Disappointing games

...

Every time I think about trying out that game I'm always deterred, because it's one of those things that you can't tell if it's legit good or just another mediocre game shilled by weebs.

It's not a bad game but it's overhyped. Wait a year or two for that to settle down so you can go in without expectations.

Let me guess… You're an SJW assblasted over the game's "sexualization" and catering to the male gaze?

God this appeals to my /ss/ fetish immensely

Brought SFZ first print edition more for the reason of getting a physical copy of Star Fox Guard (which is really good). SFZ was just . . . I just can't understand why they didn't delay it again to November 2016 instead and actually TRY to make a better single player mode than 64's.
Why are the last 3 levels the same fucking planets?
Why so many Fox only small levels?
Why was the motion control aiming gimmick and the Gyrowing (a slow moving vehicle with designed for the purpose of 3D movement) feel like something that would be better in a Pilotwings game instead of a fast paced action game?
What happened to the idea of Corneria level boss and the consequences of it returning later in a later level if you didn't defeat it by blowing up the ship? (destroying the outer turrets instead of the reactor core)

Only redeeming features I can think of are: Landmaster triple lock on, the Fortuna level and wingmen not being so useless while having their kill count add to your level end score.

Assault had hype, it was announced in May 2002 as few months before SF Adventures had even been released. It was unexpected for Nintendo to announce a sequel before the current game was even released? Then it faced delays, E3 2003 unveiling, was supposed to be release Nov 2004 but got delayed to Feb 2005. What else was there to look forward to during those Gamecube drought months?

It took me a while to realize AAA games were bad.

the wii u had a lot of these stinkers didn't it, games that were hyped but ended up as shit or disappointing in some way

SFZ will be looked at as a "hidden gem" or rather an overlooked game in 10-15 years after gyro has been normalized to the point that two joysticks has been normalized. Please don't mistake this claim as me saying it deserves this.

But user, Starfox Zero was shit. Wii U in general was so bad even Nintendo is hoping you'll forget it existed.

I think most of Holla Forums fell for this one. Also Jewka Gayly.

...

No, no one here really expects much from crowdfunded titles.

*Fell over laughing
You deserve to be bullied into sucide if you actually gave this money.

It's the later. It's a run of the mill game with a barebones combat system and a plot that ends up nonsensical but hides behind "hurrr read all the various supplmental materials 2deep4u!" that people praise because of the protagonist's ass and because it's made by le quirky guy in a mask.

Play the shit yourself, don't listen to shitposters on Holla Forums like this faggot

Really? The combat system isn't run of the mill? Made by platinum but less involved than Bayonetta and we're going to pretend it's above average?

Star Fox Zero is depressing because it's so close to being a perfect Star Fox game, but they had to go and shoehorn in some unneeded gimmicks, because Miyamoto can't just make a straight sequel. Even after 20 years of people waiting for it.

it's a decent game that has a neat story. The problem is that it's overhyped and on a system that a lot of users here hate for petty reasons.

It's an action RPG. Different genre to Bayonetta. Different standards. You should compare it to the original Nier, not Bayonetta.

It's on PC though.

I regret every game I have ever bought

Hence why I said half of the problem is that it's overhyped. It's a 8/10 game at worst. The worst thing you can say is that the game's combat is a bit simplistic but if you are playing a moonman game simply for the gameplay then you are doing it wrong. It would be like eating a cake and bitching that the icing is too plain tasting while ignoring the fact that the cake itself tastes amazing.

Kill yourself, for the love of God.

It's an RPG. The writing and world building is actually just as important as gameplay here.

Would the cake be the gameplay, with the icing being some particular part of the gameplay?

Why would I listen to a subhuman with a double digit IQ?

Wouldn't*

Hard to pin down with RPGs. I mean, most of us will defend at least one RPG with distinctly shitty or mediocre gameplay, if the writing is good enough. Good gameplay certainly helps, but it isn't necessarily the deal breaker it is for other genres.

You don't know what "run of the mill" fucking means to begin with you gigantic faggot

Gameplay is fine. it being unusual is what sets it apart; its unusualness and quirkiness is what sets it apart, being almost always changing in some way, shape or form

...

Second best Star Fox game and would have surpassed 64 if not for the forced gimmicks (thanks, Shiggy).

Dumber than a fucking nigger.

It was disappointing compared to what it could have been, but it isn't bad. It isn't 80% composed of on foot sections like Assault, for instance.

Please don't say it was because of the aiming. I can take criticisms about it that don't involve "but it was too hard/i don't want to look at the screen"

...

How is that a bad thing? 64 was annoying in that you had to do a full playthrough just to play the level you wanted. It was especially frustrating when you were going for medals.

NIGGA STOP. YOU'RE GONNA TRIGGER THE ZERO AUTIST ALL THE WAY TO HIGH HELL.

Yeah, I can agree with a lot of that.

After playing the awesome original twice, I tried the sequel. Can't be as bad as people say, right? Holy shit, it is. The environments are tiny, the interface is a clunky mess, and the character models look like dolls. I intend to keep pushing a bit more, but if the levels don't improve a lot soon, I'll give up.

You have starfox 2 though On the SNES classic edition :^)

Denuvo.