10 Things You Hate About Gaming

Brian_Zeluz

My no.1 is companies trying to justify VIP passes etc. on the basis of server time needs to be paid for by each individual player. I can see why they do it, because they're in effect losing money when someone buys 2nd hand but its still annoying.

Gandalph

I hate my arch rival Gary

Retr0gamer

Overheal wrote: »

I won't have you knocking LoD and FF. I know you're thinking it!

LoD is worse than superaids. Fact.

Kirby

Penn wrote: »

"Hello there, man I've never met before. Please take this very valuable item to my brother who you've never met in a town you've never been to and won't get to for several gameplay hours by which point you'll probably have forgotten all about it. Just talk to everyone randomly in the hopes you find him. Don't worry, he'll know who you are even though he's never met you before and he'll request the item from you once you approach him. Thanks. If you need me to remind you of this, I'll be wandering aimlessly around this village."

Any game like that (Fallout too) can f*ck right off. Never buying another one, regardless of the hype.

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

SOMEBODY didn't know how to enable quest markers...

Overheal wrote: »

Which gets back to my above concerns about game design

I agree. This happens all too often in open world games. You enter a town and pick up 6 quests and by the time you have picked up the 6th, you can't remember what the first few were about. It's information overload.

Now, yes you have a quest log sure but you always end up with with a dozen of them and then it feels like a checklist of your tasks.....a chore to do them instead of an adventure. And you know as soon as you set off to do one, you will encounter 2 random NPC's who give you some more. A packed game with lots to do is fantastic. But there has to be some structure. "open world" isn't supposed to mean "throw the whole game at me in ten minutes".

In my eyes if you were limited to 2 or 3 at a time before you could pick up another, the world would feel more authentic. It's not natural to be asked to do a hundred things at once.

Unless you are married.

funky penguin

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

A happy medium is required though. As frustrating as being spoon fed is, it's as bad as being left in the dark.

Ever play the Discworld games back in the day? Pixel hunting the most bizarre shít you can dream of - not fun.

Aye, and the easypuzzles were only easy if you'd read the books. The first one was **** hard, the second not so much....

I really enjoyed the third one where you were a private detective.

Reekwind

Pet hates:

Special boss fights: What's the point? They're an admission that the game's 'normal' mechanics are inadequate and so spinning blades and weak spots are needed to compensate. Which makes sense if you're playing a platformer in the 90s, not so much for a modern day FPS or RPG. Give me bosses that might be tough but at least play by the same rules that I do

Mini games: Honestly, who enjoys these? What do they add to a game? Why must my attempt to pick a lock or negotiate with a foe be represented in some silly mini-game? They serve no purpose but padding the game time

Gamers: I hate the tag. I play computer games. That doesn't make me part of some subculture. I also read books and watch sports, am I a 'reader' and a 'sporter'. Particularly not when the culture, for those who identify with it, can often be quite unpleasant

Game design: The big one: the very existence of modern game design philosophy. As this has developed over the past two decades it's been increasingly codified and treated as a set of rules. A set of incredibly condescending rules. This hit home with the original Mass Effect when one of the designers, in an interview, defended the incredibly simplistic level design (arrive on a planet, follow the arrow, kill the boss, fly to next planet) on the basis that some test players were getting momentarily lost and didn't know exactly where to go at all time. So let's make things simpler!

Bioware - once one of the most original developers out there - now produce games to a set format of 3-4 largely self-contained mini-plots/settings. They're not alone in this. In the name of 'good game design' the larger developers have increasingly retreated to sterile formats that treat the players like children

Mr Bloat wrote: »

I know the arguments about controllers, etc. Why can't there be an option in the PC multiplayer mode that allows you to accept some handicap if you want to interact with console owners? If you chose to accept the handicap, you can access the multiplayer servers with console players, if you don't choose the handicap, you play with other pc players. I would (sometimes) prefer the handicap for multiplayer mode so I can enjoy the single player mode on pc rather than on the console.

Two reasons:

1) Why would any PC gamer want to handicap themselves in a game that they've paid for? I'd imagine that some would but hardly enough to justify the effort/money needed to add that feature

2) The controllers are not the root cause; it's a matter of design. Console games are designed with the controllers in mind so the likes of automatic targeting, slower turn speed, level design, enemy design, weapon design, etc, etc, are all built around controller limitations. In contrast, the accuracy and speed of the mouse leads to completely different design philosophies. Which is why you can spin on a coin in a PC FPS but turn like an oil tanker in most console shooters

To be honest, I don't think that this difference can or should bridged

ShiverinEskimo

Reekwind wrote: »

Gamers: I hate the tag. I play computer games. That doesn't make me part of some subculture. I also read books and watch sports, am I a 'reader' and a 'sporter'. Particularly not when the culture, for those who identify with it, can often be quite unpleasant

Bookworms, Jocks, Couch-potatoes, geeks, gamers, nerds.

Everybody has at least one category.

Reekwind

They're slurs, not subcultures. You will find very few people who stand up and proclaim themselves to be "bookworms". You'll find few companies targeting the "bookworm market". There are no "bookworm conventions". And so on

Yet the idea is that, unlike TV or cinema or reading, those who play computer games are part of a subculture. Indeed, that this culture comes to characterise them. This is not the case in reality

ghostchant

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

Bookworms, Jocks, Couch-potatoes, geeks, gamers, nerds.

Everybody has at least one category.

It could be argued by my friends and family that I fall under all of those categories, excluding the first probably. Despite that, I would hate to hang out in a room comprised fully of any one of those groups.

ShiverinEskimo

I don't see it as a slur. I fall into all bar the couch potato (if only referring to TV).

When I'm playing games I'm a gamer. It's not exactly the most offensive thing I've been called in my time.

Potential-Monke

I consider myself a gamer, and it's a label i hold highly. Let people make assumptions about me, they're the ignorant fool who knows nothing about the most lucrative entertainment industry at present.

Dyr

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I consider myself a gamer, and it's a label i hold highly. Let people make assumptions about me, they're the ignorant fool who knows nothing about the most lucrative entertainment industry at present.

In addition to being a gamer, I am also a filmer sir, and a musicist as well.

johnny_ultimate

The **** you all on about? :pac:

Reekwind

I knew this would be the controversial one

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

I don't see it as a slur. I fall into all bar the couch potato (if only referring to TV).

When I'm playing games I'm a gamer. It's not exactly the most offensive thing I've been called in my time.

Listen, if you're happy being called that then fine. The point is that I'm not. And I shouldn't be wary of being characterised in that way* just because I happen to play computer games. This is not a culture, one that self-identifies as 'gamer', that I am part of and it's not one that I want to be lumped into

*And your choice of labels was revealing: 'gamer' in with couch-potato, nerd, geek, etc

Potential-Monke wrote:

...they're the ignorant fool who knows nothing about the most lucrative entertainment industry at present

And this is one of the reasons why. Subcultures tend to be so defensive, and the 'gamer' community in particular. Who cares how lucrative the game industry is at the minute? How does that reflect on you as a person? Do you really identify so strongly with an industry that you'll use its financial performance as a stick?

Should I be harrumphing because box office returns are up/down? Ha, take that bookworms! Up yours TV-peeps! No, that's not how it works: these are entertainment pastimes, not cultures to be defended to the death

Morag

Reekwind wrote: »

They're slurs, not subcultures. You will find very few people who stand up and proclaim themselves to be "bookworms". You'll find few companies targeting the "bookworm market". There are no "bookworm conventions". And so on

Yet the idea is that, unlike TV or cinema or reading, those who play computer games are part of a subculture. Indeed, that this culture comes to characterise them. This is not the case in reality

That readers subculture does exist.
There are people who do that, there are marketing companies who work for the publishing houses who target the different reading markets.

http://www.dublinbookfestival.com/

There are conventions were readers gather and discuss their shared interests in such books and which writers are happy to attend.

http://www.pcon.ie/category/tags/irish-writers-centre
http://www.octocon.com/
http://www.idwcon.org/
http://www.wexworlds.net/

You are right you don't have to be a gamer to play video games, it's the same with any hobby or past time there will always be an impassioned fan base who are into it more then just reading the book, or playing the video game or just watching a sports match.

ShadowHearth

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

The **** you all on about? :pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udNHsk57f24

ShiverinEskimo

Reekwind wrote: »

I knew this would be the controversial one

Listen, if you're happy being called that then fine. The point is that I'm not. And I shouldn't be wary of being characterised in that way* just because I happen to play computer games. This is not a culture, one that self-identifies as 'gamer', that I am part of and it's not one that I want to be lumped into

No one is saying you should be happy with it. Just saying I'm not unhappy with it.

Reekwind wrote: »

*And your choice of labels was revealing: 'gamer' in with couch-potato, nerd, geek, etc

Do elaborate on this because I listed the things that mostly apply to myself. So please do tell what is so revealing. What has been revealed?

Reekwind

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

Do elaborate on this because I listed the things that mostly apply to myself. So please do tell what is so revealing. What has been revealed?

The context within which the 'gamer' tag exists and the strong connotations that it carries. Some people may have no issue with being called a "nerd" or a "geek", they may even revel in it, but it's not an apt description of myself and these are not labels that I'd invite. Yet they go hand in hand with 'gamer'

I am not part of that community, I have no interest in it. Yet it is often automatically assumed, both by those inside and outside of it, that anyone who plays games is a 'gamer'. Is part of that subculture. They're wrong and it rankles

ShiverinEskimo

Reekwind wrote: »

The context within which the 'gamer' tag exists and the strong connotations that it carries. Some people may have no issue with being called a "nerd" or a "geek", they may even revel in it, but it's not an apt description of myself and these are not labels that I'd invite. Yet they go hand in hand with 'gamer'

I am not part of that community, I have no interest in it. Yet it is often automatically assumed, both by those inside and outside of it, that anyone who plays games is a 'gamer'. Is part of that subculture. They're wrong and it rankles

If it rankles then it's you who obviously has negative opinions of the groups those terms refer to.

Morag

"One of these kids is doing their own thing..."

It is a modern subculture which is based on a shared interest and shared experiences.
Such things are hardly knew, I am sure there are people who have collected stamps
but who would never want to be considered a philatelist.

I think you are getting too hung up on how it is used as pejorative term,
video games have become mainstream media these days and if you do not want to
subscribe to the culture then that's your choice, but I don't see the point in getting
bent out of shape about other people's assumptions which they make from ignorance.

Reekwind

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

If it rankles then it's you who obviously has negative opinions of the groups those terms refer to.

No, that's doesn't follow. You could call me a Brazilian if you wanted but it still wouldn't make much sense because it's not an accurate description. Even though everybody likes Brazilians. But then in this context it would be like talking to me in Portuguese because I like to samba

It's simple: I am not a gamer. I've looked at the community/culture/whatever and found little there that I identify with. I don't have or desire the baggage that comes it; I don't identify with the culture. Given this, why should I be considered a 'gamer' just because I play computer games? Isn't it possible to do with without embracing all the memes and norms of a specific subculture that is alien to me?

Sharrow wrote:

video games have become mainstream media these days and if you do not want to subscribe to the culture then that's your choice

I suppose that part of my problem is the way in which gaming is becoming mainstream. I don't think it's filtered into the mainstream per se, at least not for PC gaming, so much as the subculture that surrounds it has become a lot more prominent, larger and acceptable. To be blunt: it's a lot more common to see people with Pacman t-shirts. The issue is that when you don't identify with this subculture

ShiverinEskimo

Reekwind wrote: »

No, that's doesn't follow. You could call me a Brazilian if you wanted but it still wouldn't make much sense because it's not an accurate description. Even though everybody likes Brazilians. But then in this context it would be like talking to me in Portuguese because I like to samba

It's simple: I am not a gamer. I've looked at the community/culture/whatever and found little there that I identify with. I don't have or desire the baggage that comes it; I don't identify with the culture. Given this, why should I be considered a 'gamer' just because I play computer games? Isn't it possible to do with without embracing all the memes and norms of a specific subculture that is alien to me?

I suppose that part of my problem is the way in which gaming is becoming mainstream. I don't think it's filtered into the mainstream per se, at least not for PC gaming, so much as the subculture that surrounds it has become a lot more prominent, larger and acceptable. To be blunt: it's a lot more common to see people with Pacman t-shirts. The issue is that when you don't identify with this subculture

Who do you think is considering you a gamer? Who are these people that are pigeon-holing you so cruelly?

If it's the gaming industry as a whole then maybe cut them some slack - you play games while gaming so it stands to reason you're a gamer.

No one is saying you have to live in your mom's basement playing WoW drinking Jolt Cola by the gallon.

GTR63

A few more things I hate grinding in rpg's to beat Whitneys dickhead of a Miltank for example & comment sections on most games websites even if something is great you can just bet someone will go its sh*t or use a tired internet meme(that could be used to describe any site on the net but game ones are among the worst offenders). Also annoyed at the way some designers are heralded to the point where its sad like Kojima, Molyneux, Levine or Jaffe. Yeah respect them & enjoy their games but the sun hardly shines out there ass now does it.

Morag

10 things I hate about video games

1 Not enough good local multiplayer campaign games any more be the console or pc, esp in rpg games.

2 More restriction in the gender of the main char over the last 7 years and the assumption which rose over the last 7 years that females don't play video games.

3 Games having more style and shiny graphics over substantive plot and story.

4 Not enough silliness in the rage of games, (the deathspank and TF2 games are a return to that type of game and there should be more of them)

5 Lack of innovation, seriously were is the 'new' game play, so many esp FPS have just been using the same game play as Mobile Forces.

6 Needing to patch and get DLC to get a game up and running, has the game industry adopted the model of how VtM:Bloodlines was released as a good way to do things?

7 Games which require a massive time sink to may any sort of progress in what so ever.

8 Games which don't give you a heads up that your heading into a level/section which is too difficult for where your at now.

9 Games with stupid quick time events which don't make sense and don't use any of the sequence of buttons which you've been using in the game. FFS if I want to button mash I can play viva pinjata party animals with my kids.

10 Games with the most inconvenient autosave timings ever, which have no normal save game function, you died ok let me load you back here were you have to watch that 5 min cinematic again and then spend 10 mins getting back near to the place you died, **** you lilfe is too short to be doing that more then 4/5 times. Or else they decide to auto save when you are in the middle of a pitched fire fight and you loose track of what you were doing and the fecking boss has regenerated during the auto save. This is why I don't play JRPG.

Potential-Monke

Then maybe there needs to be a seperation, or different group, for you and me. You play games, so you could be considered a gamer. Gaming is my passion, so maybe i need to be called something else?

nyarlothothep

Kirby wrote: »

I agree. This happens all too often in open world games. You enter a town and pick up 6 quests and by the time you have picked up the 6th, you can't remember what the first few were about. It's information overload.

Now, yes you have a quest log sure but you always end up with with a dozen of them and then it feels like a checklist of your tasks.....a chore to do them instead of an adventure. And you know as soon as you set off to do one, you will encounter 2 random NPC's who give you some more. A packed game with lots to do is fantastic. But there has to be some structure. "open world" isn't supposed to mean "throw the whole game at me in ten minutes".

In my eyes if you were limited to 2 or 3 at a time before you could pick up another, the world would feel more authentic. It's not natural to be asked to do a hundred things at once.

Unless you are married.

Exactly, Skyrim often feels like work away from work. Games shouldn't have checklists of bland quest, get this, return it here, reward, pillage dungeon for no other reason than to pillage it, sell stuff etc. Another problem with Skyrim, and I have read the comments about there being more level designers on this one, but the dungeons are still incredibly samey. The amount of draugr ruins, they're just so bleh, get through it quick, kill all the draugrs, sell on the items. They all look the same, even the non draugr dungeons look the same. We need games like Baldur's Gate to make a comeback because they showed how rpgs should be done.

nyarlothothep

This sums up all my sentiments on what I dislike about modern games.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1ZtBCpo0eU

CastorTroy

Sharrow wrote: »

10 things I hate about video games
4 Not enough silliness in the rage of games, (the deathspank and TF2 games are a return to that type of game and there should be more of them)

If you mean games that you can play and they're fun and over the top, I've a few suggestions:

MadWorld on Wii - Over the top violence and the commentary really adds to it. Can be repetitive though. Greg Proops from Whose Line is it Anyway is one of the commentators. It's a short enough game but can be picked up for about €5.
House of the Dead Overkill on Wii/PS3 - Got through it in one evening but it's a fun B-movie/grindhouse story around an on rails shooter
Shadows of the Damned and Lollipop Chainsaw(PS3/360) - Both games I plan on getting as they do look like fun
Bulletstorm (PS3/360) - Wasn't too interested in it until I played the demo. Again it was a fun demo so I bought the game recently. Haven't played it yet though
Timesplitters (PS2/XBox/NGC) - I've only played 2 and 3 but if you haven't played them and like to play multiplayer as a monkey, then this is for you.

Myrddin

In no particular order:

10 - Terrible storylines, bad writing
9 - Multiplayer Monkeys [idiots online]
8 - Online Activation
9 - Ads in games
7 - Terrible Controls
6 - Same game, different year repetition
5 - Premium locked on-disc content
4 - Terrible Single Player campaigns
3 - Pet Simulations
2 - Paying over the odds for ancient games via marketplaces
1 - Lazy ports of old games commanding high rrp's

Overheal

1 - Lazy ports of old games commanding high rrp's