Outdated game design

[hanselthecaretaker]

So my fellow gamers, in this topic we discuss Outdated Game Design

What are some examples that truly stand out to you?

I will start with one that has caused increasing strife and tribulations in my gaming, which is life bars.

In this day and age of game design, why are enemies? damage limited to a bar? Hack, chop, slash or shoot until it?s gone, and then you win. It would be much better if enemies started using more dynamic physically based damage models. I think it?s one reason why I?ve gotten back into shooters after playing so much Souls and other third person melee games. They need to evolve past this outdated design. The bosses have stages and weak points which is a start, but will be much more interesting once flesh type, armor type, weapon type, etc. cause real time physical damage which effect enemies? ability to fight back. No need for a bar to decide life or death. Instead let?s do things like chop off limbs to maim, pierce heart or brain to kill. Different enemies will require different tactics of course.

It should also work this way for your character. They should show physical damage with more natural status indicators to make the gameplay more tactical. I think this is more important than destructible environments, because you don?t interact with those as much.

Of course, not all games need to be like this. A few to start is better than nothing though.


So, what are your thoughts?

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Well a lives system for starters. Its just a hold over from the arcade era, where every life was a token or quarter. Either have an unlimited number of tries for like a platformer or FPS, or do it From Software style where you lose some in-game items per life, but still have a functionally unlimited number of them.

Mandatory customization. Look, I get it, in RPGs and character-driven games, having a unique player avatar is important. You need that level of immersion for the interactions.
But games that have stock characters regardless, like Ghost Recon Wildlands or Destiny or The Division, or are gameplay driven rather than story like a From Software game, or God help me a Nintendo game, really don't need a super intricate customization screen, especially if you character is covered up 99.99% of the time.
But games like Bioshock didn't have a character editor, and somehow we all felt invested and engaged enough to continue playing. Just feels like they put so much effort into a character creation screen, with little to no payoff, and development effort is better spent elsewhere.

 

[JohnnyDelRay]

So my fellow gamers, in this topic we discuss Outdated Game Design

What are some examples that truly stand out to you?

I will start with one that has caused increasing strife and tribulations in my gaming, which is life bars.

In this day and age of game design, why are enemies? damage limited to a bar? Hack, chop, slash or shoot until it?s gone, and then you win. It would be much better if enemies started using more dynamic physically based damage models. I think it?s one reason why I?ve gotten back into shooters after playing so much Souls and other third person melee games. They need to evolve past this outdated design. The bosses have stages and weak points which is a start, but will be much more interesting once flesh type, armor type, weapon type, etc. cause real time physical damage which effect enemies? ability to fight back. No need for a bar to decide life or death. Instead let?s do things like chop off limbs to maim, pierce heart or brain to kill. Different enemies will require different tactics of course.

It should also work this way for your character. They should show physical damage with more natural status indicators to make the gameplay more tactical. I think this is more important than destructible environments, because you don?t interact with those as much.

Of course, not all games need to be like this. A few to start is better than nothing though.


So, what are your thoughts?

Sorry I don't have anything to contribute to your thread just yet (hopefully later), but I do agree with you about life bars being pretty damn outdated. I remember playing a few games back in the day (and I mean BACK) which improvised different systems, and I found them very engaging. I used to play a lot of scrolling beat-em-ups, and there was one called Cyborg Justice which I played on the Sega which was the first without life bars. Except for bosses. You could change your "limbs" to give you different attacks and abilities. You could also pull them off enemies, attack them with them, swap out with your own, etc. Everything except torsos/heads. Wasn't the greatest of games, but the innovation was great.

Another one that sticks to memory is Bushido Blade on PS1. Basically a sword fighting game, you had different characters and weapons (although I think some specialized with certain weapons), 3 stances per weapon. You could block and counter, dash, roll on the ground if you got knocked down. There were so many things that could happen if you were hit, depending on your stance, body position, and timing. You could get knocked back, your guard could drop, you could be incapacitated restricting your stances and moves, or of course outright killed. It was very tense because battles could go either way, either instant death or a long drawn out duel, running through bamboo forests and chopping down trees in the way. The settings were awesome, like out of an anime. Rooftops, castles, etc. I always wished they'd make a sequel but none came. I rarely saw the premise of the no-health bar fighter after that.

 

[Ironman126]

I will start with one that has caused increasing strife and tribulations in my gaming, which is life bars.

In this day and age of game design, why are enemies? damage limited to a bar? Hack, chop, slash or shoot until it?s gone, and then you win. It would be much better if enemies started using more dynamic physically based damage models. I think it?s one reason why I?ve gotten back into shooters after playing so much Souls and other third person melee games. They need to evolve past this outdated design. The bosses have stages and weak points which is a start, but will be much more interesting once flesh type, armor type, weapon type, etc. cause real time physical damage which effect enemies? ability to fight back. No need for a bar to decide life or death. Instead let?s do things like chop off limbs to maim, pierce heart or brain to kill. Different enemies will require different tactics of course.

One word, my friend: Money. All that cool stuff requires time and skilled programmers, artists, and animators. Which, ultimately means money. Unless the game is purely combat focused, that's a lot of time and money to spend on just damage models. Health bars are a much easier way to show damage, so I really don't begrudge many games that use them.

Also, you mention Dark Souls. How do you allow players to aim for specific parts of an enemy, control the camera, and move in a melee-combat game?

My biggest gripe is dodgy quality of life decisions. Bad UIs and text-heavy tutorials are mortal sins, as far as I'm concerned. You get a lot of that in older games, but there's no shortage in less mainstream games these days. Pillars of Eternity, for instance, has a UI so bad that I stopped playing the game. Europa Universalis 4 has a bad UI and text-heavy instructions (and a distinct lack of instructions regarding some very important stuff).

 

[TheFinish]

Also, you mention Dark Souls. How do you allow players to aim for specific parts of an enemy, control the camera, and move in a melee-combat game?

1

Well, The Surge did it, and IMO did it rather well. Only while locked on, of course, but then, when you're locked on in Dark Souls you can't move the camera either, the right stick switches targets.

Point is, definitely a thing that can be done. Not that it's what the OP wants because The Surge still has life bars, but hey.

OT:

In Party-Based RPGs, when you have more NPCs that can fit in your adventuring party and whoever you leave behind gets no XP.

Similarly, in Party-Based RPGs, when new party members you find are underleveled from the get go.

Games with a single/limited save system. The only exception to this, in my eyes, is Horror games. But any other kind of game can go suck it.

Games with shooting/fighting mechanics where no matter your skill as a player, the outcome is decided by a dice roll. Morrowing and Alpha Protocol are two of the examples that come to mind.

Any sort of game that allows the player to develop in certain ways but then forces encounters where only one way is optimal. For example: Deus Ex Human Revolution boss fights.

And last but not least: games using cutscenes to immediately undo whatever you did. Beat a guy? He wins in cutscene. Snuck through the level without alerting anyone? Level alerted in cutscene. Shot a guy through the head and killed him? Alive and escapes in cutscene. It just drives me nuts.

 

[doomtaker]

So my fellow gamers, in this topic we discuss Outdated Game Design

What are some examples that truly stand out to you?

I will start with one that has caused increasing strife and tribulations in my gaming, which is life bars.

In this day and age of game design, why are enemies? damage limited to a bar? Hack, chop, slash or shoot until it?s gone, and then you win. It would be much better if enemies started using more dynamic physically based damage models. I think it?s one reason why I?ve gotten back into shooters after playing so much Souls and other third person melee games. They need to evolve past this outdated design. The bosses have stages and weak points which is a start, but will be much more interesting once flesh type, armor type, weapon type, etc. cause real time physical damage which effect enemies? ability to fight back. No need for a bar to decide life or death. Instead let?s do things like chop off limbs to maim, pierce heart or brain to kill. Different enemies will require different tactics of course.

It should also work this way for your character. They should show physical damage with more natural status indicators to make the gameplay more tactical. I think this is more important than destructible environments, because you don?t interact with those as much.

Of course, not all games need to be like this. A few to start is better than nothing though.


So, what are your thoughts?

I wouldn't mind the dynamic stuff, as long as life bars were still optional, I actually actively dislike not having lifebars as an indicator of my progress, its actively detrimental to my enjoyment of the game because even with the dynamic stuff I like that exact visual representation of the amount I have left to beat on an enemy. But I like bars and numbers (the damage numbers in Monster Hunter world is one of my favorite additions to the game. But its also optional for those that don't like them.).

A game mechanic that needs to go? Quick time events with extremely short windows that instakill you if you fail them, those need to go and should never have existed in the first place. Life systems in games that still use them need to go too.

 

[Yoshi178]

having to play the game.

our games should just be movies so players can just watch and don't actually have to do anything.

 

[Ironman126]

Point is, definitely a thing that can be done. Not that it's what the OP wants because The Surge still has life bars, but hey.

Honestly, what's the meaningful difference between a health bar on a limb and no health bar? Every game uses a numeric damage system, some just don't tell you outright.

In Party-Based RPGs, when you have more NPCs that can fit in your adventuring party and whoever you leave behind gets no XP.

Similarly, in Party-Based RPGs, when new party members you find are underleveled from the get go.

I find this to be one of the more egregious sins, it's like the game is telling you "never use these characters." But I haven't encountered it outside tabletop D&D in something like 15 years. I'm still amazed that 5th edition D&D still does this.

Games with a single/limited save system. The only exception to this, in my eyes, is Horror games. But any other kind of game can go suck it.

Related, games that exclusively use checkpoints. I have "fond" memories of playing The Lord of the Rings: The Third Age, only to be told I had two minutes to save and quit. But, again, I haven't encountered a game with checkpoint-only saves in a long time.

 

[barbzilla]

So my fellow gamers, in this topic we discuss Outdated Game Design

What are some examples that truly stand out to you?

I will start with one that has caused increasing strife and tribulations in my gaming, which is life bars.

In this day and age of game design, why are enemies? damage limited to a bar? Hack, chop, slash or shoot until it?s gone, and then you win. It would be much better if enemies started using more dynamic physically based damage models. I think it?s one reason why I?ve gotten back into shooters after playing so much Souls and other third person melee games. They need to evolve past this outdated design. The bosses have stages and weak points which is a start, but will be much more interesting once flesh type, armor type, weapon type, etc. cause real time physical damage which effect enemies? ability to fight back. No need for a bar to decide life or death. Instead let?s do things like chop off limbs to maim, pierce heart or brain to kill. Different enemies will require different tactics of course.

It should also work this way for your character. They should show physical damage with more natural status indicators to make the gameplay more tactical. I think this is more important than destructible environments, because you don?t interact with those as much.

Of course, not all games need to be like this. A few to start is better than nothing though.


So, what are your thoughts?

In that case, you will be happy to know that I am working on building my own addon engine for Unreal Engine 4 (think similar to how Physics engines used to work before it became a mid to high-end graphics cards feature). I'm calling it a bio-kinetic engine. It basically assigns a basic set of organs to each (in game) living creature, player, and NPC as well as a basic circulatory system for any combatant (eventually I'd like to have the circulatory system apply to all living creatures, but so far it just eats way too many system resources to really be useful with modern gaming systems).

The system will calculate penetration, cutting, and impact power and apply that energy to the physical location on the target. Once applied the body will defend with flexibility, durability, and any defensive skills/equipment the target has. The hit resolution is a combination of the results of all of these calculations as well as where the game designer decided to place the organs in the body. If no organs are hit, but the target was penetrated, the target will begin bleeding out at a variable rate depending on the weapon and attack used. If an organ is hit the lifespan of the player is even further reduced on top of the target now having to deal with a debuff/disability (I.E. if the player's stomach is hit the bleed out rate is increased by 13% to reflect the severity of the wound as well as having a chance to vomit every 1.5-3 in-game minutes).

I want to add in bone structures to the wire-mesh to help realism in regards to dismemberment, but honestly, I don't know how much it would impact the performance even further than it already is, not to mention I've got my hands more than full on the rest of the project since I can only work on it 2-5 hours a night (after work).

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

So my fellow gamers, in this topic we discuss Outdated Game Design

What are some examples that truly stand out to you?

I will start with one that has caused increasing strife and tribulations in my gaming, which is life bars.

In this day and age of game design, why are enemies? damage limited to a bar? Hack, chop, slash or shoot until it?s gone, and then you win. It would be much better if enemies started using more dynamic physically based damage models. I think it?s one reason why I?ve gotten back into shooters after playing so much Souls and other third person melee games. They need to evolve past this outdated design. The bosses have stages and weak points which is a start, but will be much more interesting once flesh type, armor type, weapon type, etc. cause real time physical damage which effect enemies? ability to fight back. No need for a bar to decide life or death. Instead let?s do things like chop off limbs to maim, pierce heart or brain to kill. Different enemies will require different tactics of course.

It should also work this way for your character. They should show physical damage with more natural status indicators to make the gameplay more tactical. I think this is more important than destructible environments, because you don?t interact with those as much.

Of course, not all games need to be like this. A few to start is better than nothing though.


So, what are your thoughts?

In that case, you will be happy to know that I am working on building my own addon engine for Unreal Engine 4 (think similar to how Physics engines used to work before it became a mid to high-end graphics cards feature). I'm calling it a bio-kinetic engine. It basically assigns a basic set of organs to each (in game) living creature, player, and NPC as well as a basic circulatory system for any combatant (eventually I'd like to have the circulatory system apply to all living creatures, but so far it just eats way too many system resources to really be useful with modern gaming systems).

The system will calculate penetration, cutting, and impact power and apply that energy to the physical location on the target. Once applied the body will defend with flexibility, durability, and any defensive skills/equipment the target has. The hit resolution is a combination of the results of all of these calculations as well as where the game designer decided to place the organs in the body. If no organs are hit, but the target was penetrated, the target will begin bleeding out at a variable rate depending on the weapon and attack used. If an organ is hit the lifespan of the player is even further reduced on top of the target now having to deal with a debuff/disability (I.E. if the player's stomach is hit the bleed out rate is increased by 13% to reflect the severity of the wound as well as having a chance to vomit every 1.5-3 in-game minutes).

I want to add in bone structures to the wire-mesh to help realism in regards to dismemberment, but honestly, I don't know how much it would impact the performance even further than it already is, not to mention I've got my hands more than full on the rest of the project since I can only work on it 2-5 hours a night (after work).

That sounds ambitious and very interesting. I hope it goes well, and am looking forward to trying it out someday.

I will start with one that has caused increasing strife and tribulations in my gaming, which is life bars.

In this day and age of game design, why are enemies? damage limited to a bar? Hack, chop, slash or shoot until it?s gone, and then you win. It would be much better if enemies started using more dynamic physically based damage models. I think it?s one reason why I?ve gotten back into shooters after playing so much Souls and other third person melee games. They need to evolve past this outdated design. The bosses have stages and weak points which is a start, but will be much more interesting once flesh type, armor type, weapon type, etc. cause real time physical damage which effect enemies? ability to fight back. No need for a bar to decide life or death. Instead let?s do things like chop off limbs to maim, pierce heart or brain to kill. Different enemies will require different tactics of course.

One word, my friend: Money. All that cool stuff requires time and skilled programmers, artists, and animators. Which, ultimately means money. Unless the game is purely combat focused, that's a lot of time and money to spend on just damage models. Health bars are a much easier way to show damage, so I really don't begrudge many games that use them.

Also, you mention Dark Souls. How do you allow players to aim for specific parts of an enemy, control the camera, and move in a melee-combat game?

My biggest gripe is dodgy quality of life decisions. Bad UIs and text-heavy tutorials are mortal sins, as far as I'm concerned. You get a lot of that in older games, but there's no shortage in less mainstream games these days. Pillars of Eternity, for instance, has a UI so bad that I stopped playing the game. Europa Universalis 4 has a bad UI and text-heavy instructions (and a distinct lack of instructions regarding some very important stuff).

Understandable, but at the same time, see above. barbzilla is doing a project close to what I've described in spare time, and probably with a fraction of a fraction of the resources a full studio has. Just think if one of those big studios put their resources into actual game systems like this vs hiring expensive voice actors, or pointless cinematics and licensing fluff. It's only a matter of time before someone has the gumption to raise the bar, and as is often the case, it may start with enthusiasts like barbzilla.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

1. Leveled Loot

Diablo first brought this curse of a mechanic upon us and I have never forgiven it since. Don't tell me my perfectly sharp iron dagger can't slit throats nearly as effectively just because it doesn't have some incredibly arbitrary number attached to the side of it. And right along for the ride is its boring-as-hell cousin...

2. Constant Inventory Management

Yessiree, that's how I like spending my time. Wading through hordes of useless vendor junk and spending HOURS just trying to decide what is a good item and what is not. And with party-based RPGs, it gets EVEN BETTER. Now I get to waste even MORE time for each character I have in my party to babysit.

3. Forced Multiplayer Progression

Look, I don't mind having to earn a few skins. That's different. Skins don't have anything to do with gameplay. No, it's when I'm told that I'm too stupid to have the weapons I need to succeed just because I haven't hit an arbitrary level yet. THAT'S what pisses me off and will immediately make me trash your game.

Maybe you can just sum this all up with "Shoehorned RPG Mechanics".

 

[Souplex]

Half Life 2. Just... All of Half Life 2.

 

[TheFinish]

In Party-Based RPGs, when you have more NPCs that can fit in your adventuring party and whoever you leave behind gets no XP.

Similarly, in Party-Based RPGs, when new party members you find are underleveled from the get go.

I find this to be one of the more egregious sins, it's like the game is telling you "never use these characters." But I haven't encountered it outside tabletop D&D in something like 15 years. I'm still amazed that 5th edition D&D still does this.

Games with a single/limited save system. The only exception to this, in my eyes, is Horror games. But any other kind of game can go suck it.

Related, games that exclusively use checkpoints. I have "fond" memories of playing The Lord of the Rings: The Third Age, only to be told I had two minutes to save and quit. But, again, I haven't encountered a game with checkpoint-only saves in a long time.

The first two are fresh in my mind because Battle Chasers: Nightwar does BOTH of them. AT THE SAME TIME. It drove me nuts, and it's what I liked the least out of the game. A pity because the rest of it is aces.

As for the checkpoints, I take it you don't play a lot of big budget FPS games? Call of Duty, Battlefield, both of the new Wolfensteins, the new DOOM. All of them work exclusively on checkpoint systems. Far Cry 3 and onwards as well.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

Half Life 2. Just... All of Half Life 2.

I don't know about outdated game design with HL2... Besides it forcing you to do its now pretty quaint physics puzzles. But yeah, it's really damn boring now. Definitely one of those you-had-to-have-been-there games. Oh, and the Hammer editor needs to die in a fire. It was awful even when it first came out.

 

[sXeth]

The weird fascination with not letting you pause and/or save or have multiple saves.

I compared it somewhat to that phase when a few rock bands were insisting their stuff only be available in full album format, in the nascent days of digital audio). Just an annoying insufferable stance that THOU MUST EXPERIENCE MY ART AS I DEEM IT.

The pause thing is very much that case. Its just a disconnect from reality to assume players won't have some necessity to disengage from the game at some point, and not want to go through the hassle of closing it down and restarting it and all the loading therein. Online features are an oft touted excuse for this, but the behavior persists even if you're offline or not engaged with those features.

The non-manual save mostly falls under the same umbrella. Kingdom Come's the current good example of this. Even if I considered "OH noes, save scumming" an actual valid argument (God knows its not in that mess of a game where you play a guessing game of what is a crime, or what your character will actually say to people), its basically the extended version of the pause issue. At some point you may need to step out of the game without dumping whatever random amount of progress.

Not having multiple saves I wouldnt even say is an outdated feature issue. We had multiple saves in damn near everything that had saves back in the 90s. Its kind of a distinctively modern issue. Possibly linked to the trend of promotion that wanted to sell everyone in a household their own console I guess. Thats the obvious issue of course, two or three or more people may want to play their own version of the game on one console, siblings, partners, or whatever. Games such as Dragons Dogma which provide an array of different gameplay options you might want to try out without replaying the hours of progress to actually get back to the advanced subclass trainer (you can switch freely, but then you need to grind out new weapons, and you're at a disadvantage because all your rapid levels went into the attributes for whatever you had before). The controversial one is of course, revisiting key decision points. Which I say "So what?". From inFamous Mass Effect to Dark Souls, I can honestly say, most of the alternate choices you make in these games also include hours and hours of identical gameplay in between. The 4 or so interactions to get the "Dark" ending in DS3 total maybe 20 minutes of a 6 or 7 hour game that is otherwise identical, for instance.

 

[stroopwafel]

I don't think there is an alternative to life bars. I guess there is, with auto-regenerative health, but that takes away most if not all of the challenge. Games are not realistic, one bullet(no matter where it lands) incapacitates a human or worse. And 'one hit kill' games are incredibly tedious and even then no person could ever do what a videogame character does as it's purely fantasy. So, 'realism' is a moot point anyway. However, I do think having injury communicated to the player or having particle effects goes a long way in adding immersion. I remember Resident Evil 2 being one of the first games that did that really well. You would slump once your health became 'cautious' and you would almost crawl once it became 'dangerous'. Similarly Resident Evil 4, to this day, has insanely good particle effects and ballistic models that actually communicate the lethality of the weapons incredibly well. Similarly, it adds a lot to immersion. Even with the most modern Call of Duty games the weapons feel flimsy and the enemies cardboard cut-outs.

One thing I personally really think is outdated is item management. Or having excessive loot in a game so you have to dig I don't know how long through all the garbage. Nioh for example is one of the worst contemporary offenders. Do you really need 100 versions of the same katana with only a marginal difference? It adds nothing to the game and the repetitive grind(another thing I consider outdated) only makes it worse. So many games would be so much better if they were just a bit shorter, didn't artificially increase their duration and had way less bloat.

There are some exceptions to the rule though. Like for example the item management in Fallout 4 worked really well as it's tied directly into the(really fun) weapon customization and it's tonally consistent with the Fallout world which is one big junkyard anyway. Similarly why I think Far Cry is one of the few games where the 'Ubisoft formula' actually works as it makes sense when you're out in the wilderness trying to win back territory.

So yeah, I wish game mechanics would be more consistent with the general tone of the game and don't fall out of place when the same formula is applied in games where these mechanics don't make much sense. Less copy/pasting and more original content that is both streamlined and shorter. I guess all these complaints are redundant though in a time where we are actually lucky if there are atleast a few good single-player games.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

The weird fascination with not letting you pause and/or save or have multiple saves.

I heard the new metal gear zombie gave has only 1 save file, and any additional files are $10

 

[Aerosteam]

When all a difficulty setting does is increase/decrease enemy health points.

When tutorials are forced or completely stop the game's momentum.

When the only way to know where to go is a mark on a map. And to a larger extent, a dotted line to follow.

When a quick time event shows up in any capacity.

When I'm forced to re-watch a cutscene if I die.

When regular enemies are dumped into a boss fight to make it harder (unless that's the gimmick).

When my HP and SP (equivalent) aren't replenished after fighting a boss and I have to fight a second immediately after.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

When all a difficulty setting does is increase/decrease enemy health points.

Holy hell, I forgot about this. Indeed, bullet sponges are the worst.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

1. Leveled Loot

Diablo first brought this curse of a mechanic upon us and I have never forgiven it since. Don't tell me my perfectly sharp iron dagger can't slit throats nearly as effectively just because it doesn't have some incredibly arbitrary number attached to the side of it. And right along for the ride is its boring-as-hell cousin...

2. Constant Inventory Management

Yessiree, that's how I like spending my time. Wading through hordes of useless vendor junk and spending HOURS just trying to decide what is a good item and what is not. And with party-based RPGs, it gets EVEN BETTER. Now I get to waste even MORE time for each character I have in my party to babysit.

3. Forced Multiplayer Progression

Look, I don't mind having to earn a few skins. That's different. Skins don't have anything to do with gameplay. No, it's when I'm told that I'm too stupid to have the weapons I need to succeed just because I haven't hit an arbitrary level yet. THAT'S what pisses me off and will immediately make me trash your game.

Maybe you can just sum this all up with "Shoehorned RPG Mechanics".

I couldn't agree more, I HATE loot systems so much because of all the unneeded inventory management they cause. Damage output should be increased via character leveling or weapon upgrading or a combination of both. Having to replace weapons at a near constant rate is wasting the player's time and nothing else. Loot systems only ever somewhat work at max level/end-game because what's the point of finding some amazing weapon drop at level 5 when that weapon will be useless in 2 hours instead of normal 1 hour? At least if it's end-game, finding that perfect weapon for your build now has permanence instead of being outclassed in a few levels and having to find another one. Loot systems make games like Borderlands such a chore to play, especially in multiplayer because after every quest everyone wants to go back to the hub city and sell all their crap and equip slightly better versions of stuff they just got.

And, oh god, I cannot stand games like Destiny and The Division with their damn Skinner boxes. I played the betas for at most an hour and was like 'oh, this is what the game is about' and deleted them. At least Destiny had good shooting but The Division had really bad shooting because it's an "RPG". I was already done with Anthem at this exact point in the E3 trailer [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGjbZUD7_-k&t=323]. What are you doing Bioware? Mass Effect eliminated basically all the RPG bullshit only giving you the good stuff, even the ME3 multiplayer was devoid of it.