Talk:List of video games notable for negative reception/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

Deal or no Deal

(DS)

Average score is 22.4%. Highest score is 6/10, lowest score is 4/100. IGN and GameSpot both gave it a 1.5/10. Was runner-up for GameSpot's Worst Game of the Year 2007.

Excerpts from IGN:

• "When there is no real money involved, and you're not on TV with a former celebrity, the game isn't fun to play."
• "You know what else makes games not fun to play? When they're freaking broken! Deal or no Deal has the number values preset to certain briefcases, which means that every time the player turns the game on, the money is in the same damn briefcase. If you play multiple rounds without turning the system off, the game randomizes the cash values, but once you shut it down, the money goes back. Briefcase 3 always had the cool million, and Briefcase 13 always had the penny."
• "At least then Deal or No Deal would be a boring, pointless, annoying game. Instead, it's a boring, pointless, annoying game that is fundamentally broken and thus rendered completely absurd, much like Howie Mandel himself. To top it off, the game isn't even budget priced, making it an even worse deal." - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Those all look pretty good to me (for inclusion I mean), along with the aforementioned Action 52. But I guess we have to wait until we've decided what the title of the article is going to be before adding anything. Miremare 16:46, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

• They sound good...eh...bad enough to add here. Except Deal or no Deal, the score is only (below) average except two from IGN and GameSpot.
  • I don't know, I'm looking at the scores, and only two scores are above 29%. I mean, looking at the reviews, we've got one 4/100 score and three 1/10s. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Barney's Hide and Seek

Barney's Hide and Seek is notable for the extremely negative reception it has received from gamers. It is considered by many to be one of the worst video games ever made.

Does Barney's Hide and Seek deserve a place here?

Laughreach (talk) 15:30, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any links to reviews? Miremare 16:46, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Criteria?

I just removed following sentences.

Some games, in spite of technical excellence, still receive negative attention due to the hype and audience attention on the product prior to release.

Sound like "It's ok to add medicore (or even good) but disappoint game to the list". :p L-Zwei (talk) 15:47, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Action 52

Why was Action 52 removed? It was basically a bunch of unfinished games that appeared to be by students, but that were sold at an exorbitantly high price as if each game were full-fledged in itself. When it was on the article, it had some good citations. I'm of the view that if it had been sold cheaply and without denying what it was, it would have actually gotten praised for being shown the light of day, but instead, it was a swindle. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 13:26, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

• Last time I check, it isn't well-cited. And being 6th in some List of Ten Worst Games (one that has fact-citation) isn't enough for inclusion. We need to find one or two more reliable sources so it can be add back. L-Zwei (talk) 14:07, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Barney's Hide and Seek reviews

I found some on Gamespot

190.190.76.64 (talk) 00:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, reader reviews do not count. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:14, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

The reviews i said were for Miremare because, he or she asked if i got links to reviews. Well, Gamespot critics score is 4.0.

190.190.76.64 (talk) 19:27, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

They are NOT GameSpot critics, they are GameSpot members. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:34, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately we can't use reviews by users of the site; they have to be official reviews by the site in question to count. Cheers, Miremare 18:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

The only review on GameRankings for this game gives me a busted link to Sega-16. mattiator (talk) 02:56, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Bring back games

Bring back the games that were removed here. When a video game get's reception (if it's good or not), it shouldn't only count if a magazine, website, or just some other popular place reviews it. If a video game is given very negative reception from people but the notable critics are giving it good reviews, you're not just supposed to say "Reception, 10/10". Maybe we should have another article, "Video games notable for negative reception by People" so we can still have the other games?--Xxhopingtearsxx (talk) 18:50, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

No. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

All opinions have to come from reliable sources, rather than just people, otherwise there's no notability about the negative reception. Miremare 21:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

And generic people is N00BS :p . If you want more games, find some citable Japanese source, it will truly expand the scope of this list without violation (and it will make you cool as well :p). L-Zwei (talk) 05:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Generic people simply cannot be verified. If it's from a company, there's a trail that can be explained. If it's "people on this forum say THAT GAME JUST SUCKS", the entire time becomes a mess of arguments about what to include as well. At least, there's some way of saying "this specific person or thing said this." -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Why were many games removed from the list???

What's going on? Many games were removed from the list, including very poor games (examples: Bubsy 3D, Cassete 50, Count Duckula 2, Hotel Mario, The three CD-I Zelda games). And add The Simpsons Wrestling, The Simpsons Skateboarding, Donkey Kong Barrel Blast, Barney's Hide and Seek, Dragon Ball Z Ultimate Battle 22, and all you want to add. 190.190.76.64 (talk) 01:16, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

• Read this page, the answer is already there above. L-Zwei (talk) 03:04, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
• Lets see... Here's what I dug up on GameRankings:

Donkey Kong: Barrel Blast: 44% (Not low enough to be considered)

The Simpsons Wrestling: 41% (again, not low enough)

The Simpsons Skateboarding 38% (possible)

Bubsy 3D: 51% (Not a chance based on reviews, but it was listed on several "Worst Game Ever" lists)

Barney Hide and Seek: 40% (only one review, though...)

Dragon Ball Z Ultimate Battle 22: 32% (This is one of the few that should be on here)

Any I didn't list weren't on GameRankings. Of those, only ONE has bad enough reviews. mattiator (talk) 02:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn

Even though it received positive acclaim from critics, this is easily the worst Fire Emblem game ever.

Average score of 78%, highest score is 9.5/10, lowest score is 4/10. Could you add this one to the list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.164.189 (talk) 18:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

If it had consistently scored under 10% or something then probably, but 78% is a good score, therefore the game is unsuitable for this list. Cheers, Miremare 21:08, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Delete the article

Someone must bring back all games deleted from the list, or, I will nominate the article for deletion. But, someone can send me a message saying why some games are deleted. Thanks.Jejeman (talk) 19:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

So, you're nominating the article for deletion because it lacks unsourced content? - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

What would be your deletion rationale, Jejeman? Miremare 21:08, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Baroque (Wii version)

Average score of 54% (I think), with the highest score being a 78/100, and the lowest being a 3/10. Could you add this one please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.164.189 (talk) 21:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

1. Baroque really isn't that bad of a game.
2. If the lowest is a 3/10, that's not nearly bad enough, especially with a high of 78/100 (and another site giving it a seven). - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:04, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I personally own this game, and I enjoyed it. The real reason this game got poor reviews was because it was such a niche thing. IGN mentioned that if you hate rouge-likes, you will hate this game.

InuYasha: Secret of the Divine Jewel

This game received poor reviews from critics, bad enough to be one of the worst games for the DS. The enemy encountering is too frequent and the music is bad.

Average score of 49.8%, with the highest score being a 9/10, and the lowest being a 2/10. Could you add this one please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.164.189 (talk) 22:53, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Far too many okay reviews. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:56, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Nintendo Power gave it 6/10, clearly disqualifying it. Though they did comment it harkened back to the stone-age of the genre, but it wasn't completely awful. mattiator (talk) 02:44, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Hostile comments to editors

Nothing annoys me more than seeing comments like "YOU MUST NOT EDIT THIS ARTICLE WITHOUT DISCUSSING ARRRRGGHGHGHGGHGHG" at the top of an article. Please don't do it. Comments should be friendly and should accurately reflect policy. --- RockMFR 17:12, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe the note was added in an attempt to cut down on the likes of Sonic 2006 being re-added to the article every other day at a time when few editors seemed to have this on their watchlist, though it bore/bears little resemblance to your shouty all-caps example above, in either wording or intent. Miremare 13:17, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore, the request does not instruct editors to engage in discussion; it merely asks them to visit the discussion page. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 21:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Atari 5200 Joysticks

Although it's not a game, it is considered the worst and most hated controller of all time. Could you add this one to the list, despite the fact it's a controller?

It was ranked #6 on Gamespy's 10 Most Shameful Games of all time, even though it wasn't a game.

If it isn't a video game than it obviously shouldn't be included.--Megaman en m (talk) 19:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Not crappy enough...

I removed The Golden Compass.

Despite some quotes, the score bring it to mere "below average" category. "GameSpot rated The Golden Compass a 4.5 (out of 10) for the Xbox 360, PS3 and PS2, the Wii a 4.0 and the PSP with the worst with a score of 2.0. Nintendo Power rated the Wii version a 4.0." and "GamePro says that despite low-res graphics, sound effects, and clunky controls, the video game manages to capture the magic of the original source material; giving it a 3.75/5. (Feb. 2008 issue)"

There are two entries that need some discussion.

What about Hour of Victory? It does has some bad score and quote as "worst game". But Game Rankings's 37% based on 37 reviews. and Metacritic's 37 out of 100, based on 33 reviews. as well as IGN's 5.7 review, "Hour of Victory is a mediocre shooter with bad graphics and terrible multiplayer." Bring it to average/below average category.

Same with You Are Empty. Despite some catchy quotes and Gamespot's 1.5 score, Game Rankings's 40% based on 15 reviews. and Metacritic's 34 out of 100, based on 14 reviews. put in in bad but not utter crap category.

I would like to remove them but need to hear some opinion. L-Zwei (talk) 16:13, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Seems pretty compelling to me. Checking Gamerankings and Metacritic before adding anything to the list should probably be standard procedure. Miremare 13:17, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I would say pure **** would be under 20% from at least 3 trusted review sites --Numyht (talk) 18:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Chronological or alphabetic?

An anon user recently changed the list to alphabetic. I think the previous chronological format is the more useful, what do other editors think? Miremare 13:17, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed on your point --Numyht (talk) 18:47, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I've reformatted the list, and also removed the following entries for the following reasons:

• Turning Point: Fall of Liberty -- cited ign review was 5/10. Metacritic: 38/42/43 (PC/PS3/360), Game Rankings: 38.9/43.1/43.2 (PC/PS3/360). A below average game.
• You Are Empty -- Metacritic: 34/100, Game Rankings: 40%. Ditto.
• Hour of Victory -- Metacritic and Game Rankings: 37%. Scores range wildly for this one, from 5% by gameshark.com to 60% by several, 70% by gaming age, and 84% by PC Zone.[1]. Obviously a very divisive game, but not definitively bad.

I've also got doubts about these:

• Shaq Fu -- Generally regarded as one of the worst games ever, but has a Game Rankings average (from four reviews) of 45%. The article says it was described as "the worst game of all time" by Netjak, though the source actually says it is one of the worst. Of the six reviews cited by Game Rankings, only one of them (Netjak) rates the game at below 50%.[2]
• Spawn: The Eternal -- Has two references describing it as one of the worst games ever, but also a Game Rankings average of 42%.[3]

We need to agree on a definition for what makes a game "notable" for its negative reception. I would suggest that a game that scores 30% in a review is below average, possibly even terrible, but not by default notably so, and that games that score in excess of this on Game Rankings/Metacritic should generally be excluded from the article. In fact, I'd be in favour of a cap of 20% to make sure that we're just using the really terrible stuff. But whatever, until we come up with a definition, we will keep getting every game that scores 40% added to the list. Any suggestions? Miremare 13:35, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Dragon Ball Z Ultimate Battle 22

I think this game needs to be on this list. What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.164.103 (talk) 21:27, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "GSOver" :
  • Navarro, Alex ([[January 14]], [[2004]]) * It is one of the lowest-rated games on [[Metacritic]], with an average rating of 8 out of 100.<ref>[http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigrigsovertheroadracing Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing (pc: 2003): Reviews]. [[Metacritic]]. Retrieved on [[July 11]], [[2008]].
  • Navarro, Alex ([[January 14]], [[2004]]). [http://www.gamespot.com/pc/driving/bigrigsotrr/review.html Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing for PC Review]. [[GameSpot]]. Retrieved on [[May 25]], [[2008]].

DumZiBoT (talk) 23:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Crash Boom Bang

Should it be mentioned? go to the article of the game. I don't think the reviews are low enough so that the game can be mentioned here.--Megaman en m (talk) 00:19, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

Lead selection criteria

This article needs a lead section that explicitly defines what the selection criteria is for this list, as defined in WP:SAL. Novice editors unfortunately cannot be expected to equate the article title with the implicit requirements for a "notable negative reception". I think if written properly, it could cut down on some of the complaints of indescriminate editing; at least the indescriminate editing done in good faith. -Verdatum (talk) 22:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Crash Bandicoot: The Wrath of Cortex

Although the reviews arn't low enough, but this game is very notable because it introduced almost nothing to the series. --Angus Nitro 5 september 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the game, but on Wikipedia, "notable" is generally accepted to have a fairly specific meaning; namely, that it is significantly reported in independent reliable sources. This is not a list of lame video games. Based on this article title, the criteria to include a game on this list is that its notability is defined by way of the game's significant negative reception. -Verdatum (talk) 14:35, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Similar to DMC2, simply being disappoint (fine, but not great as previous title/reviewer expected) doesn't make it worth to add here. L-Zwei (talk) 03:01, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Who framed Roger Rabbit

I think this game needs to be on this list. What do you guys think? Nintendojo gave it a 0.7 out of 10. It was also criticized by the AVGN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.99.50 (talk) 21:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what Nintendojo is. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:09, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, since you mention "Nintendojo", I'm assuming you are referring to the Nintendo game with this title. There was also a separate PC game with the same title (It was also terrible, but I know nothing of the infamy of either). -Verdatum (talk) 14:59, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Nintendojo is a game site where critics preview, and review games released for Nintendo consoles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.99.50 (talk) 20:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

The Simpsons Skateboarding

I think this game needs to be on the list. It has an average of 38% at Gamerankings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.99.50 (talk) 23:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Jaws (NES version)

I think this game needs to be on the list. It was featured on X-Play's "Games that you should never buy". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.99.50 (talk) 14:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it was a miserable game, but if you want to get technical, X-Play doesn't really count for "reception", since that show began something like 20 years after the game was released. Perhaps you could fine additional sources? -Verdatum (talk) 14:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Action 52, Hotel Mario, etc...

Many people says that Action 52 must be added here. It must be added, many people called it unplayable, glitchy, etc. Hotel Mario and the three Zelda games must be added here, those games were called the worst CD-I games and the worst games of their series. Captain Novolin must be added here also, because, Seanbaby rated it as the 4th worst game of all time. I don't know, but I think that M.C Kids must be added here also, because, it was very difficult, and McDonalds didn't like the game.--Mangoman34 (talk) 01:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

• If you can add citation about that "many people", go ahead. L-Zwei (talk) 03:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I think a case could be made for the Zelda CD-I games at least. IIRC, the individual WP articles for those games had all sorts of sources discussing it's negative reception. (I only played the demo at a store for 5 minutes and that was enough to make my brain melt.) -Verdatum (talk) 15:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I know for a fact that IGN ran a story talking about just how awful those CD-I Zeldas were. If someone could dig it out of the hole so there could be some more sources, the case could be made. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 04:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I just added Captain Novolin to this list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirbyfan01 (talk • contribs) 20:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Bad Day LA?

This game doesn't belong here. All of the negative reviews came from reviewers who play nothing but FPS games & WoW. The voice acting isn't terrible, the AI doesn't suck, the gameplay isn't broken, & the graphics aren't even that bad. On top of that, a lot of gamesite reviewers & YouTube's popular this-game-sucks reviewers haven't bothered making videos about it because it just wasn't bad enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.236.142 (talk) 09:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

All that is just your opinion. And Youtube isn't an official soure, game reviewers (IGN, GameSpot etc...) are. This page is called "Video games notable for negative reception". Did it have negative reception? Yes so it belongs here.--Megaman en m (talk) 10:52, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

At least add "Action 52" to the list then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.236.142 (talk) 11:17, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

The problem with adding old games is that they don't have many reviews, which it needs to indicate that it's addable to this list. Back in the day reviews were done in magazines not on the internet so it's hard to find sources. If you find an official source, go ahead, add it.--Megaman en m (talk) 13:09, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Archive?

This page is getting pretty long. Can anyone archive the dead topics?--Megaman en m (talk) 10:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Yep. Will do. - X201 (talk) 13:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

 Done - X201 (talk) 13:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone have any objections to me setting this page up to be auto archived by a bot? - X201 (talk) 13:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't.--Megaman en m (talk) 17:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Night Trap

I think this game needs to be on the list because it was raanked 12th place on "Seanbaby's 20 Worst Games of all time". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirbyfan01 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

• 12th from 20 list alone isn't notable enough, more source need. L-Zwei (talk) 17:19, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't find reviews of it, so it doesn't have enough sources.--Megaman en m (talk) 17:39, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Skiing game

There was a game on the Playstation2 that was based on skiing: I'm sure it had a famous person's name in the title, but I can't think for the life of me who it was! It would be a few years old by now, but PSW Magazine gave it 1/10 ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by JaffaCakeLover (talk • contribs) 20:28, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Sonic Genesis

Sonic Genesis links here, but it's not on the list. It has a 33 on Game Rankings and 33 on Metacritic. I don't know if that's low enough, what do you guys think? The game IS virtually unplayable after all, but do you think it's notable enough to add? 69.182.107.94 (talk) 13:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

The link was removed, but I think it should be re-added and this game added to this article. 69.183.15.38 (talk) 17:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Daikatana

Why isn't Daikatana on here? // 128.113.228.45 (talk) 02:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

One reason could be that while people recognize it as not a very good game, its reviews were not very low. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:54, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

CD-i games from The Legend of Zelda series

I suggest this be added, as it is consistently cited as being three of the worst games ever made. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 06:57, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Got any sources? (Don't say the AVGN since he "reviews" games for entertainment, not professionally.)--Megaman en m (talk) 10:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Offhand, Seanbaby. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:22, 9 December 2008 (UTC)