My Pet hates in modern gaming, feel free to add yours...

Ryan711 said:
Uh, newsflash: someone owns the rights to the game, and they can (and probably will) remake them if the market wants it. Don't know where you're getting the idea that just because something is copyrighted, that the company that owns the copyright can't use them.
Click to expand...

You know, I'd love to be as optimistic as you are, but I never expect to see any of the old titles return as a "touched up but otherwise the same reworking" We live in the day of companies like EA and Activision...who don't want to give that stuff up...and if they remake it, it'll be a reinvention. You'll never see a game like Deus Ex again. You'll instead see new versions of it like the new prequel that, while they may be great themselves, are nothing like the original.

As I said before, I don't want remakes. I just want the games to work on a current day PC, no virtual machine or dosbox or any other magic needed. And to some degree, this is there already (though, Kings Quest Mask of Eternety for example fails for it's reliance on GLIDE.)
 
DeathPrincess said:
He obviously didn't do much online deathmatch in the 90s. There was a "tier system" there was 28/36/56k and Cable/adsl/T1. The "ping" value denoted how good a player was. Well at least helped a load.
Click to expand...

He was probably like me in the 90s - LAN player.
wow I haven't been to a LAN since '02 I think.
 
FPS games assume I'm using a FUCKING Xbox controller, and I can't rebind half the keys without using other software

Needing to aim down the sight to hit anything more than a meter away.

Sprinting these days now feels like walking in older games

Can't even shoot your gun while sprinting

Games that now empower explosives/auto turrets/vehicle spammers to dominate over people that actually have aim with a machine gun
 
Ruiner said:
http://www.cracked.com/article_15748_gamers-manifesto.html
http://www.cracked.com/article_15732_life-after-video-game-crash.html
From 2007. The more things change....

I'll throw minigames in as one of my pet peeves and crafting and excessively complex inventories. I already have a job and it's tedious enough, thanks.
Click to expand...

I like the loading one. I want the elevator scenes from ME1 back, damn you BIoware! The loading screens in ME2 take JUST AS LONG as the Elevator scenes in ME1. So give me the fucking elevator back, where my crew members interact...and I hear news. That was more entertaining than watching the elevator move from the 2nd to the 3rd floor of the Normandy.

Jesus people bitched about the elevators, so they removed them. People need to bitch less, and developers (well, designers) need to think more.
 
Sniping guns. Let's 'propose' sniping guns without using the cool buzzword to describe them, from the perspective of a game feature idea guy:

"So, we'll have this gun, right, and it'll be able to shoot you from, say, a mile away, and it will be small so you can hide in a bush and be invisible while using it, and you can zoom in making the shot retardly easy while the other guy can't zoom on you if he ever does find you, and the shot usually kills you in one hit, making it so you have no chance against someone with this gun until they've killed you and probably a lot of your team several times to enable you to figure out the location of the shooter, then once they do figure out your location you can simply move to some other random bush and repeat the process."

Yea, exactly. But call it a SNIPER role, and everyone is like "cool!"

Now, I understand games are frequently about war, and in war there is sniping. But the whole realism argument should take a back seat to FUN, Snipers in a game is NOT fun, unless you're the lame sniper. For everyone else it's basically just die over and over until you hunt down the 'sniper' and kill him, then repeat with a new bush on the other side of the map or whatever. Lots of things about war, are however, not put into games, even though they're realistic, snipers should definitely be in that category, or else a very watered down sniping role, where the zoom is maybe 2x what a normal gun is and the shot does not kill you in one hit, more like 3 or 4. Alas, my voice will never be heard over the screaming teenagers that think racking up a high k:d by hiding in a bush all day would make them a kick ass real life soldier.
 
rampantandroid said:
I like the loading one. I want the elevator scenes from ME1 back, damn you BIoware! The loading screens in ME2 take JUST AS LONG as the Elevator scenes in ME1. So give me the fucking elevator back, where my crew members interact...and I hear news. That was more entertaining than watching the elevator move from the 2nd to the 3rd floor of the Normandy.

Jesus people bitched about the elevators, so they removed them. People need to bitch less, and developers (well, designers) need to think more.
Click to expand...

Oh, man, completely agreed.. I remembered when I first played ME2 and was like "Yay! No more elevators!" Then two minutes later, I was like "Crap, another loading screen. I wonder what smartass thing Miranda would be saying about our latest exploits on the news."
 
I like sniping a lot, in games where it requires skill like the original BF1942 where you had to lead your target a lot, and there wasn't always a lot of cover, it was really tricky.

The problem I have with snipers is in class based games where usually each class has a purpose, a natural enemy and a natural hunter. For example assault counters support classes but is weak to armour, armour chews up infantry but is weak to anti armour troops, anti armour troops can take down vehicles but are weak to assault, so you need a good balance of all these things to win.

The snipers tend to be good vs all classes and their only natural counter are other snipers, which leads to degenerative game play where you need more snipers to counter more snipers. Their camping nature leads assault teams heavy with snipers to be doomed to lose.
 
Speaking of sniping.
AWP in counterstrike *sigh* Anybody could use an awp and get kill everyone. It was all about eh scout in that game, you had to get a headshot for a one hit kill. Whereas the AWP could kill if shot in teh forearm.. lol
 
The AWP in counterstrike completely ruined the game for me, the game became about a race to the money for an AWP then about holding on to it for as long as possible. You end up with a map full of people with deagles and AWPs every single one of which is doing the same stupid thing where they jump around a corner, zoom in then hit the last weapon key back to deagle, rinse and repeat...

I moved almost exclusively to gungame in the end to actually see a variety in the weapons and tactics, and to avoid the long re-spawn timers, before ditching the game for good a while back.
 
Indeed! Ruined it for me, in the end i had about 3 favorite servers, 2 of which removed the AWP and the other restricted 1 per team, was much better. That said, i haven't played CS:S for about a year now..
 
Agree about the AWP in CS/CS:S. The only thing that kept me playing CS:S for so many years was the fact that I could always find a No AWP server close to me down here in Louisiana, I wish other games, like BF:BC2, had configurability like that but I guess it would invalidate the 'stats' if the gameplay was so different on every server.
The maker of CS said he regretted making the AWP so powerful, but figured he couldn't change it because it would upset too many people to make such a drastic change. And he's right, if the average CS kid couldn't go 30/0 with his stupid AWP he'd absolutely go ballistic..

But to expand a little, think of your average action/war movie. It is usually not just one guy sitting in a bush a mile a way killing everybody without being seen then the credits roll. Even though that'd be 'realistic' it is neither an interesting movie idea, in most cases (a couple of exceptions here and there) nor an interesting game play mechanic. People should go buy that 'deer hunter' game if they want to do that. But I'm so small a minority with this I might as well just live with it, just wanted to blow some 'steam' I guess.
 
Ruiner said:
http://www.cracked.com/article_15748_gamers-manifesto.html
http://www.cracked.com/article_15732_life-after-video-game-crash.html
From 2007. The more things change....

I'll throw minigames in as one of my pet peeves and crafting and excessively complex inventories. I already have a job and it's tedious enough, thanks.
Click to expand...

I enjoyed that article life after video games, despite it being written in 2007 it still makes a lot of points relevant to the modern gaming market.

We're in a stage of rapid growth in the video game market, most of which comes from console sales. There is a console in almost all living rooms now and everyone can play, it's created a massive audience that has allowed the gaming industry to clean overtake every other entertainment industry out there.

However the market is increasingly more business orientated and less game orientated, this leads to developers being pressured to make games that have the biggest appeal to the greater audience, strangely enough the games with the biggest appeal are not the best games, so we have a major conflict of interest here.

Lets face it, you can take almost any game, throw a large budget at it, create fancy FMVs and do a LOT of advertising and you'll sell a lot of copies, better yet create a franchise of games which are drawn out over multiple episodes or sequels and you simply multiply that up.

Don't believe me? Halo's advertising budget was bigger than the development costs, what does that tell you about the importance of building a good game? What modern games are you looking forward to that aren't attached to some kind of established franchise?

It's all about safe investment, about making money even if your decisions lead to a worse game. Gaming used to be more niche, gamers played games because they liked the games and developers had more artistic freedom to do what they thought made a good game, this dynamic means good games sell more, and it encourages building good games (oh wasn't it simple time back then!). You get a great idea for a game like Thief and you put in complex mechanics and you don't dumb them mechanics down because it will alienate some players, them players can either learn the mechanics of the game or fuck off, you don't bend the mechanics of the game to suit every damn player out there or you end up with a generic mess crammed with quicktime events and all sorts of shit. So if you're in the market for a sneak-em-up and you buy thief by golly-fuck it's a good game tailored specifically for people looking for sneak-em-ups.

Now we have to cater for everyone, ADD kids with attention spans of 13 seconds, people who are incredibly lousy at games, etc. Basically if you have money you're a potential target for a sale and the game should be designed in a way so you can pick it up and play. It's not acceptable to build a niche game for 1 specific audience because that represents a bad ROI, it's all about money money money.

Lets face it the console market boomed and it's dragged the PC market down with it, the PC market is still healthy, you can still make niche games and make money from them games (indy games prove this point nicely) but the investors aren't interested in making just an average amount of money they want more more more, a regular profit isn't enough, you need a maximised profit even if it destroys the product you're selling.

I really hope that the whole console craze dies down, and the PC market at some point can recover from this slump of mediocre games, It's likely to never happen, but one can dream. Meanwhile I think the move towards digital distribution is going to allow indie developers a position in the gaming world, these are developers who sell games based on the merit of the actual game itself and lead to truly good content.

This is why the minecraft thread is bigger than all of the medal of honour threads put together, someone built something fucking good and people are naturally attracted to it.
 
Last edited:
Rossi~ said:
Indeed! Ruined it for me, in the end i had about 3 favorite servers, 2 of which removed the AWP and the other restricted 1 per team, was much better. That said, i haven't played CS:S for about a year now..
Click to expand...

I quit a while back just because 6 years was enough, but I can tell you the of the top 10 most populated servers left the majority of them are now either awp/auto restricted or banned altogether. Youd think Valve would have gotten the hint by now.
 
piscian18 said:
I quit a while back just because 6 years was enough, but I can tell you the of the top 10 most populated servers left the majority of them are now either awp/auto restricted or banned altogether. Youd think Valve would have gotten the hint by now.
Click to expand...

its funny that a whole page of complaining just happened saying how valve should learn, when they have it down... Is the awp an overpowered gun? yes. Do many games have an overpowered sniper? well, in the sense that they have one that is too easy to aim, yes. Has Valve "learned"? well ya because they allow mods so that you can restrict whether or not a gun can be used, or even go as far as to say you get 1 per team. That's the way games need to be... so here you go:

my biggest "pet hate" is when games are matchmaking only, or the servers you set up have so few customization options that it might as well be matchmaking only.
 
piscian18 said:
I quit a while back just because 6 years was enough, but I can tell you the of the top 10 most populated servers left the majority of them are now either awp/auto restricted or banned altogether. Youd think Valve would have gotten the hint by now.
Click to expand...

I never really had an issue with that. Valve left the gun in for the people who wanted it on their servers. It was also very easy to restrict/remove for the people who didn't want it on the servers. I always played with servers it was banned on (if I wasn't screwing around with a gun game server of course), but that doesn't mean they need to remove it from the game.
 
vengence said:
I never really had an issue with that. Valve left the gun in for the people who wanted it on their servers. It was also very easy to restrict/remove for the people who didn't want it on the servers. I always played with servers it was banned on (if I wasn't screwing around with a gun game server of course), but that doesn't mean they need to remove it from the game.
Click to expand...

I think it's more a balancing issue. I agree it's nice to have a dev who is willing to hand over the reigns to balance the game ourselves, however the AWP complaint has been universal since it's inception. I've never seen a pro Cal M/I actually defend the AWP as a balanced weapon. You're running around a server like sonic the hedgehog with an anti-tank gun. It's not even a realism issue it's just a silly weapon. The irony is that the AWP is negated by the shitty hit registry, but I'll skip over that one. I'm just saying it's a simple fix that in most other games who have been fixed by most other Dev's early on. It's surprising how random Valve's "give a shit" is.
 
Caught this over at Guru3D forums;

gaming.png


:p I honestly don't know which evil is preferable anymore! :cool:
 
piscian18 said:
I think it's more a balancing issue. I agree it's nice to have a dev who is willing to hand over the reigns to balance the game ourselves, however the AWP complaint has been universal since it's inception. I've never seen a pro Cal M/I actually defend the AWP as a balanced weapon. You're running around a server like sonic the hedgehog with an anti-tank gun. It's not even a realism issue it's just a silly weapon. The irony is that the AWP is negated by the shitty hit registry, but I'll skip over that one. I'm just saying it's a simple fix that in most other games who have been fixed by most other Dev's early on. It's surprising how random Valve's "give a shit" is.
Click to expand...

Oh, theres no question it's out of balance. But so is nade spam, "last stand", or rocket launchers.
 
Regenerating health in first person shooters. There are not words for how evil I feel this is.
 
My dislikes:

Health Regeneration. Yep, I'm another person who can't stand this. If you want health regeneration, ADD A MEDIC CLASS. Why do I dislike it? For the same reasons other people have posted here.

Lag Compensation. Yeah, I know not everyone is on an even playing field. But lag compensation hasn't evened the playing field, but switched it. It use to be the person living 15 miles from the server had a slight advantage compared to everyone else. If you had a higher ping (50+), you learned to compensate and aim ahead. Now, the person living across the country (or world), warps like crazy so your shots don't hit, and when he's shooting at you, you go behind cover only to die 2 seconds later because on his screen, you were standing still out in the open.

Spawn Protection. Seriously dev's, we've had FPS's for over 15 years now, and you still can't get it right. Either you remove all the protection so you end up spawn camped to death (ala the new MoH), or you put in invincibility so the person can just grab an MG and mow you down for 5+ seconds while you can't do anything about it. Is it to hard to add spawn protection for a limited time until you make an action?

Team Balance. I get it. You don't like to lose. But for most online games, you're not playing competively, but on a pub. Yet people are so ****ing concerned about the leaderboards that they need to make sure they're on the winning team. Auto balance SHOULD BE ON BY DEFAULT,

Save Points. Gawd, this bugs me. One of the plusses of PC games compared to console games was that in console games, you could only save at specific locations, whereas PC games, you could save when and where you wanted. But due to having more games ported over, we're stuck with this. Maybe I need to leave in 2 minutes and can't spend 5 minutes getting to the next save point. And what really bugs me is when you have a ****ing 10 minute movie before a boss fight, but after the save point. Die to the boss? Now, have to watch the movie all over again. (And naturally you can't skip it, because many dev's, particuarly Japanese ones still haven't grasped the concept of skipping movies.)

Tutorial levels. It use to be you could get a game, and start playing it. If you needed to know what to do, you could read the manual, because that was what it was for. Now, you have to spend the first 2 hours of a game going over unskippable tutorial levels. Sometimes the devs think they're clever when an NPC states "I once heard that you can press A to jump, but I'm not sure what that means", but it's retarded no matter how you try to disguise it. If you want tutorial levels, MAKE THEM OPTIONAL AT THE START MENU, AND NOT INTEGRATED WITH THE GAME!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top