I agree. F.E.A.R. 2 was a obvious attempt console-tard the game.
Could not stand it personally.
F.E.A.R. 1 on the other hand...
Tomb Raider: Underworld was also a shit heap in my opinion, just another attempt at making things work for the console-tards.
Yes i know it has always been a console game but Underworld just seemed so rubbish to me and thats saying alot considering i have loved all the other games (I havnt played 1 or AoD though).
Dawn of War: Soul storm was not good Either. Cant wait till the FoK team do there magic with it. Also, whilst i have not played DoW 2 i fear i wont liek it either. THe original was gold and i dont think anything other then a graphics redo would be needed.
Thats all i can think of from the top of my head.

I haven't played much recent games (i.e. from around 2003 on ... stopped updating hardware and switched to laptops with integrated graphics), so can't comment much on anything above. All this is subjective so lala.
In no order:
Deus Ex (the first one). I love(d) the System Shocks, but didn't have a good enough machine to play Deus Ex when it was first released. When I got to actually play it, it was already considered a classic. But man. I just felt it didn't evolve the System Shock concept and was so much weaker atmosphere and suspense wise. And ... the much highlighted RPG influences were minimal. It still is nothing but a largely linear shooter, given that - except for some very shallow differences - the choices you make do not really have any meaningful influence on what happens. Or what your character has to do to advance the story.
Neverwinter Nights. Ugh. Yes, I know mods fixed a lot, but ... after Baldur's Gate 2 this was incredibly disappointing. Especially given when one reads through (this has been confirmed, see wikipedia entry) what was actually planned (this has been confirmed, see wikipedia entry): http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=community_news.Detail&id=2700
Battle Isle: Incubation. The Battle Isle series (the first three, that is, and Historyline) are among my favourite games. I probably wouldn't have minded Incubation as a separate game, but as part of the same setting it was disappointing. I didn't like the gameplay much either. I'd probably, even, with that wouldn't have marked it down as a disappointment if ... well, if there'd been more Battle Isle of the style I wanted to play. Sadly the creativity and versatility of the team vanished, and since UbiSoft took over the company is reduced to produce bad versions of the settlers :/.

As a big fan of Giants myself, I'd be interested to know exactly you hate it so much, and how far in the game you got. I promise I won't go all fanboy on you ;-)

Bethesda could really use some good narration writers. The storytelling in both Oblivion and Fallout 3 is excruciatingly weak at times. In Fallout 3 it starts blatantly contradicting itself at points, and this kills the immersion for the more attentive players.
The combat system is very hit-and-miss with players. I don't mind it - except the UNSKIPPABLE slow-mo closeups of VATS killshots, which I mind a lot.
The world itself is beautifully realized in Fallout 3, much more so than in Oblivion. Unto itself it is a reason to buy and play the game, it's both very consistent and very detailed. But the storytelling - ugh. Terrible. It's like it was written for kids, by kids.
The pacing is also wrong, you achieve a sense of being all-powerful way too quickly. You've barely played 15 minutes of the game when you're faced with the option of killing the vault overseer? Come on. He should be cooking pancakes on your toasted buttocks any day of the week. Again, this is a result of consolification and the general idea of turning players into something resembling demigods as soon as they boot up the game, instead of having them struggle a little for it and maybe have to suffer an ego hit along the way.
Overall though, I'd grant Oblivion a 4/10, where I'll grant Fallout 3 a 7/10 because it is still, at heart, a fun game. It's just so irritating to realize what it could have been with better core game mechanics and proper storytelling.

Painkiller Resurrection...worst pre-order decision ever.
Age of Conan...bland.
Final Fantasy Mystic Quest, as a child this was my first really bad SNES game.

I'm sure there is some sort of inviolable rule about criticising x-wing. And you just violated it. I don't know the results, but I suspect apocalypse.
With that said:
X-Wing vs Tie Fighter:
Now this was actually an awesome game, well before it's time. It was an excellent squad based online multiplayer game... but it was released in the time when half of us didn't have internet connections, and the rest had 10k modems that charged us by the minute to dial up.
Having played the awesome x-wing and the more awesome tie-fighter, I got it expecting the same great story, missions, atmosphere, amazing music system, and single player. Then I found it had no story or singleplayer, and cd music instead of imuse. I tried playing it singleplayer, but it had no hook. One of the only games i've ever returned.
I'd probably love it now though.
Jedi Outcast
Totally average fps, with terrible weapons, terribly linear, boring and constricted little levels, horrible story, and average gameplay. The only thing it had going for it was the lightsaber system... and that was a little too random. It felt like Elite Force, but it should have felt like the sequel to one of the best FPS games of all time - Jedi Knight.
I don't think I can think of another one. Considering how much bitching there is on the internet about games, it's surprising to find that I've enjoyed almost every one I've played. I think it's because I get more involved in them. Unlike movies, I can think of hundreds of disappointing movies.
--
Oh, I remembered - Warrior Within
I guess all the reasons are well known. The strange thing is, deep in there there's a great game - but you have to fight to get past the horrible change of tone, all the bimbos in S&M gear, and the fact there are way too many fights, and not enough platforming and puzzle solving.

My choice of worst gaems would be
1. Command & Conquer Red Alert 3. It was an ok game but was nothing like read alert 2. The franchise never got any better than number 2 but Red alert 3 was so much look at me it made me sick. The humor sucked and the gameplay was no where near as good.
2. Star Trek Legacy. Like others i was really looking forward to this but was horrifed when i started to play the game just sucked.
3. Ultima 9 bought it when first came out in the UK and it had already been patched to latest version but still crashed within seconds of playing. One hell of a dispointment

This was the other thing I hated about X-Wing. As soon as it came out, there was this hoard of fan boys that instantly glommed onto it like it was the best thing ever. To this day, I still feel like the only person who admitted it was a disappointment.
However, Tie Fighter did manage to fix the things I didn't like about X-Wing, and I enjoyed it a lot more.

I don't really remember what mission exactly, I did the one where they first introduce the big ass elephants, those are pretty cool enemies, but then I don't know what I was doing after that. I have only played as the Meccs (if thats how theyre called) so far, and the problem is that the other 2 characters may be more fun, but I just would rather be playing another game and not have to trudge through rubbish to get to the good stuff. I want instant gratification right now!

Wow...there's an awful lot of seething hatred here concerning Fallout 3. I asked for it for Christmas, so I hope that if I get it, I'll actually enjoy it, and won't develop an utter contempt of it like some here.
While I don't agree the console part of your post, I also hated Tomb Raider Underworld. We got an overhyped, glitchy mess of a game, and DLC which catered to the Xbox 360 crowd, and screwed over everyone else (I have a PS3). Console-exclusive DLC is a inhumane piece of crap that needs to die. If you like the system sooo much that you will only put the DLC on one system, then just release it on that one system; don't screw with the rest of us!
/rant

I don't think it's liking a system, so much as that company paying them for the exclusivity. And as for Fallout 3 I am also getting it as a graduation present, and I have very high expectations, from what I have seen I am pretty sure it is going to be amazing.

Okay, if you got that far, I'd say you gave it a fair shot. You've missed out on half the game mechanics, but if you didn't like the game by that point, I doubt you'd have liked the rest of it either.
There's no accounting for taste, and I don't think any game exists that is universally liked by everybody. So thanks for the explanation :-)

Well, I didn't play it until about 4 years after it came out. So that can't be me ;-)
Still, I thought it was amazing, if not quite as polished as tie-fighter (which i played first).
I've never really enjoyed any of the Wing Commander games to be honest. I played a bit of WC2 cos I got it free with my PC, but I could never get into any of the 3d ones. Terrible flight model mostly.

Fallout 3 - Lifeless, dull, none of the wit of the first 2.
Spore - Nothing like what was advertised.
Ultima 9 - Not fun