Jump to content

 

Shit that fucks games up


Ice Car
 Share

Recommended Posts

It kinda does. There is only so much space on the disk and if they add MP then they have to make the story short so they can fit the mp onto the disk. If they didn't have to add MP they could come up with a longer and better story.

 

I kind of know what you mean, although so often it can go the other way and the addition of MP to a game can give it a new lease of life. What I really don't like are too many achievements tied to MP. In my book, it should be a "sampler platter" to encourage you to try different modes and the like, but there are too many grindy "achieve Rank n" and luck-based achievements with MP.

 

Oh, and dodgy checkpoint systems. I HATE games that have bad save systems: requiring you to go to certain points to save (Dead Rising, Far Cry 2), or with extremely long distances (and some tough sections) without checkpoints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I kind of know what you mean, although so often it can go the other way and the addition of MP to a game can give it a new lease of life. What I really don't like are too many achievements tied to MP. In my book, it should be a "sampler platter" to encourage you to try different modes and the like, but there are too many grindy "achieve Rank n" and luck-based achievements with MP.

 

That is true, but I can't think of a game that was originally SP only that added MP and did well. I know Bioshock and Assassins Creed didn't fair too well with MP.

 

I also agree with the MP achievements. If you're going to do it, just make it simple like play on all the maps or play all game modes. If people like it they will keep playing, if they don't then don't force them to play it, aka Seriously 3.0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did Dead Space 2 suffer because of the added MP? I don't recall DS2 lacking in the SP area due to an added MP.

It's didn't have the same feel as the first one. Again a development team only has a certain amount of time to develop a game. If 1/3 of that time is spent making a MP because thats where the money is, it MUST take away from the single player story. That time spent could be used to adding to the campaign, or tweaking it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Another shout for the collectibles that don't add anything specifically if you need a guide to get them.

Vanquish didn't even tell you how many there were, on what levels they were or even how many you had done! A perfect example right there.

Other offenders: Assassins Creed II feathers, Saints Row 2 CDs.

 

As long as they unlock stuff at certain points or provide backstory (B:AA, B:AC, GOW3, Alan Wake's AN) well before the 100% mark or

they provide some sort of map/level-by-level breakdown along with a challenge (the two Batman games again, Red Dead Redemption) then I'm good with them.

Otherwise it's just obvious padding that adds next to nothing.

 

 

Assassin's Creed 2 had a very detailed breakdown of the collectibles, it told you how many and what general area. You have obviously never flag hunted in the first Assassin's Creed if you think the feathers are bad.

 

I hate collectibles quite a bit but those feathers were far from annoying. They learned their lesson from the first game which had 0 ways of tracking your collectibles and there was over 400 of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assassin's Creed 2 had a very detailed breakdown of the collectibles, it told you how many and what general area. You have obviously never flag hunted in the first Assassin's Creed if you think the feathers are bad.

 

I hate collectibles quite a bit but those feathers were far from annoying. They learned their lesson from the first game which had 0 ways of tracking your collectibles and there was over 400 of them.

Agreed....although I loved the first Assassins Creed so much that I also enjoyed the collectibles. It took me 5 play-troughs, but I loved every minute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a single player only gamer. I play plenty of multiplayer games and I enjoy the hell out of it when it's done well. What I hate is tacked on garbage that isn't needed like AS or Bioshock multiplayer. They are not fun. They did not add to the experience. Use those resources to make the core game better.

 

Just because you don't find them fun doesn't mean others don't. I don't like MP shooters but enjoy AC MP.

 

Not aimed at you, AC3 MP people are moaning about it, but it's on a separate disc, meaning more SP on disc 1.

Edited by cjdavies
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's didn't have the same feel as the first one. Again a development team only has a certain amount of time to develop a game. If 1/3 of that time is spent making a MP because thats where the money is, it MUST take away from the single player story. That time spent could be used to adding to the campaign, or tweaking it.

Visceral wasted a third of their time on multiplayer then? makes sense considering the Online Pass EA tacked on to Dead Space 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's didn't have the same feel as the first one. Again a development team only has a certain amount of time to develop a game. If 1/3 of that time is spent making a MP because thats where the money is, it MUST take away from the single player story. That time spent could be used to adding to the campaign, or tweaking it.

 

That is 100% not the developers fault and more publishers fault. Same with forcing deadlines on developers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is 100% not the developers fault and more publishers fault. Same with forcing deadlines on developers.

Always blame EA, or Activision.

 

The Online Passes can still sink a game's MP support. I have read that Dead Space 2's multiplayer is extremely unbalanced now that everybody is so high-level, not very friendly to potential new players.

 

Personally, multiplayer that requires an Online Pass becomes unplayable for me, it just takes away the spirit of the game. If that makes any sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It kinda does. There is only so much space on the disk and if they add MP then they have to make the story short so they can fit the mp onto the disk. If they didn't have to add MP they could come up with a longer and better story.

 

Why do assume they "made the story short" and didn't just have the extra room? You're saying this is in relation to a single-player franchise becoming multiplayer, which means that there were previous games, probably this generation. So, don't you think they were maybe able to compress the code or something while still adding and expanding?

 

As for the "longer and better story", that's the problem with the whole Mass Effect 3 ending debacle. These writers told the story they wanted to tell. These aren't licensed or tie-in titles we're talking about. Most of them aren't pushed out to go with some other media or anything of the sort (usually; deadlines do exist in some cases, sadly). The game is likely as it was meant to be.

 

I'm not trying to really "argue". I just hate that everyone on here is so freaking cynical. Why jump right to the most negative, pessimistic conclusions? Why does it have to be:

 

"2K cut BioShock 2's storyline to make room for some tacked on multiplayer!!!"

 

and not

 

"Maybe BioShock 2's storyline didn't live up to the original's and the multiplayer was poorly implemented. Though others probably like it, it just wasn't my cup of tea."

 

 

I also hate quicktime events and tacked on MP. You can tell when its tacked on when they just take sections of the game from single player and call it a map.

 

By that definition, you're thinking more Saints Row's and Grand Theft Auto's multiplayer instead of Assassin's Creed's and BioShock 2's. The latter two's multiplayer maps were new areas. >.<

Edited by Fire Hawk D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do assume they "made the story short" and didn't just have the extra room? You're saying this is in relation to a single-player franchise becoming multiplayer, which means that there were previous games, probably this generation. So, don't you think they were maybe able to compress the code or something while still adding and expanding?

 

As for the "longer and better story", that's the problem with the whole Mass Effect 3 ending debacle. These writers told the story they wanted to tell. These aren't licensed or tie-in titles we're talking about. Most of them aren't pushed out to go with some other media or anything of the sort (usually; deadlines do exist in some cases, sadly). The game is likely as it was meant to be.

 

I'm not trying to really "argue". I just hate that everyone on here is so freaking cynical. Why jump right to the most negative, pessimistic conclusions? Why does it have to be:

 

"2K cut BioShock 2's storyline to make room for some tacked on multiplayer!!!"

 

and not

 

"Maybe BioShock 2's storyline didn't live up to the original's and the multiplayer was poorly implemented. Though others probably like it, it just wasn't my cup of tea."

Bioshock 2's MP was decent but got boring after awhile. I came to the conclusion that they cut the story to make room for the MP because it fits. People nowadays don't typically buy singleplayer only games, they rent it. Multiplayer is where its at and that leaves room for them to make map packs as I'm sure its easier to do that than to think of a story expansion.

 

By that definition, you're thinking more Saints Row's and Grand Theft Auto's multiplayer instead of Assassin's Creed's and BioShock 2's. The latter two's multiplayer maps were new areas. >.<

I wasn't referring to Bioshock 2 and I've never played Assassin's Creed past the first one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can deal with a shit ton of collectibles that don't mean anything, I skip them.

I can deal with MP in games that don't need it, I don't play it.

I can deal with short campaigns if they are fun and re-playable with decent stories. Or I just didn't spend much cash on it and don't care.

I can deal with unskippable cut scenes, I go grab a beer.

I can deal with badly developed games that are broken, not fun or are just plain fucking terrible, I play once and never again, stop playing, or don't play it at all.

 

What I can't stomach above all else, in any game but especially in otherwise perfectly fun games:

 

Quick time events. Intentionally breaking immersion. Ruining the momentum of a moment. Making a game come to a grinding halt for timed button presses that are completely not what you were just spending the entire game doing.

 

The only time they have ever been useful was during Walking Dead. Since that was the play control for it... it works and works well.

 

In any other games like shooters they can go to hell.

 

That Halo 4 ended with a quicktime event was rage inducing. Completely broke my "OH FUCK YAH WE'RE AT THE BOSS YAHHHHHHH!!!!!!! happy success vibe. Here's this epic badass boss with "The Force" of the Forerunners....thinking big badass fight ahead.

 

..... fight after fight after fight to get there and it just kept getting cooler.... then.... a QT... cut scene... roll credits....wait... what just happened? say wha? That was....it?

:confused:

:eek:

:(

:mad:

:rant:

:uzi::uzi::uzi::uzi:

Edited by Opiate42
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me the hardest thing to play isn't a bad game, but a game that if it had more time for testing or polish it would have been great. Far Cry 2 is good example of if they had spent more time on the multiplayer it woud have been amazing instead of beautifully flawed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many things that can mess a game up in my opinion. Like:

 

  • QTE's: Why do I need one just to open a door or push a sword into the bowels of an enemy?
  • Unskippable cut-scenes: especially the ones right before a boss and if you fail on the boss then you have to start from before the cut-scene. Really?
  • Useless collectables: If the collectable rewards you with something in game then great. I have no problem with them unless there are 700 or so needed...<cough> <cough> Crackdown <cough>
  • Bad controls/camera: This is mainly about games like Assassin's Creed. Great game series but when you get to those 'must jump out at a 30 degree angle to make it to other side' when the camera is wonky and/or you have a problem getting the correct perfect angle from the thumbsticks on the controller. I don't know how many times that while hanging from a post sticking out of the wall and trying to jump at just the perfect angle to the right that instead of jumping right I run up the flipping wall and fall all the way down to the ground which may result in death from extreme heights.
  • Random events: Having a story element or an achievement based on a random event that may or may not happen in your first 1000 attempts is just as fun and exciting as getting a colonoscopy at the same time as getting a root canal.
  • Glitched achievments: I know this doesn't interfere with the story, as such, but when you work hard at something for the pay-off...and don't get the pay-off, then that can mess your game up for you.
  • X-ray vision enemies: Gotta love those enemies that can spot (and then precede to shoot/attack) through a wall. Or the ones that can spot a gnat crouching on your butt-cheek from 200 yards away and also have the perfect aim to 2-shot kill you from that distance.....with a pistol.

Edited by Qonok
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quick time events. Intentionally breaking immersion. Ruining the momentum of a moment. Making a game come to a grinding halt for timed button presses that are completely not what you were just spending the entire game doing.

 

There are many things that can mess a game up in my opinion. Like:

 

  • QTE's: Why do I need one just to open a door or push a sword into the bowels of an enemy?

Man, you guys would hate The Bourne Conspiracy. :p Every boss on that game is just a huge, long, annoying, pointless quick time event battle with non stop smashing of the buttons all over your controller. So much fun!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, you guys would hate The Bourne Conspiracy. :p Every boss on that game is just a huge, long, annoying, pointless quick time event battle with non stop smashing of the buttons all over your controller. So much fun!

 

I hate QTE's but I loved the Bourne game. Didn't find the QTE's in that one very annoying at all for some reason. Want to exp some horrific Quick Time Event's? Play Resident Evil 6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, you guys would hate The Bourne Conspiracy. :p Every boss on that game is just a huge, long, annoying, pointless quick time event battle with non stop smashing of the buttons all over your controller. So much fun!

 

I hate QTE's but I loved the Bourne game. Didn't find the QTE's in that one very annoying at all for some reason. Want to exp some horrific Quick Time Event's? Play Resident Evil 6.

 

That huge ass monster in the circular room when you play Chris' campaign springs to mind, quit the game because of that and the stupid dodging and running around. URGH. Stupid game.

 

Everything is a mo'fookin QTE in that game, EVERYTHING! You might as well just turn in it to Heavy Rain 2.0... (although I did enjoy that game so maybe not :p)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate QTE's but I loved the Bourne game. Didn't find the QTE's in that one very annoying at all for some reason. Want to exp some horrific Quick Time Event's? Play Resident Evil 6.

 

I loved that Bourne game as well, I listed it along with Syndicate as one of the most underrated games on Xbox in that other thread. :p The QTE on some games like 007 Goldeneye and some of these Japanese games can get annoying though and just seem pointless.

 

I haven't played RE6, and don't want to from what I hear, the QTE's not being of the reasons which is worrying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate QTE's but I loved the Bourne game. Didn't find the QTE's in that one very annoying at all for some reason. Want to exp some horrific Quick Time Event's? Play Resident Evil 6.

 

Resident Evil 6 + QTE's = most annoying thing in a game. Climbing the rope at the end of Leon's Campaign...took me almost 30 minutes :(

 

I haven't played RE6, and don't want to from what I hear, the QTE's not being of the reasons which is worrying.

 

Good! Don't! Cause it was a waste of $60 and the biggest disappointment of 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Resident Evil 6 + QTE's = most annoying thing in a game. Climbing the rope at the end of Leon's Campaign...took me almost 30 minutes :(

 

 

 

waste of $60 and the biggest disappointment of 2012.

 

You're a literally the 3rd person to quote this towards the game word for word. :p Man they must have really fucked up, luckily I'm not even a RE fan.

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


×
  • Create New...