NationStates Jolt Archive

What are your LEAST favorite features in video games? Is it having to pay actual money to unlock features that are already on the disc? Quick-time events that can turn your average action game into Simon Says? Unskippable cutscenes that can turn gaming into a chore? Having Elmo in it?

Having Elmo in it?

That ranks right up there ;)

Tacked on bits. Be they "stealth" sections that plague FPS', "driving" sections or "ONLINE!!" modes that were added in a blind panic to appease Larry the PR Guy who wants to put "Exclusive ONLINE content!" on the box.

Serious answer?


Having to pay for the right to play a game that I've purchased.

Tacked on bits. Be they "stealth" sections that plague FPS', "driving" sections or "ONLINE!!" modes that were added in a blind panic to appease Larry the PR Guy who wants to put "Exclusive ONLINE content!" on the box.

I agree with you Yahtz... I mean Dregruk.

What are your LEAST favorite features in video games? Is it having to pay actual money to unlock features that are already on the disc? Quick-time events that can turn your average action game into Simon Says? Unskippable cutscenes that can turn gaming into a chore? Having Elmo in it?

/Creepy voice\ Elmo hates you! /Creepy voice\

Does soul-crushing difficulty count as a feature? I never finished Advance Wars 2 because of it.

I dunno. I think, generally, I prefer crushingly hard difficulties to idiotically easy. But preferably neither.

Does soul-crushing difficulty count as a feature? I never finished Advance Wars 2 because of it.

Rubberbanding AI in racing games is just awful.

lol, never did beat that game either...

*shakes fist at giant laser cannon*

Anyway, I hate subscription based games, and ones that are a PS2 port for my wii. Force unleashed had beter be good, or there will be trouble.

When the game sheats also ranks up there, for example RTS games when the copmuter can control 50 million workers at once in different directions while I'm dragging countless boxes.

Also when scale is messed up- I had a racing game where close to, my opponents were half as big as me. Was very messed up.

/rant

Depends on what kind of game I'm playing, but typically, my biggest rant is about cut scenes. Too many, too long, and I don't care that much. Let me shoot things again, please!

For me, it's usually when games decide to be ultra-realistic. Iron Storm was a good example of one that I've played. You usually couldn't take more than two hits (if you're lucky) from the enemy before you died. Basically what that resulted in was an insanely long game where you died hundreds if not thousands of times. That totally takes all the enjoyment out of it.

Loading times.

For me, it's usually when games decide to be ultra-realistic. Iron Storm was a good example of one that I've played. You usually couldn't take more than two hits (if you're lucky) from the enemy before you died. Basically what that resulted in was an insanely long game where you died hundreds if not thousands of times. That totally takes all the enjoyment out of it.

too true. it also irritates me when just you complete the level, the cutscene kicks in and all of a sudden you're standing in a whole different place, holding a different gun, doing something completely different... Halo 3 is a prime example of that imo

Depends on what kind of game I'm playing, but typically, my biggest rant is about cut scenes. Too many, too long, and I don't care that much. Let me shoot things again, please!

Shoot things? I prefer beating them into a bloody pulp, myself (which is partly why I love Mortal Kombat: Armageddon so much! :D).

AI that is way too fast. The ones with perfect aim that never miss, never have lag and taunt you afterwards :p

I hate the controllers in games. I want my brain connected so it's like I am in the game using my own limbs to strafe, jump, shoot and taunt people.

too true. it also irritates me when just you complete the level, the cutscene kicks in and all of a sudden you're standing in a whole different place, holding a different gun, doing something completely different... Halo 3 is a prime example of that imoIndeed, I hate that too. Half-Life 2 Episode 2 is an example of that I found out over the weekend.

Spoiler: The level where you pull the car up to that farm with the Combine Advisor in the old barn. I had parked the car up almost at the gate out of the farm and had left with Alyx to go into the barn. Cue cutscene and the subsequent ambush by the Combine and suddenly the car is all the way back at the other end of the farm...hell if I know how that happened

Lack of a decent plot. Happens too much - I'm not asking for Deus Ex in every game I play, but some games bore the pants off me however action-packed they are.

Boring tasks you must complete to unlock something fun, to level up to the fun levels or to get forward in the story to the next fun part. It feels so pointless to play a game to have a boring time for hours in the hope of earning the right to have fun later. I wish the gameplay elements some might find boring would be optional.

Also games that make you worry about if you accomplished something in a perfect manner or if your accomplishment was too flawed to count. Like FPS games that make you think "Maybe I used too much ammo there, I should reload last save and redo the last part even though I already got past it so I don't risk running out of ammo several hours later on in the story."

Boring tasks you must complete to unlock something fun, to level up to the fun levels or to get forward in the story to the next fun part. It feels so pointless to play a game to have a boring time for hours in the hope of earning the right to have fun later. I wish the gameplay elements some might find boring would be optional.

If only video game makers shared your sentiment.

Loading times.

I concur. That's why I chose the N64 over the Play Station.

N64: Holy, crap this game is fun, but it's so ugly.

PSOne: This game is going to be great. (three minutes later) Man, this game is taking forever to load. (fifteen minutes later) okay, the level is done loading. Ooh, pretty cutscenes. Okay, it's over. Game time. Wait, what? More loading? Dear god, is this a game or an experiment in load times? I'm going back to the ugly N64 games. At least they don't make me wait for each level.

N64: Hello, old friend. Shall we save the Lylat system or save Terminia from that evil moon that's threatening to crush Clock Town? Mario Kart? Okay, sleek black electronic friend of mine. Phail-Station says I have to WAIT. I waited fifteen minutes for a three-minute cutscene. Can you believe that? So, how is Super Nintendo? That's nice.

Flashy graphics, and no gameplay.

Also thrown in "stealth" gameplay.

Boss gimmicks. You know the sort of thing; you have to solve some puzzle to work out how to actually hit the boss rather than just, you know, attacking them like you would a regular enemy. It's alright for console platformers and the like, but when rpgs and fps start using it it really pisses me off.

Do annoying copy-protection schemes and CD-keys count?
Seriously. Screw CD keys. I always lose them, then I have to go and FIND one online and end up getting a million spyware programs installed as a result.

Uhhh...gameplay wise...
The trend of making games that are unplayable on any sane/affordable syste for a year. Seriously. They tried running Crysis at full settings on a system with TWO 8800GT's on it. TWO. Those things alone cost more than my entire system.
And it STILL lagged.

Save points annoy me too. I want to save wherever I feel like it, not end up rushing through half a level because I have to go somewhere soon. Fourtunatly they've mostly gone away in recent years.

Overemphasising multiplay is a pain too. Some of us dont want to deal with idiots shouting "HOMG HES HAXING! POWN TEH HAXOR!" over teamspeak, or getting booted out of a server because some uppity clanner wants to play.

How about becoming a fat tendinitis-ridden greaseball with no friends other than a bunch of other gamers who beat you because they're asian?

Also the music can get on my nerves.

How about becoming a fat tendinitis-ridden greaseball...

http://pc.vggen.com/features/weeklywow/southpark_wow1.jpg

:D

Seems most things has already been mentioned, but I can at least add trial-and-error gameplay to the list. We all hate things like forced stealth missions, but it's extra bad when half the doors trigger an alarm that instantly sends you to the game over screen.

Another thing I dislike, and I know this one is a matter of taste, is games that are too scripted. Half-Life 2 is a prime example of this. As polished as the game is, I just can't enjoy myself when every little detail is predetermined and will play out exactly the same way every time. "This is the gravity gun level", "this is the annoying desert puzzle level", "this is the saw blade level", "this is the room where, one at a time, 10 enemies will come out of one of the doors and only after they're dead can you continue on. The last one is pretty much how all combat in that game works.

Having to buy the book that goes along with the game,because the other person who plays it is to stupid to get through without it...:mad:

Also the music can get on my nerves.

Oh, theres this wicked new invention that can help you with that. Its called the volume button. :P

Also games for the PC that are bugy, but its seen as ok because you can always patch it later. I don't mind the odd balance patch, but I've had games crash repeatedly on the penultimate level repeatedly just cos some exec wanted it out a month before christmas X|

Edit: And where grunts decide to come at you one at a time, when if they surround you they'll beat you. I don't need copmletely realistic AI, just some slight realism.

Have I mentioned customer service?
Goes hand in hand with the buggy games mentioned.

Having to complete a mission within a time-limit. (I like to explore and take my time to watch a sunset at the battlefield,...)

Falling down cliffs or in water causing damage or death. (extremely irritating)

Unskippable cutscenes. (like 'the getaway')

...

Also the music can get on my nerves.
Yes that too, I've ripped hundreds of CDs and found dozens of good web radio channels so I have tons of music that I like. Then games think I want to keep playing their own 20 songs that I don't like over and over instead.

Uhhh...gameplay wise...
The trend of making games that are unplayable on any sane/affordable syste for a year. Seriously. They tried running Crysis at full settings on a system with TWO 8800GT's on it. TWO. Those things alone cost more than my entire system.
And it STILL lagged.
As long as it is playable and good looking on current hardware on some settings I can't see anything wrong with leaving room for taking advantage of future hardware with even higher settings. But if the lowest settings that still look good are unplayable on an average PC when the game is released then I'll agree with you.

I just remembered another one, missing features that the game appears to have all parts of except an option to enable it. For example my favourite game Flatout has AI opponents and LAN multiplayer but it doesn't have AI opponents in LAN multiplayer. So when 1 friend visits and we play a 2 player LAN game we have only 2 cars on the track even though the game does have AI opponents.

Cutscenes, I love. Especially FMVs. So long as the game has a plot, that is. Or hilariously bad voice actors (The entire Resident Evil series)(Anything by Capcom, actually.). But unskippable ones? Oh, I how I detest them...

Having to pay for online multiplayer.
But as I own a PS3 (not XBOX360) I dont have to deal with that!

*leans back*

In FPS games, being forced to do whatever the voices on the radio tell me, especially when it makes no sense and sounds like a spectacularly awful idea. The Elite Force games and FarCry are two particularly offensive examples.

Edit: Although now that I think about it, the problem with the Elite Force games was that my character was a dumbass and kept doing things I really didn't want him to do.

Escort Missions, executive meddling, everything the OP mentioned but maybe not QTEs, I've only experienced them in RE4 and there was a cutscene where I think they were done really well.

Does soul-crushing difficulty count as a feature? I never finished Advance Wars 2 because of it.

I found Advance Wars 2 pretty easy actually, now Days of Ruin's final mission on the other hand...

Not much in video games actually annoy me. Unskippable cutscenes can be annoying if you're retrying a boss fight, for instance, but apart from that and a few other things I'm fine.

What bothers me about video games is how the game company acts towards its games. I prefer it when game companies take the time to care about what the players of their games have to say about their games and alter things to fit.

What I hate is when game companies ignore players and overemphasize features I could do without. Need For Speed games, for instance, are almost purely about production values and have little in terms of actual gameplay. The Pokemon series hasn't really advanced in gameplay from day one.

Then there are times when game companies release really special versions of games with all sorts of new interesting content I would very much like to enjoy only in their home country. This isn't so bad when the home country is someplace where they speak English, but when the game is, say, Kingdom Hearts II: Final Mix + and I can't speak or read one bit of Japanese... :headbang:

Immortal badguys. I recall in Starlancer there is one mission where you are fighting the best pilot the enemy has. I was dogfighting with him, and I had his ship almost dead. Then he prepares to jump out, shouting "We will meet again!" or something like that. The thing is, jumping out takes a few seconds, during which you are stationary. While he was about to jump out, I was pouring endless amounts of firepower into him. It is quite clear that the code dictated that at this point, his ship stops taking damage. Because if he had been able to take damage, he would have exploded.


In shooters, missions that emphasize getting from point A to point B. This was my biggest beef with Half-Life 2. Most of the chapters - especially the vehicle ones - are just like that. OK, in retrospect, most of the game IS like that, as is Episode One. But it seemed as if the later missions of HL2 and most of Episode One included a hefty dose of "kill everything in your path". They also had more Alyx Vance, which was a big help.

While I can accept that video games must emphasise gameplay over scientific accuracy, I request that physics make some sense. Can someone explain why you can instantly kill an enemy soldier by flinging a corpse at him, but hurling a gun won't hurt him?

Incompetent RTS AIs. I expect that the AI should at least be CAPABLE of playing well. I can understand if the AI will not carry out elaborate attacks, since that's something many humans are incapable of. But any computer AI should be able to employ frontal assault tactics in any situation. My specific beef is the AI in Age of Empires III. While it can give you a good fight most of the time, it is hopeless on naval maps.

Exclusive multiplayer content. I want to be able to enjoy every aspect of the game without ever going online. Many shooters do not let you play "multiplayer" against AI bots (but they make up for it in other regards). Battlefield 2142 was particularly annoying in that it did let you go against bots, but you couldn't get unlockable features (which was especially annoying when the bots COULD), there were only five single-player maps, and it didn't include Titan mode.

Games where you have to use complex button combos. The reason I avoid all fighting games.

Finally, the inclusion of moments where you want to show emotion, but no way to do so. Half-Life 2 is a big offender. There are multiple times I want to give Alyx a hug, but I can't. I mean, you had to go and create one of the most sympathetic characters in video gaming history, and the most I can do is stand next to her?

Games that don't let you save whenever you damnwell feel like it >.<

Finally, the inclusion of moments where you want to show emotion, but no way to do so. Half-Life 2 is a big offender. There are multiple times I want to give Alyx a hug, but I can't. I mean, you had to go and create one of the most sympathetic characters in video gaming history, and the most I can do is stand next to her?

Sucks to be Robo-Freeman huh?

The Pokemon series hasn't really advanced in gameplay from day one.

They have the simple-looking but surprisingly deep combat system down, they made some game changing tweaks to it this generation. They keep adding in more and more interesting side-activities, there are places they can go from here but they'd have to completely change to do it, and that would piss off too many people.

Games that don't let you save whenever you damnwell feel like it >.<

QFT

Games that don't let you save whenever you damnwell feel like it >.<

The older gta's really sucked at this...

My specific beef is the AI in Age of Empires III. While it can give you a good fight most of the time, it is hopeless on naval maps.
That ticks me off too, IIRC, in AoE II (and probably AoE I) the AI wouldn’t even construct naval units until you put them on a certain difficulty.

Though I imagine it’s a right bugger to program a decent RTS AI.

I want to be able to enjoy every aspect of the game without ever going online. Many shooters do not let you play “multiplayer” against AI bots
Yeah, sometimes I’d rather play against silent AI than noisy 13-year-olds screaming at you.

And that’s why I still play Timesplitters 2.

There are multiple times I want to give Alyx a hug, but I can’t.
That annoying girl?

Maybe she was emotion-wrenching, but I was too busy trying to get that fucking ball through that fucking basket! :p

They have the simple-looking but surprisingly deep combat system down, they made some game changing tweaks to it this generation. They keep adding in more and more interesting side-activities, there are places they can go from here but they'd have to completely change to do it, and that would piss off too many people.

Yes, they add stuff in, but it's been the same BASIC system the whole way through. What they add doesn't really make much of a notable difference.

They're still fun to play though, so don't misunderstand me.

Falling down cliffs or in water causing damage or death. (extremely irritating)

Assassin's Creed. The guy is a fucking awesome assassin and can't even swim.

Finally, the inclusion of moments where you want to show emotion, but no way to do so. Half-Life 2 is a big offender. There are multiple times I want to give Alyx a hug, but I can't. I mean, you had to go and create one of the most sympathetic characters in video gaming history, and the most I can do is stand next to her?
Good point, but to find a button for "hug" in the list of controls for an FPS would puzzle me almost as much as that time when I learned in school that "engage" meant "agree to get married later" and then played an FPS where I was ordered to "engage the enemy".

What are your LEAST favorite features in video games? Is it having to pay actual money to unlock features that are already on the disc? Quick-time events that can turn your average action game into Simon Says? Unskippable cutscenes that can turn gaming into a chore? Having Elmo in it?

The feature I hate most about video games is the fact that there have been few to none that transform any one and/or multiple genres in gaming. Basically, they're all getting worse and I'm sick of it. I haven't bought a new game in months (and few in the last couple years).

[QUOTE=Northrop-Grumman;13444895]Indeed, I hate that too. Half-Life 2 Episode 2 is an example of that I found out over the weekend.


That's weird, my car stayed in the exact same spot, and my little gnome friend was even in the side-seat.


Off of gnome topic: Escort missions where your escortee is nearly suicidal, and in the case of phantom dust, specializes in things that kill her.

Half-Life 2 has a sort of escort mission. At least the people you're escorting aren't suicidal - in fact, they're quite happy to stay behind cover while you kill everything in the vicinity.

Good point, but to find a button for "hug" in the list of controls for an FPS would puzzle me almost as much as that time when I learned in school that "engage" meant "agree to get married later" and then played an FPS where I was ordered to "engage the enemy".

That'd be pretty funny, wouldn't it? A game where you go around marrying enemies to defeat them.

...

Actually...that sounds like it would be pretty fantastic if you worked it right...you know, toss in political intrigue and set it in Victorian times or something...

I'll forgive them if in Half-Life 4 you play as Eli Freeman, the unstoppable offspring of Alyx and Gordon.

I wish I could find a game where you could plunder villages, set the village idiot on fire, and enslave people. Sadly, Overlord is the only game that touches on this subject and right now I am facing the gallows for what I did to all those Irish and Welsh villages. So that it why I NEED that kind of game.

The Grand Theft Auto series comes pretty close. Not sure if you can enslave people, though.

I wish I could find a game where you could plunder villages, set the village idiot on fire, and enslave people. Sadly, Overlord is the only game that touches on this subject and right now I am facing the gallows for what I did to all those Irish and Welsh villages. So that it why I NEED that kind of game.

Games where that are supposed to be realistic, but where the CPU controlled characters, enemies, cars, etc can break the rules, eg shoot through walls, drive into you & not lose time, etc.

Having to pay for the right to play a game that I've purchased.

Something I have never done, and likely will never do.

Loading times.

Indeed...fuck graphics, I want the people working on the next generation of consoles to focus ONLY on decreasing load times.

Exclusive multiplayer content. I want to be able to enjoy every aspect of the game without ever going online. Many shooters do not let you play "multiplayer" against AI bots (but they make up for it in other regards). Battlefield 2142 was particularly annoying in that it did let you go against bots, but you couldn't get unlockable features (which was especially annoying when the bots COULD), there were only five single-player maps, and it didn't include Titan mode.

I try to avoid such games, but it's getting harder and harder to do so.

Assassin's Creed. The guy is a fucking awesome assassin and can't even swim.

Unrealistic crap like this is always irritating. It took GTA3 three games to finally get it right.

Indeed...fuck graphics, I want the people working on the next generation of consoles to focus ONLY on decreasing load times

You'll most likely have to live with them for another generation. Sure, smart programming can reduce the problem somewhat, but only when we move away from loading everything from slow disc formats can this problem truly be solved. Even installing the games on a hard drive isn't fast enough.

Assassin's Creed. The guy is a fucking awesome assassin and can't even swim.

Well, maybe he just spent his whole life training so hard to kill people that he never learned? I mean, it's possible, right?

Or maybe water in that game represents an error in the genetic memory recollection process that crashes the re-enactment. There's literally thousands of bullshit explanations that can be used to handwave it.

Actually mario galaxy has NO loading times. At all.

In a game when you're often going into buildings, its just amazing.

Actually mario galaxy has NO loading times. At all.

In a game when you're often going into buildings, its just amazing.

1: clever programming (streaming)
2: Wii has much less RAM than PS3 and 360. Less memory available leads to less data to load, and that decreases loading times.

The feature I hate most about video games is the fact that there have been few to none that transform any one and/or multiple genres in gaming. Basically, they're all getting worse and I'm sick of it. I haven't bought a new game in months (and few in the last couple years).

Did you play Portal? Because if you didn't that's a problem that needs fixing.

I have a few things:

1. Having a beautiful world where there's lots to do and you can go anywhere, but all the other systems (combat, magic, etc.) look like they were tacked on at the end

2. Having a beautiful world where there's little to do (or you're forced to do something)

3. Having a beautiful world where you can't go into most of the buildings (even if there was nothing in them it'd be fine, I have a bloody 1tb harddrive, I can handle it)

4. Not having any ability to mod the files/create maps

5. Any game with static cameras

Having to complete a mission within a time-limit. (I like to explore and take my time to watch a sunset at the battlefield,...)

Falling down cliffs or in water causing damage or death. (extremely irritating)


I second the time limit missions, although one or two timed bits I can deal with.

Agreed with water, but why on earth should falling off cliffs not deal damage?

Now, let's see...

Escort missions, bloody escort missions.

When you have to do something incredibly stupid in RPGs for plot reasons.

Making games which just don't work. I'm looking at you, EA and C&C 3.

Arbitrary population limits. Big battles ftw.

Console games where the single player is neglected in favour of multiplayer so one is forced to continue paying to get anything out of the game.

RTS games on consoles, period.

Games where the health system is completely ridiculous: in CoD3 its possible to be shot as many times as you want as long as you run and hide after.

What are your LEAST favorite features in video games? Is it having to pay actual money to unlock features that are already on the disc? Quick-time events that can turn your average action game into Simon Says? Unskippable cutscenes that can turn gaming into a chore? Having Elmo in it?Having to pay for a game after you've paid for it. Other than that, it's usually dependent on the genre of the game I'm playing.

When the game sheats also ranks up there, for example RTS games when the copmuter can control 50 million workers at once in different directions while I'm dragging countless boxes.

Also when scale is messed up- I had a racing game where close to, my opponents were half as big as me. Was very messed up.

/rant

I hate that too. The computer should be limited in some way in RTS games to simulate how the player can only see all the stuff that's on his screen and has to select using a mouse.

I also hate ridiculously hard games that make you die so many times that it takes the fun out of it.

It's shitty when you have to rescue some dumbass computer character too. You can be handling your shit and not taking any damage and then the fucking guy you have to rescue goes and does something ridiculous that gets his retarded ass blown up and so you fail the level. Fucking hate that shit.

I also don't like video games that depend primarily on jumping, because I suck at it.

Did you play Portal? Because if you didn't that's a problem that needs fixing.

Indeed. When my housemates and I spent the entire day beating it (it was a team effort, usually with my one friend at the controls until he needed a break with the rest of us figuring it out and basically back-seat driving, sometimes subbing in).

It's a first person shooter puzzle game. Truly a great game.

That ticks me off too, IIRC, in AoE II (and probably AoE I) the AI wouldn’t even construct naval units until you put them on a certain difficulty.

Though I imagine it’s a right bugger to program a decent RTS AI.



I've heard that RTS AI's always cheat as well. This is apparently due to the fact that if they didn't, they'd stand no chance.

I'll go with unskippable cut scenes, but also interface puzzles.

These are "puzzles" where the only thing that makes them remotely hard is the crappiness level of your interface. Like having to jump up thin ledges, from ledge to ledge, up a wall or cliff. It's boring, stupid gameplay and utterly pointless - if i wanted to play a goddamned (s)platformer I'd buy Mario.

games where they take your character away form you after you spent up to half an hour designing them. Bloody Cut Scenes especially no skipable ones and ones that really make no sense so at all after you completed the section. and why you cant compete in a season as Diva in any of the Smackdown games.

To loathsome features, I'll add a save point before and a difficult boss battle after to unskippable cut scenes, come to think of it.

Escort missions, bloody escort missions.

It's shitty when you have to rescue some dumbass computer character too. You can be handling your shit and not taking any damage and then the fucking guy you have to rescue goes and does something ridiculous that gets his retarded ass blown up and so you fail the level. Fucking hate that shit.

Escort Missions suck, especially when there's no reason for whatever you're protecting to be in the middle of a battle in the first place.

http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/9176/nbfrigatexi4.jpg

Indeed. When my housemates and I spent the entire day beating it (it was a team effort, usually with my one friend at the controls until he needed a break with the rest of us figuring it out and basically back-seat driving, sometimes subbing in).

It's a first person shooter puzzle game. Truly a great game.

Yeah, it was great that it most of the attention it received was as a component of The Orange Box, because I don't think Valve would have released it so short on its own, and the fact that it isn't padded and paced very well is part of what makes it great. Anywhere else executive meddling would've ruined it.

To loathsome features, I'll add a save point before and a difficult boss battle after to unskippable cut scenes, come to think of it.

Yeah. I remember when I was first playing Kingdom Hearts--the first game--and I kept dying at that battle with the Ansem-controlled Riku in Hollow Bastion, the one with that whole long cutscene before it about all sorts of stuff. That battle pissed me off in more ways than one.

I'd say the worst idea to appear in video games is Monthly payments.

Crippleware is a close second.

I'd say the worst idea to appear in video games is Monthly payments.

Yeah, because those servers maintain and upgrade themselves, new quests and items appear on their own and the administrators work for free :rolleyes:

Or, they could make the original game more than $10.

Something I have never done, and likely will never do.

Same here, doesn't change the fact that its a feature that I abhor.

AI that is way too fast. The ones with perfect aim that never miss, never have lag and taunt you afterwards :p

I hate the controllers in games. I want my brain connected so it's like I am in the game using my own limbs to strafe, jump, shoot and taunt people.

They have a game like that. It's called Going Outside And Playing Paintball.

They have a game like that. It's called Going Outside And Playing Paintball.

I used up close to 400 paintballs on a single session,... suppressing fire duty tend to do that, but I think it's an overkill. I gots me a twitchy trigger finger.

On rushing and flanking duties I tend to wait for the suppressing fire to do their job and then just go melee on my target. Seems likes I also likey bloodlust.

Okay, so when I have enough bruises, muscle sprains and of course short on cash for paintballs, I could always load up some FPS and just go barbaric in some virtual environment.

In increasing value of hatedness:

- Timed missions...without timers...
- Unjustifiably abstract puzzles
- "Protect the base while I screw around back here!"
- Racing missions in non-racing games
- Bosses that break the rules
- ESCORT MISSIONS! FUCK YOU PAL! FIND YOUR OWN WAY THROUGH THE DAMN BASE! :mad:

Monthly payments are a necessary feature of many MMOs. Some MMOs, notably GuildWars, do not have monthly payments and rely on new subscriptions for the upkeep. However, this means that you will always have tons of noobs in the game.

Games that don't let you save whenever you want. Since I play mostly PC games, the only one I had that problem with was Freelancer, which required you to dock at a station or planet in order to save. Annoying for some extended missions, where if you get killed, you have to through the whole thing again. At least they had the sense to have you dock along the way on some missions (for instance, in the Escape from Liberty, you dock twice).

Another pet peeve is in RTS games - inability to heal your own units. The biggest offender was Age of Mythology, whereby only some tech tree paths allowed you to heal your units. Red Alert 2 had no way to heal infantry except by capturing a hospital (which was not on every map). And the Protoss of Starcraft cannot repair their HP (though their shields regenerated on their own).

I also don't like games with limited resources. I prefer it when it is impossible to reach a scenario whereby there are no resources left on the map, and players will have to make do with what they have in their treasuries. And if there is one resource that is effectively unlimited, you should be able to trade it for its counterpart (also - I don't like it when I cannot swap resources). Starcraft is the big offender here. RA2 had regenerating ore fields, though one map (DC Uprising) lacked them, which was dissapointing because it was otherwise a very fun map.

Fortunately, it seems as if my demands have been answered. Most recent strategy games do not limit the total amount of resources on the map, and you can heal all your units without barring sections of the tech tree.

first one of my hates is probably games that are good but have a really short storyline, for example, Gun. to me it is a really good game, but when i completed it in about 4-5 hours, i was quite pissed off.

next is games where the levels are really fun and great to play, but you have to go from point A to point B. this one being Predator: concrete jungle, a game where i want to go round and hack at anything in my path and skin anyone in my way, but instead i have to find some entrance or kill a certain person and then its straight onto next level.

after those 2 im not quite sure, guess its just loading times, stupidly hard levels and pointless side missions that need to be completed before you can get on with the rest of the story

Another pet peeve is in RTS games - inability to heal your own units. The biggest offender was Age of Mythology, whereby only some tech tree paths allowed you to heal your units. Red Alert 2 had no way to heal infantry except by capturing a hospital (which was not on every map). And the Protoss of Starcraft cannot repair their HP (though their shields regenerated on their own).Try Warcraft II: Orcs had no way of healing. But infantry in RA2 was so vulnerable anyway, so not being able to heal them hardly matters. C&C 3, on the other hand, Nod and the Scrin are at a serious disadvantage because unlike GDI, they have no Armory in which to replenish their squads. Battle for Middle Earth 2 was irritating due to a lack of healing for the bad guys. Sauron's forces were limited to trolls consuming orcs (which wasn't so bad, because orcs were primarily cannon fodder), but Isengard really lacked for a means to heal.
I also don't like games with limited resources. I prefer it when it is impossible to reach a scenario whereby there are no resources left on the map, and players will have to make do with what they have in their treasuries. And if there is one resource that is effectively unlimited, you should be able to trade it for its counterpart (also - I don't like it when I cannot swap resources). Starcraft is the big offender here. RA2 had regenerating ore fields, though one map (DC Uprising) lacked them, which was dissapointing because it was otherwise a very fun map.Try the mission against Crete as Soviets in Red Alert 1. Limited resources on your part of the map, and you can't just go and crush the enemy because you need to capture the Radar dome. Meanwhile, he builds up on Crete with it's extra resources and becomes really difficult to dislodge.

-snip @ newfangled RTS-ses-

Try Dune 2, Ordos, last 2 mission. Pure... unadulterated... hell. Extremely low resources, lack of space to build a base, no overpowered "ultimate" unit, lousy special units, sandworms in every 5 minutes, both Atreides and Harkonnen (and Sardaukars at last mission) overpowering you with their seemingly unlimited resources.

Welcome to dawning of the new age of carnage, I thought at that time.

Try Dune 2, Ordos, last 2 mission. Pure... unadulterated... hell. Extremely low resources, lack of space to build a base, no overpowered "ultimate" unit, lousy special units, sandworms in every 5 minutes, both Atreides and Harkonnen (and Sardaukars at last mission) overpowering you with their seemingly unlimited resources.

Welcome to dawning of the new age of carnage, I thought at that time.You might like World in Conflict: No resource gathering, no building up, just pure calling in reenforcements and taking strategic points, with a couple "superweapons" to use, the most powerful and expensive of which is a tactical nuke.

Battle for middle earth one was a grea game- 2 they messed it up.

Which brings me to my next point- games that are exactly the same as every other game in that genre. It needs something to stand out- in BfME1, it was the build pads and the fact that each of the races didn't all have a pike unit, and an archer unit, and a swords unit.

Battle for middle earth one was a grea game- 2 they messed it up.Not really. They're both great games. Not being limited by the pads just gives you more versatility.
Which brings me to my next point- games that are exactly the same as every other game in that genre. It needs something to stand out- in BfME1, it was the build pads and the fact that each of the races didn't all have a pike unit, and an archer unit, and a swords unit.They didn't all have one?

For example, rohan had no pikemen unit- the races were actual races rather than just slightly differently flavoured. Sorry, if I'm confusing, it made sense in my head.

I don't know why, but I just thought that BfME2 wasn't as good. I think the first game put expectations too high, but meh.

For example, rohan had no pikemen unit- the races were actual races rather than just slightly differently flavoured. Sorry, if I'm confusing, it made sense in my head.I'm trying to think of what Rohan had in the first one. I'm pretty sure they hade something.

I don't know why, but I just thought that BfME2 wasn't as good. I think the first game put expectations too high, but meh.But dude! Elves! Actually, the War of the Ring mode was a pretty sweet addition to the game. Almost made up for the screwy AI in that part of the game and in Fortress maps...

You might like World in Conflict: No resource gathering, no building up, just pure calling in reenforcements and taking strategic points, with a couple "superweapons" to use, the most powerful and expensive of which is a tactical nuke.

I quite enjoyed it. The setting, the atmosphere, the storyline, the gameplay. It's like those what-if movies/novels from the Cold War.

The only thing unreasonable I can nitpick is the reinforcement points. Surely if I was to guard a vital point, some reasonable commander would give me all the help I can get. Oh and RTS-ses have this thing with "Defend this spot for X minutes" where at the final minutes the enemies comes with forces unheard of from hidden factories/crypts/zerg mutations. Combined with the reinforcement points of WiC, it almost made certain missions quite hard to accomplish (while attaining secondary objectives).

(At first I thought, factories churning tanks in RTS was unreasonable until I saw documentaries on the T-34. Those tanks rolled out from the Soviet factories straight into battle!)

I'm trying to think of what Rohan had in the first one. I'm pretty sure they hade something

But dude! Elves! Actually, the War of the Ring mode was a pretty sweet addition to the game.


My comp crashes too regulalry for me to enjoy War of the ring, and elves.... well, meh. They'd have been great in the old game, but it just wasn't quite lotr.

And rohan had nothing except for maybe woodelves, but no actual pike units. Perhaps it was possible to fight against calvalry with Rohan, but it was a damn sight easier with Isengard. Fortresses were take-downable with gondor, but almost laughably easy with a decent mordor force. In 2, everyone could do everything passably, and one thing slightly better.

I wish I could find a game where you could plunder villages, set the village idiot on fire, and enslave people. Sadly, Overlord is the only game that touches on this subject and right now I am facing the gallows for what I did to all those Irish and Welsh villages. So that it why I NEED that kind of game.

How about Dungeon Keeper?

Tagline: "It's good to be bad."

How about Dungeon Keeper?

Tagline: "It's good to be bad."

Love that game,... hmmm I wonder why SimCity hasn't gone with a realistic approach,... I want to see some suicides rate rather than giving people hell with UFOs, tornadoes, earthquakes and what not.

Love that game,... hmmm I wonder why SimCity hasn't gone with a realistic approach,... I want to see some suicides rate rather than giving people hell with UFOs, tornadoes, earthquakes and what not.

Yeah, 'cause those never happen :rolleyes:

Dungeon keeper's fun. Imp slapping makes me laugh.:cool:

Love that game,... hmmm I wonder why SimCity hasn't gone with a realistic approach,... I want to see some suicides rate rather than giving people hell with UFOs, tornadoes, earthquakes and what not.

I'm currently in the middle of translating and improving a Warcraft III scenario based on Dungeon Keeper.
Great stuff, and really bringing back my memories of the game. I'm even going to dual-boot Windows 98 just so that I can play it and its sequel both at a decent speed and without compatibility issues. :D

all games with a third-person perspective should have full camera control at all times!!!! and without needing to press a button to enter some kind of 'free look' mode.

Yeah, 'cause those never happen :rolleyes:

Not when it comes in a destructive combo,... along with a volcano spreading on top of your city like giant popped zit. Oh... I wish I could zoom in and see the terror.

Okay,... that's just a strawman. What I actually meant was that I'm looking for more fun ways to give misery to the Sims on a massive scale (no, I don't like the Sims, and yes, though it offers ways to torture your Sims, I still don't like the game).

Just like that,... what about terrorist attacks? Design your city to have a readiness to sustain an attack, provide safe zones, mass evacuation routes, etc,... or just be cold hearted, maniacal, misanthrope and let them eat concrete dust.

The Grand Theft Auto series comes pretty close. Not sure if you can enslave people, though.You are wrong good sir.

When a game includes no level ups, no skill progression, no new weapons. In other words, I like The Elderscrolls series and Halo, but I hate pinball and tetris.:p

Not when it comes in a destructive combo,... along with a volcano spreading on top of your city like giant popped zit. Oh... I wish I could zoom in and see the terror.

Okay,... that's just a strawman. What I actually meant was that I'm looking for more fun ways to give misery to the Sims on a massive scale (no, I don't like the Sims, and yes, though it offers ways to torture your Sims, I still don't like the game).

Just like that,... what about terrorist attacks? Design your city to have a readiness to sustain an attack, provide safe zones, mass evacuation routes, etc,... or just be cold hearted, maniacal, misanthrope and let them eat concrete dust.

Unfortunately that's not going to happen. The new Sim City game looks more like that really old Sim Town only with shinier graphics. In other words, it loses pretty much all of the simulation goodness.

1) AI cheating: If the PC has to undergo a process to get something, the AI should at least marginally follow that model. I've still never been quite as pissed off by my computer as I am when the old Civ II suddenly awards Pyramids to the Celts after I've spent the last 500 years getting to 198 shields.

2) Mistaking high mortality for difficulty: The ideal in most video games is that it takes you time to master whatever technique is required to destroy some foe, but also that you get a chance to learn this as you go along and progressively get toward this technique. Most games however go instead for something that kills you 50 times before you win due to glitching or blind luck.


3) Overemphasis on realism as opposed to playability: This most hurts games like flight simulators, where in order to play at a top level in many of the games today you effectively have to drive an F-15 in your day job. If you take a bullet on the tip of the wing, it may be realistic that you'd spend the rest of the fight with both hands jamming the stick to the left to prevent nosing over, but it's not particularly fun.

4) Anti-classes: this is particularly true in MMO's like World of Warcraft or EQ2, in that in some cases depending on what you are running and what your foe is running, you can't lose or you can't win. For instance, my 70 fury warrior in WoW really can't lose to a hunter in PvP because a hunter can't kite on me and no pet can get through 10k armor and 12k hp. By contrast, a frost mage can roll his face across the keyboard and wipe the floor with me, and I might be able to get 2 shots off with my shotgun, taking 3% of his hp. Not sure how it would work, but the ideal is that victories are based far more on comparative gear and skill rather than on the simple fact that I'm a pally and he's a boomkin.