Tried Human Revolution (thanks to humble deal :D ), but didn`t get far.

That part near start where your char` walks whilst listening to someone & all you can do is pan the camera, for aaaaages. Instant off putting.

What little else I saw just seemed generic.

Yeah, you get more money by taking 85% from 10 players rather than 15% from 1000000 players. How smart, I bet valve is poorer than most devs / publishers because valve only take 30% cut while devs / publisher get 70%.

Blizzard must have the players interest at heart.

What's your beef? They took 15% cut from the sales (+$1) which isn't >50% of the money which left the players with most of the money which is the point I was making. (Unless of course you were selling stuff for low low prices.

Final Fantasy 7, and unlike KiNgBrAdLeY7, I actually know why.

1. Too much watching and not enough actual playing. Too much of the game is spent in cutscenes and dialogue, and not enough time in actual gameplay. Similarly, the developers went overboard with summon animations; when a summon is used, the game essentially halts for 30 seconds or more. Also, there is no escape from this; cutscenes are not skipable, and while you could avoid using summons, the final boss has an attack with a summon-like animation that you can't prevent (unless you're powerful enough to kill the boss before then).

2. The gameplay is too easy and unbalanced. Why have status spells when enemies are non-threats and die too easily? (Status ailments do work; it's just that the enemies aren't dangerous and durable enough for them to be worth using.) Enemy Skill is a bit too powerful (too many skills for one materia slot, unlike FFV where you had to make a significant trade-off to equip something like Blue Magic). Cure is more powerful than it should be at low levels, while Full Cure is useless because it doesn't multi-target. Also, whose idea was it to put Knights of the Round in the game? Who thought that was balanced? (It *might* have been balanced if it required 1000 MP to cast or had a long casting time, but it doesn't.)

3. Too much of an emphasis on damaging attacks. This becomes especially apparent if you look at character's limit breaks; the higher level limit breaks of the characters you are allowed to use end-game all do the same boring thing: damage. More variety of limit breaks would help, as would not permanently removing that character from your party. (I actually think the game would have been a little better if it had allowed you to use the character from Disk 2 onward even if it would create an inconsistency with the plot; there are already enough inconsistencies already.)

4. Small party size (why only 3 characters when 4 was the standard for the series and JRPGs in general?) Also, characters don't fit specific roles; it is too easy for a character to be able to fill every role well at once. (FFV didn't have this issue; while any character can fill any role, she can't fill all of them at once.) Previous Final Fantasies (perhaps excluding FF6, which has some of the same issues, but not all) handled it much better; even FInal Fantasy 2 at least made an effort to encourage giving characters specific roles.

5. Too many mini-games. Basically, all of the sudden everything you learned about the game goes out the window when the control scheme changes totally. (This is especially an issue when playing the PC game; you learned what keys do what in normal gameplay, and you now need to relearn for each mini-game.) Some of them don't make much sense: There's a scene where you have to give someone CPR to continue, even though healing magic exists in the game and it is very likely that you have access to it at the point.

6. The game never opens up. In Final Fantasy 6, the game opens up when you get the second airship, allowing you to focus on exploration and actual gameplay without endless cutscenes. This never happens in Final Fantasy 7.

Really, Final Fantasy 7 was a disgrace to the Final Fantasy series.

Blizzard gain more from the RMAH than the players instead of the reverse you claim.

And to artificially create create a difficulty spike to nudge players to the RMAH.
That is worse then FTP microtransection because you pay a large sum of money upfront.

Native Americana Jones?

If players get 85% of the successful transaction, how does Blizzard get more money from it?
How can 15% be more than 85%?

Again, there's the regular auction house that can be used with in-game gold if you really needed it.
Funnily enough if you want you can play the AH and just keep on earning gold and buying decent stuff for low prices in bid wars.

And again, the launch was a mess but later on, like I said, it became possible to go through inferno on solo without even touching AH (RMAH or otherwise). And that was still back when the drops were bad.

Mass Effect 2, the biggest disappointment in my gaming life, thinking of this game genuinely makes me angry.

Games I've played but ended up disliking:

* Skyrim...the game-world was dull and uninteresting
* Fallout 3 & New Vegas...same as above
* Dishonored...same again
* BioShock 1 & 2 ...the visual design was ugly to me, I did not enjoy being in the game-world
* Dragon Age...too much generic Fantasy
* Diablo III...same as above
* Dark Souls...turns out I actually do care about having a narrative

Game: E.T.
Reason: reasons

Myst.

I used to like adventure games up to that point (Kings Quest, Space Quest, etc). But that game frustrated me like no other game before. I had to use a detailed walkthrough to solve it, and even then it was never easy for me. I don't mind puzzles, but they have to make some kind of sense. Playing a piano, using sliders to open the door to an airplane is just too damn irrational to make any sense. Why would anyone build a lock like that? Seriously... I don't get it.

It took me a full week to solve the piano puzzle. The only thing that kept me going was that I refused to let the game beat me. I've stayed away from adventure games ever since. I have bought a few here on GOG recently, but I haven't dared to try them. I'm afraid to run into another Myst. I doubt I would survive the experience.

Since I could not find any pictures of a native american Indiana Jones, here's Indy playing a tiny saxophone for some native american guy.

Getting 15% from 1000000 people is surely more than 85% from 10 people. That is simple mathematics.

Even though it is possible to beat the game with lots of grinding, it does not change the fact that Blizzard corrupt the gameplay for greed.

If you define FPS combat as aiming at enemies with a ranged weapon from fpp then of course the combat is FPS. Calling the combat 100% FPS is a nonsensical statement because it's impossible to determine what one percent of the combat is.
You admitted that you'll be missing all the time, but now you're claiming that it is 100% strife and speed of hand/mouse dependent. You do realize that you've proven yourself wrong in the same post, don't you?

A random or character skill dependent hit chance is atypical for FPS, which is another reason why you are missing the point.

If you like making so bold claims, would you like to tell me how FPS combat mechanics prevent a game from being a role-playing game?

I assume then that you would also claim that life action role-playing is not role-playing because its combat depends purely on your personal fitness. (That would be just as incorrect as your statement from before.)

Looks like we've already reached the point in the show where silly venting hate dies down and the silly squabbling over opinions picks up.

Ah, but after a while we'll get silly venting hate about opinions!