Trends in Video Games that Suck Shit

I wish it would return to this and stay. I'm sick of games with full auto heal in a matter of seconds.

It really depends on the game. But yes, I'd love some of that as well.

Also 3D is not always better than 2D. 2D games can be a lot of fun as well (and thank god there actually are new ones made again). Not to mention some very nice things that just can't be done in 3D. Admit it, Worms 2 and Armageddon have some of the nicest graphics ever, the 3D version really can't match that.

Er... sorry to be absolutely correct, but technically the first Far Cry didnt have predator powers. I actually liked the original without the powers much more than the ones on the consoles that did have them.

On another note:

Quick time events. I know it wasn't the first to do it (I don't think it was at least), but Resident Evil 4 did it really well. A lot of other games now? I don't know, I just don't really like it as much...

Did you say that MW 2 has a shitty story?

Also I agree with you all the points.

The story of MW2 (and MW2 in general) is like a Michael Bay movie.

It's a war movie, what'd you expect? IW just took all the epic Hollywood movies and threw them all into a game to get that same cinematic effect.

Well, I was kind of joking by posting a Robot Chicken video, but still serious in that the difference in "epicness" between CoD4 and MW2 is huge. For me, there are too many 'epic' moments, and just kinda gets old...

Don't get me wrong though, I still enjoyed the game.

Couple more.

Rehashing old games with updated graphics.
This one is a bit rare. But some games should just be left in the past. They were fun back then and they'll still be fun now. There's no fucking reason to update the graphics. And more often than not, the "updated" version sucks shit. TMNT: Turtles in Time and Bionic Commando anyone? There is no doubt that old games should be updated in some way shape or form. Preferably in the gameplay department. But this should be done in a sequel. Not the exact same game that was done in the past. Games that are in 2D does NOT need to always be updated to 3D.

Tacked on Multiplayer/Singleplayer
As some of you already pointed out, some games focus too much on MP and do not concentrate enough SP. But can be the other way around as well. There are games that tack on a multiplayer or singleplayer just to make the game seem "worth the money." This relates mostly to shooter games. Spend some time on both.

Agree with the above, Sonic 2006 is a good example of graphics over gameplay (those tail levels still haunt me).

Well this is hardly scratching the shit barrel, now when you talk about Movie games, is like finding a gold coin under the murky poopy water (also complies to the Wii game library). This gen of games feels more like publishers want to bang you for your cash instead of the 50-50 Screwatack.com mention. And yes to DLC, a waste of my money on good gaming (exceptions apply).

Ok. In this post, I'm going to continue to rant about something specific. Graphics.

It seems today, with each newer and newer generation of consoles, developers put far too much into making the game as graphically as impressive as possible. In turn, this makes gamers put more emphasis on it as well. This is perhaps the most disappointing thing about games and gamers today.

For example, GameSpot and IGN recently reviewed God of War III, giving it a 9.0 and 9.3 respectively. When I read the comments of gamers below, it was astonishing to see how many people said "WTF? This game should be 10/10!! Just look at the graphics!" Remember, GoW3 has yet to be actually released, so no one besides the reviewers have actually played the full game. It's amazing how people would give the game 10/10 based on only the graphics and a 15 minute demo. People should really remember, good graphics does not automatically make a good game.

Gamers, especially newer generations that started with the the PS2,XBox and Gamecube, put far too much emphasis on graphics. I wonder how many of them would play a game that is not a next generation game? How many of them would not play an 8-bit era game just because it doesn't look good? Would they even try playing the arcade Mario game? I also hate how gamers compare games based on graphics. I have seen far too many arguments like "Modern Warfare 2 looks way better than Battlefield: Bad Company 2, so that makes it a better game." Disappointing to say the least.

It's not just gamers too. Reviewers also concentrate far too much on graphics to my liking. Games should always be reviewed based on gameplay first and foremost. Graphics should only be the icing on top. Too many reviews these days complain about every small graphical blemish or flat textures. Graphics should NOT matter unless it interferes with gameplay. Is a game automatically worse if it has a little bit of screen-tearing or have a flat texture here and there? No, not unless it interferes with the game.

Developers have developed a terrible habit of putting graphics first. I've seen in far too many interviews, the first thing the developer would say is "Look how great the game looks." No. Just no. If you are showcasing a game, show how it will be fun, not how it's a feast to the eyes.

Also, too many old games have been rehashed by upping the graphics and then selling it again. I'm probably going to get flamed for this, but Pokemon is a big offender. Each Pokemon plays exactly like the one before it, going all the way back to Pokemon Blue and Red. Even the new Soul Silver and Heart Gold. What's wrong with just playing the original Silver and Gold? Why exactly does it need to be remade with new graphics and sold on the DS? Another recent one is TMNT: Turtles in Time. Why even bother updating the graphics? It could have been sold exactly the way it is. In fact, the old one is better than the new one. This is what I'm talking about. Gamers put so much on graphics that developers are afraid that if the game doesn't look good, it won't sell.

It seems today, that gameplay has taken a backseat to graphics. For example, look at Modern Warfare 2. The game plays exactly like Modern Warfare, but with just a new coat of paint slapped on (You can argue with me on this, but it's just my opinion). This focus on graphics is extremely detrimental to story and other areas of games that could improved on (Like say, fixing bugs?). Developers no longer seem to want to try something new with games. All they do is copy other games and then making it look better by improving the graphics. There is no doubt that graphics do add to the enjoyment of a game, but it should always be in the backseat.

For me bad graphics can be forgiven with a good story. But sadly most games out there fuck up the story just as much as they fuck up the graphics. But it's not too late yet the story can be forgiven with a good game play right? Well fuck yes but unfortunately some games today are too busy caring so much about realism that the gameplay gets horribly disfigured into a complex puzzle nobody gives a crap about.

At least most PC games come with mod support, allowing the community to polish the game to a better form.
One example could be the Battlefield 2. What it was? Just BF1942 with some unlockables, better graphics and still those throw grenades as much as possible if you can't get a tank or a plane.

Yet that game's engine farted out Forgotten Hope 2 and Project Reality, both being rather popular at MoDB.

Worst choice imo in the game developing is to leave the modding capabilities out. This infact dooms most games to be short lived. MW2 would be the first to say as an example.

I tend to enjoy playing mods a whole lot more then the real game. Why? Because the mod dev's actually care about what the players think of their mod and what might need fixing. Project Reality 0.85 didn't win the mod of the year 2008 alone or Mechwarrior:Living Legends mod of the year 2009. Seriously, very few game development companies actually respond to the feedback given by the players.

Probably one of the few is CCP, the developer of Eve Online.

lol on the topic of mods

Relic's(well at that point they gave it to iron lore)Dawn of war sister of battle race were actually inferior to the Mod version of it which by far more impressive except for their voices.

I like you even more now. Nice rant, and I agree with basically everything you said. Now if only there were more people with the same mentality.

Well, with Pokemon HG/SS there is actually the nice reason that the old games are not compatible with the new ones. That series' real problem seems to be the addition of more and more Pokemon with each generation, some of them just copies of old ones, some just plain ridiculous, up to the point where no-one will even think of
"catching them all", despite that being the final goal of the game. Compared to other "updated" games, Pokemon is doing rather well, not really changing anything in the basic gameplay, while making the game available to owners of newer consoles.

Even though I'd still play my old PS2 games and enjoy them (actually doing that now; Deus Ex ftw), I disagree with graphics being just some "icing on the cake."

Sticking to this cake analogy, if the game was a cake, I'd want graphics to have its own fucking layer, as well as gameplay. I don't care what game is made, today, PS3 games should not have PS2 graphics. Fuck that shit! Not only should the gameplay be good, but that shit should be up to standard in the graphics department, no less. I believe that GoW3 would be a much worse game had the graphics not been PS3 quality.