A great list by yahtzee... Granted the last is easily agreed on...

MW3 is basically Call of Duty: Black Ops (2010)
which is basically Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (2009)
which is basically Call of Duty: World at War (2008)
which is basically Call of Duty: Modern Warefare (2007)
which is basically Call of Duty 3 (2006)
which is basically Call of Duty 2 (2005)

Final Fantasy better watch out! come another seven years (if they don't make any more FFs) you are going to get lapped in the number of sequels!

Note: Madden doesn't count...

I like how when Portal 2 came out he eviscerated it with faint praise, but now that the year's over it turns out to be his favorite thing that came out all year.

And it pains me to say this, but he was right on both counts.

2011 fucking blew. GoW 3 was a letdown, so was Uncharted 3, so was AC: Revelations (which didn't reveal jack shit), all of which I'd been very much looking forward to.

I hear that other people really love Skyrim, but given that I almost instantly lost interest in both Oblivion and Fallout 3 when I played them, I'm just gonna save my money and not bother.

And I'm with Yahtzee about MW3/BF3, sorta. I don't really think they deserve to be singled out as garbage, they're just totally and completely not my cup of tea.

Here's hoping 2012 will be a bit less of a letdown!

yahtzee is becoming an ever increasing twat. So MW3 and BF3 are THE worst games of 2011?? REALLY? What exactly is so bad about them? That they are sequels? That they make tons of money and are not "original"? They also have great sound design, great graphics (at least BF3), solid single player campaigns (although BF3 still trails behind) and great multiplayer gameplay (even though, contrary to what most people believe, they are two very different types of game. One is twitchy, fast and completely unrealistic, the other focuses more on cooperation, realism, and overall giant maps).

I understand perfectly why he may dislike both MW3 and BF3, but disliking something doesn't automatically make it the worst of something.

By Yathzee's unbelievably moronic standards, both MW3 and BF3 are incomparably worse than Call of Juarez. Which, by the way he somehow forgot out of the list of the worst games. Think about that nugget for a second. Not to mention MANY other shitty games (and shitty by all standards. Bad graphics, bad gameplay, bad sound, buggy, etc).

Tags for this video have been changed from 'yahtzee, ramblomatic, assasins creed, assasin, ubisoft' to 'yahtzee, ramblomatic, assassins creed, assassin, ubisoft' - edited by xxovercastxx

Maybe yahtzee should just go ahead and get himself a dress up doll.

oh man,
how awesome to find out im not the only one sucked into this game.
my arena team on wow are sooo pissed at me right now due to skyrim.
i have been addicted to TES series since morrowind.
yahtzee called it correct.
its a great game with a ton of bugs and glitches but who cares?not one of them is a deal breaker.
lvl 48 in full daedric armor with a few daedric artifacts (spellbreaker is $$$) but even on the hardest setting im kicking the crap out of pretty much everything (unless i run into a few arch casters..bastards).
time to make a new toon.

This game currently owns all my free time. My jaw drops at some of the situations I get into, we're talking some seriously thought out quests. Polished is the norm and the bugs I've found are not even close to game breakers. (pc) The only issue I have is, (same as Yahtzee's) the fact that healing/stamina potions and a good weap are all you really need. At level 25 now and can clear mostly any dungeon I find with too much ease. Gonna go full cater next and see how that plays though.

>> ^direpickle:

He has explained manymanymanymanymanymanymanymanymany times that he doesn't review the multiplayer portions of these games and why.


Maybe. I only watch Zero Punctuation here on the sift, nothing else he may have recorded or written. Previously he said he stays away from multiplayer because he'd rather stab himself in the ear than listen to a bunch of 12 year old Americans calling him a fag; which of course was a gross generalization in the first place.

Sure, he isn't really a reviewer, but over time his lack of experience in the field he's trying to cover becomes more and more apparent; and is making his shtick formulaic. Part of that formula is saying every single game is crap; which is ok in and of itself (and apart from those 2 times he said something was crap then admitted at the end it's actually good); but over time I'm getting the feeling he genuinely doesn't like games at all and only plays them for this gig. That may or may not be true.

When someone knows their subject matter really well they can do great parody or just play with the tropes of the medium. Over time you get the sense that Yahtzee doesn't really do either and ZP was only ever good because he can string a bunch of funny words together.

Serious Sam was a good game. Serious Sam 2 was a horribad impression of some other game. With number 3, it looks like at least they've figured out what was good about the original (ie. a million enemies, and shooting them) and are bringing the good gameplay ideas back.

But the writing needs serious help. It's funny; they owe much of their success to good comedy writing. Not in their game, but by Eric Wolpaw, who wrote about it on OldManMurray. Eric would later go on to write for Portal, and help create probably the best games of the last decade.

Do you think Valve regrets hiring Eric? And yet, other game companies haven't figured this out. If you want to do comedy in a game, hire someone who's proven successful at doing comedy.

The one-liners in this video are sad crap. Yes, I understand that they're supposed to be over-the-top. That's the problem: they aren't, and they aren't funny.

Without any digging, you can see Wolpaw had plenty of contemporaries that are still around, still being funny, and still available for hire. Seanbaby is slumming it at Cracked. Lowtax has to be bored over at SomethingAwful. Hell, there are tons of great writers at SA who'd be great for a comedy video game. I don't think it would take crazy money to get Yahtzee (or one of the other current generation) doing game writing either.

Why aren't they being picked up by someone? How do you still get crap like this in a high budget title?

Yup, can't upvote this one; reviewer fail.

Judging 99% of a game without actually playing it isn't very helpful. Though I guess Yahtzee isn't exactly trying to be helpful.

Still, he comes of as an ignoramus for it. Has anyone explained to him that the multiplayer experience for one game does not equal the multiplayer experience of another?

Perhaps he just hates the idea of interacting with other people.

/me shrugs

It is kind of odd to review only the tacked-on singleplayer portion what is ostensibly a multiplayer game, but I guess that's pretty much Yahtzee's thing at this point.

I must go to this steak house where they serve bottles of win.

Great indeed.>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^Deano:
Personally I disagree. Single-player is very important to me with only a very few exceptions.

Given that the BF series was founded on multiplayer, and has always been about multiplayer, I think it might qualify as one of those exceptions.
Now, don't get me wrong, if you release an SP campaign and market it as heavily as EA has, it's fair game for criticism. But it's kinda like going to a steak house, having a fantastic steak, a great bottle of win and then complaining about the garlic bread. The bread shoulda been better, but it's not why you went out in the first place.
Anyway, Yahtzee has a well-known dislike for online multiplayer, given that he is a "jaded, friendless misanthrope" (his words).

>> ^ghark:

You guys calling him a hater are missing the point big time. He makes fun of the haters, who are people that hate his reviews because he's too harsh, i.e. that's you! So in effect you're playing right into his hands.


No one's hating on Yahtzee here. He's pretty funny sometimes, especially when he rips apart a truly bad game. The point is that his videos aren't really reviews, more like "creative bitching", and his criticism isn't too harsh, it's irrelevant. A vegetarian can write a funny and true review of how bad the salad is at the steak restaurant, but what's the point?

There are many, many multiplayer only games, and I'm not even talking about MMOs. Console games have lagged behind PC in terms of online connectivity, but with the success of PSN and Xbox Live, multiplayer has become much more prominent in the console-space, and will be even more relevant with the next generation. When you are playing the sequel to one of the historically greatest PC multiplayer only franchises, yes complaining about the singleplayer is like complaining about the salad at the steak restaurant.

And when 95% of your "reviews" focuses on why a game sucks, you are a "hater". It's hard to take someone's "opinions" seriously when their idea of game of the year is Saints Row 2.


>> ^Deano:

>> ^ChaosEngine:
>> ^Deano:
Personally I disagree. Single-player is very important to me with only a very few exceptions.

Given that the BF series was founded on multiplayer, and has always been about multiplayer, I think it might qualify as one of those exceptions.
Now, don't get me wrong, if you release an SP campaign and market it as heavily as EA has, it's fair game for criticism. But it's kinda like going to a steak house, having a fantastic steak, a great bottle of win and then complaining about the garlic bread. The bread shoulda been better, but it's not why you went out in the first place.
Anyway, Yahtzee has a well-known dislike for online multiplayer, given that he is a "jaded, friendless misanthrope" (his words).

If it's fair game then I don't think the steak house analogy really applies. If on the other hand it was heavily hyped as MP with far less emphasis on SP then I can see where one might have cause for concern.
The thing is no publisher is ever going to market a game that just has multiplayer, even if for many dedicated fans that is what the game is really about. They still have to sell a game to everyone which includes people like me who will play the SP, maybe flirt with the MP for a short while then stop playing.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^Deano:
Personally I disagree. Single-player is very important to me with only a very few exceptions.

Given that the BF series was founded on multiplayer, and has always been about multiplayer, I think it might qualify as one of those exceptions.
Now, don't get me wrong, if you release an SP campaign and market it as heavily as EA has, it's fair game for criticism. But it's kinda like going to a steak house, having a fantastic steak, a great bottle of win and then complaining about the garlic bread. The bread shoulda been better, but it's not why you went out in the first place.
Anyway, Yahtzee has a well-known dislike for online multiplayer, given that he is a "jaded, friendless misanthrope" (his words).


If it's fair game then I don't think the steak house analogy really applies. If on the other hand it was heavily hyped as MP with far less emphasis on SP then I can see where one might have cause for concern.
The thing is no publisher is ever going to market a game that just has multiplayer, even if for many dedicated fans that is what the game is really about. They still have to sell a game to everyone which includes people like me who will play the SP, maybe flirt with the MP for a short while then stop playing.