| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (134)

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:35AM Wiizer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"For serious, guys? Nobody else voted for 50 Cent: Blood on the Sand?"

For serious... Ugh, Wet's promotional ineptitude will be one of my disappointments of 2009.

You guys remember all the spam they caused on here?
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:39AM I AM IRONHIDE said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I TOTALLY forgot that Godfather II existed.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 12:44PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I saw it for $10 on Black Friday. I looked at it, and laughed my way past it for Dead Space (a far better purchase for 10).
Reply

Posted: Jan 4th 2010 10:05PM Ben1001 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You shut your mouth, Godfather 2 is a much better game.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:43AM ZayCube said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
This must be the worst list.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 2:17PM Jenks said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"BOTS was my jam."
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 2:37PM laser beams said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
it's funny- Joystiq put together a very strong and diverse list that i agree with (i would switch some places around, but whatever) for their overall top ten- but as individuals: (with the exception of Andrew) they all have TERRIBLE taste in games. fascinating- only their collective hive-mind is capable of defining what makes a game good :)
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 4:02PM DVincent said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
hahahaha absolutely agree with laser beams! I was amazed at how BAD all these individual lists were, with the exception of Andrew's. Of course, some guys got right one or two games, but as a list they all failed (except Andrew, as noted above).
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 4:22PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree, but I also would have liked to have seen some Demon's Souls love come from any one of them (for more recognition of course). Only JC listed it as both an honorable mention and disappointment which can be kinda confusing to the reader. Like you didn't like it but thought it was worth mentioning, you recognize it's fantastic but just not for you? Be more decisive and stick to your guns! Either like it or hate it!
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 4:23PM TheDarkWayne said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
you guys are such assholes. You can't fucking fail an opinion piece! It isn't even a full on review! It's just which games they enjoyed more! You guys are such pricks
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 5:16PM stoneNboneCDXX said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I'm with dark wayne here, you people are morons to not understand these are the games THEY enjoyed for the year of 2009. I had a good time looking at the list of different games the writers for this website enjoyed, it reminded me of some games I haven't played and still want to play.

I wonder if the IQ bell curve is different on the internet? It seems like there are a lot more retarded people online than on the streets.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 5:35PM Puertoricarious said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
it's because anonymity makes the bell curve wither away to nothing.

but yes, all of you saying "this is the worst list" are idiots. you've all had since elementary school to get over the idea that people enjoy different things than you do, but yet, here you are, chastising people for the things that they find fun and entertaining. not everyone plays video games just for the 3 most popular triple AAA titles of the year. if you want a group of reviewers who sticks to that, the message boards of gamespot and game informer would be oh so happy to accept your snobbery.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 6:20PM BPMOmega XBL PSN Steam said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Your opinion sucks because it isn't my opinion, too."

Also, I find it funny that both Laser Beams and Vincent think they're all bad except Andrew's.... and Mr. Yoon only listed PlayStation games on his list (and is, last I checked, the main writer for JoystiqPS).

Funny, indeed.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 7:05PM TacoHell said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
So wait, the comments that say this list suck are blue, but the comments that say those comments suck are blue...internet, make up your mind.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 7:55PM DWilson8504 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
agreed with Dark Wayne. People seriously need to learn what an opinion is.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 10:20PM Snarf said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You guys don't seem to get that this isn't his best games of the year, these are his games of the year that didn't make the real top ten. Reading comprehension ftw.
Reply

Posted: Jan 4th 2010 2:22AM LunarAura said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If you've never liked a shitty game in your entire life, you're probably a shitty gamer.
Reply

Posted: Jan 4th 2010 11:59AM ZayCube said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Of course it is Justins opinion. And my opinion is that his list is the worst, because I did not enjoy any of those games. But the ones I did enjoy, are Bionic Commando and Killzone 2 (havent tried Beatles tho). And why the hell is Scribblenauts on his Worst-list? I thought that game was supposed to be awesome. (Never played that game either).
Reply

Posted: Jan 4th 2010 12:00PM ZayCube said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oh, Call of Juarez was alright tho.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:43AM Spunky Monkey 190906 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hordes of Killzone fanboys ranting about your choice will arrive soon.

In the mean time, lets talk about how utterly shocking it is that a 50 Cent games everyone laughed at before release could in fact be rather good and become quite a favourite amongst the gamers :D
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:47AM Typicalgamer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
it was guilty pleasure.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:49AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah it was a pretty enjoyable co op game. I mean, we skipped all of the cutscenes, which is usually a huge no-no with me but....it's a 50 cent game, who cares about the story? It was just dumb fun.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:58AM Spunky Monkey 190906 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Very true, hopefully they don't think to make a few novels based on the game in stores afterwards like Halo did. I can only imagine the kind of people buying it. :/
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 12:24PM copa said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow, Killzone showed up on just about everyone's disappointment list. We have our Most Disappointing Game of 2009, folks!

Justin, let your wife know that she made the two best picks on this list.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 12:33PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Speak for yourself Demoman. It was primarily a disappointment to those who were expecting a revolutionary shooter like what Halo did in 2001. If you went into it with an open mind, most came out satisfied.

But saying it's better than MW2 doesn't really work. They're different styles of games. One has class-based multiplayer, one doesn't. One is a realistic shooter, one is an arcade shooter.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 12:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Reply fail, sorry.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 12:49PM Spunky Monkey 190906 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Bradwart, I think the thing was that while it was a good game, it didnt define itself well enough, the small things that would have gone ignored if it was a superb and innovative title only showed themselves more. Its biggest asset was its graphics, something that can easily be surpassed or copied with the right skill and tech, Uncharted 2 did it. Storylines on the other hand can't really be copied, once something has been done once, its originality no longer has the same effect on other games / movies. Likable characters can be done, but not in the same ways, and unique ideas can be copied as well, but the one to create these ideas in the first place will always be remembered for it.

I suppose MW is in that boat, while all the surrounding action defines it, there is nothing there that Killzone 3 can't use and surpass if Guerilla really wanted to. So in fact, they are quite similar, they both involve war with beings that look like ourselves, both have similar kind of action, both COULD have similar kinds of storylines and thus could both be put into the same bracket. MW isnt really a stealth shooter, and neither is Killzone. The only difference is one is sci fi, the other isn't, they're both fictional and both avoid using lasers.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 9:48PM Dr Perry Ulysses Cox said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, that lightning gun in Killzone 2 is super realistic...
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:44AM Typicalgamer said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
once again, KZ2 is in the dissapointment spot.

i mean cmon!!! i'm sure it didn't receive bigger hype then MW2!
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:49AM I AM IRONHIDE said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
.................Check please...................
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:51AM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Yeah it did, specially if you count that it was hyped that much starting allllll the way back in 2005. 4 long years of that kind of hype will lead most people to disappointment if it's NOT the game of the forever.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:52AM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I guess you weren't on the internet when the CG trailer (at the time it was said to be gamplay) was revealed and all the Sony fanboys said it was going to be the best game ever created. It was also hyped as the Halo killer. When you see Sony fanboys getting upset over reviewers giving the game a 9/10, and 5/5s, then you know that they have a mental deficiency. Comparing it to MW2 is going to do no good since that is the superior game in every way. This is pretty much proven that more people on PSN are playing MW2 rather than Killzone 2. Killzone 2 is a perfect example of stupid Sony fanboys, who can't enjoy multiplatform games, because they are so obsessed with their exclusives.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:52AM Crimson Major said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
MW2 was also considerable better than it...
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:56AM Typicalgamer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i was 9 back then...so no, i wasn't on the interwebs.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:59AM Special Agent Steve said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@ Demoman
"stupid Sony fanboys, who can't enjoy multiplatform games"
And this is how you set the example? By bashing one of the major players OF multiplayform games. Get over yourself.
Killzone 2 wasn't meant to be the Halo killer- and it's not needed. But it did make a franchise out of the series and that's something you can't deny. It got great reviews, and it's a great game. The only people who overhyped it are the ones who got into idiotic conversations claiming IT WILL BE TEH HALO KILLER! But no it's not. And I don't care.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 12:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Speak for yourself Demoman. It was primarily a disappointment to those who were expecting a revolutionary shooter like what Halo did in 2001. If you went into it with an open mind, most came out satisfied.

But saying it's better than MW2 doesn't really work. They're different styles of games. One has class-based multiplayer, one doesn't. One is a realistic shooter, one is an arcade shooter.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 12:34PM Levi said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I thought we were all done calling each other fanboys... are you guys still this fucking stupid?
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 12:55PM Typicalgamer said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
naw levi, only demonan is callin everyone a sony fanboy (even though, i'm probably the only one here :P)
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 1:03PM Killface was here said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Hey another argument about killzone 2. It seems that's all I've read in the comments since new years. Q
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 1:18PM Mr Khan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It performed far better than the original, which is the metric of how a sequel should be judged, though i'll agree that the promotional atmosphere surrounding KZ2 was a "game of the forever" type of hype.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 2:32PM AnderFREAK said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You know, I really liked Killzone 2 (the multiplayer at least), and I can still agree that it didn't do anything to really deserve being put on a best of 2009 list, FPS to me are a dime a dozen. And disappointment is really subjective, so I can see why people in the business of receiving piping hot hype fresh out of the oven would be disappointed, but as someone who doesn't generally get excited for FPS I'd say KZ2 was competent and worth your time, maybe not all your time, but for me I can genuinely say I've had more fun with KZ2 than MW2.

Then again, I'm a man who thinks Counter-Strike and Day of Defeat:Source are still the best multiplayer FPS gaming has to offer.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 2:43PM Sly C said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i liked it. not enough for it to make my GOTY list, but it was pretty good. the multiplayer was especially cool. the game has been knocked for not being innovative enough, which i think is kinda stupid. it introduced brilliant first person cover mechanics and its the first game to get sixaxis right, IMO. but again, only good enough to get a mention, not an actual spot.

IMO of course.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 6:26PM DrChristopher said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
There is really no use arguing the merits of KZ2 on joystiq. It's clear that all but one of the editors were "disappointed."

If that game can be called disappointing, well lets say I hope to be very disappointed this upcoming year.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 12:28PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i think it was the part that it took them so damn long to make the game and they hyped it the entire time. the entire time. the entire time. nothing can live up to that.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:48AM Signature said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Opinion or not, this list is beyond terrible, to a point that the disappointment section has -10 credibility.

Who cares what Joystiq think about KZ2? Metacritic says hi to them. Leave them to enjoy odst and blood in the sand. Kind of makes sence why the KZ2 online community is pretty amazing, seperates the men from the boys.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:53AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Rule #2 of Joystiq: Never use Metacritic or VG Chartz as a source.

It's ok though, it's a rookie mistake. We've all done it before.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:56AM Signature said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
What would you consider a source that takes a broad spectrum of reviews then cockroach? For future reference. .
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 11:59AM Spunky Monkey 190906 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Rule #3 of Joystiq.

Form your own opinions. They had thiers, and they are entitled to express it.
Reply

Posted: Jan 3rd 2010 12:00PM OnToGloryReturns said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
He didn't say it was terrible - he just said it was a let down. You've got to admit the story and dialogue weren't exactly AAA stuff.

Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW