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.

Decline What is the single worst, most annoying design choice in a game?

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,147
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
For RPGs, sequences that completely remove player agency for the sake of "plot".

The worst one IMO being the "forced captivity via obvious trap that bypasses game mechanics but it's the only way to progress the plot". At least some of the other crappy plot railroads still serve a purpose (i.e. main character cutscene incompetence to keep the villain alive). The forced capture + subsequent jail break almost never lead to anything fun mechanically or interesting narratively.
If a designer really want to do a prison escape plot, they should either:
  1. It's perfectly acceptable to go the Bethesda route and start a game inside a prison. It makes a lot more sense for you to be captured unawares before you become a powerhouse, and captivity makes for a convenient launching off point and impetus for character development that will follow. The restrictions on gameplay mechanics also tie in nicely with a tutorial section.
  2. Have some reason to deliberately let yourself get captured, such as: You have to get to someone who is already incarcerated, either to break him out, grab info, et cetera. You have to get something (like a map) that is hidden in the prison. You need to kill/enhanced interrogate a prison guard or administrator. It also generally doesn't make sense for someone to spare their political rivals an execution, so a false identity is also a must for this kind of plot.

When it comes to capture scenes, IIRC Dragon Age did it pretty well.

The encounter where you're supposed to lose and get captured can be won. It's extremely hard, bordering impossible, but if you manage to win - be it legit or by cheating - you skip the capture scene.
 

ELEXmakesMeHard

Learned
Joined
Jun 19, 2021
Messages
807
Inserting this guy and his fucking quest.

Darven.png
 

KateMicucci

Arcane
Joined
Sep 2, 2017
Messages
1,676
For RPGs, sequences that completely remove player agency for the sake of "plot".

The worst one IMO being the "forced captivity via obvious trap that bypasses game mechanics but it's the only way to progress the plot". At least some of the other crappy plot railroads still serve a purpose (i.e. main character cutscene incompetence to keep the villain alive). The forced capture + subsequent jail break almost never lead to anything fun mechanically or interesting narratively.
If a designer really want to do a prison escape plot, they should either:
  1. It's perfectly acceptable to go the Bethesda route and start a game inside a prison. It makes a lot more sense for you to be captured unawares before you become a powerhouse, and captivity makes for a convenient launching off point and impetus for character development that will follow. The restrictions on gameplay mechanics also tie in nicely with a tutorial section.
  2. Have some reason to deliberately let yourself get captured, such as: You have to get to someone who is already incarcerated, either to break him out, grab info, et cetera. You have to get something (like a map) that is hidden in the prison. You need to kill/enhanced interrogate a prison guard or administrator. It also generally doesn't make sense for someone to spare their political rivals an execution, so a false identity is also a must for this kind of plot.

When it comes to capture scenes, IIRC Dragon Age did it pretty well.

The encounter where you're supposed to lose and get captured can be won. It's extremely hard, bordering impossible, but if you manage to win - be it legit or by cheating - you skip the capture scene.
I remember winning and it wasn't that hard.
 

Pegultagol

Erudite
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
1,183
Location
General Gaming
I can say that celebrity cameos or borrowing their likeness for games has absolutely no redeeming quality and possibly the single worst design choice available unless it's Captain Picard in Star Trek NG games.
 

Hobknobling

Learned
Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
356
Bad itemization already got mentioned multiple times in this thread, but I would like to add that it also goes beyond what the stats say. Most games have very uninspired and flat item designs. Real life Roman Empire was a pitti uomo fashion event compared to most fantasy worlds. There are exceptions of course.

For example, I really liked these neckguards in Witcher 2 and I was absolutely baffled that Witcher 3 had nothing like this:

image.png
 

Lt Broccoli

Educated
Joined
Feb 8, 2022
Messages
75
Level Scaling.
'Modern Sensibilities' written in Historic/Medieval Settings.
NPCs with nonsensical movement/placement.
Poor path-finding.
Uninspired Voice Acting.
Lazy Writing.
 

Not.AI

Learned
Joined
Dec 21, 2019
Messages
305
"celebrity cameos or borrowing their likeness for games has absolutely no redeeming quality"

What about in cyberpunk?
 

user

Savant
Joined
Jan 22, 2019
Messages
839
Level scaling takes the cake. Close second is abundance of resources, that makes decision making and other mechanics meaningless.
 

laclongquan

Arcane
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
1,870,153
Location
Searching for my kidnapped sister
Huge loading composite map. I am speaking of NWN2 SOZ overworld map where you load 200+ sub maps whenever you get out to the worldmap. This was inherited somewhat in Baldur's Gate Reloaded module where Beregost load the same 50+ submap, but not BG city because they divide into each subsector, with each has about 20+ submap. Loading time much reduced in case of latter.

Honestly, the main reason I dont replay SOZ is entirely due to that huge loading time~
 

Not.AI

Learned
Joined
Dec 21, 2019
Messages
305
(Does any game have long loading times now? NVMe pro drives are so blazing fast ...)

I liked how Gothic 2 did loading. Only one place where a relatively long loading screen and everything else loads on the fly.

Actually, good point. I really, really, really dislike how most 3D games require loading at entering or exiting buildings. Not because of fade to black or not, but because the gameplay changes.

The doorway, specifically, is no longer part of gameplay.

Not a dealbreaker obviously but way too close to it.
 

Chimera

Augur
Joined
Feb 19, 2007
Messages
113
Location
A fallen nation...
Escort quests in which the NPC moves at a pace that is out of sync with your own.

I refer specifically to those games wherein your character can typically walk and sprint, yet the NPC is faster than your walk animation and slower than your sprint. This inevitably forces you to stutter-step beside them, frustratingly demanding excessive input.


To be fair, the issue has been addressed in myriad fashions over the years, which merely serves to make its reappearance more aggravating. I recall games in which, for example...

• the NPC explicitly matches the movement speed of the player's avatar
• the player can deliberately remain in close proximity, resulting in their avatar moving in tandem with the NPC
• the NPC's movement can be expedited by the player intervening, such as carrying them
 

Totktospit

Educated
Joined
Feb 18, 2022
Messages
101
Location
Moscow
Run-around quests with necessary loading screens to make injury worth. And in general filler side quests. They add only wasted time.
 

Zlaja

Arcane
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
5,730
Location
Swedex
One thing that really disappoints me every single time is abundance of resources. The really bad cases, where this happens early on in the game, tend to completely fuck up my favorite pastime in games, which is looting. Hard to continue enjoying something once it starts to feel pointless.

Romance in cRPG. Every single time it makes me sick and I want to quit the game. I hate this shit, I don‘t play to feel even more like an awkward freak

That's suprising considering your username.
 

Blaine

Cis-Het Oppressor
Patron
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
1,874,666
Location
Roanoke, VA
Grab the Codex by the pussy
RTwP combat

Could you get past that for BG2?

I much prefer turn-based combat by far, but have to confess that in BG the RTwP doesn't bother me at all.

Because you are a normal person who understands that, while TB is a cleaner system, there are shitty TB games and excellent RTwP games

Everyone knows that a RTwP RPG can be good. It's just a crying shame when an excellent game could have been even better had it been designed with TB combat rather than RTwP.

Furthermore, a botched implementation of RTwP completely ruined Arcanum's combat, and for that, RTwP can never be fully accepted as kosher by anyone who isn't a massive newfag. Had Troika been able to focus on a TB implementation, the result would almost certainly have been much less disastrous.

I've explained this before, because it seems everyone has forgotten (or, more often, never knew in the first place due to being newfags who think Oblivion was the world's first RPG): With the sole exception of Darklands, in which RTwP was truly a choice and an innovation, RTwP isn't merely a preference, an alternative, or a different approach to implementing combat. It was born as a bastardized compromise to make RPGs seem more ACKSHUN-y. You see, in the late 1990s and early 2000s, there was immense pressure for games to be fully 3D, to be full of ACKSHUN!, to have lots of CINEMATIC CUTSCENES, etc. The Infinity Engine RPGs all utilized RTwP because studio execs thought that HEART-POUNDING ACKSHUN would help cRPGs, traditionally turn-based affairs, to sell better. Prior to this period, virtually all proper cRPGs were TB.

Sadly, this strategy worked, which is why the hobby is now full of morons who think that there's nothing wrong with RTwP and who have no idea why TB is clearly superior in every way. These baboons would never have gravitated toward cRPGs in the first place without the appearance of ACKSHUN! and a CINEMATIC EXPERIENCE! to draw them in. RTwP diehards fall loosely but squarely into the category of graphics whores.

Have you ever seen a hardcore wargame—an actual wargame in the vein of hexes, dozens or hundreds of chits, varicolored markers, a thick instruction manual, etc.—employ a real-time conflict system of any kind? I haven't, and that's because TB systems always allow for much more nuance and detail as conflicts unfold. When everything must happen on a second-to-second basis, detail is omitted wholesale, and this propagates through every facet of the mechanics. TB always allows for much more granularity of mechanics and breadth and depth of action (even if this potential isn't always fully tapped by an individual TB game).

Action-based cRPGs aren't bad per se, but the direct replacement of TB with RTwP is bad. That's the real problem, and it's why I'm such an aggressive asshole. The morons' dogshit compromise ACKSHUN! mechanics largely supplanted TB entirely.

But don't worry, Gen Z has an even smaller attention span than any previous generation. To them, RTwP games are unbearably slow and tedious. Eventually, full-blown CINEMATIC ACKSHUN will be the ONLY approach to combat—and in the gaming mainstream, it just about already is.
 

Harthwain

Magister
Joined
Dec 13, 2019
Messages
4,798
Have you ever seen a hardcore wargame—an actual wargame in the vein of hexes, dozens or hundreds of chits, varicolored markers, a thick instruction manual, etc.—employ a real-time conflict system of any kind? I haven't, and that's because [...]
Steel Division series. It doesn't have hexes or chits, but that's because a real-time game doesn't need them*. Besides that it's as close to a pretty hardcore wargame (on operational level) as far as simulation of warfare is concerned.

Other examples: Men of War series, R.U.S.E., Wargame series.

Hexes, chits, turns, etc. are all the by-products of the boardgame way of playing, because you can't have real-time at the table (and some people are so used to playing this way they simply can't imagine any different way of playing, so they end up recreating what they know). In a video game that's an entirely different story. I have my own apprehension when it comes to real-time games, but it has nothing to do with the alleged inability of a real-time conflict system to fulfill the role an actual wargame. Personally I'd love to see more phase-based games.
 

Totktospit

Educated
Joined
Feb 18, 2022
Messages
101
Location
Moscow
RTwP combat

Could you get past that for BG2?

I much prefer turn-based combat by far, but have to confess that in BG the RTwP doesn't bother me at all.

Because you are a normal person who understands that, while TB is a cleaner system, there are shitty TB games and excellent RTwP games

Everyone knows that a RTwP RPG can be good. It's just a crying shame when an excellent game could have been even better had it been designed with TB combat rather than RTwP.

Furthermore, a botched implementation of RTwP completely ruined Arcanum's combat, and for that, RTwP can never be fully accepted as kosher by anyone who isn't a massive newfag. Had Troika been able to focus on a TB implementation, the result would almost certainly have been much less disastrous.

I've explained this before, because it seems everyone has forgotten (or, more often, never knew in the first place due to being newfags who think Oblivion was the world's first RPG): With the sole exception of Darklands, in which RTwP was truly a choice and an innovation, RTwP isn't merely a preference, an alternative, or a different approach to implementing combat. It was born as a bastardized compromise to make RPGs seem more ACKSHUN-y. You see, in the late 1990s and early 2000s, there was immense pressure for games to be fully 3D, to be full of ACKSHUN!, to have lots of CINEMATIC CUTSCENES, etc. The Infinity Engine RPGs all utilized RTwP because studio execs thought that HEART-POUNDING ACKSHUN would help cRPGs, traditionally turn-based affairs, to sell better. Prior to this period, virtually all proper cRPGs were TB.

Sadly, this strategy worked, which is why the hobby is now full of morons who think that there's nothing wrong with RTwP and who have no idea why TB is clearly superior in every way. These baboons would never have gravitated toward cRPGs in the first place without the appearance of ACKSHUN! and a CINEMATIC EXPERIENCE! to draw them in. RTwP diehards fall loosely but squarely into the category of graphics whores.

Have you ever seen a hardcore wargame—an actual wargame in the vein of hexes, dozens or hundreds of chits, varicolored markers, a thick instruction manual, etc.—employ a real-time conflict system of any kind? I haven't, and that's because TB systems always allow for much more nuance and detail as conflicts unfold. When everything must happen on a second-to-second basis, detail is omitted wholesale, and this propagates through every facet of the mechanics. TB always allows for much more granularity of mechanics and breadth and depth of action (even if this potential isn't always fully tapped by an individual TB game).

Action-based cRPGs aren't bad per se, but the direct replacement of TB with RTwP is bad. That's the real problem, and it's why I'm such an aggressive asshole. The morons' dogshit compromise ACKSHUN! mechanics largely supplanted TB entirely.

But don't worry, Gen Z has an even smaller attention span than any previous generation. To them, RTwP games are unbearably slow and tedious. Eventually, full-blown CINEMATIC ACKSHUN will be the ONLY approach to combat—and in the gaming mainstream, it just about already is.
RT and RTWP indeed don't provide opportunities to really handle the same amount of details as TB. But there are still leather two points, making it not so significant.
First, many RPG combat systems are even more simplistic than some real time strategies combat systems, don't count terrain advantages, position advantages, moral and so on.
And the second (the weakest argument) is that it's quite immersion breaking to spend a lot of time on decisions for several seconds (actual turns cab be quite longer, and their correct representation will make RTWP unplayable).
Personally I prefer TB, even when it is not strictly necessary. And I see, that TB games often lack some simple things like changing animation speed, adequate log and so on.
 

bobocrunch

Educated
Joined
Dec 26, 2018
Messages
148
devs always talk about voice acting being expensive and then have 10000 voice actors that just drone on and on about inane bullshit that you skip past after skimming the subtitles
only recent rpg with good VA ive played was expeditions rome, the writing was kept concise and the voice actors didnt take 10 hours to state something
 

Totktospit

Educated
Joined
Feb 18, 2022
Messages
101
Location
Moscow
devs always talk about voice acting being expensive and then have 10000 voice actors that just drone on and on about inane bullshit that you skip past after skimming the subtitles
only recent rpg with good VA ive played was expeditions rome, the writing was kept concise and the voice actors didnt take 10 hours to state something
Voice acting is only the part of the trend of aping cinematography in games. All this is rather peripheral to the core of the games but take a lion share of resources. Cut scenes even crappy need additional work, somebody has to make assets of various useles shit for decorations, there more game is graphicaly advanced (in terms of photorealism) the more work is required. Also there is a tendency to take cinema-like plots for the games.
 

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