Talk:List of video games notable for negative reception/Archive 1

message: As it has been suggested many times, and it would potentially solve many controversies, why not name the article something like "List of controversial videogames", as the word "controversy" also appears right in the first lines of the article. And, since "controversial" does not mean "worst ever", it would greatly reduce any subjectivities the latter term implies.
About the contents: the article could include, like it actually does now, games that are simply "controversial" for a reason or another: e.g. clamorous flops, kitsch games, REALLY bad games, racist/controversial games, and adopt a labeling scheme which should be added before or after each game's description, briefly caractherizing the game according to its status as this can be traced down by e.g. autoritative review sources or "univeral consensus", and will help disambiguate between "worst ever" or merely "controversial" games.
Some examples of this:
* E.T. could have the labels commercial flop, poorly made, considered worst ever.
* Wonder Momo could have the labels unusual humour, usually ridiculed.
* Ethnic Cleansing could have the labels racist contents, poorly made.
* Daikatana: could be, quite safely, be labeled as clamorous flop, vaporware and mediocre or below expectations.
Please share your ideas and thoughts of this, this article can be made quite good! EpiVictor 11:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, good idea, and a bit less subjective, but then you could only include games that were controversial. You could create a seperate article for games that didn't fare well commercially or critically, but you could NOT do a page on the Wikipedia that ranks games based on people's opinions. This is not the place for it; there are many places elsewhere where you can post opinions and reviews - the Wikipedia is NOT for opinions and reviews. Any articles with 'considered' or 'poor' or 'mediocre', or anything that isn't simply a statement of verifiable fact. --DarrenBaker 17:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title & contents change/addition proposal, please read 

message: There is absolutely no way that this article should be on the WikiPedia in its current form. It is interminably POV, and needs serious work to make it NPOV. I think we should rename and revamp it so it is either 'List of commercially unsuccesful video games' and/or 'List of controversial video games'. This article is simply indefensible in its current form.  --DarrenBaker 16:04, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Saying it's just "POV" is just too convenient, please provide some concrete arguments or counterexamples about specific games or listing criteria instead of a generic label. Also, you could very well expand the first section of the article, "Criticism of the concept" in a way similar to List_of_films_that_have_been_considered_the_worst_ever. It is a FACT that there are bad games out there, people dedicate them websites (even cults, if you prefer) and there is no acceptable "official" game reviewing method. Game reviewers themself are seldom considered "NPOV", but, as stated in the article, the do have the power to alter a game's fate. EpiVictor 16:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Yup, that subjectivity matter is indeed a thorn in the side for the article's credibility, yet I believe it can be turned into a very informative article if enough people cooperate. Maybe we should call for a peer review or settle some standards for citing sources and possibly playtesting. I currently do much of the article's maintenance myself and try to personally seek sources and review games in order to verify their allegged "badness". I've also toned down, deleted or commented out a few undocumented or unverifiable (for now) additions, but we could use some "official" standards for reviewing and sourcing, and, first of all, a team of people willing to do some research and perhaps improve the writing style of the article. EpiVictor 20:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree, I think about 50% of the 900 or so US NES games could fall into this page. I think we either need to explode the size of this article or cull it down to just very notable and famous examples. Rm999 21:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hopelessly POV 

message: Videogame version of the popular books, only with terrible graphics making it very hard to find him, immensely boring gameplay, only eight levels and no music.
http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/nes/review/563477.html
http://www.siliconera.com/nes/whereswaldo/031104.htm
http://www.seanbaby.com/nes/w20-12.htm
Savager 12:50, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's Waldo? (NES) 

message: Apart from its amusing title, this was considered a poor parody of the Myst series with no gameplay and a bad sense of humour.
http://www.gamerevolution.com/review/pc/pyst
It's an old and obscure game, I can't find any other reviews for it. I highly doubt anyone would have given it a decent review though.
Savager 17:18, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  P.Y.S.T. (PC) 

message: Surely some of the Army Men games deserve a spot on the list? Over 20 games in 8 years - if nothing else 3DO deserve an award for quickest game series to sell out. I (unsurprisingly) haven't read reviews for all of them, but I remember reading a few and seeing them getting very low scores. Savager 17:10, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Army Men (various platforms) 

message: Game Revolution had to change their review system for this game. They didn't want to give it an 'F' because they thought that was too high. They gave it their first and only 'F-'. The review for it is here; they explain it better (and much more humourously) than I could:- 
* http://www.gamerevolution.com/review/pc/survivor
Most of the reviews from other websites are pretty low too:-
* http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin/review/532099.html
* http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/survivor/index.html 
Savager 16:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survivor (PC) 

message: This game received the lowest score by far in Your Sinclair magazine, receiving just 9% in December 1992 . I would find other review sources for it, but the publishers Alternative didn't send review copies to any magazine - YS had to buy it themselves months after it was originally released (hence the 'Ones That Got Away' tag on the review) - so they must have known it was pretty bad. Sorry I couldn't find a HTML/plain text source for the review; this is a magazine scan. --Stevefarrell 12:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Count Duckula 2 (ZX Spectrum) 

message: Considered by many as one of the worst Atari 2600 games of all time due to its awful controls and programming.  
I didt even know there was such a game. I thought you made a mistake for the SNES version. I say yes to adding this, but add more sources and make it clear this isnt Nintendo.guitarhero777777 03:15, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Star Fox (Atari 2600) 

message: A terrible FPS for PC and XBOX that recieved only a 2 from Gamespot and a 3 from IGN.
Put it in, I say. It's actually a sequel to World War II Combat: Road to Berlin which is already on the list. It's from the same developer (Direct Action Games) and suffers from the same problems of the first game. Spartan 234 22:20, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: World War II Combat: Iwo Jima

message: see here the review in british game magazine amiga power, it was so bad, because it basically didn't work at all, and therefore shameful to be released, it got 2% (and about 10% in average in the british game press, see also the page for Amiga Power Romanista 14:33, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this site, the game got 56% in Amiga Joker (a German magazine) and 65% in CU Amiga. For the way those magazines marked games (ie awarding them marks just for existing and having a box, and giving games high marks because the PR people asked nicely), that's also pretty low. I don't know about The One or Amiga Action or any of those though. Amiga Action probably gave it 95%, the same mark they gave everything. --Stevefarrell 23:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  International Rugby Challenge (Amiga)

message: A terrible port of the First Person Shooter PC game. 
I've heard this game is mediocre, but not terrible. Fableheroesguild 19:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doom (SNES Version) 

message: *Doom (1997, Sega Saturn): All Game Guide gave 1.5 stars out of 5 to this port, the worst rating given to any version of Doom--they even gave the Super Nintendo version two.  I haven't played it, but from what they say it sure sounds terrible.
:That's perhaps because the comparisons were done with the original game, and at the time very few -console or otherwise- versions of the game could compete with the original PC one in terms of gameplay smoothness, 3D engine completeness, third party support, and lack of censorship, so what most magazines did was comparing the source ports to the original PC Doom itself, instead of reviewing them as stand-alone games for a given platform. EpiVictor 15:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doom (Saturn version) 

message: A terrible port of the arcade classic. Ranked 9th on GameSpy's 10 most shameful games of all time.
,  Poor graphics, bad sound, bad controls, bad jumping, bad collision detection for the hammer, and only two of the levels from arcade version.
More substance and more reviews and you have a game warranting inclusion. guitarhero777777 22:53, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Donkey Kong (Intellivision Version) 

message: An odd game designed to teach children about diabetes. , , 
:GameRankings  mentions a site that game a 2.5/5 (50%) score to this game, but unluckily the review is no longer available. Let's see...other than that there's a bunch of negative Gamefaqs reviews,  Abysmal player ratings at Gamespot... well I guess it's an "unusual" game at most, which is rendered extremely hard by Captain's Novolin inability to attack...and the premise of the game is somewhat controversial ( this particular reviewer with diabetes didn't particularly like the idea behind it). Nope, that's not a great game in my book. Further discussion? EpiVictor 00:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this is a bad game. Misguided, perhaps, but as a side-scroller it's just generic, not terrible. This is one reason why I'm trepadatious about citing Seanbaby as a source. He's a funny guy, but he's writing for comedy first, and makes it quite clear that his process of evaulating games is not making any attempt to be truly scientific or objective. The motivations behind calling Captain Novalin the worst game ever seem to lean closer to "lol game about diabetes wtf" than "this game is truly atrocious, and as one of the 20 worst games ever, it is worse than thousands upon thousands of other games". See the comment above for a good example of this reaction. Sorry if I come across as a humorless nerd in saying this, but he's no Roger Ebert. --70.108.116.231 04:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Captain Novolin 

message: The NES Pitfall game. When Activision planned to bring Pitfall to the NES, they let Pony Canyon develop and program it and the
game got a lot of negative feedback, citing poor graphics, unresponsive controls, randomness, and Harry's resemblence to Mario. , ,
, 
This game can be played here.
You have the sources. It seems terrible. Add it. guitarhero777777 22:51, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Pitfall 

message: A terrible Crazy Taxi clone on the PC. It recieved a 1.4/10 on Gamespot.com, and users of Gamerankings.com gave it a 29%/100.Fableheroesguild 18:20, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ambulance Driver

message: This game is part of Penn & Teller's Smoke and Mirrors.  It consists entirely of driving a bus from Tucson to Las Vegas in real time with a maximum speed of 45 MPH.  When the 8 hour trip is finished the player recieves 1 point and is expected to make the return trip.  Scenery consisting entirely of desert land and cacti make the high point of the game a bug splat on the windshield every now and then.
I'm definitely on the fence on this one. Pros: It is a terrible game. Has benn released for emulators and bootleg Sega CDs. CONS: Mini-game, Originaly in unreleased game. Fableheroesguild 22:02, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This game is terrible, but I don't think it should be on this list (except maybe as an honorable mention). The reason for this is because the game was terrible on purpose. The creators of the game essentially prepared a cynical response to the anti-violence in videogames campagain at the time. The game was made terribly boring to make a statement about videogames needing to be exciting. --Whiteknight 22:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Desert Bus]]

message: Circa 2001 & 2003. FMV games. Acting is mind-blowingly bad, dialogue is cheezy, and continuity errors abound (i.e., Indians who shoot guns at one cowboy, who then falls on the ground, full of arrows). Note: Worst rated games in the US edition of PC gamer with 8% and 4%, respectively. No URL's available, probably because no one wants to remember this terrible game! P.H. - Kyoukan, UASC 01:31, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mad Dog McCree 1&2

message: Apparently, a poor 3DO clone of Revolution X, which was a clamorous flop itself.
More substance and sources. no inclusion. guitarhero777777 22:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Virtuoso 

message: Anyone who's played this will know what I mean. Bad concept and execution, poor controls, graphics and sound, and the terminator can be seen driving his cycle backwards during the chase scenes. SNES and Mega Drive, not to be confused with the microcomputer games or the arcade game, which was a noted success.--BaseballFury 00:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Terminator 2 (Platformer)

message: I remember reading PC Zone years ago about 1998 or 1999 that in a top 100 worst games feature that this came out as the worst. I never played it myself but on their brief review it appears dreadful and seems to be more of a 3DO game as opposed to a PC Game. Basically comprised of watching still photos whilst a badly acted story played out.  ,  & . --Wrh1973 19:20, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Plumbers Don't Wear Ties

message: I don't know a lot about this game (designed for the Xbox and PC), but I do know that it scores 19 at Metacritic, and that Gamespot gave it a 1.1 (abysmal); they said something like, "Letting a kid play this might teach them to hate video games, which I sure don't want to do."
Gamespot never gave it a rating. the 1.1 was by IGN, but reading the other reviews, we should add it in. guitarhero777777 04:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Nickelodeon Party Blast]] 

message: (Game Boy Advance, 2003)
Dragon Ball Z : Taiketsu, a 2D fighter made by US Team Webfoot technologies, is considered by most as the worst Dragon Ball Z game ever made, and surely one the worst games ever. 
Previous DBZ games ( Legacy of Goku series ) by Webfoot received average scores, but it was not the case here. Reviewers pointed the poor graphics (ridiculous characters with bizarre proportions, horrible backgrounds), the non-respect of the DBZ atmosphere (no voices, poor introduction scene) and terrible gameplay ( ridiculous number of attacks by characters, slow and boring fights). Beeing one of the numberous games made during the DBZ revival (due to the arrival of DBZ in the United States), the game didn't match against games like Dragon Ball Z : Supersonic Warriors or Dragon Ball Z : Budokai. The game get a 1/10 on french bigget videogames site Gamekult, which said "we wonder if devellopers ever saw one DBZ Episode before making it", 1/5 on Gamespy which claimed "It's a buggy and thoroughly uninteresting mess ". Gamespot followed the same way, saying the game was perhaps worst than Ultimate Battle 22, and giving it 2,7/10 ("terrible"). IGN reviewer said about Taiketsu "this first outing is incredibly weak", before giving it the less severe, but still poor score, 4/10. 
Added by Delfiris, 05/12/2006
Add more terrible (2.5 out of 10 or below reviews) reviews we have a game warranting inclusion. guitarhero777777 22:47, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Dragon Ball Z : Taiketsu]]

message: Imagine a football game where the moment play starts, every single character on the screen got up, and started running directly towards the ball. Blockers didn't block, receivers didn't receive (unless you were explicitly controlling him to go deep) and nearly every play ended in a horrible dog pile. Collision detection was terrible, graphics were bad (even for an N64 game), and AI was terrible. --Whiteknight 22:51, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NFL Quarterback Club 

message: *Airport Tycoon 2 (2002, PC) scores 0% at Rotten Tomatoes, has an average rating of 3.3/10 on that site, and is rated a rare two stars on Amazon.com. User:gmeric13@aol.com
I would add it and even add my own opinion if the game installed correctly on my computer, but find another terrible review instead of amazon due to 2/5 equaling 4/10 or mediocre.guitarhero777777 22:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Airport Tycoon 2]]

message: Admittedly, this is hardly one of the worst games ever.  But then, a lot of films are on the Films considered the worst ever page, and they aren't even among the worst ever, and so I think Streets of SimCity fits right in.  I used to have this game, and everything about it was so-so at best: the graphics were crappy, the sound effects were so cheap that they were borrowed from an action movie, the cars deliberately run into you, the movies you are forced to watch if you lose are depressing and repugnant, and even though the races are pretty easy to win, the regular missions are beyond impossible. [gmeric13@aol.com]
Sounds mediocre, but not laughably bad. No inclusion. guitarhero777777 22:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Streets of SimCity]]

message: Psycho (1988, Amiga), a game based on Alfred Hitchcock's 1960 film of the same name.  The very poor premise, about several jewels and their caretaker being stolen, is complemented by the fact that you already know who the culprit is (Norman Bates).  All you can do inside the Bates motel is find the jewels, the caretaker, and take a fucking shower, and many people are around the house who will put you to sleep.  You only have four hours to find everything, so by sleeping, you will be further away from completing your mission.
No sources. Sounds like a person who wasted his money, but has nothing to be able to put it on this list. guitarhero777777 22:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Psycho 

message: This game got savaged by both IGN and Gamespot and generally by other reviewers as well.  It was criticized for bad graphics, a derivative nature, bugs and most of all difficult controls.  and  Ace of Sevens 18:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gravity Games Bike: Street, Dirt, Vert

message: It was one of the worst video games by many, so why can't we add this to the article?
:This is widely held to be the weakest Spyro game, but I don't recall anyone calling it the worst game ever and it has a thoroughly mediocre 49% for GCN and 56% for PS2 at Game Rankings. I don't think this fits at all.Ace of Sevens 14:11, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add "Spyro: Enter The Dragonfly" 

message: For the PC, anyone who played this game will contest to its crapiness.
Chipwich 08:36, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Howzat Cricket 

message: As it appeared in the recently added and removed entry:
*Dark Castle (1991, Genesis) by Electronic Arts, a port of the black-and-white Macintosh game of the same name. The difficult controls of the Macintosh version (keyboard + mouse) were made even more difficult and unresponsive during the port to Genesis. The primitive sound effects were downsampled further (most likely due to the unorthodox compression algorithm used in the Macintosh version) and the graphics were barely colorized. All the bugs from the Macintosh version remain, and several were added.
Ok...the story behind it seems interesting, how about some references, too? EpiVictor 18:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dark Castle 

message: Anyone who has played this game will know what I'm talking about.  I bought it one day at Target and was disgusted by how bad it really was.  Plus it scores 13.5% at Gamerankings.
Add it a 1.4 out of ten average (which is what 13.5/100 equals) must be mentioned in this article. add sources and we have gold. guitarhero777777 22:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Tabloid Tycoon]] 

message: In Waterworld on the PC and Virtual Boy you experience a painful game. Gamespot gave it a 4.5 and Nintendo Power ranked it as number 4 on the 5 Worst Games ever list in their 200th issue. According to most the graphics are sub-par a best and the game gets extremely tedious and diffecult as it goes along. They also say the Soundtrack is horrobile.
If every review was like nintendo Power's i would add it, but gamespot's review is just too much of an average score for me to recommend adding it. guitarhero777777 22:37, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Waterworld

message: Added by anon, who tried to put it back without discussing it, so here it is, up for discussion. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 10:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  South Park Rally 

message: Added by anon, who tried to put it back without discussing it, so here it is, up for discussion. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 10:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robocop 

message: I had this game when I was a kid and, fortunately, I didn't realize how bad it was until years later. Anyway, this should be on the list because it was panned by a good deal of people (The only one I know of was that the Video Game Critic gave it an F, though ()) and it got a bunch of people at Acclaim laid off. I know that this isn't the greatest case to add this game, but when I have some time, i'll look for more sources. Hossmann 10:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Batman Forever 

message: Released by EA for the Sega Genesis. I can't seem to find much worthwhile information about this game - like many games in the early 90s, it just sorta vanished into obscurity - but - and I usually refrain from such hyperbolic statements - anyone who has played this game will agree that it's one of the absolute worst pieces of shit ever created. Ever conceived. This game is to side-scrollers what Thundra is to first-person shooters. It's a side-scroller with absolutely abominable control - the single biggest flaw in a smorgasboard of flaws. In addition, it features gratutious, cheesy blood, tacky and irritating voice samples, graphics that mistake digitization with quality, and invisible pits. Invisible. Pits. The only facet of a classically bad game that this game lacks is that it was not based on a licensed property. --70.108.116.231 04:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sword of Sodan

message: I can't believe this doesn't mention E.T. -- signed, your friendly neighbourhood catgirl collector Kyoufu Kawa — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.157.236.101 (talk) 21:23, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Older subjects 

message: this article needs to be revamped. games like big rigs, action 52 and atari pac man should be kept as they are widely considered flops but games like daikatna (sp) should be removed because it seems like opinion. --Phil 12:00, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  revamp 

message: The game Timeline has to be here. It was both hated by all and a commercial faliure.80.178.164.73 17:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's Timeline? 

message: lame name change.
so weak WookMuff 20:40, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  title 

message: Umm, the article is ok...but it can stand a LOT of improving.
For instance, what's THIS doing in an "official" encyclopedia?
"Seanbaby.com wrote, 'Superman looks a lot like a flying log in panties, and the entire world is covered in a dull green fog.' " 
Since WHEN is Seanbaby a "reliable source"? The answer is, he isn't. 
I especially didn't care for the way he dissed the graphics for Bible Adventures (after all, the game is meant for CHILDREN to play--not teens or adults.) So, my point is this: if you're making a game for children, then would you pour ALL of your artistic creativity into that game you're making for children?
The answer is no, you wouldn't. You would make graphics that would appeal to the child. Hence, the cartoony and kinda goofy-looking sprites and background. 
So, anyways...Seanbaby is not a credible source--now Gamespy and its ratings on the games ARE credible and you can leave in what the polls had to say about them I guess. 
But Seanbaby....ummm no.
-- JFB
Seanbaby wrote that for EGM, which is a reliable source. They wouldn't have posted it if it was total BS. Besides, you seem to have a complete lack of humor detection, or any sense of exaggeration. Stop being all uptight. Sertman 22:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: 

message: I think the Search "bad games" should re-direct to this page as it is most likely what the person would be searching for. What does everyone else think?
el cid the hero 13:49, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitively EpiVictor 12:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: re-direct

message: I don’t know about everyone else, but I am sick of people placing games in this article out of anger over a purchase without going through the nomination process.
With that in mind would it be a good idea to insert a notice on the top of the page?
Something along the lines of 
“To allow this article to conform to Wikipedia’s NPOV policy new entries on this page have to go through a nomination process on the take page.”
:I personally think this is a very good idea. We need to check whether such a notice/template already exists for such cases, and, if not, propose it as a wider wikipedia standard for similarly themed (mostly "unusual" or "best"/"worst" lists). EpiVictor 11:44, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's what this article (and perhaps other similar articles) needs. I hope it will help raise the credibility and status of the article. EpiVictor 15:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: we need a notice

message: I was reading the article and noticed a copyedit was needed in the C section near Cheetahmen. I signed in and returned to find the section blanked. I thought I was reverting it with my edit but it didn't happen. Sorry if I stomped anyone's edits. Jasongetsdown 21:34, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed it Jasongetsdown 21:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  blanked C section 

message: I still see plenty of weasel words in this article. How about putting up the dedicated tag found here: Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_words. --Metron4 02:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tag added. I was specific by placing it at the first section to prominently use phrases like "is considered", "were generally considered", "was considered",etc. In fact, the word considered should be removed from the title, as this compromises the integrity of this article from the very beginning.--Metron4 23:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. It seems to me that this article falls under the first of the exceptions in the Weasel Word guide - "the belief or opinion is actually the topic of discussion." And the word "considered" in the title is the basis for the exception: the article concerns the opinions of gamers in general, an uncitable community of people.--Herald Alberich 06:38, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article does fall under the list of exceptions, but as with all those exceptions, they merely provide an excuse to use them. They are still poor forms of writing, such as "Some people prefer cats, others prefer dogs." How does this statement enhance information? Sometimes it's night, sometimes it's day. Who cares? Weasel words do more than inject bias by applying vague numbers of people; they inject hollow statements that detract from real facts. Some of the examples in this article actually manage to back up games that should be here. The ones that don't should be reworded, made stronger by doing some research and finding facts to back them up, instead of applying them to hosts of "mosts".--Metron4 23:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs a Weasel Words tag... 

message: GoldenEye and Metroid Prime are both listed under this section.  While GoldenEye lacks the ability to jump (massive strike), I believe that Metroid's only flaw is that falling does not cause damage (something that may be excuse by Samus' suit).  Am I remembering this correctly?  If so, I'll explain GoldenEye's position in that category (it is currently listed with no reason given) and remove Metroid.  We can probably find a better example if people wish to list several games. Ladlergo 16:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I think it would be better to remove game-specific examples in that category and just list flaws/undesirable features in a more generic manner. EpiVictor 14:19, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Physics and in-game mechanics

message: People need to delete old nominations. I deleted those that hadn't been touch on since April and before and I got marked for vandalizing. I know I forgot to put it down in the summary, but still. Please people, help me out in organizing the nominations. Fableheroesguild 01:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just did a massive clean-up.  I removed all add nomination that had been around a couple months and only gotten no votes, all add nominations that are on the list now, all delete nominations that were already removed, whole categories of games like Wisdom Tree or Atari Jaguar and combined some dupe nominations.  Hopefully this is more manageable now. Ace of Sevens 23:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleting Nominations 

message: In order to allow for a more representative article. This area is for discussing if you think a game should be removed from the list. El cid the hero 18:54, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember hating that game when I was a kid because I didn't have the manual and couldn't figure out what to do.  It's too old to have many web sources, but it averages about 5.4 at GameFAQs, but it does have a lot of ones and twos there, so some people think it's the worst game ever, at least.  Anyone have a bunch of old Nintendo Power issues around? Ace of Sevens 02:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember hating it as well, but it's important to have a source. If any GameFAQs user review qualifies as a source for the article, well... we'd end up with a lot of simply mediocre games being added to the list. Kil (talk) 02:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

text: To be fair, this game was a very good Atari 2600 style game. To be even more fair, however, it should be stated that this game came out two years into the NES's lifespan, by which time the 15 minute game had been made redundant. Generally, I think that it's more a doggedly mediocre game than a true Color Dreams style affront to gaming. --70.108.116.231 02:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I removed it.  I normally keep an eye on such things, but I missed it. Ace of Sevens 09:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Game Removal "nomination"

message: Why is it here? There's no citation or external link, and I doubt any source ranks it as "one of the worst games ever". Kil (talk) 22:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember hating that game when I was a kid because I didn't have the manual and couldn't figure out what to do.  It's too old to have many web sources, but it averages about 5.4 at GameFAQs, but it does have a lot of ones and twos there, so some people think it's the worst game ever, at least.  Anyone have a bunch of old Nintendo Power issues around? Ace of Sevens 02:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember hating it as well, but it's important to have a source. If any GameFAQs user review qualifies as a source for the article, well... we'd end up with a lot of simply mediocre games being added to the list. Kil (talk) 02:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

text: To be fair, this game was a very good Atari 2600 style game. To be even more fair, however, it should be stated that this game came out two years into the NES's lifespan, by which time the 15 minute game had been made redundant. Generally, I think that it's more a doggedly mediocre game than a true Color Dreams style affront to gaming. --70.108.116.231 02:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jaws

message: This game should not be in here. It was never nominated, had no citatons, and actually garnered good reviews (7 from gamespot, average of 7.5 elsewhere). guitarhero777777 06:23, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed it.  I normally keep an eye on such things, but I missed it. Ace of Sevens 09:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Boiling Point

message: I was looking through the games and i noticed Jonny Moseley Mad Trix was put in. while a terrible game, I dont believe it was nominated. guitarhero777777 07:04, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mad Trix

message: this talk page is now 84KB in size. is it time to archive it? El cid the hero
:I cleaned it up a bunch. Ace of Sevens 23:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: article size

message: i think this game should certenly be on this list. it has teribble and i mean teribble gameplay. you cant even tell if you are actually hitting your opponent. the game plays extreamly sloooooooooow and the fighters are very very blocky. ugh just thinking about that game makes me want to crush the cartridge! do any of you agree? the video game critic site gave the game an f- and the reviewers at gamefaqs gave the game a 2 out of 10 Touth 00:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur. This game is very bad, and it scores high in other similar lists on the 'net. --Lomedae 00:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karate on the atari 2600 

message: "only one ghost out at a time" ? false. 
I had the game, there are 4 ghosts.
The reason only 1 ghost ever appears on screenshots is that the 4 ghosts were displayed alternatively, one per frame.
*Therefore, as there is only one ghost every frame there is only on ghost at a time. therefore the statement is right. --El cid the hero 22:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  pac-man 

message: Just a heads up, but someone snuck Halo 2 into the list without anything to back it up.  Remedy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanate (talk • contribs) 
:Solution: Delete it. Ladlergo 22:19, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep. It was vandalism. I saw another person just say "Halo 2 suxs" in the D section. Fortunately, as I was about to delete it, someone else already did.guitarhero777777 22:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Halo 2? 

message: Trespasser, which is a no-brainer addition, and Star Wars: Rebellion, which may garner some debate from hardcore SW fans.  But trust me, it was awful. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.13.147.213 (talk • contribs) .
:Sorry, but that is just original research, which can't be included in Wikipedia. However, if you find a reliable source (like IGN, Gamespot, Eurogamer, CNN, etc) stating those games are between the worst ever, feel free to add a paragraph in the article including the URL for the critics. -- ReyBrujo 05:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2 more suggested titles 

message: This article could never conform to Wikipedia guidelines regarding neutrality, as what one person might perceive as a "worst ever computer game" might be considered by someone else to be much better. This article is also just asking for vandalism, as anyone with a particular dislike of any computer game would find it very tempting to add it here.
:How about you look at the discussions there have already been to delete it.JackSparrow Ninja 11:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article has been the target of vandalism already and yes the neutrality issue. However, by adding the sources and nominating games, this article can be as close to neutral as possible.guitarhero777777 16:56, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: @Savager: providing a number of credible reviews is one of the prerequisites for including a game (although exceptions on the number of references can be made if it's hard to find reviews, e.g. a certain game being too obscure or too old). @ Macarion: if this list is renamed, then other, related ones must be renamed too. Either we use one naming convention for all such lists "Stuff X considered to be the worst ever" (Where "Stuff X"= Movies, Music, Videogames...) or we adopt the "Infamous (examples?) of Stuff X" convention. But adopting different weights and measures for each case seems a) POV and b) Poor practice, going against any uniformation process that may be active in wikipedia. EpiVictor 18:31, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pointless article? 

message: How come Link: The Faces of Evil isn't on this list? I'm sure it's as much hated as it's counterpart Zelda: The Wand of Gamelon. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.210.20.19 (talk • contribs) .
: Well, it's mentioned along with the Gamelon game... --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 19:49, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Link: The Faces of Evil

message: I'm starting a collection of the Worst videogames ever, and I miss on these lists some serious contenders as "Fortress of Dr. Radiakis" and "Heroes of the Lance", which many critics include on their personal "worst of" series. DrJones 21:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fortress of Dr Radiaki 

message: :"Some game genres fade in and out of popularity, or are not particularly welcome by reviewers on a particular gaming system. For example, 2D shooters or platform games are considered as "out of fashion", at least regarding the gaming industry and the latest gaming hardware, and thus any such new release by a major manufacturer, even in some cases for a modern handheld system, would probably bias most professional reviewers negatively merely on the basis of being a 2D shooter or platform game. Similarly, PC ports of games or genres considered more appropriate to game consoles often receive negative reviews, and most reviewers consider good console ports to be the exception rather than the rule."
This is a joke to say, most certainly with the incredible succes of games like New Super Mario Bros, Yoshi's Island 2 and the Paper Mario games. JackSparrow Ninja 22:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Notice that the paragraph contains the words "on a particular gaming system". This means that such games (2D shooters etc.) may still find some success niches on portable systems or in some special cases, such as the Metal Slug series on many platforms, but otherwise it's considered a "dead" genre, I've even seen 1996 reviews bashing platform games on the PC (such as some early windows 95 releases of "Sonic the hedgehog", "Jazz Jackrabbit 2" and "Donald: in Cold Shadow"), almost like there was a deliberate plan to "declare" 2D game obsolete, especially in an era (mid 90s) where 3D games were starting to gain ground on the PSX but on the PC also. And, BTW, the examples you provided are all Mario games, presumably only available on Nintendo systems (DS? GBA?) so of course they're well-received, given the target platform, but I doubt Nintendo would release a fully 2D game for e.g. the Nintendo Wii... EpiVictor 22:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You had that spaceshooter for the Dreamcast, later ported to the GameCube. The Paper Mario games were on N64 (fully 3D platform) and GameCube. And there's the Radius series on the PlayStation 2, to name just a few. JackSparrow Ninja 02:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If this wasn't wikipedia, I would normally make myself a paladin of 2D games and the "good old way" videogames were made...but the fact is that this kind of gaming met its peak in the early-to-mid 90s (with the SNK Neo Geo and the CapCom System 1 and 2 being the ultimate arcade 2D machine), but somehow this approach didn't work well on home computers (PCs) and consoles (Saturn, PSX). It may sound like a paradox, but by the mid 90's crude-to-decent 3D graphics (like those of the first PSX and Saturn, and yes, even the N64) were preferred and arguably technically more feasible than high-quality 2D graphics. On the PC, 3D gaming had dawned since 1993 (Doom...), and platforms that couldn't keep up with either 3D or memory-intensive 2D graphics slowly died (Amiga, most 16-bit era consoles, with the exception of portable consoles). Anyway, what I mean is that a combination of technical limitations (and choices, to some extent) and marketing hype (for 3D graphics at any cost) effectively shifted the gaming industry to 3D, with the only surviving niches being arcade games, strategy games on the PC, freeware/public domain games, and of course portable consoles, but even those are starting to live the same changes that occured to console/PC gaming 10 years ago. So yeah, there might still be the occasional 2D game hitting the top now and then (usually tied to a well-estabilished franchise like Mario or Sonic, and with plenty of marketing to back it up) but I doubt we will ever see an "arcade platform revival" or a new line of multi-parallax-scrolling platform games (not emulations), not even in a combination of 2D or 3D, unless some marketing hype says so. EpiVictor 21:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre and platform criteria 

message: I see a lot of games being removed lately, but when they are brought to the talk page for discussion, no one discusses it. That doesn't really work like that, so something needs to be done. Either we start discussing a game to have it removed, or we actually discuss it. JackSparrow Ninja 20:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: if I might make a suggestion, perhaps we need a sub-page for the nomination process. That way it would be simpler to co-ordinate the large number of nominations this page has recently received (most likely due to it being linked by high traffic sites). El cid the hero 12:26, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I honestly try to comment on every game, but usually I can't get around to it. We need more members being active in he discussion.guitarhero777777 15:03, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I don't expect everyone to discuss things, but then don't interfere with the main page either.   You can't go and say, discuss it first, and then don't discuss it. If you remove something from the main page, then discuss it when the item is put on the talk page. JackSparrow Ninja 20:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about we discuss games