Someone was talking about finding joy in the worst or at least most flawed NES games, and I can see that now. It's important to note that the games in question can't just be some movie licensed schlock, but games that were ambitious but didn't quite work out due to an unfamiliarity with the hardware. At the very least, they've got to be charismatic. It's why I'll defend a game like Rambo, which WAS movie licensed schlock but somehow also offered a side-scrolling adventure game that was at least as fun to play as Zelda II. The villains' heads all expand when you hit them, and your traitorous commanding officer can be turned into a frog when you shoot kanji at him, then led back to Vietnam where he left you.
There's a lot of NES games that don't work as games, but are still valiant attempts at entertainment. Someone mentioned King's Knight by Square, and I think that's a good example, a sort of shooter in RPG's clothing where everything's cryptic and nothing really makes sense. That's a good example. One I remember was Flying Dragon, a martial arts adventure game that tries to bring one on one fighting, Kung Fu-style platform-brawling, and narrative-driven games together. Was it successful? Maybe, maybe not, but you could tell it was an early NES game by an obscure development team, and they were trying their damnedest to make this forward thinking concept work. The road to brief but memorable amusement is paved with nifty ideas that the design team couldn't quite mold into games. They were getting there, though. If we didn't have these games that tried and failed to provide a foundation for later generations of genre-straddling titles, we might not have those later games.