Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Your pet peeves

Swigen

Arbiter
Joined
Dec 15, 2018
Messages
1,014
17 developer’s logos before the New Game/Load Game screen that are sometimes skipable with an action button press, other times with a start button press. Way to keep me on my toes gaylords.
 

Black Angel

Arcane
Joined
Jun 23, 2016
Messages
2,910
Location
Wonderland
Easy modes, and the arguments that "It won't ruin your own personal experience!". Never mind the fact that easy modes where the only thing that changes are the numbers of HPs and damages are just cheap, and at the end of the day it means jack shit if the players who demanded it still can't learn how to play the game properly, of its rules and system, level and encounter designs, traps placement and mechanism, and AI combat behavior. And if developers are too lazy to change all this we ended up with not just cheap -50% HP and -50% damage, but also bare bones rules and system, linear corridor-tier level designs with non sensical encounter design, traps so obvious in plain sight it's insulting, and dumbass AI.

I'm not entirely against different difficulty, however. Underrail and Dungeon Rats, for example, managed to do different difficulty right without sacrificing its deep RPG mechanics and other aspect of the game. However, I'm not sure if there's any action games out there who managed to do different difficulty right, hence in this context of my own personal pet peeve I'm more or less speak of those dumbfucks demanding and supporting easy modes for Soulsborne games, and the most recent Sekiro: Shadows Dies Twice.
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,185
Location
Bjørgvin
When you play an Alpha demi-god, who can kill thousands of enemies in an hour with a hand gun, and who is the only man who can Save the Universe, but you can't traverse a ledge that is half a meter high.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
Well, you can save/exit anytime you want. You just can't go back to that save if something happens in-game. So you don't need to wait for a checkpoint to quit the game. (maybe I'm wrong about Dark Souls, but Demon's Souls was like that). So it's not some kind of checkpoint-only system. You quit - you get back to the same spot.

You can quit anytime you want, yes, but you can't save/load anytime you want. When you get insta-killed by surprise new enemies you have to redo a bunch of content just to get there and try again. It's tedious console bullshit I can't stand.
 

Nifft Batuff

Prophet
Joined
Nov 14, 2018
Messages
3,169
Do you remember when in old PC games saving everywhere and quicksaves were considered as a given? oh... I feel so old now.
 

cosmicray

Savant
Joined
Jan 20, 2019
Messages
436
You can quit anytime you want, yes, but you can't save/load anytime you want. When you get insta-killed by surprise new enemies you have to redo a bunch of content just to get there and try again. It's tedious console bullshit I can't stand.
Checkpoints are console bullshit, but I think that's not the case here when the game was designed around that. It's Mega Man formula in disguise. That's probably the point of the game to get insta-killed. That's not a surprise obviously, but saving in Dark Souls was not on the table either way.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
Checkpoints are console bullshit, but I think that's not the case here when the game was designed around that. It's Mega Man formula in disguise. That's probably the point of the game to get insta-killed. That's not a surprise obviously, but saving in Dark Souls was not on the table either way.

How does being designed around it change anything? If it weren't designed around it then it would be better, because there would probably be a quick-save mod or something. The fact it's designed around repetition, repeating large sections to try something specific again and again, is what I hate. The point I quit was where I beat a boss, traveled a long way to a new area, and then was immediately killed by surprise sneak enemies who backstabbed me in one hit. It's not only designed to make you redo areas over and over, it's designed to surprise kill you to make you repeat content just to learn wtf to do. In any other genre that would be called bad design, the player having no idea what to do the first time, but because it's Dark Souls it's a good thing somehow.
 

cosmicray

Savant
Joined
Jan 20, 2019
Messages
436
It is also bad design then. But there is difference between "by design" and technical handicap. And I think the reason for not having saves(only checkpoints) matters.
 

cretin

Magister
Douchebag!
Joined
Apr 20, 2019
Messages
1,347
bad visual intelligibility in shooters. I.E the ability to accurately discern/display what is going on in the screenspace. Over the past 5 years or so theres been a spate of shooters that have a bunch of pretty (obnoxious) PP and fancy lighting but are eyesores to look at for long periods of time and even worse to play. I stopped playing games like Tarkov because it didnt matter what settings i put it on, everything past 20-30m turns into a blurry pixel mess (for contrast, rising storm 2 vietnam has fantastic visual intelligibility) and the color palette is a literal pain to me.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
It is also bad design then. But there is difference between "by design" and technical handicap. And I think the reason for not having saves(only checkpoints) matters.

I think it was a technical/design limitation back in the NES days and whatnot, which got people used to it and nostalgic for it, so a lot of modern games in typically console genres follow suit.
 

Max Damage

Savant
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
658
Reversed difficulty curve, whether intentional or not, always sucks: what's the point in keeping (re)playing when first couple levels/hours are harder than anything afterwards? Never could play something like Stone Soup or Binding of Isaac for long because you end up being too powerful and just faceroll mid-endgame, by that point finishing a run is just a formality instead of achievement.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,052
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
It is also bad design then. But there is difference between "by design" and technical handicap. And I think the reason for not having saves(only checkpoints) matters.

I think it was a technical/design limitation back in the NES days and whatnot, which got people used to it and nostalgic for it, so a lot of modern games in typically console genres follow suit.

Fun fact: the original Tomb Raider had "save crystals" as checkpoints in the PlayStation version, and save and load everywhere in the PC version.
So here's a game where you can directly see that the hardware necessitated the use of checkpoints, as the PC version doesn't use them.
 

Machocruz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
4,318
Location
Hyperborea
Resources that aren't scarce - every AAA game that claims to have resource scarcity.

When we started seeing an abundance of 3 character parties and a dearth of 6 character parties in RPGs

Wall hax in stealth games.

The idea that RPGs are "about freedom" when in fact they are defined as much by limitations.
 

sparq_beam

Guest
bad visual intelligibility in shooters. I.E the ability to accurately discern/display what is going on in the screenspace. Over the past 5 years or so theres been a spate of shooters that have a bunch of pretty (obnoxious) PP and fancy lighting but are eyesores to look at for long periods of time and even worse to play. I stopped playing games like Tarkov because it didnt matter what settings i put it on, everything past 20-30m turns into a blurry pixel mess (for contrast, rising storm 2 vietnam has fantastic visual intelligibility) and the color palette is a literal pain to me.

And then developers have to add glowing auras so that you don't miss the important items, using that as an easy way out of properly designing the visuals. Compare that to how obvious the precious loot is in the Thief games, even before you get close enough to see the comparably subtle usability highlight. Older 3D games looked less real but because of their simpler graphics they were much more "readable". I find that Half-Life 2 is better than other modern games in this respect.
 

cosmicray

Savant
Joined
Jan 20, 2019
Messages
436
Concerning Thief. In modern games you have a more detailed surroundings/decoration, so usable items could get genuinely lost. Besides, even original Thief, to my surprise, had highlight on usable items. Although, it probably was because you couldn't judge at what distance you could "use" an item, which would make stealing harder than it already was.

Oh, and pet peeves:
- Starting campaign before I could change any settings to my liking. Immersion my ass.
- Mentioned already, but non-pausable cutscenes.
- No option to disable achievement, trophy or other notifications. Hate this stuff.
 

sparq_beam

Guest
Besides, even original Thief, to my surprise, had highlight on usable items. Although, it probably was because you couldn't judge at what distance you could "use" an item, which would make stealing harder than it already was.

Right, but it's subtler than say, the glowing golden aura that usable items have in Bioshock. It looks like just an increase in value of the color, and, more importantly, it only activates when the item becomes usable. It seems to me like a reasonably elegant solution, maybe even better than a prompt.

Some modern games allow you to remove usability highlights, but then the game is not designed around that mode. Same goes for minimap markers: I suspect that using this as a crutch causes games to have less intuitive level design, so having an option to remove them isn't a complete solution.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
Some modern games allow you to remove usability highlights, but then the game is not designed around that mode. Same goes for minimap markers: I suspect that using this as a crutch causes games to have less intuitive level design, so having an option to remove them isn't a complete solution.

I remember one mission in Dishonored, I believe it was a DLC mission, where if you had objective markers and highlights turned off you literally had no idea what to do because the safe code was hidden behind a breakable item. That's probably the only example in Dishonored, Bioshock or Deus Ex where turning that stuff off effected me negatively though, I think they 99% work fine. Bethesda quest markers on the other hand...
 

Chimera

Augur
Joined
Feb 19, 2007
Messages
109
Location
A fallen nation...
Cutscenes, cinematic or otherwise, that negate or mitigate your actions, determine your course or otherwise remove your volition as a player.

I am sick of being "ambushed" in situations my character could have avoided; of being struck or knocked-down by an assailant lurking behind a door or popping out from behind a box. I detest those that have you or your party surrender when surrounded by a hostile force, often comprised of mere mooks that would be slaughtered with minimal effort, if only you were given a chance to actually PLAY the game. I loathe the sheer amount of games that force you into combat situations that can be won, only to immediately transition into a scene where you collapse in defeat, the villain rants about the futility of your struggle and you're left to gnash your teeth in impotent frustration...

-----------------------------------------------------

Plotlines, or character arcs, that involve some measure of "respect for life" or whatnot, often asking that you feel remorse for the loss of an individual or plot-pivotal group... all whilst casually ignoring the veritable slew of corpses in your wake. I've seen this particularly simpering type of drek cropping up repeatedly of late and it's quite jarring. The latest iterations of Tomb Raider, for instance, or the Far Cry games in which it's even more absurd given that they track your kills... oh, the humanity, Character X has perished! Don't you feel like a monster? What do you mean the in-game stat-tracker says you've already slain 428 other people? No, no, they're irrelevant, but this one, THIS one has changed you forever!
 
Last edited:

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
Plotlines, or character arcs, that involve some measure of "respect for life" or whatnot, often asking that you feel remorse for the loss of an individual or plot-pivotal group... all whilst casually ignoring the veritable slew of corpses in your wake. I've seen this particularly simpering type of drek cropping up repeatedly of late and it's quite jarring. The latest iterations of Tomb Raider, for instance, or the Far Cry games in which it's even more absurd given that they track your kills... oh, the humanity, Character X has perished! Don't you feel like a monster? What do you mean the in-game stat-tracker says you've already slain 428 other people? No, no, they're irrelevant, but this one, THIS one has changed you forever!

This is especially annoying when they make you spare a bad guy who comes back and causes more trouble down the line. Movies do that stupid shit too. Drives me nuts.
 

zwanzig_zwoelf

Graverobber Foundation
Developer
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Messages
3,086
Location
デゼニランド
47a0b98e9abc0cf6ce5f022e11646a62.png
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,052
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Some modern games allow you to remove usability highlights, but then the game is not designed around that mode. Same goes for minimap markers: I suspect that using this as a crutch causes games to have less intuitive level design, so having an option to remove them isn't a complete solution.

I remember one mission in Dishonored, I believe it was a DLC mission, where if you had objective markers and highlights turned off you literally had no idea what to do because the safe code was hidden behind a breakable item. That's probably the only example in Dishonored, Bioshock or Deus Ex where turning that stuff off effected me negatively though, I think they 99% work fine. Bethesda quest markers on the other hand...

It probably was the first mission in The Knife of Dunwall, where you can buy a piece of intel before the mission that tells you a safe code is written on a wall, but there's breakable wood in front of that wall and the note doesn't tell you where exactly the wall is. It's not a necessary code to complete the mission but it still irked me to no end that I couldn't find it. I finally googled and checked a walkthrough rather than activate those idiotic markers :M

Other than that, the Dishonored series is very good at providing visual clues without needing to use markers or wallhack abilities. You can play these games with markers switched off and it doesn't feel like the game was designed with markers in mind.
 

Hellion

Arcane
Joined
Feb 5, 2013
Messages
1,582
"Tiered" Boss Fights. You fight your enemy, lower his health by 2/3, then suddenly you get a short cutscene (with an obligatory 'OMG HE'S SO POWERFUL" speech despite kicking the enemy's ass in like 3 seconds), his health bar is replenished and he's ON FIRE NOW. Resume fighting, lower his health by 2/3 again, his health bar replenishes once again and now HE SPEWS LAVA TOO. You fight him again 1-2 more times like this before he actually dies. OMG SUCH SUSPENSE, VERY COMBAT DESIGN, SO EXCITEMENT

I also hate it when super-obvious choices are not available during quests because the creators wanted you to proceed only in a certain way. X dude wants you to steal Y item from Z company, it's glaringly obvious that X person is up to no good and will probably double-cross you in the end but you have no option whatsoever to pursue that thought and the only way to proceed is to steal the item. Then when you return the item to X, you get a mini-speech of "HAR HAR, YOU GULLIBLE FOOL, I AM ACTUALLY THE BAD GUY HERE" and you fight him. Bitch I called that outcome from the beginning, ffs.
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,185
Location
Bjørgvin
I also hate it when super-obvious choices are not available during quests because the creators wanted you to proceed only in a certain way. X dude wants you to steal Y item from Z company, it's glaringly obvious that X person is up to no good and will probably double-cross you in the end but you have no option whatsoever to pursue that thought and the only way to proceed is to steal the item. Then when you return the item to X, you get a mini-speech of "HAR HAR, YOU GULLIBLE FOOL, I AM ACTUALLY THE BAD GUY HERE" and you fight him. Bitch I called that outcome from the beginning, ffs.

The reason why I will never replay the Tribunal expansion for Morrowind.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom