Amiga.org
The "Not Quite Amiga but still computer related category" => Alternative Operating Systems => Topic started by: runequester on April 10, 2011, 04:25:23 AM
-
So figured we could have a nice bitch fest :)
The topic is.. annoying trends in video games, whether new or old.
What brings.. or brought.. you down?
FMV games from the late 90s?
Everything being first person?
Endless side quests?
Quick time events?
-
Extensively long cutscenes or filler to make up for shitty gameplay/backstory.
-
Unskippable cut scenes. Bonus points if its immediately before a really gruelling boss fight :)
-
How about all of the joysticks being manufactured left handed.
-
Achievements. It seems to me that these "extra-curricular" developer-/publisher-imposed performance benchmarks are stifling freeform exploration of games.
-
I hate the new trend of being told what to do especially in adventure games.
In the old days you were given an object and had to work out what to do with it.
Now you get an object and the character will say "Maybe I can use this to ...." and then you will be given a cut scene showing where you need to use the item and then when you get close to the location the thing you use it on starts to flash .
-
- Online cheats, just get a life if you use these, NFS is a game where such things are used
- Nothing new, it's always based on some older game, there aren't any new ideas brought in
- Crappy multiplayer/online, some games just keep lagging/crashing
- Prices, games are 50/60 euro's, back in the days it was 50/60 Guilders which means a 200% increase, sure just keep saying everything gets better with the Euro *cough* BULL****
-
I hate the current (or has it always been like this?) trend of "bigger and better" sequels. This applies especially for bestselling game franchises - e.g. GTA - when GTA3 came out in 2002 it was a small revolution - it might not have been exactly your cup of tea (it wasn't mine...), you can't deny it was groundbreaking in many ways though. But all the newer GTA games play exactly the same and the reviewers still complain about the same things, because the core gameplay hasn't been changed one bit over the years. Still everybody wants and buys the new GTAs, because you get:
- more cities (and they're bigger, too!!!)
- more cars and motorbikes
- more guns
- more houses
- more quests
- more costumes
- more factions
- more stuff to buy in shops
- more ways to pimp your car
- you can drive a bicycle now (just WOW...)
- the main dude is black now (big deal...)
- etc etc etc
You get sooo much new stuff and sooo little new game(play), still every new GTA game is hyped like it's the second coming. This just makes me angry - there are still awesome games being released nowadays - Mass Effect, Bioshock, Fallout etc., but for each of them you get a new GTA, Tomb Raider, FIFA (NHL, NBA...), NFS, Sims, WoW expansion etc.
-
Also everything has to be online today or at least has some form of multiplayer. Why? I love a good story in a game, I love playing at my own pace.
And the lack of innovation in JRPGs - the genre is basically the same for 20+ years and no one seems to mind. When you get something new it's being heralded as a total revolution - no random fights and..... I can't think of anything else that's been changed in JRPGs. The only thing you get (bigger and better all over again) - even more minigames, even more playable characters, even more totally nonsensical ways to evolve your characters (materia system - what the f*** ???).....
EDIT: sorry for the double post...
-
QTE's are the worst.
You know, those lame mini-game segments where a button flashes on the screen and you have to press it or else.
I hate that.
-
Companies insist only on releasing games for consoles and shun PC releases.
Also, it bugs me to no end that, for LAN multi-player games, every player is expected to buy a copy of a game to play it. I know that's pretty much always been the way it is, but it still bugs me. Imagine Toys R Us (pretend the R is backwards) forcing everyone who checks out with a game of Monopoly to additionally pay full price up front for each person they intend to play the game with.
Upon completion of some games, they'd switch from being a game to being a "toy" in that it would open up and allow the player to just explore and have fun with it. Now, with multi-player games and everything being tracked online, that's not allowed and the game remains as closed as it was before it was finished.
-
Next gen brown -I blame quake :)
over normal mapping -games that look like they've been wrapped in shiny cellophane.
No bots anymore :( -I don't play multiplayer other than co-op, so those multiplayer maps go waste on my 360. yet games used to have bots. Just microsoft trying to force me to pay for xbox gold.
rubbish or short campaigns- all focus on multiplayer.
best trend- indie games and XBLA, and loads of cool flash games.
-
DLC - You pay £40 for a new game but then find you haven't got the full game and you need to keep paying extra to get all the content.
Timed Exclusives - You get a company claiming they have content that won't be released on other formats. 6 months later it's on other formats.
-
Most games today suck when you want to play them together with a visitor. Exception: Guitar Hero.
You have to unlock levels, so if you are not good at the game, you will never see all the artwork.
Online games try to monetize by making the game unbearable to those who don´t want to pay extra. So you end up with thousands of frustrated other players in your world.
You need to update your hardware at least every second year to play current titles. A C64 was good from 1983 to 1989!
-
crappy pc converts for consoles... simplified, gameplay changed, removed parts of the game etc...
released buggy half asses unfinished games, that you need 10 updates before its playable...
100 useless button mashing/keyboards combos to 100 diffrents sword/fist/gun/strategy etc, when you only need 3 and you cant remember the rest anyway....
insane hard game bosses, typically a game that have nothing going for it. and desperatly need to make the playing time longer.
singel player games(rpg games specially), that could be easly done (2-4) co-op online. but instead you have one or more useless ai character as companion.
releasing singel player games in 2011. gaming is a social affair it is not the ps2 90's anymore. co-op online is where the fun is. every game should have an option to play it through with a friend.
the 'no time to put in the game before release' excuse. then sell it as an expansion/dlc to cashin more on the game later. (new maps/more levels/new guns etc)
-
releasing singel player games in 2011. gaming is a social affair it is not the ps2 90's anymore. co-op online is where the fun is. every game should have an option to play it through with a friend.
(new maps/more levels/new guns etc)
Yeah, all games should be balanced for co-op. Where we differ though, is I call co-op someone having fun in the same room as me, not on a net connection. Split screen all the way for me. The Amiga and c64 taught me that.
-
You need to update your hardware at least every second year to play current titles. A C64 was good from 1983 to 1989!
it may be true for the pc for now but not for the consoles anymore.. i know that the ps3 that arrived in 2006 will be here at least until 2015 before the ps4 arrive.. the xbox360 will have its xbox720 more or less in the same time to. but becouse of this pc game makers will also follow the consoles, and not force anyone to upgrade often (expect games as crysis). the reason for this is simply, games are getting so big and to much time consuming to make. the game companies want to use more of what they got to earn the money. than just jump on anything new rigth away and start all over, thats always very costly... so expect long intervals like the c64 times before anything new arrive from now on.
-
Yeah, all games should be balanced for co-op. Where we differ though, is I call co-op someone having fun in the same room as me, not on a net connection. Split screen all the way for me. The Amiga and c64 taught me that.
dont get me wrong sitting in the same room as your buddy and playing co-op is fun. for 2d games a splitscreen can work pretty well. but with 3d games its just a nightmare(camera!! argh!!), thats how i feel about it. if i am going to have a friend over for co-op, i set up my older tv so we both have our screens and he can bring his box. anyway as it is with work and other commitments(wife,kids & motherinlaw etc), its just easier to send a invite for a game when you see your friend online and have some fun with headset/mic for a casual game....
-
True, their not mutually exclusive. I guess I just resent MS trying to corall me into giving them multiplayer cash. Should have bought a PS3 ;)
-
True, their not mutually exclusive. I guess I just resent MS trying to corall me into giving them multiplayer cash. Should have bought a PS3 ;)
i was actually planing to buy a xbox360 this gen to, but with all the rrod trouble and taking money for using your own bandwith(no game servers hosted by ms). i got a ps3 instead dont regret it at all and its a good divx/xvid movie player to. :)
-
Lack of split screen multiplayer. Multiplayer=online these days. But there's nothing like playing with 3 others at home, drinks/beer, nibblies, trash talk and hangin' on the losers.
Its why i like Nintendo consoles. 4 player split screen built in from N64 days. Goldeneye multiplayer on N64 was great as was Mario KArt, theres some great 4 player games on Gamecube eg Mario Kart, 007 Nightfire, FzeroGx, Smash Brothers, even Fifa.
Just bought a Wii today and son's having fun with two other mates getting to grips with it.
Hell I'd settle for two-player split screen.
-
dont get me wrong sitting in the same room as your buddy and playing co-op is fun. for 2d games a splitscreen can work pretty well. but with 3d games its just a nightmare(camera!! argh!!), thats how i feel about it.
I though the Nintendo 64 did a good job of split screen multiplayer in 3D eg Goldeneye, MarioKart 64. And following that my son and his mates have had 5 good years of Gamecube split screen mulitplayer in 3D
if i am going to have a friend over for co-op, i set up my older tv so we both have our screens and he can bring his box. anyway as it is with work and other commitments(wife,kids & motherinlaw etc), its just easier to send a invite for a game when you see your friend online and have some fun with headset/mic for a casual game....
I get where you coming from but I see it as a disturbing trend that we make less and less time to interact with friends in person what with facebook, forums, online gaming. One day we'll never leave our home and just have virtual friends, if that time isn't here already..
-
releasing singel player games in 2011. gaming is a social affair it is not the ps2 90's anymore. co-op online is where the fun is. every game should have an option to play it through with a friend.
I've yet to play an online multiplayer game which doesn't have at least two players cheating in various ways. Usually it's more, but I've yet to play with less than two clear cheaters.
I'd much rather play solo than with a cheater. If that's "so 90's" then so be it. They ruin it, and I've had more than enough of paying $50 or more just to find I can't compete unless I break down and install cheats of various sorts.
-
@Roj
I think A1260 was talking about co-op with people you know well, and your playing with, not so much against. as opposed to generic online multiplayer, where you get sworn at at by cheating kids ;)
-
I though the Nintendo 64 did a good job of split screen multiplayer in 3D eg Goldeneye, MarioKart 64. And following that my son and his mates have had 5 good years of Gamecube split screen mulitplayer in 3D
for me the n64 gfx looks like some smeared oil painting, visuals on the 3d games on that consol was bad. and 4 player split screen with a 5" play area for each player.. what a mess... but i guess kids dont know better so its ok for them...
I get where you coming from but I see it as a disturbing trend that we make less and less time to interact with friends in person what with facebook, forums, online gaming. One day we'll never leave our home and just have virtual friends, if that time isn't here already..
like i said before when you get older you get wife,kids and motherinlaw and other commitmens. it can be hard somethins to squeeze in time for your beer mates to come over and play games... so i see nothing wrong with calling a friend and then invite for a casual game when you have 1 hour to kill... and sometimes you just have to play with strangers, and add them to your friend list. after a couple of time gaming, you find out he just lives a few blocks away. then you have a new friend to take a few with at the pub, you never know :)
-
3D games should never have happened!
-
releasing singel player games in 2011. gaming is a social affair it is not the ps2 90's anymore. co-op online is where the fun is. every game should have an option to play it through with a friend.
I beg to differ. Games that have multiple player characters/allies should support multiplayer (as in Secret of Mana, for example,) but shoehorning it into every game is just going to ruin games that aren't designed for it.
As for me, I'll vote for the ur-trend: everybody blindly copying what everybody else is doing without any regard to whether it fits in their game or was even good to begin with. That's how all the rest of these trends proliferate.
-
I've yet to play an online multiplayer game which doesn't have at least two players cheating in various ways. Usually it's more, but I've yet to play with less than two clear cheaters.
I'd much rather play solo than with a cheater. If that's "so 90's" then so be it. They ruin it, and I've had more than enough of paying $50 or more just to find I can't compete unless I break down and install cheats of various sorts.
i dunno what games you play or what platform is your gaming rig... but i have never played with cheaters, and if i notice anyone cheat i would quit the game thats for sure. i dont continue gaming and raise my fist about it. i play only on my ps3, cant stand pc games anymore (specially as i also have the pc as a work place). if its going to be solo it must have a very good story that interest me, there is few and long between those games. i prefer much more to share my playing experince with my friends than alone. playing alone is what we did in the 90's, and nothing i want to do all over again in 2011. as i said before gaming is social experience nowdays, with strangers or your friends...
-
I beg to differ. Games that have multiple player characters/allies should support multiplayer (as in Secret of Mana, for example,) but shoehorning it into every game is just going to ruin games that aren't designed for it.
As for me, I'll vote for the ur-trend: everybody blindly copying what everybody else is doing without any regard to whether it fits in their game or was even good to begin with. That's how all the rest of these trends proliferate.
what the games are about today is the story, the way of gaming them is pretty much standardized with a few diffrences here and there. but i dont think you should be afraid of the shoehorning. there are game companies that do what they think is best for their games and always will. if you get tired of new games you can always go back to the good old times. as many of us gamers that have lived for a bit, also have our old gaming rigs (i see you have a pretty neat list in your sig).
-
what the games are about today is the story, the way of gaming them is pretty much standardized with a few diffrences here and there.
"What games are about today" is just another empty trendiness. Games are about the same thing they've always been about: having fun. If they're the kind of games that would be enhanced by multiplayer, sure, they should support multiplayer. But if they're the kind of games that would be degraded by it, they shouldn't be forced to support it anyway.
but i dont think you should be afraid of the shoehorning. there are game companies that do what they think is best for their games and always will.
Eh, I'd have more confidence in this if we didn't see game companies awkwardly compromise designs to fit whatever the last blockbuster did all the time.
-
When it comes to multi-player games the only decent ones that I've ever liked were SWOS, The Settlers & Archon... :)
I'd have hated for all my SNES RPG games to have been multi-player, these games are best played on your own as you get so involved in the story and mission that having to rely on playing against someone else who may lose interest along the way would have been awful... :)
Multi-player games have their place but to say almost all games should be like that is just daft... sometimes just taking turns each at games like Deluxe Galaga to try and beat the other persons high score is the best way to go, games don't have to be multi-player to make them enjoyable...:)
-
Yeah, all games should be balanced for co-op. Where we differ though, is I call co-op someone having fun in the same room as me, not on a net connection. Split screen all the way for me. The Amiga and c64 taught me that.
+1!
-
Yeah, all games should be balanced for co-op. Where we differ though, is I call co-op someone having fun in the same room as me, not on a net connection. Split screen all the way for me. The Amiga and c64 taught me that.
A thousand times this. Give us the ability to play together for F sake.
There was a cracked.com article speculating that a big part of why the wii sells so well, despite being underpowered, is that most people dont care that much about specs.. they do care about being able to play a game together
-
A thousand times this. Give us the ability to play together for F sake.
Seems odd that you'd want all or most games to be multi-player... :confused:
There has got to be times when there is no-one else around to play against or times when you just want to chill out and enjoy playing a few games by yourself with no distractions... :)
-
Seems odd that you'd want all or most games to be multi-player... :confused:
There has got to be times when there is no-one else around to play against or times when you just want to chill out and enjoy playing a few games by yourself with no distractions... :)
you heard about option?... most games have those, where you can choose to play singel player or with someone. there is really no reason why not to include this in 2011 with most games, except a few games cant have it for understanable reasons. but game companies have force fed you singel player games for years now. as someone mention earlyer up here about the wii, people like to play together. but i am not saying ever game should be co-op. where this can be done it should be done..
i give you here an example of a new game -> Knights Contract.. ( http://ps3.ign.com/objects/074/074899.html ) this is a game that could have co-op and splitscreen. but no instead it have a dumb ai character at your side that you must watch not getting killed. if the game developers had been smart they would have added an option for co-op/splitscreen also not only singel player... as you see the score the game got, its crap.. a wasted opportunity. this game is just one of many newer game out there....
-
As for me, I'll vote for the ur-trend: everybody blindly copying what everybody else is doing without any regard to whether it fits in their game or was even good to begin with. That's how all the rest of these trends proliferate.
Excellent point - I've noticed this pattern across the software field. With web browsers, one of them (Chrome?) comes up with tabs in the title bar, and now they all have it. Same thing with Linux-y window managers.
-
You get sooo much new stuff and sooo little new game(play), still every new GTA game is hyped like it's the second coming.
All GTA games have been top notch, including the mission packs. Boy you picked a wrong game as an example.
I'd say current trend seems to be FPS-games on consoles.. and the pad ain't meant for it pretty much ruining the games. Sacrifices had to be made for favor of player having crappy controls.. usually cpu-opponents have slow reaction times and have very low aimingskills.
-
Mario - worst platformers ever
Zelda - worst RPGs ever
Pokemon - putrid babyfied gameboy crap that saved Ninbendo from being wiped out in N64 days
:)
-
Mario - worst platformers ever
Not the worst, but not the best either... :)
Zelda - worst RPGs ever
Cobblers... not the best by a long shot but certainly not the worst and not as good as Terranigma or Chrono Trigger... :)
Pokemon - putrid babyfied gameboy crap that saved Ninbendo from being wiped out in N64 days
Never played it, but if it has Pokemon it the title it must be total mince... :D
-
Worst: Cinematic eye candy over playability.
-
@ hooligan:
All GTA games have been top notch, including the mission packs. Boy you picked a wrong game as an example.
Did I? Nobody argues that the games are fun. Is anything of what I wrote not true? Hardly. We used to call these data disks or expansions...
-
doom, quake and anything using 3D in such way.
3D seems to have killed the game creators imagination.
computer games should not aspire to have real life raytracing, just like movies should not try to be documentaries.
-
I think the most annoying trends are DLC, consolization/the dumbing-down of previously PC-exclusive games, and the removal of modding tools.
-
Seems odd that you'd want all or most games to be multi-player... :confused:
There has got to be times when there is no-one else around to play against or times when you just want to chill out and enjoy playing a few games by yourself with no distractions... :)
I'm not sure any ones having a pop at single player games. I play single player games more than co-op.
but a lot of single player games, with a bit of tweaking, could have really nice co-op modes as well as a single player. instead you get shitty ai buddies, or tacked on multiplayer modes.
-
I play single player games more than co-op.
but a lot of single player games, with a bit of tweaking, could have really nice co-op modes as well as a single player. instead you get shitty ai buddies, or tacked on multiplayer modes.
When I write a single player game I always allow optional co-op mode and optional crappy AI buddies both. :)
And if your AI buddy sux u can kill him and take all his kewl stuff :roflmao: