Out of curiosity Brass which ones did you think were awesome, but sucked. Any us young'uns would recognise?
"Sucked" might be putting it a little strongly... Perhaps "disappointed" would fit better.
The Morrow Project is one. I believe that Flying Buffalo UK distributed it over here, or possibly even reprinted it, so copies could be found "in the wild" (not the case for RPGs like Supergame, which I knew only from adverts in Space Gamer), and there was a boxed set available as well as the spiral-bound book. It had a reputation for extreme detail and accuracy, a sense of being a "realistic" post-apocalypse game. When I finally bought a copy it seemed to fall rather flat for me. Even for the time it came out there was a very heavy focus on weapons, ammunition and minute differences between firearms, none of which interests me particularly, but the main problem was the roleplaying side of it: TMP didn't really have much scope for developing a character until they borrowed the D100 system from Chaosium and bolted it on as a supplement. That expanded things for the PCs, but the world remained underdeveloped, only really coming to life in the adventures. It's a shame, because unlike many RPGs TMP actually gave your characters a reason to do things: they were part of a series of teams put in suspended animation in order to help rebuild society after catastrophe hit... except something went wrong and they remained asleep far longer than planned, waking to a world in a far worse state than anticipated. It's a great setup and I don't think that the game did enough with it at the start. I rather preferred Aftermath for my post-apocalypse jollies There was a crossover of writers, mechanical elements and even parts of the future history between TMP and Tri Tac's games such as Fringeworthy and FTL: 2448 (both also on the list), so inevitably some of the criticisms I have can be levelled at Tri Tac as well. Yet the vital difference from my point of view is that the Tri Tac games did a much better job of giving you a character you could really use and a world they could play in.
High Fantasy has a few nice elements, such as alchemist and "beast master" characters, but never managed to be more than a clunky D&D wannabe, feeling neither fresh nor easier to use. I kept it because it did have some very good solo adventures, though.
Wild West redeemed itself by fetching a few quid when I sold it on eBay, but like the early editions of Boot Hill it felt as though role-playing was an afterthought. Nothing to particularly recommend it, sadly.
Lands of Adventure is another oddity. There's actually a very clever, well thought out game in there... yet I can't think of a single reason why I'd run it instead of a different fantasy RPG. The included "culture packs" are a nice idea, brief setting books for Ye Olde Englande and Ancient Greece; it's a real shame that they never published more, as was planned. Some elements of the mechanics seem perversely contrary: I seem to recall that your dexterity stat was based on your skill at crafting items, rather than vice versa, for example. It also suffered from a lack of pre-written animals, monsters and NPCs, which made for heavy prep time. Still, it's the only game I've ever encountered that explains what happens to the combat effectiveness of a bear if you shave it. Loved the cover (quite radical for the time, with no oiled muscles or searing fireballs in sight) and I greatly respect Lee Gold's work, but I don't know if I'll ever try running it again.
There are others, but why be negative? It's a list heavy with brilliant games, old though they be.