Terrible design choices in otherwise excellent games?

[bug_of_war]

Just looked the explanation up, it's something about the geth calculating that in a battle the side that shoots more bullets has a higher chance of winning. I still think it's kind of shaky as an explanation.
If I take that explanation, I still have my doubts about using the clips for weapons like sniper rifles and that there is no special clip that works like the weapons in the first game.


On topic and something more about Mass Effect 2
the Hammerhead
- armored with paper and a homing gun that always aims in a different direction than you, which leads to not hitting anything.

Oh, ok, I guess I should take my own advice and re-read the codex. My bad. The weapons were mostly okay from how I played, but I can see how some didn't work what so ever. I did find using the heavy weapon nuke thing to be a pain in the ass.

 

[bug_of_war]

[quote="bug_of_war" post="9.395156.16044893"


That's not good enough! None of the characters explain any of this and certainly no one explains any of this to Shepard who, as previously mentioned was out of the loop for 2 years with a severe case of dead.
Besides, that's a pretty flimsy explanation at best since I don't recall the guns ever jamming in ME1, they just overheated which was much less inconvenient than running out of frickin' ammo in the middle of pitched battle.

Dude, I get what you're saying, but sometimes haveing every single detail explained in-game just isn't good. I HATE IT when a game stops every five minutes to say "This is like this cause blah blah blah". It's not needed for the stories progression and the fact that the Codex is there (similar to the codex/journal in Dragon Age: Origins) shows that while they didn't feel like they needed to outright say why the change or whatever, they gave people like you who are stickler's for detail a chance to find out why. Don't get angry at the game for this, they did it in ME1 where they would explain where Threshers came from, even though you could go through the whole game never seeing one. RPG's are like this, they have large amounts in-universe details and it would be silly for them to spend 5 minutes explaining this.

YES, Shepard just woke up, but we do get him saying something along the lines of "This gun aint shooting WTF?" and Miranda tells him to use clips. Shepard isn't stupid, he's been in a coma for a while, but he seems just as mentally capable as before. Seeing as how he's a soldier, surely he would no what a clip is, even if he's been using the futuristic never ending ammo guns.

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

The new Warthog engine sound in Halo 4. Damn thing sounds like a tractor.

It sounds way too weedy for a tractor, but I do agree that it sounds terrible. It's more like a kart or a lawnmower, when it should sound like a powerful dune buggy.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Dude, I get what you're saying, but sometimes haveing every single detail explained in-game just isn't good. I HATE IT when a game stops every five minutes to say "This is like this cause blah blah blah". It's not needed for the stories progression and the fact that the Codex is there (similar to the codex/journal in Dragon Age: Origins) shows that while they didn't feel like they needed to outright say why the change or whatever, they gave people like you who are stickler's for detail a chance to find out why. Don't get angry at the game for this, they did it in ME1 where they would explain where Threshers came from, even though you could go through the whole game never seeing one. RPG's are like this, they have large amounts in-universe details and it would be silly for them to spend 5 minutes explaining this.

YES, Shepard just woke up, but we do get him saying something along the lines of "This gun aint shooting WTF?" and Miranda tells him to use clips. Shepard isn't stupid, he's been in a coma for a while, but he seems just as mentally capable as before. Seeing as how he's a soldier, surely he would no what a clip is, even if he's been using the futuristic never ending ammo guns.

Yes, but the CODEX is usually for non plot important details that you can get through the whole game without ever bothering to read. The ammo clip thing kinda was important to the plot esp. considering how, as previously mentioned, Shepard wakes up after being dead for 2 years and instantly knows that they're required now. And on that subject, the whole problem with that scene is it goes something along the lines of, Shepard wakes up, base gets attacked, Shepard is told to grab the pistol, Shepard remarks how there's not a clip available as if he always knew they were required. WTF? How the hell did he know that after being dead for 2 years? Besides a lengthy explanation from Miranda wasn't required all it would've taken was like 2 or 3 lines of dialogue, with Shepard hurriedly asking why he can't fire his gun and Miranda quickly telling him he needs a clip now.

 

[Sir Pootis]

Any game focused on Motion Controls, particularly Skyward Sword and Steel Batallion: Heavy Arms.

All games with motion controls should have them be OPTIONAL, as the hardware can be prone to inaccuracies, leading to your character doing the wrong thing at the wrong time. I almost gave up on Skyward Sword simply because I was fed up with attacking, and having my attack miss because the thing regesterd about 15 degrees clockwise from where I swung.

Catchpa: Best Seller

 

[flakmagnet]

Snippy snippy
Halo 4 - The few people defending the game clearly haven't played much Halo before, or are being naive (I hate to say it, but you are - this game is not Halo),

I understand all of your points and can see how they are frustrating to you. As a long time Halo vet, I agree with some of your points, but I disagree about this one point. Personally, I have never been good at Halo multiplayer past the first few weeks. I just suck at multiplayer games, especially once people have started properly putting time into it and working out all the little advantages they can gain. I play very occasionally after the first few weeks and invariably suck. Halo 4#s abundance of luck allows me a better chance at winning. Not necessarily balanced per se, but helpful to those who can't/won't put quite as many hours in.

Not that I'm saying loyalty shouldn't be rewarded, but it being lessened a little makes it easier for some of us to keep coming back. That said, I can't fully disagree with most of your other points, but to me, it still feels like a Halo game, just one that I can do better at. (for now).

 

[Bvenged]

Snippy snippy
Halo 4 - The few people defending the game clearly haven't played much Halo before, or are being naive (I hate to say it, but you are - this game is not Halo),

I understand all of your points and can see how they are frustrating to you. As a long time Halo vet, I agree with some of your points, but I disagree about this one point. Personally, I have never been good at Halo multiplayer past the first few weeks. I just suck at multiplayer games, especially once people have started properly putting time into it and working out all the little advantages they can gain. I play very occasionally after the first few weeks and invariably suck. Halo 4#s abundance of luck allows me a better chance at winning. Not necessarily balanced per se, but helpful to those who can't/won't put quite as many hours in.

Not that I'm saying loyalty shouldn't be rewarded, but it being lessened a little makes it easier for some of us to keep coming back. That said, I can't fully disagree with most of your other points, but to me, it still feels like a Halo game, just one that I can do better at. (for now).

I don't mind you disagreeing, each to their own opinions and that, but that's my point:

Halo was meant to be hard online for competitive play (and in some regards, social matchmaking too) - it was competitive and pure. A well-organised team could beat the equal sum of their individual and better skilled parts, and map control was a key element if you wanted to beat an equally capable team. Halo 4 has sabotaged all of that to give more people a chance to win, if they deserve to or not, and it's completely gone back on what the game's multiplayer was originally designed for. I enjoy random online fun, but to me Halo 4's multiplayer just doesn't work the way it's running now. It's simply broken.

Halo 3 added to Halo 2 with features and modes, and maintaining what worked: MLG for pro's, Ranked for try-hard and serious competitive players, Social for competitive and casual play and customs/forge for the content creators and social gatherings.

Halo Reach evolved that further, giving arbitrary playlists their own group and blowing Forge/customs out of the water. the only negative was iffy community maps and reticule bloom.

Halo 4 has taken all of that to a blender, added salt and pepper to the mix, spilled half of it onto the floor, tried to bake it into a cake then decorate it with candles where the wax drips onto the top. That's the genuine impression I get from this game and it's painful to play online. It looks like Halo, but underneath it's actually nothing more than a half-baked caked with inedible wax on top, smaller than I ordered and missing the jam filling and sugar - but the core cake-mix is still there underneath the horribleness, and if they take it away and try again they could[/] get it right with relative ease.

 

[bug_of_war]

Yes, but the CODEX is usually for non plot important details that you can get through the whole game without ever bothering to read. The ammo clip thing kinda was important to the plot esp. considering how, as previously mentioned, Shepard wakes up after being dead for 2 years and instantly knows that they're required now. And on that subject, the whole problem with that scene is it goes something along the lines of, Shepard wakes up, base gets attacked, Shepard is told to grab the pistol, Shepard remarks how there's not a clip available as if he always knew they were required. WTF? How the hell did he know that after being dead for 2 years? Besides a lengthy explanation from Miranda wasn't required all it would've taken was like 2 or 3 lines of dialogue, with Shepard hurriedly asking why he can't fire his gun and Miranda quickly telling him he needs a clip now.

Okay, fair enough with the dialogue, can't argue that. But is the change from infinite ammo to heat sinks really that big of a deal towards the plot? At what point in any cutscene have we seen Shepard be out of ammo, or needing ammo? Sure it's a big change game mechanic wise, but it's just an added level of difficulty rather than a complete plot overhaul.

If you're like me and played as the soldier class, you can use every weapon but have limited powers (Adrenaline Rush being the only non-ammo power if I remember right)(and Immunity at some stage, but it doesn't mean you can't beknocked down). If you're Biotic or Tech however you have more abilities which do damage to the target without using a weapon, keeping enemies at a distance. Soldiers had to rely on shitty and unnacurate weapons for a majority of the game, think back to how much pain came to trying to aim with the early sniper rifles. See how it was a little unbalanced in the first game? Soldiers had all these weapons to use but had to use them sparingly due to the overheating, this made it hard for constant suppression fire stopping Biotics from sweeping the floor with you. The Thorian level took me tons of goes because the Asari clones would trip me up, warp my shields and then take a few shots with her pistol and kill me. Same with the Biotic Commandos on Noveria, except they would trip me up, warp my shields and then put me in Stasis. The clips made it so the Soldier did not have to wait for the weapon to cooldown after firing of multiple rounds. It also meant that the developers could make the guns more accurate as we now had a limit to how much we could shoot. If we has unlimited ammo with the aiming system in ME2, the game would be too easy. Did it not annoy you in the first game that the highly qualified soldier (regardless of class) couldn't shoot straight?

I really don't see why this is annoying you so much, if anything, the clips make more sense both plot wise and game mechanic wise.

 

[Furbyz]

I'm gonna go with the Fade in Dragon Age: Origins. I get that they wanted to change things up a bit, but good god, did they make a bad decision with that place. It was excruciatingly boring and time consuming. In my opinion, dangling a carrot in front of us with a few permanent stat bonuses and maybe some character development are simply not worth the giant amount of back tracking.

I didn't like the Fade on my first play through. I absolutely hated it on the second.

Not going to disagree on your personal pick but this always cracks me up.

For me the Fade was about the only enjoyable part in the game - the rest was bland, boring standard fantasy I've seen or read a hundred times before. Even the name of the group you're part of, Grey Wardens, put the image in my head of bland mcblandieblands riding on grey horses in grey armor around the time of the morning where everything just seems so grey...

But then again, in the last years I realised that I grew out of RPGs, they really don't do the same for me as they did back then.

That's funny, because I'm the exact opposite. I always find it funny how people complain that a Medieval Fantasy RPG is a Medieval Fantasy RPG. It's about the execution of the common tropes to the genre, not the tropes themselves, and I thought Dragon Age did them fairly well.

 

[axlryder]

Long ago at double fine:
"So we're working on the last level and we want to come up with something challenging"
"How about we have a timed jumping puzzle... we haven't done that yet, and lets add in difficult moves that the player has never had to do before!"
"Ugh, isn't that kind of a big spike in difficulty and kind of confusing?"
"Nah, it'll be fine... DOUBLE fine!"
and thus the Meat Circus was born!

Oh god so much this. I forgot about Meat Circus. It's like they took the difficulty and cranked it up to twelve. I like to think I'm competent at platforming but that was just brutal. Seriously questionable game design in an otherwise stellar title.

 

[Folji]

Long ago at double fine:
"So we're working on the last level and we want to come up with something challenging"
"How about we have a timed jumping puzzle... we haven't done that yet, and lets add in difficult moves that the player has never had to do before!"
"Ugh, isn't that kind of a big spike in difficulty and kind of confusing?"
"Nah, it'll be fine... DOUBLE fine!"
and thus the Meat Circus was born!

Oh god so much this. I forgot about Meat Circus. It's like they took the difficulty and cranked it up to twelve. I like to think I'm competent at platforming but that was just brutal. Seriously questionable game design in an otherwise stellar title.

At least they decided to go back and fix up what they had done with the Steam re-release, though. I've never played the original copy of Psychonauts as it first came out, with its ball-breakingly difficult take on the Meat Circus, but in the Steam version of it that level was pretty bearably challenging!

 

[IBlackKiteI]

- Damage reducing/increasing perks in any good multiplayer FPS (namely CoD 4 and Bad Company 2)
- Boss fights in HR
- Hilariously OP shotgun in the Gears of War series (not as bad in 3 though, FINALLY)
- The insane amount of farming needed to get stuff you want in Borderlands 2 and the fucking Anchormen (cheapest, enemy, ever) and final boss of the 1st DLC

Epic snip

Yep all round.
Also the DMR, practically no recoil or accuracy loss when shooting, nails the crap out of dudes even across the map, beats automatic Loadout guns pretty easily within their effective ranges and is a 4 shot kill. As if it wasn't good enough in Reach. And the Boltshot, *shudder*.

Love how their intention was apparently to create a faster paced game yet these two guns (and starting guns nonetheless) are seemingly built around a campers playstyle.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

Also, my go-to answer for this question: Halo's "The Library". Abysmal level design, just absolutely horrible, when the rest of the game had been built on rather large and relatively open levels. Then you have one of the best levels in the entire game, the introduction of the Flood, immediately followed by an endless corridor section with identical looking corridors that have identical enemy-spawning locations and identical artificial lengthening every time you reach another elevator. Just awful.

I just revisited Halo Anniversary and got the achievement for beating The Library on Heroic without dying and the one for beating it on Legendary within a half hour. This is a criticism I can really appreciate lol. 343 made an effort to at least add some color and variety to the visuals, and that really helps to be honest.

Since we're talking about Halo, let's mention the two dumbest things Bungie ever did: first, they got rid of the pistol. Or rather, they removed the concept of a powerful, difficult to use starting weapon from the game. To be clear, I'm not married to the aesthetics of the pistol necessarily. But the pistol was a starting weapon, and had properties that impacted gameplay. Starting players with limp-dick SMG spray guns had huge consequences and created lots of problems that plague the series to this day. The closest thing to a solution in Halo 2 was Battle Rifle start, but even this had slow kill times and the auto-aim and hit-boxes meant you did not have to develop your skills with it like the pistol of Combat Evolved (which had reasonable auto-aim). This also meant power weapons can clog up the game because no one is strong enough to take them down. It also heavily rewards "teamshot", or getting everyone to focus their fire on a single target because it takes so long to kill anyone. This sounds like a good thing, but it's not in this instance. Coordinating your fire like that was already rewarded, but without the pistol, it's often a necessity. That means the team that coordinates themselves across the entire map for control of power weapons, power-ups, power positions, sight lines, and forced respawns will be blown out of the water by the team that all stands in the same spot.

TL;DR: Powerful and difficult to master became weak and easier than the rocket launcher. This created a cascade of new problems that have only been exacerbated over time.

Second: Armor Abilities. Why was this necessary? We already had power-ups. They had to be fought for, which was way more fun and kept the game moving. Now instead of designing maps to encourage taking risks and movement, we're designing them to keep all the armor abilities relevant. Reach's maps were universally panned and Halo 4's are not much better. Probably worse. Powerups offer many possibilities for outside the box thinking. Armor abilities are restricted to what can be made to work in all situations. Power ups create a realm of possibilities for interesting map design. Armor abilities stifle it.

It is much easier to imagine and implement interesting and diverse powerups than armor abilities, and so much better for gameplay.

Moral of this story: there is good change and bad change. Don't try to pass off bad change as good change. What any series needs is growth. Clogging up the works with fluff you stole from CoD, knickknacks and shit you didn't think out properly is not growth. There is nothing more painful in life than contemplating what the Halo series could have been. Well, maybe a couple things. When I think about it, it's kind of dumbfounding that 343 actually managed to make Bungie look like they knew what they were doing.

TL;DR: Why can't I play Halo: CE mutliplayer on XBOX LIVE????????????????????????????????????????????????? I would pay all the monies for that.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

Yep all round.
Also the DMR, practically no recoil or accuracy loss when shooting, nails the crap out of dudes even across the map, beats automatic Loadout guns pretty easily within their effective ranges and is a 4 shot kill. As if it wasn't good enough in Reach. And the Boltshot, *shudder*.

Love how their intention was apparently to create a faster paced game yet these two guns (and starting guns nonetheless) are seemingly built around a campers playstyle.

The DMR is designed the way it is to make everyone feel like a Halo god. If you were an expert with the pistol in Halo: CE, you could kill someone from across the map with it. In Halo 4, the DMR scopes in so far (3x as opposed to 2x), has so much aim assist, and so much bullet magnetism at such a long range, which is actually aided by bloom, that it's like you're shooting head-shot-seeking bullets. Couple that with a hit-box with the size of a small town and...

The solution is obvious. Do I even need to say it? Give us the @($%ING pistol already! Ironically, the DMR is actually a pretty well designed starting weapon in some ways. Like so many things in Halo 4, someone who knew what they were doing could turn it into something playable.

Halo 4 has taken all of that to a blender, added salt and pepper to the mix, spilled half of it onto the floor, tried to bake it into a cake then decorate it with candles where the wax drips onto the top. That's the genuine impression I get from this game and it's painful to play online. It looks like Halo, but underneath it's actually nothing more than a half-baked caked with inedible wax on top, smaller than I ordered and missing the jam filling and sugar - but the core cake-mix is still there underneath the horribleness, and if they take it away and try again they could[/] get it right with relative ease.

I absolutely love these metaphors lol. And I'm in complete agreement. I remember when I used to gripe about Halo 2. If I had known then what the series would eventually become, my head would have simply exploded. Unfortunately, I do not believe 343 possesses the will or the understanding of Halo to make serious improvements. I put up with so much of Bungie's shit, and this just surpasses all of it by a mile. I had no idea Halo could get this bad. I should have quit years ago while I was ahead, and that's depressing.

I have a friend I have played Halo with for years. He is a committed fan and proudly boasts he will buy Halo no matter what the game is actually like. I have been way more positive about the series over the years then I should have been because of my friend and the good times we have had. I don't know how to tell him I can't play Halo anymore. I think it will come as a genuine shock. I only hope we can find a decent game to play.

Hope you're happy 343. Oh wait, they actually admit they don't listen to complaints from fans (well, as good as), so I take that back. I wonder if anyone's playing Shadowrun? The price was insulting but the gameplay was AAAAAWE YEEEEAH.

Not that I'm saying loyalty shouldn't be rewarded, but it being lessened a little makes it easier for some of us to keep coming back. That said, I can't fully disagree with most of your other points, but to me, it still feels like a Halo game, just one that I can do better at. (for now).

In some venues, you would get a lot of flak for this. I respect it. I have always felt that one of Halo's strengths was it's accessibility. Like professional sports, the fact that anyone can play the game is part of the appeal. Easy to learn, hard to master. Unfortunately, your happiness came at our expense. But do I blame you for that? Absolutely not. I believe any developer who cared could have made us both happy, and that would have been a better outcome for all involved.

Also, I should add that I am nowhere near the level of Halo player all my blustering may lead people to believe. I just demand a high quality, structured experience. Especially when this shit pretty much writes itself. A good competitive game makes you want to get better. Halo 4 makes me want to quit.

You know what the worst part is? If Halo 4 does well, they will say "thank god we ripped off CoD". If it totally bombs, they will say "I guess people just don't like Halo anymore. Obviously, the problem is we didn't rip off CoD enough."

 

[hermes]

Whoever came out with the idea of a Guitar Hero minigame in a God of War game should have his "designer licence" revoked. Even the interface sticks out like a sore thumb.