Yeah, but the 'it gets better later' isn't really a sound arguement isn't it? To quote Yahtzee Crowshaw: "You can put your hand in an oven for twenty hours, and yeah, you'll probably stop feeling the pain at some point, but have done probably pretty serious damage to yourself..." I've been told that FF13 gets good after 20 hours... TWENTY... Instead of playing utter dread for 20 hours and wait for the relief, I could've just played a game that is fun from start on for 20 hours, or not?
I really don't hold it against you, I like some bad games too, christ I still like and play BRINK, but FF13 just doesn't hold any fun for me to be seen, even after 20 hours or more...
Overlooked? Over/underrated shouldn't even be in the English language, but a game that did do well in terms of score but was not popular (at least in the US) was Akai Katana. For obvious reasons. It was $30 retail when it came out and I still find endless replay value and enjoyment in it. I was highly anticipating this and the only thing that let me down was the boss design. It wasn't to important because it was just their appearance that bothered me. The whole game is still extremely fun and a bit tough.
And another one in the same genre was Raiden 4. That was one of the reasons I bought the damn system in the first place!
It even lampshades how it could have been a great platformer, but executive medding (L.O.G.) said "Nope, kids today don't want this sort of game". And if you look around on the internet, you can read stories about how Microsoft used Rare as their 'casual-game machine'.