Finishing touches? Polish? Puh... just release it! Yes, this game was published. TerrainY for the win!
http://www.break.com/index/review-of-worst-video-game-ever.html
http://www.break.com/index/review-of-worst-video-game-ever.html
There is Hope
Miscellaneous Forums/General Discussion/There is Hope Baby Jebus is crying.
He hasn't played games from ppl here then.
The notoriety of this game is because Activision went ahead and released it on their budget label.
I'd like to know what the developer's deal with Activision was.
It demonstrates the limitations of a developer and it should be a lesson to all Blitzers that you can, and should, approach mainstream publishers with your games. Too many people go the short, shy, route. It is not what your game currently is - it is what it can become (in the publisher's eyes). Publishers look at games with potential just as much as they look at a AAA-ready game - the game with potential (in their eyes) may have better playability than the game with AAA graphics but which also has poor gameplay. A publisher could see more potential in a game than the developer ever will.
It's how we all started in the business - it is how the software houses were created. The cycle continues - the goalposts and expectations move, but the cycle continues.
Also, you have to take into account that this is also how we add people to our development teams. A game can be in development - development may be hindered in some way due to the limitations of the current developer. Somebody sends in a new game - the game is no good (in a nutshell). However, the developer has implemented something that the before-mentioned game is screaming out for. It may not be a simple case of stealing such a thing (you cannot always steal implementation without understanding how it was implemented) - so, we end up with a developer that can either be told that their game is no good and perhaps carry on working on it, or we can say we have a position for them on team with a game in development - basically, your game has some features that the game needs - the team needs your skills that you have already demonstrated (assuming they demonstrate an understanding of whatever was implemented - ie it isn't just a game cluelessly cobbled together with the various code archives of various sites).
Think of it this way - how many people have played a commercial game with poor controls? Think again about it more - how is this possible? How could it be possible? How is this remotely possible? How could a game be released with a poor control system? There is a lot of depth to that question (in various directions) and it has multiple answers. However, the point is games do often get published with clear flaws and the reasons are very specific (and wide) - these reasons are not always accidental.
I'd like to know what the developer's deal with Activision was.
It demonstrates the limitations of a developer and it should be a lesson to all Blitzers that you can, and should, approach mainstream publishers with your games. Too many people go the short, shy, route. It is not what your game currently is - it is what it can become (in the publisher's eyes). Publishers look at games with potential just as much as they look at a AAA-ready game - the game with potential (in their eyes) may have better playability than the game with AAA graphics but which also has poor gameplay. A publisher could see more potential in a game than the developer ever will.
It's how we all started in the business - it is how the software houses were created. The cycle continues - the goalposts and expectations move, but the cycle continues.
Also, you have to take into account that this is also how we add people to our development teams. A game can be in development - development may be hindered in some way due to the limitations of the current developer. Somebody sends in a new game - the game is no good (in a nutshell). However, the developer has implemented something that the before-mentioned game is screaming out for. It may not be a simple case of stealing such a thing (you cannot always steal implementation without understanding how it was implemented) - so, we end up with a developer that can either be told that their game is no good and perhaps carry on working on it, or we can say we have a position for them on team with a game in development - basically, your game has some features that the game needs - the team needs your skills that you have already demonstrated (assuming they demonstrate an understanding of whatever was implemented - ie it isn't just a game cluelessly cobbled together with the various code archives of various sites).
Think of it this way - how many people have played a commercial game with poor controls? Think again about it more - how is this possible? How could it be possible? How is this remotely possible? How could a game be released with a poor control system? There is a lot of depth to that question (in various directions) and it has multiple answers. However, the point is games do often get published with clear flaws and the reasons are very specific (and wide) - these reasons are not always accidental.
It demonstrates the limitations of a developer and it should be a lesson to all Blitzers that you can, and should, approach mainstream publishers with your games.
Can? Certainly. Should? That's somewhat more debatable. I've turned down a couple of very unimpressive offers from "mainstream publishers" and gone on to get much better deals with much less mainstream publishers. So yeah, it would be wrong to assume that mainstream publishers aren't interested. Equally, it would be wrong to assume that mainstream publishers will automatically give you a better deal.
He hasn't played games from ppl here then.
Ppl here have to write them before he can play them.
I've turned down a couple of very unimpressive offers from "mainstream publishers"
I mean people may not approach a mainstream developer because they don't think their game is good enough or they think they would get an instant rejection. I am sort of trying to say people should not feel that they cannot reach out and explore.
It's the same with normal job applications. Some people have got a job that they never thought they would get in a million years - they got it because they applied and the employer liked them - they may not have had all of the required skills - the employer simply liked them or, perhaps, had another post they were suited to. However, they could only get that job by applying in the first place.
Those types of games can be developed within a month (probably less) and the bargain bins are usually overflowing with them. Folks with a PC and zero knowledge of gaming hits the store and sadly thinks to themselves "wow this box looks neat, it HAS to be fun!" It's pathetic that some publishers rely on those types of buyers. People lose trust in ANY games because of it.
With that title there was probably zero publicity during development anyway, so nobody knew what to expect.
With that title there was probably zero publicity during development anyway, so nobody knew what to expect.
In fairness, it is not always the intention of the publisher. That particular game might have cost the publisher money. The developer was possibly the one who failed to deliver the end product, forcing the publisher to release the product to recoup some money.
It's 'swings and roundabouts'.
Some publishers have lost millions to development teams who failed to deliver. Hence the fact that we don't just take on people who want to publish a game. That new developer (clutching game in hand) might be a critical acquisition for reasons they may never have expected.
It's 'swings and roundabouts'.
Some publishers have lost millions to development teams who failed to deliver. Hence the fact that we don't just take on people who want to publish a game. That new developer (clutching game in hand) might be a critical acquisition for reasons they may never have expected.
I guess i dislike the guy in the video more than the game. He comes around quite arrogant but the flaws in the game are just too cute. Beside of that i feel more cheated by all the bad to average games with huge marketing budgets instead of such a black sheep.
I agree, he reminded me of the IT guy at work who talks about coming into work with his guns and shooting everyone.
That's Alex Navarro reviewing that ages ago. He's an editor at GameSpot, and with GameSpot's marking criteria, he had to write it in comparison to other main-stream titles at the time.......
Man - I'm going to spam everybody with my new game. I'm sure I'll annoy somebody enough to think I'm where it's all at and then have them wire me a jaw-dislocatingly, hyper-galactic, mega-huge dollar advance. I can't wait. All the top models I'm going to bed..not to mention all the juicy pop tarts that will lather themselves when I gate-crash their parties by smashing my Ferrari-red tank through their garden walls and into their swimming pools... And I'm going to buy a Harrier jump jet and fly really, really low over some still-remembered council estates just to let them know I haven't forgotten my school days (not that I'm bitter). All this and more, simply because I took the concept of a match 3 game and reduced the number by 2 - the ultimate in satisfying gameplay!
That game is just pathetic. I'd honestly be embarrassed to be anywhere near the team that developed and released that game.
If it was something made by someone who was learning 3D programming, in a few hours, it wouldn't be so bad. But it's treated like a polished, professional game, and that's just sad:
Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Rigs:_Over_the_Road_Racing
In addition to the pitiful omission of collision (even with bridges you're supposed to drive over), terrain boundaries, and physics that looks like anything more than a (horribly failed) programming exercise, this game advertises racing against AI opponents and being chased by police, when there are no police in the game, and no AI (your opponents just sit by the starting line and do nothing).
I guess it's obvious that the game was released before it was completed (seriously, no AI? no collision?), it's still pathetic that anyone would let a game like this get published in the state it's in.
The flaws in this game are anything but "cute" - they're horrible omissions in a supposedly professional game. Even the cheapest indie developer is above that. Can you honestly blame the reviewer for wanting to pull his hair out, when he is assigned to compare this game with others on the market? I agree he took his little expression of "disbelief" a little too far, but this may be one of the worst "professional" games ever.
If it was something made by someone who was learning 3D programming, in a few hours, it wouldn't be so bad. But it's treated like a polished, professional game, and that's just sad:
Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Rigs:_Over_the_Road_Racing
In addition to the pitiful omission of collision (even with bridges you're supposed to drive over), terrain boundaries, and physics that looks like anything more than a (horribly failed) programming exercise, this game advertises racing against AI opponents and being chased by police, when there are no police in the game, and no AI (your opponents just sit by the starting line and do nothing).
I guess it's obvious that the game was released before it was completed (seriously, no AI? no collision?), it's still pathetic that anyone would let a game like this get published in the state it's in.
I guess i dislike the guy in the video more than the game. He comes around quite arrogant but the flaws in the game are just too cute. Beside of that i feel more cheated by all the bad to average games with huge marketing budgets instead of such a black sheep.
The flaws in this game are anything but "cute" - they're horrible omissions in a supposedly professional game. Even the cheapest indie developer is above that. Can you honestly blame the reviewer for wanting to pull his hair out, when he is assigned to compare this game with others on the market? I agree he took his little expression of "disbelief" a little too far, but this may be one of the worst "professional" games ever.
Obviously the game's greatest crime was that it wasn't published by a publisher with enough financial muscle to get Alex fired for giving it a bad review.
Maybe he was just fired for this review, just a little bit later so that it's not this obvious anymore. He would have deserved it! :OP
That kind of reminds me of "Lights of Dreams"...
Anatoly -
Thats a cheap shot... Atleast he tries, and has completed something that works/quasi works... ive never actually played it, but come on.. Shouldnt us blitzer's stick together? haha.
Thats a cheap shot... Atleast he tries, and has completed something that works/quasi works... ive never actually played it, but come on.. Shouldnt us blitzer's stick together? haha.
Amazingly, user's review is giving it a 3.4 on gamespot... I wonder what it would take to receive a big fat ZERO on the score... the game should always crash on startup? :P~
Dear god.
My jetscream game was better than that (and thats saying a lot!) It was my first attempt at a solo (3D) game with no design or much planning whatsoever and it shows (yes, its bad).
I should have sent it to activision.. :/
Activision need their heads read.
My jetscream game was better than that (and thats saying a lot!) It was my first attempt at a solo (3D) game with no design or much planning whatsoever and it shows (yes, its bad).
I should have sent it to activision.. :/
Activision need their heads read.
How much days would it take any blitz3d user to make a clone of it? I think 30 days at most including media.
I think 'worst video game ever' is a bit much, I'm sure I could make something far far worse....which is just as incomplete - perhaps a competition we could have is "design the worst video game ever" & have the winner approach a publisher with the game. How many entries do you think we'd get....
is a bit much
If it was an honest indie first attempt i would concur, but it isnt. A game like this, published by someone like Activision and put in stores deserves every bit of the hounding - I reckon it must have been a cockup or something, they burned an early beta test of the game and sent it out by mistake. If not then its shocking :0@anatoly, stop trolling xylvan, its starting to get really old. While he has a weird narcissistic confidence and inflated ego, he must have worked hard on those LOD games, and got them "finished" at least (albeit without the suggested pollish) which is more than can be said for many of us.
haha that's pretty crap. BUT I've seen worse Indie games.
It looks like a tech demo. You could write that in Blitz in an evening.
I tried looking at the developers website but it's very basic and doesn't really have any information on it. Considering it has Activision as a publisher though doesn't say much for their quality control department.
I tried looking at the developers website but it's very basic and doesn't really have any information on it. Considering it has Activision as a publisher though doesn't say much for their quality control department.
Where is the game on that video actually?
I see an early alpha of something could potentially be a truck game.
But as it does not even have collision.
How can a commercial publisher QA give their ok on something like this????
Does not really make me believe in QA ... especially after the trash that Sony's QA recently gave the ok just because it can be patched on the console (totally inacceptable)
I see an early alpha of something could potentially be a truck game.
But as it does not even have collision.
How can a commercial publisher QA give their ok on something like this????
Does not really make me believe in QA ... especially after the trash that Sony's QA recently gave the ok just because it can be patched on the console (totally inacceptable)
I see an early alpha of something could potentially be a truck game.
But as it does not even have collision.
But as it does not even have collision.
That is the finished product your looking at.
I wonder what the system requirements are for it?
This is all over youtube:
Complete with comentary (swearing :O )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqIOdzdTUCY
this really does show that this game hasnt just got a few bugs but LOADS of them.
Complete with comentary (swearing :O )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqIOdzdTUCY
this really does show that this game hasnt just got a few bugs but LOADS of them.
How much days would it take any blitz3d user to make a clone of it? I think 30 days at most including media.
If it takes you 30 days to make that then I would assume you spent most of that time high or something.
We need to have a "worst game" contest here. I don't know about you guys but I can code some pretty crappy games :).
No we really don't need such a contest.
"That's not a bug, that's a feature!"
In all honesty, this game could have been put together in one night... if someone had access to tools like Blitz3D. Just getting the truck to ride over the landscape can be difficult sometimes. But that is from an indie developer's standpoint, not a professional team. Why the publishers ever decided to release this is beyond me, but it would only go to make their company look bad. Better to cut their losses and go back to the drawing board.
In all honesty, this game could have been put together in one night... if someone had access to tools like Blitz3D. Just getting the truck to ride over the landscape can be difficult sometimes. But that is from an indie developer's standpoint, not a professional team. Why the publishers ever decided to release this is beyond me, but it would only go to make their company look bad. Better to cut their losses and go back to the drawing board.
We need to have a "worst game" contest here. I don't know about you guys but I can code some pretty crappy games :).
If rnd(0,1) RuntimeError "I win!" Else RuntimeError "I lose!" EndIf
It's a deep exploration of fortune, corruption and revenge. After the "hot"fix, anyway.
Pff, yours isn't based around throwing error messages, and it's probably indented with tabs :P
Pff, yours isn't based around throwing error messages, and it's probably indented with tabs :P
The add on pack will update it so that it throws errors, we didn't have enough development time and budget to do everything needed. It was a four man team you know.
heads i win
tails you loose
tails you loose
Er no, Stayne, if you're correcting me. There's a very good reason I wrote what I wrote and not what you wrote.
ingrish is funnier when its written by native speakers cos you end up having no excuse
but having said that i dont think anyone who speaks english as a first language could have made anything as mass marketable as the "all your base" ingrish
but having said that i dont think anyone who speaks english as a first language could have made anything as mass marketable as the "all your base" ingrish
. Just getting the truck to ride over the landscape can be difficult sometimes.
Be easy for B3d users since there's a car-on-terrain demo included for people to tweak, that's already miles better than that game in its entirety.
If it takes you 30 days to make that then I would assume you spent most of that time high or something.
I said, with all the media. Levels, menus, vehicles, etc. single handedly. If you have time to code 10 hours a day you can make it in a couple of days maybe a week at most but most of the people here doesn't. At least I don't have that time sadly :(
LMAO @ Picklesworth's runtime error game...
NO NO NO GUYS!
The worst game ever was ET for the atari.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3-2JTkVTyA
I mean... jeez this was a huge comercial bomb a completely unplayable video game.. if its even a game.. like 90% of the people who bought it, sent it back to the stores or to atari, and they piled them into a big hole in a land fill in the desert. It was pretty much responsible for the video game bomb of the time. Oh god I spent a whole 20 mins as a child when this was relatively new just like.. WTF IS GOING ON HERE!.
-Scott
NO NO NO GUYS!
The worst game ever was ET for the atari.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3-2JTkVTyA
I mean... jeez this was a huge comercial bomb a completely unplayable video game.. if its even a game.. like 90% of the people who bought it, sent it back to the stores or to atari, and they piled them into a big hole in a land fill in the desert. It was pretty much responsible for the video game bomb of the time. Oh god I spent a whole 20 mins as a child when this was relatively new just like.. WTF IS GOING ON HERE!.
-Scott