How to make PC games properly: An open letter to developers

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Dear Developers,

I appreciate that publishers sometimes fund your work and that for whatever reasons (too myriad to get into) consoles are your primary development platform. However for those of you who do make PC games, or even just port over your console games, I want to tell you how to do it properly as you often get it wrong. Time and again you make fundamental mistakes or overlook or forget the unique features of the PC and this results in a poorer experience, a poorer product and for yourselves, a poorer reputation.

The list of grievances is long. However I will not turn this into a wishlist as I understand that budget, time, design and other constraints are among the primary considerations of your work. While I might wish for games to be designed to fully take advantage of the vastly superior processing power and capabilities of the platform, the harsh reality is that you make console games and we get ports and that isn't going to change. The below however is a list of easily achievable and inexpensive tips to help you at least get this part right. If we're only ever going to get console ports, it isn't too much to ask that you at least do it properly. So without furter ado and in no particular order:

- Field of View
I don't understand why console games need have such a restricted view, but for whatever reason you insist on putting horse-blinders on players. Your games look awful on PC; the restricted, narrow "tunnel-vision" view is nausea-inducingly bad. Either increase it by default (minimum 80 degrees), or ideally follow BioShock: Infinite and Far Cry 3's example by making it adjustable in-game.

- Controls
Unlike console owners, we have two primary input devices: a mouse and a keyboard. Our mice, especially the top-end ones have many more buttons than the 2-3 they were restricted to 15 years ago. We want the option of mapping controls to whichever keyboard or mouse key we choose, including alternate/multiple inputs for the same function. We also have many more keys to assign functions to; use them. Other games manage it, so should yours.

- Framerates
If you lock your game down to 30FPS, it will look and play poorly on a PC. Our monitors usually start at 60-75Hz. Do not lock your game's framerates on the PC, let our graphics cards work it out; it's what they're for.

- Single-slot saves/checkpoints
We detest with a passion the inability to save at will. We have long been accustomed to the ability to save when we choose, backup and trade our save files and more. The checkpoint system is horrid and if BioWare can manage a save system in KotOR on the old XBox a decade ago, you can manage it now. Copy that system wholesale if you need to. This segues nicely into the next point...

- F5/F9
These keys are sacrosanct. They are not to be used for functions within your game. They should be used for one purpose only and do not need reimagining, reinventing, revitalising or tampering with. And to reinforce the previous point, please use them.

- Direct connections in MP games
I realise that XBox Live/PSN make MP gaming on consoles easier. However we prefer options. When we wish to play with friends, we are intelligent enough to connect directly to them. Having a server-client system is fine for strangers, but as you always turn servers off after time, include the option to connect directly. Peer-to-peer is almost always superior. An alternative or addition would be...

- Dedicated servers
We had them 15 years ago. We had them 5 years ago. Now we do not. Bring them back so we can host ourselves. Your servers aren't always reliable or even necessary. It vastly increases the lifespan and playability of your games. I realise this goes against the "annual re-release of the same game with an incrememented number" policy, but is important.

- Gamespy
Don't use it. Ever. It's such an awful and unreliable service your game can only suffer for making it the cornerstone upon which your MP rests. Use Steamworks, and/or see the previous two points.

- Title screens
WTF are they even for? We don't need them and they serve no purpose. Get rid of them.

- UI
Remember the mouse mentioned earlier? Well they aren't controllers restricted to four directions of movement. Please optimise or design your game's UI properly. We don't need to go through every option to get to the one we want, we can choose it right away. This is probably the single most obvious and crucial factor that decides if you give us a lazy port or a proper one.

- Quick-time events
These are stupid and lazy mechanics in a console game. In a PC game they suck harder than a black hole. Do not include these in PC games. Hitman: Absolution's melee mechanics are a perfect example of why they shouldn't be used; it's so infuriatingly bad it's reason enough to uninstall and curse the game forevermore.

- DirectX 11/Latest OpenGL
I realise this point crosses the line into the budget/time territory, but seriously we're in 2013, not 2005. Don't mistake me, DirectX 9.0c was around a long time and gave us great games, but it's 8 years old and we've moved on since then. At least have a patch/add-on that brings your game into the current day and gives us some way to take advantage of even part of the superior processing power of the platform. Playing a brand new game with 8 year old graphics is disappointing, tragic and reflects poorly on you and your games.

- Triple-buffering
Whether or not consoles support it, PC games should. VSync is fine for low-demand games but can adversely affect high-action games. Your game should support triple buffering either way. It gives us the ability to optimise graphical fidelity vs. performance while preventing screen tearing. It cannot be stressed enough how important this feature is.

- Always-online
Have you heard of laptop PCs? They're computers, only portable. As such, they don't always have the option of going online. Or perhaps you know of firewalls, preventing your proprietary port/protocol requirements connecting? Don't implement an always-online component in your game.

- Profiles
These are a console conceit and do not belong on the PC. Multiple in-game profiles for different control schemes is one thing but do not lock down a game, save files or any other aspect to a unique profile. This is one of the worst things to come out of the last console generation and has no place on the PC.

There are more points but these are chief among them. With possibly one or two exceptions, the above list is not challenging or costly to implement. Treat us better and your games will sell more, be played more and be liked and enjoyed more. I don't know if you realise how frustrating it is when an otherwise good (or even great) game is let down by being realised so poorly on the PC. I'd love to ask you to make maps larger, fewer loading screens and better textures, but I understand that 8-year old console hardware restrictions dictate these things. In the absence of proper PC games, at least give us good ports. My thanks for your attention.

Yours faithfully,

KingsGambit

 

[hazabaza1]

Unlike console owners for whom I understand you don't wish to saddle with too many things to think about,

Really?
I mean, really?

I understand you don't want your primary system shafted, sure, but being a dick about it isn't going to help anyone.

 

[ThriKreen]

Sadly, it's all stuff devs are already aware of. Just time and monetary factors tend to prevent work on proper PC ports.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Unlike console owners for whom I understand you don't wish to saddle with too many things to think about,

Really?
I mean, really?

I understand you don't want your primary system shafted, sure, but being a dick about it isn't going to help anyone.

Yes really. Developers seem to reckon console owners aren't capable of pushing the Start button and finding the save option, so they take that away so it's one less thing to worry about. This is in spite of games that managed it on console years earlier. It's entirely a change for the worse, and particularly telling on the PC. The dig is aimed at developers, not console gamers. Saying that, games have undeniably been dumbed down significantly for the console market...look at anything by Ricitello-era EA for proof. Whether that's publishers', developers' or console gamers' fault is open to debate.

Also, that's you have to add from all the above?

 

[hazabaza1]

Unlike console owners for whom I understand you don't wish to saddle with too many things to think about,

Really?
I mean, really?

I understand you don't want your primary system shafted, sure, but being a dick about it isn't going to help anyone.

Yes really. Developers seem to reckon console owners aren't capable of pushing the Start button and finding the save option, so they take that away so it's one less thing to worry about. This is in spite of games that managed it on console years earlier. It's entirely a change for the worse, and particularly telling on the PC. The dig is aimed at developers, not console gamers. Saying that, games have undeniably been dumbed down significantly for the console market...look at anything by Ricitello-era EA for proof. Whether that's publishers', developers' or console gamers' fault is open to debate.

Also, that's you have to add from all the above?

Right, so they're not trying to saddle console gamers with "too many things to think about." According to you, it's universal.

Also it's funny you should mention Ricitello-era EA because basically all Bioware games (owned by EA I remind you) have manual saves with many slots, and in ME2+3's cases, even have quicksave.

And yes that's all I have to add. Excluding that one dig that I still think was unnecessary, I generally agree, and hey, the more user friendliness on any platform the better.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Also it's funny you should mention Ricitello-era EA because basically all Bioware games (owned by EA I remind you) have manual saves with many slots, and in ME2+3's cases, even have quicksave.

That is related to the "dumbing down" aside, not the point on saves. You are absolutely right that they did have a proper save system and that is to be applauded, but is separate from the dumbing-down they went through over the series. That is a separate discussion (that's also been done ad nauseam). The point on saves still stands and is apparent in both the games I mentioned earlier as examples of getting FoV right. They got FoV right and saves wrong.

 

[ThriKreen]

Also many points shows a lack of understanding regarding software and game development. Should I go through the ones that I can, and address and explain why that's the way they are?

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Also many points shows a lack of understanding regarding software and game development. Should I go through the ones that I can, and address and explain why that's the way they are?

I would be glad for any discussion or new points I've neglected to be added. For the record though, I do understand game development reasonably well, that much of the above is beyond any individual's control or are fundamental design decisions. QTEs, always-online, checkpoints and MP features are huge decisions that *can* cross the boundaries into both design and budget. My points are that some thought could be made at early stages to "nip them in the bud" and make them better for if and when they are ported to the PC.

I left out moaning about the tragedy of map sizes/frequent loading screens, disappearing bodies/bullet holes, low-res textures and low-polygon models and the rest as I realise that these are vastly unrealistic expectations. The only way to get a game to really look and play superbly on a PC is to design it for the platform in the first place and I've reluctantly accepted that those days are gone (soon after the first Crysis title). Anyway, discussion of the above is obviously welcome, particularly from a developer After all, it's addressed to you (and your Creative Leads).

PS. Overlook the snark. It's a character flaw of mine and passion, anger and Internet anonymity all combine to make me snarky (and lead to the Dark Side obviously).

PPS. If you or anyone could explain the terrible FoV and existence of Title Screens that would be particularly enlightening.

 

[shrekfan246]

Also many points shows a lack of understanding regarding software and game development. Should I go through the ones that I can, and address and explain why that's the way they are?

I wouldn't bother, but then that's because I automatically tune out anybody who uses the phrase "dumbed down" seriously.

Aw hell, I'll tackle this.

I want to tell you how to do it properly as you often get it wrong.

Ports have actually been getting better and better over the last two years, especially from the big guys like Square Enix or EA. Deus Ex: HR, Tomb Raider, Sleeping Dogs, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Mirror's Edge, all rather good PC ports all things considered.

- Field of View
I don't understand why console games need have such a restricted view, but for whatever reason you insist on putting horse-blinders on players. Your games look awful on PC; the restricted, narrow "tunnel-vision" view is nausea-inducingly bad. Either increase it by default (minimum 80 degrees), or ideally follow BioShock: Infinite and Far Cry 3's example by making it adjustable in-game.

I agree with the inclusion of a FOV slider, at least. Should be a standard for first-person or over-the-shoulder third-person games.

- Controls
Unlike console owners, we have two primary input devices: a mouse and a keyboard. Our mice, especially the top-end ones have many more buttons than the 2-3 they were restricted to 15 years ago. We want the option of mapping controls to whichever keyboard or mouse key we choose, including alternate/multiple inputs for the same function. We also have many more keys to assign functions to; use them. Other games manage it, so should yours.

Most of them do that now. They may not read all of the mouse buttons as extra mouse buttons, especially depending on the setup of the mouse, but most games (from big publishers, mind) allow for fully rebindable keys. Again, agreed that it should at least be standard though, it's a pretty simple thing even if I'm usually good with most default bindings.

- Framerates
If you lock your game down to 30FPS, it will look and play poorly on a PC. Our monitors usually start at 60-75Hz. Do not lock your game's framerates on the PC, let our graphics cards work it out; it's what they're for.

Locking framerate is silly, yeah. I don't even like having Vsync on if I can help it.

- Single-slot saves/checkpoints
We detest with a passion the inability to save at will. Unlike console owners for whom I understand you don't wish to saddle with too many things to think about, we have long been accustomed to the ability to save at will, backup and trade our save files and more. The checkpoint system is horrid and if BioWare can manage a save system in KotOR on the old XBox a decade ago, you can manage it now. Copy that system wholesale if you need to. This segues nicely into the next point...

Here is where I start taking issue. I'd appreciate if you didn't speak for everyone who plays games on the PC. I, for one, typically only use a single save file per character anyway. Checkpoint systems have never bothered me, and in fact I often get angrier when a game doesn't have autosaves or checkpoints than when it does. Ideally, I'd like a combination of both a la modern Bioware games - Manual saving combined with autosave checkpoints after long dialogue sections, before boss-fights, when moving into new areas, etc.

- F5/F9
These keys are sacrosanct. They are not to be used for functions within your game. They should be used for one purpose only and do not need reimagining, reinventing, revitalising or tampering with. And to reinforce the previous point, please use them.

Again, I'd love if you didn't speak for me. I rarely quicksave, I rarely even remember that it's a function that is a part of games when I'm in the middle of actually playing something. And that flies right in the face of your point about re-binding keys. Quicksaving is something that should be included, sure, but it should be rebindable just like everything else.

- Title screens
WTF are they even for? We don't need them and they serve no purpose. Get rid of them.

I like them. Unless you're specifically referring to a splash screen of the game's title that you have to click something before it loads up the menu. Which... really doesn't happen all that often, so I don't know why you'd be complaining about it. I love main menu screens. The first thing I do when I start up a game is to jump into the options menu. Why would I want to do that outside of the game in some stupid clunky pop-up menu that won't allow me to actually see the changes? Why would I want to wait until I get into the game, where I'll likely have to wade through a ten minute cut-scene or something before I can change the options?

- UI
Remember the mouse mentioned earlier? Well they aren't controllers restricted to four directions of movement. Please optimise or design your game's UI properly. We don't need to go through every option to get to the one we want, we can choose it right away. This is probably the single most obvious and crucial factor that decides if you give us a lazy port or a proper one.

Again, most games that actually require full use of the mouse (say, RPGs), give it now. I could go back ten years and pick any number of pure PC games that have horrible UIs, they're almost uniformly better now than they were then. Mouse wheel scrolling inside of in-game menus and being able to click anything currently shown in the menu is pretty much all you need, and it's pretty much what they do. Some games like Skyrim have sticky, slow UIs to be sure, but that's Bethesda. Expecting anything to not be buggy and broken in one of their games is pretty silly.

- Quick-time events
These are stupid and lazy mechanics in a console game. In a PC game they suck harder than a black hole. Do not include these in PC games. Hitman: Absolution's melee mechanics are a perfect example of why they shouldn't be used; it's so infuriatingly bad it's reason enough to uninstall and curse the game forevermore.

Hey, again, stop speaking for everyone else. Quick-time events are good when done correctly. Most games have the issue of executing them correctly, but it's ignorant to blanket paint them as being completely bad.

- DirectX 11/Latest OpenGL
I realise this point crosses the line into the budget/time territory, but seriously we're in 2013, not 2005. Don't mistake me, DirectX 9.0c was around a long time and gave us great games, but it's 8 years old and we've moved on since then. At least have a patch/add-on that brings your game into the current day and gives us some way to take advantage of even part of the superior processing power of the platform. Playing a brand new game with 8 year old graphics is disappointing, tragic and reflects poorly on you and your games.

And a lot of games since 2011 have been implementing more and more DirectX 11 features. That's to say nothing of the fact that a ton of people are still using graphics cards (or entire OSes) that don't support DirectX 11. So once more, you're speaking for people you shouldn't be.

- Triple-buffering
Whether or not consoles support it, PC games should. VSync is fine for low-demand games but can adversely affect high-action games. Your game should support triple buffering either way. It gives us the ability to optimise graphical fidelity vs. performance while preventing screen tearing. It cannot be stressed enough how important this feature is.

Most of them do. Or you can force it. I don't know what games you've been playing.

- Always-online
Have you heard of laptop PCs? They're computers, only portable. As such, they don't always have the option of going online. Or perhaps you know of firewalls, preventing your proprietary port/protocol requirements connecting? Don't implement an always-online component in your game.

Have you heard that there's only really two games people actually care about that currently use that? Or that firewalls have exceptions?

- Profiles
These are a console conceit and do not belong on the PC. Multiple in-game profiles for different control schemes is one thing but do not lock down a game, save files or any other aspect to a unique profile. This is one of the worst things to come out of the last console generation and has no place on the PC.

Why? No, really, why? The only way that would make any difference either way is if multiple people are using one computer for the same games, and if that's the case wouldn't you want a separate save file from somebody else's? Also, Steam. You may have heard of it. It "locks" games down to one person's profile.

There are more points but these are chief among them. With possibly one or two exceptions, the above list is not challenging or costly to implement. Treat us better and your games will sell more, be played more and be liked and enjoyed more. I don't know if you realise how frustrating it is when an otherwise good (or even great) game is let down by being realised so poorly on the PC. I'd love to ask you to make maps larger, fewer loading screens and better textures, but I understand that 8-year old console hardware restrictions dictate these things. In the absence of proper PC games, at least give us good ports. My thanks for your attention.

Here again you're speaking as if you're the voice of PC gamers. Maybe I just quantum leaped back in time five years or something, but ports lately have been pretty damn good. The worst ones tend to come from indie developers, and I'm a little willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on their coding skills. The last "bad" port I saw was Binary Domain, and the only reason it was bad was because the mouse acceleration was abysmal and it had poorly optimized particle effects, the former of which at least was patched shortly after release.

 

[Alfador_VII]

The OP makes several valid points, but some are just subjective things which not everyone agrees with.

ok, FOV Slider, fully mappable controls, and decent framerates are all good things which should be in place. I also agree on single save slots and checkpoints, I like many slots, and the option of quicksave.

The "sacrosanct" F5/F9 is just weird though, and goes directly against the suggestion of fully mappable controls. If someone wants to use Ctrl-Shift-4 to quicksave, and F12 to load (to give an extreme suggestion) they should be able to set that.

I have no real objection to Peer-to-peer multiplayer support, even though it's often hard to set up with routers and port forwarding, however I totally agree on dedicated servers, and the horror of Gamespy.

Personally I like Title Screens, but they should always be skippable by pressing Escape, and I see what you mean abnout UI design for PC.

QTEs are a matter of opinion again, some like them, some don't. It's pretty much platform agnostic though, they're also unpopular among some console gamers.

And I agree with the final points made too.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

I automatically tune out anybody who uses the phrase "dumbed down" seriously.

Your loss.

Ports have actually been getting better and better over the last two years, especially from the big guys like Square Enix or EA. Deus Ex: HR, Tomb Raider, Sleeping Dogs, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Mirror's Edge, all rather good PC ports all things considered.

Some are great. BioWare ones in particular stand out as generally well done ports (let down by unadjustable FoVs but modding coalesced.ini fixed that). Sleeping Dogs was a poor port of a good game, replete with shitty FoV, controls and UI. Good game that could've been better if ported better.

Here is where I start taking issue. I'd appreciate if you didn't speak for everyone who plays games on the PC. I, for one, typically only use a single save file per character anyway. Checkpoint systems have never bothered me, and in fact I often get angrier when a game doesn't have autosaves or checkpoints than when it does. Ideally, I'd like a combination of both a la modern Bioware games - Manual saving combined with autosave checkpoints after long dialogue sections, before boss-fights, when moving into new areas, etc.

I never mentioned autosaves, which are fantastic. Autosaves and checkpoints are fine *in addition* to a manual save system, not in lieu of one. That's the point I'm making. You may use only a single slot, but many players use multiple slots. Again, BioWare got this right in their games, as did Skyrim.

I rarely quicksave, I rarely even remember that it's a function that is a part of games when I'm in the middle of actually playing something.

You might not quicksave, many of us do. Having the function included is the point. If you choose not to use it, that's fine but what isn't fine is not having the function. And being remappable goes without saying. Even if F5/F9 is the correct way to do it

I like them. Unless you're specifically referring to a splash screen of the game's title that you have to click something before it loads up the menu. Which... really doesn't happen all that often, so I don't know why you'd be complaining about it. I love main menu screens.

Not main menu screens, they are the essential launching pads for all games and their features. I'm talking about the screens that come before with "Press to Continue" before the main menu. They do happen often, they serve no discernible function.

Again, most games that actually require full use of the mouse (say, RPGs), give it now. I could go back ten years and pick any number of pure PC games that have horrible UIs, they're almost uniformly better now than they were then. Mouse wheel scrolling inside of in-game menus and being able to click anything currently shown in the menu is pretty much all you need, and it's pretty much what they do. Some games like Skyrim have sticky, slow UIs to be sure, but that's Bethesda. Expecting anything to not be buggy and broken in one of their games is pretty silly.

Most may do, I'm addressing the ones which do not. And if you could go back 10 years and pick out horrid UIs, wouldn't you criticise them for being horrid and suggest that they could've been done better? Borderlands PC has a horrendous UI that actually requires the use of arrow keys to navigate at times. BioWare managed it in KotOR and JE last generation, why can't others now?

Quick-time events are good when done correctly. Most games have the issue of executing them correctly, but it's ignorant to blanket paint them as being completely bad.

They are bad on consoles, they are bordering on intolerable on the PC. I will not hammer away at my keyboard like a CAD designer or a woodpecker. Lazy, uninspired mechanics, do not belong on PC.

And a lot of games since 2011 have been implementing more and more DirectX 11 features. That's to say nothing of the fact that a ton of people are still using graphics cards (or entire OSes) that don't support DirectX 11. So once more, you're speaking for people you shouldn't be.

Some games, not many. The option would be welcome. As I said, I appreciate that this point in particular requires extra work and that including lower-spec machines is better business. However the point is that the option would be welcomed for those who wish to play a brand new game and not have it look like an 8 year old one.

Most of them do.

The point is that those which do not, should.

Have you heard that there's only really two games people actually care about that currently use that? Or that firewalls have exceptions?

All Ubisoft ports for years had it. They got rid of it recently, thankfully. The point is that (unless you're making an MMO) it is a bad idea and an unnecessary one.

 

[DoPo]

Quicksaving is something that should be included, sure, but it should be rebindable just like everything else.

Good point - I actually prefer to have them at F5/F8 as they fit nicely onto one block of function keys - it has happened to me to hit F9 when I meant F5 and vice versa. And I do NOT want save instead of load. Also, a lot of default configurations have quicksave/load at F6/F7 - that's a recipe for a disaster.

Some games like Skyrim have sticky, slow UIs to be sure, but that's Bethesda. Expecting anything to not be buggy and broken in one of their games is pretty silly.

Skyrim's problem, though, was that it had a console style menu. It was horrible to navigate with a mouse - in fact, it would sometimes not register clicks on the outer parts of the label and it would instead close the menu...which was stupid. It was more comfortable to use with a keyboard - it didn't suck then. Well, it didn't suck as much - you're still required to essentially drop the mouse.

Or that firewalls have exceptions?

In all fairness, you don't always get direct access to the firewall. If you're in a protected network, say, a university one, you may not even get any choice. Now, my university allows easy way to request ports to open - you just fill in a form online and it's done, but you're still restricted to only 20 entries (a port is 1, a port range up to 10 in a batch count as 2. Steam alone takes up 18 entries) and even then you'd still have to wait until the next day for the new settings to kick in. Point is, it's not always easy and it is a valid concern.

 

[Bad Jim]

- Triple-buffering
Whether or not consoles support it, PC games should. VSync is fine for low-demand games but can adversely affect high-action games. Your game should support triple buffering either way. It gives us the ability to optimise graphical fidelity vs. performance while preventing screen tearing. It cannot be stressed enough how important this feature is.

It's not really all that important. If your fps is equal to the refresh rate of your monitor, it makes no difference. If your fps is lower, you should lower your graphics settings. And for some reason I never notice tearing with Vsync off. And you should be able to force it through your driver anyway.

 

[Smooth Operator]

For a moment there I was wondering if my thread cleaning script broke as half the posts just vanished, but no it seems the same people will bring the same useless irritation to every discussion...

OT: I mostly agree but this should not be a platform specific thing, if developers are forced into proper standards every time then this will cease to be an issue and we will get better games all around.
By this point I expected we would be discussing far more advanced options then the basics but hey progress is never that easy.

 

[Joccaren]

They are bad on consoles, they are bordering on intolerable on the PC. I will not hammer away at my keyboard like a CAD designer or a woodpecker. Lazy, uninspired mechanics, do not belong on PC.

Would you prefer a 3 minute cutscene instead?

Personally I'd rather stay involved with some games. BF3's defusal of the bombs in one of those co-op challenges. I liked that as a QTE. Personally I would have preferred they use numbers rather than the normal controls, simply because you're not jumping at the bomb, you're inputting a code, but that's nitpicking. I would have hated to go, sit there and wait 30 seconds whilst the guy plugged in some numbers slowly and I did nothing.
Likewise, what other option is there in games like Farcry 3 where a crocodile grabs you and begins deathrolling? Instant death? Yeah, that'll go down well. Single button press? Umm... Exciting... Attack the shit out of it or die trying? Sounds good to me.
QTEs can allow more interaction in some games. They can also be stupid if done for the sake of, I.E BF3s rat QTE. It depends on how and why its done as to whether its ok or not.

 

[Tom_green_day]

Developers seem to reckon console owners aren't capable of pushing the Start button and finding the save option

I guess this means you aren't a console gamer...

- Dedicated servers
We had them 15 years ago. We had them 5 years ago. Now we do not. Bring them back so we can host ourselves. Your servers aren't always reliable or even necessary. It vastly increases the lifespan and playability of your games. I realise this goes against the "annual re-release of the same game with an incrememented number" policy, but is important.

I can see why some people would like this, but I find it really annoying. When players host, it all depends on their connection and their preferences. But if you do well, they kick you. If you use a weapon they don't like, they kick you. If you use a tactic they don't like, they kick you. I like a server that isn't run by anyone.

 

[TIMESWORDSMAN]

WE HAVE SPOKEN!

Really, on a basic level, I agree with what you're saying, but there are exceptions to be considered. Dev time, artistic license, the fact that most game companies are run like Batarian slave camps, all of these things contribute to PC porting.
Also, I kind of like title screens, I think they make a nice intro when you first start up the game. It'd just be nice if they were a New Game only sort of thing.

 

[Piorn]

Dear Developers,

- Single-slot saves/checkpoints
We detest with a passion the inability to save at will. Unlike console owners for whom I understand you don't wish to saddle with too many things to think about, we have long been accustomed to the ability to save at will, backup and trade our save files and more. The checkpoint system is horrid and if BioWare can manage a save system in KotOR on the old XBox a decade ago, you can manage it now. Copy that system wholesale if you need to. This segues nicely into the next point...

- F5/F9
These keys are sacrosanct. They are not to be used for functions within your game. They should be used for one purpose only and do not need reimagining, reinventing, revitalising or tampering with. And to reinforce the previous point, please use them.

- Title screens
WTF are they even for? We don't need them and they serve no purpose. Get rid of them.

I'd have to agree with every point except these 3.
A title screen is nice, and should at least be displayed the very first time you start the game. After that, I can understand if it gets annoying.
About the saving system, a lot of what made games like DsS and DkS so meaningful was the fact that you don't have direct control over the save system, but the game is designed around it. Dying doesn't end the game, and has consequences.
Compare that to Skyrim, where dying just ends the game, thus forcing you into a meaningless quickload playstyle.
In the end, I'd say we should let "design" dictate "technology", not the other way around.
Don't force one mechanic if it doesn't fit the game design.

 

[Dendio]

I would like you to use the word "I" rather than we. So many people boldly declare the word "we" as if they are the elected representatives speaking for others. Why fear the word "I"?

That aside good post, I don't have any problems from field of view limitations, but i agree with most of your other points.