Electronic Gaming Monthly's Worst Reviewed Games of 1997

Battle Arena Toshinden URA, Re-Loaded & Crypt Killer (Tie)

#5

Either 1997 was a really good year for video games or the editors at EGM were more generous than usual, because the scores found in this episode are surprisingly high for a "Worst Reviewed" list. This has led to bizarre a tie for fifth place, with three completely different games stuck with so-so scores of 4.6 out of 10. Just to compare, the best reviewed game on the 1996 Worst list had an average of 3.5. And that's pretty typical. It was a 3.75 in 1995 and a 3.9 in 1991. That's going to lead to a number of games that aren't really bad, per se, but wound up at the bottom because they had the misfortune of being released in 1997.

A good example of that is Battle Arena Toshinden URA on the Sega Saturn. This was supposed to be an enhanced port of Toshinden 2 on the PlayStation, but EGM was not impressed. "TURA is the worst Toshinden game ever released (yes, even worse than Remix)," starts a less-than-thrilled Crispin Boyer. "Its graphics are extremely choppy, making it hard to tell who's hitting who, and only the hi-res -- albeit flat -- backgrounds keep the game from becoming an eyesore." The rest of the critics agreed, giving it an average of 4.6 out of 10.

Speaking of underwhelming sequels, Re-Loaded also averaged a score of 4.6. While EGM loved the original, they felt the sequel was, well, pretty terrible. Dan Hsu complained that "the movement drags along like an ant in tar, the shooting gets really monotonous and the graphics are drab." The other three critics liked it marginally more than Dan, but they all agreed that it was a major step down from the critically-acclaimed first game.

And then there's Crypt Killer, which is not to be confused with the full-motion shooter Corpse Killer. Sushi-X explained that he likes light gun games as much as the next guy, but wonders "why is it that the graphics look like something out of the 1980s?" He hated the "horrible, blocky enemies and erratic accuracy," which sounds like a real problem with this type of game. He, along with the rest of the review crew, didn't have much nice to say, leading to an average of 4.6 out of 10. That's a bit worse than the 5.25 scored Corpse Killer averaged back in 1995. Not that they are in any way related.

Dragonheart: Fire & Steel

#4

It wouldn't be a Worst of EGM list without a game based on a movie. This year's entry is Dragonheart: Fire & Steel, which was based on the poorly-received 1996 film Dragonheart, which starred Sean Connery as a giant CGI dragon and was a moderate hit at the box office. Acclaim probably figured that the promising story and setting would lend itself perfectly to a 32-bit action game. And the truth is, it probably would have, if somebody other than Funcom made it.

Dan has a theory: "Some game designer, who's out of touch with reality, decides that, 'Gamers want great graphics. Let's make graphics our only priority!' And boom, out comes Dragonheart." He concluded that "Dragonheart has less substance in it than the Pope." Sushi-X didn't like the movie or the game: "Considering the failure of the movie, it's not surprising that the game would follow suit." He complained that "after the graphics, there's literally nothing to recommend." Bad music, bad gameplay, bad everything. Somehow this game performed even worse with the critics than the movie, averaging a disappointing 4.5 out of 10.

Resident Evil: Director's Cut

#3

When you clicked on the link called Electronic Gaming Monthly's Worst Reviewed Games of 1997, I bet you didn't expect to see a Resident Evil game make the cut, especially not Resident Evil: Director's Cut. I know what you're thinking: "Wasn't Resident Evil just named one of the best reviewed games of 1996? What gives?" The problem is that the EGM editors felt like they were lied to and that this so-called "Director's Cut" wasn't all that different from what came out a year ago.

"The best thing I about Resident Evil: Director's Cut is the Resident Evil 2 demo included on the additional CD," bluntly states Sushi-X. "In a really bad move, Director's Cut ISN'T uncensored, which makes this a waste of money." It's also worth noting that both Shawn and Kelly took this moment to talk about how they weren't big fans of the original version. "Considering I feel RE is a glorified version of Alone in the Dark, this title didn't exactly overwhelm me." Geez, what a difference a year makes. The one time horror champion has now been reduced to a disappointing average of 4.4 out of 10.

Battle Stations

#2

I normally like to offer some sort of history or broader context in these introductions, but that's just not the case with Battle Stations by Electronic Arts. So instead of trying to explain what the game is, I'm going to let Crispin tell us why this 1997 naval simulator is so disappointing: "Battle Stations is a game of could've beens. It could've been a way-cool real-time strategy game. It could've been a true-to-spec sim of ship-to-ship combat. Heck, it could've been a Navyfied version of the Strike series (what I had hoped for). Instead, it's a repetitive, overly difficult fighting game that demands little strategy and lots of button pressing."

Believe it or not, that was one of the kind reviews. Dan said that " Battle Stations is a perfectly good premise wasted on one of the most simplistic, most juvenile games ever to be found." Sushi-X also complained, saying that "the battle scenes involve a frenzy of button pushes that cannot be controlled, by design. Duh!" Yeah, duh indeed. Battle Stations on the PlayStation strikes out with a pitiful average of 3.9 out of 10.

Tail of the Sun

#1

There's an argument to be made that Art Dink was ahead of its time. While their 1996 game, Aquanaut's Holiday, left a lot of critics scratching their heads, its unorthodox approach would fit in perfectly in 2018. I think the same can be said about Art Dink's 1997 follow-up, Tail of the Sun. It's a caveman game where you can go anywhere and do just about anything. This approach left some critics enraptured, but Electronic Gaming Monthly wasn't having any of it. They hated Tail of the Sun, and after reading their frustrated reviews, it's easy to see why.

"A caveman's journey to enlightenment?" starts fake ninja Sushi-X. "This isn't exactly what I look forward to when I flip on my systems." He thought the idea was sound, but found playing the game to be downright boring. Dan agreed and even went a step further by warning people not to buy it. However, he did recommend renting the game. Why? "Let me just say this: The game is so dull and meaningless, some of the staff actually crowded around to make fun of it. Now that's entertainment!" It makes me wonder what these critics would say about the game now that 21 years have passed. With nothing but scorn and mockery, Tail of the Sun averaged a dull and meaningless 2.9 out of 10.