Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Whining about Modern Videogames [Top 5 Dislikes]

Author
Message
Wolf
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 27th May 2011 03:31 Edited at: 29th May 2011 04:56
Link
Hey guys!

In this thread I would like to post drama about what I sincerely despise in new big studio videogame releases. Awesome, eh? No? Well...nevermind:

Number 5: Regenerative Health.
I know, I know! A lot of you guys might like this...but this is MY list! So, I play a military shooter, get shot 10 times, a grenade hits me or I fall in a bottomless pit... no problem! Lets crouch somewhere and I will magically heal all my wounds while endless allies spawn and fight as long as I don't move. If I die? No problem, there is an autosave point every 5 steps.

Hey, I know old health and save system could get frustrating, but this kind of solution is killing a lot of the challenge and the actual "fear" of getting hit from me. It also makes the whole game way too easy...this is where we get to part 4

Number 4 Challenge

Yeah! Good old challengine videogames...the feeling of holding your breath while concentrating on the screen like a cat on a mouse...long long ago. New games are way too easy. (most likely to please a larger amount of players). I can take 4 times the damage of my opponents, my health regenerates automatically or healthpacks are everywhere and if I die, I will respawn only few steps back and almost nothing happened. Boss fights and riddles are fairly simple. I realize that the game would be horrible if I would take its impressive visual and sound effects.

Number 3 Controls

What is going on with the controls in nowadays games? I can nearly do everything with a single button. Press "e" to do this, Press "e" to perform a melee attack (and watch a cutscene... no way I could actually fight that opponent...NO! All I do is pressing "e")
Press "e" here and there and everywhere. Interactive cutscenes aren't interactive at all... they pause here and there so I can press "e" -.- This is really frustrating. Especially third person shooters. I watch my character athletically jump from cover to cover and take out opponents but I barely press any buttons. Jumping around and getting to cover wasn't that optimised in older titles... it was far more challenging and one was happy after a spectacular move...now, one thrillride chases the other without the player doing ANYTHING.

Number 2 Creativity

Hey! I believe that the scenarios in a lot of big company games are great... but they seem lifeless...where there where few jokes, innovations and flaws in older games that made it feel vivid and the player (in some way) more connected to it are now market investigators and consulters. Companies want to sell, and thats why they use a concept that sold before. thats okay...videogames are much bigger business than they used to be, but what really bothers me is: If a good game sells, they are pumping out dozens of sequel until every vain in this concept is dried out and people are fed up with it. the worst part is that they drag indie or less popular but NEW games out of the spotlight. So does all this concept stealing and copying that is going on out there lately.

Number 1 Gamelength.

You know that feeling? Buying a brand new game that you've seen a fantastic trailer from, installing it, starting to play... having a little fun over the weekend, getting to work on monday, not playing, playing a little on tuesday, having some time on wednesday and BAM! Ending credits... disbelief, frustration.

For me, 5 hours is simplay NOT an acceptable length for a fullprice videogame. That is almost an offence to the customer!

Okay, thats it, if you red it, you might aswell post what you think about it.


Stormwire Added more interesting aspects:
Quote: "
5) Lack of interesting characters

I know you cant hit the nail on the head with every new franchise but for the love of God could modern game characters be more generic. All characters in COD games are completely forgettable. I cant even remember any names right now while I write this. We need more Dukes, Laras, Garretts etc This might not be a problem for everybody but honestly I just cant get behind modern game characters. Even the revamped oldies.

4) Idiot proof level design

There was a time when you would easily get lost in a level even if you played the game many times. This was never a good thing but beating me over the head with broken lights, blood trails, paths built into the HUD or even being flat out told everything you have to do has gotten to the point of the gamer not needing to think for themselves. This in my book is bad level design. Many call it dumbing down but for me it is just really bad level design. Not from a lack of skill mind just bad decisions based on marketing data. I feckin hate marketers and there "the audience is a idiot" attitude. That exact attitude made films dumber over the years. Now we are seeing it more and more in games. It is not consoles or even game developers doing these things it is the marketers and there "notes".

3) Modern gamers

Yep I went there What ever you say about modern games you have to agree that modern gamers are a different breed to what came before. Gamers are nothing but consumers these days. They buy the same old crap and act like a bunch of spoilt brats when introduced to something different. An example off the top of my head would be a game like Red Faction Guerrilla. The response to a game where you can obliterate entire buildings was pathetic. Also Prototype. A game where you can do literally anything you want. There was a time gamers used to drool over even the hint of these types of features in a game but now gamers seem to just want to buy the same game with shinier graphics and whine about anything that tries to be different. It is like the movie and music industries all over again.

Also the lack of maturity during online play is a huge turn off and doesn't seem to be getting any better. I am all for psyching the apposing team but can we please have one game with out constant fighting among team members? In my experience adults have been the worst culprits of this behavior. I have had more run ins with adults online than kids.

2) EA

Nuff said

1) Me monies worth

I'm not getting it! If your going to charge 50+ for a game you better be damn sure it has the following, support, patches, free content, free updates and modding tools. Without these I don't feel I got value for money. You may not agree with this but 50 and up is just too expensive for a couple hours play. I cant afford it and feel completely cheated when I pay full price for a game that doesn't even get patched but the developer decides to release a second game within the year and asks for full price again. This happens way too much nowadays. Over pricing products especially in current hard times cant be good for business and the gaming market at large.
"




-Wolf

I make serious coffee - so strong it wakes up the neighbors.
http://serygalacaffeine.deviantart.com/
Twitter: @Serygala
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Vent
FPSC Master
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Apr 2009
Location: BC
Posted: 27th May 2011 04:05 Edited at: 27th May 2011 04:10
Link
I agree.

I both like and dislike the regenerative health, I like that I won't get stuck in a certain area without a chance of escape because every time I get attacked, I die because my health is so low. But I agree it takes a lot challenge from the game.

I like the way Medal of Honour: Airborne did their health system, if I remember correctly, you get 4 little health bars that decrease when hit, but regenerate when safe, but if you get hit to much and the health bar drops all the way, you lose it... I liked that game, dropping in where you want in the level was nice.

Quote: "5 hours is simplay NOT an acceptable length for a fullprice videogame."


This is the exact reason why I didn't buy Homefront, I rented it, and finished it in a few days (which translated into 4-5 hours). I tried playing the multiplayer, but I couldn't get into many matches... or past level 5 because I had no code... -.-



Back to top
Profile PM Email
t10dimensional
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Mar 2009
Location: Code Cave, USA
Posted: 27th May 2011 04:15
Link
All in all, main stream games will be made for the majority. Its just like economics, what the people are demanding or buying the suppliers will make. If the 8-year old's start asking their mom for a deep story challenging game, then, because that is 51% of players now days(joke), their will be more games made by the big companies like that. But really if you look their are plenty of indie and low budget games that have your preference of game play, just lacking big money traits.


If I always made the right decision the first time, I wouldn't have changed my name from razerx.
Back to top
Profile PM
crispex
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Jun 2007
Location:
Posted: 27th May 2011 06:43
Link
This is pretty much it. Games used to be so long...and unforgiving. Really made them worth playing.

I just now realized I've had a typo in my signature for the past 3 years.
Back to top
Profile PM
Grog Grueslayer
Valued Member
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th May 2005
Playing: Green Hell
Posted: 27th May 2011 07:25
Link
I agree with all the points especially the short non-challenging games we have today. I finally got The Orange Box. The first game I played was Portal and finished it in 3 hours (Half-Life was longer thank God).

Add to that list the fact that all games come with cheats and guides to the games that sell right along with the games (or are easily found on the internet). Because of that most kids know how to finish the game before they've even tried to play it.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Phaelax
DBPro Master
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Apr 2003
Location: Metropia
Posted: 27th May 2011 08:46
Link
Quote: "I can nearly do everything with a single button. Press "e" to do this, Press "e" to perform a melee attack"

And here I thought games were requiring too many buttons.

Quote: "Number 1 Gamelength."

I agree on this one. The first Unreal game I spent months playing without reaching the end. I was excited to play Unreal 2 when it was released. I beat that game in about 2-3 days, and most of my time was watching stupid cut-scenes I couldn't skip. Nothing irritates me more than video game cut-scenes without a way to skip them.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
uzi idiot
Valued Member
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2009
Location: Who Knows?
Posted: 27th May 2011 09:18
Link
I agree.

My list would be:

1. Regenerating health
2. Cover based combat
3. quick-time events
4. short length
5. communities full of screaming 10 year old kids who have never played the single player campaign.


Mental Stability is over-rated!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Phaelax
DBPro Master
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Apr 2003
Location: Metropia
Posted: 27th May 2011 11:35
Link
Oh yea, I forgot. Voice chat! I don't need to hear the other players talking or their stupid music playing in the game. If I wanted that, I'd sign onto a Vent server.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 27th May 2011 11:45
Link
... but despite everyone's whining, you'll all continue to buy these games. Despite your complaining, you're actively supporting this perpetual cesspit of recycled garbage.

Just stop buying the bloody games!!!! I don't!!!

Back to top
Profile PM
David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 27th May 2011 11:50 Edited at: 27th May 2011 11:52
Link
I disagree with game length

Lots of top-rating games are frequently lambasted for their short length, but have gamers not yet realised the length<->quality relationship? They're not mutually exclusive: A lot of great games ooze with quality because they're not just trying to stretch the experience out with fluff or grind. Not to mention the pacing or consistency suffering when stretched to a great length.

Most 'long games' just seem to be good gameplay interspersed with grinds to pad them out. "Short games" take out the grind most of the time. How can that be a bad thing? I'd rather pay for a short game than an artificially lengthened one any day

09-f9-11-02-9d-74-e3-5b-d8-41-56-c5-63-56-88-c0
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Thraxas
Retired Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2006
Location: The Avenging Axe, Turai
Posted: 27th May 2011 12:04
Link
Game length becoming shorter is something I just don't agree with. I think people are stuck in the past of single player games.

I've been playing computer games for about 25 years and I look back on all those consoles and all those games I've played and I don't believe games are getting shorter. I'm struggling to think of any games that apart from their difficulty have more than 5-10 hours of actual gameplay in (not including RPGs obviously), some people might find failing the same section of a game over and over fun but lots don't.

They have become easier, which mean you finish them faster, which makes you think games are shorter. Then there are those games which are tailored towards online play. These games get a short single player game attached to them because people expect it. Then they moan how short the campaign is, instead of being thankful that they got a single player game in there at all.

At the end of the day a game has as much length in it as you want it to have. I find that so many games are released now that people have this throw away attitude to games. Play it through once, trade it in because the next big thing has come out. People used to play their games to death, and now they don't and that is why they believe their old games were longer.

Fallout 3 took me hardly any time to complete but I keep seeing people cite it as a long game. I don't think it even lasted 10 hours.

Your sig has been redacted by...
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 27th May 2011 12:53 Edited at: 27th May 2011 12:54
Link
Fallout3 has so much in it, that if you complete it in 10 hours, you've only seen 1/4 of the game. I've done everything in Fallout3, every location, quest, weapon recipe, and I must have clocked up a good 70-100 hours gameplay.

I think DavidR raises a good point - just because a game lasts 5 hours, doesn't mean there's no replay value, or that somehow you get less value for money. Truth is, the last couple of games I've bought are quite short, but I don't feel that I've been done. Portal2 for example is quite short, and LA Noire is real short for a GTA-style game. Both games though, I'd recommend. It's not as if people expect Portal2 to last 40 hours, or a game like LA Noire to have countless hours of free-roam gameplay.

There are always sandbox games out there, like GTA4, Fallout3, Red Dead Redemption, so it's fair I think, that some games have a heavier storyline and shorter campaign. If it wasn't for that 'allowance', we wouldn't have those awesome actors and face animation technology in Noire, or the great voice acting and characters in Portal2. The popularity and acceptance of shorter but richer games has made these things possible, pushing games further towards the movie industries techniques, marketting, and even budgets.

Health, Ammo, and bacon and eggs!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Thraxas
Retired Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2006
Location: The Avenging Axe, Turai
Posted: 27th May 2011 13:00
Link
Quote: "Fallout3 has so much in it, that if you complete it in 10 hours, you've only seen 1/4 of the game."


Much like if you buy a FPS and never take it online... you haven't played the whole game, but people will whine and say the game is too short. Although 10 hours was plenty for me, I felt it was inferior to the previous Fallout games, and New Vegas was so boring I didn't even try to finish it.

I actually think L.A. Noire would be a better game if the whole sandbox thing hadn't been added in. It seems to me like it was added to make it more R* when in fact it would have been better without it. I do think everyone should play it though, I've loved every minute of it so far.

Your sig has been redacted by...
Back to top
Profile PM Email
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 27th May 2011 13:13
Link
One thing I found after replaying Halo 2 after years and yers of not playing it is that Microsoft ruin games.

Halo 2 was the game that prompted MS to buy Bungie, and start controlling the Halo 3 development. The result is about 100 ways of dumbimng down the challenge, from flood no longer being able to drive vehicles, to removing enforcers, stopping scarabs from being invincible, nerfing the scorpion, making flood weak to melee, and many more.

IMO Halo 2 is the best Halo there was, mainly during the 100,000 Years War chapter. It's the only sequence that feels like a full scale war before Reach came out.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Neuro Fuzzy
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Jun 2007
Location:
Posted: 27th May 2011 13:39
Link
the scorpion not being able to snipe made me sad

Honestly, the minor bugs and quirks of some games make them way more fun. It's always saddening when I read about some really cool bug you can do for an xbox 360, and then I read "Note: if you have the latest patch this doesn't work". shoots my hopes down every time. On a related note, I hate it when I'm trying to get to some cool place, and an invisible wall blocks me.

The two things I really want to do in a halo game are:
spawn NPCs in edit mode
drive a scarab


Tell me if there's a broken link to images in a thread I post, and I'll fix 'em.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
tha_rami
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 27th May 2011 13:57
Link
I disagree with all but challenge, and I believe challenge and regenerating health are the same thing.

5 hours of gameplay isn't enough? You're being nostalgic, as you could complete Super Mario Bros in about 5 minutes. More soul & creativity? Maybe the best games you remember, as a lot of them were absolute crap.

Business guy and developer at [url]www.vlambeer.com[/url] - bringing back arcade since 1956.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Kevin Picone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posted: 27th May 2011 16:13
Link
Quote: "You're being nostalgic, as you could complete Super Mario Bros in about 5 minutes"


yeah some 20->30 odd years after it's release.. Certainly not on your first play through.


Hmm, I wonder what's coming in 2011?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
tha_rami
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 27th May 2011 16:34 Edited at: 27th May 2011 16:35
Link
Quote: "yeah some 20->30 odd years after it's release.. Certainly not on your first play through."

Nonsense, I first completed the game three weeks after I got it and after a month or two, could run through it in twenty minutes or so - and that was mostly because I wasn't allowed to game for longer than an hour a day & because of what we now consider unfair punishment. The games didn't have more content, they were less forgiving. Like I said, challenge is the only point I can agree with.

Business guy and developer at [url]www.vlambeer.com[/url] - bringing back arcade since 1956.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 27th May 2011 16:59
Link
Quote: "The two things I really want to do in a halo game are:
spawn NPCs in edit mode
drive a scarab"


WHY IS FLY A PELICAN ABSENT!?
Back to top
Profile PM Email
bruce3371
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Aug 2010
Location: Englishland
Posted: 27th May 2011 17:35
Link
I agree with most of your points wolf, but I'm not so sure about game length. I'm more concerned with a game's longevity. What I mean is this, when I've completed a game, do I want to go back and play it again?

An example is this, HL OpFor; not a particularly long game, but I like to go back to it and re-play my favourite sections of the game, or play through the whole game again, with cheats enabled, 'nade spamming everything!

Which brings up a point, which has already been made, about cheats in a game. The 1st time I play a game, I never cheat. But if the game is worth replaying, I play through it again with the cheats enabled, just to see what is possible! I get a real kick out of 'nade spamming the Half-Life games and shouting "In your face MoFo" (or words to that effect)!!

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 27th May 2011 17:53
Link
I know what you mean Bruce, I like doing that with Resident Evil 4 - replay it with the unlimited ammo RPG, and the other souped-up guns you get after completing it. It's like going back and getting revenge on the enemies - especially those monk guys - nothing better than shooting them and their shields all to hell.

I don't really like, or see the point in the alignment of player characters - like in Fable, or Fallout3, you can gain or loose karma, alignment etc. Usually I play the campaign as a good guy, then turn a bit nasty once the games done... Fallout3 and Oblivion are the best games for revenge. The thing about alignment though is that they always exagerate the effect - Molyneux sized exagerations usually. It tends to boil down to restricting the player, rather than rewarding them - especially in the Fable games. I'd rather just have a storyline with an ending, I don't need multiple endings depending on how many NPC's I slaughtered without reason.

Health, Ammo, and bacon and eggs!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Kevin Picone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posted: 27th May 2011 18:57 Edited at: 27th May 2011 18:58
Link
Quote: "Nonsense, I first completed the game three weeks after I got it and after a month or two, could run through it in twenty minutes or so - and that was mostly because I wasn't allowed to game for longer than an hour a day & because of what we now consider unfair punishment."


erm, sounds familiar

Point-> Once a player learns the path through a game, of course they're going to be more efficient at completing it on successive attempts.

Which is true for old & new games.


Quote: " The games didn't have more content, they were less forgiving. Like I said, challenge is the only point I can agree with."



Too much is made of length, for me the value of any gaming experience comes more from some sense of accomplishment, than a clock.

I agree with Wolf, many games nanny the player to the point of distraction.

Where is the challenge in playing through some FPS game, if the players progress consists of. Clear Room/sector-> Collect Items -> Save My Progress -> Repeat until end of game. Dying has no penalty, Just reload and play again infinitely.


Hmm, I wonder what's coming in 2011?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Benjamin
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 27th May 2011 18:59 Edited at: 27th May 2011 19:01
Link
I agree with all points except for regenerative health, which I do like in some cases.

Quote: "Nonsense, I first completed the game three weeks after I got it and after a month or two, could run through it in twenty minutes or so"


Quite impressive. I remember when I was younger (10-13) and would literally spend hours trying to beat it, simply because it was such a challenge. These days I'm much better at gaming in general, so I can usually get quite far, although not always beat it since there are certain things that you have to memorize (such as how to tackle the hammer brothers at specific points). Fair enough that you learned to do it in 20 minutes, but it still took you 3 weeks to complete the game in the first place, which is what I call good game length.

Quote: "Where is the challenge in playing through some FPS game, if the players progress consists of. Clear Room/sector-> Collect Items -> Save My Progress -> Repeat until end of game. Dying has no penalty, Just reload and play again infinitely."


Agreed. Games these days are too easy and forgiving, which is one of the reasons many of them can be beaten in a relatively short amount of time.



Support a charitable indie game project!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
bitJericho
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 27th May 2011 19:00
Link
Goonies 2 was like an 8 hour affair. Even once you were pretty good at it. That was a tough game. It did have continues though!

[center]Official TGC President elect.
Pwning newbs since 2002.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
bruce3371
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Aug 2010
Location: Englishland
Posted: 27th May 2011 20:44
Link
I think a lot of games instill a certain amount ennui about dying, it's a question of "I died, oh well, back to my last save", or "I'm dying, I'll just rest here for a bit". There's no real sense of consequence about it.

I enjoy playing games where if you die, that's it, mission failed. Or if an NPC, or group of NPCs die; mission failed. Games like Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon require carefull planning, where each decision in the planning stage, has consequences once you start to play the mission itself.

The point I'm trying to make (before I end up going way off topic!) is that I agree with Wolf about the regenerative health. It makes the game too easy, with no feeling of consequence if you die, or come close to dying in-game.

At least with health pick ups, you have to be carefull about what you're doing, because you never know where the next pick up will be.

Aliens vs. Predator (The classic 2000 version) did the health pick up thing well, as they were randomly placed throughout each level, and rarely in the same place each time you played.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Phaelax
DBPro Master
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Apr 2003
Location: Metropia
Posted: 27th May 2011 21:43
Link
Quote: "They have become easier, which mean you finish them faster, which makes you think games are shorter"

that is possible.


I loved the Thief series and the first Deus Ex. Single player games I've beat multiple times but could still have playing all over again.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
charger bandit
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Nov 2009
Location: Slovenia
Posted: 27th May 2011 21:50
Link
I have just revisited completing Half Life,damn that game is long. It's even longer than I remember it. It's like playing all Call Of Duty games at once.


Back to top
Profile PM Email
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 27th May 2011 21:58
Link
Yeh Half Life is easily longer than hte most recent 3 CoD's put together.

And yet is also much better despite pre dating them by a decade.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Fatal Berserker
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Jul 2010
Location:
Posted: 27th May 2011 22:21
Link
1.) Dumbing games/series down.

Back to top
Profile PM
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 27th May 2011 22:43
Link
^Greatest crime in Halo.

Don't watch this if you hate happiness.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
tha_rami
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 28th May 2011 03:02 Edited at: 28th May 2011 03:15
Link
Quote: "Fair enough that you learned to do it in 20 minutes, but it still took you 3 weeks to complete the game in the first place, which is what I call good game length."

Yeah, but if that were today, I wouldn't even have gotten to completing the game. Challenge is all fine, but making me restart the entire game upon dying thrice? No way.

Personally, I still prefer enjoying a 20 minute game superintensely over moderately enjoying a 6 hour game.

Business guy and developer at [url]www.vlambeer.com[/url] - bringing back arcade since 1956.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Thraxas
Retired Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2006
Location: The Avenging Axe, Turai
Posted: 28th May 2011 03:19 Edited at: 28th May 2011 03:22
Link
Quote: "Fair enough that you learned to do it in 20 minutes, but it still took you 3 weeks to complete the game in the first place, which is what I call good game length."


Seems to me that you and I have different ideas about what constitutes game length. To me, in this example, you have 20 minutes of game play which is artificially increased by making it difficult. Like I said games are not shorter, they are just easier.

Your sig has been redacted by...
Back to top
Profile PM Email
bergice
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jun 2007
Location: Oslo,Norway
Posted: 28th May 2011 21:15
Link
Nice reasons and i agree with them all.

You should submit this to cracked! http://www.cracked.com/write-for-cracked/

Hi
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Stormwire
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Sep 2010
Location:
Posted: 28th May 2011 23:54
Link
My top five worst:

5) Lack of interesting characters

I know you cant hit the nail on the head with every new franchise but for the love of God could modern game characters be more generic. All characters in COD games are completely forgettable. I cant even remember any names right now while I write this. We need more Dukes, Laras, Garretts etc This might not be a problem for everybody but honestly I just cant get behind modern game characters. Even the revamped oldies.

4) Idiot proof level design

There was a time when you would easily get lost in a level even if you played the game many times. This was never a good thing but beating me over the head with broken lights, blood trails, paths built into the HUD or even being flat out told everything you have to do has gotten to the point of the gamer not needing to think for themselves. This in my book is bad level design. Many call it dumbing down but for me it is just really bad level design. Not from a lack of skill mind just bad decisions based on marketing data. I feckin hate marketers and there "the audience is a idiot" attitude. That exact attitude made films dumber over the years. Now we are seeing it more and more in games. It is not consoles or even game developers doing these things it is the marketers and there "notes".

3) Modern gamers

Yep I went there What ever you say about modern games you have to agree that modern gamers are a different breed to what came before. Gamers are nothing but consumers these days. They buy the same old crap and act like a bunch of spoilt brats when introduced to something different. An example off the top of my head would be a game like Red Faction Guerrilla. The response to a game where you can obliterate entire buildings was pathetic. Also Prototype. A game where you can do literally anything you want. There was a time gamers used to drool over even the hint of these types of features in a game but now gamers seem to just want to buy the same game with shinier graphics and whine about anything that tries to be different. It is like the movie and music industries all over again.

Also the lack of maturity during online play is a huge turn off and doesn't seem to be getting any better. I am all for psyching the apposing team but can we please have one game with out constant fighting among team members? In my experience adults have been the worst culprits of this behavior. I have had more run ins with adults online than kids.

2) EA

Nuff said

1) Me monies worth

I'm not getting it! If your going to charge 50+ for a game you better be damn sure it has the following, support, patches, free content, free updates and modding tools. Without these I don't feel I got value for money. You may not agree with this but 50 and up is just too expensive for a couple hours play. I cant afford it and feel completely cheated when I pay full price for a game that doesn't even get patched but the developer decides to release a second game within the year and asks for full price again. This happens way too much nowadays. Over pricing products especially in current hard times cant be good for business and the gaming market at large.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 29th May 2011 00:29
Link
Quote: "An example off the top of my head would be a game like Red Faction Guerrilla. The response to a game where you can obliterate entire buildings was pathetic."


That was one of my favourite games for months. I hate people who act like Battlefield invented firefights in destructable environments. Red Faction made firefights so intense because at any moment your precious cover could be blown away, or the tower you're sniping from could be brought crashing down by an enemy tank.

Quote: "Also Prototype."


Also good.

Don't watch this if you hate happiness.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Ocho Geek
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Aug 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posted: 29th May 2011 00:51
Link
Quote: "but what really bothers me is: If a good game sells, they are pumping out dozens of sequel until every vain in this concept is dried out and people are fed up with it"


For gods sake KILL MARIO

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Wolf
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 29th May 2011 04:58
Link
@bergice: Yeah! I think I'll add it there

@Stormwire: I added your points to the initial post. its true



-Wolf

I make serious coffee - so strong it wakes up the neighbors.
http://serygalacaffeine.deviantart.com/
Twitter: @Serygala
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
RedneckRambo
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Oct 2006
Location: Worst state in USA... California
Posted: 29th May 2011 06:27 Edited at: 29th May 2011 06:28
Link
Quote: "Seems to me that you and I have different ideas about what constitutes game length. To me, in this example, you have 20 minutes of game play which is artificially increased by making it difficult. Like I said games are not shorter, they are just easier."

Games are easier and that of course does make them shorter. However, it's not entirely true to say games aren't getting shorter. SINGLE PLAYER campaign games are getting shorter and I find that truly hard to argue. Because of the Multiplayer aspect of games, developers take from single player and add to multiplayer. With the addition of online play, gameplay is about the same in length, if not somewhat longer. I remember playing some playstation 1 games that took me probably 3 times as long to beat as the games nowadays and I didn't think they were any more difficult than our games today. But because of multiplayer, games can be played for a much, much longer time online than you ever could offline in single player.

AKA Jenkins
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Libervurto
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2006
Location: On Toast
Posted: 29th May 2011 15:42 Edited at: 29th May 2011 15:44
Link
I wish LA Noire was longer and more difficult. It could have been a great game, it was good, the facial animations were revolutionary and it was fun to play but there was too much spoon-feeding! Notice how I'm talking in the past tense a week after its release.

Games are FAR too easy these days, I don't want to feel like the developers are holding my hand through the whole thing! The first thing I do when I buy a game these days is go into the options menu and turn off all the assists, but it's still too easy.


Your memory has been erased by a mod - Your new name is Brian.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 29th May 2011 16:13
Link
Maybe a life of palying games has made you naturally good at them? So playing a game 10 years ago was hard, but now is very easy?

Although after playing Halo 3, then Halo 2, I do agree alot of dumbing down happens when Microsoft involves itself in game development.

Don't watch this if you hate happiness.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Benjamin
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 29th May 2011 16:27
Link
Quote: "but there was too much spoon-feeding"


Welcome to modern gaming.



Support a charitable indie game project!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
tha_rami
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 29th May 2011 16:35 Edited at: 29th May 2011 16:37
Link
My top 5 annoyances - not about modern games but about modern gamers.

5. Entitlement.
Gamers nowadays feel entitled to their games to an almost absurd extent. If they buy the game, they expect everything and they expect it yesterday. If the game is short, they want it to be longer even though an entire design, production & marketing crew decided this was probably the best length for the game. If you do something to combat second-hand sales, you're a greedy bastard. If the patches take too long, your forums get spammed or your website hacked. If you tweet about taking a day off, you're a lazy bastard. The customer did pay $10-$50, after all, so they're entitled to being your boss.

4. Picking on the big one
Whether its Activision-Blizzard or EA, if you're big, you're bad. Even though EA gambled millions on titles as Dead Space or Mirrors' Edge, they're still the bad guys - yet as soon as Activision-Blizzard grew bigger the anti-sentiments started flaring right away. These companies make games for the big market & in doing so, keep our industry a economically viable one - empowering hobbyists, indies and creative people to do their thing.

3. Abuse of the terms 'challenge' and 'gameplay'.
Challenge is a term that describes testing ones abilities or skills. It has nothing to do with game length, game accessibility, how many tutorials there are or how many automated helps there are available. Gameplay has nothing to do with anything that does not directly influence the game systems outcome - walking from A to B between two shootouts in a shooter is not gameplay - it's pacing.

2. Nostalgia
Games in the old days were better, longer, more fun, more challenging and better crafted. Games weren't made to earn money but to express creativity & characters had more soul to them. If you agree with any of the above, I consider you an idiot.

The games weren't better. They weren't longer. There were hardly any that were more fun even though you might remind them to be. Play that one game you love objectively or let someone else play it & chances are it will suck. Characters didn't have more soul than a Glados or a Freeman, they were plumbers with moustaches or a blue hedgehog. The lack of definition made us fill in the blanks, which is cool & all, but nowadays we'd feel the character was 'underdeveloped'.

Games weren't more challenging, they were less fair. If you want that type of challenge, I suggest you reboot your console and delete your save game every time you die three times. The majority of games were made to earn money, just like nowadays.

Take of them rose-colored glasses, the old games weren't always better. The only thing they always are is older. I'll play my Portals, thank you very much.

1. Piracy
Of course, number one annoyance is piracy. Sure, it boosts sales & all that & sure we as an industry need to cope with it & sure we need to find different ways of bringing our games to the customer but in the end, it is absolutely appaling to see people in our industry or aspirant developers pirating games.

Business guy and developer at [url]www.vlambeer.com[/url] - bringing back arcade since 1956.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Stormwire
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Sep 2010
Location:
Posted: 29th May 2011 16:41 Edited at: 29th May 2011 16:46
Link
Quote: "
That was one of my favourite games for months. I hate people who act like Battlefield invented firefights in destructable environments. Red Faction made firefights so intense because at any moment your precious cover could be blown away, or the tower you're sniping from could be brought crashing down by an enemy tank."


^Agree! It was so much fun blowing up bridges to take out a convoy or just running through buildings with one of the mechs lol

@Wolf Thank you

@Ocho Geek I am afraid Mario is going to be around for a long long time.

Quote: "If you agree with any of the above, I consider you an idiot."


No need to be so insulting. We are all having an open conversation about what we think not how it is. It is peoples opinion on current games not peoples opinion on each other. Clean it up.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 29th May 2011 17:32
Link
Quote: "^Agree! It was so much fun blowing up bridges to take out a convoy or just running through buildings with one of the mechs lol"


Looking forward to the sequel? It's set underground though, so I'm unsure how destructability's gunna play into that.

The thing with this argument is, there are good games out there that challenge you and are fun, everyone just locks onto CoD and bases their arguments against that.

Like Portal 2. That game definitely challenged me to sit back and think before moving, then when I did have my plan, I'd often have to deploy portals in a window of like two seconds while flying throguh the air at high speed.

Don't watch this if you hate happiness.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Wolf
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 29th May 2011 18:02
Link
@the rami: I do not aim at all new games and I never attacked the big companys. There are a ton of insanely awesome new games coming out!! I love that, but what annoys ol' Wolfie is that people are often not even buying these games. Its incredible what I find in the bargain bin (latest game: Red Faction Guerrilla for 3 bucks) while they are still selling Call of Duty 10.000 for 40 Euros. Somethings going wrong there.



-Wolf

I make serious coffee - so strong it wakes up the neighbors.
http://serygalacaffeine.deviantart.com/
Twitter: @Serygala
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
tha_rami
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 29th May 2011 18:03 Edited at: 29th May 2011 18:07
Link
Quote: "No need to be so insulting. We are all having an open conversation about what we think not how it is. It is peoples opinion on current games not peoples opinion on each other. Clean it up."

If I had a better word for it, I would use it. I am a bit baffled that you're telling me to not have my opinion while I explicitely state that this is an opinion (I even start with saying 'I consider'), then berating me to not allow an open discussion.

I believe there is no such thing as saying games from the old days were better: we now have the knowledge of what those games did right and wrong because they've been made & played & turned inside out, thus we're able to create better games.

@WOLF I never said you did. I just listed my annoyances with current-day game industry criticism.

Business guy and developer at [url]www.vlambeer.com[/url] - bringing back arcade since 1956.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Wolf
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 29th May 2011 18:07
Link
Quote: "@WOLF I never said you did. I just listed my annoyances with current-day game industry critisism."


A lot of players where kids when they started and are grown ups now...SO: they miss this magic effect games had on them through childhood eyes and blame it on the new games....that is, however, just a theory.



-Wolf

I make serious coffee - so strong it wakes up the neighbors.
http://serygalacaffeine.deviantart.com/
Twitter: @Serygala
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
tha_rami
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 29th May 2011 18:09
Link
Quote: "A lot of players where kids when they started and are grown ups now...SO: they miss this magic effect games had on them through childhood eyes and blame it on the new games....that is, however, just a theory."

I believe your theory is correct. They 'grew over it', just like they grow over LEGO and building blocks, then blame the new iterations of LEGO/building blocks/games on having less magic - while what is really happening is they fail to see it.

Business guy and developer at [url]www.vlambeer.com[/url] - bringing back arcade since 1956.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Benjamin
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 29th May 2011 18:17
Link
Quote: "we now have the knowledge of what those games did right and wrong because they've been made & played & turned inside out, thus we're able to create better games."


But we don't. We create shorter, dumbed-down games that a toddler could play.



Support a charitable indie game project!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
tha_rami
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 29th May 2011 18:32 Edited at: 29th May 2011 18:33
Link
Quote: "But we don't. We create shorter, dumbed-down games that a toddler could play."

You mean pretty much like back then, but without being unfair? I was a toddler back then & I could play those games, after all, but they kicked me back from 8-4 to 1-1 if I didn't clear the Hammer Bros. Nowadays, I go back a checkpoint and actually finish games. A lot better than dozens of games I never completed back in the days & can't be bothered to play anymore because they are so crappy. I'm all for challenge, like I said, but I'm against how we generalize that games are 'easy' while all they are is 'less unfair'. Super Meat Boy is a perfect example of a game that is challenging, less unfair & thus in all aspects a better way of 'difficult' than back in the days.

I completely agree we've got much ground we still need to cover in terms of gameplay, but to say it was better back then - it wasn't.

Business guy and developer at [url]www.vlambeer.com[/url] - bringing back arcade since 1956.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2025-05-21 07:41:42
Your offset time is: 2025-05-21 07:41:42