Quote:Original post by chollida1 Learn from nintendo, who in my opinion created the best console controller ever for the gamecube.
I also really like the GameCube controller. But, I think it probably has to do with which controller you use most often.
Have you ever tried to play a fighting game with that controller? I almost smashed that purple lunchbox into a million pieces!! It's like they reached their pinnacle with the N64 controller, then devolved into that stupid purple...PURPLE!!
Also, the XBox controller S wasn't so bad. However, I'm 6'5", so larger controllers work better for me than most.
XBox 360 gamertag: templewulf feel free to add me!
Quote:Original post by tstrimp I think the X-Box has the worst controller ever!
Why do so many people feel the need to complain about x-box controllers? I realize that this is just opinion, but I personally don't have a problem with them. I don't see how so many people have trouble with their size. I am only 5' 9" and have relatively small/average hands and I can use it fine. </rant>
Back on topic, I hate crashes and unskippable cutscenes the most. I would venture to say that at least half, if not a majority of people skip cutscenes when they can. Most people just want to play, not watch little movies that are usually cheesy and/or poorly choreographed.
1) not being able to reset configurations out of the game. IE getting over zealous with the video settings leading to a resolution that crashes the game. Then searching for 20 minutes to find a configuration file that isnt in text format. very annoying. sometimes you even have to reinstall.
2) NPCs that get stuck in weird places or die making a mission impossible to complete, requiring a ...*gulp*... restart. usually these are console games too so you have to start from the beginning of the level. Bad clippling / scripting.
3) levels that require you to hit a random obscure button that you search 20 minutes for...or in general you need to preform some random objective that is extremely simple, but not clearly alluded to. Clearly bad level design.
4) bad RTS troop controls/commands. Your guys get stuck or walk in circles while your collector dies...all because the movement menu is 3 items deep and you selected *look stupid and let everything die* by accident
Quote:Original post by chollida1 Agreed but so is everything else posted in this thread:)
Cheers Chris
Unless you can find someone that likes
1) Crashes 2) Long Load times 3) No skippable cutscenes 4) Difficult controls
Then I'll have to disagree with you. There are some real usability issues here that don't involve controller preferences.
First off I didn't say everything else was a controller preference I just said all the other items where preferences:)
And those are still just opinions. I'd rather had a game with a few crashes than a game that comes out a year later with no crashes ditto for the next 2. 4) is all about controller preferences:)
So in my opinon yes all those are stll just preferences.
You can have a game without them, it may just take longer ot get out and it would be my preference to have the game earlier with a few crashes, longer load times and non skippable cut scenes.
How ever I don't like difficult controls and that's why I pointed out that I thought sony and microsoft had bad controllers. I really like the gamecube controller, thats just an opinion:) I'm not trying to convince anyone else:)
But good dialogue I'll rate you up for being able to make an argument without this disolving into a rant:)
13) Timesinks. They are bad. Nothing like having to complete mundane tasks for hours to be able to actually play the game. I'd class these as a usability problem as they reliably impede your ability to get on with gameplay.
14) Poor resource management. There's nothing better than playing a game with low quality graphics and textures that takes five hours to load or stutters frequently despite barely using your Graphics card or CPU - it's constantly loading tracts of data from the hard drive and improperly compressing and storing them. You get to play around in frame-drop land for awhile while this happens. Kills my mojo.
-No-Skip cutscenes are a major pain... But so are the no-skip levels. There are lots of games that could benifit from more automatic savepoints so you can go back to particular parts more easily. Or, the oposite, start the game from a later spot more easily. *like FEAR. It needs more savespots, since I'd like to be able to go back to each "section" in the game.
-Un-mapable controls / control prefrences that can't be copied between charactors. There are plenty of games that make you remap your controls for every new charactor, with no way to save that for any other charactors. Or the controls are flat out stuck as something.
-Constant long load times, my take: Doom3 had really long load times, but the levels were fairly large for the time spent loading. I never really noticed beyond the first load, since I spent so much time playing. BUT Half Life 2 was the exact oposite. The levels were really really small. There was a loading screen (with no progress bar) every 30 seconds or so (expecially in the car and boat levels), and each load took about 2 min to complete. So the load times should be minimal in comparison to the time spent being able to play. And quick loads should not take 30seconds (HL2!), neither should restarting a level if you die.
-Instant configuration conflicts. There are plenty of games that dont have a "safe mode" or "auto-configure" for their settings, and even though you think you meet the min specs for the game, you come to find out after the fact that there is some issue with nvidia cards that causes it to crash, but only if shadows are on. But you can't turn off shadows unless you start the game or download a premade configuration file.
-Limited Online Access Prefrences. Either limited protocol prefrences that keep you from playing on a lan (router stops brodcast msgs, and no directIP play. Or similar issues) OR Reliance on some specific server to connect to inorder to play / join multiplayer games, with no options for other multiplayer.
Multiplayer should be imortal. If you can get people together who can play the game, you should be able to (MMO's or other online-based games excluded). If the company is gone, you should still be able to do a 2 person game, why would i have to log into the main server for that.
-AI. Some games just have dumb AI. COD2 and COD1:expantion come to mind. They made the uber AI from COD1 stop being uber as an ally, and upped the AI for the enemy. Rainbow 6 had really dumb teammates, who had something like a 2deg field of view, and never swept for enemys, and so would get shot down just because they didn't look slightly to one side as they entered the room. (Swat 4 is exactly the way this should have worked in R6)
If you are going to make AI somehow a game mechanic that is supposed to help the user out, it should help the user. The few "barny" charactors in HL1 were helpfull. Most RTS allys will end up being usefull. But there are too many games where the AI is the same for the enemy and ally, but somehow, they manage to nerf the ally side, forcing the user to work though areas that were designed for a "team" while only the user actually does anything.
Quote:5) No adjustable difficulty level. I've selected a particular difficulty level when I started but halfway through the game, the game is just way to difficult too beat, or too easy. Selecting a tougher/easier difficulty level requires you to play from the start again, which i don't want.
Why not dump the whole difficulty level setting anyway? It shouldn't be too hard to respond to the level of damage the user is taking or the times he dies/crashes/whatever, so why not go for a dynamic difficulty level? This absolves players of making the choice of having to pick a level to begin with (who wants to pick a higher difficulty level anyway if that means you suck all of a sudden?) and it would give each player a unique tailored experience matched to his/her abilities.
With all the other fancy coding and the tons of resources that get poured into art and marketing, this should be a relatively minor expenditure for a professional game team.
Quote:5) No adjustable difficulty level. I've selected a particular difficulty level when I started but halfway through the game, the game is just way to difficult too beat, or too easy. Selecting a tougher/easier difficulty level requires you to play from the start again, which i don't want.
Why not dump the whole difficulty level setting anyway? It shouldn't be too hard to respond to the level of damage the user is taking or the times he dies/crashes/whatever, so why not go for a dynamic difficulty level? This absolves players of making the choice of having to pick a level to begin with (who wants to pick a higher difficulty level anyway if that means you suck all of a sudden?) and it would give each player a unique tailored experience matched to his/her abilities.
With all the other fancy coding and the tons of resources that get poured into art and marketing, this should be a relatively minor expenditure for a professional game team.
Max Payne did that, iirc.
Anyway, I know this is a bit off-topic, but the main "usability problem" with games is that normal usability rules don't always apply. When writing any other app, the goal is to make everything as simple, smooth and effortless for the user as at all possible. If you do that with a game, well, you ultimately end up with one big green button with the test "Click here to finish the game". And sometimes, a "usability problem" might even be a vital part of the gameplay. I guess the #13 mentioned above is one obvious example of this. Timesinks? How dumb is that from a usability point of view? And yet, virtually every game rely on them in one form or another.
Ok, just thought I'd go philosophical on your thread... Please continue... [wink]
