The highest metacritic score game I've played that I didn't fully enjoy was Red Dead Redemption. It isn't an awful game, not even slightly. I just couldn't get into the game. I don't know why. It may have been because I started playing RDR just after finishing GTA 5, and I was getting tired of the whole open world gaming thing.
Then another I can add to my list is Starcraft 2. This game is built for competitive gameplay, and casuals are a bit shunned, or so I felt.
Lol, you just dislike Street Fighter and I doubt that a different Metacritic score would change thatOriginally Posted by broheim14
Half Life 2 - 96 PC
------------
I don't see why the hype machine was so prevalent. I mean the game is indeed objectively good. But I don't think it's worth being lauded as literally the best PC game ever made.
GTA IV - 98 PS3
------------
Any game that has has such ridiculous character movement in conjunction with having a contentious camera cannot in any way be worthy of a 98 score on MC. (I mean according to them this game is better than GTA V...)
BioShock Infinite - 94 PS3
------------
I like the BioShock franchise; really I do. BioShock was a phenomal and refreshing experience which showed how one can make an FPS title that has a lovingly crafted setting AND a phenomal story without sacrificing excellent and unique gameplay. The second iteration not so much; didn't like the story all that much but Rapture still proved too much of an interesting place to not explore and the gameplay was still solid. Infinite, however, has issues that I cannot get over. As amazing as the setting is and as interesting as it is to have a somewhat non-irritating escort mission; the story manages to be convoluted and predictable at the same time whilst the gameplay feels like the greatest chore ever underatken in an FPS.
I enjoyed Half Life 2, but I completely agree with this sentiment. The phrase "highly overrated" comes to mind.
As for a game that I actually didn't enjoy that had a great reviews:
Far Cry 3. Blegh, that's all I can really say about that.
I really enjoyed RDR and I think it was a great game, but I think you have a good point that it's because you played it after GTA5, which is a much newer, more polished game. Both were really good but they are also both very big, and there's only so much you can take at a time, I wouldn't want to play two R* sandbox games in a row.
Had a quick look at the list. For me it is Dishonored (91 on Metacritic). Bought it and was so excited for it, but after about 3 hours into the game I just got tired of it for some reason and I never went back to it.
Also, Batman: Arkham Asylum (91) - just never got into it.
2 games immediately jumped to mind; BioShock Infinite and Crysis 2.
Crysis 2 just wasn't fun, I don't know if it was the level design that didn't do it or how the AI was. I just didn't have fun. Sure, it took me about 9 hours to complete, but it was a 9 hour trudge+drudge (both for emphasis) that spanned over 8 months, if that's any indication of the fun I had. I wasn't invested in the story, didn't really care about the plight of Alcatraz/Prophet in the game. It sure looked pretty though.
BioShock Infinite was an interesting and perhaps the one that saddens me the most because I was quite amped for its release. It was also my 1st BioShock game. Anyway, I don't mind a convoluted story if you can find someway to sell me on it, so to a degree I had numerous reasons to get invested especially considering a key component of the game's story was the multiple universes/parallel worlds (an interesting plot mechanic/device). It was also a very beautiful in its peace and tragedy. But good grief, the combat of the game; the enemy AI, the level design in aid of the combat sequences, the implied checkpoint system, and the leveling system of the vigors along with weapons. That made for a concoction that was too much of a dreadful chore, felt underdeveloped, and I just couldn't swallow it.
Would I have liked to carry on with the story, even with the problems presented by how they developed the plot? Sure, I still found the plot immensely intriguing and engaging, but after too many combat sequences where I realized that the developers had substituted good difficulty design for giving a player multiple options to play with in the vigor/firearm combo to promote creativity and some form of strategic and tactical gameplay (or at least give you the option), adding salts and shields (the root of the problem I'm about to detail) to the already existing HP to make you consider multiple things mid-combat and while you level up your vigors and weapons, even creating a railing system for interesting mid-combat traversal options, only to throw away this lie once the combat actually starts and the enemy AI is somewhat brain dead in various ways depending on the type and is therefore beefed up with cheap developer tactics.
Cheap developer tactics, you ask? Oh, like the classic invisible tripwire that alerts everyone of your presence, enemies always being homed in on your location at all time, lack of any tactical play from all types of enemies (small fry and heavy hitters alike) which essentially throws your tactical play out the window when you're bombarded with so many silly combat design issues not too mention the flimsy checkpoint system that can't decide how to handle your demise and rise from the dead. I could finish it with, but seriously? That game can go jump off a cliff :/
/rant
I just realized that I might be harboring some strong feelings about the game
That rant sounded like a Drake track towards his ex2 games immediately jumped to mind; BioShock Infinite and Crysis 2.
Crysis 2 just wasn't fun, I don't know if it was the level design that didn't do it or how the AI was. I just didn't have fun. Sure, it took me about 9 hours to complete, but it was a 9 hour trudge+drudge (both for emphasis) that spanned over 8 months, if that's any indication of the fun I had
BioShock Infinite was an interesting and perhaps the one that saddens me the most because I was quite amped for its release. It was also my 1st BioShock game. Anyway, I don't mind a convoluted story if you can find someway to sell me on it, so to a degree I had numerous reasons to get invested especially considering a key component of the game's story was the multiple universes/parallel worlds (an interesting plot mechanic/device). It was also a very beautiful in its peace and tragedy. But good grief, the combat of the game; the enemy AI, the level design in aid of the combat sequences, the implied checkpoint system, and the leveling system of the vigors along with weapons. That made for a concoction that was too much of a dreadful chore, felt underdeveloped, and I just couldn't swallow it.
Would I have liked to carry on with the story, even with the problems presented by how they developed the plot? Sure, I still found the plot immensely intriguing and engaging, but after too many combat sequences where I realized that the developers had substituted good difficulty design for giving a player multiple options to play with in the vigor/firearm combo to promote creativity and some form of strategic and tactical gameplay (or at least give you the option), adding salts and shields (the root of the problem I'm about to detail) to the already existing HP to make you consider multiple things mid-combat and while you level up your vigors and weapons, even creating a railing system for interesting mid-combat traversal options, only to throw away this lie once the combat actually starts and the enemy AI is somewhat brain dead in various ways depending on the type and is therefore beefed up with cheap developer tactics.
Cheap developer tactics, you ask? Oh, like the classic invisible tripwire that alerts everyone of your presence, enemies always being homed in on your location at all time, lack of any tactical play from all types of enemies (small fry and heavy hitters alike) which essentially throws your tactical play out the window when you're bombarded with so many silly combat design issues not too mention the flimsy checkpoint system that can't decide how to handle your demise and rise from the dead. I could finish it with, but seriously? That game can go jump off a cliff :/
/rant
I just realized that I might be harboring some strong feelings about the game
I still don't get why AC3 was so poorly rated, it was a fun game and it had plenty of good elements. I think the hunting was kinda pointless but it's also pretty similar to the weapon upgrade/crafting system in farcry. To me it's a great little addition to the series and as snoop says ignore the collectibles (except the crafting pages), ignore desmonds stupid ending and skip the DLC (those extra chapters were useless, complete waste of time and money) and you have a nice game.
Also if possible get the black flag DLC, Adewale had a pretty cool story with the slaves and so on.
My ignore list: n/a
Posting Permissions
