Bullshit things in games?

Jono · March 23, 2015, 01:44:16 AM

The Swarm Host in Starcraft 2 is by far the most bullshit unit in any RTS ever.

All the other player has to do to win with these is park about 10 of them outside your base (they're cloaked when they're burrowed by the way so you can't see them without a Detector) and then the Swarm Hosts automatically send never-ending hordes of Locusts towards your stuff. Oh, and they out-range every other unit/base defense in the game so you won't see them coming.

And I thought the Lurker was bad.

Sandtrap · March 23, 2015, 02:02:16 AM

Something I superbly disliked about Dark Souls II. Whenever a boss was using a buff on themselves, even just a weapon buff, they became fucking god teir damage resistant. Or, if they were casting a spell, or doing a special attack, same thing.

For example. Vestaldt. That golden sheened mother fucker would summon the church for sunday with his fucking bell, get down on one knee, and pray to jesus for a total timespan of about 6-7 seconds.

That's a weakness. That's a fucking opening. That's your golden chance to hit him where it really hurts with all your megawatt spells or your power attacks.

Or so you would think.

But nope.

He's 90% resistant to all damage.

And any boss that does that, is like that. Fuck that. The game teaches you that when you use a buff, you are vulnerable because of the time taken to cast it. And even more insulting is that the weaker vestaldt grows, the more powerful his buff is.

So he calls the sunday church session in, becomes 90% immune to all fucking damage as he holds his choir, and then finally stands back up into the fight, boasting a buff that gives him fucking damage resitance.

Okay From, fuck that guys, that was a mistake.

Naru · March 23, 2015, 02:10:22 AM

Machine guns in games.

Like, why..

And guns with a high capacity bullet magazine.

Like, also, fucking why?

Sigma617 · March 23, 2015, 02:14:11 AM

As a recent Iron Banner Veteran:

Literally every single thing in Destiny.
There are so many one shot kill bullshit things in Destiny multiplayer it's ridiculous.

It's by far the most unfair, frustrating, unbalanced competitive mode I've played in my life.

Sandtrap · March 23, 2015, 02:28:15 AM

Quote from: Sigma617 on March 23, 2015, 02:14:11 AM

As a recent Iron Banner Veteran:

Literally every single thing in Destiny.
There are so many one shot kill bullshit things in Destiny multiplayer it's ridiculous.

It's by far the most unfair, frustrating, unbalanced competitive mode I've played in my life.

How about dem damage sponge-insta kill bosses? Don't ya love how they didn't give you a movement system to avoid their shit so that you just go down over and over again and go, "Oh jeez, this guy sure is tough!"

Sigma617 · March 23, 2015, 02:32:05 AM

Quote from: Sandtrap on March 23, 2015, 02:28:15 AM

Quote from: Sigma617 on March 23, 2015, 02:14:11 AM
As a recent Iron Banner Veteran:

Literally every single thing in Destiny.
There are so many one shot kill bullshit things in Destiny multiplayer it's ridiculous.

It's by far the most unfair, frustrating, unbalanced competitive mode I've played in my life.

How about dem damage sponge-insta kill bosses? Don't ya love how they didn't give you a movement system to avoid their shit so that you just go down over and over again and go, "Oh jeez, this guy sure is tough!"

No, I'm talking about strictly multiplayer encounters.

Destiny comes in two flavors you see.

In PvE you're an unstoppable avatar of war with enough firepower to flatten mountain ranges.
In PvP you're a *scared grunt with weak weapons and cardboard armor.

*Except when you're not and your super kills everyone on the enemy team in one hit.

🂿 · March 23, 2015, 02:41:05 AM

When AI's have no nav mesh causing them to not give a fuck about the laws of physics.

BrenMan 94 · March 23, 2015, 02:51:58 AM

Invisible walls

Isara · March 23, 2015, 03:32:34 AM

I thought it over, and here's a number of things that I came up with;

When games try to follow a "traditional" route and sacrifice creativity for an assumption that accessibility may be the most enjoyable option (but it can be the most profitable one)
Ridiculously small DLCs (like those that just add one weapon and cost ~$1 or $2)
Following ill-understood trends in the industry
Making promises based on development expectations a year before release
Generating too much hype over a game
Finding small things to amuse reviewers, and make reviewers be more lenient
Publishers that are fed by businesspeople who abuse the industry, leading to more poor-quality games with the objective to extort most money in the smallest amount of time possible
Game communities that revolve around hatred of specific groups that may or not belong in the same community
Competitive games where the players feel entitled to act as "leaders" and further punish any behavior that is not what is conceived "good" or "high skilled" play. (Take a chill pill)
People who do not speak English and there's not a system in place to aid the use of the language, especially in games where communication is necessary
When a game builds up to a moment, and that moment is too brief, not challenging or very cliché
Games that focus their character creation, and generation of female characters with an exaggerated factor to appeal to the male audience (thus reducing female characters to eye candy, and the mix becomes very annoying when the female characters are useless or stupid)
Games that claim or are made by feminists who do not understand feminism outside the enclosed box where feminism is all about the issue I mentioned above. Pretending that a well-written female character lead automatically means that all women who happen to play this game will automatically think it's a good game
Lack of tools to punish players with your own moderation, especially as games become more tied to multiplayer aspects. (I hate this person; why can't I kick them out of my world and network?)
When a sequel to a franchise is made, but little or not enough attention was paid to the loyal following that the game already had; I also would like to call this one the Jimmy Rustler sequel.
When a game integrates social media services pointlessly or attempts to emulate them with little relevance to the gameplay or context
When a game series ignores advances in its own genre, and essentially repackages the game game over, and over again with little changes, to which people respond positively by purchasing the game
How sometimes games with a large production, and funds seem to not being able to afford delaying a release, and instead give a bugged game that will not work for a few days to a month; depends on the dev and the circumstances
DRM that collects personal information without a properly or friendly to read privacy note on how the data is handled, and / or the DRM forces you to be always be online even during the actual playthrough.

Hahahaha very funny Zonda · March 23, 2015, 03:37:32 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Ásgeirr · March 23, 2015, 09:00:40 AM

Pre-emptive strike

DAS B00T x2 · March 23, 2015, 09:08:06 AM

Never trust a dev when they say something is "fair and balanced."

Verbatim · March 23, 2015, 09:12:55 AM

Quote from: Isara on March 23, 2015, 03:32:34 AM

Games that focus their character creation, and generation of female characters with an exaggerated factor to appeal to the male audience (thus reducing female characters to eye candy, and the mix becomes very annoying when the female characters are useless or stupid)

you could have just said "sexualized characters", but i mean, this is the main thing i agree with here
the rest of what you said seems like minutiae revolving around the industry/community rather than the games

Isara · March 23, 2015, 09:16:37 AM

Yeah...

Quote from: Verbatim on March 23, 2015, 09:12:55 AM

you could have just said "sexualized characters", but i mean, this is the main thing i agree with here
the rest of what you said seems like minutiae revolving around the industry/community rather than the games

Verbatim · March 23, 2015, 09:38:07 AM

RNG-centric gameplay where the outcome of a battle is determined less by your own skill/mental finesse, and more by a series of arbitrary digital coin flips (very common in RPGs)
When a well-received new feature does not recur in the next sequel
When you can only have one save file (kind of an irrelevant complaint these days, but whatever)
Mods
Overly sexualized characters to the point where it seems less like artistic expression and more like pandering (which is 99% of all cases)
Fake difficulty, especially when used for the purpose of extending the game, making it seem longer than it is (an enemy that takes one million hits isn't hard; it's just tedious)
Too much dialogue/text (I actually have high tolerance for this, but some games go way overboard)
NG+ (tends to be a lame substitute for whatever replay value there could have been)
Everything about Team Fortress 2--everything
Quick-time events (no exceptions)
Overly intricate character customization (why would i give a FUCK where my cheekbones are)
Illusion of choice (as Brute mentioned below)

i could go on and on but i have class

AngryBrute · March 23, 2015, 09:57:00 AM

-Illusion of Choice. Games like AC 3 and Dying Light have moments where it presents to you a moment where you may have to make a big choice. Only to literally just play through like a cutscene and control is never given to you.

-Press *BUTTON* To Whatever: CoD is notorious for this terrible means of interaction. These are moments where the games tell you to "Press A to drill a hole". You hold the button, and then it takes over with a long animation that you have no part in. Is that supposed to make me feel involved? Because it doesn't... Devs need to pay attention to Alien Isolation's was of doing things!

-30 FPS Makes the Game Cinematic: BUUULLLLL SHIIIITTTTTTT!!!!!!! This is a lie, a poor excuse to cover up the fact that the game cannot achieve anything higher than 30FPS. If you just came out and said that "hey we cant get higher than 30FPS due to our visuals" then fine! No problem.

-Day One Patches: I remember a time when games were finished... The attitude of "ship now, patch later" is out of control. We are having day one patches of 5gb and up! And in some cases, those patches cause more problems than they fix. AC Unity is the prime example of this problem. Due to either the publisher pushing the game out of the door and not listening to "hey this is broken!" is one, or they just did not do ANY QA testing. Pubs like Paradox Interacting is an example of pushing out games before they're ready. But thankfully they are changing for the better!

Verbatim · March 23, 2015, 09:59:26 AM

Quote from: AngryBrute on March 23, 2015, 09:57:00 AM

-Illusion of Choice. Games like AC 3 and Dying Light have moments where it presents to you a moment where you may have to make a big choice. Only to literally just play through like a cutscene and control is never given to you.

that's a good one

Verbatim · March 23, 2015, 10:02:23 AM

Quote from: AngryBrute on March 23, 2015, 09:57:00 AM

-30 FPS Makes the Game Cinematic: BUUULLLLL SHIIIITTTTTTT!!!!!!! This is a lie, a poor excuse to cover up the fact that the game cannot achieve anything higher than 30FPS. If you just came out and said that "hey we cant get higher than 30FPS due to our visuals" then fine! No problem.

honest few questions though

how do you know they're lying
how do you know that they don't actually believe it makes it look more cinematic

and why would they choose to lie about something that doesn't matter at all

i mean, obviously the framerate does matter to some people--otherwise they wouldn't get so angry about not getting their 60fps--but i just can't put myself in the position where i'd ever care about something so infinitesimally insignificant

Verbatim · March 23, 2015, 10:08:06 AM

i guess it's just the principle that you shouldn't lie

but game devs lie all the time--they're basically salesmen; it's their job to lie
and i don't see as much uproar over all that other shit they lie about

i mean, there's a little bit, but the fps issue seems to hit a soft spot with a lot of gamers
and it's just really bizarre to me

AngryBrute · March 23, 2015, 10:12:47 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on March 23, 2015, 10:02:23 AM

Quote from: AngryBrute on March 23, 2015, 09:57:00 AM
-30 FPS Makes the Game Cinematic: BUUULLLLL SHIIIITTTTTTT!!!!!!! This is a lie, a poor excuse to cover up the fact that the game cannot achieve anything higher than 30FPS. If you just came out and said that "hey we cant get higher than 30FPS due to our visuals" then fine! No problem.
honest few questions though

how do you know they're lying
how do you know that they don't actually believe it makes it look more cinematic

and why would they choose to lie about something that doesn't matter at all

Because the excuse that 30fps somehow makes the game "better" for their vision simply is. After playing a game in 30 and then jumping to 60, there is no enhancement in the way the game presents its story, it does not make me feel like "OMG I am in a frikin movie!" Games are not supposed to be movies, if I wanted to watch a movie then I would. Take The Order 1886 for example; the devs put so much time into making it feel like a movie. With its black bars, cutscene usage, and its frame rate. After playing it, I kept thinking to myself that there is nothing the FPS is doing to make this game better. It did not enhance anything for its presentation. It just gave me a less smooth camera and more motion blur. If the game somehow had 60FPS, then it would have been nearly the same. FPS does nothing to give you a "cinematic experience" that is done by whats in the game, its gameplay, and style of story telling you put into it.

In the case of The Order; as I said in the review. Its all "style over substance".

slayingold · March 23, 2015, 10:19:53 AM

When there are 4 snipers and four engies on the same team on 2Fort >.>

Turkey · March 23, 2015, 10:20:28 AM

Quote from: AngryBrute on March 23, 2015, 09:57:00 AM

-Day One Patches: I remember a time when games were finished... The attitude of "ship now, patch later" is out of control. We are having day one patches of 5gb and up! And in some cases, those patches cause more problems than they fix. AC Unity is the prime example of this problem. Due to either the publisher pushing the game out of the door and not listening to "hey this is broken!" is one, or they just did not do ANY QA testing. Pubs like Paradox Interacting is an example of pushing out games before they're ready. But thankfully they are changing for the better!

I'm totally fine with day-one patches. With the ridiculous development schedules these days, it's good to know that devs can continue fine-tuning the game after it's gone gold.

Verbatim · March 23, 2015, 10:21:43 AM

Quote from: AngryBrute on March 23, 2015, 10:12:47 AM

Because the excuse that 30fps somehow makes the game "better" for their vision simply is. After playing a game in 30 and then jumping to 60, there is no enhancement in the way the game presents its story, it does not make me feel like "OMG I am in a frikin movie!" Games are not supposed to be movies, if I wanted to watch a movie then I would. Take The Order 1886 for example; the devs put so much time into making it feel like a movie. With its black bars, cutscene usage, and its frame rate. After playing it, I kept thinking to myself that there is nothing the FPS is doing to make this game better. It did not enhance anything for its presentation. It just gave me a less smooth camera and more motion blur. If the game somehow had 60FPS, then it would have been nearly the same. FPS does nothing to give you a "cinematic experience" that is done by whats in the game, its gameplay, and style of story telling you put into it.

this all just seems to stem from personal opinion, which is fine, but i still don't know why it matters so much

you talk about how games are not supposed to be movies--i mean, i disagree in the sense that, you know... movies are pretty fucking cool

i don't see why games shouldn't try to emulate them in some way

so for you, maybe the fps doesn't do anything to make it feel like a movie, but for someone else, it might

and personally, i just don't see a reason to care at all about it
if you were really okay with games running at 30fps, you wouldn't be so passionate about this... "issue"

if your problem is with developer lies in general, i can understand that a little better
but your fixation over this one little thing is kinda... i don't know, it just begs questioning

g💚jira · March 23, 2015, 10:24:10 AM

When games, even good ones, get so caught up in setting emotional tones for individual set pieces that they forget to set one for the entire game itself. That kinda ideology leads to games which have great "moments" but end up feeling like a mess of ideas.

Also the reverse: when games get so caught up in setting emotional tones for the entire game that every experience feels like a homogenous drill of the game's main design philosophies, designed to beat the same thing into your head over and over again. Like, it's cool that you have a unique idea, but it's not unique enough to withstand being homogenized with itself.

Also when games decide to purposefully take agency away from the player by providing irremovable "assists." Ugh, why Bungie

AngryBrute · March 23, 2015, 10:28:06 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on March 23, 2015, 10:21:43 AM

Quote from: AngryBrute on March 23, 2015, 10:12:47 AM
Because the excuse that 30fps somehow makes the game "better" for their vision simply is. After playing a game in 30 and then jumping to 60, there is no enhancement in the way the game presents its story, it does not make me feel like "OMG I am in a frikin movie!" Games are not supposed to be movies, if I wanted to watch a movie then I would. Take The Order 1886 for example; the devs put so much time into making it feel like a movie. With its black bars, cutscene usage, and its frame rate. After playing it, I kept thinking to myself that there is nothing the FPS is doing to make this game better. It did not enhance anything for its presentation. It just gave me a less smooth camera and more motion blur. If the game somehow had 60FPS, then it would have been nearly the same. FPS does nothing to give you a "cinematic experience" that is done by whats in the game, its gameplay, and style of story telling you put into it.
this all just seems to stem from personal opinion, which is fine, but i still don't know why it matters so much

you talk about how games are not supposed to be movies--i mean, i disagree in the sense that, you know... movies are pretty fucking cool

i don't see why games shouldn't try to emulate them in some way

so for you, maybe the fps doesn't do anything to make it feel like a movie, but for someone else, it might

and personally, i just don't see a reason to care at all about it
if you were really okay with games running at 30fps, you wouldn't be so passionate about this... "issue"

if your problem is with developer lies in general, i can understand that a little better
but your fixation over this one little thing is kinda... i don't know, it just begs questioning

Its just the lie for me. I dont mind it one way or the other. They seem to place the FPS in contributing to making their game feel "cinematic" when thats the other stuffs job.

Turkey · March 23, 2015, 10:31:04 AM

OT: Tons of useless loot. Maybe because I'm in the middle of DA:I, but in most modern RPGs, especially loot-based and dungeon crawlers, there's just too much superfluous loot. Yeah, chests and materials encourage you to explore the environment, but if the only reason an area exists is to hold a random piece of loot, then it's a waste of space. Inventories filled with dozens of useless weapons and junk to be sold. Having to sort through inventory screens really screws up immersion, and I've never felt I've lost anything when a sequel streamlines the process.

Far Cry 2 did this really well with no menu screens at all. Even the map was in-game.

Coco · March 23, 2015, 10:52:52 AM

-Pay to win
-Competitive games focused on randomness
-When a game has no meaningful consequences for player fuckups
-Linear levels tied together by over-the-top QTEs

RomanGladiator · March 23, 2015, 11:16:37 AM

I was just thinking about this earlier. Those moments in games where you have no control while the camera moves, not a cutscene, but the game saying hey look at this! Like when your character raises his hand in front of his face while an explosion goes off. Also the healing animations piss me off in Far Cry 4 when I don't have any syringes crafted. Drives me nuts doing that while under fire.

Luciana · March 23, 2015, 11:36:10 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on March 23, 2015, 09:38:07 AM

Mods

I'm gonna regret asking but

why? Like, I think I know what you might say, and I'm ready to agree with you if confirmed, but I'm just curious.

Luciana · March 23, 2015, 11:39:58 AM

I'm surprised no one has said this yet

Early Access

Games have tried to follow the Minecraft effect and it led this this cancer of developers releasing clearly unfinished games and on some cases, not even finishing them. It ultimately led to fucking people over.

Still, people finally caught on that, much like pre-ordering, early access is a bad thing if you have to pay for it. So i'm glad it's scaling back.