Most underrated video games

Have a video game or or VG review? This is the place to to discuss it! We also accept discussions of board games and the like, but SHHH! Don't tell anyone, OK?

Postby Fish and Chips » Thu Jan 22, 2009 8:18 pm

Shiningmonk_e (post: 1283339) wrote:I'm not sure if I would consider Earthbound/Mother to be underrated, I think NOA just hates us and won't bring it here. Okami is definitely underrated and sadly didn't sell well. And where is my new Viewtiful Joe?!
600,000+ copies is not selling well?
User avatar
Fish and Chips
 
Posts: 4415
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 2:33 pm
Location: Nowhere.

Postby Shiningmonk_e » Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:56 am

CAPCOM said they wouldn't make a sequel until it sold better.
"Who is this?" they said to Me
'That the wind and waves obey
Come, let's hang Him on a tree
That His reign should pass away'
But here I am I say to you
Though you turn away, it is My will
To love you for forevermore
Peace be still, peace be still
-Showbread-the Sky(alpha)
User avatar
Shiningmonk_e
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:23 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby Nate » Fri Jan 23, 2009 11:51 am

The sales were only poor in Japan, where the game only sold about 66,000 copies. In North America, the game sold over 200,000 copies (PS2).

The Wii version has sold 280,000 copies in North America and Europe, I have no sales figures for the Wii version for Japan. Anyway, as I said. The game sold poorly in Japan, but not America. Plus, as I said, add it up and Okami has sold at least 540,000 copies.

Over half a million copies isn't record-breaking, but it's certainly not poor. Let me put it this way. The PS2 "Greatest Hits" collection are games that have sold one million copies. One million is considered a Greatest Hit.

Okami has passed the halfway mark to a Greatest Hit. You cannot, CANNOT classify that as poor. If one million is enough of a rousing success to classify it as a Greatest Hit, then OVER HALFWAY TO THAT is not poor. Period. End of story.
Image

Ezekiel 23:20
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 10725
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Oh right, like anyone actually cares.

Postby Shiningmonk_e » Fri Jan 23, 2009 2:53 pm

Oh ok, I had just heard that and didn't know the exact stats but that doesn't stop it from being a great game ^_^
"Who is this?" they said to Me
'That the wind and waves obey
Come, let's hang Him on a tree
That His reign should pass away'
But here I am I say to you
Though you turn away, it is My will
To love you for forevermore
Peace be still, peace be still
-Showbread-the Sky(alpha)
User avatar
Shiningmonk_e
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:23 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby Felix » Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:03 pm

Okay, my picks would be Jet Set Radio Future (not sure if that's exactly an underrated one, but it seems obscure to me, so maybe), Team Buddies, Riviera: The Promised Land, Yggdra Union, Metal Arms, Beyond Good and Evil, um... oh and Kaboom! on the Atari!
User avatar
Felix
 
Posts: 2098
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:00 am
Location: Unemployed in Greenland

Postby Etoh*the*Greato » Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:28 pm

Nate (post: 1283579) wrote:The sales were only poor in Japan, where the game only sold about 66,000 copies. In North America, the game sold over 200,000 copies (PS2).

The Wii version has sold 280,000 copies in North America and Europe, I have no sales figures for the Wii version for Japan. Anyway, as I said. The game sold poorly in Japan, but not America. Plus, as I said, add it up and Okami has sold at least 540,000 copies.

Over half a million copies isn't record-breaking, but it's certainly not poor. Let me put it this way. The PS2 "Greatest Hits" collection are games that have sold one million copies. One million is considered a Greatest Hit.

Okami has passed the halfway mark to a Greatest Hit. You cannot, CANNOT classify that as poor. If one million is enough of a rousing success to classify it as a Greatest Hit, then OVER HALFWAY TO THAT is not poor. Period. End of story.


The catch is, Capcom closed the studio responsible for Okami shortly after the game's PS2 release. The odds of a sequel were further diminished by that.
"I do not feel obliged to believe that that same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use." - Galileo Galilei
ImageImageImageImage
Image
Image
User avatar
Etoh*the*Greato
 
Posts: 2618
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:46 pm
Location: Missouri

Postby KeybladeWarrior » Thu Feb 05, 2009 9:18 pm

Would Odin Sphere be underrated? I want to say the Phoenix Wright games, but they are rather really well known. The games are just a pain to find.
@)}~`,~ Carry This Rose In Your Sig, As Thanks, To All
The CAA Moderators.

"YEAH TOAST! TOCAA!"
User avatar
KeybladeWarrior
 
Posts: 1176
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:04 pm

Postby TriezGamer » Thu Feb 05, 2009 10:37 pm

This ... Pong ... wow. This may be the most awesome thread ever.
Embraced by a gentle breeze, my heart breaks as I think of you.
All alone at the top of the hill, I watch as the seasons go by.
--
Wishing for courage softly, I pray.
There's no going back now, to those tender days when you held me in your arms.

MOES "I can has Sane Sig now?"
User avatar
TriezGamer
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 12:54 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Postby S.M.O.G. » Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:46 pm

Any Pokemon that can be played on a GBC...
User avatar
S.M.O.G.
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 6:56 pm

Postby Peanut » Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:11 pm

...please tell me you are joking S.M.O.G.
CAA's Resident Starcraft Expert
Image

goldenspines wrote:Its only stealing if you don't get caught.
User avatar
Peanut
 
Posts: 2432
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 5:39 pm
Location: Definitely not behind you

Postby S.M.O.G. » Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:49 pm

That was a very important part of my childhood!!
User avatar
S.M.O.G.
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 6:56 pm

Postby goldenspines » Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:51 pm

S.M.O.G. (post: 1289978) wrote:Any Pokemon that can be played on a GBC...


If a game is underrated, it means that the game received horrible ratings, but you liked it anyways.
Every single Pokemon GBC game ever made always received at least a 7 or more in a 1 to 10 rating system. Meaning, it wasn't very underrated. ^_^
Image
User avatar
goldenspines
 
Posts: 4869
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:42 am
Location: Up north somewhere.

Postby Nate » Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:11 am

Yeah, in fact, I hear most people say that the original Pokemon games were better than the new ones (which is completely and totally false but still). I'd say they're overrated rather than underrated.
Image

Ezekiel 23:20
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 10725
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Oh right, like anyone actually cares.

Postby Peanut » Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:29 am

S.M.O.G. (post: 1290051) wrote:That was a very important part of my childhood!!


Same...and that's why I asked if you were joking mostly because of what everyone above me has said. You can't even say that Pokemon on the GBC was underated in the public eye either because it was insanely popular when it first came out. Of course, if you were talking about today...then you may have a point...a point which will suddenly make me feel old...
CAA's Resident Starcraft Expert
Image

goldenspines wrote:Its only stealing if you don't get caught.
User avatar
Peanut
 
Posts: 2432
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 5:39 pm
Location: Definitely not behind you

Postby Scarecrow » Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:58 pm

Hotel Dusk Room 215 for the DS... have you heard of it? Didn't think so. I found the game by accident but it is a great mystery/detective style game that takes place in a mysterious Hotel that has connections to you're characters past though you (he) doesn't know it. As you start going around and talking and meeting people in the hotel, more details about the main characters past are revealed and why the character you play is no longer an officer. The game is extremely dialog heavy and I don't find a lot of the puzzles to be very challenging but it's probably one of my favorite DS games. It has this whole comic book with a noir feel to it and you even play the DS like you're reading it like a book. Pretty cool. Totally underrated.
"Take me down, shake me out. Give me a brain, that I might know You better"
User avatar
Scarecrow
 
Posts: 1354
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:05 pm
Location: California

Postby Shiningmonk_e » Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:53 pm

I've really been wanting to get my hands on a copy of Hotel Dusk. It looks cool.
"Who is this?" they said to Me
'That the wind and waves obey
Come, let's hang Him on a tree
That His reign should pass away'
But here I am I say to you
Though you turn away, it is My will
To love you for forevermore
Peace be still, peace be still
-Showbread-the Sky(alpha)
User avatar
Shiningmonk_e
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:23 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby S.M.O.G. » Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:27 pm

@goldenspines GBC Pokemon could get 11 out of 10 and still be underrated.

@Nate, Back in my day, we didn't have that fancy wifi* or hi-res graphics. We had to work to complete our Pokedex, a feat I am yet to acomplish after at least ten years. And the graphics and music were 8-bit, but that's what we loved about it. We didn't have crzy bad guys trying to reform the world, Team Rocket was smart enough to know the best the could do was (almost) get rich. We didn't need a super deep battle system, what we had was great for in game and battleing the nieghborhood kids.* And the Pokemon designs were just plain cool.

Our education was better too. We had to take rambaling classes, which I passed with flying-type colors.

*I do admit the deeper battle system and wifi battling is are a great combination.
User avatar
S.M.O.G.
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 6:56 pm

Postby Nate » Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:32 pm

Actually Pokemon could get an 8 out of 10 and still be overrated.

I'm sorry, did you just say "Back in my day" to me? Did you not notice where my age says 28? Are you aware that means I was a kid before the Nintendo Entertainment System (the 8-bit system) existed? That I grew up on the Atari 2600? So much for your rant about "high-res graphics." The graphics aren't even the reason the original Pokemon games are overrated. Let me get into this and school you, SON, since you're probably ten years younger than me if not more.
We had to work to complete our Pokedex, a feat I am yet to acomplish after at least ten years.

You had to work to complete it? HOW? In Pokemon Red and Blue, EVERY Pokemon is available in some form between the two games. Compare that to Diamond and Pearl, where some Pokemon DON'T EVEN EXIST in those games. For example, you'll never find a Tropius or a Tangela in them, no matter how hard you look. You'll never find a Bulbasaur, ever. The only way to get them? Play one of the Game Boy Advance games and use Pal Park to transfer them over. So in order to get every Pokemon in Diamond and Pearl, you have to play, at a MINIMUM, FOUR other Pokemon games. And I don't mean "Play for ten minutes to get one Pokemon," I mean you have to play FOUR OTHER GAMES for at least 50 hours to get every Pokemon in Diamond and Pearl.

And guess what? There's no Rare Candy cheat to get 255 Rare Candies like there was in the original Red and Blue. So oops guess I destroyed that statement since all you have to do is surf up the side of Cinnibar Island and your Pokedex is basically done. REAL HARD.
We didn't have crzy bad guys trying to reform the world, Team Rocket was smart enough to know the best the could do was (almost) get rich.

Then what was the purpose of Mewtwo, who was created by Team Rocket? Also did you somehow miss all the Grunts talking about how Team Rocket was trying to achieve world domination through brute force? I guess you did.

Now, let's get to why the original games are overrated.

First, Special Attack and Special Defense were only one stat: Special. What this meant was that it didn't allow for variation between Pokemon...in other words, a Pokemon with a low Special not only couldn't utilize Special attacks well, it couldn't TAKE Special attacks either. The split in Generation II allowed for some Pokemon (such as Chansey) to have a massive Special Defense stat, but hardly any Special Attack. This also gave Fighting types a chance, since almost all Fighting types in the original games had horrible Special, giving them horrible defense against Special type attacks.

Second. Psychics were gods. This destroyed any challenge in the game. The only things strong against Psychic types are Ghosts and Bugs. The problem is, in Red and Blue there's only three Ghost Pokemon: Gastly, Haunter, Gengar. They're all three part Poison, so guess what? Psychic is super effective against them, meaning they get KOd immediately...not to mention that there's only ONE Ghost type move that deals damage, Lick. And Lick is too weak to do anything.

As for bugs? Most Bug types were part Poison, or so weak that it was pointless to use them. There was only ONE Bug type move that did damage...Pin Missile. Guess who learned it? Well, Beedrill...who was part POISON and thus got KOd by Psychics in one hit, and there was Jolteon, who wasn't even a Bug type. Pin Missile also wasn't that strong, by the way...a base attack power of 14. Meaning it did crap damage. It wasn't until Generation II that Dark and Steel types were introduced to make Psychics balanced, which included strong Dark type moves, more Ghost type moves (like Shadow Ball), and stronger Bug moves (like Megahorn).

Third. Dual types. Find me a single Grass-type in the original games that isn't a dual type. Tangela's the only one, and guess what? It barely learns any Grass type moves, not to mention you get it so late in the game. As already mentioned, there were no pure Ghost types in the original games, meaning Ghosts got destroyed by Psychics. Since there weren't any Abilities, Koffing and Weezing and Gastly didn't know Levitate...meaning Ground moves could hit them for super effective damage.

Fourth. Useless TMs. In the original game, guess what TM you get for beating Brock? Bide. Bide is such a worthless move, and to get a TM for it was ridiculous...especially since Brock is a Rock type trainer, for him to give you a Normal TM move? In the new games, guess what TM Brock gives you? Rock Tomb, a Rock type move that's actually useful. Plenty of useless TMs in Generation I, like Horn Drill and Fissure (one hit KO moves suck), and a TM for Softboiled, a move which only THREE Pokemon can learn...two if you don't count Mew.

My dislike for the original two games isn't based on "high-res graphics" or "stereo sound" or any of that mess. It's based on the fact that the Pokemon were unbalanced, there wasn't enough variation between them, making battling very difficult. If you had a team of nothing but six Alakazams in the original games, you would destroy everything. Nothing could stop you. In the new games, if you have a team of six Alakazams, you'd get destroyed by Steel and Dark types.

So again, the reason the original Pokemon games are overrated is because of horrible balance issues. It hasn't aged well. They were fun FOR THE TIME but they haven't held up. The Gold/Silver/Crystal games show their age, but they were the first to make the system workable, and thus while not amazing, are quite good, and still very fun and playable. The ones for GBA and beyond are simply fantastic...a good challenge with deep battling strategies, something the originals sorely, sorely lack.
Image

Ezekiel 23:20
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 10725
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Oh right, like anyone actually cares.

Postby S.M.O.G. » Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:34 am

The "Back in my day" line was a joke, as I was ranting on how the old games are superior. And no, I did not toice your age, ya old coot (kidding).

About the pokedex, I was reffring to the fact that now we have wifi and the gts, making it a lot easier.

I did forget about the stuff you mentioned about Team Rocket, but they stil were not trying to reform the world.

I guess the game was unbalanced, but ten years ago, none of that mattered to me. I didn't even know what the stats did.

I loved the atmosphere of the GBC games, I liked R/S/E just as much, but it was complely different (probably just the nostalgia, which I guess is what I love about the origanals). But I think it's kinda sad when the best addition to D/P is online battling.

Personally, I think multiplayer was improved when third gen became deeper, and when fourth added wifi, though I didn't enjoy singleplayer in D/P nearly as much as anything before.

You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to mine, though if we're gonna continue this discussion, we need to watch it since we're getting close to flaming. Or we can just agree to disagree.

As I end up saying at the end of just about all my posts, sorry for rambling.
User avatar
S.M.O.G.
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 6:56 pm

Postby goldenspines » Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:12 pm

Hopping back on topic, Pokemon still isn't underrated in the sense of the correct definition of the word. All the versions were very high rated for their day and still are today(just look at any gaming review site).


But to add another game to the list though, I think the remake of Sonic Adventure 2(Battle) on the GC was somewhat underrated(it got something of a 6.5 out of 10). I enjoyed it just as much, if not more than the Dreamcast version.
Image
User avatar
goldenspines
 
Posts: 4869
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:42 am
Location: Up north somewhere.

Postby Nate » Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:51 pm

S.M.O.G. wrote:And no, I did not toice your age, ya old coot (kidding).

That's right, you young whippersnapper! Get off my lawn! *shakes cane*
About the pokedex, I was reffring to the fact that now we have wifi and the gts, making it a lot easier.

I would count that as making it easier to complete the Pokedex, but there's one thing you forget. If you haven't SEEN a Pokemon, you can't ask for it on the GTS.

In other words, you can't ask for a Celebi, a Raikou, or a Chikorita unless you have seen one...and remember, battles in the Battle Tower or over WiFi do NOT add Pokemon you see to your Pokedex.

Meaning you STILL have to play through FOUR other games to fill the Pokedex, even with the GTS.
I did forget about the stuff you mentioned about Team Rocket, but they stil were not trying to reform the world.

If that were true, why were they forcing Magikarp to evolve into Gyarados at the Lake of Rage? I know that's actually from the G/S/C games, but it's still Team Rocket.
But I think it's kinda sad when the best addition to D/P is online battling.

Actually there was one addition that was the best to D/P/Pt, that you probably don't know about. That would be the Physical/Special split.

What I mean is this. Before D/P, every move used a certain stat to base its attack power off of. Ice, for example, always used the Special Attack stat, and Fighting always used the Attack stat.

This meant that Hitmonchan was always useless, as even though it learned moves like Ice Punch, Fire Punch, Thunder Punch, it had practically no Special Attack, meaning those moves were unbelievably weak (since they were all Special moves). It also meant that Pokemon like Alakazam, with a phenomenal Special Attack, could use Ice Punch to deadly effect.

However, in D/P, this all changed. Now, moves could be Physical OR Special in addition to their type. What this meant is, Ice Punch, even though it had previously used Special Attack, now was a Physical type move and now went off Attack.

This meant Hitmonchan, with a high attack, can now destroy teams with its elemental punches, because now they go off Attack rather than Special attack. This also means however that Alakazam, having a horribly weak attack, can no longer use Ice Punch effectively.

And every move has at least one Physical/one Special type move. Yes, that means there are Physical type Psychic moves (such as Psycho Cut or Zen Headbutt) and Special type Fighting moves (like Aura Sphere and Focus Blast).

The Physical/Special split helped out some Pokemon (Hitmonchan ESPECIALLY, since it was never a contender in earlier generations due to its low Special Attack), and also screwed over some Pokemon (the aforementioned Alakazam no longer being able to use elemental punches). At any rate, the split makes for enormous amounts of strategy and even deeper battling, and was certainly the best part of the fourth gen games.
Image

Ezekiel 23:20
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 10725
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Oh right, like anyone actually cares.

Postby Peanut » Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:24 pm

Correct me if I'm wrong Nate, but during your "The Original Pokemon games are overated" I think you forgot to mention that in the original games, if you raised a Pokemon purely with Rare Candy it would be just as strong as a Pokemon which was hand raised (or at least I think that was a problem in the original Blue and Red). Of course, you did sort of mention it by bringing up the item duplication cheat and ultimately your rant was target at both B/R/Y and G/S/C...so not mentioning it probably wasn't a big deal...

Nate (post: 1290483) wrote:So again, the reason the original Pokemon games are overrated is because of horrible balance issues. It hasn't aged well. They were fun FOR THE TIME but they haven't held up. The Gold/Silver/Crystal games show their age, but they were the first to make the system workable, and thus while not amazing, are quite good, and still very fun and playable. The ones for GBA and beyond are simply fantastic...a good challenge with deep battling strategies, something the originals sorely, sorely lack.


This is actually on topic so I'm going to say it anyway. I think it is important that we take into account the context of the time in which these games were released when we consider whether they were overrated or underrated. The truth is some games don't age well, Pokemon is a very good example of this. At the time it was released, you couldn't really say that the GB/GBC Pokemon games were overrated. For the time they were good games that created a genre, however nowadays, as much as I loved the original games, I have to agree with Nate and say that you can argue that they are overrated. The truth is, the games had flaws, and those flaws have since been fixed with the more recent Pokemon games. Because of this you can claim, reasonably that the more recent Pokemon games are better then the original games.

I guess what I'm trying to say, is that for some games, as time goes on, the rating that they once recieved goes down as technology improves and gameplay issues are fixed. This should be expected in a buisness where gameplay is affected by technology. Therefore, perhaps it would be better for us to judge games in the context of the time they were released as apposed to comparing them to games released several years after their release.

goldenspines wrote:But to add another game to the list though, I think the remake of Sonic Adventure 2(Battle) on the GC was somewhat underrated(it got something of a 6.5 out of 10). I enjoyed it just as much, if not more than the Dreamcast version.


I agree...Sonic Adventure 2 (Battle) for the GC was the last good 3D Sonic game I played and I actually thought it was a decent game...nothing spectacular but still pretty good.
CAA's Resident Starcraft Expert
Image

goldenspines wrote:Its only stealing if you don't get caught.
User avatar
Peanut
 
Posts: 2432
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 5:39 pm
Location: Definitely not behind you

Postby Shiningmonk_e » Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:16 pm

goldenspines (post: 1290550) wrote:But to add another game to the list though, I think the remake of Sonic Adventure 2(Battle) on the GC was somewhat underrated(it got something of a 6.5 out of 10). I enjoyed it just as much, if not more than the Dreamcast version.


Personally, I think most modern Sonic games are overrated (except the 1st 360 one...ugh). I have found unleashed quite fun despite the terrible reviews. Still though, the old Sonics were way better but I just think the new ones deserve more credit. Sonic and the Black Knight looks like it could have some potential too.
"Who is this?" they said to Me
'That the wind and waves obey
Come, let's hang Him on a tree
That His reign should pass away'
But here I am I say to you
Though you turn away, it is My will
To love you for forevermore
Peace be still, peace be still
-Showbread-the Sky(alpha)
User avatar
Shiningmonk_e
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:23 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby S.M.O.G. » Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:01 pm

I would count that as making it easier to complete the Pokedex, but there's one thing you forget. If you haven't SEEN a Pokemon, you can't ask for it on the GTS.

In other words, you can't ask for a Celebi, a Raikou, or a Chikorita unless you have seen one...and remember, battles in the Battle Tower or over WiFi do NOT add Pokemon you see to your Pokedex.

Meaning you STILL have to play through FOUR other games to fill the Pokedex, even with the GTS.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you do a wifi trade through the pokemon center, you don't have to have seen it. Therfore, it is easier for forum dwelling nerds like us.

I count the special/physical split as partof the deepening of the battle system. Although I haven't spent as much time on D/P as I have on past games, so I don't have as much experience with playing after the split. I lost my copy of Diamond when I was on the champion battle, and am stilol only halfway through Pearl.

[qoute]If that were true, why were they forcing Magikarp to evolve into Gyarados at the Lake of Rage? I know that's actually from the G/S/C games, but it's still Team Rocket.[/quote]

And if memory serves, TR was evelvoing magicarp so they could use them to continue their plan of world domonation through brute force.

I guess what I'm trying to say, is that for some games, as time goes on, the rating that they once recieved goes down as technology improves and gameplay issues are fixed. This should be expected in a buisness where gameplay is affected by technology. Therefore, perhaps it would be better for us to judge games in the context of the time they were released as apposed to comparing them to games released several years after their release.

Like I said, I prefer the old games, but that's just my opinion, and alot of it is the nostalgia value.
User avatar
S.M.O.G.
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 6:56 pm

Postby Fish and Chips » Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:15 pm

I recently replayed my copy of Pokemon Red, with the express purpose of completing the pokedex I never could as a child. Fueled chiefly by a fond nostalgia and a greater appreciation of tactics than when I was a kid, I started a couple weeks back.

Two weeks ago I finished my game, and I am probably never going to touch it again, or at least not for some time.

The sheer amount of busywork in the game, grinding levels for pokemon I'd never use; if it wasn't for the Cinnibar Island glitch I would have given up (without which the only realistic alternative is to fight the Elite Four a million times with low level pokemon in tow just for the experience). I actually even started "Enjoying" how overpowered Psychic-types were because I could plow through battles I found annoying without a second thought, which was a lot of them. Not to mention terrible item inventory. And the Safari Zone, the Safari Zone.

The game is at its essence an RPG, and the measure of a bad RPG is too much grinding and not enough thinking. Pokemon is incredibly guilty of this. It's ultimately a very mediocre and tiresome experience.

And as a side note, I have not played any of the Pokemon games since Yellow, excepting fiddling around with Gold for maybe ten minutes, so this isn't my opinion watered down by later titles in the franchise. I am comparing the game against itself.
User avatar
Fish and Chips
 
Posts: 4415
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 2:33 pm
Location: Nowhere.

Postby Midori » Mon Feb 23, 2009 12:31 am

Lester The Unlikely.
User avatar
Midori
 
Posts: 1805
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 6:43 pm
Location: Mingling with local sentients

Postby Nate » Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:57 am

S.M.O.G. wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you do a wifi trade through the pokemon center, you don't have to have seen it.

Yeah, that's true. I was talking about the GTS. To request a Pokemon on the GTS, you need to have seen it. Wifi trades work just like regular local trading, though.
Peanut wrote:Therefore, perhaps it would be better for us to judge games in the context of the time they were released as apposed to comparing them to games released several years after their release.

I have mixed feelings about this.

On one hand, I want to say, that a good game will remain good no matter how long it's been since its original release. Super Mario Bros. 3, for example, is still the best Mario game, and it's been almost 20 years since it came out. Age hasn't affected it one bit, it's still fantastic.

On the other hand, some games were amazing at the time, but as the games went on the originals became tiresome. The Zelda games are a good example of this. When the original Legend of Zelda came out, there was quite simply nothing else like it, and it created a new IP for Nintendo to perfect. Nowadays however the original LoZ just doesn't seem as good. It's one of those "You had to be there" type deals. It isn't a bad game, it just shows its age.

So I think both statements are true. I think that there are some games that you can't appreciate unless you're around at their release, but, at the same time, I still DO think a truly good game will always be truly good, no matter how long ago it was released.
Image

Ezekiel 23:20
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 10725
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Oh right, like anyone actually cares.

Postby Alexander » Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:07 pm

Image

Limited to 12,000 copies. Released on a system that no one cared for. If it had come out for the PSX, it would have been regarded as the greatest RPG of the 32-bit era.

It's unfair to say it was underrated, considering how little praise there was was positive. Although, I have yet to meet anyone besides Saturn elitists who've played this game completely.
<img src="patent pending.jpg"></p>
<p>Signature in progress</p>
User avatar
Alexander
 
Posts: 877
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:42 am
Location: Sometimes I wish I honestly knew.

Postby Heronwing » Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:00 pm

The Fire Emblem series. It has deep, interesting storylines, awesome characters, incredible music, and the gameplay's a blast. I played Sacred Stone when it first came out, and I've been obsessed ever since. XD
Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles used to be majorly underappriciated, but fortunately, it's its own side-series now.
The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap is my favorite Zelda game, but it's been overshadowed by the other games for the most part.
I know that a lot of people hate Pokémon Channel, but I think it's fun.
Luigi's Mansion. It was nice to see Luigi be in the lead for once.
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets for Game Boy Color was the first game I ever owned, and I still play it a lot.
Pokémon Crystal. This game NEEDS a remake for DS.
That's it... I think. XD
User avatar
Heronwing
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:14 pm

Postby Akira Takahashi » Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:02 am

Games that deserve better:
ICO
Shadow of the Colossus
Breath of Fire
Fire Emblem (although it seems to be gaining a bit of attention now)
Endless Ocean

Some games that deserve to be underrated:
Red Steel
Dragon Blade: Wrath of Fire
Sea Monsters: A Prehistoric Adventure (but the film is great)
"People who sin say this: that they had to, to survive. People who sin say this: that it's too late now to stop. The shadow called Sin dogs them steadily from behind, silently, without a word. Remorse and Agony are repeated, only to end up at Despair in the end. But the sinners just don't know, that if they'd only turn around, there is a light there, a light which keeps shining on them ever so warmly. A light that will never fade." -- Vash the Stampede
Akira Takahashi
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:18 pm
Location: Minnesota

Previous Next

Return to Video Games and VG Reviews

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 88 guests