Sins of Game Design
- Thread starter defcon 1
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Most definitely this with added:Arqus_Zed said:
Allow multiplayer to be splitscreen also! (COD:WaW Annoyed me and my friends a LOT.)
Thou shalt make the way forward clear somehow at all times. (I've got lost at certain points in almost everygame that either A: has no/a shitty map or the maps all look the same, which brings me to the next point...)
Please devs, PLEASE. TRY to be original with Level Design. (No constant corridors of gunmetal grey tyvm.)
And Finally...
Please try and have a nice multiplayer map editor. (It's a personal thing, and it makes it a lot more fun for people. Timesplitters: FP kinda got me into this, easy as it was.)
11. Thou shalt not ever, ever, EVER make another motherfreaking Sonic game. Those things are as dead as the Backstreet Boys, so stop beating a dead horse. And for that matter, stop Zelda. And Halo. And Final Fantasy. And Mario. And Super Smash Brothers too. MAKE A BUNCH OF ORIGINAL GAMES FOR ONE YEAR!!!!!HT_Black said:
Hey. inFAMOUS had a solid plot, even if it did go the same direction despite your decision.Danzaivar said:
As for mine, escort missions should at least be fun. I don't care how they do it. As long as I can make it through and not feel like I've wasted time. Might help if the AI wasn't ridiculously stupid. Yes, go ahead, walk right into danger, why don't you. No, no, don't let me clear it out first, that's a silly idea.
No time based missions unless they A.Have plenty of time alloted, or B. Make sense in the story line. (Bomb about to explode? Ok, I get that. Timed boss battle? No... just no.
Saving game states at in such a way that the user can not continue. (ie game saves when you have too little health or ammunition to defeat the next bad guy)
Depriving the user of decisions. When the only option is to walk down corridor A, and shoot opponent B with Weapon C; the software ceases to be a game and becomes a movie that you have to manually keep going.
Inconsistent controls. If a button does one thing for the first half of a game that button must keep doing the same thing for the rest of the game.
Pandering to artists. Sure the artists spent a lot of time modeling the out side of the doom fortress, but that doesn't give you the right to make your players fly around it six times before the level starts.
Depriving the user of decisions. When the only option is to walk down corridor A, and shoot opponent B with Weapon C; the software ceases to be a game and becomes a movie that you have to manually keep going.
Inconsistent controls. If a button does one thing for the first half of a game that button must keep doing the same thing for the rest of the game.
Pandering to artists. Sure the artists spent a lot of time modeling the out side of the doom fortress, but that doesn't give you the right to make your players fly around it six times before the level starts.
Yah, I'm surprised more people haven't mentioned this. Designers who commit the sin of escort quests ought to get punted down to a deep dark hell that the rest of hell doesn't like to talk about for fear of getting really scary nightmares.Kellerb said:
Not being able to save wherever and whenever you want. Save points are a particularly bad offender.
Seriously, it has been possible on PC since as long as I can remember and probably longer than that. Why can't they do it on modern consoles more powerful than the supercomputers of yesteryear?
Seriously, it has been possible on PC since as long as I can remember and probably longer than that. Why can't they do it on modern consoles more powerful than the supercomputers of yesteryear?
Levels and 'experience' systems. I'm not totally against them, but I feel that they're too often used as a crutch in place of actual in-depth gameplay systems that allow people to actually improve over time (not just the faux-improvement that level systems provide).
Tomb Raider 2 scarred me for life.
It's funny, but I'm actually on the opposite end of the fence with this one. I hate gameplay systems that allow you to save anywhere. It's a twofold hate: on one side it removes most challege, and on the other side it enables game developers to give us nasty, nasty traps, forcing us (the gamer) to save every three steps.chimpzy said:
Tomb Raider 2 scarred me for life.
Splitscreen Local Multiplayer is now mandatory. Believe it or not, designers, some of us prefer to play with our friends and family in the same room instead of over an Internet connection.
Oh yeah the plot was ace, the setting and story was fun and the ending was damn cool. Not to mention comic montages for cutscene are a major win (Tho it bugged me how he's bald in cutscenes but stubbly in game? Whatever).EcoEclipse said:
I guess the story bugged me cos i played through evil the first time and was like
"Man, turning evil really screwed everyone he cares about over, but I guess it fits with getting what you deserve"
Guess I'll play for the good story next
Save Doctors + Trish, "passing" Kesslers test? OH WAIT IT'S NOT A TEST THAT REWARDS GOOD ACTIONS NOW
Destroy the Ray-sphere, rather than using it and killing John in the process?
OH WAIT DESTROYING IT KILLED JOHN ANYWAY
Oh hey I've come out screwing over everyone I've cared about, AGAIN
Guess I'll play for the good story next
Save Doctors + Trish, "passing" Kesslers test? OH WAIT IT'S NOT A TEST THAT REWARDS GOOD ACTIONS NOW
Destroy the Ray-sphere, rather than using it and killing John in the process?
OH WAIT DESTROYING IT KILLED JOHN ANYWAY
Oh hey I've come out screwing over everyone I've cared about, AGAIN
If you want to tell a story, that's fine. Especially in inFAMOUS' case when the story is a damned good one.
If you want to give the user choices, then you should give their choices consequence. What the hell is the point of choosing an option if it doesn't ACTUALLY matter?
1 - The first big one is a batman style choice, where you can save a load of Doctors that will save countless lives, or save your (newly ex)girlfriend.
If you Save the Doctors, your girlfriend falls to her death and he laments upon her death in the end credits.
If you Save your girlfriend, It turns out it's a decoy and your girlfriend is with the Doctors, so you're being punished for being selfish and he laments upon her death in the credits
2 - Near the end of the game, you get the object that gave you powers again, and you can choose to use it to try increase your power, or destroy it so it can't cause anymore harm
If you use it, it kills a fairly major character (absorbs him into you) before the device explodes, destroying it.
If you destroy it, it explodes and kills the SAME GUY.
--
No matter what choices you make in the game, regardless of your alignment. Your girlfriend dies, This other guy (John) dies and the Device (Ray Sphere) is destroyed. The End cutscene is identical in both cases too.
If you Save the Doctors, your girlfriend falls to her death and he laments upon her death in the end credits.
If you Save your girlfriend, It turns out it's a decoy and your girlfriend is with the Doctors, so you're being punished for being selfish and he laments upon her death in the credits
2 - Near the end of the game, you get the object that gave you powers again, and you can choose to use it to try increase your power, or destroy it so it can't cause anymore harm
If you use it, it kills a fairly major character (absorbs him into you) before the device explodes, destroying it.
If you destroy it, it explodes and kills the SAME GUY.
--
No matter what choices you make in the game, regardless of your alignment. Your girlfriend dies, This other guy (John) dies and the Device (Ray Sphere) is destroyed. The End cutscene is identical in both cases too.
Seconded! I've never enjoyed a vs/co-op game online in quite the same way I did sitting next to a friend on a couch.Space Spoons said:
Also, am I the only one who's annoyed by the fact that no games on the 360/ps3 come with the option to resize text so that us lowlifes with standard def tvs can actually read crap?
Is it assumed that everyone's gone hd?