ForumsGamesThings you hate in a game

193 19134
greenplanet011
offline
greenplanet011
207 posts
85

Plain and simple.What do you hate in a game.

  • 193 Replies
Bronze
offline
Bronze
2,429 posts
1,340

Basically, I don't like it when there are times that the character should talk, such as in Fallout and such other games.


I agree. And you make fair points pang, but I'm just not the kind of guy who really puts them self into a character and believes that they are a character. I want to see a story unfold, but I do overlook it when the game is awesome.

I also don't like it when my character doesn't have a name. It just makes conversations awkward. But again, I overlook it.
Salvidian
offline
Salvidian
4,229 posts
2,255

Assassin's Creed III had quite a few historical inaccuracies, mainly concerning th Templars. Example: Pitcairn was never killed by a Native American.

Kreitmaker
offline
Kreitmaker
293 posts
4,530

In their defense..that mean having to hire another voice actor (or more) and maybe even add in some of that extra data stuff that I don't care to learn haha

also..the big one...it would take out that huge RPG element..the idea that you are the character you are playing. If the character has a voice..it is as if it is some random person you are playing as, and not yourself living the adventure


Ok, but get this. What if the character already has a voice actor?

What I mean is that the character talks during the cinematic cutscenes that you have to watch at times, yet doesn't talk during the missions (or gameplay).

HINT: One example is Battlefield 3.
chuncster
offline
chuncster
24 posts
85

Things i hate in a game? Endings. Always so anti-climatic (with exception to assassins creed series, love the cliff hangers)

I also hate how you buy a game with multiplayer enabled, within 5minutes of the game being released you have people that are absolutely amazing at it, it just ruins the fun...

Chunc

Vagueshade
offline
Vagueshade
83 posts
750

(with exception to assassins creed series, love the cliff hangers)


You won't be saying that after AC III...
Bobthebest
offline
Bobthebest
28 posts
1,720

I agree with Loptice and ImTheMostManlyMan with the terrible voice acting. I also hate when you can't put on subtitles so you can mute the TV so that you don't have to listen to the voice acting.

Bobthebest
offline
Bobthebest
28 posts
1,720

And I agree with Vague shade. After AC III you are going to HATE cliffhangers.

kirks011
offline
kirks011
180 posts
2,570

I ABSOLUTELY DESPISE when a game makes u go through a tutorial everytime u play even if you have played before. After the first time it should be completely optional from the settings or something.

Masterforger
offline
Masterforger
1,829 posts
1,120

Assassin's Creed III had quite a few historical inaccuracies, mainly concerning th Templars. Example: Pitcairn was never killed by a Native American.

I don't know about you, but I do not use the AC series as historical reference.

I hate worthless characters. As in, characters with very little development who are still crucial to the game. Dishonored tried to get rid of this with the Heart and littered notes, but I think you should be able to optionally talk to people and learn about them, a bit like Skyrim/
jackfrost5555
offline
jackfrost5555
2 posts
2,335

Any game that makes you kill a certain number of things to keep going with the game.

pangtongshu
offline
pangtongshu
9,995 posts
3,285

Ok, but get this. What if the character already has a voice actor?

What I mean is that the character talks during the cinematic cutscenes that you have to watch at times, yet doesn't talk during the missions (or gameplay).

HINT: One example is Battlefield 3.


To be honest...I've never played Battlefield 3..but the only thing I can ask is during the gameplay, are there times when it would make sense for him to talk? (like, someone talking to him or something thereof)

If there are times like that...then yeah..I don't get why they wouldn't go ahead and use the resource they have, even if it'd be for just a few lines
sourwhatup2
offline
sourwhatup2
3,697 posts
3,965

I think I have a few.

Lag, bad set camera angels that cannot be changed, bad voice acting, an easy game even though it's on insane mode, bad art, bad humor, with adventure games the short stories are annoying especially if they are games where you end it and then all you can do is start over. Tedious games.

Man I have so many things I hate in games, this is why I'm such a critique when it comes to games in general, any game, whatever it may be, I judge it on every freaking detail no matter what.

For example CoD.. You know that stupid game? Yes stupid.. But not because I jumped on the bandwagon.. It's only that they have so much to work on in that game, they can do so much instead of just adding useless crap into it that just makes no sense. Also, I'm not only talking about multiplayer I am also talking about campaign, zombies, spec ops, etc. I don't know how else to explain it.. Instead of going for an amazing game that takes 3-5 years, they go for a 8-12 month game that in the end is only worthwhile for the multiplayer(and zombies if you count for Treyarch).

Anyways I've said so much about just one franchise, but whatever. Basically what I meant with the whole CoD thing is that there are these amazing developers, that can innovate so much into gameplay, make new things and expand on games but instead they end up doing the minimal job possible. This doesn't only apply to CoD but a lot of other games too.

Cristinatron
offline
Cristinatron
138 posts
1,195

What ruins a game for me is horrible camera angles and not being able to adjust or change them. Even if I really love the game and everything about it is great, not being able to see what I'm doing really annoys me and I can't make myself continue playing.

Kreitmaker
offline
Kreitmaker
293 posts
4,530

To be honest...I've never played Battlefield 3..but the only thing I can ask is during the gameplay, are there times when it would make sense for him to talk? (like, someone talking to him or something thereof)

If there are times like that...then yeah..I don't get why they wouldn't go ahead and use the resource they have, even if it'd be for just a few lines


Well, that's alright if you haven't played Battlefield 3. This problem applies to other first person shooters these days.

With my example, there are many times the main character should talk, but doesn't. For example, in one mission (called "Night Shift&quot, two US Marines named Blackburn (the main character in the mission) and Campo (the squad leader) are regrouping with the rest of the US Marines near a mall in Tehran, Iran (there's a war in Iran in the game). Campo starts to talk about how their platoon leader (Cole) is a "gloryhound" who wants to be promoted to Major even though he's been Captain for a few years. Blackburn doesn't provide any input as to whether he agrees or disagrees with Campo on the matter, which makes him less interesting to know about.

One more example would be in the mission "Kaffarov", where Blackburn runs into a Russian secret agent named Dima. Dima tells Blackburn about what the Iranians are planning to do and how they stole nukes from Russia. Blackburn is just dead silent during that moment and doesn't question what Dima is saying, meaning Blackburn is just another playable character that does what he's told and always takes a leap of faith instead of preparing himself for various conflicts and scenarios in the game.

The worst example of my problem has to belong to "Homefront". In that game, you're playing as a helicopter pilot named Jacobs. In the game, just about every second asks for Jacobs to talk yet he doesn't. He doesn't talk smack to the North Koreans when they capture him. He doesn't tell his teammates (Connor and Rianna) to stop arguing when they do. He doesn't talk to any non-playable characters when you press the action button to talk to them. (All you get is them talking to you, while you're just dead silent.)

I'm sorry to have to say this about Call of Duty, but its latest games are actually getting it right (BLOPS1 onward) when it comes to input from playable characters, making them have an actual personality instead of just being brain-dead characters that are just there to advance the story.
sourwhatup2
offline
sourwhatup2
3,697 posts
3,965

I'm sorry to have to say this about Call of Duty, but its latest games are actually getting it right (BLOPS1 onward) when it comes to input from playable characters, making them have an actual personality instead of just being brain-dead characters that are just there to advance the story.


Yeah they are getting that right with the campaigns especially with BO2, they did a good job on that, but it's mostly just in cut scenes where they do that the most.
Showing 151-165 of 193