Poll: What Do You Think Is Currently The Worst Thing In Gaming?

[shrekfan246]

It's actually a pretty exciting time to be a gamer. However, everyone is whining about it anyway.

So I chose "gamers" in the poll.

Yeah, along with most of the other people in this thread, I'll have to go along with this choice.

I can't believe the amount of bitching and whining I've seen about The Bureau: XCOM being branded with the XCOM name even though it's not a typical strategy game. The people complaining that the publishers shouldn't bother with trying to make a tactical squad-based shooter, and should instead keep the status quo and just make a sequel to Enemy Unknown. I say to hell with that. Make a sequel to EU and make The Bureau. It's been a goddamn long time since we had a decent tactical shooter release, the XCOM universe is a pretty interesting setting, and if it were its own IP people would be avoiding it because a lack of brand recognition and a resemblance to other projects -- Just look at how Bethesda's reveal of The Evil Within went.

People are negative as hell these days, and it's making it rather disappointing for me to browse forums like these and associate myself with those who call themselves 'gamers'.

 

[Ashadowpie]

no new ideas, all the games are the same damn thing over and over and over and over. its boring as hell and i seriously keep on going back to the originals or older games. i havnt even beaten Bioshock Infinite yet, its fun and excited but i'd rather play Okami or Resident evil 4, they're just actually more fun to play.

 

[Batou667]

Console wars, the lack of backwards compatibility, and no unified cross-platform gaming console yet. Ok, so that's three things, but they're related. Basically, I think consoles should become like DVD players - the hardware should be the least exciting thing about gaming (Nintendo, take note). It's the games that should be the "draw".

 

[keniakittykat]

Forced online play. This ONLY works for the facebook addicts who share everything. I don't game because I want to feel better at a game at you, or because I want to meet people. I game because I want to be entertained WITHOUT dealing with people...

Especially the childish assholes who keep spamming 'tits or gtfo' at me -__-!

If I want to play with other people I'll get them to come over and play some games, or create a private game for people I know, just don't make it mandatory!

 

[Gatx]

DRM, sort of. I mostly hate how you need to have accounts to do anything. I recently had my GFWL account hacked (partly my fault, it was attached to a really really old hotmail account) so I lost access to some online play, but what really, really irked me was that I lost my DLC and save data for Arkham City. Are you kidding me? My experience with a COMPLETELY singleplayer game was ruined because I lost an online account (I realize I can still play through the standard game, but seriously, not cool)?

Same goes for Origins. When my e-mail got hacked, same as above, I wanted to change the e-mail on everything I had used it for, so I try to do with Origins. For some inane reason, you couldn't change your e-mail through the account settings and had to contact customer service. I do, and apparently I can't switch it to the e-mail I want it attached to because I used it to try out the Old Republic for 5 minutes and it created an Origin account through that. My Origin account ended up getting hacked a couple weeks later, but luckily all I had on it was Mass Effect 3, purchased through Greenman Gaming so there was no credit card information.

Anyway that whole experience(s) really made me realize how much unnecessary risk you're taking whenever you sign up for these kind of services.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Everything else is a symptom; The audience is the cause. Well, the publishers too...

Agreed. I've seen problems of simple cause and effect go overlooked or dismissed for very stupid reasons indeed; on both sides.

-DRM is just a stupid reaction from publishers scared shitless that people who weren't really interested in buying their game pirated it and they count that as a lost sale.

This is true, but also an oversimplification. Historically, DRM has proven wildly ineffectual in deterring piracy, and given how often companies have complained about piracy, in spite of their DRM systems, is effectively admission that they know it doesn't work.

However, a simple observation reveals that the companies who are complaining the most about piracy harming them are the same companies who have thrived the most in a pirate-clad market. They know it hasn't harmed them more than any harebrained scheme or overextension on their part.

Always-Online DRM, on its surface, seems like a stronger means of securing game sales from those filthy pirates.
However, Always-Online systems serve many more purposes beyond combating piracy: none of which are good for the paying customer. (I'll spare you the list, but it comes down to market control and hiked prices, basically)

-Microtransactions are a stupid reaction from publishers scared shitless that they won't make enough of a return on their investment. i.e: "Lets get more money from the ones who pay 60$ without a second thought and lets potentially get more money from cheapskates who buy used."
-Sequels (et al) are a stupid reaction from publishers scared shitless that people won't buy a name they don't recognize.
-Rushed game are a stupid reaction from publishers scared shitless that games won't sell unless they are released at specific points in the year.

If the audience were smart(er), we wouldn't get these reactions. (But that's pretty much impossible because people don't just stop buying.)
If the publishers were smart (and gamers instead of suits), well the gaming world would be made up of companies like CDPR and Valve.

The rest, I agree with completely. Though I caution against blindly trusting Valve; their actions have been largely benevolent (especially compared to their competition), but they must realize the immense influence they have over PC gaming right now, and with such influence comes temptation.

Complacency and blind obedience is what lead the market to where it is now: To rushed, homogenized games and money-making schemes by the publishers. Don't panic, and accept trust where it is genuinely offered, but don't take it for granted either.

 

[VoidWanderer]

Publishers trying to appeal to as broad a demographic as possible.

 

[Chiiplus]

Needs a quick time buttons option. They are pointless don't involve skill, tedious, annoying, and just an excuse to break controller buttons/analog sticks forcing you to have to buy a new controller. whether it be resident evil 4, 5, 6, dragons dogma the analog stick waggle, or any other game they add nothing to the game. GET RID OF THEM!

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

Gamers. Plain and simple.

High five...

OT: I have pretty much nothing to add. Gamers will slate DRM, they'll slate micro transactions, they'll slate lack of single-player and lack of multi-player, but as soon as the newest release is out devs are rolling in gamer cash.

 

[Excludos]

Everything else is a symptom; The audience is the cause. Well, the publishers too...

Agreed. I've seen problems of simple cause and effect go overlooked or dismissed for very stupid reasons indeed; on both sides.

-DRM is just a stupid reaction from publishers scared shitless that people who weren't really interested in buying their game pirated it and they count that as a lost sale.

This is true, but also an oversimplification. Historically, DRM has proven wildly ineffectual in deterring piracy, and given how often companies have complained about piracy, in spite of their DRM systems, is effectively admission that they know it doesn't work.

However, a simple observation reveals that the companies who are complaining the most about piracy harming them are the same companies who have thrived the most in a pirate-clad market. They know it hasn't harmed them more than any harebrained scheme or overextension on their part.

Always-Online DRM, on its surface, seems like a stronger means of securing game sales from those filthy pirates.
However, Always-Online systems serve many more purposes beyond combating piracy: none of which are good for the paying customer. (I'll spare you the list, but it comes down to market control and hiked prices, basically)

-Microtransactions are a stupid reaction from publishers scared shitless that they won't make enough of a return on their investment. i.e: "Lets get more money from the ones who pay 60$ without a second thought and lets potentially get more money from cheapskates who buy used."
-Sequels (et al) are a stupid reaction from publishers scared shitless that people won't buy a name they don't recognize.
-Rushed game are a stupid reaction from publishers scared shitless that games won't sell unless they are released at specific points in the year.

If the audience were smart(er), we wouldn't get these reactions. (But that's pretty much impossible because people don't just stop buying.)
If the publishers were smart (and gamers instead of suits), well the gaming world would be made up of companies like CDPR and Valve.

The rest, I agree with completely. Though I caution against blindly trusting Valve; their actions have been largely benevolent (especially compared to their competition), but they must realize the immense influence they have over PC gaming right now, and with such influence comes temptation.

Complacency and blind obedience is what lead the market to where it is now: To rushed, homogenized games and money-making schemes by the publishers. Don't panic, and accept trust where it is genuinely offered, but don't take it for granted either.

I, for one, welcome our new gaming overlords. Valve is on an amazing roll; They simply seem incapable of doing something bad.

I just can't believe, in a market filled to the brink with copies because publishers are too afraid of not making profit, that no one has tried to copy the entire organization that is Valve yet. If I was EA at this point, I'd go "You know who's doing extremely well AND have people not hate them? Those guys. Lets just do what they do".

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

All of those things are terrible but really, all of that shit only happens because people keep throwing money at publishers whos games do all of those things, so we really only have ourselves to blame because It's a sad truth that we can't expect the companies to not fuck us over.

 

[Woodsey]

I think the 8.5 to 9.5 review scale is getting really old.

Scores should simply be ditched altogether. If they want to give a short, sharp summary of their thoughts then they can either use the words 'very bad, bad, average, good, very good' or they can do it in a sentence or two. Don't use numbers or grades or stars, use bloody words.

As things are now we have a site collating scores which have nothing to do with each other. A Eurogamer 7 is not the same as an IGN 7, so what's the point? More than that, a Eurogamer 7 from Reviewer Y will not even be the same as a Eurogamer 7 from Reviewer X.

 

[DSK-]

I picked 'poor quality control' because I didn't see DRM -_- but quite honestly I would say both of these combined. I'm rather surprised so many people are saying it's gamers (or gamer "types") themselves.

 

[Atmos Duality]

I, for one, welcome our new gaming overlords. Valve is on an amazing roll; They simply seem incapable of doing something bad.

There is no such thing as:
-"Too big to fail"
-"Incapable of doing wrong" (or conversely, "incapable of doing right")

If there is any proof of a higher being that governs the universe, it's the existence of hubris and irony because the moment we put our faith in anything being "Too big to fail" or "Too good to do wrong" they inevitably start proving us wrong.
Like our arrogance is a metaphysical version of Whack-A-Mole.

I just can't believe, in a market filled to the brink with copies because publishers are too afraid of not making profit, that no one has tried to copy the entire organization that is Valve yet. If I was EA at this point, I'd go "You know who's doing extremely well AND have people not hate them? Those guys. Lets just do what they do".

Well, EA has tried with Origin, copying the mechanics, and the legal framework, but then ends up failing in execution.

Like when Origin accounts were getting banned for some of the most stupid, asinine reasons, or when EA claimed Steam sales devalued IP right before launching a massive sale on Origin. Or how Origin cuts the middleman (Valve) out of the equation, only to have game EA's prices and DLC ratios rise.

Also, compared to EA, Valve funds very few games directly on its own. The lowered cost might be contributing towards that end, since they deal overwhelmingly with (relative to them) third party titles.
And yet, if independents can turn good profits going through Valve as a Middleman, I wonder why the big publishers can't...how complicated.

 

[introverted_surd]

A lethal combination of 2, 3 and 4 across AAA console games and the handheld market.
AAA games suffer from a lack of creativity and more and more seem to be causing suffering with DMR
while the handheld games (at least the ones I've played recently) seem to become impossible without spending real money.
Of coruse there's some overlap but thats where the issue is for me anyway.

 

[Childe]

I would say the worst thing in gaming right now is that 4/5 AAA games are shooters. Make something interesting.

 

[Proverbial Jon]

homogenising in the name of wider audience appeal is the worst thing in gaming, along with tacked on multiplayer which usually serves the same purpose.

 

[Weaver]

Every AAA game is slowly become exactly the same game.
3rd person, you'll fight like 5 enemies at a time max, because the days of fighting like 15 - 20 enemies at a time were too exciting apparently.

It will have a (usually bad) cover system, there will be a gathering mechanic and a really, really shallow upgrade or crafting mechanic.

The game will be really cutscene heavy, it will be completely linear and the whole thing will basically be set piece after set piece. The game will be all flash, and no game. Nothing will really be challenging, and the whole thing may as well just be a movie.

There will be a horde mode multiplayer, or it will knock of CoD in some way. It will be a treadmill progression system. It won't be very good and will distract you for a few hours before you realize how boring it is.

 

[Vigormortis]

Gamers - but not the way described.

I don't see a difference in gamers. They are all the same to me, be it the dudebro who only plays Madden and CoD or the selfproclaimed hardcore gamer who swears by how superiour his games are. They are all the biggest problem or your mom playing Angry Birds. They are the same, there is no 'hardcore' or 'casual' distinction in what games you play because there is no definition for 'hardcore games', the distinction is only in how much time you put into gaming. And even there: Unless you are not one of those professionals you are equal to the 'filty casual mom'.

Because the gaming 'community' contradicts itself on every topic. DRM and always on is bad? Then why the flying fuck is D3 one of the best selling titles for PC? You hate CoD because it is the same but buy the same shit from other companies who never change. You proclaim how games today are worse but deliberatly ignore every shitty game that came out during your favorite timeperiod (this bugs me the most - I recently dug out a gaming magazine from 2000 and god was it full with shitty titles I never even heard about who were obvious copycats from then successfull ones). I could go on but:

The biggest problem in gaming is the gaming 'community'. Because every other problem stems from them alone.

While I'm not of the opinion that all of the problems the industry faces rest solely on the shoulders of the gaming community, I otherwise mirror most of your thoughts on the matter.

In many cases we, the gamers, have brought all of this on ourselves. Like you said, many of us complain incessantly about always-on DRM, yet WE helped make Diablo 3 one of the fastest selling PC games in history.

This is not to say the publishers are not at fault in any way. Many of the things; the "problems"; we have to deal with today were brought to us by the publishers. They only continue to subject us to these things because we, as a community, seem content to just bend over and take it. Even if we whine about it.

Publishers. All of 'em. Every last one 'em. Second worst thing would gamers themselves for justifying every bullshit excuse the Publishers make to justify the crappy decisions that they make.

Same as with Kasp, I agree with you in part.

It's the gamers and the publishers that have created this mess.

Granted, the publisher heap the bullshit on us. But again, as a collective, we just end up "dealing with it"; just so we can play our games.

 

[JemothSkarii]

The funny things here is 'gamers' whining about 'gamers' because most 'gamers' find themselves better than other 'gamers' then the 'gamers' doing the blaming are viewed upon by other 'gamers as the bad ones and it goes into this weird spiral or even circular logic.

But I will admit, the audience for games is stupid, myself included. But personally I blamed huge budgets. Drives up the units needed to sell in which the game needs to be near perfect in the widest possible audience to be able to achieve.