Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[alexandertnt]

Alien races are collectives

Humans are made up of all sorts of different ideas and traditions and all the aliens have monolithic societies. Bonus points if all the aliens society matches the stereotypes humans have assigned to the species (alien reptiles are evil or at least aggressive, alien insects have hive minds etc). Having a single alien be unique does not avert this (it actually emphasises this).

Humans are special

Humans are weaker, dumber, and live shorter lives than all the aliens. But by mere virtue of being human, we end up uniting/conquering the galaxy etc.

My main problem with leveling is that the ideal case is almost always to have the players at the same level in multiplayer, or slightly below the NPC's level in singleplayer.  So why not just get rid of the level mechanic and add abilities through other mechanics, the way that say Legend of Zelda does it?  Well, the reason is that leveling is the easiest way to make players stick with your game.  Not because it makes the game more fun, mind you, but because it makes the game more addictive.  It lends the player an immediate sense of accomplishment to see "level up" pop up every half hour, even if the only gameplay effect is to keep the game the same while increasing the damage numbers at best, or disbalance the game at worst.

I dont really have an issue with the balance myself (it is a valid point though), but I completely agree with everything else, particularly the reason why levelling finds its way into games. Seems like people need that sparkly level up effect to get the endorphins flowing.

[Squill]

I dont really have an issue with the balance myself (it is a valid point though), but I completely agree with everything else, particularly the reason why levelling finds its way into games. Seems like people need that sparkly level up effect to get the endorphins flowing.

I really like leveling mechanics if they're not to grindy, as long as it stays in RPGs. Although I don't think it's too bad when it works like Halo multiplayer, where you can level up and primarily unlock aesthetic options. That way it allows for customization, and gives a more long term goal.

[GreatJustice]

Mindless Diplomatic AI

In which the AI declares wars and ends them without rhyme or reason. Small countries entirely surrounded by gigantic empires suicidally invade and fight to the death. Allies surrounded by enemies declare war on each other. etc

Player Hating Diplomatic AI

In which the AI will launch a blood vendetta against the player for no good reason but to make the game harder, even to the detriment of realistic diplomacy of the time. Trying to fight off the Moors in Spain during the Reconquista? Good luck with that, because the French, English, Germans, and Italians are all going to be stabbing you in the back for no reason, while anyone you ally with will instantly attack once you gain a land border regardless of strength, common enemies, etc

Boring Victory Conditions

In which you reach a point where you have won, but you haven't really "won" until you hunt down and kill that last enemy scout wandering the map.

Broken Naval AI

In which the AI is either incapable of using boats and sits around on its island waiting to be put down (eg. Age of Empires 2), or in which the AI completely cheats with its naval abilities, leading to such scenarios as Japan sending naval forces to conquer the Baltics during WW2.

[alexandertnt]

That way it allows for customization, and gives a more long term goal.

This is one of the issues I have with leveling-up based unlocking of things, and is related to why I am so fustrated it has become so accepted. Leveling-up unlocking does not allow for customisations, it does the opposite. It restricts customisions by putting often arbitrary conditions and quotas that have to first be satisfied before you have access to them.

This is the way I fell about it:

• If I want to play with/as an unlockable X, but it is not available until I level up, then I feel I am actually having a sub-par experience up until the point where I unlock X. So I blame my inability to use X, and thus my reduced enjoyment of the game, on the leveling up mechanic and its needless restriction on my play. For example, in a game like Halo multiplayer, I would rather have all the aesthetic options from the get go, my enjoyment would be derived from using them, not earning them.
• I dont get enjoyment or a feeling of progress/achievement out of the mere event of leveling up.
  
• Many of the games I have played with such a mechanic have horrible reward-to-effort ratio's (eg playing hours for a single gun). I am not just talking about F2P games (which are often horrendously bad). MMO's are by far the worst offenders here. Playing hours to level up (which may only be a few extra points to some statistics) strikes me as time wasted for the most insignificant reward.
  
• In the games that are fun but still have something like this system (games like this do exist, despite my disdain for this system), I have never found the system to add anything of value to the game, probably because of point 2.
  

On the issue of strategy games:

Buildings that are all-solid grids

Bit of a poor title. But this results in situations where you can build yourself in and get stuck by placing buildings right next to each other (despite the fact that some of the buildings may have blank space like grass). Bonus points if the AI walls its workers in with houses and breaks.

[Squill]

That way it allows for customization, and gives a more long term goal.

If I want to play with/as an unlockable X, but it is not available until I level up, then I feel I am actually having a sub-par experience up until the point where I unlock X. So I blame my inability to use X, and thus my reduced enjoyment of the game, on the leveling up mechanic and its needless restriction on my play. For example, in a game like Halo multiplayer, I would rather have all the aesthetic options from the get go, my enjoyment would be derived from using them, not earning them.

I think this is one of those things that's more personal opinion. I just like it because it allows you to display your accomplishments to your friends, in game and out, without messing with gameplay or being nothing but a couple words.

[itisnotlogical]

Surrendering AI, fight stoppage, etc.

Why does the game even let you play if the AI ends the session before you actually win? This irritates the hell out of me in strategy games, Fight Night Round 2, etc.

What's really hilarious in a really long game of CnC is if the AI sells all its buildings and uses the resulting units to successfully fight off your attack. The attack that you just spent the last resources on your side of the map to launch.

AI that just doesn't learn

I parked some Whirlwinds and bolter turrets just outside the small strip where Eldar had to rush through to get to my base. Cue theoretically infinite kill count with no way for the Eldar to even reach my position.

[alexandertnt]

I think this is one of those things that's more personal opinion.

Definitely. The whole thing is my personal opinion. I wouldnt claim it to be an absolute fact .

Surrendering AI, fight stoppage, etc.

Oh hell yes. It is a completely unsatisfying victory if the AI spontaneously resigns.

Stalemates in RTS's are no fun either.

[Akura]

Ridiculous time scales/backstories that take place a ridiculously long time ago.

For example, in Grandia II the big war between good and evil in the backstory took place 10,000 years ago(and in space for that matter). By the time game takes place, they're stuck in a some sort of late medieval/early steampunk period where their greatest technological achievement is an unsteady gondola(that falls apart) across a canyon where a suspension bridge would have allowed a lot more traffic(and be a lot safer). And nobody actually remembers how they built it.

Consider that 10,000 years ago, we were living in caves, and look where we are now.

Surrendering AI, fight stoppage, etc.

Oh hell yes. It is a completely unsatisfying victory if the AI spontaneously resigns.

Stalemates in RTS's are no fun either.

Conquest: Frontier Wars really irritates me when it does this. I win, but not completely, and they still have some facilities to fight back. Then suddenly:

"I resign."

Then everything they own explodes unsatisfyingly.

AI that just doesn't learn

I parked some Whirlwinds and bolter turrets just outside the small strip where Eldar had to rush through to get to my base. Cue theoretically infinite kill count with no way for the Eldar to even reach my position.

"Hey, you think they'll run out of ammo any time soon?"
"...Eventually? Attack!"

[flame99]

Solving the puzzles for you.
When the game literally completes its own puzzles without you having to do anything. This isn't you easily solving a puzzle, this is your NPC ally shouting it out the same instant you find it.

[hector13]

Solving the puzzles for you.
When the game literally completes its own puzzles without you having to do anything. This isn't you easily solving a puzzle, this is your NPC ally shouting it out the same instant you find it.

An addendum to that is an entire room with a puzzle that doesn't reset once you finish it, so you have to do the puzzle backwards to get out.

[itisnotlogical]

Solving the puzzles for you.
When the game literally completes its own puzzles without you having to do anything. This isn't you easily solving a puzzle, this is your NPC ally shouting it out the same instant you find it.

An addendum to that is an entire room with a puzzle that doesn't reset once you finish it, so you have to do the puzzle backwards to get out.

And puzzles that can be made unsolvable, so that you constantly have to leave the room to reset the whole thing to do it over. Or just be screwed over, because the puzzle doesn't reset once you leave the room.

[Virtz]

On the subject of puzzles,

Busy-work "puzzles"
Puzzles that take more time to do than figure out. Pushing or dragging boxes, slowly carrying macguffin A onto pressure plate B, etc..

Most notably in Limbo recently, where you spend 95% of your time retrying a puzzle you've figured out already, but failed on some arbitrary sudden death trap. It's what makes Limbo so much worse than other cinematic trial and error platformers like Another World.

[Catastrophic lolcats]

Those god damn puzzles where you have to light up a tile board but each tile will turn off a corresponding tile when interacted with. Stop doing those. I've done that puzzle so many times and it hasn't been interesting once. I'm sure the majority of people just brute force it anyway.

[flame99]

On the subject of puzzles,

Busy-work "puzzles"
Puzzles that take more time to do than figure out. Pushing or dragging boxes, slowly carrying macguffin A onto pressure plate B, etc..

Most notably in Limbo recently, where you spend 95% of your time retrying a puzzle you've figured out already, but failed on some arbitrary sudden death trap. It's what makes Limbo so much worse than other cinematic trial and error platformers like Another World.

I liked Limbo, if only because I found it to actually terrifying, versus the typical horror game theme of "Shoot bloody things". On that note:

"Horror" games
Things like Dead Space, in which the "horror" aspects comes from things being covered in wounds, versus such taboo thoughts as "Pacing".

[Virtz]

On the subject of puzzles,

Busy-work "puzzles"
Puzzles that take more time to do than figure out. Pushing or dragging boxes, slowly carrying macguffin A onto pressure plate B, etc..

Most notably in Limbo recently, where you spend 95% of your time retrying a puzzle you've figured out already, but failed on some arbitrary sudden death trap. It's what makes Limbo so much worse than other cinematic trial and error platformers like Another World.

I liked Limbo, if only because I found it to actually terrifying, versus the typical horror game theme of "Shoot bloody things". On that note:

"Horror" games
Things like Dead Space, in which the "horror" aspects comes from things being covered in wounds, versus such taboo thoughts as "Pacing".

What are you talking about? Just about all "horror" now is like Amnesia or Slender, where you're running around completely unarmed, usually doing crappy busy-work like collecting 8 pages. To me there's no horror to be had from a game that basically tells you "you can go through this without fighting, there's always a way to avoid your enemies", only annoyance at having to play by the game's arbitrary rules (basically playing a boring "exploration" game where stuff can make you go back to a checkpoint or the start of the game).

Stuff like Dead Space isn't really "horror" to me either, it's a solid TPS that's sometimes a little unnerving (and by that it's a far better game than Limbo, which fails as a platformer and doesn't really have anything "horrifying" either). To me the ideal horror game is one like the first Silent Hill, where there's no real jumpscares, only creepy imagery, you can fight or avoid most enemies, and your character isn't very good at fighting.