Modern Gaming Is A Bit Rubbish – Some might call this a rant

Am I getting old?  I might be getting old.  Maybe I already am old, because I’m about to say that thing that I never thought I would.  You know, the “not as good as it used to be” thing.  Gaming isn’t as good as it used to be.  There, I said it.  Maybe it’s nostalgia, or maybe it’s that the gaming industry is getting a bit on the bloated side now, but there are some things about this hobby that have been winding me up lately because I’m such a grumpy old bugger now.  So here they are.  A bunch of things about a thing a like that really wind me up.  Enjoy my sadness!

Constant sequels, reboots, remakes and spin offs

Alright, these aren’t all bad.  DOOM and XCOM have great reboots and Dark Souls 3 is a top sequel.  But good god are there a lot of sequels these days.  Everything is a direct follow up, a spiritual successor or an unnecessary next installment of a game or series that had already tied up its plot nicely.  Gears of War 4 continues a story that was wrapped up nicely with a lacklustre follow up.  The Star Wars: Battlefront reboot was a weaker version of a classic game.  Look at Street Fighter V!  A venerable series treated poorly and released half finished to grab money from consumers who don’t know any better.

Metal Gear Survive looks bad
Why is this allowed to be a thing?

2017 has Metal Gear Survive on the horizon.  What the hell is that?  A well respected series of political intrigue and bonkers giant robots having a zombie survival game inserted into its catalogue.  Konami is Konami and Konami is the worst as its clearly just a cash grab now they’ve realised their pulling out of the main games industry was a bad move.  We have 2 Kingdom Hearts remakes coming this year along with a Bulletstorm re-release (although I really enjoyed the original).  And who was asking for a ToeJam and Earl resurrection?  Luckily, 2017 seems to have a good number of new IPs incoming.  Plus the indie scene is growing well with a number of games with seemingly fresh ideas on the way.  Maybe this year will see new games outpace the sequels.  Then again, there’s always Call of Duty.

Microtransactions

I get it.  It’s a free game, they have to make money somehow and selling card packs, or premium currency is how they do that.  What I object to is microtransactions in full priced games.  I have a problem with full priced games that sell items in the single and multiplayer modes that completely unbalance the game.  Treasure maps in Forza, resource packs in Dead Space 3, XP boosts in pretty much any multiplayer game you care to mention.  Anything that upsets the balance of a full priced game or have been added into a single player game simply to push people towards shortcuts that shouldn’t be needed really wind me up.

Microtransactions everywhere
You said it Buzz.

Now, I’m not talking about cosmetics so much.  Whilst those do irritate me, they don’t alter the game beyond having pretty colours on your gun.  Nor do most DLC practices annoy me (pre-order ones do, but more on that later) as the cost of games hasn’t changed much with inflation and companies need to ensure the increased cost of making a product is offset somehow.  But those little costs that can quickly add up are a blight on the industry as far as I’m concerned.  When a feature is added to a game solely so microtransactions can be included is bad form.  I’m looking at you Dead Space 3!

Pre-order Bonuses

Deus Ex Pre Order
No. No I will not “Augment my pre-order”

Oh just piss off with this!  Stop locking content out of your game if I don’t pre-order or buy the day one edition!  If publishers don’t have faith that their game is good enough to garner good reviews and earn my money, then don’t release it at all.  All this pre-order nonsense does is make me feel that you’re trying to take my money before I know if your game is actually good and worth the cost of entry.  This goes double for you Bethesda!  Not sending out review copies?  Why?  What are you trying to hide?  Is it bugs?  It’s bugs isn’t it!

Open World Games

No Man's Sky Logo
Didn’t play this one. Apparently I missed out on a whole lot of empty.

Every other game has to have an open world these days.  Is it to add longevity?  To give an illusion of value for money?  Perhaps.  I feel that Falcon509 discussed this far better than I will with his blog post here.  Anyway, I don’t have a problem with open worlds as much as the emptiness that pervades so many of them.  If you have an open world, put interesting things to do in it.  Saints Row (although I’m not a fan of the series) did this well, as did Watch Dogs 2.  But so many have huge expenses of nothing filled with meaningless collectibles and pointless side quests that distract from the main story far too much.  Just take a look at Mafia 2, L.A. Noire, and of course No Man’s Sky.  Big worlds with lots of nothing in them.  That’s not to say you should just throw in a million meaningless collectibles.  Turning your game into Assassin’s Creed: Unity‘s map is never going to be a good thing.

Achievements and Trophies

Achievement unlocked

I used to love these.  Achievement hunting was something I enjoyed and would look up the lists for games as they came out, hoping to see interesting and inventive ones.  Lots of games did too!  Fable II had ones that would encourage you to experience many aspects of the game.  Half-Life 2 was very creative with the Episode One one bullet challenge.  But now pretty much every game has “Kill 2 billion enemies” or “Collect 1300 sandwiches” or the ever present, ever annoying online achievements.  They’re just dull now for the most parts, but developers have to put them in (for console games at least).  They don’t have to be easy, just make them interesting, and ideally not a grind-fest.

Time

I don’t have as much of this as I used to.  Game developers, please respect my time and don’t waste it with aimless sections of game that add nothing to the experience!  Allow fast travel between locations, avoid unnecessarily long scripted animations (DOOM did these really well), and allow me to skip cutscenes if I choose to!

Well, that was cathartic.  Is there anything that really hacks your off about gaming these days?  Do you think I’m wrong and I’m just turning into a grouchy sod as my age continues to increase.  Let me know!

Advertisements

84 thoughts on “Modern Gaming Is A Bit Rubbish – Some might call this a rant”

  1. The Open World thing is a bug bear of my own. Not everything needs an ‘expansive open world full of exploration’. Sometimes (most of the time) I want a more linear experience that’s been curated and crafted to show me the best of what’s available.

    The Witcher 3 is a fine game, but even that suffered from its open world imo. The Witcher 2 was a tighter game, and one I enjoyed many times more for that exact reason.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Agreed. I don’t mind an open world so long as the contents of that world are fun things to do. Hunting down every chest in Unity was NOT fun and I damn well wasn’t going to do it. Watch Dogs 2 has the right idea, the world is mostly made of fun activities.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Funny, I was going to write something like this. I certainly share some of the same complaints. I think I only had experience with one generation before all these problems plagued the industry (PS2). The Pre-order nonsense needs to stop, says the guy who preordered a Switch and Breath of the Wild…don’t judge me haha.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. With pre ordering, I can understand when there’s chance of a stock shortage (and this is Nintendo, so there will be!) which tends to be the case with console and special edition games. No problem preordering to ensure you get an awesome figurine! I have a problem with pre ordering a download of a game. It’s like pre ordering an album. Can people not wait a couple of hours to find out if it’s good before laying down their money?!

      Liked by 1 person

  3. I totally agree: Me and my friend were just talking about this and I thought last year was decent, pretty good year for shooters and entertainment in general but modern gaming is complete rubbish. There’s so much sequels and reboots and remakes / remasters this generation. I don’t have a problem with a reboot as long as they know what they’re doing, but all this remaster and remake stuff gotta stop. Let us experience new games, like something on the level of BioShock or experience new experiences.

    Microtranscations been around since late last generation and they have to end. I hate how in every shooter now, that you need to get a Battlepack or a crate that has something you want: For example, I got a free battlepack last night for playing a round and there’s nothing in there that I wanted. I hate this pay to win thing that’s a trend in modern gaming, it has to end. What happened to grinding for what you want, instead of getting it in a pack? What happened to the days of CoD 4 and World at War, where you had to complete this requirement in order to get that Red Tiger or that Autumn skin for your favorite weapon?
    .

    With the pre order stuff, I always fall for it and I keep backpedaling: It has to end, this preorder culture. Yes, I get a console preorder or hardware in general but if it’s a game, wait for a little bit. Wait for the review, don’t fall for it.

    As for the Open World thing, this open world trend needs to end. Not every game needs to be an Open World, yes The Witcher 3 set the bar and it’s a complete masterpiece. The open world in that game worked and had a purpose, but not every single game needs to be open world. I don’t mind linear, and in fact I prefer a linear and narrative focused game to a big Open World where I’m going to get drowned in activities but also I’m a big sucker for Open World games like Red Dead, GTA, Fallout, The Elder Scrolls, etc.

    Sorry for the rant.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. No worries, thank you for the rant in fact! You took time to write a lot an I appreciate it :-).
      Remastered irritate me when they’re for games last generation, especially on Xbox one where backwards compatibility is an option. Bioshock wasn’t as egregious as it was a triple pack for a reasonable price, but Bulletstorm irritates me.
      Cosmetics aren’t so bad for microtransactions, shortcuts in full price games are irritating, but selling power is an absolute no no!
      I like a GOOD open world game, but ones full of nothing or pointless busy work need to go. Especially from an adult point of view. Don’t waste my time, respect it and I’ll be more interested in your next games. This is exactly why I didn’t bother with Syndicate.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I’m not sure why Gearbox is even bothering with tha, shouldn’t they be doing Brothers in Arms: Bastonge or Borderlands 3? I’m not sure why Bullstorm: Remastered is going to be a thing, soon.

        Cosmetics isn’t bad, but having them in “shortcut” bundles like a lootcrates is ridiclous, that’s why when Battalion 1944 announced that, I just rolled my eyes and groaned but I’m really liking the premise and the overall promise of that game to not criticize the “crate”. Shortcuts like Battlepacks or the Weapon Shortcuts in Battlefield 1 are stupid, what happened to grinding it out?

        I like a GOOD open world game as well, that’s why I hold Rockstar Games with such high regard, you know when you play GTA or Red Dead, you know you’re getting something good out of it. Syndicate was such a bore, I had to trudge my way through it.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. The GTA games aren’t for me, but I do recognise what makes them a good open world game rather than tedious. GTA4 though, that was tedious at times. Most of the side activities felt like time sinks.
        The Overwatch model for cosmetics isn’t so bad, as you can grind for currency to buy them. Although the olympics set of crates were a bit cheeky in that regard as you couldn’t use previous currency to buy them. A bit sly on Blizzard’s part that was.

        Like

  4. *arguments against points made not detected* Honestly, I can’t find anything viable to use in disagreement. I think these things would be okay in small doses, but why the hell does EVERY game have to be open world? The reboots, spinoffs, sequels, etc. is exactly the same thing I say about movies. Nothing attempts to be original, and this is coming from a woman who’s favorite game/story of all time is Final Fantasy VII, but each game in the series does stand on its own (though there are connecting factors). Most of the “new” things I see are throwbacks to an older version of gaming. I think (again like movies) game makers now have access to astounding technology that allows for phenomenal audio and visual experiences, and they think that gives them leeway to skimp on story and/or just have open world so they can stretch it thin.

    I haven’t had the tedious experience with microtransactions…yet, because I (used to) play older games, but I’m sure it’s coming. If you’ve paid $60+ for a new game (my husband shelled out over $100 for Destiny), you should get the full game, nor is it fair to penalize people who can’t or don’t want to pre-order or purchase first day by not allowing them the full experience. Rant justified, good sir. Rant justified completely. If you love something, you want it to be the best version of itself, and that’s not going to happen without critiques.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It does amaze me that we’re in an entertainment medium in which being a cyborg chef on the moon cooking for the visiting elephant president of Mars is a possibility, and yet most of what we’re presented with is modern or dystopian open world games. God bless the indie market for creating interesting things like Oxenfree and Pony Island!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I think people understand modern dystopia (because it’s kind of happening around them) and open world for the same reasons. While I do like narratives that give social commentary and think they’re necessary, a creative or inventive person could 100$ do the same thing with that cyborg chef and the president of Mars. The market is glutted with dystopian open world games just like the book market is glutted with YA, vampires, and hell, dystopian, too. It’s popular because it’s what people are worried about. It’s making me want to write an anti-dystopian novel since those are in short supply.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Absolutely. Publishers see what’s popular and immediately demand a slice of the pie and have developers make their next 8 games for that market. And when it’s not publishers, it’s chancers on Steam. Just look at all those 5 Nights at Freddy’s knock offs!

        Liked by 1 person

    1. The stupid cash in Simulators are awful! Harambe Sumulator? Really? Some of them are alright though. 911 dispatch simulator was engaging, and the farming ones are fun. Euro Truck Simulator is great for relaxing. Problem was Goat Simulator kicking off all the meme Simulator games.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. It isnt too dissimilar to Diablo in that it is rougelike with random items.

        There hasnt been one in almost 30 years, so i dont have an issue with a reboot. My issue with reboots is things like Last of us HD being released a year after original. Or endless Skyrim updates.

        Having said that, i think TJ&E will suck ass.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I very much agree with remakes of 2 year old games screams shameless cash grab to me. I mentioned earlier about remakes like the Bioshock collection aren’t all bad due to it being a multipack for a decent price.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. I like multipacks. Megadrive had a tonne of them, was the only way to play Streets of Rage as a kid.

        I bought a dead rising multipack, which was 1,2 and 2b so it was really good value. I think there should be more multipacks and less reboots, unless it is like Resident Evil REBirth and totally overhauled.

        Liked by 1 person

      1. Agree wholeheartedly with your points about sequels and reboots. I’m even skeptical of The Last Of Us 2, and I think TLOU is the best game I’ve ever played. We’ve gone so far beyond the point of saturation with old favourites being reimagined, it’s getting ridiculous.

        Won’t stop me from seeing the shit out of the new Spider-Man movie though.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Yes yes yes to all of this! I love a good open-world, but the key word there is “good.” I love me some Dragon Age: Inquisition, but… seriously, after hours of wandering over empty countryside, it was tedious, to say the least. I know I’ve said this elsewhere, but it really seems like devs think to themselves, “The kids these days like good graphics and open worlds” and – boom – here we are.

    I also wonder if the reboots, remasters, and endless sequels are also there to diminish the possibility of a game being a financial “loss.” For every Portal there needs to be a Gears of War sequel, in order to balance out the costs of development with the (relatively) lower sales of the new games. And remastering a game is less expensive than creating one new. Maybe it’s annoying, but the sequels sell, and the remasters sell. The only problem with this scenario here is that we’re not seeing innovation come from these same companies churning out sequels so… maybe the system, like so many others, needs to be tweaked.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Very much agree with your point on reboots being a way to offset any losses through high risk releases. There are no high risk releases though, and it seems likely that the share-holders and “money men” are seeing big profits from reboots for very little risk. They aren’t seeing that money as an offset for high risk ventures, but rather just more money coming in.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. I definitely agree a lot with the microtransactions and paid DLC in general. Street Fighter vs Tekken in particular was annoying because half of the cast had to be purchasable and you also had to see them every time you went to the character select. There was no way I was going to spend another 30-50 to buy them all and I shouldn’t have too. Street Fighter V is also a perfect example of how everything is held back for DLC. I do still like a lot of the newer games, but they certainly aren’t as complete as they used to be. It’s all about the money now and I wonder how much worse it’s going to be 10 years from now.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I accept that DLC is the price we pay for games having not increased much in cost in spite of inflation for a long time. It has to be run well though. The Souls series has done it well, as has The Witcher. The problem is when things are held back as you pointed out. The in disc DLC debacle is a great example of that.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. I’m beginning to catch onto the trend of open world games that don’t need to be open world. It’s honestly getting a little old, and by the way, LA Noire is an EXCELLENT example of an open world game that didn’t need to be one. I remember playing True Crime: Streets of LA and loving the vastness of the game’s setting, but once I realized how little there was to do in the world they created, the awe quickly wore off.

    Oh and the games industry can fuck off with the microtransactions and preorder bonuses. I remember trying to leverage the bonuses into getting people to reserve games, but it felt so slimy doing it. Then I started to notice that the preorder bonuses were things that publishers eventually rolled out for free, or were things that didn’t do much good for the game at all (I sense an article idea).

    In general, so much bullshit we have to deal with these days…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Here’s one for you: The Worst Pro Order Bonuses of all time! Might need a bit of research but I bet you could put together something great.
      There are so many games (especially in the previous generation) that dearly wanted to replicate the success of GTA et al. but very few managed. Ubisoft started well but just started filling their worlds with busy work and ended up harming their franchises. I’m sure the trend will die out soon but there’ll be another one to replace it.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. As a collector – I really hate the stuff you righfully highlighted about pre-order “bonuses” and locking out content. I have wanted to pick up the new Deus Ex for a while, but refuse to until a “complete” edition is released so that I only need to buy it once with all the content :/

    Liked by 1 person

    1. When content is added later as DLC (extra story content included) then I don’t mind so much. A game having a long financial tail makes good sense. But when it’s ready and then taken out of the game for early adopters, that’s just punishing consumers who have the good sense to wait and see. I’m disgusted with Bethesda right now for their “no early review codes” policy.

      Like

  9. I can’t say I fully agree with the conclusion. Don’t get me wrong, those are legitimate problems you highlighted, but the way I see it, each era of gaming had its own way of being great and its own way of being stupid. I, for one, do not miss the days in which one could blow $60 on a game because the box art looked cool only for it turn out it was total garbage. Companies were also really bad about making their games purposely difficult to figure out so that it would move the sale of strategy guides, which is the eighties/nineties equivalent of those microtransactions that are (rightly) reviled. I’ve said in the past that what the 2000s lacked in sheer volume compared to the 1990s, it made up for in quality. So far, the 2010s seem to be continuing that trend. And I will say that I’ve awarded more 10s to games from the 2000s and even the 2010s than I did the nineties. It’s like modern music; there’s plenty of great work out there despite insistence to the contrary – you just need to know where to look (another advantage the modern era has over yesteryear).

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Don’t worry, I’ve got a counter post to this one coming up ;-). I do miss the days of expansion packs (the old DLC) that contained something worthwhile rather than 4 maps and a new gun for £20. Witcher and XCOM did this well mind you.

      Like

      1. There’s also the fact that the internet makes it easy to find out about truly bad games released this year when they show up on comedic review shows to get bashed whereas in the past, they were more likely to just fall by the wayside. It’s all a matter of perception, I’d say.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I suppose in the past there were fewer ways of checking, so box art would have been a big factor. Once magazines were more common then bad games would be ignored whereas now they get visibility, although very much negative.
        There certainly is more quality out there, I’m still not a huge fan of things like Metacritic though. A useful resource, but so many just look at the score and have done with it. I loved Deadly Premonition but would have utterly ignored it if I had followed the reviews blindly.

        Like

      3. I think the internet blowing up in 2009-2010 was the worst thing to happen to this industry. The vocal minority of entitled gamers are the ones who ended up shaping what the industry aimed for – cranking out games as fast as possible to appease that vocal minority. This minority is usually very young…

        …so we got open worlds with no content but tons of hours, games that come out yearly (Call of Duty) and contain little substance, free games with micro-transactions (young kids don’t have credit cards), etc.

        However! The explosion of indie game development has helped make this far less painful. Games like Stardew Valley and Axiom Verge just to pick two at random are doing for $15 what the AAA studios can’t seem to pull off for $60 + $30 DLC Pass + $30 Day One Edition + $25 Horse Armor version 19.

        Liked by 2 people

      4. Oh, that’s definitely a problem, but I still argue it was an overall net positive effect for the gaming industry. Sure, the AAA industry has become rather stagnant, but it’s also not the only option now. An indie scene could have thrived without the internet, but it’s plain that its growth was expedited because of that. As I said, one just needs to accept the bad with the good.

        Liked by 2 people

      5. Totally agree. I tend to sound jaded when I talk about this kinda stuff but it’s not all negative of course. Far from it.

        Two of my favorite games I played last year were Shovel Knight and Rayman Legends, one by a tiny indie developer and the other by behemoth Ubisoft, so there ya go!

        Liked by 2 people

      6. It is easy to often dwell on the bad and forget about all the good stuff. Top tier publishers release plenty of gold, but we tend to remember and discuss the bad more often. Part of me thinks that comes with my getting older though 😉

        Like

  10. I have mixed feelings on a couple of the points, but I do see where you are coming from. Remakes at times become old, but then again there are times where I have purchased an HD remake or whatever or an older game. I got Majora’s Mask for the 3Ds, it was a game I missed out on back in the day because at a younger age, the game was too damn hard and out there for me to comprehend.

    For Open World games, I do agree I find there are some games that abuse this power. There are games that do it very well and should continue doing it, but then there are other where I feel it’s forced a bit. Shadows of Mordor and the Batman Arkham series come to mind. Although they are great games on their own, I find that what the open world adds are too many distractions that offer little to no reward for me to explore. The worlds I find are dull and the side quests aren’t interesting at all. On the other hand, Witcher 3 offers a beautiful world to explore and is full of side quests with problems for characters I actually care about.

    There are other times as well where I do want to play something linear, so each has their place.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I don’t have such a problem with remakes of classics that are 10 years old (although PC gaming allows for these games to be available much more easily). I do have an issue with previous gen games getting a HD remake a couple of years after they came out.
      Open worlds are fine when the content is fun. Busy work is the enemy! I feel the first Arkham game got it right. It was more of a metroid-vania style then. Arkham Knight started to get out of hand though so I very much agree!

      Liked by 1 person

  11. I’m an old cranky gamer and I agree with most of this! I personally refuse to buy DLC of any kind. I’m stubborn and I believe all content should be included under the purchase price. I know they do it to combat the used game market, etc. but still… Nowadays they have the DLC stories planned before the game is even finished.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Pre-ordering in general is a horrible practice – you’re basically giving the company a loan. I just don’t understand it. It’s not like they’re releasing super limited inventory, so why do you need my money two months ahead of time?

        Terrible business practices only exist when they profit off it!

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I don’t mind things like Kickstarter and such (I’m doing a follow up post to this tomorrow that includes that) as the game wouldn’t happen without that input. Whilst it can backfire there’s potential for great results. But general preordering is bad practice. I saw a number of comments on the Injustice 2 Facebook page this morning with fan saying how amazing it was The you get Darkseid for preordering. No one seemed to realise that they’re buying something they don’t know about as though it’s a good thing. “But I trust Netherrealm!” Well, a lot of PC gamers trusted Rocksteady with Arkham Knight.

        Like

      3. Oh absolutely. When it comes to funding small projects, well.. I at least understand. Folks gotta eat.

        But these day-one preorders are horrible and sending the wrong message – one that’s basically puts all of the control in the hands of these huge companies and says “here, I’ll pay early, I’m gonna buy it regardless of how bad it may be anyway.”

        Kinda grinds my gears. Then they started with the bundling of pre-order bonuses! No one seems to vote with their wallet anymore, though, and that’s the “long story short” version of my rambling 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

  12. I agree and disagree with this post. When it comes to sequels or reboots it depends on the game and if it’s a lazy cash grab. Tomb Raider Definitive Edition is a great example here in my opinion, but we have games like Xcom and Civilization VI that keeps improving with every sequel.

    Microtransactions are bad in certain games, but as a avid MMO player I can understand why they’re there. Microtransactions help developers keep bringing new content to their games. Warframe is a great example here. It’s a free to play game that gives you the option to buy things from it’s shop or grind for them. CoD map packs are a good example or bad microtransactions though.

    I agree and disagree with open world games. Ubisoft open world games are some of the worst ones. Watch Dogs 2, Far Cry series, and Assassin’s Creed (with the exception of Black Flag) doesn’t offer me anything to do outside of the main story. I don’t want to waste my time collecting crappy collectables or doing your stupid side quest.

    The Witcher 3 is CD Projekt Red’s first attempt at an open world game and for the most part they knocked it out the park in my opinion. I love open world games. My first open world game was Morrowind. Games like Skyrim, Witcher, Starbound, and Don’t Starve are good examples here. Making open world games are difficult because you have to fill that world with interesting things to do. Bethesda is great at this in my opinion. I can be chasing butterflies and run into a talking dog.

    I don’t care for achievements, but I do have friends that will play a game only for it’s achievements.

    Great post dude.

    Like

    1. Very much agree that there are some great sequels and reboots, but there are so many poorly handled ones or follow ups that add nothing. Your examples are great though. I loooove the new run of XCOM.
      I’m all for microtransactions in free to play games, so long as they don’t upset the balance of the game. But yes, map packs are awful for so many reasons, the value for money being one but splitting the player base is a mistake. DOOM handled it well, shame the multiplayer was a bit weak.
      Just started Watch Dogs 2, but I’ve heard good things so I’ll see about that one. I agree with your point though. Lots of empty, uninteresting space in a lot of them but there are some good examples. Part of my issue is not having enough time to get the most out of them, which is an issue for me rather than the game. I always remember how well Fallout 3 was done. Coming across a colony of murderous cannibals that wasn’t even referenced as a quest was excellent.
      Thanks for your thoughtful response and for reading all of my ranting at all! I’ll do a counter point to this soon with some things that are more positive.

      Like

  13. Some of the same things that you wrote about really piss me off too! DLC seemed like a neat idea at first, but when they purposely leave content out of the game on release day and expect you to pay extra for it later, I find it really annoying. Microtransactions are annoying too- I had a friend a few years back who was obsessed with Candy Crush and was constantly spending $1 to unlock levels, not to mention $1 to pass certain levels! That’s really cheap to me, as I prefer to play something until I beat it! I’ve never been an impulse buyer so I guess I just don’t get it.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. That’s what single player free to play games rely on. The occasional little cost to but more lives to play a level again is the only way they can really make money. People need to be careful not to spend too much. A responsible developer might want to put a counter on to show how much you’ve spent so far, but I doubt that will ever happen.
      I think there’s a Marvel free to play game on iOS in which you can spend $20 at a time for new characters, but there’s no guarantee you’ll even get one due to the characters being split into “pieces” that you need enough of to use. I don’t like that model at all. Big spending and getting nothing from it just doesn’t seem fair. It’s almost gambling that’s aimed at kids…

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I agree! But I think a lot of people want that instant gratification of “oh I can’t beat this, let me just pay to get past it” and that’s how the developers start raking in the cash. It’s pretty sad.

        Wow, I did not know about that Marvel game! That is completely ridiculous.

        Liked by 1 person

      1. Running a Final Fantasy themed blog I felt I had to get FFXV, even after being put off by the demo. It’s a realization of most of what I don’t like about modern games. I’ll finish it and all but I’ve not much hope for the franchise.

        Liked by 1 person

  14. As a fellow ancient gamer, I do understand where you’re coming from with these feelings. Although I can agree with some outright, others I try to be a bit more open to. I actually really enjoy trophies and achievements – they remind me replaying games in my youth in order to beat my score, back when all games had a score, even if it made absolutely no sense whatsoever in context. Likewise, I am very torn on so-called “open worlds” – I think the phrase is applied too loosely as a catch-all for everything from a beautifully, meticulously crafted sandbox of things to discover (Skyrim, FFXV, Witcher 3) to lazy game design trying to disguise itself as a “feature” (No Mans Sky). But I think the one I’ve truly reconciled myself to is time. There will never be enough of it, and for a while that bugged me a lot. The flood of long games, the ever growing backlog…but one day I just suddenly said “you know what? Ok. I accept that I’ll never complete all of this. And I’ll likely keep adding more games to it. But that’s alright, because as long as I am having fun doing it, I don’t care.”

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Thank you for reading and taking the time to formulate such a thoughtful response! It’s always nice when someone takes the time to reply.
      The thing with time is game that don’t respect it. Long games are great so long as the content is good throughout. If there a swathes of it that could do without being there then I feel that’s an unnecessary waste of my time. Watch Dogs 2 is open world and fairly long, but I’m enjoying it due to the content being mostly very good and there being ways to keep yourself from spending 15 minutes travelling from one place to another. Satellite Reign is another one of that ilk.
      The achievements thing is a personal one. I used to love them but I think I’m just fed up of them now. There’ll always be there and I can just ignore them. They aren’t for me, although I may go out of my way for the odd one if they sound like fun to get. I look at some of the Overwatch ones though, and feel they’re a bit too much.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I definitely agree with respecting the player’s time. A huge empty world is the antithesis of good game design as is a world of filler with nothing meaningful to do. Those types of wide open world games are the ones that give the entire genre a bad name. And I also agree that some of the trophy or achievement requirements are just asinine for the sake of being asinine. But overall I feel they’ve added to the modern gaming experience and I enjoy having them still.

        Liked by 2 people

  15. I have to agree with some of the points you have raised here! Maybe it is just my age talking too but microtransactions are a nightmare! I don’t agree with being able to buy points on the store to upgrade your ingame gear and then playing against gamers who are taking the time and dedication to level theirs. Yes it’s nice to pay for ‘shiny’ things but I think it also makes an inexperienced player! Another peeve for me is episodic games but I’m sure alot of you can relate to that :p
    Oh! And the last one that really gets me is the lack of couch co-ops! Nice to see its not just me that has these thoughts! 💭

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I have some strong feelings on microtransactions that sell power having just tried playing Halo Wars 2 in Blitz mode. I’ll probably post about that in a few weeks.
      Episodic gaming is a bit hot and miss. I tend to avoid them until the full series is out and then play a complete game. I can see the advantages of the model; if you don’t like the first couple of episodes at least you haven’t wasted your money on the final 3. But waiting a month or more between episodes can be a pain.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I have afew friends that play Battlefield 1, they spend so long levelling up their weapons to find that a brand new player has already got it! Gets to be a little insulting to some of the hardcore players. I see what you mean about the episodic too but i usually tend to avoid them until they are all out like Hitman for example. I will be interested to read your upcoming posts, thanks for taking the time to reply!

        Liked by 2 people

  16. Pay to win is probably the thing that grinds my gears the most about modern day gaming. I miss the days of grinding for a better team or gear. It gave you something to be proud of. Now people just open their wallets for the best team or gear. It’s a sad era in gaming

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s