurrect a dead thread just so you can do so?

You did know that it is possible to disagree with the premise that the OP states, right? His classification of "unplayable" and mine are completely different. If you actually read what you posted, it invokes the topic's title and not the content of the original post. Just because you're the OP and state a premise, it doesn't mean that everyone posting in the thread is going to follow or even agree to that premise. So long as one can back up and clarify why they think the original premise may be invalid, they are free to suggest a change or entirely new premise.
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']LoZ: Link to the Past
[/quote]

Wow, that is one of my favorite games! Too bad you couldn't get into it :(

In any case, it was by no means unplayable. Very tight controls and no real bugs that I know of.
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']Devil May Cry[/quote] :shock: A friend of mine didn't like DMC either, and I can understand that people's taste differ, but would you mind explaining why you didn't like it?

Devil May Cry is one of my favorite games ever, perhaps my absolute favorite, and it received lots of praise. I'm just not sure why anybody wouldn't like it.

[quote name='JSweeney']you came back to a topic that's been dead for a couple of days just to call me an idiot? What good does that do?[/quote]
1) It was fun
2) It revived a thread that I've enjoyed reading. If I had nothing else to say, I would have just said "bump".

[quote name='JSweeney']If you actually read what you posted, it invokes the topic's title and not the content of the original post.[/quote]
I never said that text in bold. I don't know if you just assumed that since I responded to your response about it, that I posted it or what, but I've never mentioned even a single game that is impossible to finish, and I really have no clue what you're talking about.

[quote name='JSweeney']Just because you're the OP and state a premise, it doesn't mean that everyone posting in the thread is going to follow or even agree to that premise.[/quote]
I never said there was anything wrong with that, but other people should still be able to follow the original poster without being whined at by the ones that want to take it in a different diretion.

BTW JSweeney, I really like how you used several somewhat uncommon words slightly differently from their actual meaning so that it became almost impossible to understand what you were trying to say. :lol: I don't think I've ever seen that technique before. :wink:
 
[quote name='Backlash'][quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']LoZ: Link to the Past
[/quote]

Wow, that is one of my favorite games! Too bad you couldn't get into it :(

In any case, it was by no means unplayable. Very tight controls and no real bugs that I know of.[/quote]


It's not that it was a bad game or anything of the sort, it just failed to impress me after all I had heard about how wonderful it was. From what I played, which was a good amount, I didn't think it was nearly as good as Link's Awakening. Also, I didn't try to play it until it was available on GBA. I'm sure I would have enjoyed it more when it was fresh and new.
 
I never said that text in bold. I don't know if you just assumed that since I responded to your response about it, that I posted it or what, but I've never mentioned even a single game that is impossible to finish, and I really have no clue what you're talking about.

By qouting it, you reposted it. Obviously, one would assume that you read what you qouted before posting it. Of course, based upon your tirade earlier and your seeming cluelessness here, it appears that would be a poor assumption.

I never said there was anything wrong with that, but other people should still be able to follow the original poster without being whined at by the ones that want to take it in a different diretion.

This is what you said: You're an idiot. Go back and read the first post by Fatesealer, the person that created this thread. He clearly said "where you never care if you see the ending". He also lists two games that he felt weren't worth finishing, but could be finished if he wanted. Maybe you should make sure that what you're going to say is true next time before you say it, instead of just assuming things.

Unless what you were thinking is different than what you posted, there is an explict chastisement and implication of wrongdoing in that earlier post.
This is an open forum. After the OP makes thier post, they give up all control over it. It freely flows from that point until it's natural conclusion. During that time, it evolves and changes as people discuss it. You can argue that you want the subject to maintain it's current path, but trying to preserve the original intent of a thread doesn't act as a shield that prevents you from looking foolish when you indulge in crass or juvenile behavior, such as petty namecalling.


BTW JSweeney, I really like how you used several somewhat uncommon words slightly differently from their actual meaning so that it became almost impossible to understand what you were trying to say. :lol: I don't think I've ever seen that technique before. :wink:

Really, and which words were those? Believe it or not, some words have multiple meanings and various definitions.
 
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll']I can't speak for anyone else, but I hated DMC because of the idiotic locked camera. Nothing like a complete perspective change mid-jump.[/quote]Aaahhh..... those sudden angle changes. I can definately see how those could bother some people. At one time, I had nothing to play but Onimusha: Warlords, so I was forced to get used to that. When I played DMC, that no longer bothered me. If you ever get used to instant angle changes after playing a different game, trying giving DMC another chance. ^_^

JSweeney, I don't think all these other people really want to see us bickering at each other, so if you insist on continuing this, check your PMs.
 
For me, of recent...Skies of Arcadia (GC version) comes to mind.
I had put 40+ hours into it before I realized I really had no desire to ever finish it.
...
Okay, maybe it was more like 20-25 hours of ACTUAL playing time...and the other 15-20 hours was tacked on during the countless times I fell asleep in mid-battle because of how damn easy, boring, and frequent they were. I enjoyed a lot of the other aspects to the game, but the 'waste of time' battles definately made it all seem pointless. Somebody needs to shoot the person(s) involved in the decision to create a random encounter every 2 feet.
 
I don't argue via PM. Never have, never will.
It serves absolutely no purpose, and thus is a fruitless endeavor.

Here's the PM, for anyone interested:

JSweeney wrote:
By qouting it, you reposted it. Obviously, one would assume that you read what you qouted before posting it. Of course, based upon your tirade earlier and your seeming cluelessness here, it appears that would be a poor assumption.

I did read it, but I couldn't figure out how what you said related to it either.

So because you can't follow the flow of the converstation, you feel it's your job to start hurling insults, huh? No one else seemed to have a problem following the flow of the conversation.


When refering to this: After all, the question of this thread was about what games are not even worth finishing to you you said this: If you actually read what you posted, it invokes the topic's title and not the content of the original post..

First, let's cull my thought out of the abomination you constructed around it.

"If you actually read what you posted, it invokes the topic's title and not the content of the original post."

Basically, in this I state that my posts are germane to the topic, yet not to the spirit of the thread which the OP attempts to create.
The topic, as stated by the title, is unplayable games. This covers all manners and definitions of "unplayable games".
Fatesealer intended to define this as games that you just couldn't bring yourself to finish. My definition views it as "games that are either so illconcieved or bug ridden that it is not physically or technologically possible to play the game".
Of course, I was happy to just let that little discussion die down.
If you notice, that post was made almost two weeks ago. I was fine to just drop the issue and continue with the thread as is. You were the one who came in and started hurling insults. You dredged all of this back up.


That doesn't make any sense, so I just ended up saying that I didn't have a clue what you're talking about.

It makes plenty of sense. Something can be within the scope of the topic, yet not adhere to the intented course that an OP intends.
Just because you can't follow the flow of a reasonable discussion doesn't mean you get to go around willy-nilly hurling insults.

JSweeney wrote:
Unless what you were thinking is different than what you posted, there is an explict chastisement and implication of wrongdoing in that earlier post.
This is an open forum. After the OP makes thier post, they give up all control over it. It freely flows from that point until it's natural conclusion. During that time, it evolves and changes as people discuss it. You can argue that you want the subject to maintain it's current path, but trying to preserve the original intent of a thread doesn't act as a shield that prevents you from looking foolish when you indulge in crass or juvenile behavior, such as petty namecalling.

I don't want all threads to stay on topic with the first post. Other people can start talking about something else that's related but not exactly the same, but when that happens, other people should be able to continue with what the first posts was talking about. If a new topic emerges in a thread, the first topic shouldn't be killed off.

It wasn't. Follow the path of the tread. Two posts after where I define "unplayable" the thread returns to it modus oporandi.

BTW, you're the one trying to change what everybody else is talking about. You're the minority trying to convince the majority to move on to a different topic. (Bad games to games that truly are unplayable, that is.)

Again, your raising rabble over an issue that as long since passed. The only reason I bother responding to your intial troll was the unecessary insults being hurled.

JSweeney wrote:
Really, and which words were those? Believe it or not, some words have multiple meanings and various definitions.

Wow, multiple meanings AND various definitions? Both?! Seriously, the way you use some words doesn't match any of their definitions. I don't know if you've been using a word-a-day calendar and you aren't exactly sure what some words mean, but if you can't remember correctly, you shoud just stick to more common words that you still remember the meaning of.

Long on insults, short on evidence.
I'd still like to see a couple of these instances where I suposively use the wrong word or misuse a word.

Now, unless there is anything else, I consider this issue closed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top