• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Unbelievable game boundaries (aka door's locked so why not shoot it down?)

Ultima 7 is the last game that made any sense.

u7_avatar_artist.gif
 
Blood 2 had a deathmatch level in a grass field with a tiny picket fence around it. There are signs saying "Danger Mine Field!". Jump over the fence and BOOM!
 
For the most part, I don't mind invisible walls. But locked wooden doors, when I have multiple weapons capable of opening them, bother me to no end.

However, the worst is when I am playing a game where I can demolish entire buildings, but a 2 inch thick tree stops me from progressing (Mercenaries).
 
These are things I wish developers could get rid of, or at least hide better. Other things that are killing me lately? Obvious trigger spots and monster closets....
 
navanman said:
Hey, I think I've actually played that, on my neighbor's computer back in the day. I did that over and over and I think he started to get annoyed with me. It was just so much fun!
Thanks for the video. :D

And I second the notion for Half-Life 2, as I played through it for the first time recently. No good reason is given why some rubble and doors can be pummeled by the gravity gun but not others. It takes away from the experience a bit.
 
Ratchet & Clank Future is full of invisible walls. It bugs the hell out of me. Why not let us climb up wherever we can and explore? It's so much cooler when they give you that option rather than spending so much time fencing it away with invisible walls.
 
It's a necessary evil otherwise you'd have to build an entire world/universe for every game or have some ridiculous explanation that would break the immersion or be even more dumb than something arbitrary like invisible walls.

It could be a reinforced metal door or there's some toxic goo that spilled over there so you can't go there or that wall has traps on it so you can't climb over it.
 
Prime crotch said:
Ever faced a boundary in a video game that you just couldn't accept? For example some like in Silent Hill 4, where Henry never tries to break the windows of his room to get out, I just accept them and don't bother me that much. But others like in Disaster Report, where the character couldn't grab a freaking water bottle, that's sitting on a stand right in front of him having to go to behind it to get it, just get on my nerves.
I've never had something that bad but in general I want more open games. I always end up finding doors painted on walls. If I am in an office building looking for terrorists I want a full office building.
 
YYZ said:
It's a necessary evil otherwise you'd have to build an entire world/universe for every game or have some ridiculous explanation that would break the immersion or be even more dumb than something arbitrary like invisible walls.
HL2 doesn't just do it to avoid building extra stuff. In fact, they build extra stuff and make you run through it by locking a door. At the end of innumerable enemies, you've finally made it the very long way around to the other side of the doorway you wanted to walk through in the first place.
 
People want a game but they don't want the rules that automatically comes with it.

That's the videogames "realism" paradox. It will ALWAYS be there guys up until our only gaming will be to plug our brain into the Matrix.

Personally i like videoGAMES and i pretty much always understand their limits and i don't really care. I agree there are some games that are cheap into trying to make those limits subtle though.
 
Mojovonio said:
If you guys ever played ATV: Offroad Fury, then you know that game has the worst invisible wall ever.

Its an open environment, and then suddenly you hit an ivisible wall AND IT LAUNCHES YOU HUNDEREDS OF FEET AWAY.

It was awesome.

Ah I forgot about that. That was awesome. Me and some drunk buddies would look for the invisible wall for hours. I'm easily entertained.
 
What games have done this well though?

Off the top of my head there's the Halo games. The outdoor environs border you off with either water or a cliff.
 
YYZ said:
It's a necessary evil otherwise you'd have to build an entire world/universe for every game or have some ridiculous explanation that would break the immersion or be even more dumb than something arbitrary like invisible walls.

It could be a reinforced metal door or there's some toxic goo that spilled over there so you can't go there or that wall has traps on it so you can't climb over it.
Not really. You just need to build sensible barriers. You don't need to make the world bigger. You just need to ensure that the edges make sense.
 
In wind waker, remember how THIS F*CKING BOAT TELL YOU WHERE TO GO OR NOT ! It's like Epona saying "sorry, but your princess is in another castle". Not good for self-control.
 
Yeah, this is rubbish.

In a perfect world the game design would allow you to do whatever you pleased, and in the case of a locked door - say you kick it in without going through the rat-in-a-maze design they intended, then you face a more significant challenge.

Game design should accommodate multiple play styles, especially that drek Capcom churns out (RE series, DMC series), and scale accordingly. If you're content to be the rat in a maze - fine! If you're more aggressive - fine!
 
Have some of you played Sega Extreme Sports?

The game itself was garbage but when snowboarding off boundaries you could simply go on forever. There were no invisible walls whatsoever. I don't know how they did this but it was clever enough to fool me back then. Spent hours with trying to figure out whether it ended or not.
 
TEH-CJ said:
I'm guessing its just limitations of the hardware preventing you to explore any further?


No its design choices. too point the player in the direction the devs want him to go. It easier to control a gamers experience that way.

What these guys want is games full of walls and no aesthetics. or a bunch of confusing rooms with no purpose.
 
Mojovonio said:
I noticed this in Lost.

You spend most of the game going through dense jungle foliage, then a small bush will block you from going further on the beach then the designers wanted you to.
:lol
 
Ranger X said:
People want a game but they don't want the rules that automatically comes with it.

That's the videogames "realism" paradox. It will ALWAYS be there guys up until our only gaming will be to plug our brain into the Matrix.

Personally i like videoGAMES and i pretty much always understand their limits and i don't really care. I agree there are some games that are cheap into trying to make those limits subtle though.

Sure it will always be there, but it can be done right or it can be done wrong.

The way it should be done, is to make it obvious to the player where he can or cannot go so he won't unknowingly walk into these kind of obstacles. If you spend half the game breaking wooden crates and barriers, don't make wooden doors that look identical.
 
sprocket said:
No its design choices. too point the player in the direction the devs want him to go. It easier to control a gamers experience that way.

What these guys want is games full of walls and no aesthetics. or a bunch of confusing rooms with no purpose.


ahh i see thanks ;)
 
sprocket said:
No its design choices. too point the player in the direction the devs want him to go. It easier to control a gamers experience that way.

What these guys want is games full of walls and no aesthetics. or a bunch of confusing rooms with no purpose.

There are games out there that do it right. Just because the games that you've played don't, doesn't mean it can't be done, well.
 
So many FPS have this problem, it's become a kind of staple that too few people are challenging nowadays. "Ah, that door doesn't have a 3D modeled handle, so I probably can't open it. I need to find the one that's modeled and textured properly." It's a problem in games that try to immerse you in the experience, as it totally takes you out of the game world.

And don't even get me started on 99,9% of all RPGs.


Far Cry and Crysis are prime examples for this issue handled right. 100% consistency and the chance of you bouncing into an invisible wall unvoluntarily are pretty much zero.
 
i think there shouldn't be any boundaries at all in any games- no walls, no fences, no locked doors

instead, no matter what the setting, be it on an island, or in a city, or on the moon, or in a space station... there should be either an ocean or a large moat surrounding the level

you can jump in the water if you want, but there are great white sharks in the water

you give me a game with a locked door, and i'll try to shoot it open. you give me a game with a fence, i'll try to climb it. you give me a game with a wall, and i'll try to jump over it.

you give me a game with shark infested waters, i will stick to your god damn linear game path like motherfucking glue.

fucking banjo kazooie
 
as others have pointed out, it's just consistancy i want. i can accept unrealistic rules. personally i was able to accept in half life 2 that doors with that funny combine lock on them couldn't be opened... so it didn't bother me like in other games with tonnes of identical doors where some can be opened and some can't...

but things like magic slidy surfaces when you can run up equal inclines in other places, and so on, do bother me.

no one ever complains about the health kit that can repair bullet wounds by being stood on, for example.

the locked doors in silent hill wouldn't bother me if it wasn't so linear. if there were more unlocked doors that took me places i didn't need to go rather than all the unlocked doors funnelling me where i needed to go, that'd be great.

it'd be nice to see a horror game with a large open explorable expanse without realistic barriers, where the item you need is just in one room somewhere and you have no idea where, or what pitfalls you'll run into along the way.

that has great potential to be scary.

i remember getting really upset at Red Faction upon finding that only select surfaces could be destroyed, and that these surfaces were regularly identical to other surfaces that couldn't. in the multiplayer it was even worse, because once the server hit the maximum allowed geomods, all surfaces would just suddenly become immune to rocket damage.
 
Oh, and an honorable mention goes to Project IGI, which was an FPS made on some sort of flight-sim engine iirc. Which basically meant that you could pretty much go everywhere you wanted, but it was just a really empty and barren hillside.
 
Haunted One said:
So many FPS have this problem, it's become a kind of staple that too few people are challenging nowadays. "Ah, that door doesn't have a 3D modeled handle, so I probably can't open it. I need to find the one that's modeled and textured properly." It's a problem in games that try to immerse you in the experience, as it totally takes you out of the game world.

And don't even get me started on 99,9% of all RPGs.


Far Cry and Crysis are prime examples for this issue handled right. 100% consistency and the chance of you bouncing into an invisible wall unvoluntarily are pretty much zero.
Yeah, Crysis limits you through its own unique methods that require a lot of travel to encounter. If you swim too far out, for instance, you may be eaten by a shark or taken out by a patrolling helicopter. As far as land is concerned, they limit you through incredibly steep terrain at points that you would logically be unable to climb without gear. Of course, that sort of environment lends itself to such things.

In a game that models an entire office building, on the other hand, it would be a lot of work to model every single room. Unless your game is FEAR and the whole game takes place in an office building or sewers, it's a waste of time and only creates boring areas.
 
So when I first showed my buddy Shadow of the Colossus, the first thing he tries to do is shoot Agro in the neck with the bow and arrow while riding him. "Why can't I shoot this horse in the neck with the bow and arrow?" he demands. "I could do shit like that in GTA." He is twenty-eight years old at the time.

I stammered a bit, and I can't remember what my eventual explanation was, but I do remember thinking: what kind of fucking monster ARE you?
 
plagiarize said:
no one ever complains about the health kit that can repair bullet wounds by being stood on, for example.
What? I can recall at least three separate threads where this criticism has come up and one other solely focused on the issue.

It is a problem in games that try to immerse you.
 
Ultima Underworld was the great defiance of invisible game obstacles. There is a locked wooden door. You can either:

1. Find the key. *click*
2. Use a rune spell to magically open the lock. *hummm**click*
3. Bash the damn thing open. *WHAMWHAMWHAM**click*

Only certain doors were unbashable. Reinforced iron doors were more likely to break your weapon or bones before you opened them. There weren't too many in the game, and those that were made sense- they were usually armory or vault doors.
Probably the most realistic game I've ever played in terms of mechanics. Need to open a chest? Smash it open! Don't have a ranged weapon? Throw a rock! Need to fish? Combine a stick and a string! Use a lump of wax and string to make a candle! I loved it. Not even Oblivion felt as alive as the Stygian Abyss.

EDIT: I must say that I hate the use of craggy hills in World of Warcraft. Its like they throw unscalable shit everywhere to make you follow this linear path. I mean, I could climb those damn things without resorting to my hands and knees and I'm a 22 year old casual runner, not an epic-geared draenei paladin.
 
Mike Works said:
i think there shouldn't be any boundaries at all in any games- no walls, no fences, no locked doors

instead, no matter what the setting, be it on an island, or in a city, or on the moon, or in a space station... there should be either an ocean or a large moat surrounding the level

you can jump in the water if you want, but there are great white sharks in the water

you give me a game with a locked door, and i'll try to shoot it open. you give me a game with a fence, i'll try to climb it. you give me a game with a wall, and i'll try to jump over it.

you give me a game with shark infested waters, i will stick to your god damn linear game path like motherfucking glue.

fucking banjo kazooie

Its the same thing as invisible walls.
 
Slavik81 said:
Not really. You just need to build sensible barriers. You don't need to make the world bigger. You just need to ensure that the edges make sense.
What can you do in a game like GTAIV? Make it another island? Barricades? Everything will still be arbitrary and bug some people.

I don't know why people are complaining about this. If there's no invisible wall then you're going to get some bullshit explanation that you'll hate even more.

The door thing sounds stupid, but if it doesn't detract from the gameplay itself then it's a small issue.
 
Haunted One said:
Except they are consistent and do not take you out of the game world. aka a job well done.

Right. An invisible wall defies logic. A shark eating you is a real danger and most people, knowing that the waters are shark infested, will decide not to go swimming. It's common sense.

Halo 3 uses similar techniques on some of the MP maps. You have a military installation guarded by automated turrets. You can try to go as far as you like, but you're gonna get cut down. It works within the story, it makes sense, and it's a "real" danger that limits progress.
 
Alot of this is just gonna add alot of unnescessary shit for the devs to do. Not once have i ever thought "gee, i wish i could jump over that really tall hill" or go through that door with the really shitty texture, why? because i know there's fuck all of interest on the other side.

That's one thing that got on my nerves in the witcher, you could go in alot of the buildings but it just made finding the buildings that actually content or quests inside more awkward to find.

In Gothic, if you swam out to sea you'd have an fmv that showed a shark eating you...a complete waste of resources. In farcry you had a missile magically lock onto you and instakill. In that instance i would of actually preffered an invisible wall because then it'd save me on loading time.
 
I love how in Final Fantasy the protagonists are able to summon dragons from outer space and some similar stuff that shoots laser visible from the Moon, but are still bound by wooden doors, small fences... Oh, and a couple of small fry guards can throw them in prison without hassel during cutscenes.
 
I remember flying a jet away from land in San Andreas to see if I would hit an invisible wall. After flying for 10 minutes, with the land getting smaller and smaller on the map, I got bored and tried to go back, but somehow I crashed and had to swim more than an hour back to land. Maxed out my lung capacity at least.
 
It cracks me up more than it does annoy me. Take Silent HIll for example, if I have pyramid head chasing me with a goddamn 4 foot knife in an abandoned apartment complex, you better fucking believe I'm gonna kamikaze dive through that locked door to get the fuck out of there. Or the fact that in a lot of games, you're the most elite soldier on the planet, trained to kill a man with your bare hands six ways from sunday, but.no.one.taught.you.how. to. swim.
 
I recently tried out Turding Pooint (lolpun) and in the second level they've implemented something similar to the sharks in Crysis. If you step beyond a barricade and into the open, snipers open fire on you, seemingly from a building off in the distance. It makes sense.

But... You can scale low walls and stuff, but then in the trainyard level you stumble upon a red train cart with its doors open, but rather than climbing through it, wouldn't it make more sense to instead climb down a ladder, fall through a hole in the floor, walk through the blown up walls and run up the stairs?

Later in this level you climb through train carts.
 
Top Bottom