Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
10 Things You Hate About Gaming
Options
Comments
-
CastorTroy wrote: »If you mean games that you can play and they're fun and over the top, I've a few suggestions:
MadWorld on Wii -
I have that, but I found both it and Bullet Storm got very boring after the initial novelty of all the new fun ways to kill mobs and make interesting combos. I've played that more then any other wii title but there wasn't anything to keep me hooked, while Bullet Storm did have a story, most of the guns were pants and the combat system wasn't my thing and it was annoying enough that I wasn't going to endure it to get to the rest of the story.CastorTroy wrote: »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
Will keep an eye out for that.CastorTroy wrote: »Shadows of the Damned and Lollipop Chainsaw(PS3/360) - Both games I plan on getting as they do look like fun
I've looked at Lollipop chainsaw but honestly think the twee personality of the cheer leader would do my head in, why can't I have a game where I can massacre cheer leaders with a chain saw and throw them under a bus.
Mean girls the game, I'd by that.CastorTroy wrote: »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.
Only on special occasions.... ahem those look like they might be worth picking up thanks.0 -
johnny_ultimate (<3) already listed most of my points earlier but to add two more.
The inability to legitimately acquire older games. This has happened to me a bunch of times but the most recent example is Magic & Mayhem. With all this talk of a new X-Com from Firaxis I felt the need to return to one of Julian Gollop's older games which I have fond memories of. Luck in finding it? Ziltch.
Gamers. Entitled, arrogant, moany, lazy, rude, cheap gamers. Hate. You're not always right. You don't know how games are made because you play them all the time. Your opinion is not more correct than everyone elses. You're not more of a gamer than the next guy because of the games you play or the platforms you own. You don't have the right to talk down to other gamers because they're new at a game or play different games. I could go on but then I saw Overheal's post and got that lovely warm fuzzy feeling inside.
See, one of the points I feel most strongly about is that of design. The Megaman video he linked really hits the nail on the head but let me give you an even simpler example. Look closely at this image. It's the very first screen from Mario Bros on the NES. Look at the content of the screen, the placement of the blocks and enemies and the result of hitting the first question block.
Now read this. I know, right?
Now look at modern games and gamers reaction to them. You often hear people giving out about games being consolised or "dumbed down" for consoles. Why not call it what it is? Terrible design. There are a huge number of fantastic games released on consoles which in no way compromise the design of the game in order to work. Hardcore RPGs, for instance, supposedly don't work on consoles? Really? Demons Souls and Dark Souls beg to differ. I'd wager The Witcher 2 will work perfectly too. While there are certainly technical reasons why console games are handicapped in some ways, clever design can generally overcome them.
Spelling things out for players is incredibly annoying too, as the Mega Man and Mario examples above show, you can ease players into the mechanics with thoughtful design decisions rather than copping out and having great big highlighted areas and on-screen hints. Same goes for directional instructions in-games. Look at Journey, not a flashing arrow or on-screen prompt insight, all of it was accomplished elegantly through design.
I also find difficulty and challenge in games is often misunderstood. There was an interesting back in forth in the Uncharted 3 thread where we argued about the many combat scenarios in the game. Some called these challenging while others, including myself, called them poorly designed and unbalanced messes. To me, a challenge is something which forces the gamer to use their own skills and those which have been acquired during gameplay to make it through a section. This doesn't include repeatedly reloading a checkpoint, hoping the enemies spawn and act in such a way that allows you to make it past. Demons Souls and Dark Souls too are great examples of games which are tough but, for the most part, fair. You have to act cautiously, watch your opponent and exploit openings. It simply requires a more thoughtful approach from the user but this doesn't mean it's too hard.
AI is another area which has suffered in more modern games. While it is undoubtedly a difficult area of development, there has been a painfully small number of games noted for their engaging AI. The last I can really think of is FEAR. That game was the perfect blend of decent AI and thoughtful level design which meant that the firefights were constantly interesting. On a similar note, balancing in games has also suffered. What we have now is a (occasionally) balanced Normal difficulty and then for Easy and Hard a lot of devs seems to be just playing with health and damage levels for the player. While this is one facet of it, there's so much more that could be done. Look at Bayonetta for instance, it tinkered with the actual mechanics of the game to the point where it was the first game in a long time where upon finishing the normal difficulty I immediately jumped into the harder mode.
There there's linearity in games. To illustrate the point, here's the often linked image which, although perhaps being a little simplified, at least drives the point home. Note, I have no problem with cutscenes, just linear level design. While it can often be important to gently guide the player in a game, this can be done in a far more natural way than relying on things like invisible walls, radioactive fog or barking radio commands in your ear.
Finally there's the stalwarts, cover based shooters and regenerating health. In the case of the former, I cannot understand people's blanket objections to them. The ability to take cover during a firefight seems far more natural to me than standing in front of a wall, facing it and then side stepping out. What does often ruin games is not just this mechanic, it's level designers using it as a crutch for design, the infamous over abundance of chest high walls. From the looks of it, Max Payne 3 is taking the right approach, cover is sparse, destructible and can be used tactically. Not just there to be abused by players because of poor level design.
Regen health is another odd one. Used liberally it can be quite enjoyable and can ensure the player is able to take risks while knowing they have a small safety net should the **** hit the fan. This kind of system is similar to the one in Resistance where once you lose a portion of your health past a certain level, it will only regenerate back to that mark. Full regen health is a disaster though, it's constantly used as a crutch by both level designers and gamers alike and can, more often than not, ruin the flow of combat in a game. Not that I have a massive problem with good old health packs either of course, but I've found a combination of those with the staged regen system has worked quite well in recent times.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
nyarlothothep wrote: »This sums up all my sentiments on what I dislike about modern games.
this sums it up a bit better for me
0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
in practice among who exactly? when "hardcore gamers" talk about gamers, they refer to themselves, when nintendo talk about gamers they refer to everyone from 4 year olds to geriatrics playing brain training
In practice among people who take the time to write on games forums - 'hardcore gamers' I guess.
As I said before, that's where the complication arises in the ambiguity of the term, such as in the two examples you put forward. If a 'hardcore gamer' calls himself/herself a 'gamer', that's shorthand for 'hardcore gamer'. But who outside of that group is ever going to refer to themselves as such? My grandparents, who dabble with Brain Training?
As it happens, I'm more comfortable with the 'Nintendo' definition of the term 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
ghostchant wrote: »In practice among people who take the time to write on games forums - 'hardcore gamers' I guess.
As I said before, that's where the complication arises in the ambiguity of the term, such as in the two examples you put forward. If a 'hardcore gamer' calls himself/herself a 'gamer', that's shorthand for 'hardcore gamer'. But who outside of that group is ever going to refer to themselves as such? My grandparents, who dabble with Brain Training?
As it happens, I'm more comfortable with the 'Nintendo' definition of the term
theyre all gamers, whether hardcore or casual
they all play games, so they're gamers
there are similar distinctions in everything. you can be a hardcore book reader, or a casual book reader. a hardcore football fan or a casual football fan. a hardcore drinker, or a casual drinker
but in each case everyone falls under the same umberella0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1ZtBCpo0eU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4yIxUOWrtw
Advertisement