So, it has been a pretty busy year already for gaming and the biggest releases are still a couple of months away. So I'm asking you, what have been your biggest disappointment in terms of games, game tech, DRM announcements, game shows in the year so far from January?

Test Drive Unlimited 2 was the game I was most disappointed in, though thats not to say its completely bad; on the contrary, I thought it was great, but I expected a slicker experience than the first but unfortunately it was a little messy, especially on the online side of things, which has remained buggy and unpredictable since the launch. Also, I thought the addition of a 'story' and voice acting was terrible and was never needed. I still enjoyed the game immensely, but most things I liked about the first had somehow dissapeared and made for a more generic experience.

I was also dissapointed with New Vegas (which I purchased this year because of mountains of school work around it's launch and Christmas) but again not hugely so. The game was solid, more challenging than F3 (almost ridiculously so with them Deathclaws) but lacked the atmosphere and wonder of the DC wastes of F3. I praise Obsidian for creating a much more 'Fallout-ty' experience and the plethora of factions, reputation paths and choices make for great replay values and more character customisation than F3 (where there was only ever need for one or two characters without mods). Good game, but its lack of atmosphere put me off playing it to the point in which I still have not finished it :sadvaultboy: on the plus side though, the glitches were no different to what I expected from the new Fallouts.

edit: bolded key word, to avoid confusion over title

Dungeon Siege III- Terrible, incredibly short, still can't believe I wasted money on it.

Dragon Age II- Incredibly bad, rushed product, terrible design choices.

My biggest disappointment so far is that I bought Deus Ex: Human Revolution - Augmented Edition instead of just the regular edition. I don't think the extras added anything of value so it was a waste of money.

Another thing that was a waste of money was that I bought GTA4 cheap earlier this year. Decided to give it a try as the only GTA I've played before is GTA2, but I didn't like GTA4 at all.

The poor PC port of From Dust was disappointing as well. I had looked forward to that game, but I have yet to buy it because of all the bad things I heard about it. Same with Mega Man Legends 3 being cancelled and Dragon Quest X being an MMO.

There are some other games I've heard bad stuff about too, like Dragon Age 2, but I wouldn't call those things very surprising so they aren't really disappointments for me. Dragon Age 2 is cheap now, but I don't think I will bother to buy and play it anyway.

Not sure... Still haven't had the chance to open some of them, so nothing so far for me.

Oh ya now I remember

3DS and the nintendo console lineup looks dead to me.

Dragon Age II - I was only able to complete one play through. I've tried more, but I get so bored I can't do it.
Duke Nukem Forever - Loved the old ones, this one was just blah.

L.A. Noire - The only game I've played this year that I was disappointed in. It just wasn't what I was hoping for back when I saw the original trailer and I admittedly didn't do enough research of my own before buying it.

Other than that, a handful of announcements weren't any fun: Wii U's announcement (E3 in general was just awful), Mega Man Legends 3's cancellation, Dragon Quest X being an MMO.

The Witcher 2. They jumped the dumbing down bandwagon.

I'm disgusted with what I've heard about Dragon Age II, am disappointed in how DragonQuest X is a Wii and WiiU exclusive game and worse, that it's an MMO, and I'm disappointed in all the seemingly 360-exclusive focus for Skyrim.

Dragon Age II, Brink and L.A Noire. DA II an L.A. where both games I expected the world of.DAII was a huge bust and no where near the quality of the first.Noire had its highs and lows and ended up being a 7/10 when I expected at least an 8.Brink was just simply bad and unejoyable but than again I didn't expect much in the first place.

It's a toss-up between Dragon Age II and Origin's rather over-reaching EULA. Seems the nasty EA of old is back to stay.

New Vegas. Please Beth, don't let anyone else do the Fallout franchise again.

Disagree strongly. Obsidian did Fallout much better than Beth did(Save for the bugs). But that's to be expected from the staff of the studio that actually created the Fallout series.


The steamworks announcement for Skyrim bummed me out. Now I'll be waiting until it drops to $20 or less. Already doing the same for Deus Ex...

I don't know I found FONV to be quite an enjoyable experience. However it did not live up to my expectations like when I played FO3. That game just blew me away and really caught my attention drawing me to the franchise. With FONV it had the elements but it felt a little too open in some areas while in others it felt really linear which displeased me. FO3 had that spark where I could wander around find a mission then say "LETS ROCK" doing it.

In NV I felt stuck being forced to go from one area to another if I wanted to progress instead of seeing that open ended style of play that I saw in FO3.

Mass Effect 2. Couldn't stand playing it for more than 10 minutes. At least I got it for free for buying Dragon Age 2 (which was also a huge disappointment).

Agreed 100%, but whenever someone brings up this topic it always turns into a battle of "Obsidian vs. Bethesda".

Haven't got a new game yet this year so none yet

No disappointments so far but I haven't played many new games this year anyway

Umm.. All games so far? Because I have not bought a new one as of yet.

Is this the part where I point out that Fallout 1 and 2 were done by Black Isle and not Bethesda?

I'm just saying. FO3 is great and all, but the franchise certainly didn't originate there. Looking at it statistically, the majority of the games in the franchise were in fact done by someone other than Bethesda.

Edit: And to be on topic, I'd say my biggest disappointment of the year has to be Crysis 2. Not that it's a bad game, but sweet Jebus, the bugs. Crossfire glitches (which may or may not be fixed yet) made it so I couldn't run the game fullscreen unless I fancied giving myself a seizure. Then I had to stop playing the game because of a glitch that made buying the Nanosuit upgrades impossible, which made the game far harder than it needed to be. And then I had to stop playing the game again because of an audio glitch on the "Semper Fi or Die" level...well, you try playing it http://youtu.be/VdP7Gv1EyYU. (FYI, the NPCs shouting that seemingly in your ear are probably about five miles away during that point in the level. Or dead.)

Supposedly that last glitch got fixed in the last patch, but...meh. By then I'd moved on to other games and still haven't had the enthusiasm to go back and finish the game.

...Also I happen to disagree with all the retconning their new writer did to sledgehammer the story to fit his preferences. I also disagree with making the game's save system all checkpoint based. WHAR QUICKSAVE. WHAR.

Yes...... i know. And this is where it devolves into what TeeHee was saying about vs. Just know that Beth resurrected a dead series and did it better than anything before it. Now you may rebuttal with anything else, I am dont commenting on FO3 v NV bliviongate:

I recently finished "Clive Barker's Jericho", and though it wasn't that bad as a shooter (I liked the ability to switch control among the squad members, which reminded me of playing Ghost Recon), the ending was anticlimactic and rushed -- probably intended to set up a sequel.

I thought "Dragon Age II" was a lot better than I've heard; maybe gamers shouldn't judge it unless they play it at least once through to the end. The main plot twist caught me by surprise and added genuine tension to the game IMO. This sequel didn't have the "magic" of the first game, I'll admit, but it had its moments.

I disagree 110%.
But yeah, just Dragon Age 2 and Duke Nukem Forever.

NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN
Please don't present your opinions as facts.

Wasn't attempting to start a versus internet argument, just pointing out that the way you phrased that last post implied that Bethesda was the sole creator of the Fallout franchise, which it is not.



That's not a "know" thing, that's an opinion thing. One I happen to disagree with wholeheartedly, because despite being part of the same franchise I think it's an apple vs. oranges thing to compare FO3 to the first two games. FO3 is first/third person free-roamer with sandbox style gameplay. Fallout 1 and 2 are isometric RPGs without a sandbox, but which stand up on strong storylines and more linear gameplay.

Both are good. Neither is inherently "better" than the other.

Wow, I almost had a heart attack when I read that, then calmed down when you mentioned it was just the extras that disappointed. I must be quite the DX fan to react like that. :sweat:

... :stare: