Jump to content

Gaming pet hates


Sigourney Beaver
 Share

Recommended Posts

Things I hate in games:

- Street races in open world games

- Enforced stealth sections with shit stealth mechanics

- Cover based shooters with obvious cover (I love GoW but CHEST HIGH WALLS everywhere!)

- Unskippable cutscenes

- Games that are blatant ripoffs of other games

- Fanboys

- Console wars

Tbh there are probably more but these are all I can think of in my current flu'd up, half addled state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flowchart shotos. Or just shotos generally. The less experienced ones are alright since you can exploit their predictability, but a Ken who knows what he's doing is a pain in the arse. It's probably even more disappointing/annoying that the sheer number of them make it so much harder to get rarer match-ups and improve your game against less popular characters...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate nouners and nouning.

Use of the words "gaming" and "gamers" make me squirm. I'm a player, I play games, just like I read books.

I hate the sound of the words.

I associate them with tacky marketing and lifestyle-oriented material.

I hate that they are synonymous with gambling.

:angry:

Within games, I really hate bad barriers. Like when they block off a corridor with stacked furniture that anybody could get past, or a little ridge that anybody could hop or scramble over, or put a switch behind a pit that needs a 2x2x2 block pushed into it rather than reaching over and pressing the switch. Level designers need to get out more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Total agreement with shit obstacles, any little ledge especially in FPS's, which I can see with the eyes of my protagonist is lower than my own eye level but although I can carry around 20 stone of random weaponry and tat, I can't for some reason lift myself up over things higher than my own shins.

Invisible walls as well.

I hate non-skippable or avoidable intro / training areas as well, even the well implemented ones like in CoD4 generally annoy me, I've played games before, let me have an option to let the game know that. It should either be intuitive enough based on my gaming knowledge and experience or if it's a radically new game, I'll do the tutorial, I don't need to be handheld all the time in terms of testing whether I can press A to open a door or some shit. Or as was mentioned in a GTA4 discussion, if there's something like an internet cafe, I'll probably go and check it out and have a fuck about with it, if I don't want to, don't make me do a 'level' that consists of doing what I probably have done already because it seemed interesting when I first found out about it.

In fact, any sort of non-global setting stuff annoys me, I really don't want to have to keep telling my 360 where to save things, I save everything in the same bloody place, just let me know when it's full or if it does something weird. Same with controls for games, either stick to CoD controls in a FPS (or again, ask me if I've played CoD and like those controls or something) or at least have FULLY customisable button mappings, I hate playing a game where all of a sudden reload has become throw grenade and I keep blowing myself up like a tit.

Long start ups to games, the Lara Croft XBLA game has an unfeasibly long startup, it doesn't even set the scene or anything apart really. After playing a game once, just go straight to a continue or new game screen. Then if I pick new game, you can show me all the shit again if you really must but let me have the option to skip it.

Although I hate blatant rip offs too, I also dislike the sometimes almost stubborn changes that some games put in to differentiate themselves, why bother trying to make your own ragdoll physics engine when by all accounts Euphoria is not even processor intensive and can be chucked into most things. It works, use it, stop being difficult. Same with things like in-game maps etc, if someone has made something like a really good map (as mentioned somewhere on here before, the one in Planescape that you can annotate yourself) don't try and be clever and make some funky new map that's in fact just a load of shit, like Fable II.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's late and I can't think of any examples, but in a lot of games I've played there are always poorly conceived sections which have me shouting out things like "why would they do that!", "what fucking idiot thought that was a good idea!", and "didn't anybody bother to playtest this piece of shit!".

To summarise then: things in games that would lead me to beat the programmers to death with a joypad if I were a playtester.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's late and I can't think of any examples, but in a lot of games I've played there are always poorly conceived sections which have me shouting out things like "why would they do that!", "what fucking idiot thought that was a good idea!", and "didn't anybody bother to playtest this piece of shit!".

To summarise then: things in games that would lead me to beat the programmers to death with a joypad if I were a playtester.

The annoying thing is, a mate of mine was a playtester for EA and he continually thought quite a lot of the games he played were utter shit but it totally fell on deaf ears, even citing other game mechanics or examples of things, there was quite a lot of 'it's like that cos we say so'. He playtested Catwoman and Harry Potter games to name a few but of course they were tie ins but still.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Games that just don't appeal to me - or tick my boxes - don't even get close to my "goat". Games are just games. it's not like they pay my bills.

If games, genres or just styles "get your goat", then I'd suggest that you're into the wrong hobby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That character design sheet is selective bullshit. I don't like it when Fox News does it but when gamers do it, well it's brilliant as they're usually the first to bemoan media doing it about their beloved medium. They've chosen one of four available characters in L4D, a guy who gets killed off early on in Gears, Shepard who's design is entirely up to the player, Riddick who is based on a real person and one specific member from nine TF2 candidates. You can use a picture to prove anything you want, after all you get to choose what goes on it.

Even with that said you've got 24 similar characters over a 6 year time span. Considering the amount of games released each year, that's not at all bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flowchart shotos. Or just shotos generally. The less experienced ones are alright since you can exploit their predictability, but a Ken who knows what he's doing is a pain in the arse. It's probably even more disappointing/annoying that the sheer number of them make it so much harder to get rarer match-ups and improve your game against less popular characters...

I'm sorry but this is utter garbage and I'm tired of hearing people say this.

Ryu, Ken and even Akuma are not the best in SSIV and if you lose to flowchart Kens then its you who sucks, not the game. I would rather play someone who is good with shotos rather then play someone who is amazing with Gen or C.Viper since a shoto can never really suprise you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.