Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

We're offering banner ads on our site from just $5!

1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


Your most depised game "features"


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
142 replies to this topic

#1 Roots   Members   -  Reputation: 661

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 19 April 2007 - 06:58 PM

In this thread, post the features of games you've played that made you annoyed/angry and caused you to question why the hell the developers decided to put it in there in the first place. Feel free to use the little template I posted below.
Quote:
Game: Feature: Comments:
Game: StarCraft Feature: Can only select 12 units at a time Comments: Seriously, WHY? Its so annoying when you want to send a large force to attack or defend. Its just a really annoying limitation that serves no purpose but to make the player micro manage more than they should have to.
Hero of Allacrost --- http://www.allacrost.org
A free, open-source 2D RPG in development.

Latest release Oct. 10th, 2010.

Sponsor:

#2 yadango   Members   -  Reputation: 559

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 19 April 2007 - 07:09 PM

Game: Battlefield 2142
Feature: Unlocking weapons for online play.
Comments: Bought this a few days ago. Games been out for a few months. For the 1 or two hours a week I have time to play games, I go online and get my ass immediately busted by people who have been playing for months who have all these crazy weapons, invisibility, etc. while I've got jack diddly squat. With the basic guns it takes like 5 shots to kill someone, everyone else can kill me with one. Kinda makes me feel I wasted my money on this one. Unlocking is good for single-player, but multiplayer it just sucks. At my rate it will take me a year or two to collect all the weapons lol.

#3 KulSeran   Members   -  Reputation: 2566

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 19 April 2007 - 07:16 PM

on the StarCraft thing, I'd say it was a design decision based in something, maybe bandwidth, speed, memory
and was a huge improvement over WC's 4(6?) unit groups. Even AgeOfEmpires only let you select something like 32
units. Today's infinite unit selection(SupCom) is likely just cauze of advancement in computers allowed it
where it wasnt posible to do before.


Game: Homeworld 2
Feature: No fuel in ships
Comment: Why in the f*** would you remove one of the greatest tatical features of HW1 when making the next game?

Game: CallOfDuty 1(expantion) and COD2
Feature: AI waits for you
Comment: Why???? The AI in COD1(no expantion) was great, it moved foward, and supported you.
You didnt have to charge foward alone, cauze your buddies were always moving around you instead
of just behind you.

Game: Nexus The Jupiter Incident
Feature: Can equip multiple batteries, batteries can't be destroied like other modules, BUT the effects
of the batteries do not stack.
Comment: If you could lose them, cool, more would be backups. But since you cant what is the point of being able
"use" more than one?

oh man... the list goes on an on im sure.....

#4 Captain P   Members   -  Reputation: 1092

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 19 April 2007 - 10:34 PM

Game: Codename: Panzers
Feature: Earning prestige by completing objectives and secret objectives allows you to buy more units in later levels
Comments: While it's a nice idea, in reality it only emphasizes the already slow, micromanaging gameplay style: complete every hidden and optional objective and you'll be stronger in the next level. On hard mode, every lost unit is lost for good, thus making me play the game even more cautious. I want a game that challenges me at the moment I play it, not a game that punishes me long after I made some mistakes. That's frustrating, not challenging.
Oh, and it makes me abuse those save game buttons more than I should need to. Which makes me think, I almost manage my savegames more than my troops...

Oh, and when I get to choose my units for the next mission, why can't I see how many troops a truck can carry on board? More importantly, where's the intelligence reports on the supposed enemy strengths? I understand that's not always readily and reliably available, and recon airplanes are a great thing, but please. Don't give me a juggling game.


Having that said, it's still an interesting game, even if only for the detailed and polished levels and units.
Create-ivity - a game development blog Mouseover for more information.

#5 Roots   Members   -  Reputation: 661

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 19 April 2007 - 10:40 PM

Quote:
Original post by KulSeran
on the StarCraft thing, I'd say it was a design decision based in something, maybe bandwidth, speed, memory
and was a huge improvement over WC's 4(6?) unit groups. Even AgeOfEmpires only let you select something like 32
units. Today's infinite unit selection(SupCom) is likely just cauze of advancement in computers allowed it
where it wasnt posible to do before.


Doubt it. The original Command & Conquer (released 1995) allowed you to select as many units as you wanted and issue them commands. Starcraft was released 3 years later in 1998. Warcraft II was released in 1995, the original Warcraft in 1994, and Age of Empires in 1997.
Hero of Allacrost --- http://www.allacrost.org
A free, open-source 2D RPG in development.

Latest release Oct. 10th, 2010.

#6 ajones   Members   -  Reputation: 432

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 19 April 2007 - 11:43 PM

Game: Halo (1 and 2?)... and many others 'featuring' a torch
Feature: Torch battery drains
Comments: It's dark -> I can't see anything -> slightly annoyed. TORCH ON -> okay, continue... Torch battery expires -> TORCH OFF -> WTF. Wait until torch battery recharges... TORCH ON-> okay, continue... [rinse, repeat]

I know the torch is intended to increase the sense of atmosphere in dark, scary games (I see the point), but [1] I don't have a torch in real life that dies every minute or two, [2] surely the designer could have added the intended atmosphere another way (sound, gameplay, story...?), and [3] all the designer has achieved is for me to sit and wait for the recharge anyway... grr!

[Edited by - ajones on April 20, 2007 7:43:23 AM]

#7 Ahnfelt   Members   -  Reputation: 176

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 12:02 AM

Game: Diablo II
Feature: Bucketloads of useless items
Comments: In Diablo II, monsters and chests constantly drops compleatly useless items that won't even give a good selling price... Why?

#8 Kest   Members   -  Reputation: 547

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 12:11 AM

Game: King of Fighters
Feature: Rugal
Comments: If it's fun to fight decently skilled opponents throughout a game, why do designers think we want to battle an impossibly cheap bastard that defies the game's own physics and rules at the end? My complaint goes with all such fighting games, but mostly just Rugal.

#9 tstrimple   Prime Members   -  Reputation: 1724

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 02:46 AM

Quote:
Original post by Ahnfelt
Game: Diablo II
Feature: Bucketloads of useless items
Comments: In Diablo II, monsters and chests constantly drops compleatly useless items that won't even give a good selling price... Why?


Because then finding a unique one wouldn't be exciting.

#10 Ahnfelt   Members   -  Reputation: 176

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 03:15 AM

I disagree. In the Diablo-like (ripoff?) game Titan Quest you can set up a filter so you cann't se compleatly useless items. It doesn't take anything away from finding a useful item, except maybe the pain. If all the useless items didn't drop, each item that did drop would be worth a look. As I see it that can only make item hunting less tedious.

#11 Moe   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1248

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 03:50 AM

Game: Doom 3 (demo)
Feature: Can't hold the flashlight and a gun at the same time
Comments: I realize they were trying to make things scarier, but honestly, come on. You are telling me the super-beefy looking marine can't hold a pistol with one hand and a flashlight with the other, or strap his flashlight to a gun?

Game: Ghost Recon (the first one)
Feature: The AI in a coop multiplayer match (on the one level with the streets - Embassy?) camps at your spawn point, then gives you 1/2 a second to run before they shoot you.
Comments: It's kind of funny for the first 4 or 5 times it happens, but after that it gets annoying. Really annoying.

#12 coolcutter   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 04:46 AM

Game: Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter
Feature: Online Multiplayer
Comments: Thats absolutely ridiculous that when I play online with a friend we can only see our cross hairs and not the people.

#13 coderx75   Members   -  Reputation: 406

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 05:23 AM

Quote:
Original post by Ahnfelt
Game: Diablo II
Feature: Bucketloads of useless items
Comments: In Diablo II, monsters and chests constantly drops compleatly useless items that won't even give a good selling price... Why?

This was the first thing that came to mind when I saw the thread title. It was such a great game, yet so flawed because of the constant item hunt.

More specifically...

Game: Most RPGs
Feature: Randomly dropped items
Comments: You've killed Giant Spider... who just happens to be carrying a full plate mail that fits you perfectly... and it must be your lucky day! This particular spider must have just left the ATM 'cause he's carrying a pretty good deal of money!

Waaaaay back in the day there was a game called Wizard's Crown on the Apple II that actually matched items to the monsters you killed. If you killed a band of goblins and a goblin leader, there would be armor and weapons for each one killed and the leader would have better equipment. Wizards carried scrolls and giant spiders didn't carry anything. If you needed an axe, you went to a location that was infested with monsters that carried axes. It made sense... and THAT was in 1985!

#14 Gazillion   Members   -  Reputation: 483

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 05:39 AM

Quote:
Original post by yadango
Game: Battlefield 2142
Feature: Unlocking weapons for online play.
Comments: Bought this a few days ago. Games been out for a few months. For the 1 or two hours a week I have time to play games, I go online and get my ass immediately busted by people who have been playing for months who have all these crazy weapons, invisibility, etc. while I've got jack diddly squat. With the basic guns it takes like 5 shots to kill someone, everyone else can kill me with one. Kinda makes me feel I wasted my money on this one. Unlocking is good for single-player, but multiplayer it just sucks. At my rate it will take me a year or two to collect all the weapons lol.


I love BF2142... I'm up to Major and I've managed to unlock three full trees with only 2 more to go. I have to say the unlock system is great because it allows some sort of character advancement you'd get in other online games.

Also what you're saying about the weaponry is false. There is no weapon (excluding explosives) in the game that gives one shot kills unless you're using the advanced sniper rifle *AND* you get a headshot (not an easy task)... You should give it some more time the game is really fun. PM me if you want to play together :P.

Well to contribute to the thread:


Game: Jade Empire
Feature: Follow the way of the Open Palm or the Closed Fist which, according to the developers, doesn't mean Good or Evil.
Comments: Total baloney! I just went through the game and I was very disappointed to see that to follow the path of the Closed Fist you have to always make the obvious 'evil' choice. When I got the game I thought it would be more flexible and I'd become Closed Fist by making personal choices that reflected my hunger for power (not kill someone needlessly).

#15 gharen2   Members   -  Reputation: 520

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 05:42 AM

Game: any mmorpg

Feature: mindless, mind numbingly tedious grinding for levels and items

Comment: took me a year or so to realise how pointless mmorpgs are. They're an endless cycle of repetitive grind for levels and the best gear. Even if you're only interested in pvp, as I am, you still need to grind. Makes me want to cry when I think of the wasted hours. Guild Wars was an improvement because you could create a full level pvp character right away, but you still needed to grind to unlock stuff.



Game: GTA vice city

Feature: Mission that can pretty much only be accomplished through random chance. It's the one where you have to race against someone in a much, much, better car than you, driven by a very impressive AI. The internet is rife with people complaining about how many times they've had to retry the mission before succeeding.

Comment: I love a challenge, but that was ridiculous.



Game: Lineage 2 (lots of other examples too)

Feature: horrible, horrible user interface

Comment: You can't change the key bindings???? Come on, I shouldn't have to use F1-F12 in the midst of heated pvp. A crappy UI is a game killer for me. World of warcraft on the other hand, is an example of a game with an excellent UI.



edit- yet another one:

Game: Freelancer

Feature: can't skip cutscenes

Comment: The fact that I have to sit through cutscenes I've already seen is the biggest thing that keeps me from replaying this one. What on earth were they thinking?

edit - another annoyance about freelancer is that it was touted as being open ended, but the story line is forced down the throat. You HAVE to follow it in order to visit new star systems or acquire new ships.



Quote:
Original post by sanch3x
Game: Jade Empire
Feature: Follow the way of the Open Palm or the Closed Fist which, according to the developers, doesn't mean Good or Evil.
Comments: Total baloney! I just went through the game and I was very disappointed to see that to follow the path of the Closed Fist you have to always make the obvious 'evil' choice. When I got the game I thought it would be more flexible and I'd become Closed Fist by making personal choices that reflected my hunger for power (not kill someone needlessly).


Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic 1 is another example of how moral choices could have been implemented better. To reach the dark side, you basically have to be a petty bully; by doing things like mugging old men or spoiling someone's dance audition. Not very diabolical. The sequel did a much better job of this. You get the opportunity to do things like incite civil war on your way to the dark side.

[Edited by - gharen2 on April 20, 2007 12:42:02 PM]

#16 Derakon   Members   -  Reputation: 456

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 06:00 AM

Game: most modern games
Feature: in-game tutorial that must be completed before real gameplay begins
Comments: In-game tutorials are fine and dandy; just don't make them required. They just waste the time of people who have done one of:

* played the game before
* read the manual (gasp!)
* gotten used to figuring things out on their own

This also applies to an extent to situations where the player has just acquired a new item/ability/etc.. If you need a tutorial right there to explain it, then your interface probably has problems (use of new abilities should be obvious). Or else you have no confidence in the intelligence of your players.

#17 Xai   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1458

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 06:12 AM

Anyone who doesn't understand why starcraft has 12 unit selection limit doesn't belong on this site. Could they do better, sure, look at Warcraft 3, or other games that get it "right". Is the stupid limit worth complaining about, yes! But to not know WHY the limit exists, that's idiotic.

It exists solely for the UI. The UI has a cool little area in the bottom middle that show awesome unit Icons that display an indication of each units type, shield status, and health (green, yellow and red polygon mesh). The display gives feedback in an ongoing battle about the status of units, in a way that is more "interesting", "cool" and "realistic" (kinda) than a simple red / green health bar. Espcially because it become increasingly visible as health drains (slighly not-green is not very visible, mostly yellow draw some distinction, and half red is instantly recognizable for you to act upon).

Why 12? Because of the number of pixels no the screen. The icons had to be sized as a balance between the number they can support, and the detail they can convey. They choose 12, because it was greater than or equal to the 4, 8, 10 and 12 limit which other RTS games with arbirtrary limits had, and yet allowed big enough icons to be usefull.

Look at AoE III, no limit, little icons in selection display, USELESS. You cannot tell or act on ANYTHING about the little icons it is showing you, they are static full color hard to distinguish icons of the build button for the unit.

Is AoE 3 supperior in letting you grab infinite units, YES! Is starcraft supperior in giving you squad feedback and control - YES!

So that is why. Just another game design and implementation tradoff decision.

Notice of course that Warcraft 3 adds even more features to the squad control, like-unit grouping, like-unit group tabbing, active group enlarging, etc. Should these have been in SC? Yes. Why weren't they? Software development is about time and resources, ideas, feedback and experience. Either the idea came up after SC was designed / built, or they didn't have time to code it. Simple as that.

Similar to the reason Dungeon Keeper doesn't have all the features of Dungeon Keeper II, etc.

#18 Alpha_ProgDes   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4692

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 06:31 AM

Game: Megaman and Megaman X
Feature: Sequels which don't carryover weapons from the original
Comments: Why? I got all these weapons and enhancements in Megaman X5 (for the record it could be any megaman) and in Megaman X6 I have to find the same enhancements again and start off as a weakling that doesn't have access to anything I had before. Why?

#19 Rasterman   Members   -  Reputation: 206

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 07:09 AM

Quote:
Original post by Roots
Game: StarCraft
Feature: Can only select 12 units at a time
Comments: Seriously, WHY? Its so annoying when you want to send a large force to attack or defend. Its just a really annoying limitation that serves no purpose but to make the player micro manage more than they should have to.


My guess is this is a limitation of path finding, when you have a ton of units selected and tell them to go somewhere, that puts a huge strain on the pathing system.

#20 Telastyn   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3726

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 20 April 2007 - 09:38 AM

I also dislike unit selection limits, and tutorials you can't avoid.

Game: Any persistent game.
Feature: PvP with consequences.
Comments: You are making half of your userbase losers in a gamestyle that depends heavily upon said userbase.

Sure, winning all the time is kinda lame, but placing your players at the mercy of the scum of the internet (yes, yes you can constrict pvp to never successful rank equalization, or say 'well stay in town then', or say 'well, join a guild and only ever play when they're on and feel like protecting you'... but those are still horrible features.)




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS