• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

Most overrated game?

Antronach

Bringin' sexy back~
Final Fantasy 7 is overrated and still overpriced.

Gotta agree woth this. It's atmosphere is brilliant but 10 felt more worthwhile than that, even when you play through the game again.

Another game I gotta say is clunky and hard to handle is Super Mario Kart. Tried this game again and holy crap overturning is too easy, especially when you're trying to keep your top speed.
 

SirRob

Well-Known Member
  • The game is slow. Like, really slow. A lot of areas seem large and open for no particular reason other than they are (Hyrule Field is a vast expanse of nothingness and Link moves extremely slowly; Epona was obviously created specifically to help with this). This is a huge reason why I haven't been able to get into the game.

Games do this deliberately so you have more time to take in the environment/atmosphere. Lots of games do this.
Also, stay far away from Wind Waker.
 

Runefox

Kitsune of the PC Master Race
Another game I gotta say is clunky and hard to handle is Super Mario Kart.
I tried playing this again recently and I couldn't get it. Doing power slides makes you swoosh around in a completely non-intuitive way; Instead of maintaining momentum, you just start skidding off to the side. It's hard to explain exactly, but it feels like you attach to an imaginary circle and just start moving along it regardless of where you were actually going. I wouldn't be surprised if this is actually what happens when you start a slide in SMK.

Personally... And I'm going to take some heat for this... I think Symphony of the Night is overrated. I understand that it revitalized the series and started the Metroidvania 'genre' that I happen to love, but beyond the hilarious voice acting, I just didn't really like it very much. Alucard was a wholly uninteresting player character, and the game felt really padded out. It was also a pretty dick move to start Alucard out superpowered and then remove all that, leaving you with a butter knife. It was bad enough that the intro sequence gets you accustomed to Richter's gameplay style, but then when you think you've got the hang of Alucard, lolnope. I just feel like they had the concept and they really pushed that, but didn't really spend much time polishing it.

EDIT:

Games do this deliberately so you have more time to take in the environment/atmosphere. Lots of games do this.
Yeah, and I hate it when games artificially pad their content. If you want me to take in the environment, make the environment interesting to look at or focus on it in the gameplay. In OoT's case, it's not. Boring me into looking at the scenery is a shitty way of doing it.

Also, stay far away from Wind Waker.

I hate Wind Waker for a number of reasons.
 
Last edited:

Arshes Nei

Masticates in Public
Games do this deliberately so you have more time to take in the environment/atmosphere. Lots of games do this.
Also, stay far away from Wind Waker.

Yet a 2 hour game of Journey does this so much better.
 

SirRob

Well-Known Member
Yet a 2 hour game of Journey does this so much better.
I wasn't specific enough... What I meant was, games with an overworld typically make you move through it slowly the first time, and then you're given the option to move faster through it (a la Epona) after you've become familiar with the overworld's layout.
The reason the overworld is large when you're on foot is to make it seem expansive, but when you get Epona, you're able to get where you need to go pretty easily-- without making the overworld feel like it's too small. I think it's a good size, honestly...
 
Last edited:

Maolfunction

Resident Feline
I would say that OoT doesn't stand up for a number of reasons:

  • The game is slow. Like, really slow. A lot of areas seem large and open for no particular reason other than they are (Hyrule Field is a vast expanse of nothingness and Link moves extremely slowly; Epona was obviously created specifically to help with this). This is a huge reason why I haven't been able to get into the game.
  • The graphics are just bad. They didn't hold up to the test of time, and even the 3DS remake and emulation texture mods don't really do much to fix that. It really shares this flaw with the NES Zelda; I really agree with Rob on that one. It's just really crude.
  • The presentation kind of sucks. At no point when I play it do I actually feel like I'm invested in what I'm doing. That said, I barely managed to drag myself through the opening quest to get the sword and shield, because frankly, I was bored to tears. Compare the opening of OoT to the opening of LttP. In OoT, you wake up, stumble out of bed, get told that a tree wants to speak to you, and before you're even allowed to go see it, you have to jump through hoops. In LttP, you wake up, stumble out of bed, and head straight to the castle on a rescue mission with awesome music and a dark atmosphere, and you're given your equipment right away when you get there. Adventure! You start off the game by saving Zelda. Right off the bat, you've got a sense of accomplishment and foreboding that keeps you interested.

I would say Majora's Mask did it better, but it still suffers from a number of the same problems. Personally, I've found it incredibly difficult getting into any of the 3D Zelda titles as a result.

World of Warcraft and MMO games in general are the very definition of overrated.

Thank you for being willing to talk.

Now then, I disagree with your point about Hyrule field having nothing in it. It's chalk full of stuff. Hidden fairy grottos, Lon Lon Ranch, and enemies that actually serve a purpose once you get to Adult Link. Link does move slow, but the field is not nearly as large or empty as say Twilight Princess. That Hyrule Field is absolutely huge and it absolutely has nothing in it. There's no incentive to explore it other than bugs and Poe souls. It takes about three minute to walk across the whole length of OoT's field. It takes upward of seven to fifteen to walk across TPs whole field as human Link. And since you can get Epona pretty much immediately after you become Adult Link, a lot of the game doesn't have this issue.

Again, I hate using graphics as a point because it doesn't effect the game play. I understand that it can be a personal point, but it's unfair to judge OoT objectively on such a subjective point of view.

And I don't understand your point of presentation. Getting the sword and shield presents you all the basics of the game outside of explicitly telling you everything in a dialogue box. You learn as you play, not learn as you're told. Remember, when this came out people were still unfamiliar with moving in a 3D environment so they needed to have a stage where people could get familiar with it.

But even then, you're in the first dungeon within an hour at most if you're really bad at the game from the start. With Twilight Princess or even Skyward Sword it takes a good three or four hours before you get to the first temple. That's bad pacing. OoT, on the other hand, starts with trouble, has you attempt to save a protector of the forest, has you fail to show you how powerful an opponent you're facing, then throws you in an environment much much larger than Kokiri Forest. I think it presents itself very well for a game displaying the power of a three dimensional world.

Though I'm curious, you don't think ALttP slows down a lot after the initial contact with Zelda?
 
Last edited:

chocomage

Member
I would like to throw out there that pokemon (any of the games) is more over rated than OoT. I personally know several people that dropped enough cash to buy a 3ds just to play the latest pokemon game, then haven't played it since. When the 3ds rerelease of OoT came out I knew no one that went and bought a 3ds to play it.
 

Dire Newt

Avatar by Zenia
Here's a few more...
Ffxboxart.jpg
kingdom_hearts_box_art.jpg
The_Elder_Scrolls_V_Skyrim_cover.png


That's right, come get me.
 
Last edited:

Arshes Nei

Masticates in Public
I would like to throw out there that pokemon (any of the games) is more over rated than OoT. I personally know several people that dropped enough cash to buy a 3ds just to play the latest pokemon game, then haven't played it since. When the 3ds rerelease of OoT came out I knew no one that went and bought a 3ds to play it.

You're comparing apples to oranges. The latest Pokemon is a new game, so therefore hasn't been even rated yet. Whereas OoT was already played by the fans. It makes no sense to make a comparison that way as people are willing to play a new game over a re-release.

Do I find both games overrated? Yes, but if people want to go out and play the newest game and are willing to buy a system for it, that's not so much overrated, vs saying "Pokemon is the best game in existence"

There is a difference between saying "this is one of my favorite games to play" vs "game of all time" If a game doesn't hold up well - it's not an "all time" game and is definitely overrated.

I find all the GTAs over rated.

I also find games overrated where during the game play it tells you how you have to press a button, and I don't mean as a tutorial mechanic. But God of War and Heavy Rain are guilty of this.
 

chocomage

Member
The 3ds rerelease of OoT also featured master quest only released 1 other time in the US on a very limited edition.
 

Runefox

Kitsune of the PC Master Race
Now then, I disagree with your point about Hyrule field having nothing in it. It's chalk full of stuff.
I would disagree with that.

Hyrule_field.jpg


Again, I hate using graphics as a point because it doesn't effect the game play. I understand that it can be a personal point, but it's unfair to judge OoT objectively on such a subjective point of view.
Well this is about opinion. But the graphics of OoT have always seemed crude to me, in particular the character models. This has a lot to do with the N64's weak texture handling (a whopping 4KB of texture cache), and Mario 64's models were done the same way; Non-textured, shaded polygons. Mario Kart 64 was done with sprites because of it as well.

And I don't understand your point of presentation. Getting the sword and shield presents you all the basics of the game outside of explicitly telling you everything in a dialogue box. You learn as you play, not learn as you're told. Remember, when this came out people were still unfamiliar with moving in a 3D environment so they needed to have a stage where people could get familiar with it.
Actually, I recall seeing lots of signposts that told you exactly what to do during the tutorial part, and they really could have made it less obtuse. Where LttP starts you off with a sense of urgency, OoT has a lazy atmosphere about it.

But even then, you're in the first dungeon within an hour at most if you're really bad at the game from the start. With Twilight Princess or even Skyward Sword it takes a good three or four hours before you get to the first temple. That's bad pacing.
I would argue that all of those are examples of bad pacing, with TP and SS being particularly egregious examples. Stepping out of the Zelda franchise, games like Skyrim start you off with a frantic opening sequence that also gets you used to moving around in the game world without being boring or holding your hand.

OoT, on the other hand, starts with trouble, has you attempt to save a protector of the forest, has you fail to show you how powerful an opponent you're facing, then throws you in an environment much much larger than Kokiri Forest. I think it presents itself very well for a game displaying the power of a three dimensional world.
Actually, that part of the opening isn't even brought up until well after the tutorial parts. It doesn't really have a sense of urgency from the get go.

Though I'm curious, you don't think ALttP slows down a lot after the initial contact with Zelda?
It loses its sense of urgency, but at the same time it liberates you and lets you explore your surroundings. You're still a wanted criminal and your uncle's been killed. There's still unresolved conflict and the game pushes you in that direction as a result. Not to mention it's much faster to move around on the overworld, so exploration doesn't really feel much like a chore by comparison. I would say you could essentially cross much of the overworld in the time it takes you to cross Hyrule Field in OoT.

Here's a few more...
The_Elder_Scrolls_V_Skyrim_cover.png


That's right, come get me.
I agree with the others, but would disagree there. Maybe overhyped, but the game is pretty beautiful if you ignore the standard Bethesda bugs. Though, after the first couple of 'quests' in the intro, the game does kind of leave you to your own devices.
 

Judge Spear

Well-Known Member
Mario Kart is and always will be trash. The driving mechanics are garbage and the stupid skilled player punishing "ERRYBUDDY SHOOD WIN" philosophy creates a chaotic utterly broken kart racer. I can name SOOO many others that do the job better but Mario Kart will sell based on name alone.

And Touhou sucks also. Everything about it. I suppose that's why no one but a few are actually a fan of the GAMES rather just the copy pasta stupid ass lolis.
 

CaptainCool

Lady of the lake
I would disagree with that.

That is one of those things that I just don't get... People always say there is so much to do in the game but the overworld is freaking empty o_O There are a few sidequests that make you run all over the place but that's it! There is something to do at the hotspots of the game but other than that there is jutst nothing there...
It's like an atom. There is a lot of stuff in the center and you have stuff surrounding the center. There is quite a lot there but that doesn't change that an atom is 99.9% nothing :p
 

Imperial Impact

The Imperial Juicer

SirRob

Well-Known Member
Driving felt great in Mario Kart DS and Wii... the level of control you get in those games spoiled me from playing other racing games. Honestly... I question the whole casual aspect, 'cause there were plenty of people who curb stomped me consistently, and I played -a lot-.
 

Judge Spear

Well-Known Member
Ok, DS was good. I always forget that one.
Wii and DD though are the worst driving mechanics I've experienced since Forza. And that game was like driving on candlewax with ice tires. lol
I found them to play PAINFULLY atrocious.

But I've seriously played better kart racers in my time.
 

Schwimmwagen

Well-Known Member
Space Invaders is outdated as hell, I can't stand it and how so many games copy the stupid idea of hitting moving targets. That shit gets boring quickly.
 

SirRob

Well-Known Member
Huh, maybe it was just the vehicles you used, Pachi. I didn't notice much of a control difference between DS and Wii, unlike 64 and DD which were worse. I always use Toad though, so it might only be due to that.
 

Imperial Impact

The Imperial Juicer
Video games are overrated.
 

Dire Newt

Avatar by Zenia
I agree with the others, but would disagree there. Maybe overhyped, but the game is pretty beautiful if you ignore the standard Bethesda bugs. Though, after the first couple of 'quests' in the intro, the game does kind of leave you to your own devices.

My issues with the game are not from a graphical standpoint, it's more about the gameplay. I don't like the Elder Scrolls leveling system in the first place, but it's especially broken in Skyrim. The perks are terribly unbalanced and it is extremely easy to overpower your character, even unintentionally. Quests and dungeons felt samey and there were few that really stuck with me as memorable. Really, I think my biggest problem with Skyrim is how repetitive it is. It's one of those open world games that focuses on quantity rather than quality.
 

Fernin

6150 rpm and spinning.
Driving felt great in Mario Kart DS and Wii... the level of control you get in those games spoiled me from playing other racing games. Honestly... I question the whole casual aspect

Forza, iRacing, Gran Turismo, The F1 games, and many other dedicated racing sims would VERY much like to educate you on the error of that statement. Mario Kart has all the good control and gameplay of a bus in foot deep mud.
 
Top