I'm sure there's been a thread of this before, but I thought it would be interesting to bring up anyway. I say this because I just watched the opening of God of War 3, and I cannot understand why it's so popular. I think it's because the game tries to characterize Kratos in a sympathetic light, but he really is just an unrepentant maniac. There is literally no reason for him doing the things he does, other than "REVENGE!". I mean, most of the stuff that happens to him happens to other Greek Heroes, and as dickish as some of them could be, even they couldn't do the stuff he does. Heck, at the end of the demo, an unintentional side effect of his actions lead to an entire city of innocent civilians being murdered, and he doesn't even bat an eye. I mean, the guy's story is he literally just fights for the sake of fighting, more or less. RRRGGGHHHHH.

*Whew*

Sorry.

So, yeah, series that everyone is crazy for that you just don't get.

(Also, Gran Turismo. This summarizes my feelings perfectly: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2001/07/13/)

Errrr... your basing all this after just playing a demo? Did you play the actual game or the first two games?

And Gran Turismo is a RACING game! What is there to GET?

I didn't realize that there's a story to God of War. Or a story worth caring about. Isn't just about some dude with an anachronistic crew-cut slaying Greek myth monsters?

Anyways, it's been the "In" thing since Xena to hate on Greek gods, probably because they remind us of popular HS jocks and cheerleaders, and snobby/stupid college frats and sororities... and Ancient Greeks are acceptable collateral damage because they aren't us.

VegaX
Errrr... your basing all this after just playing a demo? Did you play the actual game or the first two games?

And Gran Turismo is a RACING game! What is there to GET?

I'm basing it on God of War's story. As for Gran Turismo, it's not a racing game in my eyes so much as a game where you tinker endlessly with useless sim aspects of car customization in between driving, a concept I find boring.

Also, the entire point of this thread is to post about good games that you personally don't get or like. For example, I can admit God of War and Gran Turismo are objectively good game series, just not ones that I would ever like. So, putting that in mind, are there any series regarded as objectively good that you are incapable of appreciating?

As for Gran Turismo, it's not a racing game in my eyes so much as a game where you tinker endlessly with useless sim aspects of car customization in between driving, a concept I find boring.

Then you're focusing on the wrong aspects of the game. Most people don't spend that much time tinkering and instead spend most of their time racing. For me, Gran Turismo is more of a racing game than any other console racer simply because it is attempting to actually simulate racing. You get a more true to life experience and it is about as close as I'll get to actually driving some of the cars made available in the game. You don't need turtle shells and rediculous power slides for a racing game to be fun, some people are perfectly capable of enjoying more down-to-earth fantasies.

I hate the Halo series. Since I first played it I hated it and I hate it today. There isn't anything all that unique about it, everyone who seems to like the multiplayer modes are dicks, and console FPSs in general suck.

I also don't really get it for Halo. It's not a bad game, it's actually pretty fun, but was just a normal shooting game to me with nothing that made it special.

I used to like Prince of Persia, but I don't really like where it's going.

For the life of me I just could not get into the Grand Theft Auto series. Like, any of them. I've tried again and again, but I think a big part of it is that the actual driving part of the game tends to be pretty bad. Actually, most aspects of the game, if taken on their own, are pretty bad. The combat is a mediocre shooter, the driving is mediocre, the minigames are often mediocre versions of existing games... granted the games just give you so much to do, but I've never really gone for Sandbox games in general. I prefer a more focused approach to game design: I'd rather play a game that does one thing well than does a dozen things poorly.

Final Fantasy. It just doesn't appeal at all to me. I've admittedly never played one but I just don't like the way they look or anything else for that matter.

And many of the nintendo games. The first console I ever owned was an xbox 360 so Zelda and all the games with Mario I just don't like. I've played Mario games quite a bit at friends houses but I still hate that little plumber. And Zelda I've played like once. Didn't like it.

Any Pokemon after Silver and Gold. I love Pokemon. The first game I've ever played was Pokemon Red, but the ones after Silver and Gold are just rehashed copies of the game with some gimmicks strung along. I just could not drag myself through it.

On the God of War thing, Kratos is like the Hulk. Nobody cares what he's doing now, it's all about the why. He has this epic of a back story. The appeal of the game is being an unstoppable demi-god bent on revenge.

I pretty much don't like most/all FPS nowadays. And yes, I had played FPS in the past, such as finishing Doom, Descent, and Duke Nukem. The idea of being nothing but a gun on the screen stopped appealing to me. Maybe it just doesn't feel cinematic (different from game immersion), or doesn't attach me to the story/character. I can get into 3rd-person shooters like Resident Evil or Gears of War much better.

Oh, and I don't get sandbox RPGs where you have no party; it's just yourself walking around. IMO you lose a lot of tactics possibilities, and also it just feels lonely and boring.

Zelda, bland character free childish bollocks.

Resident evil, okay idea but horrible controls spoiled them for so long.

Killzone, just terrible go look at halo and COD for how to do a FPS.

Metal gear games, crap stealth tedium.

3D button masher hack fests, I don't know what the term is.

I'm talking Devil May Cry, God of War, Bayonetta, Dante's Inferno, and a slew of identical titles with different names. Lone badass goober destroys everything and everyone in sight with pointlessly flashy combos created by slamming on the buttons like a spaz. Collect orbs from dead enemies for ho hum power ups, fight a few gigantic screen size bosses, and run into the same handful of mobs over and over again. You play one of these games, you've played all of them in the last several years.

I pray for the day this inane genre dies.

I'm definitely on board with the age-old debate as to whether the Zelda games have an actual time line. I've even tried to piece it together myself and failed miserably.

Not to detract from the games though, they're great - OoT being arguably the best adventure game (still) out there.

I'd also throw in any ongoing, "recolored," sports game series, most notably from EA. Honestly, why do people continue to throw their money away on these games that only change the jersey names/numbers as well as implement minor graphics revisions? I like to consider myself a gamer, and that stuff is just pathetic for anyone that has respect for the industry.

Oh yeah, SPORTS GAMES. You know, I'm sure it's mostly due to my complete indifference with sports in general, but I simply cannot enjoy them in any way. I guess I can understand why somebody else would... maybe they're able to dredge up the strategic qualities of the sport itself. But then why buy the SAME game a year later? Is it that important that characters on the screen have up-to-date names printed on their jersey?

I know they try to add new features, but it still always looks like the same game to me.

I guess there's one big advantage to liking sports games... you can always find last year's version in the bargain bin for dirt cheap.

By the way blindsk, I actually get the impression that Zelda doesn't really have a timeline, or maybe it used to, but there's no way of discerning one now. I've seen people try to piece it together, and the results are always WAY out there.

blindsk
I'm definitely on board with the age-old debate as to whether the Zelda games have an actual time line.

Yeah Nintendo confirmed that. They even have their own timeline for it, it's just considered confidential.

Hmmm game series I don't get...I can't really think, seeing as though I don't own a console that isn't Nintendo, and as Nintendo fanboy I refuse to ever play any other games.
But I will say that I don't really like fighting games (Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat) where there's complicated combos for everything, so you either remember one combo and do it constantly, or just mash buttons.

Oh yeah sports games too. MADDEEEEEEEEN!

I don't much like sports, racing, FPS, or fighting games, but it's more like I don't get the genres themselves rather than any specific series...

But although I'm ok with tactical RPGs, I can't see the appeal of Disgaea. I tried so hard to enjoy it, but one has to level-grind so much! So much! One has to level-grind in the Item World in order to level up the items as well! I felt like a failure because it appears people who like imported, translated games apparently have to like Disgaea, but I just kept thinking "How convoluted. How tedious."

Even if I am a failure, I'd rather play non-challenging Gust RPGs or something forever in blissful happiness than suffer through a popular tactical game that exhausts me... >_<;

Ochitsukanai
But although I'm ok with tactical RPGs, I can't see the appeal of Disgaea. I tried so hard to enjoy it, but one has to level-grind so much! So much! One has to level-grind in the Item World in order to level up the items as well! I felt like a failure because it appears people who like imported, translated games apparently have to like Disgaea, but I just kept thinking "How convoluted. How tedious."

Oh man, I didn't even think of this one. But I completely agree. Disgaea struck me as maddening micro-management to some unknown end.

Chernobog
3D button masher hack fests, I don't know what the term is.

From what I've heard, the "term" for these types of games are Quicktime events. ;)

Hawk
Oh yeah, SPORTS GAMES. You know, I'm sure it's mostly due to my complete indifference with sports in general, but I simply cannot enjoy them in any way.

Agreed completely! The only exception to sports games being bad is when they mount guns/manipulate the rules of the sport to give it a nice twist. Couldn't think of a better example at the time, but Mario Kart definitely comes to mind.

crocty
Yeah Nintendo confirmed that. They even have their own timeline for it, it's just considered confidential.

Ah, thanks for clearing that up. I'd love to see some of the fan-made time lines Hawk was talking about though. B)

crocty
Yeah Nintendo confirmed that. They even have their own timeline for it, it's just considered confidential.

Really? I thought Miyamoto said he was just making it up as he went.

therealtj

crocty
Yeah Nintendo confirmed that. They even have their own timeline for it, it's just considered confidential.

Really? I thought Miyamoto said he was just making it up as he went.

From my understanding they aren't required to consider the timeline when making new games, but once the game is complete they decide where to put it in the timeline.

therealtj

crocty
Yeah Nintendo confirmed that. They even have their own timeline for it, it's just considered confidential.

Really? I thought Miyamoto said he was just making it up as he went.

Sorta. They don't know where they fit while they're making them, but put them in the timeline before they're done. Let me find where it said that now, though I'm not gonna post this if I don't find it, so I've found it if you're reading this.

Well I found the quote

Someone
"The creators maintain that the series has a set timeline, however due to debates over the available information the timeline continues to be disputed. Miyamoto stated in a 2003 interview that there is a master document detailing the timeline. Eiji Aonuma has also stated in a July 2007 video interview that there is such a document on his PC, and that this document is considered confidential. According to this interview, development of a Zelda title can commence without the team knowing in advance where exactly the title will fit into the timeline; but by the time the title is finished, its placement in the timeline will be determined. However, this document has not been seen publicly, and there is little other proof of its existence. "

So, I don't even know anymore. D:

Everyone
Zelda timeline.

Oh boy. This requires a 20 minute documentary.

I played like I dunno half of the first one (my ps2 went to hell and I sold the majority of my games so thats why I didn't finish it not because it sucks or anything) and I quite liked the first one, but I played the demo of the third one and its just, wow such fricken overkill. Why in gods name would you constantly stab everything you're trying to hitch a ride from? you can't just hold onto the harpies while they fly around? you have to stab them constantly? whats next are you gonna rape their dead bodies kratos? are you? Cause the way I see it if theres a 4th and they're planning to escalate the violence thats the only way they can do that, because it is just redicilous right now. I mean there was a civillian stuck to a wall and instead of doing the simple act of helping him he not only throws him off the building he also first knocks his head into the wall so he has no way of recovering from while falling, TAKE THAT GUY THATS TERRIFIED AND HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG, THIS IS FOR MY FAMILY! AND GOD STUFF! GRRRRR!

Also I don't get open world games in general especially grand theft auto past the first game and I mean the first on the PC overhead look one, that one was good the rest are I dunno something to kill time with for an hour driving around and creating havoc the rest of it is just meh. I enjoyed Infamous though but that's about it I think. I tried Red dead redemption, it was okay but I'd rather watch it as a series on tv if they're gonna feed me random details about their family and all that ugh useless crap like that. I found it very dragging.

Also final fantasy past 9 is stupid. The characters are just poorly written and the plots are ridonkulously overly complicated and ugh, also I dislike their leap to a more realistic style because they all look too similar.They act the same too.

What has sickened me regarding the FF franchise is that every guy looks like a J-pop boy band member, and every woman a J-pop idol. And they dress/hair like it too. Oh, and ofc sometimes they even sing/ dance.

It was cool back when Sephiroth did it. But now I just want to bash every one of their heads in with a proper warrior. Like... Kratos.

agreed I mean Tidus was borderline okay but the 12 and 13 ones are just really uninspired.

"I have to agree. The Zelda timeline is harder to figure out than an 1000,000 piece Jigsaw Puzzle."
(Yes I know that was bad)

I never enjoyed any of the Legend of Zelda games. Phantom Hourglass drove me ballistic, Twilight Princess' Midna wasn't quite awesome enough to make up for the rest of the game, and any other games I played really didn't click with me. So yeah.

Let's see... Animal Crossing? I love the series, but at the same time it is so dreadfully boring that I can't even play it. I think it's one of those all too common "like the concept, despise the everything else" instances... so yeah. And as for God of War, I don't even want to think about it; I'm sure they'll have mauled the mythology to smithereens.

Steetfighter.

It's just a fighting game. Why all the iterations?????







...But I know why... We all know why they keep on with series: Franchises are guaranteed to make money, whereas new titles aren't.

Still, I can't wait for Duke Nukem Forever! ^___^

Ah yes, Street Fighter. I never could get into fighting games in general, mostly because they all turn out to be button-mash fests for me. I realize that SF is supposed to be the peak of the genre where you're required to have precise timing to counter, hit, and so on. But honestly, I only enjoy it when there's plenty of theatrics like in Dead or Alive (not to mention jiggle physics...yeah...).

Anyway, SF4 is a game I can understand. People wanted a reboot of the series in terms of better graphics, some new characters as well as the familiar, and online play. But what I don't understand is the need for a Super version (SSF4)! Their claim is that they had so much extra content that they couldn't really release it in DLC form. But what new content? New gameplay modes, a few new characters, and maybe cleaning up the online. Maybe I just need to be more of a fan of fighting games, but I don't think this justifies a "new" game.