Quirks and trends in modern games that bother you

What kind of trends in modern games (in general, not just FPS) really irk you? Can be anything, big or small.

One thing that really bothers me (when it comes to FPS games) is the FOV. 90 used to be the standard in almost all FPS games, now it's usually 60-80. I understand that they might be trying to increase the framerate a little bit, and maybe make things look less distorted on widescreen (which is starting to/already has taken over 4:3), but seriously, it looks awful, on 4:3 anyway.

I had to change my Rage config to use 90, but that introduced a few oddities. Namely, the weapons look too far away now, despite only being 10 more degrees of view, and I can see where the arms cut off at the shoulder. That, and whenever I load a game while I was already ingame, it changes back to the default 80! What the hell?


One thing I really hate about modern games in general is the flat out linearity, is it really that hard for devs to make more interesting layouts?

The ridiculous overuse of screen shaking effects in pretty much every modern "indie" game. God, it's just so fucking obnoxious. It's on par with the shaky cam effect in modern movies, except worse, since you can't see what the fuck is happening anymore and it can lead to fatal results for your character rather quickly.

Slow player speed is the worst. Increase that and you can make just about any game better.

Having projectiles to dodge using said speed (instead of nothing but hitscans everywhere, all the time) could help, too.

FOV and screen shaking. Aw, come on, it's no fun if you already name the two worst ones. So, to try and name something I don't see often mentioned in annoying modern trends, hmm...

Pretentious games without real gameplay, and people who use the word "pretentious" as some kind of Godwin's Law to avoid answering the critics. Especially prevalent in the indie scene as of late. It's irking me because not only the games themselves tend to be fairly primitive and contrived in their message, it also makes the assumption there's no emotional significance in other games, and that fanfiction-level crap they're feeding us is the pinnacle of any experience you can have. Sorry, I find more beauty in a perfectly choregraphed gunfight than in dating paraplegic anime girls. And yet I could see myself buying into that sort of stuff, say, ten years ago, when my standards were lower because I had less experience, and I think that's what makes it so infuriating: it's people who don't get it yet who believe you are the one who doesn't get it, and they tell you that loudly and repeatedly with a smug grin on their face you just want to wipe out.

Boring generic orchestrated movie-like soundtracks are definitely something I'd like to see take a hike.

Sodaholic said:

One thing I really hate about modern games in general is the flat out linearity, is it really that hard for devs to make more interesting layouts?

This, mostly. A lot of current level design. I find nothing less exciting than a wartorn city/rooftop, less so when the entire map is two colors. Even when the maps are non-linear (and that's really only the case for multiplayer maps), they're still boring. Worse if they come in packs of 3 for a quarter of the price of the original game.

Cutscenes. Ironically they pretty much kill the sense of immersion for me, unless they're the interactive kind. I don't like losing control of the player character.

I also hate it when the player doesn't have freedom to do things, like kill NPCs. I don't care if 10,000 guards run out and kill me right afterwards, I'd just like a reaction out of the NPC instead of having them be bulletproof and oblivious.

Lack of freedom in general really irks me, and it should be easy to fix with modern game engines but no one really seems to care about it.

-Slow pace in action games

-Dumbing down the games (lack of depth, removing options from players, etc.)

-Lack of real, skill-related challenge

Big developers/publishers are the worst. It's telling, to me at least, that almost all modern games that I appreciate are either from small, indie or Japanese developers. Or any combination of the three.

Context sensitive music that changes all the time doesn't do anything for me. Catchy music that loops continuously is a lot more enjoyable.

Generally anything that gives me the feeling the game requires zero thinking to solve: hinted interactive objects (on by default), mission objective compass/minimap and many others. I don't like wasting my time with my brain thinking nothing.

QTEs. Great, now we have a way of making cutscenes more interactive and interesting. Now we also have a reason to plaster our games with many more cutscenes instead of trying to make the actual game mechanics more interesting.

(Most) downloadable content. Whoever came up with the idea for downloadable content was brilliant. First, finish your game. Next, decide which parts of the game you are going to amputate and charge the player to use. Usually "downloadable" content is actually stuff that is already on the game disc, and you are just downloading the right to use it.

I have a friend who bought FF13-2, and it is particularly notorious for this. The ending to the game itself is downloadable content, and the character that is plastered on the front cover of the game isn't even playable unless you pay for it.

They are not Doom. Period.

Retro graphics.
What's retro about them? The fact that the game is in 2D? The excessive use of rainbows and gradients? The low resolution?

When I see a game with "retro graphics" I can't help but notice there isn't a single retro platform that could run the game. Sure, your main character looks like a retarded one-color stick figure but why does he have hundreds of frames of animation? Why does your Atari 2600 inspired game have tile-based graphics? And I can't think of an 8-bit platform that supported 256-color sprites. This is the disconnect with "retro" as an art style, and the graphics of the day dictated by the limitations of the hardware.

Where are my god damned secret areas... I used to like finding those in older shooters n stuff.

I absolutely hate having no manual saves and you have to rely on checkpoints, save gems and in between level saves.

Jodwin said:

-Slow pace in action games

-Dumbing down the games (lack of depth, removing options from players, etc.)

-Lack of real, skill-related challenge

Big developers/publishers are the worst. It's telling, to me at least, that almost all modern games that I appreciate are either from small, indie or Japanese developers. Or any combination of the three.

Hi, all of your concerns are answered by Tribes: Ascend.

-300 KPH+ speed.

-Loadout customization with real choices about what role you want to be playing in a complex class based, CTF environment.

-Mid air shots involving projectile speed inheritance, arcing trajectories, etc.

Regeneration of health and crapshoot allies

sgt dopey said:

Regeneration of health and crapshoot allies

Hmm...so John Romero DID pave the way, after all, with his Daikatana, and secretly made us ALL his bitches!

Edit: 7999th post, so the next one has to be something epic and melodramatic.

- Slow player movement in FPS games
- Almost every FPS game deals with "missions" and uses war as a theme
- Tutorial levels
- Everything has a voice, no text
- Hints every 2 seconds
- Hints on loading screens
- 15gazillion "made in partnership with!" logos before a start screen
- Stupid orchestral music
- Downloadable content
- PC games being console ports
- Requiring me to sign onto some network just to play the game
- DDR lacking the type of music it used to have
- Regenerating health or shields

1. Games that take place in the present. Shooters especially.

Doom is enjoyable because it takes place in an "alternate reality" kind of world (the future where tech is advanced and weapons seem new and unique), and so do a few other games. Halo comes to mind even though it's still not that great. Skyrim was very good for me as well until I finished the quests, but that's an RPG for you.

2. Arcade style shooters. Tactical shooters are always more fun for longer periods of time, and focus on better aspects of game play.

CoD just sucks. I mean, it's catered towards the casual player and it's frustrating when everyone is capable of doing amazing by getting a few lucky kills and getting the killstreak rewards. These elements also create an incentive to camp or abuse cheap tactics in order to do better than the other players in terms of kills, as well as making winning less important than such. Also, in order to make the game accessible to lower skilled players, mechanics like recoil and bullet drop are reduced or removed altogether, and players receive help when they do bad; I.E deathstreaks.

However, a game like BF3 is better for team work and strategic play; greatly rewarding team efforts and punishing those who only play for themselves. The lack of large rewards for doing good allow a player to feel more inclined to try for an objective or sacrifice themselves for the greater effort in order to win, which is the main objective here. Also, players will receive point rewards for performing team-oriented tasks; providing ammo, healing others, fixing vehicles just to name a few. All vehicles are up for grabs, so everyone has a fair chance to use them, and the guns have realistic physics in order to increase the level of skill required to do well, and increasing it much more in order to do great, while still being below the threshold of requiring mastery in order to do just average.

Unskippable cutscenes. Almost always quit/not bother with games that have them.

Use3D said:

Boring generic orchestrated movie-like soundtracks are definitely something I'd like to see take a hike.

I'd argue that Nintendo is one of the very few doing this right, but i still mostly agree.

Also, where's my easter eggs/cameos game industry? I used to love looking for those in games. I can't remember the last time i played a game where they were present that didn't revolve around pop-culture nonsense.

I'm sick of the delusion people on DOOM forums have that they played deep games when they were kids. There's nothing deep in DOOM or even in Half-Life. Most of our favourite games are really simple, but tuned to some kind of perfection.

System Shock 2 is more complex, but it's really just a fancy FPS game where you run around for hours looking for the last button in the maps and can choose to be more or less stealthy.

The trend towards linear maps with no secrets really, really sucks, however. I'm at the point where I'll no longer play any FPS games that aren't also RPGs or puzzle games just to get around some of that.

The fact that modern shooters aren't all Serious Sam 3 is a pretty annoying trend.




(Enjoying the mechanics of The Darkness 2, not so much the on-rails level design and progression)

Anything that bogs down the gameplay "BECAUSE REALISM". Also linearity, especially when it comes down to the invisible walls crap. If you're gonna limit a player's freedom, at least try to give them the illusion of choice.

Bucket said:

Retro graphics.
What's retro about them? The fact that the game is in 2D? The excessive use of rainbows and gradients? The low resolution?

When I see a game with "retro graphics" I can't help but notice there isn't a single retro platform that could run the game. Sure, your main character looks like a retarded one-color stick figure but why does he have hundreds of frames of animation? Why does your Atari 2600 inspired game have tile-based graphics? And I can't think of an 8-bit platform that supported 256-color sprites. This is the disconnect with "retro" as an art style, and the graphics of the day dictated by the limitations of the hardware.

Thank you!
Most of the "8-bit" games now are more akin to their 16 or 32-bit brethren.

In terms of FPSes, all you're doing is using four keys to move, then moving your mouse to line a crosshair up with a picture, and finally pushing a button. The idea is how to NOT make it feel like you're just clicking your mouse button at pictures as if you're playing a keyboard mouse tutorial.

sgtcrispy said:

Thank you!
Most of the "8-bit" games now are more akin to their 16 or 32-bit brethren.

this is how you do a modern "retro" game.

VVVVVV actually looks/sounds like a Commodore 64 game :P

The trend that a gamer will buy a game, play it, complain about it, and continue playing it until the same developer makes a new one and starts the cycle over.

Shaikoten said:

Hi, all of your concerns are answered by Tribes: Ascend.

Yay, a multiplayer-only FPS game!

...wait, I don't like multiplayer FPSs. :(