Genres you hate and what you would do to make them enjoyable

[Apocalyptore]

Don't know what brought this up. Talking about it anyway.
Personally, I can't stand the RTS genre. I have nothing wrong with taking things slowly and strategically looking them over, but for whatever reason, RTS games bore me to all Hell.
What I would do to make them more enjoyable for myself would be taking more part in the action-- being a part of my own plan, seeing right in front of me how good or bad my strategy is. I find it hard to sympathize with a bunch of tiny, insignificant, expendable dots on my screen when a plan goes wrong and thus have little motivation to actually do a good job. However, if I was to BE a member of my own troops or somehow be right there on the field, doing my own fighting and whatnot, I'd have a much better time. I mean yeah, it'd be a bit of a pain the ass do be directing an entire army whilst having a one-on-one with a member of the opposite army, but whatever. Just an idea.

So yeah: what genre of games do you hate the most and what would you do to make them more enjoyable for yourself?

 

[Kahunaburger]

I'm generally of the opinion that if you don't like a core mechanic, you won't like the core mechanic plus a gimmick.

For instance, I really dislike 2-D platformers, and that's not a genre that's exactly starved for re-imaginings. I'll try one with some sort of variation (you can mess with time! You can rotate the world and the dev is a racist! Everything's black and white and pretentious! It's comedy, with the punchline being "you died again!") and I always end up disliking it because I dislike the core mechanic of jumping on things in 2-D. I'd imagine the same would hold true for OP and the Dynasty Warriors-style RTS, because the elements that would go into making the game a good RTS would be the same elements OP dislikes about other RTS.

 

[Cranky]

I can't stand the RTS genre nor the Military FPS genre. And I cannot think of anything to help make it appealing.

 

[Don Savik]

RTS game's aren't about feeling sad for your characters, its all strategy, all of it. Its about crushing your opponent with superior thinking, not about not trying because your soldier doesn't have a wife and kids and sad backstory. There isn't character depth for a reason. I think changing it into what you would want (basically a shooter) defeats the entire purpose.

2-d Platforming doesn't excite me anymore because its become the lazy medium. Yes, its surpassed shooters. Any indie dev can just take mario and add a cooky mechanic with a different aesthetic these days. You know how shooters have gimmicks like time-manipulation, super suits, physics shit and the like? Its gotten this way with platformers as well. The only platformer that grabbed me is Super Meat Boy, because the emphasis on skill was the gimmick. Anyone with enough time can beat Fez or Super Mario World, or Limbo, but SMB requires actual the player to learn and get better. More games need a learning curve for this genre.

Dating sims need to have turret sections. And nudity cheat codes. Because that's the point right? Click all the "I love you so much" options and watch a bad hentai at the end? True fucking love at its core. Oh its about the manufactured girls with 'depth'? How about you make them all fat and freckled, hyper religious, politically skewed and diverse (not super models that happen to be "cripples") and go from there. That way its a true test of character. In fact, you shouldn't even be able to see their faces. And more turret sections.

captcha: she loves him

yes, because she was programmed to.

 

[dessertmonkeyjk]

Even though I have no problem with RPGs in general I really dislike turn-based ones. They tend to require you to keep track of a crapload of stats that half are pracically redundant and shouldn't even be there as well as the chance the characters will hit their target based on a dice roll. It's really not something I like to see when I'm cheated out of a well placed shot at ten feet away.

Now it's obvious what I want changed. First, cut down on pointless stats when there is one already serving that purpose. Second, I like to have some like timed hits that boost the chance of hitting a target. Third, avoid having to extensively grind to advance the plot by 5-7 levels (or depending how quick xp is earned).

Yep, that's my take.

 

[Davroth]

Pokemon style games. I find them tremendously boring.

I'd give them a shot again if they combined the polish and production value of Pokemon with a real time fighting engine. But then again, that's not what people come for with those games. But that's pretty much what it would take for me to be interested in it again. XD

 

[TehCookie]

I also would have to go with RTS games. Have it be something other than a war, add an interesting story, setting, aesthetic or something and I may enjoy that so much I'll give the gameplay another shot. I use to dislike tactic games until I played Disgaea, and the tone of the game makes it enjoyable. Adding that kind of tone and style to almost any genre would make it better, until I get sick of it.

 

[Vault101]

take ever modern style shooter...and give them an interesting setting/protagonist

BAM fixed

 

[Vault101]

2-d Platforming doesn't excite me anymore because its become the lazy medium. Yes, its surpassed shooters. Any indie dev can just take mario and add a cooky mechanic with a different aesthetic these days. You know how shooters have gimmicks like time-manipulation, super suits, physics shit and the like? Its gotten this way with platformers as well. The only platformer that grabbed me is Super Meat Boy, because the emphasis on skill was the gimmick. Anyone with enough time can beat Fez or Super Mario World, or Limbo, but SMB requires actual the player to learn and get better. More games need a learning curve for this genre.
.

but whats the difference between a gimmick and inovation?

for exampleis Dead Spaces uniuqu weopons and "shoot off their limbs" game play a gimmick? because I would have though "gimmick" ment somthing flashy but didn't actually [i/]add[/i] anything to the experience

where as Dead spaces take on shooting is what makes it awsome (that ans zero gravity)

 

[random_bars]

Personally, I can't stand the RTS genre. I have nothing wrong with taking things slowly and strategically looking them over, but for whatever reason, RTS games bore me to all Hell.
What I would do to make them more enjoyable for myself would be taking more part in the action-- being a part of my own plan, seeing right in front of me how good or bad my strategy is. I find it hard to sympathize with a bunch of tiny, insignificant, expendable dots on my screen when a plan goes wrong and thus have little motivation to actually do a good job. However, if I was to BE a member of my own troops or somehow be right there on the field, doing my own fighting and whatnot, I'd have a much better time. I mean yeah, it'd be a bit of a pain the ass do be directing an entire army whilst having a one-on-one with a member of the opposite army, but whatever. Just an idea.

So... Something like this, then?

 

[blaqknoise]

I don't hate any genre, but I dislike RTS games. I'm too dumb to play them, so there's not much I could do to make them enjoyable.

 

[AndrewF022]

JRPGs

- No story mode option (seriously Persona, I love ya and all, but your stories/dialogue are a drag)
- No grind mode option (enemies scale according to your level)
- Global party EXP (fuck you final fantasy, I'm not grinding levels for each character individually, that's a pointless waste of my time)

 

[Danceofmasks]

There are games in every genre that impresses me.
Some genres less than others, obviously.

Used to think tower defense games were really shit, then ... I played Plants vs Zombies.

So much so that I've given people lessons on how to play starcraft by making them do levels in plants vs zombies a certain way.
Yes, you read that right.

 

[Snowbell]

I really hate harem animes. To enjoy them I could;

A) become a lesbian and have the main character become female
B) become male myself
C) have the male main character become believably attractive

I don't see any of these things happening any time soon.

 

[Evil Smurf]

I love Pokemon, but I would change it so there is a replay value to the games.

 

[Shadowhawk77]

Turn Based RPGs tend to bring me down the hardest due to the fact that many games have the same type of attacks/moves/tactics without forcefully moping around...I find that Kingdom Hearts is how Turn Based RPGs should be converted to-that along with this other game that i had for a little(story sucked) where the teamates didnt die but due to missing bullets, being overwhelmed, or just general damage would demoralize them making them weaker and weaker-until they are either knocked unconscious(weakening them even more) or you improve their moral through various tactics and your own badassery...however i think that should be in every game(it was a shooter but it can be applied to a Turn Based RPG easily as if a health system for your allies like it was in that game)-taking the morals into a sort of third person rpg with Kingdom Hearts type combat system would do wierdly awesome things....but the monotonous turn based gameplay of these RPGs just really destroys any that ive tried no matter how well done=no RP in the G

 

[Dryk]

but whats the difference between a gimmick and inovation?

It's all in how well it's implemented and as you said, whether it actually adds something.

I love Pokemon, but I would change it so there is a replay value to the games.

Pokemon doesn't have replay value? I'm always having the most fun with a Pokemon game when I'm playing through the story with the rag-tag team I've managed to put together by that point. The only reason I don't replay them is because I'd lose everything.

 

[Evil Smurf]

but whats the difference between a gimmick and inovation?

It's all in how well it's implemented and as you said, whether it actually adds something.

I love Pokemon, but I would change it so there is a replay value to the games.

Pokemon doesn't have replay value? I'm always having the most fun with a Pokemon game when I'm playing through the story with the rag-tag team I've managed to put together by that point. The only reason I don't replay them is because I'd lose everything.

Exactly that! I loose everything if I replay a game

 

[DanielBrown]

Already said this in a simular thread, but I dislike racing games(well, sports games in general), so I suggested a stealth racing game.