D0WNT0WN said:
I usually look out for buzz words like "Innovative" or "Streamlined". They are never a good thing considering what we think is innovative is either 3D or waggle, streamlined speaks for itself.
That's one I definitely hate. Especially "Streamlining."
Others ones that I generally fear is the over-use of the word in "intuitive" and "play-friendly." They're not always bad, but it usually means "this game is a simplistic cakewalk", which is booooooooooooooooooooooooring.
Which brings me to something else, while I do play easy games, they're definitely a
major turn off for me and they damn well better offer other features to make up for it so I don't fall asleep.
Something that really pissed me off about Fable 2 and 3 is how they dumbed the difficulty down ridiculously low, and made it impossible to die, and there's no options for turning that off or upping the difficulty.
Why?!
Why do casual players who only
just barely started supporting the game industry recently get priority over those who have been following it for years on end?
(Don't answer that, by the way, I already know why. It's all about money, loyalty is irrelevant.)
dosp5 said:
DLC. Why is your main selling point selling me more stuff?
I can agree with that, I'm very sick of the recent DLC craze. It's especially stupid when you have to pay $10 for a DLC pack with 2 hours of content, for let's say a $50 game as an example, which is say 50 hours long. Hm... So, wait now I've just spent $60 in total on a game that's 52 hours long, instead of 50... That doesn't add up at all...
theevilgenius60 said:
How about these three simple words: Better With Kinect. To hell with Kinect worming it's way into my controller friendly titles!
In general, I get extremely hesitant around Motion Control stuff as well.
I don't inherently hate it, as some games could potentially benefit from it. However, outside of VERY rare exceptions motions controls completely suck and make the game a clumsy pain in the ass to play. I especially hate the number of Wii games which simply tack on "shaking" which essentially just functions the same as a button press, for no reason. It's slower to perform and respond and there's no point when a button can do the same thing just as well or better. It's not immersive either considering it doesn't reflect the actual action you're performing.
Khravv said:
DRM, or DRM-esque things. And when Devs blow off fans/say/do stupid stuff.
I agree with this one as well. DRM is a major turn off, especially if it requires me to permanently register an account or log into a server in order to play a single player game.
I've avoided buying various games or bought different versions because of DRM before.
And yes, if anyone is wondering, I have been majorly inconvenienced before because of DRM. As it is, I've bought games in the past which used Starforce which I can no longer run on my computer anymore because their version of Starforce is considered "too old" now, so they refuse to start up and are unplayable (you can't update it either.) Fuck you publishers.
---
A couple of other things that turn me off to a game completely are (I don't inherently consider these BAD things, just a personal preference as I don't care for them):
1. Rock, Paper, Scissors mechanics in a Strategy game. Granted, sometimes it works, but I generally despise the majority which emphasize it, Command & Conquer especially.
2. Business management. Generally means instant snore-ville for me.
3. Flight Simulators. I like arcade flying games plenty, but simulation ones just bore me. Racing Sims are another, I hate them as well and have never played a single one I liked. That said, I have played some Mech Simulators I've enjoyed and I have more tolerance for less-arcadey elements in space flight games.
4. Submarine or Naval ship games. No, just no.
5. Lessened or complete lack of combat emphasis in a strategy game. I hate managing resources and politics, and my favorite thing is Combat Tactics. If there's no combat tactics, I'm gone, end of story.
6. Japanese RPG or being likened to Final Fantasy. In general, I don't like most JRPGs, at all. Why? Well, generally because many of them do their best to contain no actual Role-Playing whatsoever. Playing through a completely linear game with turn based battles is not my idea of fun. They damn well better have character development options at least, and preferably branching storylines as well. Just because it has an experience bar doesn't mean it's a role-playing game, and most JRPGs are realistically just linear adventure games with turn based group tactics and a huge stack of cutscenes thrown in between.
That is not Role-Playing!
That said, I've also been known to play some which come up with really creative or in-depth combat systems, even though they don't necessarily contain Role-Playing either.
7. Lack of gameplay. In general I can't stand playing a game which holds together entirely based on its storyline and has very little to no interactivity. I loathe them and refuse to play any games which deliberately try to avoid being "games." That said, contrary to popular belief, gameplay does not inherently mean combat only. I enjoyed Heavy Rain a lot, and many people seem to be under the impression it has no gameplay, which is simply not true as the game puts a heavy emphasis on choice and dictating every little action within each scene so in a sense it almost lets you be the director of a film. I messed around with tons of different outcomes to each sequence as well as various endings for that game for a week straight after I bought it.
