The single worst decision in gaming history

[SigilFey]

Ah. very true - selling games alongside trinkets and figurines will probably never go away. Also I forgot about Limited Run Games.

My favorite iteration of this was when a buddy bought the "Limited Special Edition" of some game (can't remember which one it was -- I think it was a Halo game) and it came with a big box. Inside was a gorgeous figurine, a couple smaller figurines, holograms, a keychain, cloth map or flag or something, a collector's coin, a t-shirt, etc., etc, etc....

...and a nicely printed card with a code that they could use to download the game.

 

[the_underw0rld]

Paying for Destiny 2

 

[quintivarium]

To me the worst thing that ever happened to computer gaming was the spread of 3-D graphics in the late 1990's to early 2000's. It's not that there is anything inherently wrong with 3D, it was that -- to me at least -- it represented a shift from priority on gameplay mechanics to priority on game cosmetics. At the time, the 3D games required much more up-to-date computer systems to run, consumed many more resources, slowed game play, and were often buggy. And, for me at least, the games were a lot less fun. And my game purchases went from about 30 a year to one every 2 years.

 

[lyin321]

To me the worst thing that ever happened to computer gaming was the spread of 3-D graphics in the late 1990's to early 2000's. It's not that there is anything inherently wrong with 3D, it was that -- to me at least -- it represented a shift from priority on gameplay mechanics to priority on game cosmetics. At the time, the 3D games required much more up-to-date computer systems to run, consumed many more resources, slowed game play, and were often buggy. And, for me at least, the games were a lot less fun. And my game purchases went from about 30 a year to one every 2 years.

Sure, but it was a phase that had to happen and more importantly has passed. You can't expect technology to just stop evolving

 

[quintivarium]

Sure, but it was a phase that had to happen and more importantly has passed. You can't expect technology to just stop evolving

It's not the evolution of technology that was the problem -- it was the shift in priority for games. I don't see that that shift has reversed itself since.

 

[lyin321]

It's not the evolution of technology that was the problem -- it was the shift in priority for games. I don't see that that shift has reversed itself since.

Fair enough. What games are you thinking of this 'golden time'? Because I am pretty sure something like tyranny or pillars of eternity is as good, but who knows

 

[Spectral_Warrior]

Worst gaming decisions in history?
I have a few
A small one that bugs me very much: the 'deletion' of a proper map and objective HUD in Mass Effect 2 (and 3 to some extend) I'm not usually a shooter-type of player but I serious hate not havi g a normal minimap/radar.

But that small. Here comes the big ones
- C&C4, for EVERYTHING they did in that game. Its a complete and utter trashpiece on every level. Graphics, gameplay, 'RTS', story. All of it. And as a player who much loved C&C3: KW, it made me angry.
- Anthem, but only because I'v heard about what shitshow it was. It was amusing to me how it failed epicly, seeing its an EA thing.
- Fallout 76, particulairly the first 18 months. I actually watched many Jim Sterling video for the fun of seeing him shit on the game and Bethesda. I cancelled a preorder for this game when I saw the direction it went in.
- The approach Bungie took with Destiny 2 in how the game you got 3 years ago basically doesn't exist anymore for a returning player. The currently playable content contains absolutely zero of what I have played and its impossible to revisit the old campains. Its like buying a Tshirt that has a giant hole hole in both the from and back and misses its sleeves.


And then a biiiig gap...

 

[quintivarium]

Fair enough. What games are you thinking of this 'golden time'? Because I am pretty sure something like tyranny or pillars of eternity is as good, but who knows

The two examples that come to mind (I remember them because they were games I played a lot — as opposed to the many I tried and trashed) of games I loved but were ruined in later editions by a switch to three D graphics were Master of Orion and Heroes of Might and Magic.

The original Master of Orion was perhaps the first game I purchased when I finally got a computer with graphics capability. I played it for years, appreciating the unique abilities of the different sides, the simple planetary development, the ability to design my own space ships with the systems I wanted, etc. I was very excited for MOO 2, but it was a disaster. The turns were tedious. Planetary development was enriched, but really just made complicated and limited rather than interesting. The stupid graphics would take 15 minutes to load and were unimpressive. The game was very buggy until a patch. And it featured a multiplayer mode that was unplayable because probably 90% of the turns involved literally doing nothing (waiting for planetary structures or ships to be built, or for ships to travel).

Even worse was what happened to Heroes of Might and Magic. I got a trial version of the original on a demo disk that came with a magazine, loved it, and bought the full version. I was a little slow to switch to HOMM 2 because of how much I liked the original, but HOMM 2 was clearly, and even came with a map making tool. But it wasn’t until HOMM 3 that I came to really appreciate the art of map making. HOMM 4 introduced major changes to the game; many players deserted this version, complaining about changes they didn’t like and/or a much weaker strategic AI. (The combat AI remained very good). But I still loved the game. I appreciated a map maker where I could program objects. And while I missed the old game I could always go back to it.

HOMM 5 introduced 3D graphics — and was dreadful. HOMM 3 and 4 maps were beautiful pieces of art, HOMM 5 maps were a jumbled attempt to turn something by its nature 2D into a 3D experience. Instead of simply moving from place to place, or swiping a curser to find hidden passages and objects, you had to continually adjust camera angle, zoom in and out, and other tedious nonsense. It was very hard to get a sense of the world as a whole. Even worse, the original HOMM 5 did not even include a map maker (it was cut so they could focus on the graphics). When one was released in a patch, it was virtually unusable without a PhD in CS. It had no intentional user interface and no instructions. When I finally did figure it out, I realized it was worthless. While the HOMM 4 AI was weak, HOMM 5 AI was nonexistent. (I believe they programmed specific responses for the developers maps rather than a generic AI for any map.) It was literally impossible to create a map in which the AI functioned. The game was transmuted from a creative and intellectual masterpiece to a limited playtime, semi tedious blip. I think I briefly tried HOMM 6, but have never been interested since.

 

[lyin321]

The two examples that come to mind (I remember them because they were games I played a lot — as opposed to the many I tried and trashed) of games I loved but were ruined in later editions by a switch to three D graphics were Master of Orion and Heroes of Might and Magic.

The original Master of Orion was perhaps the first game I purchased when I finally got a computer with graphics capability. I played it for years, appreciating the unique abilities of the different sides, the simple planetary development, the ability to design my own space ships with the systems I wanted, etc. I was very excited for MOO 2, but it was a disaster. The turns were tedious. Planetary development was enriched, but really just made complicated and limited rather than interesting. The stupid graphics would take 15 minutes to load and were unimpressive. The game was very buggy until a patch. And it featured a multiplayer mode that was unplayable because probably 90% of the turns involved literally doing nothing (waiting for planetary structures or ships to be built, or for ships to travel).

Even worse was what happened to Heroes of Might and Magic. I got a trial version of the original on a demo disk that came with a magazine, loved it, and bought the full version. I was a little slow to switch to HOMM 2 because of how much I liked the original, but HOMM 2 was clearly, and even came with a map making tool. But it wasn’t until HOMM 3 that I came to really appreciate the art of map making. HOMM 4 introduced major changes to the game; many players deserted this version, complaining about changes they didn’t like and/or a much weaker strategic AI. (The combat AI remained very good). But I still loved the game. I appreciated a map maker where I could program objects. And while I missed the old game I could always go back to it.

HOMM 5 introduced 3D graphics — and was dreadful. HOMM 3 and 4 maps were beautiful pieces of art, HOMM 5 maps were a jumbled attempt to turn something by its nature 2D into a 3D experience. Instead of simply moving from place to place, or swiping a curser to find hidden passages and objects, you had to continually adjust camera angle, zoom in and out, and other tedious nonsense. It was very hard to get a sense of the world as a whole. Even worse, the original HOMM 5 did not even include a map maker (it was cut so they could focus on the graphics). When one was released in a patch, it was virtually unusable without a PhD in CS. It had no intentional user interface and no instructions. When I finally did figure it out, I realized it was worthless. While the HOMM 4 AI was weak, HOMM 5 AI was nonexistent. (I believe they programmed specific responses for the developers maps rather than a generic AI for any map.) It was literally impossible to create a map in which the AI functioned. The game was transmuted from a creative and intellectual masterpiece to a limited playtime, semi tedious blip. I think I briefly tried HOMM 6, but have never been interested since.

Haven't played Master of Orion so I won't comment on that, but from your HOMM example, it sounds like your problem is more with the direction its developers decided to take it rather than anything else. Interesting that your problem is with HOMM 5 and not 4 btw. Most people (imo) have problems with 4, as that took the series in an entirely different direction with how your 'hero' was suddenly a unit and units ability to move around the map without a 'hero'.
Anyway, my point is that I can't see how the advance in 3d is a bad thing (other than when it came to the earliest tries, such as NVN1 where the game was in a weird place not looking as good as the 2d games before it and not having something of worth to show for that).

 

[quintivarium]

Anyway, my point is that I can't see how the advance in 3d is a bad thing (other than when it came to the earliest tries, such as NVN1 where the game was in a weird place not looking as good as the 2d games before it and not having something of worth to show for that).

3D graphics, used appropriately (not just for the sake of 3D when the object — like a map — is inherently 2D) is fine. My objection is where appearance is prioritized over game play.

We see this even in Gwent where animations slow game play significantly, and the coordination of faction borders with card art has led to certain borders (e.g. Nilfgaard and Skellige) being very hard to distinguish. I actually resort to identifying the border texture rather than attempting identify different shades of black.

 

[83427]

One of the most epic fails in gaming history happened in late 90´s when John Romero didnt believe in Carmacks idea of Quake III Arena purely multiplayer based game and left ID software to bring own vision of legendary game - Daikatana.

But while Carmacks Quake III is true legend and still played game, almost nobody played and remember John Romeros Daikatana.

Iam pretty sure that it was one of the worst decisions in gaming history. Ave John Carmack ;-)

 

[Barracuda88]

Gotta be the creation of Nilfgaard faction in gwent

 

[igor565]

Gotta be the Cursed Toad card drop

 

[LeKill3rFou]

I didn't read the whole thread and it's maybe not "the worst", but it's a good "bad decision"
For King Features, due to licensing disagreements, for not letting Shigeru Miyamoto use Popeye in Donkey Kong in 1981. So instead of the spinach eater, he created a plumber, Mario.

 

[TWG.Deathbysound]

Agreed.

 

[The_Blacks]

A certain quest from TW3 concerning a mage and a magical tower illustrates perfectly the single worst decision in the history of videogames

 

[Iferrebee]

A certain quest from TW3 concerning a mage and a magical tower illustrates perfectly the single worst decision in the history of videogames

Tower of Mice?

 

[mattcaron]

Sure, but it was a phase that had to happen and more importantly has passed. You can't expect technology to just stop evolving

I'm going to throw a hot take in here - the move to 3D video cards actually has limited radical technological evolution (revolution?).

Hear me out on this one.

Back in the 90's, there were a few different approaches to 3D rendering - 3D polygon worlds with 2D sprites, full 3D polygon everything, Novalogic's Voxels, etc.

The industry, largely as a hole, went with polygons, so video cards were built to optimize polygon math. Build up more polygons, you get more complicated meshes, and you get the beauty that is Night City and other cutting edge games of today.

On the flip side, however, it's become this one progress "hallway" that we walk down. As far as I know, no one is even looking at non-polygon based rendering systems now because everyone's systems are set up to push polygons, that is the standard, that's where the money is.

From the user perspective, back in the day, different games ended up having a different look to them because of their rendering technology - the Novalogic airplane games looking different than the Jane's airplane games, for example. You can still see this a bit today, where CP2077 looks different than, say Fallout, which looks different than, insert your favorite Unity game here. Some of this is stylistic choice, for sure, but other aspects of it are functions of the graphics subsystem of the game engine. But, absent radical style choices, everything just looks "real", which I suppose is the goal.

In the end, like Carmack said in one of his guest lectures, eventually people are going to stop writing their own game engines and there will just be a few commodity ones. He's not wrong, but I fear there's something lost in the shift.

Or I'm just a grumpy old man who still plays old DOS games (remember Terminator: Future Shock and its successor, Skynet? Classic!) and is trading heavily in nostalgia these days (played SMB3 and Sonic with my 8 year old son on the MiSTer for about an hour last night after dinner.)

Or maybe both.

One of the most epic fails in gaming history happened in late 90´s when John Romero didnt believe in Carmacks idea of Quake III Arena purely multiplayer based game and left ID software to bring own vision of legendary game - Daikatana.

But while Carmacks Quake III is true legend and still played game, almost nobody played and remember John Romeros Daikatana.

Iam pretty sure that it was one of the worst decisions in gaming history. Ave John Carmack ;-)

I remember everyone waiting for Daikatana. Waiting for CP2077 reminded me of it. Lol.

 

[Draconifors]

A certain quest from TW3 concerning a mage and a magical tower illustrates perfectly the single worst decision in the history of videogames

Very close-quarters combat with enemies that are either large and strong or fast and numerous?

 

[83427]

I remember everyone waiting for Daikatana. Waiting for CP2077 reminded me of it. Lol.

I remember waiting for Duke Nukem Forever :-D