What single aspect of gaming bothers you the most

[Guild McCommunist]

I guess I should have been more specific. I don't have 1 hour a day. Maybe 4 hours a week...max. Games are an afterthought. Once bills are paid, groceries are bought, then I can start thinking about whether or not to get a game. I got CoD in December... By that time everyone online already had all of their guns/perks purchased and had spent tens to hundreds of hours honing their reflexes. It was my first CoD since 4 and those reflexes just aren't there anymore. Does that make me a shitty gamer? I don't think so. I think it just makes me a little more picky about where I invest my money and what I expect to get out of it.

I don't think you should be marking a game as "bad" or anything like that simply because you can't devote enough time to it. On the flip side of the coin, fighting games take a lot of practice to become a master in. What fun is it to play a fighter like Street Fighter II, III, or IV if you can't devote enough time to it to stand a chance to others online. Yes, you can local play, but you can in CoD as well.

 

[machomuu]

I'd rather play co-op than any sort of deathmatch or competitive multiplayer. I have a job, a family, and a home to take care of. I don't have 4 hours a day to devote to a game in order to become "good" enough to survive online for more than 2 minutes. All I played CoD:BlOps for was the combat training with my wife. Once I realized that I would essentially be paying $120 to get all of the content for a game I barely played, it was time to move on.

Borderlands, Dead Island, Street Fighter II, III, and IV are my favorite games at the moment because of the ability to drop in and out while still feeling like something is being accomplished in the small amount of time I get to play them.

As far as "multiplayer is the present and future of gaming", that is very sad for a grown man to hear. Believe it or not kids, once you and your friends have grown-up problems and grown-up responsibilities you'll find there's no time or need to participate in "the present and future of gaming"...

Honestly, not all online multiplayer games are like that. There's nothing wrong with being bad at a game but having fun with it. Unless you're completely terrible at games in the first person, you don't need to be some guru to have fun with it.

And if you play more, no matter how much you play a day, you'll probably get better at it. It doesn't have to be 4 hours a day.

I guess I should have been more specific. I don't have 1 hour a day. Maybe 4 hours a week...max. Games are an afterthought. Once bills are paid, groceries are bought, then I can start thinking about whether or not to get a game. I got CoD in December... By that time everyone online already had all of their guns/perks purchased and had spent tens to hundreds of hours honing their reflexes. It was my first CoD since 4 and those reflexes just aren't there anymore. Does that make me a shitty gamer? I don't think so. I think it just makes me a little more picky about where I invest my money and what I expect to get out of it.

Well that's not a problem with most games that aren't CoD since most others don't have perks and player enhancing features. Just don't play CoD, problem solved.

 

[BobTheJoeBob]

you are a sage, it's true that fps whores (many of them only play fps and sport games only, and mostly fps) think they are hardcore but when rpg fans hear that they think they are better and all
but there are many innovative out there, the super generic one tick me off more than a cod

And this brings me to another thing that annoys me: The CoD Hatetrain.

I don't really like CoD myself. It's just not my type of game. But so many people call it "generic" or "bad" because that's what everyone else says. The gamer base for CoD isn't just "bros" who play sports games and CoD. It's pretty vast. It can be from those people (who are just dumb people in general, not because they play CoD) to seasoned gaming vets who enjoy a good FPS game when there is one.

I couldn't agree with you more, I'm being serious, I genuinely can't agree with you more. What's up with the whole thing of hating something because it's popular? (Ironically, that itself, has become somewhat popular)

 

[1234turtles]

The fact that it's the fucking scapegoat for everything.

Violence? Over-eroticism? Addiction? People becoming retards?


They blame it on video games. The same bastards who take away part of the money you work for, proceed to fuck the world ten times over and live like they gods of all creation. Video games are just one of their many scapegoats.

Seriously, a gamer-gamer disagreement may never end [I still think Sony's just a tech-whore], but at the end of the day, gamers are gamers. These guys don't deserve an opinion.

this

 

[machomuu]

you are a sage, it's true that fps whores (many of them only play fps and sport games only, and mostly fps) think they are hardcore but when rpg fans hear that they think they are better and all
but there are many innovative out there, the super generic one tick me off more than a cod

And this brings me to another thing that annoys me: The CoD Hatetrain.

I don't really like CoD myself. It's just not my type of game. But so many people call it "generic" or "bad" because that's what everyone else says. The gamer base for CoD isn't just "bros" who play sports games and CoD. It's pretty vast. It can be from those people (who are just dumb people in general, not because they play CoD) to seasoned gaming vets who enjoy a good FPS game when there is one.

I couldn't agree with you more, I'm being serious, I genuinely can't agree with you more. What's up with the whole thing of hating something because it's popular? (Ironically, that itself, has become somewhat popular)

Welcome to 2011, where every game that's cool looking is popular and everyone who buys the games is hated by others for no reason.

 

[retKHAAAN]

I guess I should have been more specific. I don't have 1 hour a day. Maybe 4 hours a week...max. Games are an afterthought. Once bills are paid, groceries are bought, then I can start thinking about whether or not to get a game. I got CoD in December... By that time everyone online already had all of their guns/perks purchased and had spent tens to hundreds of hours honing their reflexes. It was my first CoD since 4 and those reflexes just aren't there anymore. Does that make me a shitty gamer? I don't think so. I think it just makes me a little more picky about where I invest my money and what I expect to get out of it.
Well that's not a problem with most games that aren't CoD since most others don't have perks and player enhancing features. Just don't play CoD, problem solved.



That's the route most FPS are going though isn't it? One thing I enjoyed in Brink was the fact that you leveled up and unlocked everything through all modes rather than keeping them separate. You could do some training, level up, get some guns, and then jump into the fight. You're not handicapped for waiting a month or two to get the game.


QUOTE(Guild McCommunist @ Sep 13 2011, 05:48 PM)

I don't think you should be marking a game as "bad" or anything like that simply because you can't devote enough time to it. On the flip side of the coin, fighting games take a lot of practice to become a master in. What fun is it to play a fighter like Street Fighter II, III, or IV if you can't devote enough time to it to stand a chance to others online. Yes, you can local play, but you can in CoD as well.

I never said CoD was bad. I rather enjoy it...in Single Player or Combat Training. Online multiplayer just isn't a selling point for me. I'd be more impressed with local splitscreen against bots on every game (and yes, I know CoD has splitscreen).

 

[machomuu]

I guess I should have been more specific. I don't have 1 hour a day. Maybe 4 hours a week...max. Games are an afterthought. Once bills are paid, groceries are bought, then I can start thinking about whether or not to get a game. I got CoD in December... By that time everyone online already had all of their guns/perks purchased and had spent tens to hundreds of hours honing their reflexes. It was my first CoD since 4 and those reflexes just aren't there anymore. Does that make me a shitty gamer? I don't think so. I think it just makes me a little more picky about where I invest my money and what I expect to get out of it.

Well that's not a problem with most games that aren't CoD since most others don't have perks and player enhancing features. Just don't play CoD, problem solved.

That's the route most FPS are going though isn't it? One thing I enjoyed in Brink was the fact that you leveled up and unlocked everything through all modes rather than keeping them separate. You could do some training, level up, get some guns, and then jump into the fight. You're not handicapped for waiting a month or two to get the game.

Wait, there's no option to play with people your level/rank in CoD?

 

[ninchya]

Blogs like these bug me, joking. In all the same we are gamers, its all preference FPS Vs Rpg, MMo but what bugs me isnt the games but the companies, Pc gaming companies releasing F2P games but making the standalone game with out in-game purchases worthless bugs me the most, while Console companies are creating game not even worth mentioning, their idea of games is a Generic FPS to appeal to the side of gaming while trying to max out prophits with Theater quality trailers and bonus features instead of focusing on the gameplay and fundamentals of the game itself, and then they release the same game just rehashed with like 2 new characters and make you pay an extra 30 bucks or dlc for like 15 bucks. Raging PC communities, trolling in pc games, Griefers, obnoxious kids, hackers. What bugs me more the companies are the communities that support the gaming companies, that what really bothers me the most of all in gaming, what happened to peaceful times of booting up your consoles and playing a nice peaceful games with your friends, the gaming community is dying T.T.

TIME TO SUPPORT THE INDIE DEVELOPERS!!!!!!!!

 

[machomuu]

Blogs like these bug me, joking. In all the same we are gamers, its all preference FPS Vs Rpg, MMo but what bugs me isnt the games but the companies, Pc gaming companies releasing F2P games but making the standalone game with out in-game purchases worthless bugs me the most, while Console companies are creating game not even worth mentioning, their idea of games is a Generic FPS to appeal to the side of gaming while trying to max out prophits with Theater quality trailers and bonus features instead of focusing on the gameplay and fundamentals of the game itself, and then they release the same game just rehashed with like 2 new characters and make you pay an extra 30 bucks or dlc for like 15 bucks. Raging PC communities, trolling in pc games, Griefers, obnoxious kids, hackers. What bugs me more the companies are the communities that support the gaming companies, that what really bothers me the most of all in gaming, what happened to peaceful times of booting up your consoles and playing a nice peaceful games with your friends, the gaming community is dying T.T.

TIME TO SUPPORT THE INDIE DEVELOPERS!!!!!!!!

...Tell me, what do you think this blog specifically is about?

 

[TheDarkSeed]

Do you know what really Grinds my Gears? The fact that console makers hold back when making their console. They make this awesome sandwich of a blueprint then begin to strip it of various things, leaving nothing but cheese and bread. They know full well that they can make something that sends chills down the spine of gamers. But there is never a case when this is top priority. Leaving gamers with much to be desired.

 

[ninchya]

Exactly what bugs you about games and im just saying what bugs me XP

 

[machomuu]

Exactly what bugs you about games and im just saying what bugs me XP
Oh, well I thought you misunderstood after you said QUOTEits all preference FPS Vs Rpg, MMo

which isn't what the thread's about.

Nevermind, then.

 

[Panzer Tacticer]

Interesting, saw 4 pages of replies, almost thought I had seen it wrong

Seems like a lot of contrast between the shooter crowd and the rpg crowd here (I tend to think MMO gamers are rpg players).

I see shooters and I think silly bugger. That's what we called running around in the woods as kids with combat gear and something to point and yell bang with. I was too early for paint ball, so the target guy always complained that the other guy missed hehe.
Shooters is just a means to play silly bugger and not need to argue if the other guy actually got hit.

Playing a shooter solo, that's too much like having no friends to play with.

Battefield 1942 is my idea of one of the most perfectly executed video games in 10 years.

RPGs when I use those three letters I always mean paper and pencil and funny shaped dice.
Playing an RPG solo is too much like playing a wargame solo. Too much like having no friends again.
Playing them online though with MMOs, you're still doing it wrong.

Playing MMOs all day long every day, yes you need to be saved from yourself.

Real role playing requires pop and chips, being up late at night and laughing at your friend for rolling a fumble.
It's about staring at the one girl at the table and admiring her tits. Hey we do that at any age eh. it's not a teen thing.
I have the pleasure of being able to game with the wife, and I know of other female gamers too. Yes I am lucky there.
And yes, I have gamed in my teens where one of the girls at the table was indeed screwing one of the guys. I've known games that had long munchie breaks because two players had to be alone for a bit.

MMOs simply can't do any of that.

I don't hate MMOs, I just find them dreadfully boring looking. But I suppose I am simply too biased in favour of paper n pencil role gaming.
But then I prefer being the DM not a player. MMOs seem to only work as players and the rules are too absolute too.

I think too many games have sold out too much so where graphics is concerned. Seems like all you get are graphics now, and no actual game.
If the game can only be played once through then it sure isn't the equal of my infinite replay wargames.
But then again movies and books are often only viewed once.
Then again, we can watch a movie or read a book for a fraction of the cost of a game.
I think you guys are getting too often ripped off for games that are getting a bit to predictable.
Then again, I could say the same about movies too.

I don't hate dlc just as long as the base game really doesn't need it to be a complete experience.
I sympathize with those outside of the reach of modern high performance internet services. But I prefer to exploit them myself.
I don't require ANYthing be sold in physical form.
But I have no objection to physical form being available to those that want it.
I think digital delivery should be cheaper though, there is no over head or middle man after all.

 

[iNFiNiTY]

Bothers me most?

People have different tastes and you cannot deny you've called Call of Duty shit before just because it's generic but guess what? Most RPGs are generic.

Call Of Duty sucks balls, the real FPS games that are great are Battlefield and Half-life + Portal series.

>Half Life
Linear.
>Portal
Puzzle game, over rated and shit.

I wasn't defending Call of Duty, I was defending people who have different tastes. Just because you like FPS doesn't mean RPGs suck and vice versa.

Dismissing Half-Life (1 at least) is just stupid... i remember the release and for it's time, it was incredible. It was such a massive step-up in every way from Quake 2/Unreal, the template for most of the genre for years to come. It made the current console games frankly look like crap in comparison, and not just graphically. Think of the tripe like Turok that was popular before it. Probably the first somewhat convincing real world environments in a game too outside of say racing games. A game being linear is not a criticism unless you have some convincing argument why it would be better otherwise... there's no reason for exploration in an FPS that moves from set-piece to set-piece. The game wouldn't be improved if you could wander around random bits of Black Mesa.

Also there's a kinda Japanese-like over-criticism of first person games even though it's the most logical viewpoint for a lot of games if you want immersion and was only not done more in the past because of technology. Games copying CoD is the current phase (although why blame CoD, a well-made game, for other peoples lack of innovation) but it will pass. It's not like there isn't variation when you have games like Oblivion or Mirrors Edge. Or even a shooter like Riddick which used first person perspective very effectively, game would have been worse if it was 3rd person. Unfortunately making major titles is so costly now that making 'safe' games is important, unless you want developers to try to innovate and die repeatedly - it's just supply and demand.

Anyway.. i probably agree with the OP about single most annoying aspect. Some genres are almost as good as dead on PC. I used to play every RTS that came out, then after the move to 3D there's less and the ones that are around are literally no advancement, or less advanced than the 2D ones. Some complaints of simplification are overstated but there's no doubt RTS games are more shallow. When they even get released that is. 3D isn't the only reason for it but it is lame how it's completely unfeasible to even released a 2D game outside of XBLA-like systems.