Flat-Out Worst Game

Unfortunately, not all games can be good, and some turn out to be especially poor. These are the games that aren't forgotten as quickly as the many lackluster games that are published each season--these particularly bad games gain notoriety for being remarkably flawed. They're not necessarily disappointing, since no one really expected much of them in the first place, but then again, no one could have been prepared for just how lousy these games turned out to be. It's a regrettable commendation, but even so, GameSpot now presents you with the finalists for Flat-Out Worst Game of 2003:

Charlie's Angels (GC)

Publisher: Ubisoft
Developer: Neko Entertainment
CHECK LATEST PRICES >>


You've heard about how games based on movies often turn out bad. Look no further for one of the best examples in many years of this unfortunate trend.

Dragon Ball Z: Ultimate Battle 22 (PS)

Publisher: Atari
Developer: Bandai
CHECK LATEST PRICES >>


When this game was originally released eight years ago in Japan for the PlayStation, it already sucked.

Drake of the 99 Dragons (XBOX)

Publisher: Majesco Games
Developer: Idol FX
CHECK LATEST PRICES >>


The editor who reviewed this game for GameSpot proceeded to inquire about whether his company benefits provide for psychotherapy. You think we're joking, don't you?

Gods and Generals (PC)

Publisher: Activision Value
Developer: Anivision
CHECK LATEST PRICES >>


It's a toss-up between playing this game and getting gangrene.    

Navy SEALs: Weapons of Mass Destruction (PC)

Publisher: ValuSoft
Developer: Jarhead Games
CHECK LATEST PRICES >>


Take away the offensive attempt at cashing in on the Middle East conflict, and you'd still be left with a truly awful game.

And the Winner is...