Bad Game Design

[Dustmop]

If this travesty actually counts as a game, that is.

You left out the best part of that game. The grey limbo you teleport to when you spin in reverse for too long. {XD}

 

[Aeroblast]

You left out the best part of that game. The grey limbo you teleport to when you spin in reverse for too long. {XD}

And the classic "YOU'RE WINNER!" message.

Nothing can really do justice to this game's reputation as one of the worst ever made, though.

 

[Oryx]

I'm going to take this in a different direction - save points. There are too many games that take after the NES model and give you massive amounts of space between save points; in fact, the whole concept of save points is outdated in most cases with the ability to save as you go. People will "up the difficulty" by making you go through a long piece of the game and then have something hard at the end right before the next save point, so if you lose you have to do that piece of the game all over again.

The worst is that there are good ways to do this - for example, in Bit.Trip Runner the levels are all only a few minutes long but you have to redo the entire level if you fail. It gives you the feeling of "I need to beat this" without the rage that I get from knowing that I have to go through tons and tons of irrelevant stuff.

 

[Dustmop]

And the classic "YOU'RE WINNER!" message.

Nothing can really do justice to this game's reputation as one of the worst ever made, though.

Haha, even when all you did was back-up over the finish line and win in .2 seconds flat because they couldn't be bothered to fix that, either.

And no, no it can't. It's right up there with Superman 64, which I'm surprised to find nobody has mentioned yet.

 

[Palkia]

I remember that there was a port of the NES TMNT game to DOS that was impossible to beat as there was a jump early on that was impossible to a ceiling getting in the way. It's one thing to have bad game design but to make it unwinnable is something different.