What random thing in games bothers you?

[Benji]

I'm not talking controls, or a general thing in games. I'm talking something so specific it doesn't matter, but it irks you.

This thread bought to you by King II in Tekken not being El Hijo del King.

[Lineker]

When developers release them much earlier than they should, before they are fully ready-to-go, riddled with bugs and glitches.

[JasonM]

I loved Horizon: Zero Dawn when I finally ran through it at the start of the summer, really beautiful game, fun story, interesting setting. It's one of the top games of its era and developed by a non-major developer on top of that.

But when I finally got into the left part of the map (after going through most stuff on the right 'kiddie pool' side), my heart just sank completely because of how 'fuck you' big it was. I pushed on, because the right side of the map had been quite big compared to the starting area but they had filled it with lots of things to explore and look at, so surely that theme would continue on, right?

Nope, just a massive fucking wasteland with no real features occassionally dotted with not very interesting spots of interest. Complete disappointment, and worst of all the travel times were tripled/quadrupled compared to the other side of the world map.

It didn't help that acquiring mounts felt a hassle (I didn't invest XP into getting a free one, stupid me), so I ended up finding the closest fast travel location and still having to leg it for 5 minutes to get to the mission area to do the mission. (Of course, that was if I had unlocked that fast travel point, else I still had to leg it there to unlock the point for future use)

So this one's to you, Horizon. I loved you, I genuinely did. But 40% of your map was fucking atrocious to deal with.

Special consideration to AC: Odyssey, which turned the grind of traveling from X to Y into an artform.

[The Kraig]

Shit voice acting. Absolutely ruins some games. I think they run out of budget before getting to that stage, and in this day and age, there's so many great voice actors who aren't asking for more than they bring to the product.

I'd also go as far as to say poor soundtracks too. A great game without a great soundtrack is immediately not a great game.

[Paton]

Terrible voice acting makes for a terrible game.

Edited September 20, 2021 by Paton
I can't read.

[Colly]

No local multiplayer. I can understand some games not being suitable but the PS4 SSX was such a let down.

[Bobfoc]

When zombie games call their zombies something else. Calling them infected, walkers, freakers or anything else doesn't make the idea cleverer or more original. Just own the fact that you're using zombies and let the gameplay speak for itself.

[Gazz]

Fake narrative time constraints.

'My son has been kidnapped' *spends 300 hours rebuilding settlements and collecting holotapes*

'You're going to die very soon' *spends 300 hours t-posing and falling through scenery*

 

[JasonM]

33 minutes ago, Gazz said:

Fake narrative time constraints.

'My son has been kidnapped' *spends 300 hours rebuilding settlements and collecting holotapes*

'You're going to die very soon' *spends 300 hours t-posing and falling through scenery*

 

If you want a game that doesn't play with that, and if you want a CRPG, get Pathfinder: Kingmaker. You get a timelimit on most major plot points and if you don't get there and do the heroing in time, you actually game over.

[OctoberRaven]

No arcade mode endings in a fighting game. This more of a modern phenomenon, but automatically kills my enjoyment.

[RPS]

I hate when a game mechanic is not fully explained and presumed to be inherently understandable. I started playing Superliminal and I did not think the game did a good enough job really explaining the perspective mechanic. I felt like it was a little clunky trying to figure out how to make things bigger or smaller by playing with the forced perspective. 

[Skummy]

These are quite general, but card game dynamics. Every time I look at a game on GOG or Steam that seems like it might have an interesting premise, and then find out it's all "deckbuilder" stuff I lose all interest. If I wanted to play cards, I'd play with cards, not my computer.

More of an "old man shouts at clouds" thing, but I dislike games that don't have proper unlockable stuff. Like how in the 2k WWE games for the most part you get fake money to spend on unlocking characters and add-ons and stuff - even without the lootbox dynamic they use, there's just no investment in it. Oh, I've got 25,000 moneys and that will get me a Bill Goldberg. Now I have a Goldberg, great. How about having to defeat Goldberg in career mode to get him? Something that feels somewhat earned? So many modern games tend to reward time spent or blind persistence over actual achievement. 

[RPS]

7 minutes ago, Skummy said:

These are quite general, but card game dynamics. Every time I look at a game on GOG or Steam that seems like it might have an interesting premise, and then find out it's all "deckbuilder" stuff I lose all interest. If I wanted to play cards, I'd play with cards, not my computer.

Even something like Slay the Spire? 

[Skummy]

Yep. It's just a mechanic that doesn't remotely appeal to me, and that I've never enjoyed in the few games I've played with it. I haven't played Slay The Spire because of it, so maybe it's an exception to the rule.

[gunnar hendershow]

While I know why it's necessary for games to do it I always get a little bothered when an open world map respawns enemies and (though less common) treasures/loot at areas I've already cleared. Makes the game feel neverending. If only there was unlimited RAM I suppose.

[Kaney]

I hate when you finish an open-world game and in order to allow free-play atfer the credits, you're thrown back before the final mission. Id rather just complete everything then do the final mission as the final thing to do if thats the case. I get theres some examples where the protagonist ends up dying or something at the end that would limit the possiblity, and not every game can have a John-Marston-episode but eh. I always enjoy the aspect of seeing how the world has dealt with the end of the story, and even games like GTAV acknowledge that the main story has finished. Just always annoys me for some reason.

[Skummy]

24 minutes ago, damshow said:

While I know why it's necessary for games to do it I always get a little bothered when an open world map respawns enemies and (though less common) treasures/loot at areas I've already cleared. 

A similar thing for me is lack of variety in enemies. It was the one thing that put me off Breath Of The Wild - huge, gorgeous open world map that's a joy to explore, but every enemy encounter...oh, it's those pricks again. 

[Roster Depth Sicko No. 2]

5 hours ago, Subject Delta said:

I'm not talking controls, or a general thing in games. I'm talking something so specific it doesn't matter, but it irks you.

This thread bought to you by King II in Tekken not being El Hijo del King.

This complaint doesn't work because the two Kings aren't related and the two Armor Kings were brothers, so none of them would be "El Hijo".

[gunnar hendershow]

8 minutes ago, Skummy said:

A similar thing for me is lack of variety in enemies. It was the one thing that put me off Breath Of The Wild - huge, gorgeous open world map that's a joy to explore, but every enemy encounter...oh, it's those pricks again. 

BOTW was particularly good about not respawning in areas too quickly (Blood Moon is a RAM reset to keep the game from breaking). But, yeah, everywhere you go it's the same few types of enemies. I always felt the reason they made weapons so brittle was so that you'd spend most of your time either a) trying to completely avoid combat or, b) going boom boom explosion to avoid breaking your good swords and spears.

I hope the sequel puts even less focus on monsters and their campsites and instead makes you work to explore by hitting you with more puzzles.

[9 to 5]

Trophies.