aronnov reborn
Banned
DLC day 1. 5 hour games that cost $60
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Generally accepted things in gaming that baffle you
- Thread starter ronito
- Start date
Yeah, it gets really annoying having overworld background music constantly being interrupted by the same old music theme that in no way blends or matches the ambiance or atmosphere of your current surroundings. Imagine, walking through a dank, dark cavern with ominous music in the background then... UPBEAT BATTLE THEME!
I wonder why JRPG designers haven't put much thought into developing more dynamic music that takes into account of the current overworld and has an appropriate predefined battle track that can seamlessly be played after the overworld track stops. Then it won't seem like you're listening to a different and disjointed track.
Okay, okay, okay. Here we go. Rage already building.
Online games with "perks". Just... send them all to hell. Yes, I understand that progression is a good thing, and it's important to dangle the carrot. Perks are great in that regard -- the more you play, the more you get rewarded, right?
Only, this immediately disqualifies me from playing online games.
Uncharted 2 is the perfect example. Every game goes through it's honeymoon multiplayer phase, when everyone's busy learning the controls, mistakes are funny, and if you don't quite know what you're doing you usually have a couple people playing who are also in the same boat. It's a good time! Everyone has fun.
And then, the Divide -- the hardcore players keep playing non-stop, while the casual players start to get left in the dust. Eventually, you find yourself in games filled with really, really good players who have been playing it religiously. And guess what? The more you play, the more powerful you are. As you play, you unlock perks, which means that casual players aren't only unpracticed, they're easier to kill.
What the hell is this? Who decided multiplayer should be totally inaccessible to those who can't devote hours a day to playing? Shouldn't it be exactly the opposite, in order to level the playing field a bit? Getting constantly curbstomped online isn't fun at all, and this system all but ensures that happens.
Online games with "perks". Just... send them all to hell. Yes, I understand that progression is a good thing, and it's important to dangle the carrot. Perks are great in that regard -- the more you play, the more you get rewarded, right?
Only, this immediately disqualifies me from playing online games.
Uncharted 2 is the perfect example. Every game goes through it's honeymoon multiplayer phase, when everyone's busy learning the controls, mistakes are funny, and if you don't quite know what you're doing you usually have a couple people playing who are also in the same boat. It's a good time! Everyone has fun.
And then, the Divide -- the hardcore players keep playing non-stop, while the casual players start to get left in the dust. Eventually, you find yourself in games filled with really, really good players who have been playing it religiously. And guess what? The more you play, the more powerful you are. As you play, you unlock perks, which means that casual players aren't only unpracticed, they're easier to kill.
What the hell is this? Who decided multiplayer should be totally inaccessible to those who can't devote hours a day to playing? Shouldn't it be exactly the opposite, in order to level the playing field a bit? Getting constantly curbstomped online isn't fun at all, and this system all but ensures that happens.
BIONIC-ARRRMMM!! said:
Yeah no. The way that some people find silent protagonists more meaningful than speaking ones is because they fill in the holes (or not, just leave it a mistery) of said characters themselves. Gives more room for imagination, gives the feeling of more depth to the character, you name it. Hemingway, bro.
Ickman3400
Banned
Silent main characters. I HATE this more than I can describe. Am I playing the role of a mute bastard who stares off in space all day?
Multiplayer for every game, or asking for it in every game. You have a billion games where you can play deathmatch with your bros all day. Stop asking for it in Mass Effect, Skyrim, Batman, etc etc
The notion that all Nintendo needs to do to fill a gap for core games, wether it's for a new console or just a slow period is release ANOTHER mario/zelda/metroid/smash bros game. When will you people get tired of them?
No pad support on PC. In current times this is becoming much less of a problem but there's still several instances of developers holding out (looking right at you Bioware). There's no excuse for a multiplatform game to not have the option of using a controller, especially when one of the biggest pc only games of the year will have it.
Multiplayer for every game, or asking for it in every game. You have a billion games where you can play deathmatch with your bros all day. Stop asking for it in Mass Effect, Skyrim, Batman, etc etc
The notion that all Nintendo needs to do to fill a gap for core games, wether it's for a new console or just a slow period is release ANOTHER mario/zelda/metroid/smash bros game. When will you people get tired of them?
No pad support on PC. In current times this is becoming much less of a problem but there's still several instances of developers holding out (looking right at you Bioware). There's no excuse for a multiplatform game to not have the option of using a controller, especially when one of the biggest pc only games of the year will have it.
Steve Youngblood
Member
One thing that comes to mind in terms of "things I irrationally hate on principle that don't seem to bother other people" is how prolific pre-ordering still is in an era where supply is never short. I understand that there are pragmatic reasons for doing so as company's sweeten the pot more and more with both real and artificial incentives, but even disregarding the savings and bonuses I can't tell you how many times I've heard of people just embracing it as something that you "just do" without question whenever you're interested in a title. I understand why company's want you to do it, but I don't understand why consumers so willingly embrace some degree of commitment to purchasing a title months, sometimes more than a year out from release.
End curmudgeonly rant.
End curmudgeonly rant.
malingenie said:
Two factors in the NES era: Many games came from the arcade, where the main idea was getting as many quarters out of a player as possible, hence the difficulty.
Games also tended to be short (like under 90 minutes), as they didn't really do saving back then. So, in order to lengthen the game and create value, they ramped up difficulty.
As for me: Retailer-specific pre-order bonuses. They started out as annoying, and they're becoming evil as more and more important stuff is now being hidden. Missions? Weapons? That's ridiculous.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
While I agree, there are some titles where it matters. I remember Jackson talking about how high pre-order numbers for Scribblenauts were important for an unproven property, and of course theres the niche stuff like my Atlus DS RPGs that usually have very small shipments.Steve Youngblood said:
Some developers treat saving and loading as though it isn't part of the game, when it's so painfully clear that it's one of the most important and fundamental decisions a developer needs to make.
Also, closely related: Why don't more developers use a setup that allows for temporary saving anywhere? Much better than standard old quicksaves, and it SHOULD quiet people who whine about that sort of thing.
Also, closely related: Why don't more developers use a setup that allows for temporary saving anywhere? Much better than standard old quicksaves, and it SHOULD quiet people who whine about that sort of thing.
Fimbulvetr
Member
HK-47 said:
Shepard: "Get out of here, now! I hate looters.... now let's see what's inside this wall safe."
NullPointer
Member
Nice.HK-47 said:
OK, one more. My biggest game biz pet peeve: Charging for multiplayer DLC. It splinters the community, splits playlists, and forces all kinds of weirdness into matchmaking systems that *try* or fail to take into account the various combinations of DLC that players might have. so either you can't jump online with friends who haven't bought the maps at all, or you *can*, but the game just kicks you out when loading a new map. Or take the new Firefight map in the latest Reach DLC. I have yet to get one single matchmaking game with that map. Not once.
The way it should work? Charge for single player DLC, and keep the multiplayer maps free. Yeah, FREE. As in all players get the content when going online, and nobody gets split. Either pay for the development of map packs by selling single player content, or stupid avatar t-shirts and socks, or just bite the bullet and write it off as a measure that reinvigorates the community, adds another opportunity for marketing, and keeps the title in gamer's collections rather than being sold back to the game shop.
This whole system of premium map packs is the stupidest, greediest, short-sighted, aggravating, steaming pile of horse shit that has occurred this generation.
WickedLaharl
Member
quick time events
BIONIC-ARRRMMM!!
Member
SalsaShark said:
So Gordon Freeman has more depth because when Alyx talks to him he just stands like a dummy without as much as nodding in agreement, really?
Yeah, no.
Non-skippable cut scenes. I'm sure your story is very nice and all, but I'd rather get back to playing the game.
Screw you. The most fun I have had with games and friends have involved splitscreen multiplayer. Shooters that don't support this are less likely to be bought in my circle of friends.Majine said:
Starwolf_UK
Member
FPS weapon reloading.
scar tissue
Banned
This.ShaneB said:
I fucking hate Valve FPS because of this. Don't tell me Portal 2 still has this...
Like the hat?
Banned
Jrpgs where you have to fight someone to get them to join your party, and during that fight they have like 10,000 HP and a bunch of crazy spells, then they join you and have 250hp and their only spell is a level one fire spell.
anonymousAversa
Member
Willy105 said:
really? What baffles you about that? There is an enormous cost involved with developing a game. Developers need to recoup that cost because it is a BUSINESS.
The market price is also based on demand. People are willing to pay $60, so the games cost $60. Same reason why they make $150 collectors editions: because people have a high enough demand to buy them.
Learn economics.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
StuBurns said:
You're going to have specify. Is it something to do with how a HUD is supposed to be quickly and easily legible and as novel as it is to put it all on the suit it actually works against the intended purpose of a HUD despite clearing up the screen for a more immersive and less "gamey" presentation?
You don't really think the idea of an integrated HUD has absolutely no positive qualities, do you?
scar tissue said:
Your priorities are fucked. Valve rulez.
