dtgreene: An anti-feature is a "feature" that the game (or other thing) would be better off without.

For purposes of this topic, please only discuss anti-features of the game design itself, and not things like DRM (which is an anti-feature, but it's not the point of the topic).

What anti-features in games are more common than they should be?

Here are two that I can come up with:

1. Punishment for death. Some games penalize characters who die with things like aging or permanent stat penalties. These penalties simple serve the function of encouraging players to reload rather than accepting the death and continuing on. The player already has to repeat a section or play down a party member or spend resources on revival; you don't need to punish her any further.

2. Genre switches. When someone chooses a game, that person chooses a game of a genre that she wants to play (and is able to). When the game switches genre, you end up in a situation where the player must get through a part of the game that she hates to get to the good part of the game. One example is stealth sequences in non-stealth games (like modern Zelda); another is action mini-games like the ones in Final Fantasy games.

In the cast of example 2, some players may not even be able to pass certain points. Putting action in a turn-based game, for example, causes problems for disabled gamers who can't press buttons fast enough to go through action games. Putting a turn-based sequence in an action game (which is far less common) can be an issue for young children who don't know how to read.