-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
What shouldn't be carried over to next-gen?
- Thread starter BFIB
- Start date
runningjoke
Member
The lack of HL3.
NotoriousLynx
Banned
Things people in this thread have said that I agree with (as in they shouldn't be carried over):
- Online Passes: I don't even like understand who thought this would be a good idea. I have yet to buy one and refuse to. My sister and I play on the same console and I let her have all the online passes (though the only games have only been MK and SSX iirc).
- $60 Pricing: I feel like $60 is way too much for some games and pricing should be dependent on the longevity of the game. My friend got Mirror's Edge for 60 I believe and he beat it in like eight hours. You got games like Fallout NV that have the right to be $60 since they can last up to 200+ hours. That's pretty much $7.50 an hour compared to $0.30 an hour.
- QTEs: I understand that sometimes QTEs could be necessary, you can't allow the player to have every motion with about 12-16 buttons, but don't allow the player to realize they are limited to a certain number of moves. If I can only dodge during QTEs, just give me some button combination that allows me to dodge.
- Tacked-on Multiplayer Modes: Seriously, why do developers waste resources like this? BioShock 2 and Assassin's Creed 2 did not need them; they are pointless and about five people play them. Sure, they're optional, but its more about how the developers are wasting their times with modes like these instead of improving the mode people are actually going to play.
- Microsoft in general: This may be biased, but I hope Microsoft fails big time next generation. In the beginning, they were doing great with achievements and making game consoles as a multimedia device, but by the end, they forgot that xbox's are still video game consoles and shouldn't just be used for netflix. Microsoft needs to get more first party franchises. Its Wii U and PS4 for me unless Microsoft shows their worth.
- Games which are basically movies: Uncharted was awesome the first time around, but the second time you play it, you realize how linear it is. Some games are fair exceptions to this rule, like Metal Gear Solid - the cutscenes and gameplay go hand-in-hand.
- - - - - - - -
Things people in this thread have said that I disagree with (as in they SHOULD be carried over):
- Pre-planned DLC / DLC announced before the game's completion / on-disc DLC: The only problem with DLC is if the cost of it fits what the product is. You got people like Capcom who make you waste a stupid amount of money on costumes while the Fallout developers have these awesome 10+ hour campaigns set in some completely out of map town. In Fallout's case, yea those DLC campaigns are gonna be pre-planned and if they can store some part of it on the disc, that's great since they take up a lot of space.
- Retailer DLC / Preorder DLC: I like this. It adds diversity to players in online games, like Halo for example. I don't understand why people would hate this since it really doesn't affect their experience.
- Social Website Interrogation: Seriously? Having games that connect to Facebook and Twitter bother people? I think it would be awesome if you could send invites to people through fb, post some new record from a game directly to fb, or even chat with them while on xbox and they are on the computer.
- Achievements: huh? Optional things that improve the longevity of games? Yea, they really suck.
- Motion Controls: Again, why the hate with this? Its not like every game has them and if they do, its most likely optional. MC can be fun if done right. Move and Kinect just have terrible games.
- HD Collections: I got a chance to play some of the best games from last generation because of the HD collections coming out. I think something like the Infamous and Resistance package are a bit dumb since you can get each game for like two bucks each.
- - - - - - - -
- Things I don't care about:
DRM: Don't really play on the computer since my favorite game developers only make games for consoles (Nintendo and their first party companies, Sony's first party companies, Platinum, Suda51). Pretty sure DRM is gonna phase out anyway, especially if someone has thought of a better solution already.
Region Locks: I don't import games or anything. I think I understand the purpose for them though? Something with pricing iirc. I think region locking for countries deemed more sensitive to the content on-disc is a stupid reason. Not everyone living in the same country has the same opinion and they can handle offensive games easier.
- Online Passes: I don't even like understand who thought this would be a good idea. I have yet to buy one and refuse to. My sister and I play on the same console and I let her have all the online passes (though the only games have only been MK and SSX iirc).
- $60 Pricing: I feel like $60 is way too much for some games and pricing should be dependent on the longevity of the game. My friend got Mirror's Edge for 60 I believe and he beat it in like eight hours. You got games like Fallout NV that have the right to be $60 since they can last up to 200+ hours. That's pretty much $7.50 an hour compared to $0.30 an hour.
- QTEs: I understand that sometimes QTEs could be necessary, you can't allow the player to have every motion with about 12-16 buttons, but don't allow the player to realize they are limited to a certain number of moves. If I can only dodge during QTEs, just give me some button combination that allows me to dodge.
- Tacked-on Multiplayer Modes: Seriously, why do developers waste resources like this? BioShock 2 and Assassin's Creed 2 did not need them; they are pointless and about five people play them. Sure, they're optional, but its more about how the developers are wasting their times with modes like these instead of improving the mode people are actually going to play.
- Microsoft in general: This may be biased, but I hope Microsoft fails big time next generation. In the beginning, they were doing great with achievements and making game consoles as a multimedia device, but by the end, they forgot that xbox's are still video game consoles and shouldn't just be used for netflix. Microsoft needs to get more first party franchises. Its Wii U and PS4 for me unless Microsoft shows their worth.
- Games which are basically movies: Uncharted was awesome the first time around, but the second time you play it, you realize how linear it is. Some games are fair exceptions to this rule, like Metal Gear Solid - the cutscenes and gameplay go hand-in-hand.
- - - - - - - -
Things people in this thread have said that I disagree with (as in they SHOULD be carried over):
- Pre-planned DLC / DLC announced before the game's completion / on-disc DLC: The only problem with DLC is if the cost of it fits what the product is. You got people like Capcom who make you waste a stupid amount of money on costumes while the Fallout developers have these awesome 10+ hour campaigns set in some completely out of map town. In Fallout's case, yea those DLC campaigns are gonna be pre-planned and if they can store some part of it on the disc, that's great since they take up a lot of space.
- Retailer DLC / Preorder DLC: I like this. It adds diversity to players in online games, like Halo for example. I don't understand why people would hate this since it really doesn't affect their experience.
- Social Website Interrogation: Seriously? Having games that connect to Facebook and Twitter bother people? I think it would be awesome if you could send invites to people through fb, post some new record from a game directly to fb, or even chat with them while on xbox and they are on the computer.
- Achievements: huh? Optional things that improve the longevity of games? Yea, they really suck.
- Motion Controls: Again, why the hate with this? Its not like every game has them and if they do, its most likely optional. MC can be fun if done right. Move and Kinect just have terrible games.
- HD Collections: I got a chance to play some of the best games from last generation because of the HD collections coming out. I think something like the Infamous and Resistance package are a bit dumb since you can get each game for like two bucks each.
- - - - - - - -
- Things I don't care about:
DRM: Don't really play on the computer since my favorite game developers only make games for consoles (Nintendo and their first party companies, Sony's first party companies, Platinum, Suda51). Pretty sure DRM is gonna phase out anyway, especially if someone has thought of a better solution already.
Region Locks: I don't import games or anything. I think I understand the purpose for them though? Something with pricing iirc. I think region locking for countries deemed more sensitive to the content on-disc is a stupid reason. Not everyone living in the same country has the same opinion and they can handle offensive games easier.
Lord Panda
The Sea is Always Right
Motion Controls.
Nickle-and-dimeing DLC
Region Locking
Uninformative multiplayer lobbies (just tell me the ping of that server dammit)
Strict and pricey certification.
Nickle-and-dimeing DLC
Region Locking
Uninformative multiplayer lobbies (just tell me the ping of that server dammit)
Strict and pricey certification.
Tutorials that explain way too much and last far too long (hand holding). Every time I pick up a new thingy or whatever, I'd like to be able to figure out how it works myself and not have the surprise spoiled by some detached voice over telling me everything about it.
Single player focused games like dead space and bioshock getting multiplayer modes because they are afraid of used games sales. games like battlefield 3 getting a campaign which is nothing more than a pile of "me too" scripted garbage that teaches you nothing about playing the multiplayer.
Single player focused games like dead space and bioshock getting multiplayer modes because they are afraid of used games sales. games like battlefield 3 getting a campaign which is nothing more than a pile of "me too" scripted garbage that teaches you nothing about playing the multiplayer.
Outside of the usual "Having to pay for multiplayer access" (which is an exclusively Microsoft thing this generation, actually), I'd probably go with, "Having to pay to access services that you are already paying for, such as Netflix, and Hulu (wait, that's another Microsoft exclusive this gen).
Basically, I don't want Microsoft carrying over that BS to the next Xbox, and I don't want Sony or Nintendo copying them if they do.
There's ways to monetize your online services, but charging people just to access game play, or features that they can access for free on any other device isn't the best way to do it.
I've never paid for LIVE, because on every device I own, from the PS3, to the PC, to the Vita, and my phone, I can access Netflix, Hulu, Facebook, Youtube, etc, without having to pay an additional fee on top of any service fees I may be paying. It's a shame, because I think LIVE is great, but not, "It's so good I should be PAYING for this!" great. Especially when the competitors have stepped up their game significantly, while offering it for free.
I don't care about day one DLC or anything like that. I don't have to buy that stuff, and I usually don't. Or I'll get it when I feel like it. I don't like it when a developer will purposely cut stuff just for the sake of DLC. If it's content that simply wasn't ready by the time the game went gold, and just happened to be ready by release (remember, a game tends to go gold a good month before release, so developers are free to polish up and finish DLC during that month in between gold and release), I can understand that and have no problem with it.
Basically, I don't want Microsoft carrying over that BS to the next Xbox, and I don't want Sony or Nintendo copying them if they do.
There's ways to monetize your online services, but charging people just to access game play, or features that they can access for free on any other device isn't the best way to do it.
I've never paid for LIVE, because on every device I own, from the PS3, to the PC, to the Vita, and my phone, I can access Netflix, Hulu, Facebook, Youtube, etc, without having to pay an additional fee on top of any service fees I may be paying. It's a shame, because I think LIVE is great, but not, "It's so good I should be PAYING for this!" great. Especially when the competitors have stepped up their game significantly, while offering it for free.
I don't care about day one DLC or anything like that. I don't have to buy that stuff, and I usually don't. Or I'll get it when I feel like it. I don't like it when a developer will purposely cut stuff just for the sake of DLC. If it's content that simply wasn't ready by the time the game went gold, and just happened to be ready by release (remember, a game tends to go gold a good month before release, so developers are free to polish up and finish DLC during that month in between gold and release), I can understand that and have no problem with it.
Captain Tuttle
Member
Holy shit this.Bad hair and running animations bug the shit out of me.
southsidewolf
Neo Member
I've agreed with a bunch of comments so far. A couple of things that a few folks haven't mentioned are:
- Digital purchases not offering the costs savings you'd expect from no physical manufacture / packaging / distribution (in many cases being laughably expensive)
- PSN downloadable content still requiring first-play updates (not sure about 360) - why don't you replace the original executable with a patched version so that I don't have to download twice the content to start the game?
- Digital purchases not offering the costs savings you'd expect from no physical manufacture / packaging / distribution (in many cases being laughably expensive)
- PSN downloadable content still requiring first-play updates (not sure about 360) - why don't you replace the original executable with a patched version so that I don't have to download twice the content to start the game?
Soodanim
Member
I have a problem with the way that games do things before you even get to the title screen. When I put in a game, I want one of either two things to happen, and it usually goes wrong either way: I want to walk away from the console and come back to the TV (which is ruined by "This game has auto save, press X to acknowledge that we've wasted your time with this"), or I want to get to the main menu as quickly as possible (which is ruined by unskippable (or not skippable quickly enough) "Here's the 10 groups and technologies that made this game possible" animations. If your animation isn't iconic like the Sega screen or even slightly interesting to look at (the sound of Capcom's PS1 intro, like in RE2) not one of the 7 billion people on this planet gives a shit.
Make me view them once (including the auto-save warning) and flag it so that I don't ever have to see them again. I'd be happy with that.
And once I'm at the menus, I want to be able to navigate them as quickly as possible. That goes for all menus, including pause screens. I don't want delays during which my inputs do nothing.
If Modern Warfare 2 did anything right, it was this stuff. At least, that's how I remember it. You can go from console OS to multiplayer in about a minute. While we're at it, why can't we have a shortcut from OS straight to multiplayer?
Make me view them once (including the auto-save warning) and flag it so that I don't ever have to see them again. I'd be happy with that.
And once I'm at the menus, I want to be able to navigate them as quickly as possible. That goes for all menus, including pause screens. I don't want delays during which my inputs do nothing.
If Modern Warfare 2 did anything right, it was this stuff. At least, that's how I remember it. You can go from console OS to multiplayer in about a minute. While we're at it, why can't we have a shortcut from OS straight to multiplayer?