Poll: Your about to murder 1 video game clishe...What will it bee?

[geldonyetich]

Other: The Grind.

Basically, being forced to go out and do repetitive activities you're already bored of in order to get to the part of the game that might entertain you, solely because the developers want you to play longer.

 

[geldonyetich]

[Extra post, lag.]

 

[Cj Vanek]

[Extra post, lag.]

Actually, I thought you meant to post the grind twice as a way to represent the grind.

 

[geldonyetich]

[Extra post, lag.]

Actually, I thought you meant to post the grind twice as a way to represent the grind.

Too clever for me, apparently.

 

[Dorian6]

well if i were to chose one horrible cliche, it would be violence for the sake of violence. I hate the new "moms hate it" advertising campaign for Dead Space 2. It plays to this juvenile, misplaced sense of rebelliousness, and only makes people take video games less seriously as a legitimate medium

 

[Icehearted]

I don't see it, so I'll write in bad storytelling. Just because you can make a game doesn't mean you can tell a story well enough to make it stick. Most games have horrible stories, which means there are game devs that want to try their hand at authoring their own ideas, or they're really hiring writers on a shoestring budget.

Either way I can tolerate most of what is listed far more than I can having to sit through a pretentious storyline with god awful character dialogue. JRPGs are the worst offenders, but I get that there are cultural differences that influence when people are supposed to be outraged or aghast, though let's be real, the writing in most games from that country skirts along the threshold of juvenile and melodramatic. Games like Gears of War and Fallout 3 could have vastly benefited from better writing.

This also make me wonder if putting the game design before the writing is like putting the cart before the horse.

My 2¢

 

[mjc0961]

I'm going to say bad stories. When it comes to stories, first of all a good story is awesome. Love a good story. If that's not possible, I'd rather see no story or the old 8 & 16 bit era stories of "princess was kidnapped, go save her" or "big fat guy stole all your animal friends and put them in robots, go kick his ass." If a game isn't trying to tell a story and just wants you to go have fun, I can't see a legit reason to fault it.

But a game trying to pass off a bad story? You went the story route, so it had better be a good one. Telling a story but having it full of plot holes and general stupidity is something people are going to notice and people are going to be looking for answers, and noting "this plot is terrible". And that is something to fault the game for.

EDIT: Oh yeah. Bad stories are only bad if the game is taking itself seriously. If a game knows it has a pretty awful plot but is just pretty much taking the piss, I can live with that. I present the difference between Red Alert 3 and Command and Conquer 4. C&C4 is taking itself seriously with its utter nonsense and is a worse game for it. Red Alert 3 knows that its plot is nothing resembling anything that should be taken seriously anymore, and just has as much cheesy, camp fun as possible.

Spoiler

Tim Curry saying that he's going to the only place left that hasn't been tainted by capitalism (SPACE!) is dumb, but also hilarious. So you groan, you laugh, and you get back to playing without being too bothered. Come on, just look at his face right before and as he says "SPACE!". You can't help but laugh:

But when Kane decides to make you look like him, because Gideon wants to kill you, is just dumb. Gideon wants to kill Kane as well, and in fact more people want to kill Kane than want to kill me, so this helps how? It doesn't, and you end up getting shot twice by people who thought you really were Kane. Just stupid, but the game expects you to take it seriously, so you facepalm and just try to forget something so dumb happened as you go back to playing.

Red Alert 3's bad but camp story is easily more enjoyable than C&C4's bad and serious business story, at least to me.

 

[Extasii]

Underwater level, I NEVER thought one was fun, and I sure as hell wont now.

But what about Bioshock? Isn't it ALL the underwater level?

Just joshin' XD

But seriously, I hate QTE's with a burning passion. I'm tempted to just create a time machine and pop the guy who spawned that hideous idea in the head with an armchair.

And in response to the Losing All Abilities problem, it really depends on how it's presented. In Metroid Fusion and Metroid Prime, it was done masterfully imo. You get your shit rocked by either Ridley or the X-virus, and then all hell breaks loose. Other games in the series don't work this in quite so well.

 

[UrbanCohort]

The one where they spell "cliche" and "be" correctly, because those ones are all played out.

 

[Kenami]

Definitely losing all of your abilities.

This is the one thing that stopped me from loving the Metroid games.

 

[Rooster893]

Instantly respawning enemies.

(cough, cough, Ninja Gaiden.....)

 

[bl4ckh4wk64]

I honestly don't give a shit whether a game looks pretty, if the story is incoherent or non-existant, I'm not playing it.

 

[Hiroshi Mishima]

There's good graphics, and then there's "wow, did you spend the entire fucking budget on cutscenes and high-end graphics?" and I think that some of the people in this thread are not aware of this. Also, little tip for some of the people trying to push the excuse that this isn't the case.. while graphics will be important for presentation, they're not the be-all end-all of a game. If you have a game that doesn't have gameplay equal to or greater than the graphics, then there is a problem with that game. No amount of poo-pooing or excuses are gonna justify otherwise. ..unless you're making a movie, but the two are not synonymous. Something a few developers need to realize.

Personally, I think we need to stop pushing for better graphics. We're going to hit the uncanny valley in no time, and some would argue we already have...

However, that isn't what I chose for this poll. I chose "Quick Time Events" because in all the games I've played these are the things that piss me off the post insofar as actual games are concerned. The graphics issue is usually being caused by people on the outside going on about a game not looking good enough and generally being bitchy. The QTE problem, however, is purely a developmental issue and there's really no call for it other than being lazy.

Topics like this are always hard. Why do we have to remove just one and have a mediocre game? Why not remove several and actually make a good game?

This is especially true when it comes to Lives, Insta-kills (glares at MMX8), and cliff hangers. The last one is fine if you're actually going to MAKE A GODS-DAMN SEQUEL, but if you aren't or there isn't a lot of certainty.. include a fucking polished ending. :/

..sorry for swearing, it just feels like there needs to be emphasis somewhere, and I hate using the "words, *****" crap. I'd love to pummel whoever started that...

 

[KDBTV]

Water Temple in all Zelda games
Skyward sword better have a "easy" one

 

[MrAkuma201]

Cliffhangers they can lead to a crappy sequel like I don't know DMC 2 the worst DMC game too come out well maybe not I will wait for DMC5 then Judge

 

[AssassinX66]

Definitely graphics over game play. I'm sick and tired of my friends saying graphics make the game and if the graphics aren't state of the art, the game is going to suck and its a waste of time to even bother playing it. Games don't need great graphics to be a blast to play. This cliche needs to be dragged out in the street and shot.

 

[Jamiemitsu]

graphics over gameplay, the easiest choice ever. Granted QTEs are a pain, and infinite enemies can be abused by developers. Then theres always the cliff hangers leaving a series open for a sequel which is never made, but the graphics over gameplay one is easily the greater of the collective evils.

I'd rather have a blocky almost primative display with story telling powerful enough to make me actually feel for the character than an explosively pretty 2 hours of story. I.e. I'd take FF7 over FF13.

Yup, exactly this. It pushes the wait for a game to unreasonable lenghts, and gives you a dissatisfactory experence at the end of it all. FFXIII, heck, the series in generall is a perfect example, as if, the better looking the series got, the less that could be done with it.

 

[blankedboy]

Uh, cliffhangers can be used amazingly well, not just in games but in any storyline... It's kinda hard to do them bad, you have to have some amazingly shitty writers

 

[CatmanStu]

There are things on this list that annoy me, but I wouldn't get rid of them as they have there place.
QTE's are not that bad if the button presses correspond to the actions (Heavy Rain was reasonably enjoyable and that was all QTE).
Graphics are more important than gameplay if the game is graphics driven (like an FPS or TPS) the graphics in these types of games add variety and interest to the largely monotonous gameplay style.
Respawning enemies are pointless in a game like Splinter Cell or Thief as those games are about avoiding contact so if you disable enemies it's to clear a path; but they are essential in a game like CoD where the tension is created with adrenaline rather than suspense.
When it comes to platformers I think that lives work perfectly fine and there is no need to change that (not saying don't try other approaches, just leave them as a workable option).

Basically, a cliché only feels like a cliché if it is badly implemented.

 

[Leemaster777]

Escort missions. I HATE escort missions.

Oh, Jesus dude. You spelled it "clishee"? Really?

Beat me to it.

I can think of exactly TWO times in the history of gaming where escort missions were appropriate:

ICO and Dead Rising 2. That's it. They suck in just about every other game they are implimented in.