But what makes a “bad” game? Is it poor design, poor control, poor graphics, music, rabble rabble? Certainly, obvious lack of care in a game’s development factors into its “badness.” For me, playability or lack thereof cements a game as good or bad. I can play through a good game like Castlevania from start to finish and have a wonderful time doing so.
It’s challenging, sure, but everything you need to complete it – weapons, items, strong control – is designed into the game itself. In other words, it’s playable and completable – even if it is harder than sin. On the flip side, Deadly Towers is technically playable, in that, you can beat it if you try hard enough. Its incompetent design, however – poor hit detection, vague objectives, wandering through pointless rooms – renders it difficult to actually play the game, let alone enjoy. Thus, the games on this Bottom 86 list are organized in terms of playability: playable (really bad, but hey, if you want to torture yourself), barely playable (broken in many aspects, but your character still kinda does what they’re supposed to), and unplayable (“what is this?” “I can’t even begin to” “how was this ever released?!” and other various exclamations).Every game on Part 1 of the list is considered playable by me. Proceed with caution.As a wise man once said, if you got beef, eat a pork chop. Or, you know, disagree in the comments section.
Airwolf laughs at your desire to progress. “Want to beat a mission? Figure out what this dial means first!” “That’s just my fuel gauge” you reply to Airwolf. Airwolf frowns and says, “Of course it is! Now shoot this fighter jet!” A jet appears on the bland blue horizon. You shoot it down. “Ok, now can I go to the next level?
I’ve shot a million jets already!” Airwolf cackles infinitely without replying. Your mind begins to break. You shut the game off, silencing Airwolf ‘s mockeries forever.
Peace and silence are your reward.