Poll: Biggest Pet Peeves In RPGs

[Xpheyel]

Trivial combat (or combat which get trivial through shitty balance). I am looking at nearly every RPG ever made. And especially you, DA:O, Mass Effect games, TES series and about every jRPG I ever touched.

Same. I put that under unbalanced classes. Though it's really unbalanced systems.

DXHR is an example too, and this is an elaborate one. There a part where ten guys bust in looking for you. I threw a flash bang at them and sprinted into the middle of the group. Used the Typhoon, 8/10 are down immediately. Then I got instakilled by one of the remaining guys the moment the animation was over, despite having the maximum body armor aug. So the Typhoon works almost ridiculously well for a two point investment while I didn't need a sprinting aug at all and my body armor was useless.

Like I said, elaborate. Then you've got the hacking aug that does what the hacking minigame does by default.

 

[Bostur]

Level scaling. It defeats the purpose of a level system in the first place. Many of the games that feature level scaling would probably have been better off without any kind of leveling at all.

I chose Faux choices in the poll, because it is used too excessively sometimes, especially in Bioware games. The illusion of choice isn't a bad thing per se, but it needs to be done right and with some care.

Another pet peeve of mine is the concept of action RPGs. RPG and action doesn't mix well, since by definition action gameplay is handled by players instead of characters. And in RPGs it's about the characters. There are notable exceptions that do action RPG well of course. But a trend has appeared that every game must use a 3D engine, and therefore use shooter gameplay. Thats not a quality for every type of game.

 

[Bostur]

Fair point, but that's a universal game trope. Not just an RPG related one...

I don't know about that. There's no analogue for the "bring me five bear asses" filler quests in RPGs in other genres. Fighting games? Shooters? Strategy? I can't think of anything. It's an interesting case of a separate but similar genre, the MMO, seeping into single player games. However, while the mechanic makes some rudimentary sense in the MMO, which is a lousy medium for storytelling anyway, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in a single player RPG other than serving as the blandest of filler.

I think there is an analogue in 'find all the things' gameplay in other genres. Quite a few games add filler content that makes little sense in the setting.

I agree with your point about MMOs seeping into single player games, and I'm not particularly happy about that myself. MMOs can sometimes get away with filler content because they work on a different level, with emergent player controlled gameplay making up for filler content and sometimes the two support each other. Single player games don't have that quality.

 

[veloper]

Since the OP assumes we already gave up on the combat parts in the CRPG, there's only the choices left to make the crappy RPG vaguely interesting.
That makes fake choices the worst thing on this list.

 

[Emiscary]

Since the OP assumes we already gave up on the combat parts in the CRPG, there's only the choices left to make the crappy RPG vaguely interesting.
That makes fake choices the worst thing on this list.

Yeahhh, like I've said before, the list reflects my personal grievances. And I'm not *THAT* picky about combat. I've got a pretty decent imagination, if I'm immersed enough in the game world I can polish up the lamer/glitchier parts of combat with the power of retroactive memory.

I'm well aware that doesn't work/fly with everyone, so I'm not pushing the viewpoint- just stating it. lol

 

[DarkhoIlow]

For me its Faux Choices if I were to choose from those options.

I really hate it when my choices have no consequences or weight to them and I get shoehorned onto the same path(Dragon Age 2,Mass Effect 3 etc).

And that is why I love Witcher 2 to death over most RPG's that have come out in the past years.It's out on X360 as well so all of you who didn't have powerful PC's to play it and are RPG fans,you have no excuse this time to try this one out.Really shows how the system "choices&consequences" is done right.

 

[MammothBlade]

All three at the top... a general lack of choice which forces you to level up party members you don't like, or use items you don't like. Really cramps my gameplay style.

 

[pharaoh malik]

"Binary Morality Systems - Look, the idea of trying to read intent into a gamers actions? It's great, in theory. But reducing everyone's moral and ethical inclinations to either selfless altruism or self interested dickishness? It's not a good way of going about it.
report "

THIS probably bothers me he most. I mean, god-forbid if I wanna shoot this guy for being a complete dick to me and not fucking loose karma. (I'm talking about Fallout, if that was unclear.) I like the idea of it all, but seriously, must I really get bad karma for STEALING from bad guys? And half the characters are complete dicks, so why the fuck can't I decapitate a few of them without getting punished. Meh, it's just faulty. It's a cool concept, but I haven't seen it be well executed. Like the original post said, you either have to choose be a saint or a complete dick, and hell, that's just not realistic or relatable at all.

OH ALSO:::

I agree with the comment on balanced classes.
Dude. I never want to be a fucking mage/wizard.I always want to be a thief/rouge... and yet, they seem sooo underpowered compared to wizard class and warrior class. Well, blah. And why do I feel like there isn't as much love for unarmed combat?

 

[York_Beckett]

Annoying protagonists. That alone can ruin a game for me.
Think Lloyd, from Tales of Symphonia. I hate his voice, his outfit, his personality, his hair, his voice, his face, his fighting style, his backstory, his constant confusion, his MOTHERFUCKING VOICE, and pretty much everything else about him. I understand it if he's got his fans, but I'm just not one of them.

I know that's a bit harsh, but he has always annoyed me. And don't get me wrong; I like Tales of Symphonia. I just can't stand the characters. All of them were either cliched, annoying or just kind of stereotypical:
The clumsy one, the dark/quiet one, the nerdy one, the little kid etc. I did like Presea and Regal, mainly because they both had good backstories that were well-presented and honest, and didn't seemed rushed.

That's basically it; a cliched, overdone story with equally cliched characters can quickly become an annoyance for me. I think it's mainly because I've seen it before several times.
I know it's a universal topic, but it bothers me most in RPGs.
However, I can forgive this if the game is fun to play and actually makes the cliched characters kind of likeable. I think Lost Odyssey did this well, because it was incredibly well-done and even very emotional at times.
Also, if the game really has a unique style to it (in terms of graphics, landscapes and universe etc), that's a huge step upward for me. One example is Baten Kaitos which managed to create a beautiful world and likeable characters that I ended up caring for, as well as wanted to see more of.

Aside from this, I'm not really sure. As long as the game is understandable in terms of combat, it's not a big problem for me.

I know this mainly concerns JRPGs, and I apologize if the thread wasn't really aimed at that. It was just the first think that popped into my mind.

 

[York_Beckett]

Also, for western RPGs, I think the "elves and dwarves" aspect of fantasy is overdone, and that's not just because Yahtzee said it. I think people should try to be more creative in that aspect.

 

[endtherapture]

Same setting.

I don't mind medieval style Europe as a setting but don't have it as completely boring.

Great Kings, Wizards, ancient Evil = Boring. Warcraft is utterly boring as a setting, but I find Dragon Age and The Witcher more interesting because of differences in the setting to make them stand out more. A Game of Thrones is my favourite right now.

 

[Sectan]

That's a great list so far, the big one I feel you have missed is this:


Dialogue Options That Don't Do What You Think They Do - I'm sure we all know this. How many times does there have to be this failing before people realise that shortening a whole conversation down into singular word answers that are then extrapolated back into actions and talking is going to lead to problems? So. Very. Frustrating. At least the quick save/quick load can bring you out of this.

The Witcher 2 when you're in prison talking to Roche is a great example of this.

1. "I'd shake your hand if I could" - Self Explanatory

2. "Very Funny" - Does Geralt give a little smirk with a sarcastic comment? Nope! Get's all angry at Roche. "Fuck you!"

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Plot Doors and Plot Armor. They are weapons wielded by lazy writers.

 

[babinro]

Faux Choice - I understand why this exists but it's a trend that's gotten old now. I still love the games that use it, but I feel the replay value isn't there anymore like it was just a few years ago.

My actual peeve is grind. Anything in game that is unnecessarily time consuming while not being overly fun. Examples:

- Mass Effect 3: Planet scanning - it's better than ME2, but does anyone look forward to doing it?

- Skyrim: Smithing - I'll go out on a limb and assume most people craft dozens of the same item if not hundreds of the same item to boost skills like this. It's boring and extremely time consuming.

- FF13 - Grinding off mobs to gain levels: this exists in nearly every FF and has always hurt the pacing of the franchise.

- All RPG's: Talk to person 'X' who is located 3 load screens and 6 minutes of real-time travel from here. There are no important story elements between you and this person. Hope you find this fun...it's something you'll be spending about 25 - 50% of your game time doing.

 

[Chairman Miaow]

Kai Leng's plot armor pissed me off, but then again ME3 had some of the stupidest cutscenes in the series.

Only his plot armour? Really? REAAAAALLY?

 

[dark-mortality]

I'd rather say I am annoyed that so few RPG's out there are truly 'Mature'. It's not "mature" when a demons willy bounce of your screen while 2402384 gallons of blood forms a river down the alley, nor is it "Adult" when you see a second of bare ass and a half-naked man standing awkwardly behind with a non-chalant face. That is an imature teens vizualisation of Mature!

That is why I like the Witcher games. It is the most mature series I have ever tried. I won't go deeper though for those who haven't played them.

So yeah, my answer is this: The faux mature themes in RPG's annoy me.

 

[malestrithe]

Grind. I should not have to level up for hours just so I can kill off the next boss. The monsters I kill getting to the boss should be enough to get me to an adequate level.

Sense of isolation from the rest of the world. I do not like most Western RPGs because of this reason. Something about having a character creation process makes the writers hesitate to adding specific dialog to most interactions. Also, it makes it feel like they are talking through the character and not to him or her.

 

[ThePenguinKnight]

Generic characters, settings, stories, designs.
Grinding.
Forced romances.
Allies joining and willing to risk their lives for you because, uhhhh.

 

[Polarity27]

I chose half-done romances as it's the thing on the poll list that has genuinely irritated me the most often (and most recently), although I've carped about almost everything on that list at one time or another.

Really though, had it been a poll option, I'd have gone for binary morality. It absolutely KILLED Knights of the Old Republic for me, which is a game most people cannot stop fellating. I found it agonizingly juvenile in its approach to morality and the force. Want to go to the Dark Side? Better wax up that mustache, Snidely, because you're going to be twirling it.

To be fair, you don't have to metagame and pick the asshole option every time. My first playthrough I didn't know anything about games like this (it was the first video game I'd played since Atari in the '80s, thankfully it got me back into computer gaming) so I picked the option that I thought made the most sense to me in the given situation. I ended up with a mostly-neutral-with-a-bit-more-to-the-Dark character in the end, which unfortunately for me made the endgame much more difficult.

My problem with the first KOTOR was the damn *ending*. I chose to destroy the Star Forge, and I was coming at it from a Sith point of view. For one thing, ancient artifacts are rarely ever *not* trouble, and this one completely toppled a Dark Side civilization much more advanced than the Sith by driving the people who used it bonkers. Neo-Sith have chronic backstabbing disorder as it is, why in the world would I want an alien artifact encouraging it? If the Rakata couldn't master the thing, why would I be so foolish to think my Revan could? Destroying it just seemed like the pragmatic thing to do. So I was more than a little irritated that I was suddenly hailed as the hero of the Jedi for doing so, and my (admittedly rather slight) Dark-Sidedness was completely wiped away.

So I'm not really disagreeing with you, the lack of nuance bothered me too. I wanted to play a Sith, not a Dark Jedi. Bullying peasants is beneath me.

 

[Polarity27]

But it seems Star Wars will probably never get past the "Light = Good. Dark = Bad." trope ever again.

George Lucas will never get past that, that's the problem. Whenever anyone in the EU tries to make a more nuanced character, they must be a Sith or be retconned into being a Sith (I will never, *ever* forgive the retconning of Vergere). The simplistic bullshit that you and I both hate is G-canon (and it's also something a lot of people like about the series), which hamstrings writers who want to make the universe more complex. KOTOR 2 and the NJO did a really good job with that, but I doubt we'll see their like again.