racketboy.com

Reprise wrote:That said, there are a few aspects that I find frustrating.

1. Extended tutorial sections

2. Increasingly complex games

3. Unnecessary and annoying talking, story exposition, characters explaining stuff in an obnoxious way.

I have some thoughts on these as well.
1. This arose as a response to the problem of players leaping into games and being confused because they don’t bother to read manuals. There is a very high chance of losing a player if they are confused or frustrated in a game world, so this is an attempt to acclimate players in a way they can’t route around easily. Better developers do this in less disruptive ways. Poor developers do not.
2. Complexity in games is not a new thing at all. Some early PC games were often needlessly complex (sometimes for all the wrong reasons). If you are talking about shoe-horning systems into games that don’t “need” then, that’s not an issue of complexity but rather a mismatch of game styles and expectations.
3. Game developers have wanted to do that forever, but only could when storage got cheaper. You see early signs of it in some SNES and it takes off in PS1-era and GBA games. Basically, it was inevitable.

I think making a distinction between new and modern games is arbitrary and makes little sense. Most of the issues y'all are listing with modern games are just problems of bad games... doesn't have anything to do with when they are released

marurun wrote:2. Complexity in games is not a new thing at all. Some early PC games were often needlessly complex (sometimes for all the wrong reasons). If you are talking about shoe-horning systems into games that don’t “need” then, that’s not an issue of complexity but rather a mismatch of game styles and expectations.
3. Game developers have wanted to do that forever, but only could when storage got cheaper. You see early signs of it in some SNES and it takes off in PS1-era and GBA games. Basically, it was inevitable.

Yeah, as for #2, you're totally right. Early PC RPGs were often bafflingly complex in ways that no modern game I've encountered has managed to rival, with all kinds of statistics and systems that had no indication of how they functioned in the game or how they interacted with any other stat or system. That being said, I do agree that unnecessary systems are pretty annoying. A personal pet peeve of mine is when a game implements an unnecessary crafting system. And for the record, I actually like crafting systems in games when they're built into the core of the game play. It can be a fun way to trickle out rewards to a player in a way that makes them feel like they're accomplishing more than they really are. However, when they're implemented poorly all they do is serve as an irritating bottleneck that just slows everything down, and there do seem to be a lot of games nowadays that just slap them in there because, well, you gotta have a crafting system!

In regards to #3, I actually think the issue is kind of similar. I think it doesn't really matter how long the script of a game is if it's well written. Something like a visual novel or one of the Ace Attorney games are essentially all text, but when it all serves the function of organically advancing the plot, it ends up feeling relatively breezy. I think the problems start when one of two things (or often both) happen: 1) the script is poorly written and just wastes time with unnecessary chatter, or what I feel is typically the more likely culprit, 2) the game doesn't respect the player's intelligence and has constant cut scenes where they reiterate the beats of the plot over and over again or they explain in intricate detail logical conclusions a reasonable person would have already reached. Either of those things can turn an otherwise fun game into a real slog. As much as I really like Persona 5, that game could have easily cut down its length by probably close to a third if they just took out all the dialog where everyone reexplains the entire plot during a cut scene at every significant plot beat. While I do agree that games have actually been pretty chatty for at least the last twenty years, I do think really disrespecting the player's intelligence is a relatively new phenomenon, although one that's definitely not unique to videogames. A lot of modern movies are pretty bad about this too, with lots of scenes where characters explain the plot over and over again because the writer and/or director assume the audience is too stupid and/or doesn't have enough of an attention span to follow along. And, hey, maybe they're right, but I'm not sure this is a behavior they should be validating in their viewers/players.

I don't really have much pent up rage for games nowadays. If it has an element or design decision that significantly impacts gameplay I'll just stop playing.

However, there's something that's almost universal to 3d or first person action games that I hate: following an NPC. The NPC will always walk slower than you (even if it's a crisis situation), stop and wait for a scripted action to happen (car explosion, dragon attack, etc), and they will most certainly put themselves in unnecessary danger (can't let you go in first; they *must* run into the claws of a zombie).

I don't want to insult game designers, call them names, and question their intelligence. However, I feel like 99% of situations are so mind-bogglingly stupid that the player is left scratching their head because most reasonable people won't run into the dark, spooky house, orc nest, or what have you. I understand the need to set up action sequences but come on. Some games feel like babysitting the Lemmings when you have to be around NPC's.

Edit:
And I know that at some point one must be able to suspend your disbelief for the sake of a game experience. If everyone acted logically then there wouldn't be any adversity to overcome.

I feel it's okay to still have issues with how it's often presented, though.

Yeah, I don't really get angry at games. Over the years, I've also learned to appreciate the things that are interesting about bad games, so my taste is definitely a little trash in the eyes of some.

The only "modern" trend I really strongly dislike is one that I don't think is seen much and comes from certified retro classic Shenmue: the QTE. Those things feel obnoxious and I'm always more annoyed by them than I am engaged. I can't even take a sip of water while I'm watching a cutscene because a QTE might pop up and insta-kill me. I feel like they peaked about a decade ago and I've yet to play a modern-gen game with them though.

opa wrote:If everyone acted logically then there wouldn't be any adversity to overcome.

This one gets me, too. It's not that I expect every character to be logical, but the NPCs are so consistently stupid and illogical.

One of my favorite games, Ogre Battle 64, has a single mission where you have to ensure that a character isn't killed. Of course they go off on their own, but at least they're heavily guarded. So in that sense it felt more like a timed thing - gotta go fast or else you'll run out of time. I can deal with that. But when a bunch of townsfolk in Skyrim start attacking a dragon with their hands, you have to wonder how stupid the game designers are. Maybe one drunken idiot with too much machismo for his own good would run out, but otherwise people are running to hide.

But that's why there are mods to alleviate Bethesda's terrible design choices.

With enough mead, anything is possible!

Nemoide wrote:The only "modern" trend I really strongly dislike is one that I don't think is seen much and comes from certified retro classic Shenmue: the QTE. Those things feel obnoxious and I'm always more annoyed by them than I am engaged. I can't even take a sip of water while I'm watching a cutscene because a QTE might pop up and insta-kill me. I feel like they peaked about a decade ago and I've yet to play a modern-gen game with them though.

Cutscene QTEs definitely fell out of favor, with Uncharted/Tomb Raider being the notable exception that keeps them in (but it doesn't feel bad there, because it's not so much a cutscene as the game taking broad control away for a cool setpiece). You do still see what I'll call interaction QTEs, where instead of just tapping the interact button you have to mash it or spin the stick or something else, where it's used either to sell the difficulty of a task or to help buffer a load.

Well, just to add to the thread. I'm so sick and damn tired of "parry" systems in LITERALLY EVERY GODDAMN ACTION GAME THAT COMES OUT THESE DAYS

I just played a little bit of this new game called Sifu, and they might as well have just called it Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice...but with kung fu guys instead of ninja samurais

It's the same stupid, parry based gameplay that requires the same perfect timing. And just like Sekiro you and every enemy have stance meters that will break over time...unless of course you master the insane parry timing

Even before parries were a thing Platinum Games was essentially doing the same thing with perfect dodges in their games

I'm just sick of this damn mechanic. I remember a time when games just had normal blocks, not overly demanding perfect parry/dodge mechanics. Oh well, whatever. It's like one game does a thing, it gets popular, and now LITERALLY EVERYONE MUST COPY IT...allowing no room whatsoever for originality

EDIT: Oh and it's also a roguelike, because that's also status quo in 2022

The oldest game I can think of off the top of my head with a Parry system is probably WeaponLord, though the idea for the mechanic also comes from combo breakers in the likes of Killer Instinct. And featuring a stun system goes back to at least Street Fighter 2, just you couldn't see the meter. These are systems that have been part of fighting games for nearly 30 years. It provided a way to defeat opponents who excelled at chipping, which had in turn come about from players turtling constantly.

For action games, they've been a main component of samurai-themed games for almost as long. Bushido Blade, Soul of the Samurai, and so forth utilize them. Titles like Way of the Samurai and even the Tenchu games wouldn't play the same without a parry system, and their combat wouldn't be as interesting or feel as cinematic without it. Is it overly done? Perhaps, though it's pulling from the influence of popular East Asian-themed games and movies. Give it time, the pendulum will likely swing back to favor something else.