Generation jumps are a fine time for embracing the New, and a fine way of doing that is sticking two fingers up at the Old. I've been pondering the state of gaming this week like a cat pondering a fish bowl, and I've concluded that there are 13 mechanics, publishing tricks and the like that I never want to play, see, hear or read about in any form, ever, ever again.
You doubtless have your own ideas, and should post them in the comments. Let's make this a regular free-for-all. Last man to ragequit, wins.
Manual saving
Having to save the game yourself is only just when the game makes doing so part of the fiction, or at least part of the entertainment. Perhaps you're playing Dark Souls, where the unforgiving spacing of those bonfire checkpoints is integral to the heart-pounding dread of exploration. Or maybe you're tackling ICO, where the fourth wall is playfully broken by save points which resemble large stone sofas, so all sessions end with Yorda and Ico mirroring the player. Otherwise, manual saves are just an obsolete inconvenience.
Non-analogue running
We're still, somehow, seeing games that treat "running" and "walking" as though they were discrete existential categories, separated by oceans of otherworldly fire. The Dualshock control setup has been around for a decade, chaps. There's really no excuse for not being able to subtly tilt a shuffle into a jog. It's far more intuitive than clicking a button to activate Speedy Mode.
23 comments so far...
Thos. on 27 Jul '12 said:
I've given up on any game with non-cosmetic unlocks. If I get beaten, I want to know it was by a better player, not some kid with 12 hours a day spare time on his hands, and the entire arsenal of weapons.
It's lazy programming, and it feels too much like being tricked/forced into playing. I won't be getting Halo 4, and if it means only playing XBLA games like BF1943, or CS:GO, then that's absolutely fine by me. When progressive content unlocks die I'll be delighted.
Clanger67 on 27 Jul '12 said:
Yeah i have already had a rant about the Dishonoured dlc.Fair enough i can probably appreciate that it means certain places will be assured orders.But the pre order i want for DH is with Tesco.To be fair i know people that shop there,but i don't or have ever bought a game from them.So that means i might have to shirk my normal purchase places,that tend to sell games above all else.Just so i can get the dlc i want day one.Instead of have to wait a month or whatever until it becomes available to anyone dlc,WHY !!!!!!!!!!
golliwoza on 27 Jul '12 said:
If it makes you feel any better all of the preorder DLC just gives you a few stat and perk style bonus points as well as 500 coins. But I do get annoyed by retailer exclusive DLC I would not be to worried if I was able to get it from everywhere or even after release for a small cost.
Clanger67 on 27 Jul '12 said:
Yeah Golli. think that might be the case with me when a bit more info. becomes available.See how much the dlc is gonna be afterwards and how long.Thing is i can probably appreciate somebody like Game trying to get back on their feet,so they are now snapping up all the CE's,SE's.But since when has Tesco started getting exclusives.You would think that after all the chatter about devs. struggling and the gaming marketplace in general they would at least let places you tend to associate with games get first refusal.
JCHN on 27 Jul '12 said:
There is nothing wrong with manual saves!!! It allows you to make sure that you do not have to make the same trek you just did all over again if you die. It makes life easier, a lot easier.
lazercut123 on 27 Jul '12 said:
If you want to talk about auto saving, the play banjo kazooie nuts and bolts, that saved every 12 seconds, got a bit annoying after a while.
Oh, and to Thos, I think you mean 15 hours, what a day that was
stryder84 on 27 Jul '12 said:
REHASHED MAPS in DLC packs...I absolutely refuse to fork out for DLC if it has any rehashed maps from previous games if your going to do that include in the original package or do a "classic map collections" DLC that way we get to choose if we want to play on the old maps
Wonky Sausage on 27 Jul '12 said:
I also don't think there's anything wrong with horde modes. It gives you something else to do should you be raging your tits off trying to get veteren difficulty campaign achievements, or when your doing absolutely shite online on CoD, Halo Reach, Gears, Saints Row 3 etc...
I'd rather have a horde mode, than none at all. I think manual saves are quite important too - there's been so many occasions where autosave has overwritten something I didn't want overwritten (On CoD World at War, It autosaved a checkpoint - but when I reached the checkpoint, a grenade was about to explode, so you can imagine that every time I spawned, I was a second away from dying again. So the autosave saved the checkpoint with me about to die - so frustrating
OXM Log on 27 Jul '12 said:
"gunpowder-stuffed abstraction of my penis"
Jesus, Ed. I won't be able to look at you in the eye on Monday
msbhvn on 27 Jul '12 said:
Isn't Ed only back from his holidays on Tuesday?
Those two sexism entries could be replaced by something like: "devs/publishers need to realise that the average gamer is no longer a hormone crazed fourteen year old boy and stop targeting every game to that demographic".
DGR1980 on 27 Jul '12 said:
Enough with the difficulty related achievements.
I know i'm shit at gaming, but having the majority of my games list topping out around the 650 - 750 point mark really rubs it in
sonicmark on 27 Jul '12 said:
I have to agree that sexism is a trend that needs to die in video games, I'd been tossing around a few ideas over the last few days for a new kind of gaming character, and I thought "how about someone who's got an average body? Or even someone who's smaller than the average person?", but I think the problem with making something like that a successful idea, it would take some convincing to the developers since they tend to get frightened of originality nowadays. Now I can't get it out of my mind that even Isaac Clarke might have a 6 pack and massive torso hiding under his space suit
.
Bezza89 on 27 Jul '12 said:
Might as well get rid of achievements then, they should be given when you achieve something - not for just playing a game otherwise it becomes a meaningless number, which it sort of is anyway but you get my point. They are to encourage the higher difficulties, and when done perfectly - they make you experiment with the gameplay.
I hate annualisation/quick turnarounds - but it's costly to do otherwise, saves should be manual and automatic to a) alleviate frustration manually, b) alleviate frustration when you forget to manually save. Nolan North isn't that brilliant. Horde mode is great as a separate gamemode but don't integrate it into the main game, mass effect 3.
I've mentioned the ridiculousness of GoD pricing many times, it needs to be slapped in the face and changed up.
DGR1980 on 27 Jul '12 said:
That wasn't quite the point i was trying to make. Well it kinda was . . . but when you have to replay a game 3 times to get all the achievements because the higher difficulty levels aren't unlocked to start with, to my mind thats just a cheap way to stop people trading games in quicker and to delay the second hand market
DGR1980 on 27 Jul '12 said:
Oh and don't get me started on the <X> amount of kills achievements particularly when <X> turns out to be 1000% of the available enemies in one playthough.
Damn its cathartic to vent sometimes
Bezza89 on 27 Jul '12 said:
That's a different kettle (really, thought it was kettel for the fish thing) of fish and I'd agree with you, though Hitman BM has you having to do each difficulty separately and is sublime regardless and needs to be played on each difficulty due to the different approaches you do due to being forced to being perfect each time.
Caligulove on 27 Jul '12 said:
14. Segregating unlocks via game modes
A few posts have complained about progressive unlocks in multi-player, I can see your point but realistically its not going anywhere. This is why I think games such as CoD, BF ect, but more recently Max Payne 3 and Ghost Recon should not divide their unlocks between SP and MP. The reason being, if like me, you complete the campaign before jumping on to multi-player, and sometimes that includes multiple playthroughs, then you're immediately at a disadvantage to others. Just because they've decided to ignore the (arguably) main bit of the game I'm stuck fighting against things like 50cal rifles, RPG's and grenade launchers with only a crappy pistol or machine gun.
Not only that but in the case of say Ghost Recon I spend all campaign working to unlock deadly shiny bits for guns so that by the final mission I've just about got the lot, then make me start from scratch again as soon as I want to shoot something other than a bot with the IQ of Jedward.
Seriously in any game that offers progressive unlocks there's more than enough to go around so why not throw some of them over to other modes. For the sake of the devs even, who spend years making a campaign only for it to get ignored because a) there's no reward and b) it will take time away from progress towards a golden hand cannon.
In an ideal world you'd achieve rank 1 as soon as you switch the game on and could rank up playing single-player, co-op, horde and multi-player. All of which would contribute towards new stuff for your custom set-ups for playing any game type. And if you just don't like to be competitive at all and have no interest in multi-player then there's an off switch in the options.
bamozzy on 28 Jul '12 said:
Actually Max Payne does not segregate its unlocks between SP and MP to a degree. If you play the SP first and find ALL the Golden Gun parts - you unlock them in MP too - in fact that is the only way to unlock them. However I haven't completed the campaign yet (I only got it a couple of days ago) I have also dipped into the MP. I tend to play a bit of both and not concentrate solely on one aspect. I don't always buy games on release so there is always a lot of people who have unlocked bigger and better weaponry in MP. Games like CoD though with the Prestige system does mean that you get a wide variety of levels but not necessarily better weaponry. You could have all available weaponry and custom classes on first prestige level 80 and be up against someone who has just prestiged to 20 with the default only classes. Like I said though I rarely buy games on release so there is always people with access to better stuff - there is always people who spend more time in MP too so they are better at it as well - that's just the way it is.Maybe games should have a beginners only/training lobby and players up to a certain level can only access it - those above cannot!
As for games that make you play through again because of different difficulty unlocks after completion, I must admit I do find that really annoying. In fact the only time I think that is permissible is if the game offers a new game + mode where everything from your first playthrough is carried over. Dead Space 2 had a great New Game + mode as it also offereed NEW items on the second playthrough too (like new suits) as well as carrying over everything from the first playthrough (upgraded weaponry etc etc.)
I also think that if you beat the game at a higher difficulty setting you should unlock all the achievements for completing the game at the lower difficulty ratings at the same time (for example if you beat the game on Hard you should also unlock Easy and Normal at the same time)
I also agree with the Walk/Run thing to a degree - we have analogue sticks for a reason - although in some games it could get annoying if you break into a run (especially shooters) as it usually means you can't fire your weapon which could happen in the heat of a firefight. I would like to see the analogue sticks used more like Mario 64 did though.
lazercut123 on 28 Jul '12 said:
I am truly offended by that statement, because I am 14, and if you don't like that you can just go and play black ops, you loser.
By the way, Im kidding, although I am 14
usrev2 on 28 Jul '12 said:
1 DLC - DLC is bad unless its used for the original purpose ( to extend the gameplay) the problem is the prices are absurd
2 digital everything prices going along with number 1, a COD map pack is $15 and you get 4 maps, that is almost $4 per map. anyone who has used a map editor for a PC game can tell you that it is absurd. $1 per map TOPS. $15 map pack is an actual map pack with 15 maps??? yes please.
3 COD- COD4 was great, then they stopped improving the game and it stagnated with only fanboys buying it. gamers have been ignoring cod for years.
4 COD clones games that try to leach the marketshare COD has is very bad.
YoungTobias on 29 Jul '12 said:
Forget pre-order DLC, that's small-fry compared to day one paid DLC of content that is virtually required for the main game. From Ashes was ridiculous, Mass Effect 3 is literally incomplete without Javik (then again, it was incomplete anyway due to the rushed, nonsensical ending that didn't deliver on Bioware's explicit statements), and EA release it at £7.99/800MSP on the same day as you've spent upwards of £40 to buy the damn game - and much of the content is just stuff that was on the disk to begin with. This, along with the tedious trend of developers releasing games way too early so they can just patch or complete them later (again, ME3 among others), is the single most worrying and disappointing trend in modern gaming, along with the "take it or leave it" attitude prevalent in many mainstream articles.
Dash469 on 30 Jul '12 said:
I hate games like battlefield 3 where you can buy all the unlocks for each class and vechile and also buy all the guns, it makes it unfair on players who actually spend time unlocking the guns through challenges and leveling up
bamozzy on 30 Jul '12 said:
I kind of agree with you but for those that join late are they at a disadvantage because others have unlocked the weaponry?? Personally I don't think so in Battlefield as the starting weaponry is quite strong anyway. However I do disagree with the purchasing of unlocks as it does make a mockery of the whole unlock system and a way of 'money grabbing' by EA. I don't know if the unlocks also include all the attachments - I refuse to buy anything that I can get by playing the game. Besides even if they haven't played the game (to get the unlocked weapons) it doesn't mean they will have the advantage of more experienced players as experience is what counts more than the weaponry!I can see it being more beneficial to unlock the Vehicle upgrades as that will obviously help them more...
Personally I don't like the whole Season Pass/Premium/Elite type of deals either as you don't know what you are paying for. If companies where more upfront about what exactly they are offering then I would have far less issues with it. Elite/CoD has been so secretive about its DLC and I am quite disappointed with the content it has offered - I expected it to all be Multi-player based - NOT spec-ops Missions and even 'Face off' is a joke as it is too restricted and of limited interest!! Surely people could play smaller maps in smaller numbers in private matches - that avoids the boosting and rage quitting!!!
Premium was released to late in BF3's life as it came AFTER the B2K DLC was released - quite a long time after meaning I bought B2K and then bought 'Premium' which would have given me B2K free!! GRRRRRRR
But at least they were a bit more upfront about what they were offering in terms of DLC
I haven't bought ANY other Season Pass - Most games that have offered it are sat on my shelf and not played often enough to warrant me buying it anyway - maybe I would have played them more if I had - but I doubt it!!