Gaming Tropes That Need to GO

[RockyRan]

Battles where you're supposed to lose... the entire focus of the game is to win battles so areas where the condition to proceed is the exact opposite throws me off. I'll even find myself guessing during the battle if they're supposed to occur leaving me most of the time with "Oh, that boss was just ridiculously overpowered."

People with infinite health. Like main allied npcs in shooters that can literally just stand there and take multiple rockets to the face and then shrug it off kinda breaks immersion, kinda enjoy how Killzone handles it where you actually have to "revive" main characters if they go down. Enemy npcs are even worse though... when the game gives an enemy infinite health so they can stay alive until "important scene x" leaving you wasting time/resources trying to kill it

 

It was one thing that was flat out bad in Tales of Vesperia. I enjoyed the game, but it made the huge, HUGE mistake of making your very first battle an unwinnable one, right after it gave you the rundown on the basics of battling. Bad, bad design decision on that one.

Edited February 18, 2011 by RockyRan

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

Anything without quicksave

 

See now for the most part that has gone. Problem is it's now so common to have quick save that when you play older games it throws you off that you died and have to go back to the start of the game

True, with the exception that first-person shooters have largely switched to a checkpoint system. When I first started playing COD2, I couldn't figure out why F5 wasn't doing anything!

[Bigduo209]

Probably, also the ending of Uncharted 2 was a bit...

 

sappy!

 

Wait, are talking the ending cutscene, boss fight, or the ending set-piece where your falling/sliding?

I hated the boss fight at the end, it was cheap in the harder difficulties and outright underwhelming in every other way. The cutscene at the end though felt right for a game like Uncharted 2.

How about a classic trope that we've only started seeing in recent years?

 

Achievements that can only be gained through multiplayer progression/ stats.

 

 

When I first heard about this I didn't really care- I only really played Halo 3 and Gears 2 online, and I didn't have an achievementsmack-addiction on those, so I just had my fun, forgot about it, and moved on.

 

But more recently, in games like Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory, which I've nearly 100%ed, the only achievements I haven't got are ones that you need to do in multiplayer- which has barely any players online these days.

 

Or the worst? Killzone 2. To get plat you have to be, literally, in the top 5 players on you entire continent's server. You have to be top of the leaderboards. Out of the tens of thousands who play all the time, and the hundreds who play it every day. Fucking ridiculous. I'm fairly sure there's one for being 1st as well. I love the game and have practically all of the singleplayer achievements, but screw that shit.

I see why developers put those achievements/trophies in that way, basically forcing you play the multiplayer. Problem is that it's not gonna stop anyone from going back to play COD or any other game where multiplayer is perceived to be better. Developers need to realize that MP games is something that gamers invest serious time into, and gamers aren't going to set aside that time for smaller titles that aren't known for popular MP.

 

Developers need to set goals that are achievable for both SP and MP. They need stop messing around with the idea of MP if they're not bringing anything new to the table. Focus on adding as much content to the SP portion of a game as possible, not a stupid bullet-point to the box that nobody is ever gonna really care about.

 

Racing them isn't fun. That's how.

 

Edit: I'll put it like this. Where GTA is concerned, have optional races if you want, but don't make it a required mission.

 

And RDR horse racing was required? Seriously?

GTA4 had shitty vehicle handling that was a pseudo-attempt at realism. Previous GTAs already arcade driving that worked well enough, not great but enough to get the job done with enough retries.

 

RPGs having enemies with elemental weaknesses and defenses is kind of the point. So you don't just go through spamming "Fire" all the time. You have to adapt. It is annoying when it's not so obvious that they're immune to certain things.

I hate that in most (if not all) RPGs, I think that's why I can stomach Kingdom Hearts and Pokemon games. Even if they're meant to be easy, they actually have reasonable RPG battles that aren't too overwhelming by normal standards. Basically it still takes a good amount of effort to beat higher-leveled optional enemies (Sephiroth), but it's still an achievable goal.

 

I hate that I even bought 'FF7:Crisis Core' because of it's crappy ass battle-system.

[TheMightyEthan]

The inability to access the load menu during cutscenes in games that let you make choices that affect the outcome. "No! Shit! That's the wrong option! Now I have to wait through 15 minutes of cutscenes before I can load my save and redo the convo..."

[Yantelope]

I just got Borderlands and I was trying to figure out why I liked it so much more than Fallout or Oblivion since they're very similar. I think that the biggest difference is that in Borderlands the enemies don't change their levels. The levels are based on the area you're in. It's very similar to an MMO in that respect. Fallout lets you go in any direction you want and does that by making the enemies just level along side you. I really don't like that because it seems like leveling only makes the game harder. I think that Bethesda really should abandon the old system and move to a Borderlands/WoW style of fixed enemy levels.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Except that enemies leveling with you IS the new system. The old system is doing it by area. I just think there needs to be a balance (and New Vegas did decent with that IMO.)

[deanb]

It's early I can't scour my brain too much in regards to New Vegas but FO3 still had areas that were leveling up with you, but still full of things like deathclaws n supermutants that kept you out until you had later level weapons n skills.

Borderlands had a very linear style to so it could do that. But Bethseda titles you can just kind of pop about wherever, it'd be pretty limiting.

 

brain spurt: Deathclaw quarry right at the start, forces you to go the long way around, tbh I wasn't a fan as it did make the start of the game fairly linear.

 

Anyway Skyrim has caves that stick to a certain level point once you enter them. Which does encourage you to not go and explore every single cave n dungeon while at level 1 n 2 or end game is going to be pretty boring.

[AgamemnonV2]

Bethesda has always had that formula in their game. In Oblivion, enemies have a base level and then it is multiplied depending usually on your own level. The only problem people had with this is that as you became this super-powerful hero with lots of enchanted armor, then bandits started to pop up with mithril and daedric armor and weapons, knocking the stuffing out of you. Also, mudcrabs. Bethesda got the memo that not EVERY enemy should level like that and tweaked it. Ergo, in FO3, there are some specific enemies that always remain difficult fights (i.e. Deathclaws).

 

Gaming tropes that need to go: A game revolves around a beautifully-detailed city. Sometime later, it is destroyed. The end of the game has you coming back to the destroyed and/or pillaged city for the final fight. Prominent developers that LIVE AND BREATHE this trope: Bethesda and Bioware.

 

Something tells me Bethesda and Bioware's old ties extend further than just old employees. Either they use the same writer or both their writers found a book when they worked at Black Isle (or whatever) called "Story Tropes for Dummies." The main point of this trope is always: the people of the major city are conceited, ignorant, etc. and ignore you and your warnings of the impending doom, even when surrounding countrysides are on fire. It's not until the horde is in the city, it's on fire, and people's heads are being put on spikes until the leaders say, "Oh God, they were right!" And even after you save them, they both then like to play the mob role, i.e. the surviving citizens turn into a mob and look for someone to blame. Usually it's you or an integral party member/NPC that you know.

 

Neverwinter Nights and Dragon Age: Origins have nearly identical endings. They both have you finish the game in the war-torn city, romping around familiar areas you had fond memories of, and then it has you slay the Big Bad and bring back order. However, the mob forms and says, "Rargh, we need to execute someone!" and rather than feed the mob the leaders give into their demands to execute someone.

[SanaEquiesterer]

Gaming tropes that need to go: A game revolves around a beautifully-detailed city. Sometime later, it is destroyed. The end of the game has you coming back to the destroyed and/or pillaged city for the final fight. Prominent developers that LIVE AND BREATHE this trope: Bethesda and Bioware.

 

I agree, and on a semi-related note, I think Bioware has used the same formula for their stories long enough now.

 

http://gza.gameriot...._1257581825.png

 

It was illegible when embedded.

 

Some of those points are a bit of a stretch, and yes, they fit the hero's journey story archetype, as most fictional works do. But Bioware has deviated from their methods so little that it has become too obvious. Even some of their puzzles and riddles carry over from one game to another with very few changes.

 

EDIT: Thanks Dean, but I was originally trying one from my Photobucket. Lesson learned.

Edited April 9, 2011 by SanaEquiesterer
not illegible, just you need to click it to go big again :P

[TheMightyEthan]

Even some of their puzzles and riddles carry over from one game to another with very few changes.

You mean like the Tower of Hanoi?

[deanb]

Meh, Bioware (to a degree, the magic is wearing off, and right before a MMO too) have the same knack as nintendo. Manage to recycle games with a few tweaks here n there and get massive praise for it.

It's a rare trait that I imagine many developers are constantly raking their brains trying to figure out what Factor X it is that allows this to happen.

[RockyRan]

Meh, Bioware (to a degree, the magic is wearing off, and right before a MMO too) have the same knack as nintendo. Manage to recycle games with a few tweaks here n there and get massive praise for it.

It's a rare trait that I imagine many developers are constantly raking their brains trying to figure out what Factor X it is that allows this to happen.

 

 

Establishment of trust, I guess. The longer the trust, the more they can get away with.

 

Just look at Nintendo, for instance. Half the stuff they release would get completely destroyed by critics and gamers alike if a dev would've released the same game without the well-known IP they carry. The stuff that flat out tanked (like Wii Music) would've gotten 2.0 scores across the board and called "shovelware".

 

Here's another trope that needs to go: locked content that shouldn't even be locked. Mostly in multiplayer games that feature unlocks. Biggest culprit IMO is Bad Company 2. Why the hell I have to play multiple matches without being able to heal at all to "unlock" the healing-related gadgets. How is this in any way helpful? They're FORCING people to be noob scrubs who can't help the team even if they wanted to. It's like "locking" voice chat and having the game micspam for you until you reach a certain level.

 

Never before has a game gone out of its way to make me play like a noob.

Edited April 9, 2011 by RockyRan

[deanb]

Thing is some companies established just as long get slated too.

Square for example do the same thing, being around just as long. And have many loved games. XII, XIII n XIV have been slated.

Though as I said, Biowares magic touch is fading a bit too, DA2 got a mostly warm reception, but there's a few sites running more in-depth post release reviews on "what went wrong".

[SanaEquiesterer]

Nintendo keep things relatively fresh by comparison since they often have a new piece of hardware to experiment with, I think. And their many second and third party developers allow them to release some titles far enough apart that rehashed ideas aren't too obvious (some series excepted).

 

Companies like Square, and especially Bioware, release the same genre every couple of years, too, but I think because a good RPG depends so much on the story is why it has become more obvious that they're rehashing ideas.

[AgamemnonV2]

Gaming tropes that need to go: A game revolves around a beautifully-detailed city. Sometime later, it is destroyed. The end of the game has you coming back to the destroyed and/or pillaged city for the final fight. Prominent developers that LIVE AND BREATHE this trope: Bethesda and Bioware.

 

I agree, and on a semi-related note, I think Bioware has used the same formula for their stories long enough now.

 

http://gza.gameriot...._1257581825.png

 

It was illegible when embedded.

 

Some of those points are a bit of a stretch, and yes, they fit the hero's journey story archetype, as most fictional works do. But Bioware has deviated from their methods so little that it has become too obvious. Even some of their puzzles and riddles carry over from one game to another with very few changes.

 

EDIT: Thanks Dean, but I was originally trying one from my Photobucket. Lesson learned.

Yeah, I know that graphic. : \ I actually know the guy who created it. And honestly, I don't think I have a single nice thing to say about him. Long story short: we go back a ways.

 

Anyway, yeah, I was surprised when he made the chart, considering he's such a huge Bioware fan. I loved it when Bioware's writer got flustered when he saw it and felt the need to defend his recycled writing.

[-Dex-]

I think that Bethesda really should abandon the old system and move to a Borderlands/WoW style of fixed enemy levels.

 

I disagree with your opinion and here's why:

At the starting "town" in borderlands, roughly 50m from my character there was a bandit/outlaw/badguy/ that was only 3-4 levels higher than mine. I was like: "Oh, cool, I'll just shoot him in the head from distance and get extra exp". I shot him, only to find out that it didn't even make a scratch to him and he responded with a shot from his handgun that killed me in one shot. Whut just happened?!

 

After several failed attempts to kill him I decided to ignore him and move on to smaller fries.

Eventually I got to the first boss. I went behind him and lulzd because his head was at my aim 2feet from me and I had a shotgun at that time. I pulled the trigger only to find out that it took VERY little of his health.

 

I left the game and uninstalled it followed by throwing the disc in the garbage.

 

Don't get me wrong, just because I think the game is garbage, doesn't mean that it is to someone else.

P.S. I love Fallout3, and F:NV, so I can make some sense when that situation happens there because I'm actually against a Deathclaw, and not a hobo human that isn't even aware I'm there.

 

 

Now back on topic.

 

Don't you hate it in RPG's when you're level 9001 and here comes an enemy that uses instant death spell and succeeds? (Persona franchise, I'm looking at you!)

 

also, I hate random encounters. Battles should be my own choice. Walking down the corridor....there's the door! Please, please, just 2 more seconds! ABOUT to press a button to open a door BOOOM, YOU'VE ENCOUNTERED AN ENEMY. God fucking damn it : (

 

also, sidequests that require you to fetch something. You're an allpowerfull human/alien/machine/whatever, yet you have to do those silly sidequests. Why can't I command someone from my crew/gang/party to do it for me?!

[FMW]

All right, I've got some tropes that need to go. We'll start with good must triumph over evil. It is a RARE game that dares to break this mold. The games that break it make up most of my favorites. And yes, we're all thinking of THAT game, but it's too soon to talk about it.

 

Boss Fights at the end of a level. Now don't get me wrong, bosses are great. Bosses make for epic battles and epic memories. However, bosses MUST be mixed into the structure of a game. If there is a predictable pattern, then no amount of story explanation can cover up the fact that you're just playing through a sequence of "levels". Level 1, boss. Level 2, boss. Level 3, boss. Ho hum. My favorite games that had cool bosses at unpredictable moments are Metroid and Gun Star Heroes.

 

Active Time Battle systems. If you want to make real time combat, we now have the technology to do that. No more SNES sprite/processing limitations (which is why ATB was created). If you want to do turn based combat, you can do that too! ATB is a relic of the past, and it's time for it to go. Exception to my rule? FF XII.

 

Cutscene logic not matching up with gameplay logic. Come on guys. The dude runs out in the beginning of Mass Effect and gets shot dead. Once the scene is over, I run out there and take twice as many bullets. I'm just fine. This is a problem. Fix it.

 

Whip/Flail weapons. There are exactly two franchises allowed to do this. God of War in 3D, and Castlevania in 2D. Everyone else needs to think of a new idea. And honestly, Castlevania hasn't made much use of their rights since IV. I'm tempted to strip them of the authority too.

 

Mass murder. It's not ok to have the player commit mass murder and not address the moral, physical, mental, religious, legal, or ethical implications of this. Uncharted, I'm looking at you.

 

Amnesia. I totally understand why it's done, but it's not acceptable any more. Time to go. You'll need to put a little more work into scenario development now. Too bad, suck it up.

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

Just look at Nintendo, for instance. Half the stuff they release would get completely destroyed by critics and gamers alike if a dev would've released the same game without the well-known IP they carry. The stuff that flat out tanked (like Wii Music) would've gotten 2.0 scores across the board and called "shovelware" .

 

Or maybe the games are actually pretty good? I can understand the demand for more innovation or change out of some of their IP's, but overall I think it's just a company that releases pretty fun games, known IP's or not.

Edited April 10, 2011 by p4warrior

[deanb]

Active Time Battle systems. If you want to make real time combat, we now have the technology to do that. No more SNES sprite/processing limitations (which is why ATB was created). If you want to do turn based combat, you can do that too! ATB is a relic of the past, and it's time for it to go. Exception to my rule? FF XII.

See I dislike this one. Just cos the system was made for limited hardware doesn't mean that now the hardware is much stronger we should drop it. Same could be said for 2D platformers. It's still an alright genre. It's not like the games are made still using sprites, it has kept up with current technology.

 

 

Mass murder. It's not ok to have the player commit mass murder and not address the moral, physical, mental, religious, legal, or ethical implications of this. Uncharted, I'm looking at you.

Not played Uncharted 2 to the end?

[Yantelope]

on ATB: The whole turn based RPG style of combat from classical JRPGs should die completely. No need for it anymore.

 

Back to Bethesda vs. Borderlands: I understand the freedom that Bethesda gives you and while I think that's a plus the fact that the game literally punishes you for leveling up, well, I find that insufferable. Additionally I never felt like I didn't have enough freedom in borderlands.

Edited April 10, 2011 by Yantelope

[Mr. GOH!]

Nintendo gets a pass because they make children's games and kids are relatively uncritical and shovelware-tolerant, whether they're actual children or childlike adult Ninty fans. It's like panning Dora the Explorer or Blue's Clues for lacking complex narratives; those shows, like Nintendo games, are made for people whose brains are still growing. They're not for mature adults who have fully come into their mental faculties.

 

But another trope that needs to go is shooting gallery FPS games. I fully expect MW4 to be 3D and on-rails, because that's the sort of bullshit single player FPS games seem to be developing towards.

[deanb]

Nintendo gets a pass because they make children's games and kids are relatively uncritical and shovelware-tolerant, whether they're actual children or childlike adult Ninty fans. It's like panning Dora the Explorer or Blue's Clues for lacking complex narratives; those shows, like Nintendo games, are made for people whose brains are still growing. They're not for mature adults who have fully come into their mental faculties.

 

You may be aware and actually taking a very subtle dig at game critics, but I think for the most part when we say they don't get stick we're talking from critics not the kids. Most critics tend to review a game as if it was made for them and generally disregard intended audience so I doubt they'd review it as if aimed at kids.

[-Dex-]

on ATB: The whole turn based RPG style of combat from classical JRPGs should die completely. No need for it anymore.

 

Whut? That's like saying 2D sidescrollers should die. You haven't played Ar Tonelico, Grandia or Mana Khemia have you? Those games made turns super fun.

[AgamemnonV2]

Nintendo gets a pass because they make children's games and kids are relatively uncritical and shovelware-tolerant, whether they're actual children or childlike adult Ninty fans. It's like panning Dora the Explorer or Blue's Clues for lacking complex narratives; those shows, like Nintendo games, are made for people whose brains are still growing. They're not for mature adults who have fully come into their mental faculties.

I made this point in a writeup of mine (although not nearly as passive-aggressively).

 

http://agdom.wordpress.com/2010/12/17/a-critical-look-at-the-american-gamer-easily-entertained-easily-amused/

 

Essentially what ever phenomenon is going on in Japan that dictates everything needs to be cute and under-age there is not transferring successfully to the American market. Indeed, the biggest-selling genre in the American market happens to be (wait for it) sports games. You know, the very definition of a recycled product? And people wonder where the sentiment comes from in America that if you still play video games you're a kid. Given Nintendo's vast majority of console-exclusive titles and we have no one to blame but ourselves.

 

on ATB: The whole turn based RPG style of combat from classical JRPGs should die completely. No need for it anymore.

 

Whut? That's like saying 2D sidescrollers should die. You haven't played Ar Tonelico, Grandia or Mana Khemia have you? Those games made turns super fun.

ATB is a thirty-year-old concept that needs to DIE. That seems to be the other crux to the PlayStation line: JRPGs apparently refuse to change (this includes character designs as well).

Edited April 10, 2011 by AgamemnonV2

[deanb]

2D side scrollers are just as old if not older. Sports just as much too.

Up to now that's the only argument I'm hearing against TB-RPGs is they're an old genre. Pretty silly reason if you ask me.