Things No Game Should Do

[Diddy_Mao]

Both of my gripes are largely aimed at the RPG market.

#1. Teleportation Mazes. These aren't fun at all, they're confusing and arbitrary. When the player has no way of deducing which path may take him to the exit and must instead simply choose at random which path to take, that is bad design.

#2 Disproportionate Boss fight to enemy difficulty.

Say for example I've just spent the past three hours grinding for XP and gold to toughen up my party, learn some new skills and buy the best weapons currently available. Once I'm completely kitted out the enemies I'm coming across are dying in one or two hits and there is a notable increase in the time it takes any given character to level up.
Anyone would logically assume that they were ready to tackle the nearby dungeon, perhaps even more than strictly need be.
You blow through the dungeon without breaking a sweat, most things don't even get a chance to attack before your party slaughters them. All things being equal you're pretty confident in your ability to survive anything this dungeon throws at you.
When you finally get to the Boss at the end of the Dungeon it promptly kills your ass because you weren't actually tough enough to take on that fight.

Once again this is just poor design, I'm all about a challenging boss fight but don't make me level grind WAY past what would logically make sense just to be able to survive the fight.

(I'm looking at you Dragon Quest series.)

 

[Blue_vision]

My pet hate at the moment is the fact that killing enemies in almost any game (RPG's particularly) takes forever. They have insane amounts of health and you do medeocre damage. See: Mass Effect 2, Oblivion, Brutal Legend and Fallout 3 for the top of my head examples.

Oh my god, yes. Really, no game should do this.

 

[Good morning blues]

I would rather mash a button for five seconds to open a valve in a game than press it once and wait for a five-second animation to finish.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

Not give us customizable controls. Because R2 is a terrible fucking shoot button, but the fucking game won't let me change it. And preset layouts don't count, because there's only one good one, and that's if you're left handed.

On a side topic, why the fuck does Marston put his gun away every five seconds in RDR? I pulled it out for a reason, and I have a fucking button for putting it back when I goddamn want it put away, but apparently that's too complicated, so he holsters it if you go five seconds without killing anything. Fucking thanks, John. Fucking thanks.

 

[Sebenko]

Dumbing down in sequels. Nothing will turn me off a game faster than something like the skill list in an RPG suddenly missing several entries (See Oblivion after Morrowind, Mass Effect 2 after ME1)

 

[garfoldsomeoneelse]

predictable enemy animations

I strongly agree with this. When opponents from different games move in the same way, it feels like you're just killing reskinned versions of the oafs you've killed a million times already, and who wants that? Pardon the psychospeech, but killing enemies needs to be fun and varied.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

A game should never restrict clothing options to race or gender.

WHY CAN'T I WEAR NORMAL PANTS?! (Oblivion)

Because that's where his power is, in his leather pants!

Let us steal them!

Be openworld but force you to do missions in a liniar style. If i have compete freedom outside the story is it so much to ask that when im told to do X i can do X however i want?

 

[Deofuta]

Can I just say that, before anyone says it, quicktime events can work. I cite Heavy Rain, Guitar Hero, and Rockband as an example.

OT: I agreed with pretty much everything on there. Though you do have a bit of a problem with Wolvie, don't you?

I was about to bring up QTE's myself actually. I loved, and I mean loved Dark Cloud, in which the boss battles ended up being QTE's and they Rocked!

For things that no game should do, I am going to have to go with promising features that simply don't exist.

 

[Judgement101]

No game should be hyped. Seriously, I want to hate New Vegas but it's hype is contagious.

 

[Towels]

1) Having to power-level to survive the next logical challenge in an RPG. Final Fantasy Tactics; There was series of connected battles. The first was a standard skirmish, the second was a boss fight that was suddenly a one-on-one fight. (Weigraff) 1v1 fights in a TACTICS game severely limit the coordinated team tactics that you've been using to "use powerful attack and hope for the best." Even the offical strategy guide suggests that you spend at least 2 hours power-leveling the main character just so the boss doesn't kill you in 2 hits. WHY SHOULD I SUDDENLY HAVE TO POWER LEVEL when my tactical manuvering was doing just fine?! Isn't THAT the point of the game? If I wanted to grind, I'd go play a MMORPHger. Power leveling is just training to bolster your weaknesses as a player. It should never be a requirement for winning.

2) Games that require outside information to progress. I remember some older RPGs. (Interplay's Lord of the Rings) You would talk to an NPC, but instead of getting a responce, the game you tell you to refer to some page in the instruction manual to understand the dialoge of the NPC. No, I'm not doing that. I sat down to play a video game, not do research. This doesn't really happen any more, but it leads me to my next peeve...

(And this is more subjective)
3) Games that encourage you to have outside information to enjoy the game. Many MMORPGers are guilty of this, and its lead me to stop playing them. Everquest was the absolute worst offender. On top of the eternal grinding you have to do anyways just to beef up to not be killed by a mangy, rabid mouse, the quest-giving NPCs make you read a page full of text when you talk to them; then you play a game of guessing the right keyword to progress the conversation, then half the time you've just been wasting your time reading a short-story of how someone just had a bad day farming but doesn't want anything done about it. When multiple players are involved, no one has to time to sift through boring dialoge, so they take shortcuts via online databases or bother their guildmates with directions. But I feel I shouldn't have take time on the internet or pay $30 for a strategy guide, so I just get left behind to sift through boring dialoges.

 

[bojac6]

This actually works in alot of games and is much better. Most people would actually tap a button rather then just hit X and wait 10 seconds. In for examply the gow games its used to make the game feel more intense and frantic. You have to hit that button really fast or your going to get crushed by a giant fireball, if all it was was hit X and wait you wouldnt get that feeling.

And after you fail it a few times? Is it still intense and frantic or is it just a chore? When it's the 15th crank to turn to open a door in the last 15 chambers, when you haven't actually fought anyone in half an hour, is it really a great feeling that you can tap that button fast enough? Ok, maybe this is just my personal feelings on this one, but I think these games are about combat and combos. About hitting that sweet spot of dodge, hit, counter, flip, dodge X - X - Triangle EXPLOSION, kill kill kill. Then maybe a logic puzzle, bit of a maze, then back to killing. To me, a test in how fast I can press a button tears me directly out of the action and just reminds me I'm mashing buttons. There is no skill involved and there is no thinking or puzzle, it's just "press this button twenty times to keep playing."

In games with say levels which is alot of them if people get stuck on a boss fight they want to go do something else. Thats why the checkpoints are normally before the cut scenes. In most games it makes alot of sense and works very well.

In some games it makes a lot of sense, games where you need to grind and level up to beat the boss. But that's assuming the check point isn't the beginning of the cutscene. I was specifically referring to the check point being AT the boss fight, no turning back, you're trapped at the boss fight, but you still need to watch his intro a thousand times. You don't get to turn around and level up, you just immediately see movie, fight boss.

Different games work better with different save types. In games like gta, farcry, crackdown it makes sense and works to only be able to save at your hideout/base. Others like gow that have set save points are basically set out every 10-15 mins or so. Its pretty much assumed that if your going to sit down and play a game its not going to be for 5 mins so this isnt really a problem for most people. Unless your talking ff games you never really are more then a few minutes from a save point, sure you might have to backtrack alittle but your always close to one in the games iv played.

I can't speak to Farcry 2 or Crackdown, but in both GTA and the first Farcry, you don't just have save points. In GTA, the game is saved every time you complete a mission, die, complete a stunt, and other things. It's almost always autosaving. The original Farcry, I'm pretty sure, just let you save where ever. But how does needing to backtrack to a glowing beam of a light or a bed or a bathroom make more sense than pausing and pressing save? I really don't get how that somehow is better than letting me save and quit whenever I want.

Fixed cameras still work in todays games. You dont need to be able to look in every single direction. Alot of games can and do fixed cameras without hindering gameplay in the slightest.

Yes, because when the best something can do is not hinder gameplay, that's something we definitely should keep. At best, a fixed camera won't get in your way, just make you watch yourself from set angles keeping you separated from the character you're supposed to be playing. At worst, you can't see what you're doing, gameplay is totally broken, and puzzles are based around the fact that you can't see around a corner instead of challenging you as a player. Why is this worth defending? There was a good reason for it before, it was cheap in performance, so you could have better looking environments and more enemies on screens. Well, performance is a lot less of an issue now, and there are plenty of games like GoW that give you camera control or at least have the camera stay on the character. Ninja Gaiden Black actually went back and added this to Ninja Gaiden. Games have moved past this.

 

[zehydra]

I agree with all of these points except the save points one. As, where you can save in the game can help determine a game's difficulty. For instance, in the original Donkey Kong Land for gameboy, you had to collect the 4 letters in the level that spelled "KONG" to be able save. Since saving is pretty important to the player in a game so difficult, it provided an incentive (A very STRONG incentive) to try to find these hidden letters.

 

[Mesca]

I agree with all of these points except the save points one. As, where you can save in the game can help determine a game's difficulty. For instance, in the original Donkey Kong Land for gameboy, you had to collect the 4 letters in the level that spelled "KONG" to be able save. Since saving is pretty important to the player in a game so difficult, it provided an incentive (A very STRONG incentive) to try to find these hidden letters.

Donkey Kong Country 2 did much the same. You had to collect 3 tokens from levels to be able to save more than once at a point. There were usually a few in each level, so it was no problem if you knew where to look, but it did end up frustrating very often.

I always liked the way Resident Evil did it. You had a very limited number of saves, so you were always careful to conserve everything. It's part of what made it survival horror, all you had were handful of bullets, some healing gear, and a few saves.

 

[end_boss]

I don't mind save points, but when placed before really long unskippable cutscenes, I lose interest FAST. I love the game Golden Sun, but I have not finished the first one entirely because the last boss battle requires sitting through about 5 minutes of cutscene on each attempt.

 

[IamSofaKingRaw]

So I was playing Wolverine Origins the other day (before you say anything, I borrowed it, no money went towards that terrible game) and I found myself really frustrated with the game, not because of poor writing or bad gameplay (which the game had) but because of stupid design decisions. So I started listing the stupid things it was doing and realized it was things that just should not happen in a modern game. Here's a few I came up with:

Wrestling with the Camera - This was the moment I gave up on Wolverine. I was in a fight and the camera angle kept jumping around because there was some sort of magic "camera must face this way" line right in the middle. So I couldn't see anything, keep track of anything, or enjoy it. No game should make you spend more time working on camera angles than doing whatever the game is about.

Using Bad Controls to Up Difficulty - Wolverine, many 3rd person fighters, others. Just like you should never wrestle with the camera, you should never wrestle with your controller. Don't make me use the Left stick and the D-Pad simultaneously, that's just stupid. Controls should be fluid and responsive, difficultly should flow from the game. Perfect counter-example, Batman: AA. Really simple buttons, no complicated combos, but you do such amazing things.

Mash a Button - GTA, Wolverine, almost every game ever. Making tap A repeatedly to run does not increase realism or make the game more fun. Pressing B a billion times to turn a crank does not simulate turning a crank. All developers are doing is frustrating players who don't want to just twitch their thumb, but actually want to play a game.

Base A Game Around Something Cool, Make Bad Guys Immune - Force Unleashed, others. What's the point of the Force Unleashed? I would say it's using Force powers. Zapping and choking dudes left and right, shoving them off cliffs with your mind, it should be awesome. So why are the majority of the enemies in magic suits that protect them from the Force and can only be killed by doing the same stupid lightsaber move three times in a row? This is dumb and ruins the game. Do what the Jedi Knight games did, introduce more bad guys, not more powerful bad guys. The last level of Jedi Knight is fantastic because you just cut down a hundred stormtroopers. It's tough because there's a lot of them, but it's fun because you're amazingly powerful. Compare that to fighting the Dark Troopers in Force Unleashed. Repetitive, dull, and frustrating. Halo doesn't suddenly introduce bad guys that can't be shot. Why should a Star Wars game introduce bad guys that can't be choked.

Checkpoints Before A Cutscene - Wolverine, a lot of games. Don't make me watch the stupid cut scene over and over again because I died in a boss fight. Don't make me skip it, don't make me wait for it to load so I can then load the fight. Check points should load you to action. I don't know what's worse, loading to a cutscene that takes 5 minutes to get through and having to watch it a billion times, or loading to a single snarky comment before the fight and having to hear the bad guy say "And now you die, hahahaha" or whatever over and over again.

Save Points - PoP: Sands of Time, Dead Rising, others. Yes, there was a time for these. Yes, it was technology limited. You know what? We're passed that. I should be able to pause, save, and leave the game at any time. Maybe not in the middle of a fight, I get that. But I should never be more than a few minutes from saving. Some of us game to kill some time before doing something else. I shouldn't have to ask myself if I have enough time to actually save any progress I made.


Now the rules are, these should not be things that you personally don't like, but things that are more or less objectively bad. For instance, saying "Be an FPS" is just an opinion, make it a legitimate bad design decision. Secondly, have real examples of games guilty of this. I agree with you completely that games should not literally kick you in the balls every five seconds, but I haven't heard of this game. Finally, feel free to cite games that were great at the time but shouldn't be done any more. Like fixed cameras, worked fine back in the day of the first GoW and other games like it, but today, I think we've moved past it.

WHOA WHOA WHOA. For a movie game this game is up there with Spiderman 2. I know you secretly like. Its ok you can admit it.

 

[IamSofaKingRaw]

Base A Game Around Something Cool, Make Bad Guys Immune - Force Unleashed, others. What's the point of the Force Unleashed? I would say it's using Force powers. Zapping and choking dudes left and right, shoving them off cliffs with your mind, it should be awesome. So why are the majority of the enemies in magic suits that protect them from the Force and can only be killed by doing the same stupid lightsaber move three times in a row? This is dumb and ruins the game. Do what the Jedi Knight games did, introduce more bad guys, not more powerful bad guys. The last level of Jedi Knight is fantastic because you just cut down a hundred stormtroopers. It's tough because there's a lot of them, but it's fun because you're amazingly powerful. Compare that to fighting the Dark Troopers in Force Unleashed. Repetitive, dull, and frustrating. Halo doesn't suddenly introduce bad guys that can't be shot. Why should a Star Wars game introduce bad guys that can't be choked.

If they didn't so that then the game would be fucking easy. Thats like asking why the enemies have snipers in Halo when I have one. The point of the game is to kill aliens so shouldn't the devs make the enemies stand there for me to kill them? What would the point of lightsabers be if you didn't need to use them. It diversifies the game and forces you to play the game differently according to the situation.

 

[IamSofaKingRaw]

I already posted one, but a game I'm playing just made me rage right back here with a fresh gripe: Bosses with multiple forms.

"Yes! I just spent three hours and all of my healing spells on that boss, but he's FINALLY gone! I can finally... wait... are you fricking KIDDING ME?!?!"

I'm pretty sure this has happened to all of us. It makes it even more frustrating when you have to immediately go into the next fight with no opportunity to heal your weary party.

Oh, and the second form of the boss is usually exponentially harder than the first.

Offending games? Several. MGS3, Marvel vs Capcom, Every Final Fantasy ever, etc, etc. For a recent release, I cite DQ9 (King Godwyn.) I'd cite Dissidia Final Fantasy (Chaos,) which had three forms, but all of them were laughably easy, and more of an annoyance than anything.

GOLDEN FUCKING SUN. After fighting the last bosses for half and hour and expiring all my revival items I finally won with all my characters with critical health with one of them dead. Then they say "Hah we were just warming up". Me: : O then they both powe up and combine into an uber dragon more powerful then they were in the last battle. The best part is that YOU CAN"T FUCKING HEAL BEFORE THE FUCKING BATTLE. So twenty seconds in the dragon does an attack that hits all characters and....

Spoiler: ....

 

[Imbechile]

Regenerating health - I HATE THAT THING, but more and more games seem to have it.
And I think that a health bar is still "more realistic" than regen health.

 

[deleted20220820]

DELETED

 

[bojac6]

Base A Game Around Something Cool, Make Bad Guys Immune - Force Unleashed, others. What's the point of the Force Unleashed? I would say it's using Force powers. Zapping and choking dudes left and right, shoving them off cliffs with your mind, it should be awesome. So why are the majority of the enemies in magic suits that protect them from the Force and can only be killed by doing the same stupid lightsaber move three times in a row? This is dumb and ruins the game. Do what the Jedi Knight games did, introduce more bad guys, not more powerful bad guys. The last level of Jedi Knight is fantastic because you just cut down a hundred stormtroopers. It's tough because there's a lot of them, but it's fun because you're amazingly powerful. Compare that to fighting the Dark Troopers in Force Unleashed. Repetitive, dull, and frustrating. Halo doesn't suddenly introduce bad guys that can't be shot. Why should a Star Wars game introduce bad guys that can't be choked.

If they didn't so that then the game would be fucking easy. Thats like asking why the enemies have snipers in Halo when I have one. The point of the game is to kill aliens so shouldn't the devs make the enemies stand there for me to kill them? What would the point of lightsabers be if you didn't need to use them. It diversifies the game and forces you to play the game differently according to the situation.

I think it does the opposite, which is my point. You have a dozen different force powers, but you spend more than half the game limited to your lightsaber. In the Jedi Knight games, you used your lightsaber a lot, but you also electrocuted and choked and did all kinds of things. It was challenging because there were so many bad guys. There were bad guys that you couldn't hit with a light saber and had to use force powers on, which worked because you still had options. Force Unleashed takes every action away from you except the lightsaber. It's not saying "make the bad guys stand in front of me" it's saying "Don't make me a bad ass, then introduce bad guys that are completely immune to me." There's really no story reason for them to be Force immune, they just are. It's not saying the bad guys should stand there and let you kill them. It'd be like setting a Batman game in the desert with no buildings. Sure, you've got a kick ass grappling hook, but there are no buildings, no places to hide, and nothing to do but run.