This is a followup to @SorosFootSoldier@hexbear.net 's recent thread for completeness' sake.
I'll state an old classic that is seen as a genre defining game because it is: Myst. Yes, it redefined the genre... in ways I fucking hated and that the adventure game genre took decades to fully recover from. It was a pompous mess in its presentation and was the worst kind of "doing action does vague thing or nothing at all, where is your hint book" puzzle gameplay wrapped in graphical hype which ages pretty poorly as far as appeal qualities go.
So many adventure games tried to be Myst afterward that the sheer budgetary costs and redundancy of the also-rans crashed the adventure game genre for years.
Couldn't get into Elden Ring. I love Dark Souls and Sekiro, but adding the huge world just made things dull to me. It became too much of a grind rather than a cool experience to have. I don't really understand the hype around it.
I never liked CounterStrike. The entire game is walking into a courtyard and getting shot by someone I didn't even see.
I've never liked Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem. The writing is incredibly goofy and it's just not as scary as it's hyped up to be. The pacing is dull and the puzzles are just tedious running back and forth. And before it's mentioned it's a game from 2002: it came out a month after the Resident Evil 1 remake, which is a masterpiece to this day. It also came out a year after Silent Hill 2 and the first Fatal Frame, both of which are still very effective at horror.
I don't like any dark souls. I just don't like how even the most basic enemies revolve around "sit and wait, don't attack yet, if you get bored and impatient, well, you are gonna get even more bored so just accept being bored"