What is the most objectively universally objectionable game?

[Gloves | 11,776]

4 hours ago, mbd39 said:

Shows how influential AVGN is. People just regurgitate the opinions of a fictional Youtube character.

WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?!!?

[GPX | 1,369]

Regarding Superman 64, it might be a crappy game, but I don’t think many people have actually played it compared with the Mario and Rare games on the N64. 

I’m thinking the answer is likely to be a game from a popular franchise that happen to be utterly crap. Bearing in mind also that games can be played on emulation and not just on physical copy.

[Andykin Skysk8r | 49]

Objectively it would probably be a super buggy game that crashes a lot. Otherwise its just an infamy contest where games that got hyped but didnt meet the hype like ET will rise to the top.

[mbd39 | 2,020]

33 minutes ago, Gloves said:

WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?!!?

I know, right?

[the_wizard_666 | 1,325]

6 hours ago, DefaultGen said:

How crazy is it that on Wikipedia's list of games notable for negative reception there are only 5 games from the 80s. Out of the horseshit released in the 80s, Friday the 13th is on that list?? Really???

I don't think ANY of those games had much of a negative reaction to them.  Maybe Custer's Revenge, but I doubt it was even covered by the gaming media, nevermind reviled by people who bought it.  Pac-Man and ET were both MASSIVE sellers for the 2600...disappointing sure, but not terrible.  As for the two NES games, they are more non-intuitive and confusing than actually bad.  In fact, I can't think of any NES game that would be universally reviled.  I think as defined in the OP, the only game I can really think of that fits the bill is Superman 64, as previously mentioned.  I've played a shitton of bad games, but that's literally the only one I can think of offhand that didn't have a redeeming factor to it. 

[Webhead123 | 675]

7 hours ago, Gloves said:

In 1997 Electronic Gaming Monthly ranked it the eighth worst console video game of all time.

Friday the 13th isn't even the 8th worst LJN-published game, let alone 8th worst of all time. I mean, I get that reviews are necessarily subjective and that any given person or even group of people could never possibly play every game ever made...but a statement like that just shows either how incredibly limited the EGM staff's exposure was or how eager they were to grind an axe someone had against the game.

Honestly, the game isn't all that terrible, as NES games go. Merely average.

Edited October 21, 2021 by Webhead123

[obnoxious | 107]

7 hours ago, mbd39 said:

Shows how influential AVGN is. People just regurgitate the opinions of a fictional Youtube character.

Maybe there's a coincidence here. We're talking about bad games and AVGN is based on bad games...

 

I mean, the character's been running for more than a decade, it's very hard not to pick something he already reviewed

[Tulpa | 3,492]

1 hour ago, the_wizard_666 said:

Pac-Man and ET were both MASSIVE sellers for the 2600...disappointing sure, but not terrible.

They're both in the top ten bestselling Atari 2600 games (Pac-Man is #1, ET something like #8.) The big issue is that they overproduced them, especially Pac-Man. Atari/Warner counted on every single existing 2600 owner buy it, some ten million owners, and another two million to buy a 2600 with it as the pack-in, but ended up only selling about seven million. ET similarly had overexpectations.

Both games are okay, certainly there are far worse 2600 games, but they did contribute to Atari's downfall. I thought ET had a lot of good ideas, it's just that 2600 games aren't the best platform for that type of game.

 

1 hour ago, the_wizard_666 said:

As for the two NES games, they are more non-intuitive and confusing than actually bad. 

Friday the 13th is interesting, but has a few flaws. The map is TERRIBLE, and it's a little non-intuitive at first, but for a game based on that movie, I don't think you could do much better, especially since it does effectively do jumpscares. You round a corner in a cabin and Jason is right there, that's legit frightening.

Jekyll and Hyde, eh, the Jekyll sequences range from boring to frustrating. Hyde's gameplay is okay, but nothing to write home about. It's kind of novel to do the duality of man thing, but I wouldn't call it a "good" game. I kind of wish they kept the levels of the Famicom version in the US one, because some of the town stuff has some funny moments, like the two ladies throwing shit at each other.

1 hour ago, the_wizard_666 said:

In fact, I can't think of any NES game that would be universally reviled.

I dunno, Bill and Ted doesn't have a great reputation. X-men is janky as hell. Where's Waldo is pointless, though I don't think many played it back in the day.

I would say Dragon's Lair, but I know someone here actually loves that game. And apparently the PAL version is like ten times more playable.

Edited October 22, 2021 by Tulpa

[the_wizard_666 | 1,325]

2 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

They're both in the top ten bestselling Atari 2600 games (Pac-Man is #1, ET something like #8.) The big issue is that they overproduced them, especially Pac-Man. Atari/Warner counted on every single existing 2600 owner buy it, some ten million owners, and another two million to buy a 2600 with it as the pack-in, but ended up only selling about seven million. ET similarly had overexpectations.

Both games are okay, certainly there are far worse 2600 games, but they did contribute to Atari's downfall.

The last sentence is pretty much why neither fit the category.  OP is asking for the objectively worst game.  None of these games would count due to both not being terrible.

2 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

Friday the 13th is interesting, but has a few flaws. The map is TERRIBLE, and it's a little non-intuitive at first, but for a game based on that movie, I don't think you could do much better, especially since it does effectively do jumpscares. You round a corner in a cabin and Jason is right there, that's legit frightening.

Jekyll and Hyde, eh, the Jekyll sequences range from boring to frustrating. Hyde's gameplay is okay, but nothing to write home about. It's kind of novel to do the duality of man thing, but I wouldn't call it a "good" game. I kind of wish they kept the levels of the Famicom version in the US one, because some of the town stuff has some funny moments, like the two ladies throwing shit at each other.

Didn't know about the monkey behaviour in the Famicom version, and yeah, it's not an objectively good game, but it's certainly not the objectively worst game, even on the console.  As mentioned below, there are FAR worse games for the NES.

2 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

I dunno, Bill and Ted doesn't have a great reputation. X-men is janky as hell. Where's Waldo is pointless, though I don't think many played it back in the day.

I would say Dragon's Lair, but I know someone here actually loves that game. And apparently the PAL version is like ten times playable.

Bill & Ted isn't great, but again, it's not objectively terrible.  The isometric view makes the game pretty janky, but the core game seems to just need refinement as opposed to being objectively bad.  X-Men is horrid single-player, but when I was a kid it was a go-to rental when friends were around...can't be bad if a bunch of kids wanna play it right?  Where's Waldo does pretty much exactly what it sets out to do - it's actually pretty decent for what it is.  It just lacks the staying power to be worth playing repeatedly.  As for Dragon's Lair, it's not terrible either.  It's just balls hard.  It actually kinda captures the feeling of the arcade game on a system that is technically incapable of delivering the same gameplay, which is kind of an impressive feat if you ask me.  Can't comment on the PAL version though, as I've never played that one, but the US one is alright if you approach it as a quarter muncher rather than a straight action game.

Objectively speaking, I think on the NES I would probably count The Last Starfighter as my bottom pick, but even then I can't say for sure because I haven't played every game to have a fair assessment.  I also can't say it's outright terrible either...just not very good. 

[Tulpa | 3,492]

37 minutes ago, the_wizard_666 said:

  X-Men is horrid single-player, but when I was a kid it was a go-to rental when friends were around...can't be bad if a bunch of kids wanna play it right? 

It's a LITTLE better two player. But getting to the last level is messed up, especially with the hint on the cartridge WHICH YOU CAN'T SEE BECAUSE IT'S IN A CONSOLE THAT COMPLETELY COVERS THE GAME!

 

I'm okay, I really am.

37 minutes ago, the_wizard_666 said:

Where's Waldo does pretty much exactly what it sets out to do - it's actually pretty decent for what it is.  It just lacks the staying power to be worth playing repeatedly. 

Oh, I disagree. When I "find" Waldo (by randomly clicking), I still can't find him in the mess of pixels most of the time. That's pretty much failing the core gameplay.

Color a Dinosaur does what it says on the label. Same with Taboo, the Fisher Price games, and the Sesame Street games. I don't think Waldo quite does that.

37 minutes ago, the_wizard_666 said:

As for Dragon's Lair, it's not terrible either.  It's just balls hard.  It actually kinda captures the feeling of the arcade game on a system that is technically incapable of delivering the same gameplay, which is kind of an impressive feat if you ask me.  Can't comment on the PAL version though, as I've never played that one, but the US one is alright if you approach it as a quarter muncher rather than a straight action game.

Eh, it's got some really trollish positioning of some of the items (like the dagger on the way to Singe.) I think it's beyond balls hard to being actively hostile at points. That's not a good game to me.

The PAL version you're not moving like you're in molasses and you can actually anticipate some things rather than "Oh, I died there, okay, let me go, oh, that's death, too."

I understand the arcade version is that way, but that had FMV and gorgeous imagery and a hot babe.

37 minutes ago, the_wizard_666 said:

 

Objectively speaking, I think on the NES I would probably count The Last Starfighter as my bottom pick, but even then I can't say for sure because I haven't played every game to have a fair assessment.  I also can't say it's outright terrible either...just not very good. 

Yeah, that one might be my bottom pick as well. I mean, you can't shoot half the enemies, you fly way too fast, the homing mines troll you, you're a sitting duck on the landing sequence, and hell if I can understand the bomb setting minigame. It's the reason I'll never own all the shooters on the NES.

Edited October 22, 2021 by Tulpa

[mbd39 | 2,020]

If we count unlicensed then Action 52 is the objective worst hands down.

I've never played Ghostbusters on the NES, but that staircase section doesn't look fun at all.

[Tulpa | 3,492]

Oh, yeah, the staircase in Ghostbusters. Did anyone actually beat it the legit way without resorting to the glitch?

[Reed Rothchild | 9,520]

39 minutes ago, the_wizard_666 said:

OP is asking for the objectively worst game

I think he's asking what is "universally" considered the worst game.  So, what do the masses perceive.

[obnoxious | 107]

Where's Waldo (NES)

[the_wizard_666 | 1,325]

2 hours ago, Tulpa said:

It's a LITTLE better two player. But getting to the last level is messed up, especially with the hint on the cartridge WHICH YOU CAN'T SEE BECAUSE IT'S IN A CONSOLE THAT COMPLETELY COVERS THE GAME!

 

I'm okay, I really am.

As a kid, I don't think we ever actually beat a level, so that point was moot.  But the biggest problem with the code is that they fucked up and forgot to put part of the code on the label.  So even if you knew to check the label, you were fucked because the label was wrong!  But that isn't a game-level problem, that's a design flaw.

2 hours ago, Tulpa said:

Oh, I disagree. When I "find" Waldo (by randomly clicking), I still can't find him in the mess of pixels most of the time. That's pretty much failing the core gameplay.

Color a Dinosaur does what it says on the label. Same with Taboo, the Fisher Price games, and the Sesame Street games. I don't think Waldo quite does that.

 

I never had a problem with Waldo, although it got a bit tough near the end for sure.  But I had no trouble differentiating him from the surroundings.  I agree on the other games you mentioned - they all do what they were designed to do, and in most of those cases they actually did a good job of it. 

2 hours ago, Tulpa said:

Eh, it's got some really trollish positioning of some of the items (like the dagger on the way to Singe.) I think it's beyond balls hard to being actively hostile at points. That's not a good game to me.

The PAL version you're not moving like you're in molasses and you can actually anticipate some things rather than "Oh, I died there, okay, let me go, oh, that's death, too."

I understand the arcade version is that way, but that had FMV and gorgeous imagery and a hot babe.

That's the thing, it was designed to emulate the arcade experience, which it does well enough in that it's brutally difficult and requires straight up memorization to proceed.  The problem is, there's no save feature, and iirc it has limited continues.  If it had either a password/save function or unlimited continues (preferably both), it likely wouldn't have been so bad.  It  The goal of the arcade version was to drain quarters as quickly as possible, while keeping you engaged enough to keep plugging them in.  On the home market, you need to give the player a break.

2 hours ago, Tulpa said:

Yeah, that one might be my bottom pick as well. I mean, you can't shoot half the enemies, you fly way too fast, the homing mines troll you, you're a sitting duck on the landing sequence, and hell if I can understand the bomb setting minigame. It's the reason I'll never own all the shooters on the NES.

I hear ya.  I played a few hours, trying to give it a legitimate chance.  It's rare for me to not be able to find a redeeming quality in a game, but this one is on the list.

2 hours ago, mbd39 said:

If we count unlicensed then Action 52 is the objective worst hands down.

I've never played Ghostbusters on the NES, but that staircase section doesn't look fun at all.

We're absolutely counting unlicensed because they're games.  And taken for what they are, most unlicensed games are at least playable.  In the case of Action 52, there's a ton wrong with it, but taken for what it is (essentially a homebrew), and considering that most of the games only take minutes (if that) to get through, it's still a fun kitsch game to load up from time to time, even if only to mock how shitty it is.

Ghostbusters is a pretty solid game, except the stair sequence.  That part is balls.  The rest of the game though, I actually kinda dig.

[Tulpa | 3,492]

35 minutes ago, the_wizard_666 said:

I never had a problem with Waldo, although it got a bit tough near the end for sure.  But I had no trouble differentiating him from the surroundings.

You must have better eyes than I had, because I can't see a goddamn thing in that game.

35 minutes ago, the_wizard_666 said:

That's the thing, it was designed to emulate the arcade experience, which it does well enough in that it's brutally difficult and requires straight up memorization to proceed.  The problem is, there's no save feature, and iirc it has limited continues.  If it had either a password/save function or unlimited continues (preferably both), it likely wouldn't have been so bad.  It  The goal of the arcade version was to drain quarters as quickly as possible, while keeping you engaged enough to keep plugging them in.  On the home market, you need to give the player a break.

Eh, the main thing about the arcade game is that it's a joy to look at, even if the gameplay isn't all that great once you actually start to get into it. Plus, if you do figure out all the right moves, you can blow people away watching you skate through it. You don't have that in the NES version.

But even so, the PAL and (I just found out) the Famicom versions play much quicker. They're still brutally difficult, but they actually look fun to play. The Famicom version you can throw daggers like a mofo. The sluggishness of the US version just kills it. But that's more of a localization issue than the core game.

 

But at least we're on the same page with Last Starfighter. I also legit tried to give that game a chance (several times) and I just can't abide by it. It just pisses me off.

Edited October 22, 2021 by Tulpa

[peg | 370]

I think last starfighter is worse than just about anything on the nes.  I'm still not fucking sure how anyone has beaten it, seems straight up impossible.  Seriously, who is fucking beating this shit for the yearly thing?  The only video I could find was Mexican runner but he seemed to be abusing pause to slow the game down.  

[Sumez | 2,941]

13 hours ago, DefaultGen said:

I think LS gets some undue hate for being a default beloved NES game

Who the hell hates on Little Samson? I don't think it's a top NES game, but this is the frist time I've heard of anyone disliking it.

[the_wizard_666 | 1,325]

2 hours ago, Tulpa said:

You must have better eyes than I had, because I can't see a goddamn thing in that game.

Eh, the main thing about the arcade game is that it's a joy to look at, even if the gameplay isn't all that great once you actually start to get into it. Plus, if you do figure out all the right moves, you can blow people away watching you skate through it. You don't have that in the NES version.

But even so, the PAL and (I just found out) the Famicom versions play much quicker. They're still brutally difficult, but they actually look fun to play. The Famicom version you can throw daggers like a mofo. The sluggishness of the US version just kills it. But that's more of a localization issue than the core game.

 

But at least we're on the same page with Last Starfighter. I also legit tried to give that game a chance (several times) and I just can't abide by it. It just pisses me off.

Damn, that's a hell of a difference!  One of the rare instances where PAL-land didn't get screwed over Although it's looking like the Famicom version is a pretty solid choice too.  I don't think it's localization though...it would appear that the US version was released first, in December '90.  The Famicom version was released in September '91, followed by the PAL release in January '92.  So my guess is that they continued tweaking the game for the Famicom version, with a few more tweaks happening before the Euro release.  Kinda weird though IMO.

[mbd39 | 2,020]

8 hours ago, the_wizard_666 said:

We're absolutely counting unlicensed because they're games.  And taken for what they are, most unlicensed games are at least playable.  In the case of Action 52, there's a ton wrong with it, but taken for what it is (essentially a homebrew), and considering that most of the games only take minutes (if that) to get through, it's still a fun kitsch game to load up from time to time, even if only to mock how shitty it is.

Ghostbusters is a pretty solid game, except the stair sequence.  That part is balls.  The rest of the game though, I actually kinda dig.

I factor in that Action 52 originally retailed for $200 in 1991 dollars, so it was basically a scam. Today it's interesting as a collector's piece and it's fun to mess around with on an emulator, but at the time it was a total scam. Thankfully it didn't sell.

[cj_robot | 540]

EARTHBOUND

I'm pretty sure nobody likes this game. Even Nintendo's own marketing says, "This game stinks!" It doesn't get any more damning than that.

[Tanooki | 4,932]

And before that AVGN idiot it was the perpetual largely anti-Nintendo bullshit mill that was Exaggeration Gaming Monthly which taught an entire generation and more not to trust the media before the online stuff got patently bought off and stupid.  Lies as rumors, lies about what a game did or didn't do, if they preferred the competitor or hated a specific company (third party, etc.)  EGM was like gospel for shitting on stuff back in the 80s and 90s before online took off and people just ran with it, because if it was printed it was true.  Same dumb mentality for dinging Friday the 13th, the dim bulbs just switched from printed crap to video crap on youtube.

[T-Pac | 7,534]

On 10/22/2021 at 2:01 AM, Sumez said:

Who the hell hates on Little Samson? I don't think it's a top NES game, but this is the frist time I've heard of anyone disliking it.

There's a popular argument that Little Samson isn’t as good as its value and hype would suggest, which sometimes gets misinterpreted as “Little Samson is a bad game”.

-CasualCart
 

[Reed Rothchild | 9,520]

20 hours ago, Tanooki said:

And before that AVGN idiot it was the perpetual largely anti-Nintendo bullshit mill that was Exaggeration Gaming Monthly which taught an entire generation and more not to trust the media before the online stuff got patently bought off and stupid.  Lies as rumors, lies about what a game did or didn't do, if they preferred the competitor or hated a specific company (third party, etc.)  EGM was like gospel for shitting on stuff back in the 80s and 90s before online took off and people just ran with it, because if it was printed it was true.  Same dumb mentality for dinging Friday the 13th, the dim bulbs just switched from printed crap to video crap on youtube.

wut

EGM was gold in the late 90s.  By far the most reliable reviews.

[GPX | 1,369]

3 hours ago, Reed Rothchild said:

wut

EGM was gold in the late 90s.  By far the most reliable reviews.

EGM was gold in the early 90s, but I’m not sure about the late 90s as I had lost interest in them since the internet was becoming more accessible and the magazines were getting too damn expensive.