It isn't even racism or homophobia or 13 year olds. I've been dealing with those since RA3. It's that nobody has anything worth saying to me, and I've got nothing I want to say to them.
I'm not a dick about it. After someone leaves my room I'll send them a gg, that's just proper etiquette. You'll have to work for any other response.
L Ron HowardThe duckMinnesotaRegistered Userregular
edited February 2010
What I do not like is tiny and cramped spaces that you must crawl through. I'm talking about the claustrophobic vents found in Half-Life, for example. This doubles especially when things come crawling/attacking me from both sides/around a corner, and it's impossible to kill the things in front of you quickly, then turn around and destroy the ones behind you. Since you're crouched, you can't run away either, so you end up nearly dead. For some reason tiny crawling vent-like things in games, be it FPS or third-person, make me claustrophobic.
The only exception being the vents used in AvP games, when you're the Alien, and the tunnels/vents are designed for you to use.
And underwater levels. Those can die.
I also hate games where you cannot jump, nor can you get over tiny rises in the terrain. And FPS games with jumping puzzles. There isn't enough input from the speakers and screen that I can use to make accurate jumps. The protagonist that you're playing as weighs 20 lbs and has more muscles on his legs to make him jump further and higher than nearly any other human can at this moment, so it's really hard to try and figure out how you're going to behave when you try to execute the jump.
Furthermore, the physics of nearly every racing game ever. There are racing games that you can play and get into races pretty easy. For instance, the older NFS Underground games. Those are meant to be arcadey and not have any semblance of physics. But after that EA, I believe but I'm probably wrong, started touting that they were using "teh phizicks," on their games. Yet when I play those games, the fact that they have some action that resembles gravity is very stupid. I don't know what universe they're getting their physics from, but it isn't our own. I'm noticing this in other racing games that are a bit more serious too, like Test Drive Unlimited. The way the cars behave make me want to take the developers and shove them into a basic Neutonian physics course at the community college.
So basically you want to play with people but not really interact with them in a social way.
You have completely missed his point champ. It's not about the game at all.
Only a complete masochist would openly invite interaction with the dregs of humanit... I mean pubs. Seriously the signal to noise ration on live has to be what? 1:100? 1:1,000?? Mics are for two things on live:
A) talking to your friends during a game because you don't want to be on the phone with them during the game.
2) spewing racist, profane, bigoted insults at every living breathing thing because you are a total asshole.
Seriously... "meeting people" on xbox live is like looking for a nice girl at a maximum security prison. A MALE maximum security prison.
I don't see what people have problems with XBox Live. I've never encountered any of these racist slur slinging 8 year olds. I once, ONCE encountered someone on Phantasy Star Online who played rap through his mic in the lobby, but that was like 6 or 7 years ago.
I don't get it. Maybe it's just luck on my end, but I find that everyone's in a Party Chat or doesn't have mics. Hell, there was this time in BF: 1945 where I was sniping out on this boat in the middle of the Coral Island bay thingie for a good.... I dunno, Ten minutes? Got like 8 kills. Then I got headshotted. I sent the guy a message.
"Nice shot! "
He sent back a thanks and said he was a Marine. We swapped messages back and forth for a bit, seemed a nice guy.
Six of the eight dudes on my XBlox Live playlist came from random games on F.E.A.R. 2 MP. We were the only ones with mics in our respective games. All of them were polite, well spoken individuals. Not a single screaming 8 year to eb had anywhere....
I dunno, it's probably a case of I don't play titles until a year or two has passed since launch and all the ADD kids have moved on to the next "Halo-Killer."
OH, speaking of.... ANY GAME THAT CALLS ITSELF A 'HALO-KILLER.' What the flying frak?!
You've been incomprehensibly lucky to have not run across these cretins on a regular basis, trust me.
Actually I think part of it is what settings you do. There's a list of like family, pro and, underground. The latters description pretty much says 'this is for assholes'.
I don't even play console games online anymore (aside from with friends) because I got tired of the rampant stupidity. If I want to be harassed by idiot 13 year olds, I'll... wait, I can't imagine ever wanting that.
A recent pet peeve of mine is that in any game RPG/shooter/whatever where you can customize your character, I've become so familiar with my own preferences that whatever I make on my first playthrough winds up being really close to my "ideal" fun character. Which makes sometimes makes replaying games a bit of a drag. I remember back in the day when I'd play a game two or three times before I found the setup I really enjoyed, but now I seem to create it almost instinctively.
I guess this is a problem of my own making, but still. I find myself thinking that I should deliberately make a less than ideal character the first time, rather than just playing the game and trying stuff.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
I don't even play console games online anymore (aside from with friends) because I got tired of the rampant stupidity. If I want to be harassed by idiot 13 year olds, I'll... wait, I can't imagine ever wanting that.
A recent pet peeve of mine is that in any game RPG/shooter/whatever where you can customize your character, I've become so familiar with my own preferences that whatever I make on my first playthrough winds up being really close to my "ideal" fun character. Which makes sometimes makes replaying games a bit of a drag. I remember back in the day when I'd play a game two or three times before I found the setup I really enjoyed, but now I seem to create it almost instinctively.
I guess this is a problem of my own making, but still. I find myself thinking that I should deliberately make a less than ideal character the first time, rather than just playing the game and trying stuff.
Speaking of character customization, I wish I'd break out of the mould of just making more attractive and talented versions of myself. It's like I can't call on my imagination when it actually matters.
edit: actually I'm pretty good when I can customize the whole party, e.g. Icewind Dale
I don't even play console games online anymore (aside from with friends) because I got tired of the rampant stupidity. If I want to be harassed by idiot 13 year olds, I'll... wait, I can't imagine ever wanting that.
A recent pet peeve of mine is that in any game RPG/shooter/whatever where you can customize your character, I've become so familiar with my own preferences that whatever I make on my first playthrough winds up being really close to my "ideal" fun character. Which makes sometimes makes replaying games a bit of a drag. I remember back in the day when I'd play a game two or three times before I found the setup I really enjoyed, but now I seem to create it almost instinctively.
I guess this is a problem of my own making, but still. I find myself thinking that I should deliberately make a less than ideal character the first time, rather than just playing the game and trying stuff.
What makes an RPG fun for me is coming up with a character and trying to decide what choices he would make and not just making a video game version of myself, that's pretty boring.
I'm not saying I always create myself, just that I find myself making fewer "mistakes" as far as prioritizing one thing or the other. So I wind up less excited about the opportunity to try everything again.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
hold your head high soldier, it ain't over yet
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
edited February 2010
I always make low Charisma characters cause seriously, what a fucking point sink.
I always make low Charisma characters cause seriously, what a fucking point sink.
Seriously, make it a 2-for-1 things where you get 2 Charisma for each 1 point you put in it.
Only a few games make it worth having high Charisma for anything beyond getting party members. Initial reactions don't mean shit for the most part. If Charisma was enough to actually win some games, like "Damn, that's one Charismatic Motherfucker, we better lay our weapons down and follow him" that'd make it more worth it.
I think that if a game is going to use a SPECIAL type approach to stats then the developers need to take a good hard look at it. They're NEVER going to balance the damn things perfectly with each other.
Solution?
Make the most average stat be worth 10 points to upgrade. Make weaker stats be less than 10 (like 5 for Charisma in most games), and awesome stats (like Intelligence in Fallout 3) be worth more than 10. Then take the number of points you would hand out and multiply them by 10.
I always make low Charisma characters cause seriously, what a fucking point sink.
Seriously, make it a 2-for-1 things where you get 2 Charisma for each 1 point you put in it.
Only a few games make it worth having high Charisma for anything beyond getting party members. Initial reactions don't mean shit for the most part. If Charisma was enough to actually win some games, like "Damn, that's one Charismatic Motherfucker, we better lay our weapons down and follow him" that'd make it more worth it.
I wish they would just put in another stat for the bard type skills and all story related charisma checks would be something else. And higher charisma shouldn't always = better. A low charisma character should just have different options than a high charisma character and you should have to spend points to move it lower or higher, with it starting neutral.
like the NPC would say
"i'm sorry but this treaty is atrocious, you will have to come up with something better"
then you high charisma character is all like "surely we can come to some agreement, how about this..." and the NPC says "well that seems reasonable.
while your low charisma character would just be like "atrocious like your face"
and the npc would go "sigh, i see there is no reasoning with you. very well, we need their help, there isn't much we can do about it."
Option A - Let me help you out of the goodness of my heart. I don't need a reward - just improve my alignment. But if I get a reward, it'll be so damn good that there's never any reason to do anything else.
Option B - I'm neutral. Give me a reward. Probably gold, for which I have little to no use.
Option C - I think I'm evil, but I'm really just an asshole. I will kill you and take my own reward. Probably nothing, but there's always an off chance it's so damn good there's never any reason to do anything else.
Option D - I don't want to talk to you. But put the quest in my journal anyway.
NPC: You must help us by finding the four ancient orbs! That is all the counsel I have to offer - begin your journey wherever you'd like. But do note that there are exactly four distinct exits from town, one to the North, one to the East, one to the South, and one to the West.
I always make low Charisma characters cause seriously, what a fucking point sink.
Seriously, make it a 2-for-1 things where you get 2 Charisma for each 1 point you put in it.
Only a few games make it worth having high Charisma for anything beyond getting party members. Initial reactions don't mean shit for the most part. If Charisma was enough to actually win some games, like "Damn, that's one Charismatic Motherfucker, we better lay our weapons down and follow him" that'd make it more worth it.
I wish they would just put in another stat for the bard type skills and all story related charisma checks would be something else. And higher charisma shouldn't always = better. A low charisma character should just have different options than a high charisma character and you should have to spend points to move it lower or higher, with it starting neutral.
like the NPC would say
"i'm sorry but this treaty is atrocious, you will have to come up with something better"
then you high charisma character is all like "surely we can come to some agreement, how about this..." and the NPC says "well that seems reasonable.
while your low charisma character would just be like "atrocious like your face"
and the npc would go "sigh, i see there is no reasoning with you. very well, we need their help, there isn't much we can do about it."
Low charisma? :P
Ed321 on
0
acidlacedpenguinInstitutionalizedSafe in jail.Registered Userregular
I always make low Charisma characters cause seriously, what a fucking point sink.
Seriously, make it a 2-for-1 things where you get 2 Charisma for each 1 point you put in it.
Only a few games make it worth having high Charisma for anything beyond getting party members. Initial reactions don't mean shit for the most part. If Charisma was enough to actually win some games, like "Damn, that's one Charismatic Motherfucker, we better lay our weapons down and follow him" that'd make it more worth it.
I wish they would just put in another stat for the bard type skills and all story related charisma checks would be something else. And higher charisma shouldn't always = better. A low charisma character should just have different options than a high charisma character and you should have to spend points to move it lower or higher, with it starting neutral.
like the NPC would say
"i'm sorry but this treaty is atrocious, you will have to come up with something better"
then you high charisma character is all like "surely we can come to some agreement, how about this..." and the NPC says "well that seems reasonable.
while your low charisma character would just be like "Go for the eyes, Boo!"
and the npc would go "AHHH PET RODENT IN MY FACE!!!!"
I always make low Charisma characters cause seriously, what a fucking point sink.
Seriously, make it a 2-for-1 things where you get 2 Charisma for each 1 point you put in it.
Only a few games make it worth having high Charisma for anything beyond getting party members. Initial reactions don't mean shit for the most part. If Charisma was enough to actually win some games, like "Damn, that's one Charismatic Motherfucker, we better lay our weapons down and follow him" that'd make it more worth it.
I wish they would just put in another stat for the bard type skills and all story related charisma checks would be something else. And higher charisma shouldn't always = better. A low charisma character should just have different options than a high charisma character and you should have to spend points to move it lower or higher, with it starting neutral.
like the NPC would say
"i'm sorry but this treaty is atrocious, you will have to come up with something better"
then you high charisma character is all like "surely we can come to some agreement, how about this..." and the NPC says "well that seems reasonable.
while your low charisma character would just be like "atrocious like your face"
and the npc would go "sigh, i see there is no reasoning with you. very well, we need their help, there isn't much we can do about it."
Low charisma? :P
Well sure, you would of course have to spend points to get it that low. Being able to talk to people in such an uncultured way and get away with it is a skill.
I always make low Charisma characters cause seriously, what a fucking point sink.
Seriously, make it a 2-for-1 things where you get 2 Charisma for each 1 point you put in it.
Only a few games make it worth having high Charisma for anything beyond getting party members. Initial reactions don't mean shit for the most part. If Charisma was enough to actually win some games, like "Damn, that's one Charismatic Motherfucker, we better lay our weapons down and follow him" that'd make it more worth it.
I wish they would just put in another stat for the bard type skills and all story related charisma checks would be something else. And higher charisma shouldn't always = better. A low charisma character should just have different options than a high charisma character and you should have to spend points to move it lower or higher, with it starting neutral.
like the NPC would say
"i'm sorry but this treaty is atrocious, you will have to come up with something better"
then you high charisma character is all like "surely we can come to some agreement, how about this..." and the NPC says "well that seems reasonable.
while your low charisma character would just be like "Go for the eyes, Boo!"
and the npc would go "AHHH PET RODENT IN MY FACE!!!!"
Also chalk me up for "min maxing beats all" attitudes in online games.
Diablo 2 had so much diversity and fun just there for the taking. Anyone who has read Sirian' s adventures knows that skill does beat all. Too bad lag and online asshattery prevented the potential from ever being harvested.
Having only scanned the middle part of the thread, I add my peeves.
Apologies in advance for repetition...
1) No Modern Update for M.U.L.E. - This would seem to be perfect Wiiware/XBLA/PSN game. 4 players local (maybe more online). Still one of my all time favourite games. Yes, I am that old.
2) Games where sidequests resulting in over-levelling. Okay, I am definitely something of a completist, but it does become dissappointing when you return to the main story line after running a few errands to discover that you now stride amongst your enemies as an unstoppable collossus. All dramatic tension is lost.
3) Fetch quests in games where it involves travelling back an forth between several load areas. This is my one and only complaint with BG2. If you have to spend as much time waiting for the area to load as it takes you to travel (and then rinse and repeat 3-5 times) you are sorely trying my patience.
4) RPGs where you don't run out of arrows/bolts. Ammo depletion = challenging = good
5) is RIGHT OUT! (sorry)
6) WWII RTS games with health bars on units. Remember the Close Combat games? Those were awesome! Tanks didn't "take damage until they died." Instead they became immobilized, or their crews bailed, or were just plain knocked out. Squad performance was based on how many guys were left in the squad, as well as other factors. Some units would flat out refuse orders (favourite gaming moment - Asking a British Paratroop squad to assault a Panther, so others units could flank. The squad commander responded "You're Mad!" and buggered off!)
That's all I've got for now.
The Derm on
Overwhelmed as one would be, placed in my position
Such a heavy burden now to be the one
Born to bare and read to all the details of our ending
To write it down for all the world to see
But I forgot my pen...
0
DunxcoShould get a suitNever skips breakfastRegistered Userregular
6) WWII RTS games with health bars on units. Remember the Close Combat games? Those were awesome! Tanks didn't "take damage until they died." Instead they became immobilized, or their crews bailed, or were just plain knocked out. Squad performance was based on how many guys were left in the squad, as well as other factors. Some units would flat out refuse orders (favourite gaming moment - Asking a British Paratroop squad to assault a Panther, so others units could flank. The squad commander responded "You're Mad!" and buggered off!)
That's all I've got for now.
You know, that made me consider another personal pet peeve of mine - World War 2 games. It's not so bad now but when there was a slew of them in the early-mid 2000's. There's only so much Nazi-shooting one can stomach. I can't enjoy the genre anymore because it's been done so many times. And alterations of the formula don't work either. "World War 2... With magic" was basically Wolfenstein (the more recent one), and it sucked. I just want the concept of the WW2 shooter to die.
Dunxco on
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
I always make low Charisma characters cause seriously, what a fucking point sink.
Seriously, make it a 2-for-1 things where you get 2 Charisma for each 1 point you put in it.
Only a few games make it worth having high Charisma for anything beyond getting party members. Initial reactions don't mean shit for the most part. If Charisma was enough to actually win some games, like "Damn, that's one Charismatic Motherfucker, we better lay our weapons down and follow him" that'd make it more worth it.
I wish they would just put in another stat for the bard type skills and all story related charisma checks would be something else. And higher charisma shouldn't always = better. A low charisma character should just have different options than a high charisma character and you should have to spend points to move it lower or higher, with it starting neutral.
like the NPC would say
"i'm sorry but this treaty is atrocious, you will have to come up with something better"
then you high charisma character is all like "surely we can come to some agreement, how about this..." and the NPC says "well that seems reasonable.
while your low charisma character would just be like "atrocious like your face"
and the npc would go "sigh, i see there is no reasoning with you. very well, we need their help, there isn't much we can do about it."
That's a good idea. I like how it'd just be "different" instead of restricted options.
Posts
I'm not a dick about it. After someone leaves my room I'll send them a gg, that's just proper etiquette. You'll have to work for any other response.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
The only exception being the vents used in AvP games, when you're the Alien, and the tunnels/vents are designed for you to use.
And underwater levels. Those can die.
I also hate games where you cannot jump, nor can you get over tiny rises in the terrain. And FPS games with jumping puzzles. There isn't enough input from the speakers and screen that I can use to make accurate jumps. The protagonist that you're playing as weighs 20 lbs and has more muscles on his legs to make him jump further and higher than nearly any other human can at this moment, so it's really hard to try and figure out how you're going to behave when you try to execute the jump.
Furthermore, the physics of nearly every racing game ever. There are racing games that you can play and get into races pretty easy. For instance, the older NFS Underground games. Those are meant to be arcadey and not have any semblance of physics. But after that EA, I believe but I'm probably wrong, started touting that they were using "teh phizicks," on their games. Yet when I play those games, the fact that they have some action that resembles gravity is very stupid. I don't know what universe they're getting their physics from, but it isn't our own. I'm noticing this in other racing games that are a bit more serious too, like Test Drive Unlimited. The way the cars behave make me want to take the developers and shove them into a basic Neutonian physics course at the community college.
You're strumming along, fa la la la.
Then you meet that one enemy, or one boss.
DEATH.
No telegraph, no chance to prepare, strategize, or react. Just a cheap death to pad game length.
Hate it.
GTFO CC FAIL!
Get the fuck out community college fail.
what?
You've been incomprehensibly lucky to have not run across these cretins on a regular basis, trust me.
Dire Dire Docks
Not only is it a water level, but the level begins with you falling into the water. It took me weeks to gather the courage to face it.
Twitter
Hmmm. I guess. I just hope it holds out.
If this is true, we still have pricks.
A recent pet peeve of mine is that in any game RPG/shooter/whatever where you can customize your character, I've become so familiar with my own preferences that whatever I make on my first playthrough winds up being really close to my "ideal" fun character. Which makes sometimes makes replaying games a bit of a drag. I remember back in the day when I'd play a game two or three times before I found the setup I really enjoyed, but now I seem to create it almost instinctively.
I guess this is a problem of my own making, but still. I find myself thinking that I should deliberately make a less than ideal character the first time, rather than just playing the game and trying stuff.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
Speaking of character customization, I wish I'd break out of the mould of just making more attractive and talented versions of myself. It's like I can't call on my imagination when it actually matters.
edit: actually I'm pretty good when I can customize the whole party, e.g. Icewind Dale
What makes an RPG fun for me is coming up with a character and trying to decide what choices he would make and not just making a video game version of myself, that's pretty boring.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
Ugh, the flood spore things in Halo.
Seriously, make it a 2-for-1 things where you get 2 Charisma for each 1 point you put in it.
(i'm so old)
I had to look that up :P
Only a few games make it worth having high Charisma for anything beyond getting party members. Initial reactions don't mean shit for the most part. If Charisma was enough to actually win some games, like "Damn, that's one Charismatic Motherfucker, we better lay our weapons down and follow him" that'd make it more worth it.
Solution?
Make the most average stat be worth 10 points to upgrade. Make weaker stats be less than 10 (like 5 for Charisma in most games), and awesome stats (like Intelligence in Fallout 3) be worth more than 10. Then take the number of points you would hand out and multiply them by 10.
Bam, instant balance.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
yeah i think they got some screenshots on fische there.
I wish they would just put in another stat for the bard type skills and all story related charisma checks would be something else. And higher charisma shouldn't always = better. A low charisma character should just have different options than a high charisma character and you should have to spend points to move it lower or higher, with it starting neutral.
like the NPC would say
"i'm sorry but this treaty is atrocious, you will have to come up with something better"
then you high charisma character is all like "surely we can come to some agreement, how about this..." and the NPC says "well that seems reasonable.
while your low charisma character would just be like "atrocious like your face"
and the npc would go "sigh, i see there is no reasoning with you. very well, we need their help, there isn't much we can do about it."
Option A - Let me help you out of the goodness of my heart. I don't need a reward - just improve my alignment. But if I get a reward, it'll be so damn good that there's never any reason to do anything else.
Option B - I'm neutral. Give me a reward. Probably gold, for which I have little to no use.
Option C - I think I'm evil, but I'm really just an asshole. I will kill you and take my own reward. Probably nothing, but there's always an off chance it's so damn good there's never any reason to do anything else.
Option D - I don't want to talk to you. But put the quest in my journal anyway.
NPC: You must help us by finding the four ancient orbs! That is all the counsel I have to offer - begin your journey wherever you'd like. But do note that there are exactly four distinct exits from town, one to the North, one to the East, one to the South, and one to the West.
Low charisma? :P
Well sure, you would of course have to spend points to get it that low. Being able to talk to people in such an uncultured way and get away with it is a skill.
Simply awesome.
Twitter
How about higher game difficulty settings that only quadruple enemy HP making each fight last forever... metroid prime
Graaagh trash mobs using unescapable and unbreakable combos on you in third-person action/melee games.
Diablo 2 had so much diversity and fun just there for the taking. Anyone who has read Sirian' s adventures knows that skill does beat all. Too bad lag and online asshattery prevented the potential from ever being harvested.
http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Zeromus_%28Final_Fantasy_IV%29
http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Yu_Yevon_%28Boss%29
Games with final villains that are given two lines of backstory and then go "fight him just because he's the last boss," I just...
Also,
http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Level_5_Death
I don't know who ever thought that could even be considered a good idea.
Anyone want to beta read a paranormal mystery novella? Here's your chance.
stream
Apologies in advance for repetition...
1) No Modern Update for M.U.L.E. - This would seem to be perfect Wiiware/XBLA/PSN game. 4 players local (maybe more online). Still one of my all time favourite games. Yes, I am that old.
2) Games where sidequests resulting in over-levelling. Okay, I am definitely something of a completist, but it does become dissappointing when you return to the main story line after running a few errands to discover that you now stride amongst your enemies as an unstoppable collossus. All dramatic tension is lost.
3) Fetch quests in games where it involves travelling back an forth between several load areas. This is my one and only complaint with BG2. If you have to spend as much time waiting for the area to load as it takes you to travel (and then rinse and repeat 3-5 times) you are sorely trying my patience.
4) RPGs where you don't run out of arrows/bolts. Ammo depletion = challenging = good
5) is RIGHT OUT! (sorry)
6) WWII RTS games with health bars on units. Remember the Close Combat games? Those were awesome! Tanks didn't "take damage until they died." Instead they became immobilized, or their crews bailed, or were just plain knocked out. Squad performance was based on how many guys were left in the squad, as well as other factors. Some units would flat out refuse orders (favourite gaming moment - Asking a British Paratroop squad to assault a Panther, so others units could flank. The squad commander responded "You're Mad!" and buggered off!)
That's all I've got for now.
Such a heavy burden now to be the one
Born to bare and read to all the details of our ending
To write it down for all the world to see
But I forgot my pen...
You know, that made me consider another personal pet peeve of mine - World War 2 games. It's not so bad now but when there was a slew of them in the early-mid 2000's. There's only so much Nazi-shooting one can stomach. I can't enjoy the genre anymore because it's been done so many times. And alterations of the formula don't work either. "World War 2... With magic" was basically Wolfenstein (the more recent one), and it sucked. I just want the concept of the WW2 shooter to die.
That's a good idea. I like how it'd just be "different" instead of restricted options.