Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


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

#61 Nathan Baum   Members   -  Reputation: 1027

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 08:31 AM

Quote:
Original post by gharen2
Quote:
Original post by Nathan Baum
Game: Nearly every space sim ever.
Feature: Outer space is full of water.
Comments: In the real world, outer space is nearly a vacuum. In the alternative universe which nearly every space sim ever is set in, outer space is filled with water. There is a top speed which is only a few km/s at best, and continuous thrust is required to maintain constant velocity.

I agree that realistic physics have merit, but I think for most people it also detracts from the "fun factor" of a game.

Does it really? Are football games with realistic ball physics unfun? Were the physics-based puzzles in Half-Life 2 unfun? I think when you say "unfun" you really mean "different".

Sure, people who are used to space shooters which are actually submarine sims might not enjoy a space shooter which is really set in space.
Quote:

Keeping track of physics in 3D space in the middle of a fast paced fight would be highly unfun.

That's why I propose we use a computer to do the physics calculations for us. [wink]
Quote:

Personally I think realistic physics should only be used in 2D space games, as the physics are easier to visualize.

Perhaps you're thinking of terrible 'space' maze games where you have to twist your ship around and carefully apply tiny amounts of thrust to stop your ship smashing into a wall? That is unfun. But space isn't actually filled with mazes, and even if it was nobody would really make a space ship with such a stupid control system.

Sponsor:

#62 ZQJ   Members   -  Reputation: 496

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 08:32 AM

I had the character development problem in Neverwinter Nights and Fallout 2. In Fallout 2 I looked up a guide fairly early in the game to tell me which skills were useful (only about 5/20 of them actually are). In NWN I just about scraped my way to the final battle and then just got massacred repeatedly.

So, as far as character development goes, how about a system where:

1) You aren't required to decide a massive amount about your character before you've even started the game when you've absolutely no idea how the game will go, so you can't make the game unwinnable before you even start.

2) Instead of having generic skill points that you can allocate to whatever you want, why not advance different skills based on how much you use them, unlike in Fallout 2 where you can start with 67% Small Guns skill despite the fact that nobody in your village has ever seen a gun?



#63 Iron Chef Carnage   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1801

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 09:24 AM

Undoubtedly a repeat, but...

Game: CRPGs of all flavors
"Feature": Grind
Comments: Just absurd. Technology is past this. P&P evolved beyond it ages ago. ePeen crap is what it is. "Character progression" is six flavors of bullshit when you've got to butcher 10,000 pigs to learn a new magic spell.

#64 Omid Ghavami   Members   -  Reputation: 981

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 09:57 AM

Game: Sims
Feature: Need x number of friends for promotion at work.
Comments: It takes away a lot of the fun, at least for me.
Best regards, Omid

#65 abdulla   Members   -  Reputation: 164

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 10:00 AM

Game: GTA: San Andreas (PC)
Feature: Flying planes with the keyboard
Comments: It would have been far simpler with two analog sticks on a console, they could have eased it up a bit for the PC, or made a better control scheme. There's other parts that give away that it's still a console port, such as buying items, there's a friggin keyboard, make better use of it.

#66 JavierMC   Members   -  Reputation: 212

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 10:01 AM

Game: Mostly the ones with long opening FMVs or cutscenes
Feature: Lack of options before starting the game.
Comment: Maybe it's just me, but if my PC is old and I know the game is going to lag I'd like to set low settings before spending 20 minutes seeing a horribly slow initial cutscene. Or in the case of FMVs, hey maybe I'd like subtitles before watching them (this is specially annoying if there's no translation to your language).

#67 Prinz Eugn   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3530

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 10:47 AM

Game: Battlefield 2
Feature: FMV background for the menu
Comments: the huge background video causes the game to actually make you wait while the menu loads, which is a little bit ridiculous for something that is just pretty and does absolutely nothing for UI.
I haven't played any other game that actually had to pause while the menu loaded instead of just going directly there.

It's especially frustrating trying to bail out of a laggy server to jump into another one before someone else does.

Actually for as fun a gae as BF2 is, the user interface on the whole is pretty damn bad.

-Mark the Artist

Digital Art and Technical Design
Developer Journal


#68 Way Walker   Members   -  Reputation: 744

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 11:26 AM

Quote:
Original post by Iron Chef Carnage
Undoubtedly a repeat, but...

Game: CRPGs of all flavors
"Feature": Grind
Comments: Just absurd. Technology is past this. P&P evolved beyond it ages ago. ePeen crap is what it is. "Character progression" is six flavors of bullshit when you've got to butcher 10,000 pigs to learn a new magic spell.


Unless, of course, they were sacrificed as part of a dark ritual to the dark gods for access to their dark magic.


#69 gharen2   Members   -  Reputation: 520

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 04:35 PM

Quote:
Original post by Nathan Baum
Does it really? Are football games with realistic ball physics unfun? Were the physics-based puzzles in Half-Life 2 unfun? I think when you say "unfun" you really mean "different".


We aren't talking about football games or half life 2 here. That's entirely different. I'm talking about the challenge of keeping track of the physics of a spaceship in 3D space on a 2D screen. Most people don't find that very intuitive.

Quote:
Original post by Nathan Baum
That's why I propose we use a computer to do the physics calculations for us.


I see your point here, but I also think that kind of defeats the point.

Quote:
Original post by Nathan Baum
Perhaps you're thinking of terrible 'space' maze games where you have to twist your ship around and carefully apply tiny amounts of thrust to stop your ship smashing into a wall? That is unfun. But space isn't actually filled with mazes, and even if it was nobody would really make a space ship with such a stupid control system.


This isn't what I was thinking of (I assume you're referring to subspace), but I agree they're unfun.

Regardless, I think what we have here is disagreement between different players. Some things may be universally despised by players, but this is probably more of a gray area. I suspect there's lots of players who'd favor either system.

#70 Trapper Zoid   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1370

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 04:40 PM

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).


I'd like to extend that:
Game: Any RPG where you can choose your moral path
Feature: The promise of proper role playing; choose whether you will be good or evil or a mix inbetween
Comments: ...except it never seems to quite work as adverised.

First the main format of the RPG story is tailored towards the good path. Gathering a rag-tag bunch of companions and collecting the five magical doohickies to overthrow the Evil Overlord works for the traditional hero. But typically the "evil" path is exactly the same, save for the twist at the end where the protagonist betrays his quest givers and comrades and claims the mantle of Evil Overlord for his or herself. Due to the linear nature of RPG stories it's very rare I see a game story that works well from a number of motivations (example: Baldur's Gate II, where your initial motivation is either to rescue a friend, gain revenge or learn your inner power, all which convieniently involve going to same place).

Second though is the previously mentioned lameness of choosing the evil path. It seems that the choice between "good" and "evil" in games means either being the traditional all-round good guy or a totally sociopathic jerk. This is worst in those Bioware RPGs where you need to gain "evil points" by committing evil acts, which are typically just done for the sake of proving your evilness, such as beating up beggars for chump change.

I agree with the original choice of Jade Empire as a problem. I too was looking forward to a richer Closed Fist experience that wasn't cartoon evil. The impression I got from the game that the Closed Fist wasn't so much pure selfishness or a lust for power, but more the respect for power. In the case of peasants being bullied by brigands, the "Open Palm" approach would involve mediation with violence being a last resort, whereas the "Closed Fist" approach would involve arming and training the peasants to fend for themselves. While there was a little bit of that it was still too much of the "good" path being giving the smack down to the brigands whereas the "evil" path was screwing over both sides if possible.



#71 Roots   Members   -  Reputation: 657

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 05:01 PM

Quote:
Original post by SunTzu
Let me guess... you're a student? Or unemployed? Or otherwise have lots of free time? That's fine for you then, wish I was still a student, but I get, typically, about seven hours a week (one hour a day) to play computer games because I have a busy, busy life. The threat or danger of having to waste my precious time if I fail does not add suspense, or a fear of failure. Really, it doesn't. It adds frustration and annoyance and, very quickly, the result of me taking the game back to the shop for a refund.


Excuse me, but I take offense to your comment. I am 24 years old and I also have a busy life without much time for playing games. I do not wish to spend my time re-playing a game frequently either. Where you find frustration and annoyance, I find suspense and enjoyment. So lets just leave it at that and stop trying to frame me as someone who is ignorant of the needs and lives of others.


Quote:
Original post by SunTzu
One design decision (save when you want, or at least have frequent save points) allows both of us to enjoy the game - you don't have to save at all, and if you want to go back more than one save point you can. The other design decision (can only save at certain widely spaced save points) only allows you to enjoy the game, as I won't enjoy having my valuable time wasted.


No, this design does not allow us both to enjoy it. The presence of those save points still gives me a warning that a tough fight is around the corner. I will use those save points as well; I'm not going to pass up save points like you are supposing I would just because I want to feel the fear of failure. If the save points are everywhere, it does nothing to help someone like me.


Quote:
Original post by SunTzu
If, as a game designer, you make the choice based on what you like, not what other people might like, then the chances are very high you are not designing the the kinds of games I (for one) want to play.


Very well. I'm glad that 99.9999% of the Earth feels exactly the same as you do, while no one feels the same way I do. Do you realize how arrogant you sound here? It is impossible to design a game such that everyone who plays it will enjoy it to the upmost. You chose your audience, and you chose your features. You don't ignorantly try to design a game thinking everyone is going to like every decision you make.


Anyway, lets drop the save game talk and get back to the real discussion in this thread, shall we?
Hero of Allacrost --- http://www.allacrost.org
A free, open-source 2D RPG in development.

Latest release Oct. 10th, 2010.

#72 Way Walker   Members   -  Reputation: 744

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 22 April 2007 - 06:07 PM

Quote:
Original post by Roots
Quote:
Original post by SunTzu
One design decision (save when you want, or at least have frequent save points) allows both of us to enjoy the game - you don't have to save at all, and if you want to go back more than one save point you can. The other design decision (can only save at certain widely spaced save points) only allows you to enjoy the game, as I won't enjoy having my valuable time wasted.


No, this design does not allow us both to enjoy it. The presence of those save points still gives me a warning that a tough fight is around the corner. I will use those save points as well; I'm not going to pass up save points like you are supposing I would just because I want to feel the fear of failure. If the save points are everywhere, it does nothing to help someone like me.


Solution that fits everyone: make it one way of determining difficulty. Really, don't put in a hard, medium, easy, put in different variables to change and make one of them the number and placement of save points. Think of Fallout Tactics' "Ironman" mode where you can only save between missions.


#73 Ahnfelt   Members   -  Reputation: 176

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 April 2007 - 03:48 AM

I agree. Make it part of the difficulcy. Limiting the number of save games based on difficulcy is a cheap, but effective way to implement this (Hitman 2 does it to great effect).

To stay on topic (and please, do!):

Game: Most
Feature: Anonymous music
Comments: Command & Conquer was the first game with recorded music (non-midi, non-mod) as far as I know. Most of the music was great, and some of it even became popular outside the game. Today has music that just blends in. Forgetable. I miss the memorable game music from games like Mario, Transport Tycoon Deluxe, Sonic...

#74 Nathan Baum   Members   -  Reputation: 1027

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 April 2007 - 04:05 AM

Quote:
Original post by gharen2
Quote:
Original post by Nathan Baum
Does it really? Are football games with realistic ball physics unfun? Were the physics-based puzzles in Half-Life 2 unfun? I think when you say "unfun" you really mean "different".

We aren't talking about football games or half life 2 here. That's entirely different. I'm talking about the challenge of keeping track of the physics of a spaceship in 3D space on a 2D screen. Most people don't find that very intuitive.

But throw in a top speed and suddenly it's perfectly intuitive? I can't help but think we mean entirely different things by "physics in space".
Quote:

Quote:
Original post by Nathan Baum
That's why I propose we use a computer to do the physics calculations for us.

I see your point here, but I also think that kind of defeats the point.

That's too bad. I kinda like using computers when implementing computer games...

#75 cdoty   Members   -  Reputation: 438

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 April 2007 - 05:04 AM

Quote:
Original post by Xai
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.


So, you mean the limit is 12 because they were too lazy or closed minded to find a better way to display the information?

It would make sense if 12 was a reasonable number for battles, but it isn't. That makes about as much sense as Microsoft (or any Linux desktop) only allowing 12 programs to show up in the start menu.

If you're selecting more than 12, maybe it's not as critical to know what each unit is. Easy answer, use increaingly smaller icons as the number of units increases.

#76 Sandman   Moderators   -  Reputation: 2079

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 April 2007 - 05:39 AM

Quote:
Original post by Nathan Baum
Quote:
Original post by gharen2
We aren't talking about football games or half life 2 here. That's entirely different. I'm talking about the challenge of keeping track of the physics of a spaceship in 3D space on a 2D screen. Most people don't find that very intuitive.

But throw in a top speed and suddenly it's perfectly intuitive? I can't help but think we mean entirely different things by "physics in space".


I'm not quite sure what you mean, because I think gharen has a perfectly valid point.

The average bod expects spaceships to fly a bit like aeroplanes, banking on turns, moving in the direction they're pointing, being subject to drag etc. That is how spaceships fly on TV after all.

Of course, it is completely unrealistic, but then again so are lots of things in games. Space games shouldn't have any sound effects beyond what's happening in your own ship, for example. 'Real' space physics is somewhat alien to the average player, and it strikes me as a reasonable design choice for less 'hardcore' sims to opt for the less realistic, but more accessible aeroplane type physics.

#77 Avatar God   Members   -  Reputation: 1072

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 April 2007 - 05:47 AM

Design feature: Easy bosses.
Games: Dozens. Most recently, Zelda: Twilight Princess.
Comments: I want a challenge, and while I enjoy that I may have to figure out the mechanism for defeating a boss, I also want that mechanism to be more than a routine system of clicking. I want Krieger from FarCry, and I want Tartarus from Halo 2 (but on Legendary. He was way too easy on the other settings). Of course, I prefer that the game simply lets me choose the difficulty. If you give me difficulty settings, then the bosses simply cannot be too difficult on the top settings.

Game: Doom 3.
Design feature: Doom 3.
Comments: Seriously, why? (Kidding. Sort of.)
gsgraham.comSo, no, zebras are not causing hurricanes.

#78 Avatar God   Members   -  Reputation: 1072

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 April 2007 - 05:53 AM

Quote:
Original post by Prinz Eugn
Actually for as fun a gae as BF2 is, the user interface on the whole is pretty damn bad.
I've never seen or tried to use a worse interface system than that in BF2 (hell, it's not like they improved it for 2142, either). You should hear me curse it...

I'll also second the call for fixing the incredibly difficult airpline/chopper steering with a keyboard, or even keyboard and mouse combo. It was hard enough in BF2, a little easier in BF2142, and downright impossible in GTA: San Andreas.

The airplane-style physics in outer space bothers me as well. My favorite part of Battlestar Galactica is the way the ships utilize 3D space and thrust to fight effectively - it's very cool, and I would love to see a space sim that wasn't based on a physics system that requires lift and air resistance.
gsgraham.comSo, no, zebras are not causing hurricanes.

#79 Dave   Members   -  Reputation: 1483

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 April 2007 - 06:19 AM

Quote:
Original post by Omid Ghavami
Game: Sims
Feature: Need x number of friends for promotion at work.
Comments: It takes away a lot of the fun, at least for me.


Yes.

-----

On a similar note to the save point just before a boss.

Game: Most FPSs
Feature: Giving you load of ammo and health just before a boss.
Comments: The game would be far more challenging if you were topped up nearer the start of the level. You would have to manage your resources more carefully.

-----

Game: Counterstrike Source
Feature: The bots on the top two levels of difficulty spotting you directly above them.
Comments: I can understand them spotting you when you are in their FOV but when you are directly above them??

-----

Game: Deus Ex 2
Feature: Eliminating lockpicks.
Comments: Alot of the fun in the first game was deciding whether to lockpick door A or multitool door B to get to a given area.

-----

Game: Deus Ex 2
Feature: Single ammo type for all weapons
Comments: I didn't like this. Granted it is a more futuristic game than the first, but FPS traditionally have different ammo for different weapons.

-----

Game: 99% of games
Feature: Gorgeous graphics, lack of replayability.
Comments: Admittedly alot of games are of the genre where the implementation of replayability is not necessarily needed. Gameplay is what keeps me playing, not graphics.

-----

Game: 99% of FPSs
Feature: Items in the same places every time. Passwords the same each time.
Comments: A small step towards replayability is having pick-up items in different places each time you start a new game. I also don't like it when you can remember the password for a door from the last time you played it. All passwords in a game that are yet to be discovered should be random each time you load the game (and yes i do mean load from a save, not when you start a new one).


-----

Game: Deus Ex
Feature: Lack of truely dificult setting.
Comments: It has the usual settings and a realistic setting, but even realistic is a piece of piss. How about reducing the amount of pickups so we have to scavange.


Dave

#80 Sneftel   Senior Moderators   -  Reputation: 1776

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 April 2007 - 06:27 AM

Quote:
Original post by Prinz Eugn
I haven't played any other game that actually had to pause while the menu loaded instead of just going directly there.

Could be worse. They could've had a "loading menu" cinematic to load.




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