This is possibly the worst game I've ever played, and I'm not even talking about the extremely generic combat

user, why don't you give some examples to back up your claim that "it's shit" instead of just spewing hateful opinions without any reasoning and expecting us to accept it?

Gone Home
Firewatch
Depression Quest
Her Story
Cibele

Forgot the worst

Unhappily, being inspired by something doesn't guarantee the same quality as the original product, but it is a excellent way to grab attention and cash with "cultured" persons. If you want to see a good media inspired by heart of darkness I highly recommend Apocalypse Now.

Aside from that, I liked the game, but I admit it would be way better if it had actual meaningful choices. The unreliable narrator thing and escalating violence are pretty awesome though.

powerpoint slides and 3d environment simulators don't count

The Last of Us.

I don't think those can be considered games and your absence of quads only confirms this.

Pretty much this.

Oh fuck I can't believe I forgot that one.

And there go the goalposts

This is possibly the worst thread I have ever read through.

Not talking about things inspired by garbage, this game claims to be inspired by one of the best books from the turn of the 20th century.

lol

Not even mentioning the railroaded "choices", and then later referred to as examples to why Walker is such a bad person, Walker spends the entire game being blamed for everything, including by his squadmates. Yet never refers to

And so on. The game has so many plotholes and blames Walker for everything. The writing is so bad, but had so much potential on this subject. It's disgusting.

see

Fair enough, though doesn't claim to have source material from actual literary works.

My problem with it is that it doesn't even scratch the surface of the kind of "Apocalypse Now" kind of shit that goes on in the Middle East. Either it's on purpose to hide the Vietnam-tier things that happen or it's just bad writing. How is that even allowed?

yep, those goalposts have vanished over the horizon now
And? What's your point? .
Regardless, you can't honestly say this game has the worst gameplay and writing out there when Bioshock Infinite exists.

just from a mechanical point of view its alright. its a tps with teamates that arent useless and better than average mechanics.

did the story trigger you?

There are plenty of choices in the game, but they're hidden in a lot of places. When the game says to shoot civilians to stop the riot, or to just run away, shooting in the air makes them disperse and the game will recognize that you didn't kill any. There's a handful of different endings you can get in the game based on these choices.

Pretty sure he's actually a huge fan of the game, but gets tired of everyone hating on it usually. So he's making a thread about it being the worst game ever so people will come and defend it.

I should have included my perspective in the OP since people are getting confused.

I don't go into bad games expecting anything good. If I do play a bad game, my expectations are so low that I couldn't care less how bad it is. If I were expecting Bioshock Infinite to be good and if it were inspired by a great work, then I would make a similar thread about Bioshock being one of the worst games of all time, but I didn't since I knew it was shit from the beginning.

Spec Ops has the appearance and reputation for being a good game that is basically the Apocalypse Now of the contemporary Middle East. So I go in with somewhat of a high expectation, only to be absolutely drowned in shit. There are very few games that do this, possibly Duke Nukem Forever comes to mind, but at least that was never a serious game with an actual message.

For being so bad and convoluted about a very real subject, yes.

If only m8.

It was ok, but the story was condescending as fuck.

...

Really? I thought the ending was defined by those last choices you made. Source pls.

Also, I know those are choices, they are fun to talk about and compare with what your friends did, but they are not meaningful plotwise, For example they will kill Lugo anyway, not killing the civilians could a difference on his death but it doesn't

So you're saying that what Spec Ops is based off of isn't real?

There's multiple endings. They're all equal in how shit they are though.

Do you think people will still get triggered by Spec Ops: The Line in 10 years.

Do you think people will really think this is your first post ITT?

I know there are multiple endings but user said they are based on what choices you made through game which I think is false, the endings to my knowledge are based in the final choices you make before the credits roll,which are basic A or B if B C or D.

I'll take that as a yes

There you go again with that. Your problem here is you're judging it entirely by the writing and ignoring the game part of the game. That's what prevents this from ever even approaching the worst game of all time level.
Being inspired by a good book doesn't have any bearing on anything because even with that taken into account there are far worse written games. It's intellectually dishonest to assert otherwise.

The point I think it was trying to make there was whether the player would even consider intimidating the crowd instead of massacring them.
Unfortunately it's in a video game and people who play a lot of games tend to look at everything from a mechanical standpoint unless they're role playing. Also only firing into the air works. I tried shooting at the ground in front of them and after that failed I figured you had to kill them.

It's sort of like Fallout, it's shows in a slideshow way whether you shot one of the guys hanging, or didn't, killing or not killing the crowd at the camp in the end, some other things that I'm forgetting.

Hipster and other non gamers garbage/nerdwhatever praise it because it tells a shitty story. In their mind, breaking a fourth wall is a peak of philosophical and mental depth. Coincidentally this is also a peak of their ability to critically think.

Then I'll downgrade to simply it's a very poorly written game for the sake of argument. It depicts American interventionism in the Middle East in a very dishonest way by not going further in explaining why US soldiers are actually fighting there. It's propaganda and a limited hangout for forces that created the Middle East in its current state.

There you go. It's a poorly written, overrated game. That's something you can actually argue

Maybe those people see aspects of Heart of Darkness in the game, to the point where the game itself resembles that book?

It exactly tells you why muricans are there, but since you didn't even played game…

Faggot

Leave anytime Stirner

That's the problem, people playing this game and thinking it's related to Heart of Darkness at all.

Yes, in a very dishonest way.

Don't blame the game, blame the idiots who hype the game beyond reasonable expectations.

It wasn't making commetary on wars in general, or even the Iraq war specifically, it was making commentary on games about war.
How, like you seem to agree, war can be pretty terrible, and yet popular video games like CoD make light of it to give the players their power fantasy.

I disagree with that, because fantasy and reality are very different, but despite that I don't mind the game for exploring the idea.

It is you inspired by Heart of Darkness. If the creators said they were inspired by it, then that's the end of the argument.
Whether you think it does the book justice is irrelevant.

...

Heart of Darkness is hardly about any of this shit that is primarily backdrop for the actual intent of the work.

No, you said literally the worst game. That implies the entire fucking package. You don't get to backpedal and cherry pick.

Holla Forums is now full of white knight faggots desperately defending the honor of pathetic 2deep4u hipster trash games. How did things get this bad?

I saw that theme, and it was okay, if very forced, the part where the radioman sarcastically blames video games for US military operations specifically. However, it still doesn't do any justice for actual US soldiers in the Middle East, even if you see Walker as an avatar for CoD players, by not pointing out hypocrisies in why situations like the one in Spec Ops would happen, something that Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse now both did.

checked

Where in my post do you see me saying that the game does not explain why Americans are there? It doesn't go any farther than plopping you down. Despite having elements like the CIA present, the game doesn't expand on why the US as an entity is in the Middle East, and by extension Dubai after a natural disaster, in the first place.

So it follows Heart of Darkness except for the part where the protagonist goes back home and criticizes his own people and leaders. The intent must be to leave out this important part and to redouble the blame for the people on the ground.

Maybe you should play an horror game about RUNNING IN THE DARK, I hear only the finest conneisseurs appreciate those.

see

Or go back to reading Stirner if you want to intellectually masturbate over being "right" in debates.

Maybe you should learn to stop speaking in absolutes asshole.

It's so easy to draw people like you out of the woodwork. Here's my reasoning as to why I think it's one of the worst games of all time

If you get too caught up, just see and try to post something relevant.

Yes, I can post an image as well.

It's not commenting on real US soldiers in the Middle East at all.
Even then, the soldiers aren't in the game depicted as outright bad, and even Walker is sympathetic and tragic.

Let me point this out again, because I think it's a reasonw hy many people dislike this game.
It's not saying anything critical of the US military and the war in Iraq at all.
Possibly even the opposite, since Konrad is the only thing holding the place together until Walker misguidedly fucks everything up.

What? I'm not sure what you mean by this.

Disaster happens, US sends troops on a relief effort, Konrad Kurtz goes rogue, US sends CIA to capture Konrad, CIA fails, US then sends Delta Force on a recon mission.

And it doesn't have to because that wasn't what you asked for. You asked for worse games that claim to be literary icons. Don't try to shift goal posts on me.

Surprised to see there was as many people responding to this blatant bait thread as there was. Next time just ignore shit threads.

I think it's one of the better examples of story telling in a game. There's a lot of gameplay mixed with story. The more you progress through the game and the more Walker loses his sanity the way he executes people gets more and more violent. There's other things like this throughout the game.

I don't think the story is amazing and the ending kinda ruins it all together. But spec ops the line does a fantastic job of combining gameplay and story at the same time.

By default it is. If you were to find an antagonist in this game, it would be an US soldier or other American, whether it's Walker, Konrad, the radioman possibly, Briggs, or Americans in Dubai in general. I have a problem with the fact that it does not critically examine the US military for a game that is mentioned in the same vein as Apocalypse Now or Heart of Darkness.

Specifically the US MO of "bringing democracy" by first sending in troops and then later using covert methods to either clean up mistakes or to sway Middle East "democracy" in their favor. This theme was very, very lightly touched on with CIA agents leading Dubai citizens against the 33rd as insurgents, but doesn't even come close to going far enough to have the audacity to blame someone like Walker for anything without giving the player more information to show that Walker doesn't deserve as much blame as he gets.

For someone who implied that I didn't even play the game, this is embarrassing.

Well thankfully I left myself room to escape by saying, "one of the worst".

Everytime

top lel

No one's believing your ruse anymore, don't waste your time.

?

I wasn't defending this game, it's just stupid to call it one of the worst games ever when it's not even bad just average at worst. Stuff like The Sniper or Limbo of the Lost exist.

top lel

Indie shit that pretends to be 2deep4u is not on the level of this game as it talks about very proactive IRL themes. Something as bad as this game should be a crime really.

That's only because the player character is usually implied to be American in a typical Cod, MoH, Battlefield game.

And if Walker is the protagonist who does pretty horrible things, wouldn't that make the antagonist fighting against him the morally superior character?

You expected something the game didn't provide.That's fine, I'm not going to tell you you're wrong for not liking the game because it dissapointed you on that front.

This seems pretty accurate for me at a surface level…

Are you in the military to find it this triggering?

Don't forget Fallout 4 user. So bad in so many ways. Lore, gameplay, writing, content, business practices, map.

Spec Ops is a decent game but not one to be considered "worst game". You play for the ride and that's it. Compare it to Fo4 and you'll fucking think it's near perfect.

If anything, the protagonists are the Dubai people, not including their leaders. Walker can't be considered as a protagonist, even if he isn't aware of what he is doing, despite the player realizing what's going on about 1/4 of the way through by reading the intelligence items.

By having a game on this subject and not expanding on certain themes, themes talked about in Vietnam movies for example, makes the game propaganda at best and terrible at worst.

Again, embarrassing. At least read the wiki page.

Are you hoping somebody outside of your board will latch on to this and make it a real meme?

It's already a real meme. People ironically posted Stirner memes and then people unironically liked it, like most things created out of sarcasm.

Again, see

Who here actually thought Fallout 4 was going to have anything worthwhile in it?

Looks like we got an autistic visitor from reddit here.

It's a satire of modern shooters. In other words, it's kind of shit on purpose.

Sorry for not using a VPN bud :^)

No that would be this game. And it's already been said in the thread, as well as why that doesn't give it a pass. Try reading.

Now that's retarded. Look up the definition of a protagonist. Here's a hint, it doesn't mean they're the good guy, or even the character the audience is supposed to relate to or support.

Not if you're making a video games about video games, which is very indirectly related to any real-world events
Now you sound like an autist who is crying over a movie not being hard enough sci-fi because it doesn't explore how the technology works.

Spec Ops is basically the same as Undertale; a lot of polish and not a lot of content, telling a story that falls apart if you know the twist and actively try to avoid it.

Spec Ops has a lot less autism, though

Maybe these things happen on your board but nobody with an ounce of sanity ventures there. I don't know why you'd mention him here when he's a proto-meme without a hook and no chance of spreading.

No. It's worse than that.

This game has heavy ties to real world events, and criticizing modern games wasn't it's only theme. That would be this game's

My point is, by leaving out the theme US interventionism, the game becomes very dishonest and will leave alot of players with the idea that soldiers and similar actors have heavy blame for warcrimes and similar things that have happened in the Middle East and elsewhere.

Well you seem very aware of what Stirner is, what's the problem?

This is a quote from the lead writer.
"Some people certainly interpreted it as an anti-war story, and I think there's a certain angle to it that you could say it is very anti-war, [but] it's simply that war in itself is horrible. It's horrible to anyone who's fighting it on any side of the conflict, and the real damage in a war comes to those who are fighting it, and those who are in the confines of its theater. It can be much more damaging than simply death, and there are consequences of war that are worse than death."

To me, both the quote and the game portray the soldiers as the victims of circumstance, both from the storm and their commanding officers.

Wouldn't say that's the important part of it but take from it what you will. FC2 did the journey much better and wasn't cracking one over the head with the subtext and chose to let it play out naturally.

Or alternatively, "War is Hell". Not denying that. I'm saying that this writer is a hack or purposefully made propaganda by not including the full picture. Heart of Darkness did it and Apocalypse Now did it. This game leaves the blame with Walker and does not go into the faults of commanding elements, political leaders and the media, even though the elements themselves are present in the game. This quote only shows how much of a shit tier writer this guy is, or a well paid propaganda spinner.

Have you considered that the only people who blame you are your subordinates and yourself?

This game leaves the blame for the war crimes with the player.
(Whether or not placing that blame on the player is justified is another argument).

This guy is also a writer for video games, so of course he's going to be a hack. The loading screens with DO YOU FEEL LIKE A HERO YET? are evidence enough.

This is also a good point, with the soldiers still rescuing you in one of the ending if you let them.

I don't disagree. Far Cry 2 had great underlying themes. I can't name any vidya that talks about NGOs and other destabilizing factors in 3rd world countries in such a negative light, if at all.

Yes. Konrad was an extension of Walker's troubled mind obviously. However, the game itself, or rather the writers, the idea that Walker is a problem and not a solution when it fails to allow Walker to see that there are other and more larger problems that led to what happened in Dubai. Why would Walker blame himself after learning that the UAE politicians and wealthy purposefully lied to the Dubai people in order to escape? Or that the CIA was destabilizing the situation in order to clean up the 33rd and not let the word go out? It's hack writing or propaganda.

Yes, and not letting the player see otherwise without the game forcing it upon you is the problem.

forces the idea*

It's also been said a million times before your thread. Redundant threads deserve redundant replies.

Literally a million? Damn, I guess I'm late to the party. If you've discussed this game a million times, then you are free to leave this thread.

They clearly showed that greater powers are manipulating him with the CIA involvement making him destroy the last water supply, but expanding any greater than that would ruin the focus of what is a character story.
Walker also disobeyed orders from the very start of the game, so arguably it truely is all on him.

Now back to your actual point.
If you walked away from the game thinking that soldiers are always directly responsible for war crimes they commit, then that tells us more about you than it does about the game.

The thread started with OP saying it was the worst game ever. Now he's only saying it was bad because he didn't like the opinions he thinks the game told. Could you find a worse example of a human being?

How so? If this game was a character story, then that makes it even worse.

Yes, but the game does not give Walker the chance to "figure it out" on his own. At no point in time does Walker, or others, discuss how Dubai became such a hellhole.

The game certainly makes it seem that way. How else do you see Walker's blame? Walker never creates a thesis of what happened in Dubai and instead blames himself, unlike works that this game is inspired by.

I haven't changed my opinion, see for my reasoning Stirner cuck.

I'll bet both my nuts OP never noticed all the little details the devs worked on, like the corpses that turn into mannequins between ascending and descending the spiral staircase, or the clothes Walker's wearing in the epilogue, or how many options the player has at the level with the mob.

The lesson here is that you won't enjoy a game by getting into it with the attitude of a sour contrarian.

Pretty much everything you said was correct, user.

They told me Summer shitposting was a lie. OP, you're a fucking retard, please kill yourself.

Or the mannequins moving around during the part where the lights flicker on and off. Yes I noticed them. It still doesn't excuse this game for reasons I posted.

Feel free to prove me wrong at any time.

user, take a look around you.
There's no one there, is there?
Maybe there's something to that.
I'll leave you to your grumbling. Goodnight.

Good night user-kun~

Metal Gear Series with the exception of Metal Gear Solid PS1 and including MGR.

agreed, its stupid as hell

I like how you player as a character and then you find out at the end your character is really the other bad guy character you thought you were chasing, but who was actually dead the whole time, so your character is, what, hallucinating for 40 hours? And your teammates, they were a dream?

And then when you realize you were in two places at once, you're escorted out by the enemy army that you thought you had imagined but….were actually real?

and the CIA was imagined, but you someone destroyed the aquarium in your dream and…in reality?

yes! Kojima is shit. Fuck you dumb faggots that worship him.

The only reason I need to like this game is that you faggots STILL argue and shitpost about it

I'm not sure what's canon really. Your squadmates would have put Walker as FUBAR when he was talking about the two hanged men long dead and then shooting one. What would make more sense, and would have made the game better, was if Walker was part of the 33rd and hallucinated his "mission" to get to Konrad. But the game doesn't go very deep into the unreliable narrator aspect. Just some minor details until the end where it's shoved in the player's face.

MGS2

That said, people shit on Spec Ops the Line for the pretentious "YOU ARE BAD FOR PLAYING THIS GAME" and rightfully so.

That still doesn't change that if you completely ignore that and pretend it doesn't exist, Walker as a character and his break down are well written and very well directed, especially the hallucinations and the change in his behavior and animations

The gameplay is tedious as shit though

Easily.

I love and I hate the effect this game has on Holla Forums. It exposes a lot of us as easily triggered babies who got so pissed off at a game that they missed the point, and everyone who isn't left that way can have an actually good discussion.

It was a meh cover shooter that paid extremely good attention to details. That's it. The game is still playable, there are SOME variety to the enemies, OK game feel. Hell, Gears of War is worse. Stop making this fucking thread already.
I refuse to believe that unless you've only played only the objectively best video games your entire life. Please fucking kill yourself.