Actually, the both-way hinge for doors exist NOW. They're not as commonly used, but uhh...we have the technology.ZeroMachine said:
That one reoccurring game design flaw!
- Thread starter Stammer
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I can vouch for this. Really, I see no reason why modern games need finite ammunition. If it's supposed to punish you for missing, then all that accomplishes is making the game harder for those less skilled at the game.Kittynugget said:
And this really hits home with Mass Effect. In the original, ammunition was infinite. This was explained by having a "virtually infinite stock of ammo, each about the size of a grain of sand". It was finely balanced with accuracy and weapon heat being self-regenerating resources to draw from. And then Mass Effect 2 comes along and they say "to prevent overheating, we give you an extremely limited supply of clips that absorb the heat, and once you run out of clips you aren't allowed to fire the gun".
You know what would've made a lot of sense? If the thermal clips prevented overheating, and if you ran out of them you could still shoot, but the downside would be that you could overheat your weapon. So you'd have infinite ammo, but if you did well you'd get a bonus.
Insta-kill Melee in FPS. COD is the main example of this. I understand they want some game balance for using a melee attack since it's "harder" than just shooting someone but it just gets annoying esepcially on MW2 where the Commando perk comes into play. It's now becoming an overused game design flaw in fps that more often than not takes away from the actual SHOOTER aspect of the game. To go back even furhter look at F.E.A.R's online play, it people put their gun away and just did melee it ruined it for everyone hence why so many servers banned the use of melee only.
Although I don't particularly like Halo it does have a good melee system, 2 hits from the front or one from behind, kinda makes sense to allow insta-kills on an unaware enemy.
Also Third person shooters that won't let you change which shoulder you aim over, it's not much guys, one button so we can see what's on our left instead of playing like we only have one eye.
Although I don't particularly like Halo it does have a good melee system, 2 hits from the front or one from behind, kinda makes sense to allow insta-kills on an unaware enemy.
Also Third person shooters that won't let you change which shoulder you aim over, it's not much guys, one button so we can see what's on our left instead of playing like we only have one eye.
Inability to have all your characters in a fight.
Example of doing it right: Breath of Fire IV. 3 active characters, but the other 3 sit in back, still within the fight and may aid the active 3 characters at any time and can seamlessly be switched back and forth, from front to back trio.
Games that do it wrong: I absolutely fking love the Mass Effect games, but they're a recent example. You're saving the galaxy from definite extermination, and have lots of characters to use, but you only get to make use of all of them at the same time in the suicide mission. If the world hangs on your actions, and you have 10 allies, why would you only bring 2 with you?
Example of doing it right: Breath of Fire IV. 3 active characters, but the other 3 sit in back, still within the fight and may aid the active 3 characters at any time and can seamlessly be switched back and forth, from front to back trio.
Games that do it wrong: I absolutely fking love the Mass Effect games, but they're a recent example. You're saving the galaxy from definite extermination, and have lots of characters to use, but you only get to make use of all of them at the same time in the suicide mission. If the world hangs on your actions, and you have 10 allies, why would you only bring 2 with you?
The recurring flaw for me is this tendency for writers to insert prolific profanity like it's the one and only mark of an adult in their game. Considering how we view violence and sexuality ('five cents a pound now come get some' and 'only for people going on into their second decade and onward now be cursed forever for even mentioning it' respectively), this seems to be taken as some sort of last vestige for writers to convey that their character isn't just a childish power fantasy. "It's in character," you may say, but it just means that character is immature and unimaginative, not hardcore and amazing. I'm not saying a strategically placed F-bomb won't add a bit of extra impact to a person's dialogue, but you only get that effect if they haven't been carpet F-bombing the whole time.
I'd even argue that God of War didn't get it right, by their very nature I find QTE's kill immersion, I just find it annoying and somewhat prententious for the game to make me occasionally press X and be told that I'm doing all the awesome stuff on screen when really...a chimp could do the same. The only QTE's I find suitable are in gmaes like Resident Evil and Dead Space, when an enemy attacks you, you have to shake the analgoue or mash a button really fast (or Waggle like crazy if you're into that) to get the enemy off you, even though you're being attacked it gives you the opportunity as a player to reduce the damage being done to you.Meatramen said:
Devs need to walk the hell away from QTE's and focus on ways to make the player do the cool stuff themself.
This. This really came to my attention when I bought GHOST Squad for the Wii. It has three control options, but it won't let you make the Z button the trigger. All I can think when this happens is "Why the heck not?". It can't be that hard.Dirty Hipsters said:
I'll add non-pausable loading screens to that.Random Encounter said:
It's great to add tips of the day or other bits of random info to a loading screen, but it doesn't do much good if my rig loads faster than I can read it.
At the other end of the scale if a game loads really slow I may not want to stare at it intensely to be ready for the upcoming level.
The right way to do it is to pause when loading is done, and let the user click a button to continue. Old games figured that out, bring it back please.
Reloading. You can reload your weapon while it still has some ammo in the magazine, fine. But when your character throws the half full mag away yet somehow retains those bullets is very frustrating, especially when games are trying to be "Srs realism"
That's my one anyway.
That's my one anyway.
Non-pausable cutscenes and the lack of VOLUME CONTROL. I want to be able to turn down the music if it's too loud or turn down the other sounds (and up the TV volume) if it's too low. When there's just one generic volume button then.. well, bleh.
That was the only thing I didn't like about Catherine. That and the way the undo function became insanely unpredictable when there were enemies around, but that doesn't show up in too many games.
That was the only thing I didn't like about Catherine. That and the way the undo function became insanely unpredictable when there were enemies around, but that doesn't show up in too many games.
Um, since when? I'm pretty sure I've seen doors that do that.ZeroMachine said:
OT: I've only played three games with this, one from the late ninties, but I'm told this is in other games too: Enemy level's scaling to match yours. I always liked the idea that you can choose a low level run and get an actual challenge, or choose to power level and annihilate anything in your way. But with this, your only choices are low level runs in order to have it easy, or max your level and have everything you fight be far tougher. Why put in lots of side quests when doing those will only make the endgame that much more difficult?
FalloutJack said:
See my earlier post:Dracowrath said:
My point is that they have doors that open both ways that definitely wouldn't open both ways if they existed in reality.ZeroMachine said: