Talk:List of video games notable for negative reception/Archive 17

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

One to add to the watchlist - Grand Theft Auto: The Trilogy – The Definitive Edition

The game's launch has been nothing short of absolute chaos. Nintendo Life has already suggested it could be 2021's Cyberpunk due to the amount of glitches across all versions (not to mention the PC version was unplayable for over a day). It's also garnering bad press since evidence has emerged that unlicensed music and the Hot Coffee source code were accidentally left in the game JOEBRO64 00:44, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

There is still apparently issues [1] after it was brought back so I agree this is on the watch list. --Masem (t) 01:31, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Suggesting text, but still want to see if Rockstar addresses these any time soon (sources can be pulled from its page)

Grand Theft Auto: The Trilogy – The Definitive Edition is a remastered version of the 2005 compilation of Grand Theft Auto 3, Vice City and San Andreas supporting modern computers and consoles. The remastered version was developed by Grove Street Games and published by Rockstar Games; besides intended visual improvements, Grove Street Games also converted the games to use the Unreal Engine instead of the original RenderWare when the compilation was first released. Prior to release, Rockstar removed the three individual games and the original compilation from sale on digital storefronts, intending the remaster to be the replacement for these titles, which drew criticism from preservationists. At release, the game had several visual and technical flaws, and while some improvements made to gameplay were appreciated, critics were generally disappointed with the treatment of these influential games by the remaster. Further troubling its launch, Rockstar pulled the Microsoft Windows version of the remaster from the Rockstar Launcher a day after sale after players reported finding a trove of data in the distribution, including developer notes, sound files for the original music of the games that had to be pulled earlier due to licensing issues, and existence of parts of the code for the sexually explicit "Hot Coffee" minigame in San Andreas. While the game was removed from the launcher, it was unplayable by those that had purchased and downloaded it already. When it was brought back for sale a few days later, Rockstar stated that they had removed files that were "unintentionally included" in the original distribution, but this did not deal with the visual and technical glitches observed by players. Some players asked for refunds from Rockstar either due to the inability to play the game or the poor quality of the remasters.

--Masem (t) 14:59, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Adding that while Metacritic is hovering just over 50, it's likely worthwhile to point out that the original games has 90+ MC scores all around (I can't find any good summary if the 2005/2009 releases had poor reviews, but I doubt they did). Also watching to see if the potential DMCA action on modders is also going to be an issue. --Masem (t) 00:19, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

IIRC those rereleases hover in the 80s/high 70s. Definitely a lot higher than what they're getting now. JOEBRO64 00:36, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

To add if we include, Rockstar admitting the quality of these games was not good. [2] --Masem (t) 21:24, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Revamping to be prepared.

Grand Theft Auto: The Trilogy – The Definitive Edition is a remastered version of the 2005 compilation of Grand Theft Auto 3, Vice City and San Andreas supporting modern computers and consoles. The remastered version was developed by Grove Street Games and published by Rockstar Games; besides intended visual improvements, Grove Street Games also converted the games to use the Unreal Engine instead of the original RenderWare when the compilation was first released. Prior to release, Rockstar removed the three individual games and the original compilation from sale on digital storefronts, intending the remaster to be the replacement for these titles, which drew criticism from preservationists. At release, the game had several visual and technical flaws, and while some improvements made to gameplay were appreciated, critics were generally disappointed with the treatment of these influential games by the remaster. Further troubling its launch, Rockstar pulled the Microsoft Windows version of the remaster from the Rockstar Launcher a day after sale after players reported finding a trove of data in the distribution, including developer notes, sound files for the original music of the games that had to be pulled earlier due to licensing issues, and existence of parts of the code for the sexually explicit "Hot Coffee" minigame in San Andreas. While the game was removed from the launcher, it was unplayable by those that had purchased and downloaded it already. When it was brought back for sale a few days later, Rockstar stated that they had removed files that were "unintentionally included" in the original distribution, but this did not deal with the visual and technical glitches observed by players. Some players asked for refunds from Rockstar either due to the inability to play the game or the poor quality of the remasters. About a week after the launch, Rockstar stated that "the updated versions of these classic games did not launch in a state that meets our own standards of quality, or the standards our fans have come to expect" (arstech source), laying out a pathway for how they will work to fix they, and restoring the original versions of the three games for sale on the Rockstar Launcher for personal computers as a bundle, and giving this bundle freely to anyone that purchased the Definitive Edition.

--Masem (t) 02:34, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

I would definitely include The Trilogy remasters in this list. The Metacritic scores for the games are quite crushing when you look at the user scores. PC version has 5009 ratings, 0.5 score, Switch version has 672 ratings, 0.7 score, PS4 version has 793 ratings, 0.7 score, PS5 version has 3718 ratings, 0.9 score, Xbox One version has 749 ratings, 0.5 score, Xbox Series version has 948 ratings, 0.6 score. The quick and dirty average for these is like a rating of 0.65.

Comparatively, another entry on the list, Cyberpunk 2077, has relatively healthy user ratings of 7.1 (PC), 4.9 (Xbox) and 3.7 (PS4). Granted, this is after about 11 months since release, and there have been many patches and many people have probably bought the game for a discounted price and are more willing to give it a higher rating. However, with the help of the Internet Archive, we can actually verify that Cyberpunk 2077 did not receive user ratings as crushing as the GTA Trilogy remasters have now when it had just released. The PC version had a score of 7.1 (22398 ratings), the Xbox version had a score of 4.5 (3251 ratings), and the PS4 version had a score of 3.2 (8192 ratings). Granted, larger sample sizes, but also much higher scores.

Hamuko (talk) 10:07, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

We specifically do not consider user scores for games, due to aspects like review bombing. Now, if RSes talk about the user score as making the game having a negative reception, that's fine. --Masem (t) 18:13, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

In my opinion, the compilation should definitely be on the list. Remember No Man's Sky, Fallout 76 and Cyberpunk 2077? There's a pattern. Hello Games' No Man's Sky, pre-release hype, release bugs/undeliver. Bethesda's Fallout 76, pre-release hype, release bugs/undeliver. CD Projekt's Cyberpunk 2077, pre-release hype, release bugs/undeliver. Now it's Grove Street Games'/Rockstar Games' time to shine with Grand Theft Auto: The Trilogy – The Definitive Edition! With that game, pre-release hype, release bugs/undeliver. You see my point? TwilightKid53 (talk) 15:19, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Not really. Many games have pre-release hype, so there's really not a pattern, as these titles otherwise have no relation to each other. -- ferret (talk) 15:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Fair. TwilightKid53 (talk) 16:11, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

There is an angle that given the success of the GTA3-series games in the past, the poor quality of the definitive edition is a slight to these classics. It's not so much pre-release hype but expectation settings and that Rockstar (by shuffling off to a different studio) failed to meet expectations. --Masem (t) 04:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Well, from what I've read, there does appear to be a lot of professionally-written articles covering the user backlash in significant detail, so I think the GTA DE compilation does deserve a spot much like with Warcraft: Reforged. The games are seminal works, and as one source noted, it was of utter irreverence to butcher it like this, an opinion shared by both critics and the audience alike. Blake Gripling (talk) 03:48, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I support the inclusion of GTA Trilogy into the list with the writeup by Masem. We are a month away after its launch, and the Metacritic scores for the PC and Switch versions are currently in the red at 49 and 47 respectively. The PSX and XBSX versions aren't much better at 55 and 56 respectively. For context, WarCraft III: Reforged which is another botched remaster for a single platform, has a Metacritic score of 59. A few other editors in this discussion have already highlighted article writeups by industry critics which are not reviews per se, but editorials which highlighted the game's poor quality and negative reception. Haleth (talk) 01:14, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

• This game's not on the list yet? Neo-corelight (Talk) 23:32, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
• Is it worth adding the entry now?  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 03:38, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Yes, let's just make sure the sourcing is there. ---Masem (t) 04:19, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

    @Masem: [3] Made a first attempt at adding a subsection.  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 04:49, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Remove Fallout 76? (maybe?)

I've tried out Fallout 76 recently and its redeemed itself so much. it went on a rise and fall and rise. maybe delete? if not that's okay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoNVLORD4013 (talk • contribs) 22:25, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

We cover that the reception improved due to later updates and fixes. That doesn't change that it's reception was very negative. That is why NMS is also here. -- ferret (talk) 22:55, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I get it now. Thanks for awnsering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FoNVLORD4013 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

• Comment Even if the game has gotten better due to patches and updates, the negative reception it received in it's early for is still notable so the game should remain on this list.--JOJ ^Hutton 18:56, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

List of game companies known for negative reception

I suggest you make another page talking about terrible video game companies. EA, Konami, Activision Blizzard, Tencent, basically big name companies that a lot of fans hate.--24.44.76.88 (talk) 04:18, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

We would never make such a list based on what "fans" dislike. The games we have here are based on critical negative reception, not fan reception. --Masem (t) 04:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Then how about big name game companies that have received a negative reception from company critics?--24.44.76.88 (talk) 02:42, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Not to be biased, but if that were the case only a few companies would not be on your article. TwilightKid53 (talk) 18:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Suggestion: Battlefield 2042

Very poor launch, hostile player reception and dwindling playerbase should make this game a candidate for is list Sirfalcon11 (talk) 05:27, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

I honestly kinda agree, is going through a similar hatred that Fallout 76 and Cyberpunk 2077 once had, and playerbase is plummeting, and EA is considering F2P, so maybe it could happen, I just don't have the guts to add it in myself, because I am super sensitive when my edits get reverted. TwilightKid53 (talk) 15:42, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Given this postmortem from EA, this may be more a commercial failure. --Masem (t) 04:20, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

MASEM, they’re excuses. The game is universally hated by players, myself included. TwilightKid53 (talk) 21:47, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

We have to go by reliable sources, which have noted declining player counts as well as some negative user feedback, but we can't direct use user feedback here. --Masem (t) 22:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Please clarify. If you say that it's only the players who hate the game and shouldn't be on the list because of that, then Warcraft III: Reforged shouldn't be on the list by your logic. TwilightKid53 (talk) 16:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

The Battlefield 2042 article even mentions that players hate the game significantly more than critics. TwilightKid53 (talk) 16:41, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Cyberpunk update

I can't deny that Cyberpunk 2077 had a (majorly) negative reception on release due to its incomplete status and complete lack of functionality on older gen consoles, but it never really had terrible reviews per se, at least across the board. I'm not going to argue against its inclusion given its release debacle, but since then, Sony have unblocked the game and it's reached the 1.5 update, so at least it should be updated by what Projekt Red's corrective actions were and how they've been received by reviewers and gamers? 90.194.224.161 (talk) 19:10, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

The factor of poor reviews doesn't take precedence in classifying whether a game received a negative reception. In the case of Cyberpunk 2077, it was because the game suffered widespread criticism towards its performance issues and conditions around its release. Also, while games may improve over time, that doesn't take away from the fact that they received a negative reception at launch before they were reworked (see the article lead on the examples of Final Fantasy XIV and No Man's Sky). If you can find enough sources documentating that Cyberpunk 2077 has notably improved in terms of stability and player reception (like No Man's Sky), then it might warrant a mention. Wikibenboy94 (talk) 12:29, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Gran Turismo 7

Despite positive reviews from critics, player reception was overwhelmingly negative following an update which added microtransactions, so I suggest you add it in.--24.44.76.188 (talk) 01:54, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

That's covered under review bomb. We do not consider games where the negative reception is primarily from users to be appropriate for this list. --Masem (t) 02:07, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Suggestion: Family Party: 30 Great Games Obstacle Arcade

Misleading title, outdated graphics, sloppy controls, boring minigames, annoying voice acting and a crippled name function system should make this game a candidate for the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.184.76.69 (talk) 11:48, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

No one's even ever heard of this game. 182.1.124.203 (talk) 23:20, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Add Battlefield 2042 to this list.

This is a clear one to add. 24.239.124.243 (talk) 19:49, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I would support adding this to the list. there is clear precedent to do so. If a reason not to add it is not provided in a reply to this comment I would likely add it myself given a clear and current abundance of provable negative reception greater than that of current approved entries. Nachotacl (talk) 15:24, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Please delete this admin. BawlMuncher123 (talk) 20:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Battlefield 2042 addition

While its inclusion has been discussed twice previously by IP's/new users, an IP editor has recently added Battlefield 2042 to this article, despite no prior consensus having been reached. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression for a game to be added it preferably needs to be determined on the talk page first? Wikibenboy94 (talk) 12:20, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

It ought to be proposed first here, yes, unless you are experienced enough and know what we're looking for to add it here. But I think really as we've filtered down this list twice now, the only games that are going to be added are recent titles as they get over their first few months of release, it will be obvious or not if they should be added. --Masem (t) 12:32, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Bad Rats

Proposal for inclusion of Bad Rats, quoting the article:

• "the worst game available on Steam" as of 2015 —Kotaku
• "possibly ... the worst physics-based puzzle game of all time" —Hardcore Gaming 101
• "worst PC game box art ever" —PC Gamer
• "became a popular gag gift" due to its poor quality —Hardcore Gaming 101, Kotaku, Rock Paper Shotgun

9³ (talk) 06:39, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Fails inclusion criteria. Despite a spurt of coverage, there is not one single review from a critic on Metacritic. Somewhat of "meme" rather than any serious critique of the game in my view. And even the user reviews on Metacritic aren't below 50%, likely due to a lot of joking. -- ferret (talk) 13:31, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

I would argue that Grayson's Kotaku review qualifies as at least one "relevant retrospective and column" that describes it as the worst game on Steam. The lack of Metacritic reviews is not disqualifying, as inclusion criteria above states "one or more of the criteria listed below", not all of them. 9³ (talk) 04:34, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, but we're looking for games with a lasting reputation of being notably bad. Bat Rats simply doesn't have that. --Masem (t) 12:06, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

How exactly does this game from 2009 not have a "lasting reputation of being notably bad" when it has received reliable media attention for its poor quality through at least 2018? If nine years is not enough, that would disqualify at least 15 games currently on the list. And even if that were the case, how would that disqualify it when it clearly meets criteria 2 and 4?

Criteria 2: "Its quality having been acknowledged in relevant retrospectives and columns by reliable sources (i.e. being literally referred to as one of the "worst games ever" (either of all-time or within a specific category or genre)."

• "the worst game available on Steam"
• "this is easily the worst game on Steam"
• "possibly... the worst physics-based puzzle game of all time"

Criteria 4: "Having a notably negative response from end-users over its quality, especially in situations where negative user response impacts the reception by professional critics. In order to meet this criteria, at least three reliable citations must discuss such a response in significant detail. This negative reception should be something of discussion some months after a product's release; short-term negativity towards a bug or flaw that is patched shortly after release does not qualify for inclusion on this list. A title is ineligible for inclusion based on user response if it received an otherwise positive response from critics [...]"

Being sent as a "gag gift" by users because of its poor quality, as per sources:

• "Bad Rats quickly became the Steam equivalent of a gag gift; an obviously junk game that’s gifted to friends solely as a cruel joke. Unfortunately, the low price and people’s morbid curiosity meant that, if 2018 SteamSpy stats are to be believed, over 400,000 Steam users now have this trash in their libraries."
• "Basically, if someone wants to gift you a godawful game on Steam, odds are, it’s gonna be Bad Rats."
• "Y’see, for several years the physics puzzler was the gag gift of choice on Steam, with thousands of copies given as jokes. It’s weird-looking, pretty shonky, cheap..."

Additionally, Bad Rats' essential claim to notability is its negative reception and significant coverage due to this (as demonstrated at the admittedly small AfD) and was introduced in its DYK blurb as a "critically panned video game" that "was a popular gag gift". It can be described as shovelware that was intentionally designed by its creator to be funny, but it is an exceptional example of one due to its notability for it being firmly established. Additionally, the Bad Rats article is currently a GA and appears to lack sourcing issues that might otherwise disqualify it. 9³ (talk) 03:16, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

References

Babylon's Fall

A game by a major publisher (Square Enix) with lots of negative buzz. Under 50% on Metacritic for both PC (46% out of 12 reviews) and PS5 (41% with 43 reviews). Barely anyone is playing it even though it was recently released due to what critics described as aggressive monetization so that's "negative response from end-users over its quality" in my view (Eurogamer and Kotaku). A few commentators have literally referred to it as one of the worst games in recent memory: VGC, Kotaku, Tom's Guide, WCCF Tech. Pretty straightforward case for inclusion in my opinion. Haleth (talk) 13:37, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

M&M's Kart Racing should be added

turning is nearly impossible, going up makes make the kart barely move and when going down you can't steer, the tracks are far to narrow and or boring, the game has no items and is just generally as I already said extremely boring and terrible audio balancing — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBritishDoge (talk • contribs) 03:26, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

• That would qualify under licensed game which we normally do not include. --Masem (t) 03:53, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 5 August 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved per WP:SNOW and a lack of any new arguments given compared to previous discussions that would prompt a change in people's views. (non-admin closure) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

---

• List of video games notable for negative reception → List of video games considered the worst
• List of automobiles known for negative reception → List of automobiles considered the worst

– For consistency, since all of the other articles of this nature are named "List of foos considered the worst/best", rather than "List of foos notable for negative/positive reception". Blubabluba9990 (talk) (contribs) 23:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Blubabluba9990 Did you read the past RMs and even AFDs about why this article was moved AWAY from that name? This is the 4th such discussion. "Consistency" with other articles isn't really a valid rationale. -- ferret (talk) 23:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes it is. Articles should be consistent. If this opposes it would be wise to move the other articles to "List of foos notable for negative/positive reception". I did read those discussions. I merely chose this since more articles have the "considered the worst/best" title rather than "notable for negative/positive reception". If the latter is preferred we can move all of the articles. Blubabluba9990 (talk) (contribs) 23:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

• Opposed per the same reasons as the multiple past discussions as well as when this topic has been broached during AFDs. This one has been beaten into the ground. Actually, I'll call for a speedy close too. -- ferret (talk) 23:40, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

  If so, I would be fine with moving the other articles to "List of x notable for negative reception". Articles should be consistent with each other, to avoid confusion. Honestly these could even be deleted as fancruft, but what happens to one must happen to the others. Blubabluba9990 (talk) (contribs) 23:47, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

  No, because the meaning of these titles is literally different. That you don't understand that part of the argument suggests you did not read the past discussions. And no, what happens to one does not have to happen to the others, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST, etc. -- ferret (talk) 00:05, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per past reasoning. Specifically, this is not the list of worst-reviewed games, but those that are notable because of that. There's a ton of shovelware that we do not include purposely because of consistently low ratings they get but those games aren't notable. --Masem (t) 00:12, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

  And as ferret points out, the lists that are in the form "Lists of x considered the worst" are lists based strictly on ratings. Technically such a list could have for video games, but I don't think we need that. Masem (t) 00:13, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

  Well there should be consistency in article layout as well. All of the other articles have notable media. If these articles are laid out differently then they should at least be placed into separate categories. Blubabluba9990 (talk) (contribs) 00:21, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose as above. A lot of games can be considered the "worst" (such as Akira for the Amiga), but these are notable for being kusoges. Shadowboxer2005 (talk) 03:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per above arguments and WP:SNOW; also I support moving “worst” lists to “negative reception” lists, definitely not the other way around. Dronebogus (talk) 04:08, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

  I would support that then. The reason why I requested this specifically is because there are more articles named "List of foos considered the worst/best" and not "List of foos notable for negative/positive reception". Blubabluba9990 (talk) (contribs) 18:58, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

  As long as what applies to one applies to the others, per WP:CONSISTENT and WP:TITLECON. Blubabluba9990 (talk) (contribs) 19:00, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

  The problem is that the lists have different criteria, so it doesn't make sense to require consistency in the lists. Masem (t) 19:01, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

  You're still failing to acknowledge that the name has different meaning and scope. "worst ever" and "notable for negative reception" have a different connotation. -- ferret (talk) 20:21, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose and suggest speedy close per WP:SNOW. JOEBRO64 20:52, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Adding to watchlist: Diablo Immortal

Eg [4]. Right now it seems more fan driven but that multiple sites have taken notice is a thing to keep watch on. --Masem (t) 21:44, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

@Masem: Diablo Immortal has the lowest user score for any PC game ever on Metacritic. On iOS it currently sports a miserable 0.5 out of 10, whilst for PC, it's even lower: 0.2.[5][6]. By the looks of things the entries in this article are taken from a post-mortem/historical perspective, so I don't think we should add it at the moment (so far it's just anger from fans about microtransactions). But I agree it's something to keep an eye on; being the lowest-ranked game on Metacritic by users is definitely interesting. Endwise (talk) 08:16, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

@Masem: At this point there's been almost two months of steady negative press coverage on this game. Here's the ones I referenced. You might disagree, but it looks to me that negative reception of the game is widespread.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chiffre01 (talk • contribs)

Because the general review scores for Immortal were not bad (59 at metacritic) while it has a very low user score, we have to make sure that we're talking about actual negative reception and not simply the controversy over its monetization model, which is very much controversial. And in terms of negative reception, that really hasn't been the case, its been reviewed bombed for the microtransactions but few reliable sources have actually negatively reviewed the game, and it is doing quite well ($100M in revenue so far, far different from the SW:BF2 case). --Masem (t) 14:00, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

References

Masters of Teras Kasi

One of the most infamous Star Wars games of all time, it is a fighting game with questionable character inclusions like a Tusken Raider named Hoar, stiff controls, frustrating to execute special moves, unfair difficulty, and the fact that Darth Vader is not voiced like James Earl Jones like he is in every other piece of Star Wars media in existence. 2600:1008:B06A:14A1:C092:3182:975F:283E (talk) 22:40, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

All legitimate points, but does it meet the criteria at the top? Dronebogus (talk) 01:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Fantasia for the Sega Genesis

Fantasia for the Sega Genesis is infamous for its delayed controls and poor renditions of the classical pieces from the Fantasia film by Disney. The game was made due to the success of Castle of Illusion and the rerelease of the Disney movie in theaters and home video. Sega usually developed the Mickey games on the Genesis themselves, but this time, they outsourced their development to Infogrames (who later became a subsidiary of Atari). The game was rushed for the Christmas season of 1991 and the game was panned by critics for its clunky controls, bad level design and poor renditions of the classical pieces of music chosen for the film. Roy E. Disney, the nephew of Walt Disney, discovered the game soon afterward and was angry at Sega for violating a promise he made to his uncle to never give out licenses for Fantasia to anyone. He made an agreement with Sega, Sega would recall all unsold copies of the game and have them destroyed, and in return, Disney would give out more licenses of more of their IPs to Sega at no further cost. 2600:1008:B028:6C05:A5E6:7306:1F88:DD0C (talk) 16:27, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

This is a tie-in game. What is your argument that it is should be exempt from the usual criteria? -- ferret (talk) 16:33, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Fantasia the game was released in 1991, 51 years after the Fantasia movie was released in 1940. It's more of a tie in to the 1991 home video release of the movie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1008:B06A:14A1:C092:3182:975F:283E (talk) 16:02, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok, how does that change the argument? -- ferret (talk) 18:13, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Suggestions

Can you use this YouTube playlist to find any games to put on the list? And also remove games whose negative reception isn't notable. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJdyZRNyk92o4AxWF2Yu_0t3NWib1v8yX 100.1.226.81 (talk) 18:07, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

We can't use a random youtuber to make the call. Masem (t) 19:26, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Potential candidate: Saints Row (2022 Reboot)

Is this even eligible for addition to the article? From what I've gathered it may be? 2607:FEA8:1D60:1D8E:89EE:F72F:313E:8F1E (talk) 00:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Its more mediocre but certainly wasn't negative. --Masem (t) 01:32, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

There are a reasonably large amount of negative reviews on places like Youtube however, though take those however way you will regarding being grounds for eligibility. 2607:FEA8:1D60:1D8E:9A2:9013:6B9:6A36 (talk) 18:51, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

We usually do not take into account user reviews and focus on critical reception, which for the SR reboot was mild (in the mid-60s, so nowhere as bad as other games on this list). It came, has some iffy play, but wasn't really bad, just "meh". Hence not really notable for here. (We are trying to just list "bad" games, we want games that have a reputation of being bad) Masem (t) 19:15, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

missing game

I looked at the page of crash boom bang and this game has actually negative reviews, and it isn't in the list.  The game got a score of 37/100 in Metacritic and the mains complains were the controls and the lack of originality.  176.175.167.233 (talk) 20:21, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

It may have a low score buy we require the game's poor reputation to be significant or notable. As a party game based on an existing IP, I don't think there was expectations for a good game and thus its not a notably bad game. Masem (t) 21:37, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Suggestion: babylon's fall

This game has a low metacritic for both the gaming press and users. This along with an announced shut down in February 2023 (less than one year after launch),a non active playerbase and store employees ordered to destroy physical copies should easily qualify babylon's fall for this list. Sirfalcon11 (talk) 23:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea. Probably best to add it before it shuts down two months from now. 2601:280:CA7F:9490:1DDA:F47A:154E:2214 (talk) 00:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Possible suggestion: Bakugan: Champions of Vestroia

Since Bakugan: Champions of Vestroia is said to be pretty bad, both before and after it came out, I think it should be added to the list. 2601:280:CA7F:9490:280F:9E3A:85B6:F644 (talk) 21:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

We're looking for games that have notable bad reception, and that game doesn't even have its own oage. As well as being a tie in game, which are generally considered to not be great, it doesn't quite meet the standards here Masem (t) 19:51, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

So I take it it's only "meh," given it's based on a pre-existing IP? 2601:280:CA7F:9490:E425:FA6C:F289:9B1D (talk) 19:57, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

That already works against it. Unless it was a high profile, AAA game, we generally don't include those. But we want the poor reception to be beyond low review scores, as there are lots of bad games out there and we have to be selective for this list. Masem (t) 20:03, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Very well. In that case, we can just leave Champions of Vestroia off due to being a game that I guess mostly received mixed reviews due to being based on a pre-existing IP in favor of something that's actually bad. 2601:280:CA7F:9490:5C80:7BC1:A9BD:6E90 (talk) 19:10, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Duke Nukem: Forever

I literally created an account just to point this out, but Duke Nukem: Forever could be on this page as it was notoriously poorly received, as it's own page on Wikipedia suggests. Making numerous worst games of all time lists and with scores on Metacritic as an example at 54, 3/10 on Eurogamer, and 5.5/10 on IGN. Infact, a line on it's page even links to this page.

"In the years since its release, Duke Nukem Forever has been cited as one of the [worst video games of all time], mainly attributed to its extremely long and arduous development cycle." Despite redirecting here, this game is not on this page. It should be added. NegativeMP1 (talk) 01:29, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Actually, the lead of the article should be adjusted not to link here. While it wasn't well received, it's above the basic cutoff the inclusion criteria of this list uses. The fact that someone put that in the lead anyways is not an argument for inclusion. -- ferret (talk) 03:22, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Gran Turismo 7

GT7 had a horrible release and reception. Including being an always online game that servers were down for days shortly after release, making the game completely unplayable for everyone who had purchased it. 2603:3003:539:8100:D1:8B0E:A61D:1957 (talk) 13:02, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

An Metacritic score of 87 is hard to justify inclusion on this list. If there was massive outages in the same vein as SimCity 2013, that really didn't stick to the game's long-term reputation. Masem (t) 13:44, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion: Marvel's Avengers

While the game had a lukewarm reception, post-release caused the critics and playerbase grow increasingly negative about the bugs, repetitive gameplay, and lack of content in the base game. The pc playerbase also collapsed in little less than 3 mouths with only 1,190 active players (96% drop off). All this and the most recent announcement that the game is getting permanently delisted in September 30, 2023 should allow this game to qualify for this list Sirfalcon11 (talk) 03:01, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Metacritic scores of around 65-68 are really hard to judge being notable for negative reactions. --Masem (t) 03:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion: CID The Dummy & Crash Dummy

I recommend to added CID The Dummy and its demake Crash Dummy because the game is give by Metacritic a score 41/100 for the PlayStation Portable version based on 6 reviews, and 31/100 for the Wii version based on 7 reviews.

GameRankings gave this game a score 36.00% for the PlayStation 2 version based on 2 reviews, 35.60% for the PlayStation Portable version based on 5 reviews, and 33.43% for the Wii version based on 7 reviews.

The game was panned by both gamers and critics for its lackluster gameplay, sluggish controls, poor graphics and awful voice acting. The game is also notable for using music on the game's Wii startup page that is a shoddy cover of Fatboy Slim's "Weapon of Choice" and the battle music "Let The Battles Begin" from Final Fantasy VII during a driving level. In some levels, the game also feature images plagiarized from various sources.

The demake is plagued with poor controls, lackluster sounds and music, dull graphics, imprecise jumping and platforming, numerous typos and errors in grammar during cutscenes with text, confusing level design, poor story, and lack of replay value.

In both games, the playable character CID comes off as being an unlikable protagonist. After rescuing Werken's daughter in the game's final cutscenes, he claims that he never really cared for her safety and well being or stopping D.Troit's plans. Instead, he boasts about his given "mission" as an opportunity to simply cause his own brand of trouble for his own amusement with no comedic or sarcastic tone. NIKO (talk) 09:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

We need more than just low scores but a reputation that persisted from those scores. This does not seem to be a very well known game and thus would not be an entry on here. Masem (t) 13:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

In spite of the additional context you've provided, this game still isn't nearly notable enough to warrant being added to the article. You have to consider this from a perspective of games history, and whether or not the titles you're suggesting had any impact on said history. Maybe if there were a more notable developer / publisher involved in either version, or if the game had been anticipated in any capacity prior to its release, there'd be something to work with here. But as it stands, there isn't. ~ ConnoisseurCass (talk) 18:34, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Crash Dummy doesn't get a score from Metacritic. NIKO (talk) 00:35, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Putting Redfall on the consideration list

While Redfall has a >60 aggregate score, it definitely has hit a bad tone across fans and critics, perhaps the straw breaking the camels back of a string of poor AAA releases. I know Phil Spencer has already apologized for the poor quality of the game. I will still wait for more to come in if this needs to be added. Masem (t) 17:51, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I came here to see if it was on the list. I think that, considering the controversy surrounding it and the impact on Arkane, it would fit well. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:41, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

According to this Bloomberg report, the lengthy time and conflicts over dev caused Arkane to lose a significant portion of its staff during dev, and hence the poor state of the final release. I would argue this would lean well towards inclusion here. Masem (t) 16:43, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion: Lord Of The Rings: Gollum

With a Metacritic score of 44 and 40 for PC and Playstation respectively, and a mostly negative rating on steam, I feel strongly that this game be added to this list due to it's quality and license. Sirfalcon11 (talk) 21:29, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Just having a low score is not enough nowadays - we do want to see about immediate or lasting effects (eg is the studio harmed significantly such as being shut down? is the publisher affected). Consider Redfall (which I note above), it came and went and we know not of anything that has happened, so it likely won't go on the list. That said, from what I've been seeing about the quality of the game, there's still a lot of potential for Gollum here. Masem (t) 04:19, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

During the summer games fest 2023 live streams, People are calling video games names from words to gollum, (For example Cyberpunk 2077 to Gollum 2077 and Assassin's Creed to Gollim's Creed) It just goes to show about LOTR Gollum negative reception of 2023 Xstronomy007 (talk) 16:46, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

We have news that Daedalic is switch to publishing and dropping the Gollum sequel, so that is clearly going to put Gollum on this list per the standards for it. Just need to have some context for this news to be able to write it well. --Masem (t) 17:15, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

for later ref [7], [8] Masem (t) 18:19, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello Neighbor?

Upon release, the game was panned by critics and gamers. Having a critic score of 38 out of 100 and the user score of 4.9 out of 10 for PC on Metacritic. Should we added on the list? Xstronomy007 (talk) 22:21, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

We need more than just a low score to be added. Given the game got a sequel and the like, I really don't see any lasting impact from that game. Masem (t) 23:30, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Games that gained negative reception (outside review bombs) later in their life

Currently there are two live-service games, Destiny 2 and Overwatch 2, which have been seeing a lot of dislike from the player communities (D2 due to how there seems to be not attention to specific game modes or other features, OW2 due to MTX and the change of PVE content). Neither right now would qualify because these are shortterm bursts of dislike, but if these were continued trends and well reflected in the sources, would these type of situations qualify? Masem (t) 16:56, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Overwatch 2 as possible

Since launch there has been some concern about OW2 and that OW1 had to die tet it thrive. But with yesterday's announcement that planned pve have been scrapped. Mostly rumblings in the community but it could get more commentary. Masem (t) 20:42, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Overwatch 2 has a Metacritic score of 79. Salty fans are by themselves to sufficient to include the game here. Cortador (talk) 11:31, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't see OW2 landing here. It's more like controversy over developer decisions than actual negative reception of the game. -- ferret (talk) 13:13, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

When Overwatch 2 was released on steam, it almost immediatly became the worst reviewed game on Steam with as of writing this, 9% of players recommened this title, giving the steam page Overwhelmingly Negative

As one reviewer says "Overwatch porn creators work harder than game developers"

Although It won't be on the list and more on the List of controversial video games but it's just a pipe dream for me Xstronomy007 (talk) 22:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Should Mortal Kombat 1 switch be on the list?

Considering the controversy regarding the MK1 port on the Switch and its many issues shouldnt it be on here? 174.240.251.121 (talk) 22:59, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Let's wait a while longer before we add it. Ed Boon said that it would get update's. So let's wait and see. 98.118.17.222 (talk) 15:21, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Probability not, it's a just a port that is a downgrade, so it's least likely to be on the list Xstronomy007 (talk) 22:01, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Cyberpunk DLC

Whelp, we gotta update the cyberpunk 2077 section as the New update and DLC no longer makes the game run like a potato. Thunder lord370 (talk) 13:03, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

We've already addressed that CP2077's reception has improved since the troubled launch. However, if is clear from reliable sources that the new patch and DLC boost that even further, then yes, let's add that, but we need the sources first to work from. Masem (t) 04:10, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Pokemon Scarlet and Violet as possible contender

It has one of if not the lowest User Scores in the series history (on both Google and Metacritic). In order to boost the user score Pokemon fans resorted to attempting to prop up the game but just throwing a positive score up. It's the only Pokemon game that was given a green light for mass refunds. It's glitches break the game worse than other games upon the pages list. It's recieved the most backlash and has caused opionions to turn upon Pokemon as "The Bad" Nintendo Franchise. Cider621 (talk) 19:59, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

We don't use user scores, and the critic reviews seem reasonably fair. There hasn't been much impact of these score either. Really hard to justify it. Masem (t) 20:18, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Enchanted Portals

I think Enchanted Portals is a good contender for the list, because when it got announced, people compared it negatively to Cuphead, qualifying it to be a clone. When the game actually came out, critics reviewed it negatively for its bad controls, really unbalanced difficulty, lack of sound effects and sometimes inconsistent art style. 2001:861:D32:80A0:8030:BC36:7650:90F0 (talk) 07:54, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

It's not an ideal candidate in my opinion. Metacritic has six reviews for the game; Opencritic has ten but from very dubious sources. The game doesn't seem to have much metacommentary on its negative reception. The game's notoriety as a Cuphead clone is interesting but this sits in some ways to the side of its negative reception over its quality. There are plenty of games that are received poorly or have controversies; I think the inclusion criteria point to the need for sources that indicate some commentary or impact over how bad the game is. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 11:29, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Might be interesting to be on the list but only 6 reviews by critics on Metacritic is not eligible to be on this list, if any circumstances that the devs announce will announce they will no longer make video games after Enchanted Portals, it most likely to be on this list Xstronomy007 (talk) 20:23, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Skull Island: Rise of Kong

Here's a holding area to discuss the inclusion of Skull Island: Rise of Kong in future. Putting this discussion here as a few users have already enthusiastically attempted to do so. I think it is generally too soon and it is not appropriate at the current state. Despite a very well documented online reaction to the game's poor quality (IGN, Escapist, Kotaku, PC Gamer) and some evidence of a troubled production (Verge) the game is not high-profile and has not widely been actually reviewed (IGN). Given the game only came out a few days ago and lacks reliable review content, it is quite premature but hopefully this can serve as a starting point for a discussion if things improve. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 05:32, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Currently, it fails the list criteria on almost all points. It has no aggregator score at this time (that I saw in the article), it's only got 4 reliable reviews presented (10 are required). It's also a tie-in property. -- ferret (talk) 19:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Generally agree, although a tie-in isn't necessarily fatal (see Gollum) it does reduce the likelihood a poor quality licensed game is notable. At any rate, I'm inclined to say that this will not ever be eligible for inclusion. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 20:12, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion: CrossfireX

It received unfavorably reviews from critics and players and the servers shut down on May 18th of this year, similar to Babylon's Fall

Should we add it on the list or no? just saying Xstronomy007 (talk) 05:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Given how little this seems to be discussed (compared with Babylon's Fall), I think it doesn't meet the "notable" aspect. Masem (t) 05:31, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Unlikely - there is some more coverage not captured in the article, including a review by Edge, but not a lot. Even then, just because a game is agreed to be bad doesn't make it notable for its negative reception. There has to be an aspect of commentary that singles it out as poor. That doesn't seem to be present in the article other than Metacritic noting it had one of the lowest scores of the year. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:14, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposed removal of Mortal Kombat: Special Forces

I like the state of the article and think the entries are largely worthy, but there are some I'm not sure should be in the list. If I had to make one suggestion, it would be:

• Remove Mortal Kombat: Special Forces: There are three Mortal Kombat games cited between 1997 and 2001. Whilst two do have listicle "worst game" citations, Special Forces is an uncontroversial remove to me. Its score is sourced from seven Metacritic reviews, and comments on its reception only cite one "worst games" mention in a 2011 listicle from GamesRadar. I also really question the value of saturating the article with poorly received Mortal Kombat titles when the franchise as a whole is not generally seen as low quality. No talk page discussion in favor either.

Some other titles that should be improved in their sourcing are those that don't have substantive metacommentary on their reception on the talk page or article, but just seem to be here because they're games with low scores attached to high-profile franchises or developers, such as Alone in the Dark: Illumination, Babylon's Fall and Umbrella Corps. Stalin vs. Martians is also clearly shovelware which is discouraged.

Let me know what you think. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:56, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Part of what we are looking for in games notable for negative reception is the impact that negative reception had on the developers, publishers, or the like. for MK:Special Forces, we've got that the series was paused to better refocus the next game, which is a reasonable but weak reason to keep.

To contrast, Babylon's Fall was a major title but its poor reception led to its servers being closed rather quickly, which is why that's on this list. Masem (t) 13:28, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts. I know I am agitating the point a little, but there's no sources or discussion on any impact of Special Forces to the franchise on the game or franchise page. It does not seem correct that Special Forces led to a pause in any development given that Deadly Alliance was already under development from 1998 and released in 2002. It seems true that there was a glut of low-quality spinoff games, but adding them all absent other games in the same period seems to be excessive. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:50, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion: Rise of the Robots

It got very bad reviews when it came out and it is on Gameradar top 100 worst games list in 2014. It is a rather well known bad game that deserves to be on this list. Was promoted a lot in magazines back in the day. 87.51.178.26 (talk) 18:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion: The Simpsons Skateboarding

This game is as infamous bad as Simpsons Westling and argueable even worse @ 87.51.178.26 (talk) 17:49, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Typically falls under the "no tie-in or shovelware" category. What makes it standout? -- ferret (talk) 17:50, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It is as special and infamously bad as Westling. I know it got very negative reviews and are often paired up with Westling when talking about bad Simpsons games. I cant say what makes it specially standout, but i cant say that about Westling as well. They are both very bad games released close after each other. 87.51.178.26 (talk) 17:57, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article for Skateboarding gives 10 reviews for the game. Surely that are enough for being notable for the list? 87.51.178.26 (talk) 18:09, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It have two 1/10 reviews. Also from said Wikipedia article

Andrew Reiner of Game Informer said: "Never before have I seen a developer put forth such an effort to secure the Worst Game of the Year award. I'll even go as far to say that this may very well be the worst PlayStation 2 game on the market." Kevin Murphy of GameSpy said that "The Simpsons Skateboarding should be a case study in bad game design."

Also while this is OR, Simpsons Skateboarding is one of the most bashed game on YouTube (just from the quality of the game, not for other reasons) and i believe it is one of the more well known bad games in general.

I believe this is enough for the list but i am not an expert on this. 87.51.178.26 (talk) 20:23, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Was there some significant result from how bad it was reviewed? Its not a game I see on all-time worst game lists, so there would need to be a more significant impact to include, not just a badly reviewed game. Masem (t) 20:34, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Unlikely but definitely sound reasons for nomination. Some reviews are promisingly notable in how negative they are: the "one of the absolute worst" games played, "worst of 2002", "worst" Simpsons game, (GameSpot [9]) "worst PS2 game on the market" (Game Informer). But most others are milder - consensus with most of the archived reviews is that it's a poor Tony Hawk "rip-off" or "clone" (i.e. "average skateboarding game with the Simpsons license plopped on top" - Electronic Gaming Monthly [10]). Given what makes this noticeably "bad" is its tie-in/shovelware imitation of another genre or brand, it might be a little harder to argue for inclusion. As raised earlier it also doesn't seem to have raised much post-release commentary outside of Simpsons circles. No issue with having two Simpsons games in there - there's three Mortal Kombat (!) games, after all. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:33, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion: The Day Before

With this game getting notable coverage for it's bad release state (overwhelmingly negative on steam), the highly suspicious marketing and now the studio's (Fntastic) closure due to the poor sales of this game, I strongly suggest that The Day Before be nominated for this list. Sirfalcon11 (talk) 19:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

This might fall better on the commercial failures list. TDB has no reviews from reliable sources, only the negative user reviews, but that sent the devs to close up. So we have no way to judge its normal reception, but can judge its financial performance. Masem (t) 22:58, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

It's worse than that. A paying customer can't even buy the game now while the studio is trying to disappear from the internet: https://www.ign.com/articles/the-day-before-steam-fntastic Sirfalcon11 (talk) 00:26, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Don't see what that has to do with negative reception. Someone not being able to buy it means no one is out any money, so them pulling it should be seen as good, not bad, if the game is as bad (or a 'scam') as people are saying. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 13:33, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Agree re. the conflation with poor performance and poor reception. If the reliable reviews don't exist, it falls short of the standard for this list, but good sourcing for the game's disastrous rollout could be a good case study for a commercial failure. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 01:06, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

The "Failed financially" part is not from the game failed marketing, but instead mass refunds on steam Xstronomy007 (talk) 01:36, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

All the statements from the dev say "poor sales". While that could include the fact they had a lot of sales that then got refunded, we don't know if that was the primary reason. The case clearly can be made for commercial failure, with noting being the worst reviewed game and many trying to get refunds (and then Steam now automatically allowing for all purchasers to get refunds).

However, I'd also like to see if there's more exploration of the question being raised if this was all a scam, and give some time for our RSes to determine if that was the case. As if it was a scam, it would not belong on either list. Masem (t) 05:50, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Agree, we don't know if it was a scam or not nor the sales reasoning

But I do point out that Scamming is consider fraud Xstronomy007 (talk) 06:10, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

it's a scam that crashed hard with both players and games journalists hating it with IGN, GamesRadar and Rock Paper Shotgun giving it VERY negative reviews Sirfalcon11 (talk) 03:53, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

I think it bears noting that the three sources you listed seem to be the only major reviews of the game, for what it's worth. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 04:46, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Are we going to do the same situation as Babylon's Fall? Xstronomy007 (talk) 01:57, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Update on The Day Before

They announce that they are closing the servers down due to Fntastic closure: https://twitter.com/playdaybefore/status/1738112110385914052 Xstronomy007 (talk) 07:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Forspoken

Mainly regarded as mediocre. 0GDuckyD00m (talk) 17:14, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Simply having mediocre reviews is not sufficient for inclusion. Masem (t) 17:32, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Cyberpunk is at a positive on Metacritic 2603:8000:6E00:4871:248E:71FE:8540:883 (talk) 04:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

As stated in the Scarlet and Violet section, Forspoken is a valid suggestion, but the sourcing is not remotely comparable to the notability for the negative reception for the Cyberpunk article. If you think there is notable negative reception out there, you need to make the case for it rather than the angle that people saw it as "mediocre". ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion: Cube World

Of course, I understand that this game is not particularly popular and not considered "enough legendary to be memorized as bad", but more videos have been made about it than Superman 64. Majority of Cube World's fanbase prefers to play alpha version or modified latest version rather than finished vanilla game because of "region-locking" that makes your game items disappear after leaving the region and many, many flaws... 188.163.69.27 (talk) 03:58, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I'd consider Cube World closer to "not notable at all" than "explicitly notable for negative reception" -- ferret (talk) 04:11, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hoshi Wo Miru Hito

This very infamious game in Japan (not that much in the west because this game was Famicom exclusive) that created a term kusoge. Many years after it launched there are still articles talking about how bad it is https://www.destructoid.com/legendary-crappy-game-hoshi-wo-miru-hito-gets-completed-fan-translation/ From Wikipedia:

Reviewers noted the often confusing and highly difficult gameplay. Japanese gamers have dubbed it "Densetsu no Kusoge" (伝説のクソゲー, lit. '"Legendary Crappy Game').

http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/hoshi-wo-miru-hito/ 87.51.178.26 (talk) 15:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I've looked at sources for the origin of Kusoge and it does not appear to be tied to this game, but to Ikki (video game). (in part being the earlier-released game). We'd need a lot more sourcing than these two to support including either game here. Masem (t) 01:53, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I always thought the origin of Kusoge was from Hoshi Wo Miru Hito. Now i learned something new. And from sources i believe there are a lot but they are japanese only, as this game is far more notable and known in Japan (as a Famicom only game would be) I also very much believe that this game DO have a lasting impact. I did find this source from 2017 where this game was listed https://www.famitsu.com/news/201703/11128780.html

Try using the japanese name for sources 星をみるひと 87.51.178.26 (talk) 18:34, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

M&M's Kart Racing

On one hand this is a shovelware tie in game, so some here might say that it is not notable for that alone (even with the fact that there are other tie in games on the list) But there are some reasons why it might qualify anyway, like being on several worst games list and being in Guinness World Records 2011 Gamers Edition as worst kart racing game on GameRankings

M&M's Kart Racing was critically panned upon release. It has a GameRankings score of 23% and 22% for the Wii and DS versions, respectively, earning it Guinness World Records Gamer's Edition 2011's award for the lowest-rated kart game. IGN cited that "commercial mascots make terrible video games" and that the game "barely uses the license at all". GameSpot opined that the game "could put you off M&M's for life". It also awarded the game "Flat-out Worst Game" award in its "Best of 2008" awards. GameZone also panned it, as did Nintendojo. Gameplay footage of the game was featured as Joystiq's "Today's most hilariously atrocious video", stating that the gameplay footage "is a true testament to the wrong way to build a kart racer". The game was chosen as one of GameZone's "most abysmal racing games ever", due to the sluggish pace of the game and the dialogue. GamesRadar ranked it 32nd on their "The 50 Worst Games of All Time." They criticized the Wii's motion controls making the karts impossible to handle and the absence of items to use in races, saying most Mario Kart rip-offs include the use of items. 87.51.178.26 (talk) 15:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

That really doesn't make it have long term notability for negative reception, just a bad game that didn't get much coverage afterwards. Masem (t) 16:18, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

It did get Guinness World Records Gamer's Edition 2011's award for the lowest-rated kart game. That must count for something? 87.51.178.26 (talk) 16:34, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Also being the flat out worst Mario Kart clone in a list that counts many shovelware tie in Mario Kart clones must count for something. Mario Kart are one of the most ripped off game for shovelware tie in games and being the worst in a genre known for a lot of bad shovelware tie in games must count for something. Not just one of the worst, but flat out the worst rated Kart Racing game on GameRankings. 87.51.178.26 (talk) 16:37, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

You said with Simpsons Skateboarding that it was not in any worst games ever list. However 87.51.178.26 (talk) 19:27, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your ideas. I appreciate that you've done due diligence on this one and brought some research to the table to help this time. The suggestions are great but it can take time to properly consider, and there's been four suggestions posted this week...

Generally I'm a no on this one again. I'd agree that it satisfies the general criteria that usually puts games on the list. There's two factors that I think limit this one:

(1) Shovelware and tie-in games are not included as they do not typically have a reasonable expectation of quality. Many publications relish in lambasting poor-quality games for entertainment value; it doesn't make the latest Barbie game notable. So the case is whether this one is remarkably poor in a way that makes it notable. The "worst game" retrospective sources are good, so maybe I would agree that this game is unusually a little more well covered than most shovelware in its negative reception.

(2) Most of the games on the list have long-term significance arising from their negative reception. The games are included because their negative reception prompted an unexpected critical or commercial failure, the collapse or hiatus of a franchise or publisher, that sort of thing. I think some of the outliers probably shouldn't be on the list, like Stalin vs. Martians. So in this case, yes, the kart racer game sucked and people pointed it out, but the reception itself wasn't notable - it was an expected consequence for a shovelware game and nothing really came of it. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:15, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I think Simpsons Skateboarding and M&M's Kart Racing are far more notable than Stalin vs Marines 87.51.178.26 (talk) 23:31, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree with you there completely, although that's probably not the key takeaway. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

When a game is on both several worst games lists and flat out the worst rated kart racer,it meets your question if the case is whether this one is remarkably poor in a way that makes it notable. The GWR Gamers Edition award in 2011 over two years later also gives some later notably to this game. Also it says that shovelware and tie in games makes it harder to be listed, not that it automatically disqualify. There are other tie in games on this list 87.51.178.26 (talk) 23:36, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Also would be nice if you can respond to Rise of the Robots and Hoshi Wo Miru Hito above. I am very surprised both games are not listed in this article, given how legendary bad both games are. 87.51.178.26 (talk) 23:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Simply being on a few worst games of year YYYY is not sufficient to include..it needs a lasting legacy or some impact. This might be reason for the Hoshi game, but not rise of the robots or this kart racer. Masem (t) 11:46, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

To play the devil's advocate of 87.51.178.26 and their suggestions, the above criteria are independent, not cumulative. A lasting legacy or impact would be a strong indicia to inclusion, but not necessarily essential. It's just that the other criteria - consistently negative reviews and accolades, notable reporting on user response, not a shovelware title - aren't clearly satisfied either. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:18, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Pokémon Scarlet and Violet

Has lowest review score of any game in the series with fan reaction being mostly negative. 0GDuckyD00m (talk) 17:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Review scores aren't low enough to consider, and just because fans were upset at how released does mean appropriate to include. Masem (t) 17:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Cyberpunk has relatively high scores 2603:8000:6E00:4871:248E:71FE:8540:883 (talk) 04:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Look at the article for Cyberpunk and Scarlet & Violet. One has quite a lot to say about the reception of the game beyond its technical issues: the disastrous launch, the mismatch in expectations to the game's hype, a proposed class action, and the crunch culture of the publisher affecting the game's release. The other does not. I agree that Scarlet and Violet does have some notable comments around the technical issues putting refunds on the table like Cyberpunk, but the breadth and context of the sourcing for Cyberpunk is far wider than fans not liking the game. With respect to your valid suggestion, they're not comparable. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

What about Nintendo offering mass refunds on the Nintendo eShop, of which rarely happens, as the site/app does not usually offer refunds.

Enough people were upset to convinve Nintendo to do so. Cider621 (talk) 01:51, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

It would be good to get a sense of the coverage of this. A brief look at the news articles around that - of which there are admittedly quite a few - leads only to the key messages of "some people on Reddit said they've been getting refunds" and not really in-depth coverage on the technical issues and refunds. I imagine there's definitely more, but there is the "must discuss such a response in significant detail" hurdle to get through from the criteria above. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 02:22, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Metacritic says the reviews are mixed, so no Xstronomy007 (talk) 23:44, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Coming around to this one but I think the supporting sources need to be much stronger than what's in the article or otherwise linked here. Is there significant, sustained coverage of the relationship between technical issues, negative review scores and fan reaction? I'm mindful the "what about this" approach with suggestions does endear one to the status quo maybe a little too strongly. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 02:43, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Axie Infinity

I dont know if it should be listed here or in the List of controversial video games, but there are to me no doubt it should be in one of them. Both the crypto/play2earn model and the gameplay itself have got a lot of negative press. The negative press is not just a flash in the pan, but something that lasts for several years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axie_Infinity 87.51.178.26 (talk) 15:10, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't think it goes on either list. Crypto-based games are broadly controversial and discussed at Blockchain game (but there is room for expansion), and I don't see a lot of long-term notability for this game. Masem (t) 15:23, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Have you seen the sources on the Wikipedia article? It ranges from 2020 to 2023. That and the fact https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2006/11/3/article-p716.xml exists that have quiet a bit focus on Axie, the fact that a lot of sources call it a Ponzi or pyramid scheme plus the fact that North Korean hackers founded by the DPRK gov stole 630 million usd from this game. With those two things i found it really weird not to see it in this or List of controversial video games. And this is a game that a lot of sources talks about each year, this is a very notable game.

Longevity of the project

Researchers have questioned the game's longevity, as there have been repeated accusations that Axie Infinity is a Ponzi or pyramid scheme. Per this accusation, Axie Infinity lacks long-term economic durability since it has to rely on players continuing to invest in the game. The in-game economy depends on the existing number of actively involved players:

Like the majority of P2E models, [Axie Infinity] relies on players financial input/output to regulate the value of the in-game currency. In other words, the games [sic] economy is influenced by the number of players investing into [Axie Infinity] (...)

— 

Axie Infinity's basic economic design has been described as a speculative bubble since the game creates a gig economy where they have to invest more and more to make a profit. Andreas Hackethal of the Goethe Business School has referred to the concept as pump and dump, maintaining that players are only willing to spend money and time playing the game because of their hope that the prices will increase and speaking of a pay-to-earn rather than play-to-earn game. Bernd Richter of Fidelity National Information Services considers the game a pyramid scheme.

Potential negative psychological effects

Games like Axie Infinity are often associated with psychological problems on the part of their players. In this context the main point of argument is the suspicion that players might play the game primarily for monetary reasons rather than for the purpose of entertainment: The extrinsic motivation to play outweighs the pure entertainment factor. According to critics,[neutrality is disputed] this leads to a sunk-cost-fallacy where players primarily play the game due to the fact that they have already invested a lot of money and time into it. Furthermore, the combination of financial speculation and videogame is said to potentially worsen the condition of gambling addicts involved in the game. 87.51.178.26 (talk) 17:32, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Going on a limb here to say I do actually think controversial games could be a good fit. However a source analysis needs to confirm that the academic analysis of the P2E model cited in the Axie article is talking specifically about the design and impact of Axie Infinity and not more broadly about P2E of which Axie is used as an example. Otherwise it's a lot of fluff that should be in the article for P2E. As for negative reception, academic criticism is not the same as critical or player reception, which is not covered in the article. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I guess this belongs on the controversial games list rather than this one? It is easily a very known controversial game and you cant get more controversial than North Korean hackers founded by the DPRK gov stole 630 million usd and a lot of sources call it a Ponzi or pyramid scheme. 87.51.178.26 (talk) 08:00, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Redfall

Generally negative reviews from a majority of outlets. Terrible fan reaction. Loads of technical issues and many many more aspects of criticism. IGN gave it a 4 and its metacritic score is 56 on Xbox and 53 on PC with a user score of 3.5. Opencrtic is at a 57 average with 14% of critics recommendeding it. 0GDuckyD00m (talk) 23:55, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

However, nothing has happened with Arkane or the like. We're avoiding filling this list with games that have only gotten mediocre scores and no ultimate outcome that can be discussed at length. Masem (t) 01:16, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

At least i post games that have very NEGATIVE reviews. I dont understand why people post mediocre games, this game dont even pass the sub 50 metacritic critia. I think this list is very lacking (i also want Sonic Genesis GBA port and Crash Boom Bang here) but even i would not include this on the list. 87.51.178.26 (talk) 08:07, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Family Party: 30 Great Games Obstacle Arcade

Pretty much the same reasons as my last suggestion. 2600:1006:B060:A58F:2596:73F3:DDC7:FAC (talk) 21:02, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Simply being a low-scoring game is not sufficient. It needs to have a legacy related to being a low-scoring game, and this seems like something that few people know about. Masem (t) 21:04, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Charlie's Angels

The page says it is considered one of the worst games of all time, and it has a decent (10+) amount of reviews to back this up, but for some reason, it’s not on the list. I think it should be added. 2600:1006:B060:A58F:2596:73F3:DDC7:FAC (talk) 20:38, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Low scoring but also would fall into shovelware (as a movie tie-in game). --Masem (t) 21:05, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article says it is the lowest rated Gamecube game and it also on the worst ever game list on Gameradar. It also have a lot of reviews, so it is clearly notable for negative reception. Being the lowest rated Gamecube game do give it an legacy. 87.51.178.26 (talk) 23:20, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Skull Island: Rise of Kong

I know movie tie-in games are usually not considered for the list, but Skull Island: Rise of Kong I believe is a different case. There are plenty of negative reviews to back this up. Games like this would usually go forgotten and recieve little to no attention, but the extreme negative reception to this game caused it to recieve notability and attention throughout the industry in articles from various news sources due to just how bad the game was. (see this article for example) - Huntergem1 (talk) 14:49, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Both this and The Walking Dead: Destinies got a lot of negative criticism, but as both were tie ins, neither seem to have created any type of impact on the industry (conpare to the Gollum game that caused that studio to shift back). Masem (t) 15:26, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

See this discussion: [11] I think the barrier here is that very few outlets actually reviewed the game upon release. Has this changed over the last few months? ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:07, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

There is a 1 out of 10 review here in Danish https://www.gamereactor.dk/skull-island-rise-of-kong-1252143/

Personally i think super low reviews like below 3 on Metacrtic should be an auto include, as long as there are a good number like 10 of said reviews. Said reviews or other articles that are very negative of said game (like a top x worst games list on a notable website) means that it is notable for negative reception. Most tie in games are at least mediocre or just normal bad. The truly god awful ones that gets on worst games ever lists are rare. 87.51.178.26 (talk) 23:16, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

It's only up to 5 reviews on Metacritic, but I can instead point you to numerous articles that are reporting on the disaster and extreme negative reception outside of the critics, I think proving that this game was notable in some way beyond that typical of a tie-in game.

https://gamerant.com/skull-island-rise-of-kong-gameplay-graphics-bad-reaction/

https://kotaku.com/skull-island-king-kong-worst-game-2023-gollum-switch-1850933945

https://www.techradar.com/gaming/skull-island-rise-of-kong-was-apparently-made-in-a-year-which-is-why-it-looks-so-questionable

https://www.ign.com/articles/the-bad-king-kong-game-is-part-of-a-vicious-cycle-of-licensed-titles-devs-say

https://www.ign.com/articles/the-internet-is-already-roasting-worst-game-of-2023-skull-island-rise-of-kong

https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/20/23925326/skull-island-rise-of-kong-development-gamemill-entertainment

I'd also like to argue that this potentially will have an impact on the industry, because many artciels I've found in researching the reaction to this game are highlighting the working conditions found at the company and Gamemill partners, especially because the company was only given a year to make the game. Huntergem1 (talk) 15:45, 11 January 2024 (UTC)