Video Game Pet Peeves

[Alyxx Thorne]

It annoys me to no end when people rush ahead without a care for others, just to see how quickly they'll pass a map or to just piss others off. This is supposed to be CO-OP, not an [insert game name here] version of Speedrunners!

Especially worst offenders are in Sven Co-op. I'm serious: the longer you play, the more likely you'll encounter an annoying speedrunner who finishes a map way before you even reach a halfway point.

 

Now, don't get me wrong: I'm not against speedruns. I do like them, actually; hence why Games Done Quick is awesome. HOWEVER, unless there is a server specifically for that, SPEEDRUNNING and CO-OP DO NOT MIX.

I agree, speedrunning is something you can do in single player. In co-op you're supposed to be a team.

[Psychotic Ninja]

It annoys me to no end when people rush ahead without a care for others, just to see how quickly they'll pass a map or to just piss others off. This is supposed to be CO-OP, not an [insert game name here] version of Speedrunners!

Especially worst offenders are in Sven Co-op. I'm serious: the longer you play, the more likely you'll encounter an annoying speedrunner who finishes a map way before you even reach a halfway point.

 

Now, don't get me wrong: I'm not against speedruns. I do like them, actually; hence why Games Done Quick is awesome. HOWEVER, unless there is a server specifically for that, SPEEDRUNNING and CO-OP DO NOT MIX.

 

+2

[The Signless]

My other Pet Peeves in MMOs are when they invite me to a party, they usually all leave, making me die over and over. Even when i invite a person over, it still happens! It's a real problem for me, especially and run into these in Dragon Ball Online Global. It became a whole problem for me to join a party, but i hope this dose not ever apply to Guilds, ever.

 

Besides, it would be suck if they did that too. Plus, i have to forcefully solo any quests with skill and stealth because for me, joining a party is a pain in my ass and i don't want to risk being left out in a short-lived party. Overall, fuck being left out after everyone has left and fuck the people in the MMO Dragon Ball Online Global that gave me a hard time trying to become full on trolls in a party and i became a marching soldier being left out in the dust.

[Alyxx Thorne]

I only play with people I know in any multiplayer game, including MMOs. If you're not on my friends list, you can fuck off.

[BTGBullseye]

I only play with people I know in any multiplayer game, including MMOs. If you're not on my friends list, you can fuck off.

+1

[Icebox]

My other Pet Peeves in MMOs are when they invite me to a party, they usually all leave, making me die over and over. Even when i invite a person over, it still happens! It's a real problem for me, especially and run into these in Dragon Ball Online Global. It became a whole problem for me to join a party, but i hope this dose not ever apply to Guilds, ever.

 

Besides, it would be suck if they did that too. Plus, i have to forcefully solo any quests with skill and stealth because for me, joining a party is a pain in my ass and i don't want to risk being left out in a short-lived party. Overall, fuck being left out after everyone has left and fuck the people in the MMO Dragon Ball Online Global that gave me a hard time trying to become full on trolls in a party and i became a marching soldier being left out in the dust.

 

 

On a similar note, people in a party who keep going AFK because they are busy doing something else.

[Templar Knight]

My pet peeves in gaming are:

 

1-Inconsistent narratives and poor writing in general: This really irks me in AAA games particularly, since they should have the money and resources to afford and find good writers. Some recent examples of where this pissed me off in games were in Watch_Dogs, The Order: 1886, The Evil Within (watched, not played, that's how bad I thought the writing was), Bioshock Infinite: Burial at Sea Part 2, and Batman: Arkham Knight.

 

Watch_Dogs I felt the story became incredibly inconsistent and poorly mid to late-game. It was already on shaky ground from the start since they didn't really establish Aiden very well, but only got worse later. For instance, how exactly is a hacker of any kind supposed to hack The Bunker? I thought they very clearly said that it was designed to be an "outside the net" viewing station where basically anyone who controls it has unlimited access without it being traceable back, the ultimate means of controlling an entirely connected city. But then we have an Ex-Dedsec member who just so happens to be able to do it and basically do nothing meaningful with it other than stall the story for another hour or so? Or the fact that apparently ace hacker and criminal Aiden and his buddy had no fucking clue who planned the hit on them when they know who the only Mob-boss in town is, how fucking hard would have been to figure out that this guy owned the fucking building they were robbing? Mob bosses love to show off how much property they own, this guy was throwing big city parties in the place for fuck's sake, but it takes them over 8 months and the whole game's story to figure it out?! Or the climax, where apparently Dedsec doesn't hold a monopoly on gaining access to hacking everything in the city, any fucker can figure it out with enough time, begging the question as to why the hell Aiden even needed Clara in the first place. Or perhaps the worst: Aiden is supposed to be vigilante, yet NOBODY in the game EVER refers to him by his vigilante name "Street Fox", the only reason we know the fucking name even existed is basically they say it in the end news credits. Everyone in the news knows who he is apparently, and he may as well have not even bothered with a fucking face mask.

 

Bioshock Infinite's second DLC writing felt incredibly lame, campy, and hamfisted. I understand the company was basically bankrupt and they wanted to tie it all together, but FFS. They had literally in the last two games made a concept that guaranteed that the series could continue indefinitely (a la Skyward Sword style), and they throw it all away in less than two DLCs by basically saying: "Oh, she just gave up her infinite powers to come back to life after getting killed in the most ridiculous way possible, to save one girl whom she doesn't even end up saving." Fucking trash.

 

The Evil Within's story pissed me off to no end, since it felt like the plot was just doing whatever it wanted at any given point. The antagonist might as well have been God with the amount of plot powers and plot armour he has and begs the reason as to what the fuck kind of chance did any of the protagonists have. Actually plot armour seems to appear and disappear at random for a bunch of characters in the game. The story also makes no sense. If the goal was to give the antagonist's brain a host body, why even bothering hooking up more than the one guy to the machine and instead just kill all these other people who came in? And the ending is entirely sequel-bait with how many loose ends it leaves, so wtf.

 

The Order: 1886, very poorly executed story despite having some interesting ideas, prime example of a game where looks can kill a plot. The writing is heavily contrived to make things happen in particular ways, and leaves a shitload of loose ends assuming that its going to get a sequel when it never will. I hate that last part in films, and I hate it in games.

 

Batman: Arkham Knight, I felt that they pulled a cheap shot bringing Joker back, not that Mark Hamil and Joker aren't amazing, but that it basically means they were completely full of shit in Arkham City saying it would be his last performance, and basically they were just pulling a cheap shot to sucker fans in and immediately earn A+'s. I hate it when creators blatantly lie to the public on stuff, even if the stuff turns out to be good later. Otherwise, I hated the fact that they contrived a way to basically just turn Gotham into Arkham City 2.0, what the fuck is the point of setting the game in Gotham if you're going to just make the city empty of civilians? I want a living breathing Gotham to play as Batman in since that's the next step up after a city sectioned off to be run by criminals, not just the same fucking thing again only slightly bigger.

 

2-When AAAs give me less value when asking for more money than Indies: The Indie game market has spoiled me for AAA gaming, because I've played such amazing Indies for fractions of the prices of AAAs, I hold AAAs to even higher standards since they've got more resources and more money. If a AAA title cannot deliver a better experience for more money, I get pissed. The Witcher 3 is the gold standard of which I hold AAAs against in terms of top quality for money in modern games. I got nearly 300 hours out of a single playthrough, quality writing (I have a few knit-picks with Eredin as an overarching antagonist, but overall it was very good), great VAs, amazing expansions that were even more worth the money, a whole set of free DLC, great music, and it looked and played like a treat. Any game that doesn't provide me with a more for my money when asking for more when I know I've played better games made on less and ask for less really irks me as a customer.

 

3-Most cash-in titles: With only a couple of exceptions, I hate all movie cash-in games because of traditionally how little effort is put into them. The only exceptions I have are The Golden Compass (since I think they actually made the game WAY better and more detailed than the movie by some amazing circumstance, even though it still has its problems), the earlier Ghostbusters game (the recent one is a shitty cash-in), and maybe one or two more I cannot recall.

 

4-Badly designed games or with sections of broken difficulty. Tough and challenging games I can take, I do not like it when the game basically gives you a big middle finger and says: "Yeah, try and get past this easily, bitch." Like Dark Souls, there are precisely 2 instances of broken difficulty where the game's design literally fucks you up rather than actual skill. The flying buttress in Anor Londo with the two archers who apparently are standing on ledges smaller than their feet, and who will potentially keep trying to shoot you even if you're right next to them, and The Bed of Chaos' final stage with how fucking ridiculous the jump you have to make is when the boss can knock you out of the air mid-jump or kill you in basically two hits, OR even kill you when you've landed and are trying to get through the fucking roots because of ridiculous hit boxes. Both of those sections are trolling the player with ridiculous mechanics that in any other circumstance would be considered broken. Other instances are like AI that Ross encountered in Polaris Snow-Cross will they will literally cheat and the player basically has no way to win other than cheating themselves.

[rairii]

It annoys me to no end when people rush ahead without a care for others, just to see how quickly they'll pass a map or to just piss others off. This is supposed to be CO-OP, not an [insert game name here] version of Speedrunners!

Especially worst offenders are in Sven Co-op. I'm serious: the longer you play, the more likely you'll encounter an annoying speedrunner who finishes a map way before you even reach a halfway point.

 

Now, don't get me wrong: I'm not against speedruns. I do like them, actually; hence why Games Done Quick is awesome. HOWEVER, unless there is a server specifically for that, SPEEDRUNNING and CO-OP DO NOT MIX.

I agree, speedrunning is something you can do in single player. In co-op you're supposed to be a team.

If you can speedrun a co-op game then by all means you should be allowed to, if there aren't any sections that require multiple players to pass then the game isn't designed to be played co-operatively and it's purely on the developers

If you don't want people to rush ahead of you, play a private game with friends.

[TheTron852]

If you can speedrun a co-op game then by all means you should be allowed to

Yes

if there aren't any sections that require multiple players to pass then the game isn't designed to be played co-operatively and it's purely on the developers

Not always

If you don't want people to rush ahead of you, play a private game with friends.

Or find a server where "no rushing" rule is enforced. Don't like the rules? Find another server!

[Meelis13]

4-Badly designed games or with sections of broken difficulty. Tough and challenging games I can take, I do not like it when the game basically gives you a big middle finger and says: "Yeah, try and get past this easily, bitch." Like Dark Souls, there are precisely 2 instances of broken difficulty where the game's design literally fucks you up rather than actual skill. The flying buttress in Anor Londo with the two archers who apparently are standing on ledges smaller than their feet, and who will potentially keep trying to shoot you even if you're right next to them, and The Bed of Chaos' final stage with how fucking ridiculous the jump you have to make is when the boss can knock you out of the air mid-jump or kill you in basically two hits, OR even kill you when you've landed and are trying to get through the fucking roots because of ridiculous hit boxes. Both of those sections are trolling the player with ridiculous mechanics that in any other circumstance would be considered broken. Other instances are like AI that Ross encountered in Polaris Snow-Cross will they will literally cheat and the player basically has no way to win other than cheating themselves.

 

I feel you. Old call of dutys (you know, before game turned into modern s-fest) were great with 1 exception: if you played the game hardest, it turned into near-impossible game. Not because AI was good (although it did make pretty much entire AI army shoot at you), but because of friking grenade spam. You were sitting still in cover for 2 seconds? heres a grenade. And of course since entire enemy army aims at you, you get killed when you move to find another cover.

That said, i dont mind AI actually cheating a bit (because it often needs it), but not to unfair levels

[Selfsurprise]

My pet peeves in gaming are:

 

1-Inconsistent narratives and poor writing in general: This really irks me in AAA games particularly, since they should have the money and resources to afford and find good writers. Some recent examples of where this pissed me off in games were in Watch_Dogs, The Order: 1886, The Evil Within (watched, not played, that's how bad I thought the writing was), Bioshock Infinite: Burial at Sea Part 2, and Batman: Arkham Knight.

I loved this game, but even I thought the character casting and voice acting was pretty appalling, veering into sub-original Resident Evil dialogue territory at times. If it wasn't for horrifying enemy and location design, the unavoidably awesome premise of a world distorted by the mind of a madman, and genuinely tough gameplay that awarded caution and determination on your part, some of the "artistic" choices made with the plot and characters would of been a serious detractor for me.

[Psychotic Ninja]

If you can speedrun a co-op game then by all means you should be allowed to

 

If you have an itch to speed run a game, do it in your own terms. Co-op is meant to be an experience, you're meant to have fun with your friend(s). Dick around even. If you're speedrunning, especially with glitches, you're leaving everyone else behind, and it's not fun.

 

if there aren't any sections that require multiple players to pass then the game isn't designed to be played co-operatively and it's purely on the developers

 

Not really. It's possible the publishers pushed for co-op the last minute, thus the developers didn't have time to put in a proper co-op mode.

 

If you don't want people to rush ahead of you, play a private game with friends.

 

Again, if you have the urge to speedrun, do it on your own terms.

[Templar Knight]

I loved this game, but even I thought the character casting and voice acting was pretty appalling, veering into sub-original Resident Evil dialogue territory at times. If it wasn't for horrifying enemy and location design, the unavoidably awesome premise of a world distorted by the mind of a madman, and genuinely tough gameplay that awarded caution and determination on your part, some of the "artistic" choices made with the plot and characters would of been a serious detractor for me.

 

Yeah, the dialogue really did the game in for me, not even necessarily how it was delivered, but just by the fact that so much of it is redundant and useless and amounts to basically not even saying much at all. Certain character motivations felt very weak or simply very inadequately explained, and the overall script left me just asking constantly: "Okay, what the hell's that supposed to mean?" or "How does that make any sense at all?", and in the end after I watched a full play through, I was left without many satisfactory answers to any of those questions.

 

I do agree the premise was a great idea and the designs were great for the most part and in some cases genuinely horrifying, but then I kept getting ripped out by so many elements that told me that this wasn't taking place in any kind of reality other than whatever reality the plot accepted at any given point in time. Basically what Ross felt during Deus Ex: Human Revolution in terms of story, I felt while watching The Evil Within.

 

IMO its a very difficult concept to pull off on it own, and shitty dialogue and character typing doesn't help make it any easier.

[rairii]

.

 

If you want to play a game with your friends, do it on your own terms.

See? Works both ways.

And no, if publishers did not include at least a trigger that blocks the next area without more than one player present (which is an incredibly simple thing to do even if co-op is tacked on garbage) then it wasn't intended for co-op. Sven co-op in particular has no excuse because that game has been out for 15 YEARS.

 

Not always

You could at least make a point.

[Heliocentrical]

Are we really having one of those "How friends should treat friends" arguments? Why does it matter? Are people only allowed to communicate in a friendly manner and if they don't they obviously hate each other's guts?

 

I was kind of hoping that this thread died since it largely consists anal retentive posts from me and practically everyone agreed that this was an awful thread.

[Psychotic Ninja]

 

If you want to play a game with your friends, do it on your own terms.

 

Yeah, if I want to co-op with a friend, I'll ask them, not force them to co-op with me.

 

Comment about Sven

 

Guess what. It's a mod. For Half-Life 2. A game that didn't have co-op in mind.

[TheTron852]

How about you two stop arguing over my opinion? You come off as people who treat opinions as facts, and therefore do their best to disprove them, and that does not help your reputation in the slightest >_>

I was kind of hoping that this thread died since it largely consists anal retentive posts from me and practically everyone agreed that this was an awful thread.

I was more hoping that that other thread would die. The one with "Mechanics in video games that should die", I mean

And I don't know where you decided that, but I don't think it's an awful thread just because it tends to stride off in arguments

 

Also, that statement:

SPEEDRUNNING AND CO-OP DO NOT MIX"

That was me being stupid (as usual). I meant "DO NOT SPEEDRUN A CO-OP GAME WHEN OTHERS CAN'T".

[rairii]

How about you two stop arguing over my opinion? You come off as people who treat opinions as facts, and therefore do their best to disprove them, and that does not help your reputation in the slightest >_>

I don't get what it is with you (and a few others who act like they've never seen an argument in their life) but it's not against any forum rules to discuss or even argue your opinions. It's like you guys want this place to be a boring circlejerk where everyone thinks the same way and can't have their opinions brought in to question.

 

If you want to play a game with your friends, do it on your own terms.

Yeah, if I want to co-op with a friend, I'll ask them, not force them to co-op with me.

Were you getting at something with this?

 

Comment about Sven

Guess what. It's a mod. For Half-Life 2. A game that didn't have co-op in mind.

First of all, the point of a MOD is to change some aspect of the game, and if it means adding co-op puzzles or at the VERY LEAST a trigger to block progression without multiple players, you can manage that in the period of 17 years.

Not that it matters, but Synergy is the HL2 co-op mod Sven co-op is for HL1

[Heliocentrical]

Alright you guys are welcome to continue your off topic discussion elsewhere via PMs or something else while I do what I do best to get this thread back on topic. Gripe and complain incessantly about minute and unimportant details.

 

* failure/success rolls

All failure/success rolls serve to do is prolong gameplay for a couple seconds until the player succeeds. They aren't engaging on any level and just kind of there for the sake of being there. I hated them back when I played tabletop D&D and I hate them now. At one point when it was my turn to DM I came up with the idea of omitting attack rolls entirely and just went straight for calculating damage rolls. Everyone agreed that the game was much better without them and thus omitting attack rolls became a house rule for all the other players who DMmed. What does that tell you about failure/success rolls in general? They're dumb, useless and do not serve any immersive purposes like they were perceived to be. Failure/Success Rolls for all intents and purposes are archaic, annoying bullshit.

 

* limited inventory space

Look, just let me carry as much stuff as I want. I don't care how realistic it is. Newsflash, realism isn't very fun and in most cases it's just straight up annoying as hell. The only time limited inventory Space was interesting and made sense was in Deus Ex GOTY. In Deus Ex GOTY you had to constantly think about what your approach to the game was and that design philosophy extended all the way to inventory. Well guess what, you don't do that when all your carrying is 20 radscorpion tails that you're going to haul all the way back to town in order to sell them like you do in most RPGs. Every item in Deus Ex GOTY had reason to be carried, Beaver tails do not.

 

* the fucking car from Fallout 2

So technically this falls under limited inventory space but I feel the car from Fallout 2 deserves a special mention as it occupies a very specific circle of game design hell. So let me get this straight, you want limited inventory space and be able to carry everything you come across? Why not just let the player carry everything they want from the get go like I mentioned previously instead of doing mental gymnastic game design? Why are you trying to do two completely opposite styles of inventory design at once? They implicitly work against each other through design. What was done with the Fallout 2 car was just utterly illogical design.

[Psychotic Ninja]

The only excuse FF4 had on limited inventory space is because of hardware limitations. Which is why Square created the Fat Chocobo.