Bad design decisions in otherwise good games.

Agricola

Don't think we'll ever see a traditional Tomb Raider game again and that's a pity. If an Uncharted clone didnt sell as well as they expected, what hope would a largely puzzle based 3rd person platformer have? All we can hope is that they listen to the internet chatter and flesh out that aspect of the sequel. If it goes full on COD mode, then I wont bother even renting it for console.

landsleaving

krudler wrote: »

All the animus stuff in the Assassin's Creed games, especially when you have to play as Desmond and do absolutely basic "training" stuff halfway through a game when you've been doing it the whole time. Just set each game in whatever time period you need and ditch the future stuff altogether Ubisoft.

And the disconnecting from the past rubbish, all the wireframes on the screen, and everything else that ripped me straight out of the setting. Such a bad idea, the premise of those games is amazing but I just can't enjoy them. I get suckered in with every new setting too, forgetting that I'll be playing as either a guy in a hoody or a bad ass assasain being punished for exploring the painstakingly detailed setting.

Retr0gamer

Sometimes a change is good. Look at how popular Minecraft is and Tomb Raider became a surprise hit despite breaking convention at the time. Developers are just so risk adverse now but it's hard to blame them when you have the amount of money that was riding on Tomb Raider that needed to be made back.

Agricola

Yeah, the massive AAA budgets are a killer. And while a change is nice sometimes, I don't want all games becoming brainless shooters. So many titles come out nowadays in the form of reboots using old and venerable IP's but they are often a long way off what the original was really about. Thief looks like another to go down this route. I hate the way the lowest common denominator rises to the top as a result of financial worries about making back the budget, exactly in the same way cinema is going these days.

It is nice to know that, in Tomb Raider's case at least, it took a full year before the game actually turned a profit, which means this is a genuine problem about a company breaking even from the work it puts out, and not simply about being pissed off it didnt sell 10 million copies in the first 2 weeks so that all concerned could go buy a Ferrari.

Randall Floyd

Unnecessary tacked on online multiplayer modes need to stop.

gugleguy

Sims 3: Dumbing down of the PC version it can be sold to a younger audience.
One example of dumbing down: Female sims can no longer have the Grim Reaper as a boyfriend/ or have Grim reaper's child. (Well if you look in the right place on the web, you can find mod to re enable this. )
SIM city town's now are more Apple pie than 'Sin City'

McDonnellDean

The ending of the Mass Effect series. It was completely disconnected from the premise of the story. I would have waited longer for a better ending.

death1234567

McDonnellDean wrote: »

The ending of the Mass Effect series. It was completely disconnected from the premise of the story. I would have waited longer for a better ending.

Not just the ending, which amounted to pick your favourite colour, but the failure to recognise any of the decisions you had made earlier in the game. Worst ending ever.

pablomakaveli

The combat sections in Deadly Premonition were horribly designed. They really didn't fit well with the rest of the game. The shooting felt awkward and every shooting section was the same as the last.

I do believe these sections were added later in the games development and weren't intended to be in the game originally and you can sense that when playing the game.

SeantheMan

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

I get the impression this will contain a lot of the stuff from the "bad sections in otherwise good games" thread.

Just started reading the thread and thought it was the old one.....

-( i )- Wicker

The multiplayer in GTA5 was horribly done. If you want to join friends it takes half an hour of retrying to connect, then when trying to join a mission you'll regularly be thrown into a different party and you have to spend another half an hour trying to connect to your friends again. Such a shame as the gameplay itself is great.

Potatoeman

Duggy747 wrote: »

Far Cry 2 - Nearly instant respawn of enemies and the whole malaria system. Both combined to make me ditch the .

I didnt mind that but I got the later edition for 20 quid where you get the truck with a heavy machine gun which makes tavel easier. It spawned near the gun shop too which I would go to so I could re-equip after every mission.

FC3 had quick time events :-( and I tried to replay it recently but the story missions can be a pain. The stupid climbing and platforming bits too. You have to do missions to get skills. I really enjoyed the first run through though.

Grimebox

The fighting is Mass Effect is utterly pedestrian. There is no depth to it at all. Shoot then hide behind a box till health recharges, repeat ad nauseum. I'm playing through it now for the first time and it is really grating on me.

So the design of those actual sections I think are poorly thought out. Corridors with conveniently placed waist height boxes. They are tacked on in an otherwise brilliantly diverse and colourful universe.

Stone Deaf 4evr

Battlefield 4's squad system / friends implementation.

if I'm joining friends, surely it'd be safe to assume that we all want to be in the same squad and on the same side? I know you stick together once you've manually sorted it out but its an odd choice nonetheless.

Potatoeman

Grimebox wrote: »

The fighting is Mass Effect is utterly pedestrian. There is no depth to it at all. Shoot then hide behind a box till health recharges, repeat ad nauseum. I'm playing through it now for the first time and it is really grating on me.

So the design of those actual sections I think are poorly thought out. Corridors with conveniently placed waist height boxes. They are tacked on in an otherwise brilliantly diverse and colourful universe.

I didnt think it was as bad as most coverbased shooters which I cant play. I stopped playing gears of war and spec ops.

Grimebox

Potatoeman wrote: »

I didnt think it was as bad as most coverbased shooters which I cant play. I stopped playing gears of war and spec ops.

I have never really played any cover based shooters to be honest, not the two you mentioned anyway.

I was trying out ME2 combat just there again. If you stand behind a pillar, you will get shot. However if you cover behind that pillar exposing pretty much the exact same amount of your character, you do not get shot even though the bullets appear to be travelling along the same trajectory. This happens to me a lot as I prefer a "gun and run" approach rather than playing whack-a-mole. So basically you are invulnerable to extent when behind cover. The game could be beaten with the assault rifle alone. Unlimited ammo. It's just awful all round.

gaynorvader

Grimebox wrote: »

I have never really played any cover based shooters to be honest, not the two you mentioned anyway.

I was trying out ME2 combat just there again. If you stand behind a pillar, you will get shot. However if you cover behind that pillar exposing pretty much the exact same amount of your character, you do not get shot even though the bullets appear to be travelling along the same trajectory. This happens to me a lot as I prefer a "gun and run" approach rather than playing whack-a-mole. So basically you are invulnerable to extent when behind cover. The game could be beaten with the assault rifle alone. Unlimited ammo. It's just awful all round.

I prefered ME1's cover system. You had unlimited ammo, but you had to be clever with your crouching.

Potatoeman

Grimebox wrote: »

I have never really played any cover based shooters to be honest, not the two you mentioned anyway.

I was trying out ME2 combat just there again. If you stand behind a pillar, you will get shot. However if you cover behind that pillar exposing pretty much the exact same amount of your character, you do not get shot even though the bullets appear to be travelling along the same trajectory. This happens to me a lot as I prefer a "gun and run" approach rather than playing whack-a-mole. So basically you are invulnerable to extent when behind cover. The game could be beaten with the assault rifle alone. Unlimited ammo. It's just awful all round.

I tried to give them a chance and ME is not too bad once you get into it but most coverbased shooters for me are unplayable.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

max payne 3 is the only cover based shooter I've played where I didn't feel like I was playing a game designed for five year olds. the enemies actually shot the cover away from you so it forced you to react, it was great.

still not a patch on classic max or classic shooters but as far as cover based combat goes it was actually entertaining, i'd even throw a 'dynamic' in there.