What annoys you the most in modern gaming?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Kahunaburger:
Seriously, man, all them chess and go players should just l2p CoD

Oh, wait... Tribes, then? Maybe?

Chess is not a video game, and trying to say that my views on what should be in video game = my views on how other types games should be reeks of desperation to find anything to make fun of.

SajuukKhar:
And some games still use turn based BS and dice roll mechanics.

Yet still, hardly a trend of modern gaming. People using those mechanics are catering to a specific niche of gamers. "Dice-roll mechanic" also is quite frankly just another way to say "randomized variables" since there are quite frankly very very few modern games that actually visualize their randomized mechanics as actual dice

SajuukKhar:

Kahunaburger:
Seriously, man, all them chess and go players should just l2p CoD

Oh, wait... Tribes, then? Maybe?

Chess is not a video game,

Depends on whether you play it against a person or a computer. Do you think that chess vs. a computer would be better without turn-based mechanics?

Kahunaburger:
Depends on whether you play it against a person or a computer. Do you think that chess vs. a computer would be better without turn-based mechanics?

Ohh god kid. Is purposefully taking shit in ways blatantly not intended and trying to use it to create stupid arguments all you can do? Because it seems to be your attack method in almost every thread you post in.
.
.
Beyond that, you can play against a computer using a real chess board, and when making Chess into a video game not having it be turned based would make it not chess. however that is a super rare exception.

I have a quick list of a few things in modern games which annoy me:

#1 - Linearity
Modern games seem reluctant to give players options for where to go, to allow them to do some exploring and such. The worst cases are when they become hallways of a sort, but most games avoid being that bad. This does allow for tighter narratives and better pacing, but the inability to go off the rails at all in some games is just depressing.

#2 - A bit too easy and lacking depth
A bit of an offshoot of the previous point. This isn't exactly a complaint about games being "dumbed down", which is normally ridiculous; I'm learning how to design bridges right now, so I don't want to have get a spreadsheet to figure out what works best in my entertainment as well as my studies (and eventually, career). Still, many games are a bit too forward with pointing out where to go; they don't allow the player to figure things out for themselves. Execution-based challenges are still present here and there, but genuine mental challenges are few and far between.

#3 - Brevity
While I have nothing against some games being short (no point dragging things out when you don't have to), the rarity of epic sagas contained within a single game is a bit saddening. It seems what comes closest is when a story is stretched over several games, such as Mass Effect. Still, my favourite games are those which have story contained within itself... and they're getting harder to find.

#4 - The dominance of online multiplayer
In the case you haven't noticed already...I'm moreso into single-player games, namely those which have a long and engrossing story. Multiplayer modes are a fun diversion at times, but even then I prefer to keep it local. The shift towards online multiplayer can only be described as "maddening", especially since I always seem to get caught with jerks and/or idiots. While it's easy enough to avoid these games when they're a niche market, they seem to be everywhere right now.

Can't believe no-one has mentioned kids.

DLC and the industry apologists who let them get away with it.

SajuukKhar:

Kahunaburger:
Depends on whether you play it against a person or a computer. Do you think that chess vs. a computer would be better without turn-based mechanics?

Ohh god kid. Is purposefully taking shit in ways blatantly not intended and trying to use it to create stupid arguments all you can do? Because it seems to be your attack method in almost every thread you post in.

Wooooosh...

(That was probably the sound the point made when it went over your head.)

SajuukKhar:

Beyond that, you can play against a computer using a real chess board, and when making Chess into a video game not having it be turned based would make it not chess. however that is a super rare exception.

What makes chess rare in that it works better turn-based?

SecretNegative:
That writers still haven't learned that seeing a story 2000 times in a row is a bit boring. Yeah, I know themes and stuff, but seriously, can we please play a game where I'm not a grisly looking, hugely muscled, growly-voiced "badass" saving the world, or a "realistic" game based today with me fighting foreigners stealing nukes?

Sure. It's called Journey:

That's just an example though. There are tons of games like that. You just got to know where to look.

teqrevisited:
DLC and the industry apologists who let them get away with it.

Because splitting an expansions packs worth of content into 3rds and then releasing it for 1/3 the price, and faster, is somehow far worse then taking those 3rds, combining them into one, having to take longer to make it, and then charging 3 times the price for it?

I mean on-disk DLC is a dick move, and Day 1 DLC causes to many conspiracy theories but how is DLC in general bad?

I

Kahunaburger:

SajuukKhar:

And some games still use turn based BS

Seriously, man, all them chess and go players should just l2p CoD

SajuukKhar:
and dice roll mechanics.

Oh, wait... Tribes, then? Maybe?

This is the same dude that was trying to tell us how great the ES leveling system was ?

Who needs tactical turn based rpgs and dice rolls when we can have mindless button mashing/shooting and TOTAL IMMERSHUN. FUCK YEA !!!!

Anthraxus:
I

Kahunaburger:

SajuukKhar:

And some games still use turn based BS

Seriously, man, all them chess and go players should just l2p CoD

SajuukKhar:
and dice roll mechanics.

Oh, wait... Tribes, then? Maybe?

This is the same dude that was trying to tell us how great the ES leveling system was ?

Who needs tactical turn based rpgs and dice rolls when we can have mindless button mashing/shooting and TOTAL IMMERSHUN. FUCK YEA !!!!

Oh, yeah. HIKING TO COVER. IN MULTIPLAYER. WITH YOUR LOVE INTEREST. TEH FUTUAR OF GAEMING1!

Kahunaburger:
snip

If you are going to make a video game version of something like chess or checkers or some other board game that you can copy-paste it 100%, as is, into video game form then not doing so would make the game not the thing you are copying.
.
.
It is fundamentally different then trying to base a video game off of a pen and paper D&D tabletop game, because I know the ultimate point you are going to try to make is about how sacred and pure old-school P&P games are and how video game RPGs should stick to them devoutly, which you CANT copy 100% into video game form.
.
.
Copying something like chess means you should stick to it, basing something off of something else, like how various RPGs are based on older tabletop games, shouldn't mean the video games should be restricted to the limitations of the original medium.

Its like making a video game based off of a movie then trying to make the video game have the same limitations as the movie, its stupid.
.
.
Also if they could somehow make a real-time version of chess or checkers I would actually love to play it.

It would certainly be interesting, but it wouldn't be chess at that point.

SajuukKhar:

teqrevisited:
DLC and the industry apologists who let them get away with it.

Because splitting an expansions packs worth of content into 3rds and then releasing it for 1/3 the price, and faster, is somehow far worse then taking those 3rds, combining them into one, having to take longer to make it, and then charging 3 times the price for it?

I mean on-disk DLC is a dick move, and Day 1 DLC causes to many conspiracy theories but how is DLC in general bad?

Sorry, yes I meant the on-disk stuff, I'm rushing about at the moment. There've been quite a few "proper" DLCs that I've thoroughly enjoyed. New Vegas in particular.

Who says it HAS TO be copied 100% or else it shouldn't be made at all. WTF ??

Yea, all video game rpgs should just be turned into mindless button mashing action games !! (like we don't have 9687346578936454396874646598677895754986 of those anyways)

And the 'limitations of the original medium' argument is horseshit because... yes, they did have fucking action games back then too ! It's not like all they could do back then was turn based combat. They did that because it is the best way to emulate p&p/d&d. What's so hard to understand about that ?

My only problem is how most games are half-assed and unambitious. Just look at Ubisoft's garbage.

The increasing emphasis of requiring an Online Connection.

There's a lot more behind this trend than just DRM (like the obvious Dualing between CoD4.x/WoW and their competitors' clones; it's all about the multiplayer), but DRM is easily the biggest symptom I'm worried about.

I'd rather not be at the mercy of an online gaming system. Systems break down and the companies running them are most prone to giving into the temptation to squeeze their customers as time goes on.

With a hard-copy game, I can at least enjoy it in peace after the companies who made it are gone.

scorptatious:

SecretNegative:
That writers still haven't learned that seeing a story 2000 times in a row is a bit boring. Yeah, I know themes and stuff, but seriously, can we please play a game where I'm not a grisly looking, hugely muscled, growly-voiced "badass" saving the world, or a "realistic" game based today with me fighting foreigners stealing nukes?

Sure. It's called Journey:

That's just an example though. There are tons of games like that. You just got to know where to look.

Yeah, I know that there's a few lightningbolts of brilliance in gaming, it's just that they're too few, and too often found in the indie stage.

Take a look at movies, just because a lot of money was spent on it, doesn't mean that it's brainless. Apocalypse Now was the most expensive moviewhen it was made, and I bloody dare anyone to call that thing brainless.

I feel that too many of the developers are way too safe, and when people play safe, there's no room for development.

Anthraxus:
Who says it HAS TO be copied 100% or else it shouldn't be made at all. WTF ??

Yea, all video game rpgs should just be turned into mindless button mashing action games !! (like we don't have 9687346578936454396874646598677895754986 of those anyways)

And the 'limitations of the original medium' argument is horseshit because... yes, they did have fucking action games back then too ! It's not like all they could do back then was turn based combat. They did that because it is the best way to emulate p&p/d&d. What's so hard to understand about that ?

Yes because RPGs should be games were all you do is move around while all the combat is handled by numbers randomly spit out by a computer?

Gotta love turning games into interactive movies were the computer practically plays all the combat for you.

Because games aren't supposed to be things you play yourself or anything

SajuukKhar:
snip

Chess is turn-based because it works better turn-based. The strategy and prediction involved in playing the game well depend on the turn-based element of the game. Chess operates on a different time-scale (and uses a different kind of strategic thinking) than, say, Starcraft - you spend much more time thinking about what your opponent is trying to do, and what options are available to you and your opponent both now and a few turns from now.

The ability to ponder the next move is important to chess - consider that the quality of chess matches is better than the quality of speed-chess matches.

This is why people still play chess even when RTS games exist - TBS is a thing because strategy and a turn mechanic go extremely well together in a way that non-turn-based games can't duplicate. (Example from video games: Frozen Synapse works because you can spend ten minutes planning your next move. You wouldn't see anywhere near the depth that game has if it were a similar thing, but real-time.)

SajuukKhar:
It is fundamentally different then trying to base a video game off of a pen and paper D&D tabletop game, because I know the ultimate point you are going to try to make is about how sacred and pure old-school P&P games are and how video game RPGs should stick to them devoutly, which you CANT copy 100% into video game form.

Actually, I'm of the opinion that developers working in a genre originally derived from P&P RPGs should thoughtfully draw upon a pool of mechanics that includes all P&P mechanics, not just "this game should have a progression mechanic and should also have swords in it." This does not mean that all RPGs should be turn-based or have stats, but that developers should consider using these elements when said elements are optimal for the game they want to make.

The fan base. Oh god, the fan base. They are just the most awful set of people I have ever encountered. Just... urgh. They are what really get my goat. I am going to go play and enjoy some good video games. Peace out.

This guy doesn't understand the tactical and planning element to turn based rpgs, because according to him all they are is "the computer practically playing all the combat for you." image

Mashers gonna mash !

I could see myself playing more action rpgs if they actually had some decent combat like Dark/Demons Souls.

Aside from a collection of the above items.

HIT INDICATORS IN SHOOTERS! I hate those damn things. When I point and shoot at something, I don't need to be told my shot was accurate because, generally speaking, the body of the person I was shooting at hitting the floor is indication enough.

BreakfastMan:
The fan base. Oh god, the fan base. They are just the most awful set of people I have ever encountered. Just... urgh. They are what really get my goat. I am going to go play and enjoy some good video games. Peace out.

To be fair, annoying fanbases have always existed. Difference is, they're easier to notice now with the internet and all.

Loooooong, unskippable intros.

Waaghpowa:

BreakfastMan:
The fan base. Oh god, the fan base. They are just the most awful set of people I have ever encountered. Just... urgh. They are what really get my goat. I am going to go play and enjoy some good video games. Peace out.

To be fair, annoying fanbases have always existed. Difference is, they're easier to notice now with the internet and all.

True, true. It just really gets my goat that the most vocal members of the gamer community are the asses. The only thing many people see are the asses (hell, it is sometimes hard for me to see good people for all the asses), which makes use all seem like asses, and I don't like that. I really don't like to be associated with those people, yet I am simply by being a gamer, which makes me pissed.

EDIT: It also pisses me off that more people don't speak out against the asses and are content to let them represent us. >:(

Instant gratification over even the vaguest hint of intellectual gratification. Particularly, the need to be 'cinematic' and just above average, instead of being comfortable in becoming the Boss-Mans of their own genres. I mean really, how the hell did Splinter Cell go from Chaos Theory to Conviction? And every time they show more of the latest Hitman I die a little fucking bit inside.

Speaking of which, I also hate contrived excuses to make things super fucking easy for morons. Include multiple, properly balanced difficulty settings, do not include magic powers that let you see through walls for no real reason, whilst showing guards' paths by drawing a line on the bloody ground. If people are that stupid, they probably aren't old enough to play the game.

And finally, the fact that immersive-sims aren't the kings of gaming, and instead mostly died around 2000. Thankfully, DX:HR has shown that the approach is viable in a modern market, and hopefully Dishonored will start evolving that genre further again.

Anthraxus:
This guy doesn't understand the tactical and planning element to turn based rpgs, because according to him all they are is "the computer practically playing all the combat for you." image

Mashers gonna mash !

ok I understand the tactical thing behind turn based rpg's and there is no random computer deciding stuff for that... What i complain about is the old KOTOR, Morrowind thing.. random invisible dice rolls to determine whther you hit or miss...yes there is a lot of tactic in upgrades and stuff but..honestly thats something i dont want in games.

Waaghpowa:
Aside from a collection of the above items.

HIT INDICATORS IN SHOOTERS! I hate those damn things. When I point and shoot at something, I don't need to be told my shot was accurate because, generally speaking, the body of the person I was shooting at hitting the floor is indication enough.

What's worse than that is the direction of fire indicators. Play a game like Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis on the highest difficulty. (which only removes the on screen helpers)

It's a whole different world.

i can't really think of anything other then the annoying players that drive you up the walls or the reason i don't like mp games short of mmo where i can just go off and do my own thing

DLC that cost too much
So many games not enough money/time
too many good/great games get over looked
way too many developers/publishers biting the dust

Anthraxus:
This guy doesn't understand the tactical and planning element to turn based rpgs, because according to him all they are is "the computer practically playing all the combat for you." image

Mashers gonna mash !

Where as you might be right. Being ignorant and insulting people is not a good way to get your message out. If you try being civil and others disagree in a civil or uncivilized manner you could try and respect there opinion on the thing. What I am trying to say is you are not wining any support by being a ass hole. Take that as an insult if you will, but you are simply not helping.

Games that feel like glorified tech demos i.e., all of Crytek's games.

Anthony Wells:

Anthraxus:
This guy doesn't understand the tactical and planning element to turn based rpgs, because according to him all they are is "the computer practically playing all the combat for you." image

Mashers gonna mash !

ok I understand the tactical thing behind turn based rpg's and there is no random computer deciding stuff for that... What i complain about is the old KOTOR, Morrowind thing.. random invisible dice rolls to determine whther you hit or miss...yes there is a lot of tactic in upgrades and stuff but..honestly thats something i dont want in games.

Yea, i prefer the dice rolls to be visible too.

While I don't like throwing my weight in with 'OMGZ MODERN GAMEZ R STOOPID' crowd, cut content is bullshit. That does annoy the hell out of me. Whoever invented DLC should be thrown into a bottomless pit.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked