halo 4 is under hyped imo

I personally feel that none of the games on that list was as absurdly overhyped as Watch Dogs. That game, honestly, was the most overhyped I've ever seen in my 26+ years of gaming.

wheres titanfall,gta 4,gta 5,mw2?

"'I Am Alive' has been in production for over 10 years, so it is justifiable to expect that it would be a great game. However, the storyline doesn't explain why the city is in ruins."

Huh? The storyline + collectibles constantly refer to "The Event" and it being an earthquake. I'm pretty sure even the description page where you purchase the game mentions this. If you're going to question anyone who may have enjoyed that game with "did you actually see or play the game at all?" it would be wise to make sure your complaints are actually correct.

halo 4 overhype?? for me halo 4 story was way better then 2& 3. But ac3 conner suck lol

Titanfall and watchdogs over hyped and rated both become boring really quickly.

Dead Island, Dead Island riptide, Watch dogs, bf4 due to problems, resident evil 4. Those are the titles im most dissapointed with.

Looking back at Final Fantasy XIII's initial reaction, I'm kind of flabbergasted at the fairly consistent positive reception it got. It even got some perfect scores.

Look, I'm somebody who likes a pretty large variety of games. Linear games, open world games, shooters, RPG's, strategy - my taste is pretty broad. Plus, I'm a huge Final Fantasy fan (Gilgamesh is my avatar). With that being said, it is actually hard for me to understand why critics praised the game so much.

As for Assassin's Creed III, I feel similarly to it as I do towards FFXIII, but I think ACIII is much, much closer in quality to it's predecessors than FFXIII is.

Then we get to Halo 4, which is a tricky one. At first I like the story, but after beating it something never really clicked. It's something I've never really been able to figure out - just what I felt was missing. Though the campaign was a little tedious, overall I'd say it is pretty good. But the multiplayer, oh the multiplayer...

I feel like the vast majority of reviewers probably played the multiplayer just long enough to be able to include it in the review, and probably weren't very invested in it. I say this because most Halo fans seem to agree that Halo 4's multiplayer is a really poor copy of Call of Duty and the antithesis of what Halo multiplayer is all about.

Halo is about map control and power weapon control. Those two things are what separates Halo from just about every mainstream shooter. In Halo 4 both of those are taken out, and we are left with random chaos. In previous Halo games, you formulated strategies on the fly - is a team camping the top level of Ivory Tower with Sniper and Rocket Launcher? How do I neutralize that combo? In Halo 4, it's run around until you see somebody and shoot them. Honestly, it sucks unless you like Call of Duty. And if you like Call of Duty, it's multiplayer is better than Halo 4.

As for Fable, I kind of liked the first one. I thought the second one was a step back from something I thought was decent. I never bothered with the third one because I know, without a doubt, that I would really dislike it. That being said, the games do have enough going for them that I can see why people enjoy the games.

So I agree with ACIII, Halo 4 and especially FFXIII. One game I'd have to add is GTAIV. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot about that game that is great, but the fundamentals of traversal be it moving or driving just feels so odd that it really made the game not fun for me. In an open world game, for the simple act of running and driving around to be not fun, it's weird that it is one of the two or three highest rated games of the last generation. But, like I said, there are a lot of really good things in the game.

Skyrim.

I don't know how to judge Skyrim. On one hand, I really enjoyed my 200~ hours with game. However, I can't help but feel like Skyrim is the most overrated game of all time in at least some respects.

I once read that Skyrim is a collection of mediocre parts stitched together. And other than the music, the lore and the freedom of exploration I agree. The writing is average other than a collection of Daedric quests. The companions are dull and get in your way as often as they help (basically named pack-mules). The graphics are pretty good, but nothing special. The combat is, honestly, kind of bad.

If you play a melee character it is really tedious. An archer is almost as tedious. Mages are somewhat fun to player. However, almost none of the enemy encounters feel like there is really any strategy for them. Are you high enough level or have good enough gear? Then you will win. If you don't you better chug potions or find an exploit. With a really fun combat system it might not be as big of an issue, but a bland combat system + bland enemy encounters = not fun. Also, dragons are incredibly underwhelming and exemplify my assertion that there isn't strategy in most fights, it's just a gear check.

With all that being said, the freedom of Elder Scrolls games is something pretty unique, and I think that freedom plus shallow gameplay/narrative/NPC's allows for just about anybody to pick the game up and enjoy it. I myself really like it, I just think it has more faults than any 90+ rated game.

Skyrim really is an odd, wonderful, frustrating game.

There's no quick time events in Final Fantasy XIII.

Final Fantasy XIII and Assassins Creed III

Halo and GTA series as a whole take the cake on this by far

Agreed with ass creed, never liked it. Story is good but the gameplay (combat) is just way to dull to make me try more then a few hours.