So last week we looked at some
irritating aspects of video games that are overused and
stereotypical. But when making that list there were a bunch more
problems that I just couldn't let slip. I tried grouping these
problems separately in that these are more like stupid
directions/tendencies that video games as a whole seem to be heading
towards rather than problems with individual games. Whereas cliches
will have you simply rolling your eyes, these following problems are
the ones that you should be genuinely concerned about in today's
gaming industry. Or something like that. Just consider this the
second half of last week's list if you want. Let's roll.
10 – Difficulty settings that you
have to unlock
I will never understand this design
decision, other than the fact that it tries to make you play through
the game a second time. Why is a game's highest difficulty something
that I have to earn? It should be something that's available right at
the start. This is just lazy; unlockables in video games are supposed
to be rewarding, not basic necessities. What's worse is when you're
playing a sequel of a series that you're already well familiar with –
like me when I first played Gears of Wars 3 and Judgment
– and you can't have the challenge you want until you've already
beaten the game once. C'mon, man! Veteran players already know how this game works.
Don't treat the player like a baby.
9 – Unskippable End Credits
Same as last week's #1 worst cliche,
but slightly less aggravating. These are just credits and it is the
end of the game, so you could just get up and do something else while
you're waiting for them to finish. However, the end of the campaign
is supposed to feel satisfying and rewarding, not tedious and
punishing! Developers, I know a lot of hard work went into your game,
but c'mon, we already paid money for the damn thing. Be thankful for
that and call it a day.
8 – Clumsy Weapon/Item Switching
Don't you just hate it when you're in a
tight jam and you need to use a weapon or item quickly but the
controls just won't allow you to do it? Video games – action games,
especially – need to have a way to swiftly select things. Otherwise
you'll get screwed sooner or later. Even though I consider it a great
game, Far Cry 3 has caused me a lot of grief in this category.
In this game you switch weapons by holding the left shoulder button
and selecting the weapon with the thumbstick, which is OK but it
would've been better if this was mapped as a simple press of the
D-pad. Instead the D-pad is used for your camera, throwing rocks, and
two random syringes – and you'll never remember exactly which
syringes they are. To heal you have to press and hold the Y
button, which is a pain in the ass. Holding the Y button takes too
long and it doesn't even work for about 1/3 of the time. This “hold
Y” bullcrap is the cause of probably 80% of my deaths in Far Cry
3. Other than that, if you want to use anything else you have to
painstakingly do it from the start menu, bringing the gameplay to a
screeching halt. What a load.
7 – Sequels that change up the
controls
You've just bought the latest game in
one of your favourite video game series. You pop the disc in. You
start the game aaaaaaaaand... the controls are totally different from
before. Dangit! Most of the time it isn't a huge big deal, but every
once in a while they change up something critical to your
survival/success. Like in Gears of War: Judgment, where I
wasted a ton of grenades all because the objective/squad status
button has been replaced with the grenade throw button. What's worse
is when in one game the controls are really awkward and different and
then in the next game they go back to being fairly straightforward.
For instance, playing Splinter Cell: Blacklist right after
playing SC: Conviction is a complete mess. I end up crouching
when I'm trying to reload. I've aimed when all I wanted was to get
into cover. I've leaped into cover when I wanted to perform a melee
takedown. I've been spotted a lot because I pressed the “attract”
button, expecting to see what the objective is. And worst of all,
I've wasted so many gadgets just trying to crouch! Thanks,
Conviction. You completely screwed up the following (and,
might I add, much better) game.
6 – Short Single-player Campaigns
I know I'm definitely in the minority
here, but I spend a lot of time playing the single player mode of
video games. In fact, I don't think I've ever gamed online (with
consoles anyways, I've done it before with PC games). To me at least,
the meat of a game should be its single-player campaign; the
multiplayer is the icing on the cake... of meat. (And if we're
talking about a game that's multiplayer-only, then forget it.) That's
why it really bothers me that a lot of games nowadays seem to be
geared much more towards multiplayer with ever-shortening campaign
modes of less and less creativity. It breaks my heart to see such
games as the newest Star Wars: Battlefront have a campaign
that's less than a couple hours long, especially when the original
Battlefront games actually tried to do a fun single-player
story mode. And that was over a decade ago! You'd think that
games without a campaign mode would instead have a mind-blowing,
revolutionary multiplayer mode where all their effort was directed,
but for the most part multiplayer games haven't changed all that much
in the past few years. And then there's the games that are
single-player-only but they still have very short campaigns, like The
Order: 1886. What's their excuse? Out of respect they'd better
not be full price, because there really is something to be said of
games with which you'll be completely finished in just one or two
sittings.
5 – Difficulty Spikes
In video games, difficulty should be
increased gradually in increments. But sometimes a game will
unexpectedly crank up the hardness, which isn't very fair to the
player especially when it's for no apparent reason. For example,
about 2/3 of the way through Rainbow Six: Vegas 2 – a
squad-based tactical shooter – you're sent on a mission to clear
out an oil refinery. Not only are there snipers everywhere, dozens of
bad guys waiting around every corner, and exploding hazards all over
the place, but also your squad has been taken away and you have to do
this all by yourself. Oh come on! This is supposed to be a tactical
shooter, so why don't I have my squad with me? I tried playing this
game through on the highest difficulty setting, but this is where I
got stonewalled and gave up. There are other times when the
developers can't think of a decent challenge for the last level so
they instead just throw everything and the kitchen sink at you. This
rarely goes over well, as was the case in such games as Battleship
(2012), Rambo
(2014), and Deadpool (2013).
Way to go, guys.
4 – Unclear
objectives
I know I complained
about hand-holding and intelligence-insulting tutorials last week,
but sometimes the exact opposite problem can bug the crap out of you.
Designing video games requires a delicate balance between directly
stringing the player along and just dropping him in the middle of
nowhere with no clues at all of what to do. Everyone has at some
point played a where-the-frick-do-I-go type of game. Every time that
happens to me – like in Half-Life 2 or Tomb Raider:
Legend – I find myself thinking of the Coldplay lyrics: “Where
to, where do I go?” That's right, you can tell that even Chris
Martin has gotten stuck in video games with unclear objectives. This
issue is why I've come to hate Red Dead Revolver so much.
Right now I'm about halfway through that game and there's hardly been
a single level where I didn't have to look up what to do. Would it
have been too much for them to just drop a hint every now and then?
If this ever happens to you, here's what to do: keep your phone handy,
then when you get stuck speak the words that I've repeated countless
times over the years: “Almighty YouTube, show me the way!” The
sad part is that if this happened to you in the age before YouTube
and the internet then you were screwed, sometimes permanently.
3 – Not Enough
Checkpoints
This
one's self explanatory. Video game levels that have only a couple
save points are never an easy affair, and it's the kind of problem
that you only notice when you're doing a hard level. I'm the kind of
guy who doesn't like having to redo things over and over. It's
incredibly frustrating, another reason why I don't like Red
Dead Revolver very much. That's
why games with quicksaves are da bomb. That way if you screw up/die
you can pick up at that challenging spot right away (if you saved)
instead of having to go through hell and back just to try it again.
Be careful though, because games that have quicksaves like Doom
3 and Splinter Cell:
Chaos Theory sometimes have no
checkpoints at all. And of course you'll never find out until you die
for the first time and are forced to restart the entire level all
over again.
2 – No Couch
Coop/Local Multiplayer
WHY?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Yeah I know that online gaming has revolutionized the video game
industry and all that bullcrap, but come
on! Video games are most
fun when you're playing with a friend; you know, a friend who's in
the same room as you. Same-screen gaming has been a part of video
games for as long as anyone can remember, even in the days of Pong
and Magnavox Odyssey. Since when did the idea of two or more people
playing together on the same screen become obsolete? Why take it away? I'll
tell you why: it's a blatant attempt to force people into buying more
consoles and copies of games. I think my heart skipped a beat when I
learned that Halo 5
was not going to have splitscreen. That's right, the thing that Halo
did best, the thing that made that franchise what it is today is now lost
and gone forever. To me that's as crazy as a sports game not having
local multiplayer. According to Angry Joe, it's all because of a new
prevailing doctrine amongst developers/publishers known as “F---
you! Give me money!”
1 –
Preorder/DLC/Microtransaction culture
This
may not come as a shock since I just mentioned that I'm not much of
an online type of gamer, but I do think that this problem is a huge
waste of time and money for lots of people. Let's face it: video
games aren't cheap, so when I buy a new game for full price I expect
a full game. I don't want to install anything. I don't want to have
to wait for things to update. I don't want to have to download a
bunch of extra content to wind up having a complete gaming
experience. I understand that not all DLC is bad. Patches that fix
coding problems are OK. Paying a few extra bucks for additional maps
and campaign levels is OK, but when it gets to the point where the
release-state of the game is really only half a game – Star
Wars: Battlefront (2015),
anyone? – something has gone horribly wrong. A lot of downloadable
content is just stuff that should've been included in the game
already. What's worse, when it gets to the point that you have to pay
additional money just to unlock/activate items or characters that are
already clearly on the disc (i.e. you've already paid for them) it's
obvious that the developers/publishers have lost their way and only
care about the money. Capcom and Ubisoft should be ashamed of
themselves. In the more complete games of the past, the player would
unlock these things by completing some challenge or using good
old-fashioned cheats. Nowadays it's all microtransaction this and
preorder that.
In conclusion, when
I play a video game all I want is the console, the controller, and
the disc/cart that the game comes on. That's probably why I like old
school gaming so much. I guess I'm a man of simple tastes. Thanks for
reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment