What's an absolutely medium quality game? Not great, incredible or terrible or any single ended extreme. Dead medium quality

[sonotsugipaa@lemmy.dbzer0.com]

I think Halo Infinite qualifies, I played the multiplayer waaay back when it released so things may have drastically changed (haven't heard of it being the case);
it didn't / doesn't do anything that no other game does, nor did / does it do anything particularly well nor better than its competitors (including every Halo from Bungie).

I did watch a walkthrough of the campaign, and it doesn't look particularly engaging either.

[tikiporch@lemmy.world]

This is probably more subjective than best/worst. So...

Vanilla Skyrim.

[pogogunner@sopuli.xyz]

Just Cause 3

Movement was more annoying than Just Cause 2

[jeebaichow@lemmy.world]

Mighty no 9.

[zoldyck@lemmy.world]

Minesweeper

[tuckerm@feddit.online]

Unreal 2, at launch, was the most absolutely 7/10 game I've ever played. Just a very generic singleplayer FPS, and not the sequel to Unreal that everyone was hoping for.

I say "at launch," though, because almost a year after the game's release, they added multiplayer, and that is still my favorite multiplayer game.

[yamper@lemmy.world]

we are in a golden age of medium good action games. lies of p, stellar blade, khazan the first berserker, another crab's treasure come to mind for me.

non-fromsoft soulslikes are starting to find their voice. they're not quite great yet, but they're competent now.

[mohab@piefed.social]

Assault Spy comes to mind.

And Mad Max maybe?

[thatkamguy@sh.itjust.works]

Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning

Had all the individual makings of an exceptional game (with input from Todd Macfarlane, R A Salvatore and Grant Kirkhope), and while it was definitely enjoyable enough - it lacked any wow-factor whatsoever, winding up an otherwise forgettable 7/10.

[brobot9000@lemmy.world]

From a gameplay perspective GTA has been mid for ages.

[armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world]

Lies of P is amazing how dare you.

[acefuzzlord@lemm.ee]

In my opinion ( haven't played or really seen the DLCs, so I'm just talking about base game ), Pokemon Scarlet and Violet.

Definitely had ups and downs when I did my only playthrough. Absolutely middle of the road compared to the official games ( completed gen 3, part way through gens 4-7 ) I have played and still even middle of the road compared to some of the fan games I've played over the years.

[bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de]

Do you mean Mario Bros:

Or Super Mario Bros? They are very different games.

[brsrklf@jlai.lu]

If you are actually talking about Mario Bros., i.e. the game that's only about kicking turtles, crabs and flies coming out of pipes, yeah, I'd say that one was hardly a new thing.

Super Mario Bros. though? Hard disagree. Back then, that's a scrolling platformer with controllable jumps, inertia that let you do sliding tricks, and relatively complex physics (acceleration, positional damage, shells, ...)

Also very good readability with mechanics that were easy to learn on the spot.

Look at what most platformers played like around that time, and even what basic design errors a lot of them kept doing long after that. SMB was lightning in a bottle.

[overspark@feddit.nl]

Hell no, Mad Max was way more fun than it had any right to be. I'll agree that on paper it didn't look like anything special, with mechanics we'd seen lots of times in other games, but in practice everything came together as much more than the sum of it's parts.

[bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de]

Neverwinter Nights

The multiplayer is supposedly incredible. But I remember being extremely whelmed by the main game.

But it's hard to remember the mid games. Because it is very likely that they didn't leave any lasting impression.

And especially if previous titles in a series or from a studio were great a mid game would feel disappointingly bad. Although compared to other games they might actually still be considered great.

[vaguerant@fedia.io]

This is a tough question because it's like asking "What's the most forgettable game you've ever played?" I can remember some of the best and worst games I've ever played, but mediocre games are explicitly not interesting.

That said, the first one that came to mind for me was Starshot: Space Circus Fever for N64. It's just a very generic late-'90s collectathon platformer. It's hard to be mad at it, because it's not terrible or anything, there's just no reason to play it. If you've got an N64, there's Mario, Banjo, Rayman, even B- and C-tier stuff like Gex and Chameleon Twist. There's hidden gems like Space Station Silicon Valley or Rocket: Robot on Wheels.

That last one is the only reason I played Starshot, I saw it clearanced at a used game store and was like "Oh yeah, I remember hearing this game was good," but it turned out I was thinking of Rocket. That game actually is good, while Starshot is just fine.

[mynameisatticus@lemmy.world]

Sackboy a Big Adventure. Absolutely no ill will towards it, and the issue may lie more with me than the game, but it just felt very "okay" for me.

[quazatron@lemmy.world]

The Halo series.

I like shooters, so I got the full bundle and I tried hard to like it.

None of the games gave me a lasting impression. The plot didn't stick with me, the enemies were weird, the guns felt weak and flimsy, the rooms kept repeating in some sections and it got very boring. There were some fun bits with the vehicles, etc., but overall the experience was... pretty much average.

I was expecting something like the Half-Life series, but this wasn't it.

[stm@lemmy.dbzer0.com]

Rogue Trooper