Game design choices that should be outlawed

[baker80]

OT:
Giving me the option to save anywhere, I always end up abusing it.

Yeah, because being forces to sit through another half hour of cutscenes before the final boss every time you lose is so much fun. So's backtracking to the fucking savespot on the other end of the level, it's not like I have anything better to do than run around for 10 minutes just so I can finally stop playing.

Seriously, this isn't the fucking PSX era anymore. We don't need to preserve storage space, modern consoles come with multiple gigabytes of space out of the box! Any modern game should allow you to save where and when we want to, like PC games do (although even PC games are starting to get infested with this retarded console design convention).

 

[timeadept]

Not necessarily. I think he's talking about leaving the match while it's still early. You know, before anyone can gain a clear advantage. It annoys the hell out of me when it does this to me. Especially because i tend to start the match and then realize... you know? i really don't want to play any more.

I'd already said something to this effect but, think about your opponant, they wanted a game, they were willing to play to the end, cutting out, even early, is bad form.
Fine you don't want to play any more, accept your loss then, if your record means so much to you then fight for it.
More than a few times I've been playing a game, then suddenly half the team up and quits, or worse my opponant leaves, I was ready to play, you were the one that abandoned the match, imagine if sports worked that way, "Despite being 5-0 this mach ended in a draw when the losing team decided they'd had enough.
Frankly I find the idea somewhat selfish, but then I'm a sportsman when it comes to games.

Oh well obviously it should count as a loss if one side is able to gain a decisive advantage (or hell maybe lock it at, when the first point is scored you are committed to finish the game?).
But why should the game ever make the player play (barring the already clear point that it is no fun playing if your opponent would rather quit than louse). I mean at worse it's a minor inconvenience and you have to wait for a new opponent. For me it's like a kick in the balls (don't take that too literally) because i was a bit slow deciding that i was done playing.

Maybe it's just a problem i have cause i have a bit of a competitive streak. But i find it insulting that the game counts it as a loss when it's too early for ANYONE to reasonably predict a victor.

 

[Drummie666]

Putting aim assist on and not letting the player turn it off. No, I'm not going to drop this bit. This stupid bullshit needs to be removed from CoD more than anything else.

EDIT: Oh, and taking control of the camera away from the player to show off the scenery in 3rd person platformers. I cannot count the times I've fallen off stuff in assassin's creed because of this.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

Removing player control in a first person game. First person implies that the player is the character, third implies that they are watching and empathising with the character. What this means is that in a first person game it's horribly jarring if there character does something the player wouldn't do or want them to do. This is typically expressed through dialogue, especially dialogue that prompts character interaction.

I agree with this however there are times in games where it makes a perfect scenario for having no choice. if like what you says happens and your character just decides to save someone or something else you dont want to do of his own free will then its bad. but in moments like a scene in "the darkness"(i think) he is stopped from saving someone by something inside of him (the darkness). i don't have the game but this feels like an amazing scene that would make a great story.

EDIT: forgot to add my own.when developers put in tones of boring bits to make a game longer. i mind the second desert area in castle crashers is a bad mark on an otherwise great game. this includes the desert chase after the alien ship and the sand castle area.

 

[moretimethansense]

OT:
Giving me the option to save anywhere, I always end up abusing it.

Yeah, because being forces to sit through another half hour of cutscenes before the final boss every time you lose is so much fun. So's backtracking to the fucking savespot on the other end of the level, it's not like I have anything better to do than run around for 10 minutes just so I can finally stop playing.

Seriously, this isn't the fucking PSX era anymore. We don't need to preserve storage space, modern consoles come with multiple gigabytes of space out of the box! Any modern game should allow you to save where and when we want to, like PC games do (although even PC games are starting to get infested with this retarded console design convention).

Sorry but your arguiements don't really hold water, most games with hour long cut scenes have the option to skip them nowadays and if not that's hardly the fault of the save system.
Also the ability to ssave anywhere make for lazy gaming, "I need to gat to that point over there *quicksave* *runs out gets shot* *quickload* repeat ad nasium, If dying carries at least a small penalty it encourages smarter playing.
Finally saving anywhere simply doesn't suit certain kinds of game, open world RPGs it does(though I'd still prefer save points, the temptation to save scum is too great), survival horror it does not(they're not really that scary if you know they can't hurt you), RTSs it does(if only to quit temporerily), Beat 'em ups it does not(sereously imagine it), Baldur's Gate yes, Devil May cry no, do you see where I'm coming from here?

 

[Canid117]

For example:
- Choosing to count a game as a loss against you when you quit an offline match or campaign mission.

As annoying as this one can be it does help prevent people from quitting to keep their stats padded. Sure you are going to take a hit even if you have a legitimate excuse to quit but sometimes (especially in a strategy game) you have to see it out to the end.

- Adding quick-time events spontaneously to cutscenes forcing you to watch them all over again if you fail.

That is inexcusable.

- Giving you 1-hit deaths, maximum of 3 lives, and no continue option-- you die 3 times you start the game from scratch.

I haven't seen this in a game since the late 90s so it strikes me as an odd complaint. Then again I don't play Sonic or Mario games any more.

 

[moretimethansense]

Oh well obviously it should count as a loss if one side is able to gain a decisive advantage (or hell maybe lock it at, when the first point is scored you are committed to finish the game?).
But why should the game ever make the player play (barring the already clear point that it is no fun playing if your opponent would rather quit than louse). I mean at worse it's a minor inconvenience and you have to wait for a new opponent. For me it's like a kick in the balls (don't take that too literally) because i was a bit slow deciding that i was done playing.

Maybe it's just a problem i have cause i have a bit of a competitive streak. But i find it insulting that the game counts it as a loss when it's too early for ANYONE to reasonably predict a victor.

Perhaps locking after the first kill/goal/X amount of points would be the best way, though if you quit because you're losing, you've admited you can't win, that should definatly count as your loss, I feel the same way about disconnects, the problem's on your end why should your opponent be robbed of a win?

If I am in a match, even one I'm certain to lose I prefer to go down swinging, I'll occasionally hit home delete in DoW 40K if my base is attacked ion two fronts though.

 

[farq1414]

FPS stop they all suck

 

[tylerzd]

The detrimental effect of QTE's is widespread:

Cheapens player death:
-skillfully fight your way through a tough boss fight, QTE triggered for the finish, miss one button press = character dies, checkpoints back to the start of the QTE. This destroys immersion. Developers use this device to try to keep players invested even when the game has mostly taken control away for cutscene purposes. Unfortunately, if the player does not respond to the inputs as planned, they will die in a completely mindless way totally divorced from core gameplay which then trainwrecks the smooth cinematic flow the developer was trying to achieve in the first place. This is further exacerbated by,

Pass/fail criteria, needlessly short input window:
-Get the button press = live, miss it = die, respawn to checkpoint. On screen prompt and input window = 0.5 seconds (if you're lucky). I'd like to see some hard data on how many players fail QTE's on their first playthrough of any given QTE sequence. I expect the numbers are staggeringly high. It gets to the point in many games where the input window is so small that a player is highly unlikely to respond in time on reaction if they aren't expecting the prompt. This is then further exacerbated by,

Random and inconsistent QTE placement in cutscenes:
-I was playing Bayonetta earlier today. I plowed through a tricky boss fight early in the game, complete with shitty camera angle (that's another story), and triggered the post-boss cutscene. The cutscene ran for a solid 25 seconds completely QTE free and then POP- QTE prompt flashes on screen. I jam the button in under a second. Death screen displays, apparently I missed the window. Checkpoint respawn to just before the little QTE bit, I hover my finger over the correct button in anticipation this time to make sure I get it. Cutscene continues, then the chapter ends. One button press. That was it. You cheap killed me, jarringly broke my immersion, all for a single button press prompt. Did that really need to be there? What conceivable value does that prompt have? Why?

I want to go back to the days of cutscenes being your reward for overcoming a major obstacle. A time where you can set the controller down for a minute, take a drink, and watch the story unfold. When did developers decide that this was a bad thing? It's not that gamers don't like cutscenes. They just don't like them when they are awkwardly placed in such a way as to prevent the player from progressing in the game in a timely fashion. Specifically if they died to a thing and want to retry that thing ASAP without having to watch the entire cinematic again. Usually repeatedly. I realize developers are quite proud of their ability to put together a pretty cinematic. That's totally okay, but please remember, developers, that you are in the business of gameplay first and foremost. When gameplay takes a backseat to your fancy little movie, you have failed as a game developer.

 

[baker80]

I'd still prefer save points, the temptation to save scum is too great

Right, so because you have no self control, I need to suffer needlessly through repeated unskippable cutscenes and pointless savepoint hunting, when there's absolutely no technical reason why these things should even exist anymore. Selfish much?

Other people shouldn't have to give up on an essential convenience feature just because you think it's not "hardcore" enough. Nobody is forcing you to abuse the quicksave button.

When gameplay takes a backseat to your fancy little movie, you have failed as a game developer.

That's something a lot of game developers really need to learn. Stop trying to make crappy interactive movies and try to make good interactive games instead!

 

[G-Force]

not having the original Japanese voice acting available in Japanese games.

Of course a big exception would be if the Japanese game was never recorded in Japanese such as No More Heroes, and Dead Rising correct?

 

[Eldarion]

Character creation systems that only let you see your character from a few strict angles so that you can't see if they look any good. I'm looking at YOU, Mass Effect.

Freaking this.

I had to remake my female shep like 3 times because she looked totally different in the game world's lighting.

 

[Lieju]

Quick time events in cutscenes.

They can work in some games if used well. To take two examples of QTE-use from the same game series, bad and good; Resident Evil.

I hate, hate hate Quick-time-events in Re4 and Re5. Especially in harder difficulties. I've dies numerous times and got lower ranking for playing well the game but failing at button-smashing.

As for using them well, Umbrella Chronicles did it right.
You got the music cue so you knew that this was a cutscene where one was going to pop up, there weren't long sequences of button-smashing, and even if you failed, usually the game didn't kill you immediatly, and you just lost some HP.

But majority of QTE's should not exist in the games they are in.

Also, unskippable cutscenes.

And enemies that kill you in one hit. Well, you can use them well, but usually they are just rage-inducing and annoying.

 

[Hulten]

1.Insta-death traps
2.Quick time events the require you to shack the controller. (Mostly guilty is the PS3)
3.Infinite ammo.
4.Regenerating to full health after sucking your thumb in the corner for a while.

 

[baker80]

4.Regenerating to full health after sucking your thumb in the corner for a while.

I actually think that kind of thing has its place. It's really not that much worse than running for the health pack whenever you get a paper cut, it's just a different way to tell the player "you need to finish this set of enemies within X points of damage."

Of course a big exception would be if the Japanese game was never recorded in Japanese such as No More Heroes, and Dead Rising correct?

An exception would be anything where two sets of voice acting plain wouldn't fit on one DVD. Voice data takes up a lot of space, it's not like the publishers ship the game without the original voice track just to spite people.

 

[drunken_munki]

Your character has amnesia.

Lazy!

I don't suppose you've played Planescape: Torment?

Nah. I was going to, but the outdated UI and general graphics hit me like a brick wall.

...Ow.

Your loss.

Mmm. Does suck; I've heard it's a fun game. But design that old and graphics that iconic of the 90's grind on me pretty hard.

Funnily enough, it was okay when I played Diablo II.

You might be able to use the 'widescreen mod' for infinity engine games. It allows you to set a screen resolution and the game is rescaled. Looks marvelous for BG and BG2

http://www.gibberlings3.net/widescreen/

p.s. I playing BG2 with 1920x1360

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

The way some people respond to these sorts of threads, it seems we're headed for a gaming future where no gratification is delayed, no fingers are challenged, and no story or puzzle requires multiple braincells.

The ability to save every 30 seconds isn't a good thing. The ability to respawn in three seconds isn't a good thing. The removal of anything remotely time consuming or complicated isn't a good thing.

But damn if we aren't headed for the prettiest game of pong anyone's ever seen. Mind you, both paddles will cover the entire screen.

 

[Plinglebob]

While I don't mind fixed save points/checkpoint systems in games (as they do help to keep the flow of the game going), please can companies make it obvious when a checkpoint has been reached. This comes about from Halo 3 where I spent 20 minutes fighting through enemies, reached a spot where there was a lull and thought "I must have reached a checkpoint by now" so switched it off. Came back to it the next day and I was back where I started.

Also, if its a linier game, please put in level selects for areas previously completed preferably with all collectables you've got at that difficulty saved.

Finally, have 3 or 4 Auto and Quick save slots that are on rotation. Save space is no longer an issue so te ability to go back to a previous quick-save if you hit the button at the wrong time would be lovely.

P.S. RPS' Do & Don't series [http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/tag/do-dont/] is a good read for this sort of thing. PC focused, but has some good points.

 

[Jessta]

Asking you if you want to save right AFTER crossing a point of no return (not before after) and then throwing a ridiculous difficulty curve at you. Final fantasy tactics! although I don't think anyone should be complaining about how quiting counts as a loss, honestly I ABSOLUTELY HATE when people quit in the middle of a game, I can understand it when they have to go, but if its just because they are losing or something stupid like that then they deserve to have it count as ten loses (offline I understand quiting when your losing, should still be a loss but not ten losses, otherwise the whole counting loses and wins thing is worthless because when ever your about to lose you just quit then you get a perfect win to lose ratio and bleh).
I can understand the whole un-skippable credits thing but when you can't skip a cut scene I get thoroughly frustrated when I try to get any replay value out of the game or if I die.
Character creation that only gives you a couple of decent looks and a million crappy looks, plus character creation that doesn't let you view your full character very well. Also being able to choose what buttons do what is just awesome that would be nice to see more of.
I also hate messanger boy type quests, god damn get a phone or pigeons or something *world of warcraft is especially bad with this* Oh I just spent an hour and a half running to this side of the world and you just want me to stroll on back across the world four of five times... No problem I can TOTALLY just spend the rest of my day doing nothing but walking back and forth...
necessary grinding is also another thing I hate, spend forty minutes walking in circles killing spiders before you progress that kinda thing. Also when a game is almost entirely based on gear rather than skill or strategy *cough* world of warcraft *cough*