Your gaming gripes? (1 Viewer)

[Shayne Lebrun]

Something that I like to call 'developer logic.'

My prime example is Fallout: Tactics. At one point, you need to go up some stairs. In a library, I think. At the base of the stairs is a pile of sandbags, about waist height. A small fortification.

You cannot move the sandbags. You cannot step over them. You cannot wire them up with plastique or dynamite and blow them up. You cannot slit them open and pour out the sand. There is no physical way for a 6 foot tall man, who has no trouble carrying and firing a mini-gun, to get past these sandbags. No, you're supposed to go outside, around back, to a different building, up a fire escape, hop rooftop to rooftop back to the library, then go in through a vent.

Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot?

 

[Jake Gove]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xbox Gripes:
Lack of a save anywhere feature in most games
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In fairness, though, if more Xbox games did make use of such a feature, future "gripe" threads would complain about how saving anywhere makes games too easy.

Does it make PC games too easy? Instead of making a game challenging by itself, console developers are lazy and put in save points to make the game harder.

 

[Peter Rohlfs]

Updates of classic arcade games that completely violate the spirit of the original (i.e. limited bullets and worrying about civilian casualties in Spy Hunter).

Fighters that don't support the analog sticks.

Arcade adaptations that limit the number of coins can use (i bought the game so I don't need to keep spending coins).

Bizarre ways to unlock special features. Special features should be unlocked by beating the game, not fight as character X, win using special move z and then enter these special initials.

Peter

 

[BrianB]

Does it make PC games too easy? Instead of making a game challenging by itself, console developers are lazy and put in save points to make the game harder.

'Save anywhere' encourages as much lazy designing as limited savepoints.

 

[Dave E H]

PC games put out by companies w/ really poor QA (see Interplay.)

Blizzard, for example, may take forever, but its games are solid when released - I played all the way through Diablo II w/o needing to patch it for crash reasons.

 

[Morgan Jolley]

Bad cameras in games.

Not being to enable the features I want to or disable them.

Having to play through most of a game to get to the cool thing that was originally a selling point.

Fighting games where its impossible to do anything unless you're a complete master.

No new KI game (this one really pisses me off).

 

[Romier S]

PC games put out by companies w/ really poor QA (see Interplay.)

Interplay I believe is a publisher and really has very little to do with QA unless they themselves developed the game. In general though the developers that create the games are in charge of that area. If I'm off base or incorrect here, please feel free to correct me you developers out there.
The reason I mention this is because Interplay has published extremely bug free games like the Baldurs Gate series and Icewind Dale.
In the case of Blizzard, their QA is top notch though of course that is because they develop thier games while I believe Vivendi is their publisher.

 

[BrianB]

Interplay I believe is a publisher and really has very little to do with QA unless they themselves developed the game.

Usually QA is done by the publisher not the developer directly - it all depends on the size of the companies involved. Usually there's some QA in-house with most done by the publisher.

99.9% of the time, it's the publisher's decision to release the game in whatever buggy state it is in.

 

[Romier S]

Usually QA is done by the publisher not the developer directly - it all depends on the size of the companies involved. Usually there's some QA in-house with most done by the publisher.

Thanks for clearing that up Brian.
-Crawls back in his hole-

 

[ChrisV]

Patches, minimum system requirements (all reasons I play mostly console games )
Oh, and I agree with Morgan on this one:

Bad cameras in games.

Spider-man anyone?

 

[Aaron Silverman]

I just got done bitching about the lack of save anywhere in the MOH:FL thread--look there to see me whine.
It's not a question of difficulty--it's a matter of not always having 45 minutes to put into a game!
Also, old-fashioned turn-based RPG combat. BOOOOOORING! Character A attack monster B with weapon C. Repeat ad nauseam. Do this for 50 random encounters before advancing the plot of the game or making an actual non-obvious decision!
(Nothing wrong with turn-based, mind you. I've been playing board wargames for over 20 years. It's just those old RPG combat systems take forever and don't involve FUN.)

 

[Sean Moon]

Gripes? Bad games, pure and simple. There are lots of great games, but it is hard to filter through the shit populating the shelves these days.

My real complaint is centered around the J6P gaming that has taken over the industry. It is great that gaming is bigger than hollywood now, but there is too much rehashed shit going on now. The most popular games are Sports games, which come once a year and offer small upgrades most of the time. And the best ones are usually overlooked due to EA brainwashing most of American culture. Also, racing games and "ADULT" games. Most people wont play anything without blood or violence in it. THey look down on Mario games and whatnot, ignoring the main principle that makes videogames a great thing...GAMEPLAY!
Most stuff today is style over substance, and it sells God help us all. A great game like Rez is overlooked, or others because it is not like everything else out there.

Gaming is bigger than ever, but it is getting harder and harder to find the true gamers out there...the ones willing to play anything, no matter what system it is on or what the game looks like.

Which reminds me of the BIGGEST gaming gripe I have. SYSTEM BIAS! It is great to only own one system and love it beyond reason, but most people(the Joe 6 Packs of gaming) refuse to play or acknowledge the existence of good content on other systems because it is on something they dont have or dont want. The PS2 fanatics are the big offenders. I break the camps out like this.

PS2 Camp-Loyal and unwavering in their commitment. Their system is superior no matter what because it has the most games and most "adult" games, and there are more systems like this out there so PS2 has to be the best

XBOX camp-Loyal and defensive of their system, because it is the upstart, the underdog. They have to prove why their system is a valid choice for gaming.

Nintendo- The most loyal and dedicated following. Have been around the block and back, will defend their system to their dying days, claiming the most respected titles belong to them

and then the HARDCORE camp-Loyal to no one, yet still have a certain emotional attachment to one of the above three camps. Loves ALL systems and is willing to try almost anything. Will defend and attack all systems, realizing that all systems exist for a reason, the one exclusive game per system that makes the owing of it all worth it.

I consider myself HARDCORE...loyal to no one, loving all of them, but with a special place in my heart for one of the camps, and it is Nintendo.


That is my little rant, sorry. Just my gripe...the J6Ping of gaming.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Oh yeah, I almost forgot!

CHEAP DEATHS!

I was just now playing MOH, and occasionally a damn Nazi would magically appear behind me with a Panzerfaust, a one-hit-kill weapon, and I'm dead before I have a chance to react. (They don't even make a sound before firing!) Back to the beginning of the level, another 15 minutes wasted!

And on a related topic, obstacles that are essentially impossible to complete on the first try. Not due to pure difficulty, but designed so that you have to KNOW what's coming. This destroys my suspension of disbelief, which can really put a crimp in my enjoyment of a game.

For instance, the aforementioned MOH. I'm in a level which consists of a mineshaft. No doors, no side passages I haven't explored, and yet Nazis magically start appearing *behind* me! Where the *&^*^&% did they come from???

One of my otherwise all-time favorite games that was a big offender in this regard was the original X-Wing. I remember particularly one mission which had about 8 Imperial shuttles, and you had to disable the correct one. However, the mission's time limit meant that you'd better pick the right shuttle on your first or second try, because the rest will escape! It was just stupid trial-and-error, go through the mission a few times until you know which one's the target, then go after it immediately. Suddenly I'm playing a computer game instead of flying with the Rebel fleet!

 

[BrianB]

And Aaron, those nasty cheap deaths you so have are frequently 'encouraged' by 'save anywhere'. A lazy designer puts them in knowing the player has in all likelihood saved at each & every corner.

 

[Aaron Copeland]

The most popular games are Sports games, which come once a year and offer small upgrades most of the time. And the best ones are usually overlooked due to EA brainwashing most of American culture.

I have to disagree with this one. I don't think it's a fair complaint against sports games. How much different do you actually expect a sports game to play from one year to another? It's the same game with the same rules. If the control was good the previous year and people liked it, why do a wholesale overhaul? The only real things to change are tweak the graphics and AI then update the rosters. Which is exactly what sports game developers do. If they didn't change anything then you would suddenly have people complaining about how it's been two years since they have released a new game with updated rosters. It's not like they are forcing you to buy the updated version every year. Just skip a year if you want.

I think EA has been getting a bad rap. It's become the "popular" to bash them recently. Their sports games are almost always solid. They are always rated highly by every magazine and gaming site. Are they always the best? Likely not, but that comes down to personal opinion. The only problem I have with EA is that they don't always spend enough time optimizing ports for each system (like SSX: Tricky for the GC).

Aaron

 

[Dave Falasco]

I agree with you, Aaron, if the core gameplay is solid, then really all a new edition of a sports game can offer is updated rosters and maybe better graphics. My problem with that is, why charge another $50 for it? If I buy Madden 2001, why should I have to pay another $50 to get a new roster and some different play-by-play commentary in 2002? And I guess the short answer is, because there's no other way to deliver that content. Since they have to include the entire game every time, they get to charge for the entire game every time. That's one thing I'm hoping will change with the Xbox hard drive and Xbox Live. Fever 2003 is coming out and will be $50, but wouldn't it be nice if next year you an either buy Fever 2004 for full price, or just the updates for $20? That would be cool.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

And Aaron, those nasty cheap deaths you so have are frequently 'encouraged' by 'save anywhere'. A lazy designer puts them in knowing the player has in all likelihood saved at each & every corner.

If a designer is lazy, then the designer will be lazy regardless of whether the programmers implement a save anywhere feature. Hard and good are two separate concepts. (I'm talking about GAMES, you sickos! ) Hard can be good or bad, as can easy, and that's the job of the designer.
In Medal Of Honor (no mid-level saves), there are blatant cheap deaths set up in many places.
In Red Faction (as cool a save-anywhere feature as there's ever been), your enemies may get in the occasional lucky shot with a railgun, but there are not really any guaranteed deaths built into the game.
Is there some particular evidence that has led you to your conclusion?

 

[Aaron Silverman]

I believe there are roster update discs for some original PSX EA Sports games, like Madden. I'm not sure whether they were official EA releases, though. I'm assuming that it's not economically preferable for EA to put out roster discs, though--enough people probably buy the whole new edition.

My sports game policy is just to always buy last year's edition. I don't care that much about having current rosters, and I can always put in trades if I want. At $15 per title instead of $50, I have no problem getting a new edition each year!

(This also makes it easier to swallow the fact that you get jack doodly in tradein value for sports games.)

 

[Aaron Copeland]

I still say that checkpoints are the best option for saves on games with long levels. A "save anywhere" feature can make a game too easy, but not having any mid-level saves can sometimes be very frustrating for various reason (cheap deaths, suddenly having to quit your game, etc...). Especially if a level takes 30 minutes or more to complete.

Aaron

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Checkpoints are fine, as long as they're fairly frequent and don't involve some kind of awkward in-game mechanism (ie, spending money to save a la GTA2 or having to find save objects a la RE).

The issue at hand here is TIME. Save anywhere is IMO the best since it's the most convenient way to save.