It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionGame features you hate but most people seem to like(103 posts)(103 posts)
(103 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Posted March 05, 2016
avatar
Fenixp: I don't understand people who would skip a game because it doesn't contain achievements, that feels insane to me. But to point out that achievements, a standard feature in today's industry, are missing in a game is a perfectly natural reaction. I honestly think that when a game comes to Steam and doesn't have achievements at this point, developers were just too lazy to implement them, which makes me wonder which other and more important standardized features they happened to omit?
I agree that gamers shouldn't decry a game that doesn't have achievements. But if a game developer decides not to include achievements because they feel it doesn't add to the game, I can't fault them for that.
Posted March 05, 2016
Features like Mark and Execute from Splinter Cell which are designed solely so casuals can go through without doing the difficult parts. Makes no sense whatsoever but you waste tutorial time explaining it, and its still not clear.

Drone sections / other disembodied non player character locomotive sections. Driving is OK but mandatory drone sections are just lame.
Posted March 05, 2016
My one big complaint:


Fitting Multiplayer into a game that DOESN'T NEED IT!!!! and actually detracts from the single player portion of the game. This happened more in the early 2000s when publishers/devs were just really getting into the multiplayer thing but its still something that happens and something that doesn't need to.

If you're that insecure that you need other peoples approval of your actions, you can get that in something we call the real world.

That is all.
Posted March 05, 2016
In-game exclusives that are offered for a limited time only.

Pokemon is a perfect example. Some monsters are offered only during certain events and they cannot be obtained normally.
Posted March 05, 2016
avatar
Leroux: snip
Yes, I agree with everything you said there and I understand your opinion much better now. :D So, thanks a lot for the reply. (Just to clarify: With "But man, you hate that?" I meant realistic merchants.)


___
avatar
Emob78: Quest markers.

Took game design, especially for open world RPGs, into a whole new direction of suck. What's the point of interpreting clues or game information when there's a big flashing arrow on the map showing you where you have to go?
I thought about mentioning it but thought: "Who likes them anyway?"
The worst thing is when you have to rely on those quest markers because no one gives you even a hint about where to go. *cough* Skyrim *cough* Instead there's dialogue that's so bad that I don't even see the point of it.
Post edited March 05, 2016 by 0Grapher
Posted March 05, 2016
avatar
Leroux: snip
avatar
0Grapher: Yes, I agree with everything you said there and I understand your opinion much better now. :D So, thanks a lot for the reply.

___
avatar
Emob78: Quest markers.

Took game design, especially for open world RPGs, into a whole new direction of suck. What's the point of interpreting clues or game information when there's a big flashing arrow on the map showing you where you have to go?
avatar
0Grapher: I thought about mentioning it but thought: "Who likes them anyway?"
The worst thing is when you have to rely on those quest markers because no one gives you even a hint about where to go. *cough* Skyrim *cough* Instead there's dialogue that's so bad that I don't even see the point of it.
Just follow the flashing light/arrow. Been causing problems for man since F-all AD.
Posted March 05, 2016
A checkpoint system instead of a 'save whenever you like'.

I've gotten into heated arguments that 'save whenever you like' is basically a cheat and I very much disagree it is.

Nothing worst then trying to do something and while nearing the next checkpoint you fail. Then having to start over with the last checkpoint and doing the same thing all over again and doing so time and time again in some cases. Drives me crazy.
Posted March 05, 2016
avatar
Charon121: There was a thread not long ago called "little things you hate in games". This one is about the big things, or fundamental game mechanics that you can't stomach, but that everyone around you adores. I'll start with a few things:

Dungeons: the staple of every RPG and most action adventures since the beginnings of computer games. Labyrinthine corridors with monotone textures filled with illogically placed loot and a nonsense ecosystem of critters. For some odd reason, torches are always lit, and foodstuffs are never rotten. They can take many forms, but most commonly that of a dreary castle dungeon, absurdly spacious sewers, swamp where your movement is restricted, forest with conveniently cut passages going through it, etc. Sometimes developers get creative, but even if the dungeon is a massive tree bough, it's always the same labyrinthine corridors, creatures that sit tight waiting for you to stumble upon them, and valuable stuff left around. I'll take a logical overworld map or city setting anytime over dungeons, which I consider to be lazy design. Huge sprawling dungeons are even worse because they never seem to end.
Haha, this one tickles me. I found it amusing in games like Darkstone when there's a creature just sitting in a room behind a locked door. It kind of gets you thinking, isn't my character little more than a monster to them, going into their places of living, smashing through their barricades, killing everyone there, and taking everything that isn't nailed down? Obviously those 'dungeons' are actually fortresses designed by their inhabitants to protect them from pillaging 'heroes'.
Posted March 05, 2016
avatar
itchy01ca01: My one big complaint:


Fitting Multiplayer into a game that DOESN'T NEED IT!!!! and actually detracts from the single player portion of the game. This happened more in the early 2000s when publishers/devs were just really getting into the multiplayer thing but its still something that happens and something that doesn't need to.

If you're that insecure that you need other peoples approval of your actions, you can get that in something we call the real world.

That is all.
Yeah, this happened with Bioshock 2. The first game was incredible, so for the second they decided to haphazardly add multiplayer which really wasn't needed. If anything, the multiplayer aspect should have been a stand-alone game so they could focus more on the story.
Posted March 05, 2016
We are telepathic here.
Characters talk to each other, one gives you a quest, and the game assumes I know everything I need. Except when I don't. Like, how about you said to me in what part of that place exactly is that bloody sewerage entrance… Do you want me to help you or not, NPC?
Posted March 05, 2016
avatar
itchy01ca01:
Fitting Multiplayer into a game that DOESN'T NEED IT!!!! and actually detracts from the single player portion of the game. This happened more in the early 2000s when publishers/devs were just really getting into the multiplayer thing but its still something that happens and something that doesn't need to.
And vice versa, fitting single player campaign into multiplayer games that don't need it. Battlefield 3 and 4 with overblown budget on fancy cinematics and voice acting and next to no gameplay would be a good example
Posted March 06, 2016
avatar
itchy01ca01:
Fitting Multiplayer into a game that DOESN'T NEED IT!!!! and actually detracts from the single player portion of the game. This happened more in the early 2000s when publishers/devs were just really getting into the multiplayer thing but its still something that happens and something that doesn't need to.
avatar
Fenixp: And vice versa, fitting single player campaign into multiplayer games that don't need it. Battlefield 3 and 4 with overblown budget on fancy cinematics and voice acting and next to no gameplay would be a good example
This too. Although Battlefront still needed that single-player campaign aspect and Ill never forgive Disney for doing that to the new one.
Posted March 06, 2016
Wobble during walking/running

Timing puzzles/QTE's with no real indication what it is you're suppose to do

Stamina bars (and not the edible kind)


I'm sure i could list several more but this is sufficient...
Posted March 06, 2016
QTEs are the worst for me. I cannot believe anyone likes them. A distant second is cries for multiplayer in every single game made, just about.
Posted March 06, 2016
3rd Person View instead of 1st Person View. In shooters it's annoying having the characters blocking the view, and in the Hitman games it's disturbing to have a bald dickhead on the screen all the time.
In stealth games it's downright pointless.
OTOH it's supposed to reduce chances of getting motion sickness.


Voice acting every single smegging line in games. And it's not more "immersive" or "realistic" than writing when the rest of the game world stands still when in dialogue mode.
It makes the game more expensive to make, more dumbed down, less moddable and less flexible for the designers to change things under way.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionGame features you hate but most people seem to like(103 posts)(103 posts)
(103 posts)