The following list contains the worst games the PS4 currently has to offer. Some of these games are genuinely awful from start to end, some would be acceptable were it not for different technical issues that really make these games nearly unplayable. Sony fans take this note; you will want to stay as far away from the following games as possible.
Digital Foundry : Whether it's via FPS Boost or bespoke software upgrades, backwards compatibility on the current-gen consoles delivered an unexpected delight - the ability to liberate older console games from their 30fps limits, running them at 60 frames per second or even higher. FPS Boost did the business for Xbox Series consoles on an impressive range of titles, but there was always the sense that PS5 could do more. It's a hunch that checks out as a range of frame-rate unlocks are available for PS5, covering many must-have games - the major caveat being that only exploitable consoles running on older firmwares are invited to the party.
you love to see new life being breathed into older titles but damn the process to get there. It should be automatic that these work for everyone... not just those who exploit their systems. Really wish Sony and MS would keep this program going officially.
Damn this sucks. I want this shit so bad, but I’m not jailbreaking my console. And frankly I shouldn’t have to. I’m not a tech person, but is it really that hard for developers to unlock the framerate? Or would that have to be a large patch?
"but is it really that hard for developers to unlock the framerate?"
I guess it's not.
But it has become a profitable business if you do so.
So no one would pay for only the framerate patched to being unlocked. So studios need to offer more than that.
But this would take more time, polishing and would cost more money. So they shy away, but won't unlock the framerate, either.
That's just my personal assumption. But from what I can comprehend technically, it shouldn't be difficult to unlock framerates via a patch for older games.
... if it hadn't became a business.
frame-rate unlock should be free ...
We've seen many devs offer free patches and updates to pretty old PC titles, even bonuses ... so why can't devs offer the frame unlock patch for free (in consultation with the platform-producers) for a title from just a generation earlier?
RaidenBlack
"frame-rate unlock should be free ..."
Obviously the result of that thinking is that developers aren't even going to do it.
If they had been allowed to charge $5-10 you would see incentivized developers doing it way more often.
People just always want everything for free, but it's not free to make the patch, people have to code it then other people have to test it, and there will always be other costs involved.
If people want dollar store gaming then expect to get what you pay for.
Raiden I might be wrong but last I thought it cost money to put patches out on consoles.
As far as me paying for it, I'm not all that interested tbh. Not enough to pay for it with older games, and newer games have been pretty decent about it for the most part.
Sounds like the modder has to go in to make changes to unlock it on a game by game basis. "Simple" enough to do it unofficially, but to have it done officially, they need someone to go in a make that change, put out a patch and put it through certification, which I believe is not necessarily a cheap thing to do. It's questionable if going through this would then give them enough sales to make it worthwhile.
Many games still have physics tied to framerate, i think it's cause they wouldn't want to go in and do anything extra. Then there's the 10 dollar upgrades they rather charge. The problem is that there's no compromise, cause if I could mod my PS4 and all I'd lose is online play then id jailbreak it immediately. Mods have done so much for PC games and they could do the same for consoles, but manufacturers hafto be willing to compromise.
It's not to hard to do and there's youtube videos that break it down really well. ANyway most of us here arent able to break are console anyway due to being up to date on firmware from playing
Yep, this sucks having to require a jailbreak for something that should be standard in our industry by now. I learned my lesson when PS4 was jailbroken and I didn't keep a console on low firmware for years, but now I'm holding onto two low firmware PS5s specifically because there are features I'll be able to do that you can't do on official firmware, so this will pay off for me soon enough.
Digital Foundry : Released in February 2015, The Order: 1886 was a stunning PlayStation 4 game at the cutting-edge of rendering technology, with visuals that still hold up today. The game's release pre-dated in-depth Digital Foundry coverage, something we're looking to address with this new video! Ready at Dawn's game never received a sequel and never received a PS4 Pro upgrade, but thanks to developments with exploited, older firmware PS5 consoles, we can now show you the game running locked at 60 frames per second.
The gameplay was bland and extremely frustrating at times with unnecessary QTE combat at points. But the world and the lore and the characters and the story were fantastic. I’ve always wanted a sequel. I still hope Sony will surprise us one day.
And let's not forget,
Ready At Dawn showcased The Order 1886 running on PC at 60fps at SIGGRAPH 2015
https://www.dsogaming.com/n...
I still stand by my theory that this game just released at the wrong time. Almost every outlet spent a lot of time in their reviews ragging on the game for not being an online experience, everyone was in the Destiny hype train and at the time they wanted EVERY game to follow suit, bashing any game that didn't. If this were released after everyone realized how much that wasn't future, people would've appreciated it more. I loved it, and I'm always disappointed that we'll never get a sequel
That doesn't seem to be true about outlets complaining on the lack of online. The review summaries on Metacritic are very consistent: Amazing graphics, but shallow gameplay and a very short length with little reason to return.
Here's an example of how *little* time IGN spent talking about multiplayer:
"With no multiplayer, and no reason to revisit the short and stunted single-player campaign once it’s been completed, there just isn’t a lot to it."
It's the final sentence. They don't even take the time to say "online multiplayer"
"Amazing graphics, but shallow gameplay and a very short length with little reason to return."
You are right, that's what everbody was saying at the time, never heard anything about it not being online.
I've been thinking about trying this game for years, I may get it now that it's dirt cheap, no big loss if it sucks
Oh, add to that bad enemy AI, I remember that from the reviews, I saw a video of a wherewolf boss fight with a very weak AI
And there we glowing reviews for shorter games. It was one of the times where hating this game was "cool."
Can you show me the reviews that rag on it for not having an online experience?
I’m not doubting you or anything. I’m just being lazy.
That's also fake news, isarai. Again, the game was consistently criticized for what it was (Pretty but extremely short, extremely linear, hand-holding, no replayability), not for what it wasn't (multiplayer/open-world)
Nope, every review uses the term "linear" several times as if it's some inherently bad attribute. Not fake news at all. Since then there's veen plenty of short and sweet single player linear games that get lots of praise, again after the reality of everything being open world set it and it wasn't as great as everyone thought. But at the launch of the last gen everyone had open world fever, and especially the first couple years "linear" was a con in many games reviewed
That's your own contortion assuming criticism of its extremely linear design is suddenly a call for it to have been open world.
You totally made up a claim regarding an overall review consensus that isn't true. And, instead of just ignoring being called out for it, you respond with "oh actually i ment to say OPEN WORLD". Which literally isn't true either. You can't show us one review that bashed the game for "not being open world". And, somehow the other guy is getting downvoted. Over a bullshit liar.
Games were being criticized at that time for any game that wasn't open world or online. So yeah I got one mixed for the other, doesn't change my argument one bit that it would've been received better if it released later. People are agreeing because if you were not riding the "online and open world" hype train at that time, it was blatantly obvious there were biases in play for how games were criticized. Now after all that has happened since people want to say "oh wait these games were actually pretty good" cause they know better now
The gameplay was very shallow and when one says repetitive, it is by the very definition for some fights. As in, completely identical but different setting.
The game has amazing potential.
The graphics, the lore, characters…
This could most definitely have been all corrected with a sequel and became a franchise hit…
Still would love to see an attempt.
Ie fantastic premise and moments that shine…
But it had its downfalls that deserved the negative marks.
It was the "game to hate" when it launched. And right here, on this site, we saw people posting stories that were outright fabrications about the game. It was weird. The game launched, it was fun, a really cool game but the hate was too much. And so were the lies.
It was just too short....but I loved every minute of it....double dipped and grabbed the ultimate CE
That isn't true. I remember people talking about how incredibly short it was and the somewhat janky gunplay.
First I'm hearing of this. I don't know what multiplayer has to do with anything. The game was just dull. Amazing graphics, great narrative, great lore, boring gameplay sprinkled in pieces between cutscenes, and lackluster AI and controls.
People cried this game was too short. No people are crying because games are too long.
Games like Ubisoft open worlds not enjoyable lengthy games like Elden Ring or Baldur's Gate III
I get it, but people also complain about the main stories being too long or just games being too long in general because they are "adults".
Ready At Dawn cut their teeth developing spin-offs for PlayStation Portable and porting games to consoles. When they got a chance to establish their own with The Order: 1886, its poor critical reception ostensibly halted their trajectory. Can one middling game really sully one’s reputation in the eyes of Sony?
Wanted a sequel for this game so much. It was left wide open for one with the ending it had.
Sony did file a new trademark a while back, so you never know. Though if I were to guess it would be a reboot rather than a sequel.
The Order was great from my playthrough and really enjoyed it. The same with Days Gone. Both, amongst others out there, deserve a follow-up. Anyone who actually played through the complete games knows there were hidden gems in and around these 2 games. Too many out there put too much faith in reviewer's opinions instead of thier own and get put off or join the hate bandwagon.
Seriously, gamers need to game & not read or view other people game with added opinions thrown in.
Honestly, if you haven't played either of these 2 games yet, do yourself a favour, pick it or them up, forget anything you know about them & just play it for yourself & create you're own opinions.
I ignored the reviews and went straight to the store to but the game. Thoroughly enjoyed it I might add. If only Sony had the balls to summon enough faith to reboot or give us a sequel. Maybe even a prequel done right and make it a 3 part series. Wasted opportunity for a really different exclusive if you ask me.
Days Gone is really an exceptional game though it feels like it took a bit of time for it to get interesting.
The Order 1886 was unfortunately not very good. Super beautiful game with beautiful cinematics but felt incomplete and don't really remember much happening at all in the game i.e. it was kind of bland. A sequel where they learned from their mistakes would be very intriguing though and I would have bought it.
I loved Days Gone and I would have loved a sequel.
I didnt like The Order. There was enough there for me to give a sequel a chance if they improved on bits but I'm losing no sleep over the absence of it. I thought the 1st one was genuinely terrible for a multitude of valid reasons.
I really enjoyed it. I was hoping for a game in the same world but less linear. With lots of that sweet lore.
Yeah with the tech sorted and expanding on the existing assets, they could/should have been able to do a trilogy that gen. What happened..
Agreed. Such an interesting title just abandoned. Makes no sense. As I said the ending of the game sets up for a sequel perfectly.
Incredible graphics and presentation. Great use of photo mode. A really interesting premise. The actual gunplay felt solid. The game just needed to be longer, and the levels could have been a bit less constrained. More enemy variety as well. At full price it just didn't have the value, at least in my opinion.
I would like to see a sequel or reboot, which I think is more likely. It would need to be a new dev as Ready at Dawn are part of Oculus now
I think Bluepoint could do a good job. They have the technical capability if Demon's Souls is anything to go by.
Agreed. Because of all the bad reviews I waited until the end of last gen to buy it, but was really surprised. The only knocks against it were length and linearity. Really loved the visuals, atmosphere, story, and characters. The gunplay was actually really well done with unique and fun weapons.
You mentioned the photo mode, and this was one of the best examples I have seen. They actually allow you to add filters and modify the visuals in the photo mode, and then apply those to the game. I have never seen that before or since. I really wish more games would allow this. Give the users more control over how the game looks to cater it to their tastes.
Because it’s literally a 5 hr game, yet had the same quality offering of the other AAA Sony games that are tens to hundreds of hours of gameplay.
I used a walkthrough trophy guide for the platinum to not miss any collectibles in one run, it took 8hrs. I thought it was actually a pretty great game, but always wonder why that level of game development didn’t continue for a 15hr single player campaign.
I'm part of the community and I loved it.
I think a lot of the hate was from people who didn't even play it jumping on the bandwagon. Clearly there was the usual hate from xbox fans but also from insecure PC players as the graphics were (still are) phenomenal.
The game is a flawed gem. A new entry on PS5 would have great potential (doubt it will happen though, Sony isn't into risk taking these days).
All the early hate was a people who haven't played it and were quick to call it a QTE game.
I'm an Xbox fan and I'm planning on getting a PS4 pro one day to play this game along with gravity Rush 2 and others.
-"I think a lot of the hate was from people who didn't even play it jumping on the bandwagon."
Can we please stop retreating back such tired defenses? It's had a heavily mixed reception ever since critics PLAYED the game back then, and justifiably so. Even trying to rope in "insecure PC players" just shows how shallow this view actually is.
Ugh, I love this game! But yes, those lycan fights were terribly designed, for real.
Overall though, solid gameplay.
Playroom? it's free. That's a bit of a cheap choice :P
Of the decade? PS4 isn't even 3 years old yet.
Why not just list some of the worst games of the decade on EVERY platform?
I agree with Knack, The Order and Godzilla
Wow, never even heard of Hardware: Rivals.
I'm going to go ahead and crown The Order: 1886 as the Batman v Superman of the video game industry.
I take back drive club and the order and give you the worst p4 title of all time duck dinasty and might not be playing the room but my kids love that game maybe u don't play it but others do