Author Topic: Universally shit things in games  (Read 5260 times)

chand

  • "like Louise Mensch but with a sexy beard"
    • https://twitter.com/RopesToInfinity
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #60 on: January 08, 2013, 01:53:08 AM »
FPS and third person games insisting on realism by letting you carry a very limited number of weapons. I get that it's meant to be realistic, but it means you rarely get to use the exciting guns. If I've got two weapon slots, I'm not gonna carry round a sniper rifle or an RPG, because they're useless for most fights. It forces the game designers to then script in The Bit Where You Use A Sniper Rifle; a cutscene happens and you find yourself stood on a ledge with a gleaming sniper rifle presented for you. There are so many games where I've got to the end without using anything other than an assault rifle and a backup SMG, because they're the only weapons multi-purpose enough to be used in most situations. This is the main reason I loved Resistance 3: you can just hoard the fuck out of guns and switch between ALL OF THEM at any time. It meant I ended up using every weapon the game had to offer, because I wasn't about to go round the next corner and realise that my shotgun and RPG combo were completely inappropriate.

Agreed on the checkpoint save thing. I know devs thinks it's easier for us not to worry about saves and that, but sometimes I just want to turn the fucking game off and go to bed, and pick up again where I left off.

Additionally, I've noticed a lot of games will only let you have one profile, so nobody else can play without using your save game. It shouldn't be the case in this day and age that someone I'm with asks if they can have a go and I have to say no because we can't have a second fucking playthrough saved at the same time.

Big Jack McBastard

  • Dancing on unicorn bones.
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #61 on: January 08, 2013, 05:52:51 AM »
Bodies that 'no_clip' when they die so limbs and heads end up passing through walls and such.

12 faces with different hair and hats for 'variety' in character design.

Death situations where NPCs are idiots. 3 minutes after a bullet riddled dead body is found, the alarm gets turned off and everyone just goes back to patrol, walking around the corpse like it's invisible, or worse, going back to it and being alarmed in exactly the same way all over again.

Staggered boss fights where it's impossible to kill the boss in the first or second sections and therefore not have to listen to all of their lame taunting/evil plot bollocks, because the action pauses and cut-scenes us and then that shit pops into the next bit with their health bar refreshed.

AsparagusTrevor

  • Member
  • **
  • I'm fine, thank you.
Re: Universally poo things in games
« Reply #62 on: January 08, 2013, 08:12:18 AM »
Max Payne 3 was very bad for checkpoints, there was one about every 4 gunfights, gunfights which would often last ages even if you didn't die, which was unlikely since it was a bastard hard game.

The checkpoint isn't as bad as the save-point, especially when they're placed far apart.

I remember playing Silent Hill 3, and I got to the point where I have to stop playing for some reason but had to trudge on for another hour before I could find anywhere to save the bloody game.

chand

  • "like Louise Mensch but with a sexy beard"
    • https://twitter.com/RopesToInfinity
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #63 on: January 08, 2013, 09:59:36 AM »
Bosses who are just human beings and yet because they've been designated the boss they can withstand hails of bullets. Particularly weird when the boss is some old man.

Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #64 on: January 08, 2013, 10:28:18 AM »
Or, in the case of Mass Effect 2, do it with the supporting cast, so that half of them are just faceless drones that you don't care about.

Here's the worst thing Mass Effect 2 does, doing the mission where you get Legion causes the part of the plot where the rest of the crew get kidnapped, but there's other missions you have to to do before you do the big rescue mission, but it's also timed so that the longer you leave it, the more of the crew will die.

If you look on youtube you see that someone used a hack to show that they did actually write and record dialogue for Legion on some missions that in the game you have to play before you can actually get him, but that all goes unused because of the way the game is structured, even though it's on the disc. The most interesting character you can have on your team and they relegate him as much as possible.

Dark Sky

  • Hallo you
Re: Universally poo things in games
« Reply #65 on: January 08, 2013, 01:10:27 PM »
Max Payne 3 was very bad for checkpoints, there was one about every 4 gunfights, gunfights which would often last ages even if you didn't die, which was unlikely since it was a bastard hard game.

Is that true?  I thought Payne basically saved every time there was a cutscene, which was approximately every five minutes.  That game was mostly cutscenes and very little gameplay.

Quote
I remember playing Silent Hill 3, and I got to the point where I have to stop playing for some reason but had to trudge on for another hour before I could find anywhere to save the bloody game.

You should've played it on PC.  Better graphics, obviously, but also you could save whenever you liked.

I did quite like the way that Silent Hill 4 only had one save point in the whole game.

mcbpete

  • No hat.
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #66 on: January 08, 2013, 04:45:11 PM »
Bosses who are just human beings and yet because they've been designated the boss they can withstand hails of bullets. Particularly weird when the boss is some old man.
Flipping heck Kingpin (anyone remember that ?) was terribly for that, the final boss probably needed about 20 rocket blasts and 100s of shots from a rapid fire machine gun - I don't even think the guy was wearing a vest !

Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #67 on: January 08, 2013, 04:58:47 PM »
Bodies that 'no_clip' when they die so limbs and heads end up passing through walls and such.

Unless it's BF3 and you're knifing someone so hard they pass through the wall.

bit like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=JKNC0VXYUL0#t=5s

Big Jack McBastard

  • Dancing on unicorn bones.
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #68 on: January 08, 2013, 10:10:35 PM »
Quote
i push a guy thou the wall while knifing him because im so powerful

Yeeeah... Not because the game is just typically rubbish at dealing with bodies, but because of his raw powa. The fact that he thinks this is noteworthy proves the uploader is about 7.

Now if he'd have knocked the body through a wall which was 10 stories up and it went plummeting into the street below, then maybe...

Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #69 on: January 10, 2013, 12:39:22 AM »
When repeatedly jumping is faster than running.

Hangthebuggers

  • Coulda, woulda, shoulda
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #70 on: January 10, 2013, 12:56:23 AM »
When repeatedly jumping is faster than running.

As above, but when 'jumping' is a skill that levels up your character (think early Elder scrolls) and suddenly you've leveled your character to level 26 just by jumping around them map and now face hordes of enemies of the tough level 20+ variety and you can't take them on, because your other skills are at level 1. Just because you jumped everywhere. Like a jumping cunt.[nb]That's what I did anyhow.[/nb]

Rev

  • A Manufacturing Concern
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #71 on: January 10, 2013, 02:58:01 AM »
Horror games!  It's alright, most of us have probably encountered a game before, so you don't need to completely fuck up any tension your storyline might have afforded by starting us off in a 'nightmare' bit as a tutorial, before giving us the slow build-up afterwards.

Still Not George

  • Sarcastic arsehole
    • Numbers and Lights - My Blog
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #72 on: January 10, 2013, 10:10:38 AM »
As above, but when 'jumping' is a skill that levels up your character (think early Elder scrolls) and suddenly you've leveled your character to level 26 just by jumping around them map and now face hordes of enemies of the tough level 20+ variety and you can't take them on, because your other skills are at level 1. Just because you jumped everywhere. Like a jumping cunt.[nb]That's what I did anyhow.[/nb]

I was amused that so many used that as a sort of handicap mode.

Mister Six

  • Half-masted, bass-boosted, sling-backed
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #73 on: January 10, 2013, 10:11:50 AM »
FPS and third person games insisting on realism by letting you carry a very limited number of weapons. I get that it's meant to be realistic, but it means you rarely get to use the exciting guns. If I've got two weapon slots, I'm not gonna carry round a sniper rifle or an RPG, because they're useless for most fights.

Yeah, I was going to complain about this one, too, but then couldn't be arsed. The 'realism' conceit is absurd anyway, because your guy might only be able to carry a rocket launcher and a machine gun (both of which are absurdly heavy in real life), but will somehow be able to stash five-to-ten rockets and 200 rounds of ammunition on his person.

Especially egregious when, as in Far Cry 2, the weapons slots are type-specific, so you can only carry one sidearm, one 'regular' weapon and one 'special' weapon. Not only does this break the 'realism' of the thing even more - why can't the slot I use to carry a flamethrower be used to carry an uzi? Combined with the save system mentioned above, I was even less tempted to experiment with the more interesting weapons, because I knew that if my experiments failed I'd have to drive cross-country for five minutes all over again.

Quote
Agreed on the checkpoint save thing. I know devs thinks it's easier for us not to worry about saves and that, but sometimes I just want to turn the fucking game off and go to bed, and pick up again where I left off.

Yeah, and it's especially silly because there's no reason at all why you can't have both checkpointing (or Skrim-style 'saving every X minutes' and user-directed save options.

Quote
Additionally, I've noticed a lot of games will only let you have one profile, so nobody else can play without using your save game. It shouldn't be the case in this day and age that someone I'm with asks if they can have a go and I have to say no because we can't have a second fucking playthrough saved at the same time.

I don't know about PS3s or PCs, but on the Xbox this is pretty easily remedied by switching to another gamer profile. But it is fiddly, yes. Arkham City, for example, is good enough to provide three separate Arkham profiles per gamer profile, so while you can only save to the same 'track' in each playthrough, you can set up a new one for housemates, partners and the like without faffing about making new gamer profiles.

mcbpete

  • No hat.
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #74 on: January 10, 2013, 10:22:31 AM »
As above, but when 'jumping' is a skill that levels up your character (think early Elder scrolls) and suddenly you've leveled your character to level 26 just by jumping around them map and now face hordes of enemies of the tough level 20+ variety and you can't take them on, because your other skills are at level 1. Just because you jumped everywhere. Like a jumping cunt.[nb]That's what I did anyhow.[/nb]
Oblivion right ? I did that on my first playthrough (before my PS3 died) and found the game to be a complete nightmare - I too was up to around a mid-20 level. The second time round I just refused to sleep (apart from that mission that you had to - to retrieve man man stuck in his dream world) and stayed at about level 3 throughout the whole game, found the game a doddle doing that !

chand

  • "like Louise Mensch but with a sexy beard"
    • https://twitter.com/RopesToInfinity
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #75 on: January 10, 2013, 11:01:40 AM »
Especially egregious when, as in Far Cry 2, the weapons slots are type-specific, so you can only carry one sidearm, one 'regular' weapon and one 'special' weapon. Not only does this break the 'realism' of the thing even more - why can't the slot I use to carry a flamethrower be used to carry an uzi? Combined with the save system mentioned above, I was even less tempted to experiment with the more interesting weapons, because I knew that if my experiments failed I'd have to drive cross-country for five minutes all over again.

Far Cry 2 was the one I thought of, as it wouldn't let me have a decent backup to the sniper rifle. I wanted to be sneaking about sniping things but have a plan B for when I was spotted, but the secondary guns were all too weak so I ended up just packing an assault rifle and having endless shootouts.

eluc55

  • Member
  • **
  • bleep
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #76 on: January 10, 2013, 11:25:59 AM »
FPS and third person games insisting on realism by letting you carry a very limited number of weapons. I get that it's meant to be realistic, but it means you rarely get to use the exciting guns. If I've got two weapon slots, I'm not gonna carry round a sniper rifle or an RPG, because they're useless for most fights.

Realism is one of those things that really divides gamers up, I think - and it's no wonder game designers can't win. Recently I've been reading the Hitman forums a lot, and one of the biggest points of contention with the most recent game, Hitman Absolution, seems to be that the game is too generous with what you can and can't carry.

The consensus seems to be that you should only be able to carry "big guns" like shotguns, sniper rifles and machine guns if they are openly visible, and stop you carrying other weapons. Yet, in a game like Hitman, that means you might as well not take them at all, because guards would be alerted instantly and you'd be attacked.

It seems obvious to me that sacrificing realism so that you can hide bigger guns on you is preferable to not being able to take them at all[nb]In previous Hitman games you only took "fun" guns if you planned to start a shootout from the beginning, and not bother with stealth.[/nb]. And yet, time and time again, this is an issue which the posters bring up as one of the game's biggest flaws. There are even people who refuse to play the game because they can't hide their sniper rifle in a case any more!

KnuckleSupper

  • Jelloem number one!
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #77 on: January 10, 2013, 12:00:31 PM »
Low drop-rates in MMOs/RPGs.

"Collect 10 Tortoise Livers" and only 1 in every 12 tortoises has a fucking liver.

Actually still fuming from trying to collect Pristine Golden Crownfeathers for an hour.

Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #78 on: January 10, 2013, 12:09:23 PM »
Unredefinable controls.

Fuck knows why so many games have the 'jump' on the 'A' (Xbox) and 'X' (PS) buttons.  It doesn't make sense.  Put them at the Y or triangle buttons instead.  Serves me right for only playing side-scrolling beat-em-ups, I guess.

Cerys

  • Bionic-Arsed
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Cyber Engineered Ravaged Yakking System
    • The Brainwrongs of Cerys
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #79 on: January 10, 2013, 12:24:42 PM »
As above, but when 'jumping' is a skill that levels up your character (think early Elder scrolls) and suddenly you've leveled your character to level 26 just by jumping around them map and now face hordes of enemies of the tough level 20+ variety and you can't take them on, because your other skills are at level 1. Just because you jumped everywhere. Like a jumping cunt.[nb]That's what I did anyhow.[/nb]

I did that in Oblivion.  Because it was funny.  Until I automatically started jumping while going down a mountain side, forgot quite how athletic I'd become and sailed to my unfortunate death many metres below.

Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #80 on: January 10, 2013, 07:10:07 PM »
Resident Evil 4 had the best compromise in inventory realism - allow you to carry a lot, but too much and make a fun game out of organizing it.

chand

  • "like Louise Mensch but with a sexy beard"
    • https://twitter.com/RopesToInfinity
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #81 on: January 10, 2013, 07:42:26 PM »
Realism is one of those things that really divides gamers up, I think - and it's no wonder game designers can't win. Recently I've been reading the Hitman forums a lot, and one of the biggest points of contention with the most recent game, Hitman Absolution, seems to be that the game is too generous with what you can and can't carry.

The consensus seems to be that you should only be able to carry "big guns" like shotguns, sniper rifles and machine guns if they are openly visible, and stop you carrying other weapons. Yet, in a game like Hitman, that means you might as well not take them at all, because guards would be alerted instantly and you'd be attacked.

It seems obvious to me that sacrificing realism so that you can hide bigger guns on you is preferable to not being able to take them at all[nb]In previous Hitman games you only took "fun" guns if you planned to start a shootout from the beginning, and not bother with stealth.[/nb]. And yet, time and time again, this is an issue which the posters bring up as one of the game's biggest flaws. There are even people who refuse to play the game because they can't hide their sniper rifle in a case any more!

Depends on the game though. The Hitman series was all about concealed weapons, planning, having to get in and out without being spotted. The sniper rifle in a case was great, you'd use your wire to take out guards and then work out a good vantage spot, and the level would build up slowly to taking that one shot. It was part of the feel of the game. It was just cool to walk around with a gun hidden in a case that you were gonna use very specifically.

Also, in stealth games, I never ever get into shootouts. If I do I'd always go back and reload and try again. For games which are not specifically stealth based, you need a backup. Far Cry 2's stealth mechanics weren't reliable enough, whereas in 3 it's much easier because you can lure guards and hide in bushes. But it's still hard until you have three or four weapon options because you're not totally in control, you never know when you're about to get snuck up on by a fucking massive bear. It's an open world so you can't be quite as methodical as you can be in, say, Dishonored, where I didn't have to kill anyone at all. The restriction of options in stealth games and the punishment for fucking up and triggering alarms is the whole reason I play them. Getting a Hitman game and shooting the fuck out of everything seems daft when there are so many shooters expressly designed to have that kind of action. If I just wanted firefights then Resistance 3 and Vanquish and shit like that are where I'd go, games that let you have a whole bunch of guns and actively encourage you to use them.

Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #82 on: January 10, 2013, 08:19:26 PM »
the most recent game, Hitman Absolution

Wasn't very good, was it?

Mister Six

  • Half-masted, bass-boosted, sling-backed
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #83 on: January 11, 2013, 02:08:25 AM »
Getting a Hitman game and shooting the fuck out of everything seems daft when there are so many shooters expressly designed to have that kind of action. If I just wanted firefights then Resistance 3 and Vanquish and shit like that are where I'd go, games that let you have a whole bunch of guns and actively encourage you to use them.

Yes, exactly. My complaint about guns was specifically for shooters - games that, by their very definition, are all about using weapons. Hitman is a game about adapting to the environment and tricking people, so the restrictions and rules are an important part of both the optimum gameplay mechanic and the psychology of the main character.

eluc55

  • Member
  • **
  • bleep
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #84 on: January 11, 2013, 02:15:01 AM »
Depends on the game though. The Hitman series was all about concealed weapons, planning, having to get in and out without being spotted. The sniper rifle in a case was great, you'd use your wire to take out guards and then work out a good vantage spot, and the level would build up slowly to taking that one shot. It was part of the feel of the game. It was just cool to walk around with a gun hidden in a case that you were gonna use very specifically.

I agree that the sniper rifle should still come in the case, for the reason's you outline. That it was a deal breaker was what I can't get my head around.

The other guns, though... I think its better that you can conceal large weapons now. There was literally no point in taking them on previous games, because the first guard you met blew your disguise and you had to shoot your way through the level. It's much more fun - albeit unrealistic - to stealthy sneak through a level, reach the building containing your target, suddenly reveal your shotgun and blow everyone away when they didn't expect it...

I want that choice. Choice is what makes the Hitman games so much fun.

Quote
Getting a Hitman game and shooting the fuck out of everything seems daft when there are so many shooters expressly designed to have that kind of action.

Absolutely. But as I say, it's about choice. I want to do a level all kinds of sneaky, silent ways, and then maybe do a cool run-through where I walk though the level blowing everyone away like The Terminator. Or using silenced shotguns and silenced machine guns, without getting spotted the first time I meet an enemy. There was no point in larger silenced guns in earlier games. Stealth might be preferable, but it shouldn't be obligatory. The Hitman games have always had that choice, but wisely make stealth more fun and rewarding.


Big Jack McBastard

  • Dancing on unicorn bones.
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #85 on: January 11, 2013, 03:23:27 AM »
Hair, body parts and clothing clipping through each other when some unusual combination is put together. If you've the facility to create a big nosed, 7ft tall horned freak with an afro then he should be able to wear a helmet without his head clipping through the damn thing.

I appreciate making custom alternate skins/textures and meshes to sort out clothing problems would take up a lot of time and space, but even if your bod is 'normal' then shit like capes clipping through armour or long hair going through your arms during any vaguely strenuous looking manoeuvre is still common.

Mister Six

  • Half-masted, bass-boosted, sling-backed
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #86 on: January 11, 2013, 04:00:16 PM »
Absolutely. But as I say, it's about choice.

What they should do, then, is make it a toggleable option on the menu screen. Actually, the more options the better as far as I'm concerned.

Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #87 on: January 11, 2013, 04:16:02 PM »
Playing Crash Bandicoot 3 reminded me of one that's similar to the above - mandatory driving/vehicle levels in games of another genre.  There's a nonsensical motorbike level in Crash 3 that you HAVE to complete, it's nightmarishly tough.  I don't pick up Crash Bandicoot to drive a bike!  I pick it up to jump on boxes!

See also: Tony Hawk's Underground (FUCKING CAR LEVELS, REALLY?), Spyro the Dragon 3 (FUCKING SKATEBOARDING LEVELS, REALLY?).

Exception: Jak II/III.  That was a good balance.

chand

  • "like Louise Mensch but with a sexy beard"
    • https://twitter.com/RopesToInfinity
Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #88 on: January 11, 2013, 06:19:46 PM »
Playing Crash Bandicoot 3 reminded me of one that's similar to the above - mandatory driving/vehicle levels in games of another genre.  There's a nonsensical motorbike level in Crash 3 that you HAVE to complete, it's nightmarishly tough.  I don't pick up Crash Bandicoot to drive a bike!  I pick it up to jump on boxes!

The original Sly Cooper had one too, a Mario Kart style race which you HAD to win, and which required pretty smart use of power-ups to do. Likewise the original Ratchet & Clank makes you do a hoverboard race in which you need to hit virtually every Wipeout-style boost pad. There are a couple where, if you miss them, you're cursed to pootle along slowly for ages while rivals whizz past. There were also various routes and it took a bunch of goes to work out which ones were shortcuts and which were actually slowing you down. And a shortcut that if you miss it, you basically have no chance of winning.

Both games usually get the mix right with mini-games, but racing ones seems especially annoying.

Re: Universally shit things in games
« Reply #89 on: January 11, 2013, 06:35:45 PM »
mandatory driving/vehicle levels in games of another genre.

Fucking Mafia.