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 discussion (archive)Six Pests of modern gaming(209 posts)(209 posts)
(209 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
This is my favourite topic
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
monkeydelarge: Yes, bad games are nothing new but bad INDIE games are new.
I ... ... ... ... Nevermind, carry on. You're completely correct, bad indie games are so completely different from bad any other games! Your logic is flawless. I salute you.
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
monkeydelarge: 7. Shitty console ports that run like garbage when they shouldn't because the people behind these games decided not to put any effort into the PC versions. So instead they just make the game play through a shitty unoptimized emulator. GTA IV is a good example of this. When it came out, powerful PCs were barely able to run it at 30fps and the game would just overheat lesser machines until they exploded in people's faces(I'm exaggerating a bit here but not too much). :)
This D:
IMO the developers think: "consoles are our priority, then we will give some garbage to PC guys to, so they shut up. And they better shut up, because we could have easily give them nothing, and yet we were kind enough to give them something :P "

BTW terrible PC ports are not only about the fps. It's also the controls and the interface. I *hate* when I can't remap keys. Why? In the console version keys can not be remapped, so the devs "forgot" to include it in the PC version as well. I saw a guy on a forum complaining that he can't play at all, because he uses a non-english layout, and the keys are all over the keyboard for him. Guess what the answer he got (thankfully not from the devs, just the "friendly" community): "get a f**ing controller you a**hole! @&#@&#"
No thanks. I prefer keyboard+mouse. I find controllers to be uncomfortable. If I can't play a game with a keyboard, then I won't play it at all.

And the interface.... I understand that consoles need different interface, but getting a console interface on a PC is basically the huge middle finger of lazyness -.-
Again, some games get it right. They either give different interfaces to PC and console players (rarity!), or make an interface that is fully usable on anything.
I recently played a JRPG with console interface, and guess what? The console interface worked perfectly on PC as well. It was both pretty and perfectly usable.
On the other hand in a western RPG *coughskyrimcough*... well I swear to my mother's life that if it wasn't for a mod that gets rid of that ugly and completely useless "interface" then I would have stopped playing on the first day I bought the game ._.
"let's be lazy, modders will fix it"
"well, f*k you too -.-"

sigh... rant over ^-^
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
monkeydelarge: Yes, bad games are nothing new but bad INDIE games are new.
avatar
Fenixp: I ... ... ... ... Nevermind, carry on. You're completely correct, bad indie games are so completely different from bad any other games! Your logic is flawless. I salute you.
Of course, there is a difference between bad games and bad indie games.
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
MadyNora: ...
Yup, that's one of the genuine issues that's been mentioned - while there were -some- bad console ports back in the days, most games just remained at whatever system they got released, or received a complete rehaul as a port. On the other hand, to be perfectly fair, the amount of actually good PC ports is rapidly increasing as of the couple of past years - when it comes to high profile games at any rate. So that's good.

Also, as far as I'm concerned, I'd rather play a bad console port than not having the game on my preferred system at all, so in a way, I consider bad console ports an improvement.

avatar
monkeydelarge: Of course, there is a difference between bad games and bad indie games.
Yeah, naturally there is. Bad game is a bad game whereas bad indie game is a bad game which doesn't have a publisher. The gap there in the gameplay itself is absolutely massive, I am sorry that I have ever doubted you.
Post edited April 12, 2014 by Fenixp
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
Fenixp: Also, as far as I'm concerned, I'd rather play a bad console port than not having the game on my preferred system at all, so in a way, I consider bad console ports an improvement.
I can agree... up to a point. If I can't remap keys, and the game is literally unplayeable for me unless I grow a third hand, than I don't call a bad console port an "improvement".
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
MadyNora: ...
avatar
Fenixp: Yup, that's one of the genuine issues that's been mentioned - while there were -some- bad console ports back in the days, most games just remained at whatever system they got released, or received a complete rehaul as a port. On the other hand, to be perfectly fair, the amount of actually good PC ports is rapidly increasing as of the couple of past years - when it comes to high profile games at any rate. So that's good.

Also, as far as I'm concerned, I'd rather play a bad console port than not having the game on my preferred system at all, so in a way, I consider bad console ports an improvement.

avatar
monkeydelarge: Of course, there is a difference between bad games and bad indie games.
avatar
Fenixp: Yeah, naturally there is. Bad game is a bad game whereas bad indie game is a bad game which doesn't have a publisher. The gap there in the gameplay itself is absolutely massive, I am sorry that I have ever doubted you.
LOL

Bad indie game - a bad game made by one person or a small team with not so much money.
Bad game - a bad game made by a huge team with lots of money.

Of course, there are going to be a difference when it comes to quality of graphics, quality of sound, quality of voice acting etc.

When it comes to ONLY game play, obviously, there is no difference between a bad game and a bad indie game.
Post edited April 12, 2014 by monkeydelarge
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
monkeydelarge: Bad indie game - a bad game made by one person or a small team with not so much money.
Bad game - a bad game made by a huge team with lots of money.
...
When it comes to ONLY game play, obviously, there is no difference between a bad game and a bad indie game.
All right, first of all: We're talking about pests of modern gaming here. What you're talking about - games developed by just a bunch of people for as little money as possible - was a common sight in game development of old, so by this definition, you're basically saying "New games are better than old games as old games are on the level of indie games", unless your discrimination of indies actually means you like them more, in which case ... Your point still doesn't make much of a sense, really.

Secondly, the distinction you've made is just false altogether. Yes, big-budget games are able to pour more resources into assets of their gamers - however, that doesn't mean said assets are actually going to be better in any way. Look at Bastion, the game's absolutely gorgeous, has brilliant voice acting and great music, all of these absolutely comparable with any AAA title. And then there are non-indie games released by major publishers like or [url=http://cassiopia26.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/wpid-photo-dec-12-2012-127-am.jpg]these!

Lastly, 'when it comes to gameplay' ... No, when it comes to story, when it comes to gameplay, when it comes to pretty much anything that a good videogame has to offer, budget plays little role. Expeditions conquistador is brilliant in all of these things, and it's an indie. There are tons of big-budget non-indie games which don't come even close to that level of quality - the only difference is that more money has been put into them. Rating quality on the basis of money put down for it is silly at best.

avatar
MadyNora: I can agree... up to a point. If I can't remap keys, and the game is literally unplayeable for me unless I grow a third hand, than I don't call a bad console port an "improvement".
Well, there's always going to be utter crap in there, that's pretty much given. Still, I'm very glad for the fact that I can play a lot of stuff on my PC that I could not play if it were released in like 2000 or so.
Post edited April 12, 2014 by Fenixp
Posted April 12, 2014
Great list, I agree 100%.
Posted April 12, 2014
Number 2 is the only one there that REALLY bothers me, though number 3 is also annoying for sure. Movies and TV do the same thing though, assume the audience is dumb and write/direct/design around that is the mantra of the entire mainstream industry. They don't hide it in the movie industry either, if you listen to a movie commentary directors will often point out the moments where they are explaining things for those paying half attention or too stupid to figure it out.

Why do they care if dumbasses figure it out? Dumbasses pay them money to be entertained, that's why. It's honestly not hard to put two and two together there. As video games expanded beyond niche entertainment (especially shooters and RPGs) they had to suddenly worry about that same mass market's needs and desires. Some of us were screaming to the rooftops in the 90's "no please stop wising gaming were 'accepted by the mainstream' because that means games turn into Summer movies" but no one listened and here we are, for better or worse.

Luckily the gaming world has now, 10 or so years later, become so eclectic we can have Summer movies and art house movies, in the form of big "AAA" releases and smaller digital or indie games aimed directly at a certain niche audience. So theoretically we have the best of both worlds.
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
Klumpen0815: Reminds me of "The Fall - Reloaded", "Sacred - Reloaded", etc... where this actually happened.
The Fall is still buggy (still worth the play) and the addon of Sacred runs like shit.

The worst example of buggy games may be "Ultima - Ascension" and "Gothic 1", but at least the support for Gothic 1 was ongoing until most bugs were entirely gone (took some years though), while Ultima... well you know the story.
I'd really wish for a playable remake of Ultima - Ascension. Was anyone ever able to finish this game?
avatar
JudasIscariot: One of our testers, Krash, finished the game :)

edit: our version of it, anyways :)
Interesting. Has GoG patched the game or were there enough community patches out there by now?
I am tempted to try it again, because it's a really good game as long as you won't get stuck because of some bug.
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
monkeydelarge: Bad indie game - a bad game made by one person or a small team with not so much money.
Bad game - a bad game made by a huge team with lots of money.
...
When it comes to ONLY game play, obviously, there is no difference between a bad game and a bad indie game.
avatar
Fenixp: All right, first of all: We're talking about pests of modern gaming here. What you're talking about - games developed by just a bunch of people for as little money as possible - was a common sight in game development of old, so by this definition, you're basically saying "New games are better than old games as old games are on the level of indie games", unless your discrimination of indies actually means you like them more, in which case ... Your point still doesn't make much of a sense, really.

Secondly, the distinction you've made is just false altogether. Yes, big-budget games are able to pour more resources into assets of their gamers - however, that doesn't mean said assets are actually going to be better in any way. Look at Bastion, the game's absolutely gorgeous, has brilliant voice acting and great music, all of these absolutely comparable with any AAA title. And then there are non-indie games released by major publishers like or [url=http://cassiopia26.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/wpid-photo-dec-12-2012-127-am.jpg]these!

Lastly, 'when it comes to gameplay' ... No, when it comes to story, when it comes to gameplay, when it comes to pretty much anything that a good videogame has to offer, budget plays little role. Expeditions conquistador is brilliant in all of these things, and it's an indie. There are tons of big-budget non-indie games which don't come even close to that level of quality - the only difference is that more money has been put into them. Rating quality on the basis of money put down for it is silly at best.

avatar
MadyNora: I can agree... up to a point. If I can't remap keys, and the game is literally unplayeable for me unless I grow a third hand, than I don't call a bad console port an "improvement".
avatar
Fenixp: Well, there's always going to be utter crap in there, that's pretty much given. Still, I'm very glad for the fact that I can play a lot of stuff on my PC that I could not play if it were released in like 2000 or so.
A bad game made by a few people who suck at game development with not so much money is going to be a lot fucking worse, than a bad game made by people who suck less at game development with a lot more money. It's really simple. And A) Bastion is not really an indie game in my opinion and B) I'm not saying new games are better than old games. Typical Fenixp, always trying to twist shit around. Trying to make this all about new games vs old games. It's like talking to an angry teenage girl sibling who just wants to WIN, no matter what. If you want to WIN, go play a video game.
Post edited April 12, 2014 by monkeydelarge
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
butcer: toturials been like that forever , myth 2 tutorial was like that for example and thats a game from 98
avatar
AnimalMother117: That's true, AoE II was like this, but that was optional. At least back then, I'd at least like to say, control schemes were a little less well defined and game conventions less universal. Like I keep going on about, why is it by 2001 no one would know how the mouse moves the camera?
I even defend the tutorial of AOE 2 since it was nicely executed and - as you say - optional. Heck, it was one of the very few tutorials that were actually FUN to play.
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
monkeydelarge: Bad indie game - a bad game made by one person or a small team with not so much money.
Bad game - a bad game made by a huge team with lots of money.
...
When it comes to ONLY game play, obviously, there is no difference between a bad game and a bad indie game.
avatar
Fenixp: All right, first of all: We're talking about pests of modern gaming here. What you're talking about - games developed by just a bunch of people for as little money as possible - was a common sight in game development of old, so by this definition, you're basically saying "New games are better than old games as old games are on the level of indie games", unless your discrimination of indies actually means you like them more, in which case ... Your point still doesn't make much of a sense, really.

Secondly, the distinction you've made is just false altogether. Yes, big-budget games are able to pour more resources into assets of their gamers - however, that doesn't mean said assets are actually going to be better in any way. Look at Bastion, the game's absolutely gorgeous, has brilliant voice acting and great music, all of these absolutely comparable with any AAA title. And then there are non-indie games released by major publishers like or [url=http://cassiopia26.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/wpid-photo-dec-12-2012-127-am.jpg]these!

Lastly, 'when it comes to gameplay' ... No, when it comes to story, when it comes to gameplay, when it comes to pretty much anything that a good videogame has to offer, budget plays little role. Expeditions conquistador is brilliant in all of these things, and it's an indie. There are tons of big-budget non-indie games which don't come even close to that level of quality - the only difference is that more money has been put into them. Rating quality on the basis of money put down for it is silly at best.

avatar
MadyNora: I can agree... up to a point. If I can't remap keys, and the game is literally unplayeable for me unless I grow a third hand, than I don't call a bad console port an "improvement".
avatar
Fenixp: Well, there's always going to be utter crap in there, that's pretty much given. Still, I'm very glad for the fact that I can play a lot of stuff on my PC that I could not play if it were released in like 2000 or so.
Isn't Bastion funded by Warner Brothers?
Hardly counts as an indie game then.
Post edited April 12, 2014 by Klumpen0815
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
monkeydelarge: 13. Mutliplayer games with no community being advertised... So you look at the ad, think,"WOW, this game looks awesome." Then you buy it and then you find out, you can play this game with 2 other people in this world. There are some multiplayer games available for purchase that are entirely dead(meaning nobody plays the game). That is like selling a car without a fucking engine...
And then multiplayer games even might have regional restrictions. Because you are not allowed to play with friends from different continents.

avatar
monkeydelarge: Bad indie game - a bad game made by one person or a small team with not so much money.
Bad game - a bad game made by a huge team with lots of money.
By definition Valve still is an indie company (they have no shareholders, etc.). But then, I didn't see bad games per se from them yet. Although I don't like the Day of Defeat games.
Post edited April 12, 2014 by Protoss
Posted April 12, 2014
avatar
monkeydelarge: A bad game made by a few people who suck at game development with not so much money is going to be a lot fucking worse, than a bad game made by people who suck less at game development with a lot more money. It's really simple.
I completely disagree. A bad game is a bad game. Big budget (same goes for better graphics, music or voice acting) won't help it.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Six Pests of modern gaming(209 posts)(209 posts)
(209 posts)