Powerpuff Girls managed to be bad enough to have several bad reboots until I stopped caring or paying attention to them.

Transformers started as a glorified toy commercial and even at its best didn't wander far from that, but the Michael Bay era almost killed my fondness for the setting and its characters. Almost. The Bumblebee movie seemed like a sincere apology attempt.

The bloated and unnecessary Hobbit film trilogy. :why-angel: Check out the short and beautiful Rankin Bass animated movie instead.

Most Disney live-action remakes of animated films sucked, but the Mulan one was especially insulting and utterly missed the point of both the literary original and the animated film that was a lot more respectful to it.

  • BeamBrain [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Command and Conquer 4: Absolute garbage that completely failed to capitalize on the sequel hooks left behind by Tiberium Wars and Kane's Wrath

    Halloween Kills: Michael Myers is supposed to be an ambush predator, not a Terminator. He's hard to put down, sure, but he wins because he gets the drop on vulnerable targets (and even then he doesn't always win, as seen in the original Halloween). Having him leisurely wade through armed mobs Dynasty Warriors style completely misses the point of the character.

    XCOM Enemy Unknown: This one was painful because it did make a lot of decisions that genuinely improved on the original, such as tossing much of the useless research options and redundant equipment along with providing a much friendlier UI and better tutorial. On the other hand, though, it was disappointing to me in a lot of ways:

    • Making individual soldiers much less versatile. They get automatically assigned a random class, something over which you have no input, and that class is fairly locked into its role. You don't look at a soldier's stats and judge for yourself whether they'd make a better sniper, scout, or heavy, and you can't, for example, give a Heavy a sidearm and have him help sweep a UFO's interior.
    • Severely restricted action economy. In the original game, you could have up to 14 soldiers in the starting Skyranger. In the remake, squad size maxes out at 6. A single lucky enemy crit dropping one of your soldiers, ora rookie panicking because they got shot at, can be crippling.
    • Strategic decisions feel much less organic. There is no question of balancing saving money and space vs. having more soldiers, fighters, and transports so you can respond to more events at once. No more deciding when and where to build new bases, radars, and hangars so you can better detect and intercept UFOs. No weighing your performance and deciding whether that battleship you raided earlier this month will offset the reputation hit you'll take from passing up this hellish-looking terror mission. Instead, you get explicit binary choices between different missions, UFOs that show up whenever they feel like it with no real way to improve your interception rate.
    • Proper reconnaissance feels much less important. Not only does the limited action economy make dedicating soldiers to recon much less appealing, but enemies tend to appear in discrete groups, then move out of turn in ways that let you see where they're going. It makes encounters feel less tense and organic and more video gamey.
    • The presence of civilians in terror missions feels a lot less meaningful. In the original game, they were a constant concern. You didn't know how many there were or where they were, and it forced you to weigh the risk vs. reward of every full auto shot and use of explosives. Knowing exactly how many there are and being able to move a soldier next to them to have them instantly vacate the battlefield makes them much less impactful.
    • BynarsAreOk [none/use name]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I spent so many hours with XCOM EW and I used to love that game, but these days I deeply resent it. It was certainly the first game that created the "losing is fun" trend which people now try to force down your throat.

      And it wasn't even the devs fault, but the whole community around that game, the insufferable amount of elitism around playing Impossible/Ironman, like people literaly believe that this was the "only" way to play.

      It was never about skill, for which at least you could make this argument in favor of some PvP games, no it was all to justify their addiction to gambling, and not exciting or intresting gambling either, but literal dice rolls where a 5% or a 1% could ruin a campaign. Why would you ever accept this is a good thing if not because you are addicted to gambling.

      And this inevitably lead to so many games trying to copy this masochistic formula, mainly Darkest Dungeon(another love hate). Maybe losing is fun sometimes, but wasting 50-100h of progress isn't fun, its self-harm. But people wont admit that because then you are not a real Gamer.

      Just look at this interview with the lead dev where he basicaly explains people shouldn't play classic/ironman straight away.

      Your points are all valid too, things like the random soldier class eventualy got fixed with mods, realy the Long war mod is such a much better experience because they straight up fixed so much bullshit.

      If you haven't played LW I realy recommend it.

    • frogbellyratbone_ [e/em/eir, any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Command and Conquer 4: Absolute garbage that completely failed to capitalize on the sequel hooks left behind by Tiberium Wars and Kane’s Wrath

      i remember pirating this shit awhile back and being so damn excited only to make it like 20 minutes being like wtf? i can't build a base? i just have one giant unit spitting out other units? god damn wtf?