We're all always talking about how all these games don't deserve to be forgotten, how they don't get the credit they deserve etc. Now let's hear a few games of which you think the opposite is true: everybody seems to love them, but you just can't understand why. Basically, I see two different categories:

Games which undeservedly got good reviews when they were new
Rise of the Robots: The classic example of an overhyped game which many magazines just seemed to adore - ignoring the fact that it's utterly unplayable.
Command & Conquer: I'm not trying to start yet another 'is RTS strategy' discussion here. What I'm trying to point out with this entry is how most gaming magazines here in Germany apparantely wanted to compensate for rating Dune 2 'too low' (common view in the mid-90s) by giving out insane marks to its only slightly changed sequel.

Games which have a huge cult following nowadays
Cannon Fodder: Somewhat nice shooter with some well-made attempts at humor, but nothing more.
Simon the Sorcerer: Above-average Adventure game, but largely dominated by forgettable attempts at humor in the tedious dialogues, pixel-hunting and a story so obviously ripped from Monkey Island that it hurts.
Moonstone: Interesting non-linear epic for an action game, but what's left if you subtract the gore?
Populous 2: A game I really like very much, but doesn't the endless 'flattening' of the land get on your nerves, too?
Zak Mc Kracken & the Alien Mindbenders: Fits perfectly in both categories. Excellent and funny beginning, then quickly degrading into a series of endless mazes.

Please note that I haven't included many games which I basically consider crap. King's Quest and Lotus are too obvious to even mention on such a list. I also don't like the whole RPG genre, so any game of it is overrated to me - but I simply acknowledge that the inner beauty (or whatever it is) of the genre escapes me, rendering the individual games pretty much immune to my judgement. And so on and so on...

Edited by Mr Creosote at 15:42 on September, 21st 2004

Once again, I have to completely disagree with you on C&C. C&C completely deserved it's reviews, and it was a wonderfull game. Unlike the newest games following it (Red Alert and up), you actually had to think about the composition of your army because cash was not infinite. It wasn't also easy to win a map by making only one type of units unless you are talking about the most high tech units, and those took a long time to produce because of all the side buildings you had to build before reaching them.

I think the only "RTS" better than C&C is Starcraft (without expension).

I had C&C and it honestly bored me to tears. Pounding on the stupid build button was so dumb. Plus it had that "feature" that I hate: All computer players team up on the human player. How lame.

Another game I did not like was Speedball. Way too overrated.

As I said, the actual quality of a game isn't the point of this thread. A game can be excellent, but still be overrated (see my examples again).

Speedball (especially the second part) indeed can be considered overrated. It's exactly one of these cases: I absolutely love the game, but how it's generally talked about if it comes up in discussions is.... a little silly.

- Turrican: Mostly referred to as a classic, it's not more than an average platformer for me.
- Sudden Strike: I was not able to get into that game after several attempts. Horrible controls, no tutorials or easy mission to start with. No idea why this has been such a succesful game.
- Super Metroid: Similar to Turrican. A fair platformer that is sometimes considered the best SNES game ever.
- Any Sierra adventure I played (tried to play). Ridiculous.
- Last Ninja series: Quite popular as a "typical" C64 game in spite of being unfair.

Definitely agreed on Turrican, but I didn't want to be the one to throw it into this thread, too, myself I haven't played Super Metroid and Last Ninja enough to judge them fully, though they both didn't seem too appealing. What's Sudden Strike, though?

Mario Bros: Another average platformer that was succesfully marketed into overhype. It was more about the Mario Shampoo and things than the actual game.

Tuss: In C&C, you only have one computer playing against you whatever happen... Really makes me wonder if you are really talking about the right game.

I am talking about the scrimmage mode. I remember this game because it was so terrible every time I tried to play it, much like you'd remember eating out of the trash or something when you were a kid.

Excuse my stupidity, but what would be the "scrimmage" mode?

I know C&C like the back of my hand. No idea of what you are talking about.

Agreed. Definately average gameplay. Music on the other hand....



No way!!! Expecially Last Ninja 3! Sure it was difficult as hell, but who cares, thats part of the challenge, I love it

It's the mode where you fight like 8 computers at once or whatever and they all attack you. It stinks.

....stinks?

Silly of me to expect a German would have good taste in music.....you need your government to decide what you should and shouldnt listen to

Yeah, ok, sorry for not listening to 90s-Techno 'music'

Tuss: There is no such mode in C&C. There is, on the other hand, such an option in Starcraft where you can play against 7 other computers. But then again, it never been refered as "scrimmage", at least in the game itself.

I think that you could not even play against a computer in "multiplayer" mode in C&C, if I remember well. You had to play the missions to do that.

Okay, my terms were wrong. I loaded up the game and it's called "Skirmish". Sorry for not having 100% correct memory about things.

Here's another one: Lionheart. Hugely hyped at its time for having amazing graphics (in spite of having shit graphics). That urban legend lasts until this very day. Not to mention the average-average gameplay...

Edited by Mr Creosote at 19:37 on September, 23rd 2004

Did anyone overrate Lionheart AFTER it's release? This could happen in previews perhaps but I doubt any reviewer would have the balls to like it

Graphics are a bit on the kitsch side but not shit, flawed maybe for not having a style.

Yes, most magazines did, and many people still do today.

Acceptable compromise