10.0
2011′s Least Improved Sequel
I’d recommend listening to our thoughts on these ‘Dubious Honor’ categories, but I’m not an advocate of masochism, or at least not openly. Though we eventually settled on Duke Nukem Forever getting an honorable mention, having little to no improvements on a fifteen-year old game and adding little to the FPS genre as a whole, this category was a two horse show that ended as a debate of what ‘least improved’ really meant. None of us were particularly impressed by Modern Warfare 3, seeing it as not even an expansion of the experience provided in Modern Warfare 2, but rather a new coat of paint. Modern Warfare 3 felt and acted like a carbon copy of its previous iteration, so surely that would constitute as a ‘least improved’ for a lack of effort, right? However, we’ve settled on Batman: Arkham City for this award, having come to the consensus that the changes in the game have actively made it worse and less enjoyable. The developer clearly put effort into its new ideas, but none of them work out, especially not the open-world element of Arkham City. Combining that with useless gadgets, watered-down Riddler challenges, a mess of a narrative, and just generally worse level design, and a big ball of good intentions really weighed what should have been a great product down into mediocrity.
Honorable Mention: Modern Warfare 3 and Duke Nukem Forever
1 Comment
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Interesting category but I really don’t agree. Asylum has the edge with atmosphere and story for me so sure Arkham City wasn’t better on every level. I thought the open world was great though, side missions were a nice touch and there wasn’t a step backwards on any other aspect. Can’t say I see the issue with the new gadgets or moves.
I’d have went for Modern Warfare 3 or Assassin’s Creed Revelations but each to his own.