WHAT ANNOYS YOU IN A GAME?

Posts

harmonic
It's like toothpicks against a tank
4142
Gerkrt, I massively agree with everything you said. I'm... so happy that there is someone out there who despises having the game's challenges fed to the player on a silver platter.

Sometimes mass player bases don't know what they really want in a satisfying gameplay experience. example "DONT MAKE THE GAME HARD IM A LAZY WUSS >:("

That said, there should be challenge progression. The first battle and dungeon should not be very difficult.
I don't like games that take too long to kill off the enemy. I haven't played anyones games on here except a couple so no I am not targeting anyone (read the first 4 pages of this topic and holy crap people got beat up) Anyways I hate enemies with too much health and are just there to make me bored out of my mind because you usually have a selected strategy for almost all occasions. Forcing me to hit the same button for 12 minutes is not my idea of fun....
author=waytogo24 link=topic=2479.msg54967#msg54967 date=1231618701
I don't like games that take too long to kill off the enemy. I haven't played anyones games on here except a couple so no I am not targeting anyone (read the first 4 pages of this topic and holy crap people got beat up) Anyways I hate enemies with too much health and are just there to make me bored out of my mind because you usually have a selected strategy for almost all occasions. Forcing me to hit the same button for 12 minutes is not my idea of fun....

Don't play FFX
author=waytogo24 link=topic=2479.msg54967#msg54967 date=1231618701
I don't like games that take too long to kill off the enemy. I haven't played anyones games on here except a couple so no I am not targeting anyone (read the first 4 pages of this topic and holy crap people got beat up) Anyways I hate enemies with too much health and are just there to make me bored out of my mind because you usually have a selected strategy for almost all occasions. Forcing me to hit the same button for 12 minutes is not my idea of fun....

Don't fight Emerald Weapon, in FFVII
Don't fight Yiazmat in FFXII unless your prepared for a boring fight.
Max McGee
with sorrow down past the fence
9219
author=harmonic link=topic=2479.msg54955#msg54955 date=1231613057
Gerkrt, I massively agree with everything you said. I'm... so happy that there is someone out there who despises having the game's challenges fed to the player on a silver platter.

Sometimes mass player bases don't know what they really want in a satisfying gameplay experience. example "DONT MAKE THE GAME HARD IM A LAZY WUSS >:("

That said, there should be challenge progression. The first battle and dungeon should not be very difficult.

Basically, this. There is hard and then there is stupidly punishing the player and then there is way too easy. 95% of RM games are either the second one of those, or the third. Very few are the first (actually, legitimately hard) and when one comes along, people tend to mistake it for the second.
author=waytogo24 link=topic=2479.msg54967#msg54967 date=1231618701
I don't like games that take too long to kill off the enemy. I haven't played anyones games on here except a couple so no I am not targeting anyone (read the first 4 pages of this topic and holy crap people got beat up) Anyways I hate enemies with too much health and are just there to make me bored out of my mind because you usually have a selected strategy for almost all occasions. Forcing me to hit the same button for 12 minutes is not my idea of fun....

How should game makers make it fun then? Do you mean to say that enemies should have low HP? I like enemies to have ways on defeating them easily, like having elemental weaknesses so you can inflict more damage or you can use items to inflict lots of damage (Golden Sun works well here).
Craze
i bet she's a diva with a potion popping problem
13865
ZPE:

1) Even if you have three monsters indentical in function--a man-eating flower, a cannibal, and a bat--give them the same skill under different lights. For example, while all three enemies have a Drain HP skill the man-eating flower only does a little damage with Snap Shut but inflicts an HP Degen; the cannibal uses Devour Flesh which is a strong ATK-based drain with a 10% chance to not work; the bat has Bloody Bite, which is a mix of ATK/MGC for damage (it can be stopped with Silence) and the bat gains a 2-turn ATK buff.

2) Limit the amount of skills you give enemies. This sounds counter-intuitive, I know. Look at it this way: when a player figures out what triggers three actions (probably only one or two) that a specific monster type can perform besides a normal attack, they can hold that information much better than if every enemy has six actions out of a common pool (see #1 on how to diversify the pool). Let's look at Demon Tower's enemies: the Flamer usually starts off a battle by boosting the enemy party's magic power; this is counterable by having a high enough speed to ice the monster before it acts. It also has a 50% chance to subsitute a weakish normal attack with two fireballs... a silencing ability works wonders, here. When fighting a Fairy Minion, the player knows to either attack with multi-hit skill (Minions can easily dodge any attack, so the more the better) or just focus on it until it dies. If up against an Antantant, the player might switch out characters for slower allies because besides a Defend action, Antantants are notorious for damaging characters based on their speed--the player knows exactly how to prevent this from devastating him.

3) Yes, low HP is important. You NEVER want a high HP, high DEF monster--one or the other is much, much easier on the player. To judge this, make a 'neutral' monster for each tier of difficulty. You don't even have to use it in battles, but you'll want the stats. Following D&D 4e trains of thought, you add some HP and ATK to that normal creature to create a Brute--tough to take down, but easy to actually hit. If you add DEF and , you get a tough-to-hit/damage Soldier. With a high HP/DEF monster, you create a Jerkwad.

4) If you throw Jerkwad monster types at your player, you suck. Stop making games.

5) Think about the archetypical party when putting together monsters: let's say you need an ORC DUNGEON and an ELF DUNGEON. You make a Healer, Inflicter, Nuker, Warrior, Soldier, Rogue and Red Mage type for each monster race. In the orc dungeon, enemy troops are primarily warrior/soldier/inflicter/nuker types grouped together. The odd encounter will also feature a single healer shaman or quick-hitting goblinoid rogue. In the elf dungeon, enemy troops are primarily healer/inflicter/rogue/red mage types grouped together. Both have inflicters (although the orcs are probably degen-focused and the elfs stat-down focused), but the elves have more stealthy and short-term waves. The occasional wolf warrior or elf magus nuker might appear, but in general the orcs are enduring while the elves are short-lived but rip through your defenses. Besides different feels inside different areas, party-based troops also have the advantage of providing the absolutely WONDERFUL who-the-Hell-do-I-target? feeling in players. This stabs the 'ugh buttonmash' to death.

MODIFY (Ode to Defenses):

6) If you have the ability, I strongly suggest that you make a solid set of defenses. Choose MAYBE five elements to focus on (including physical elements, not just LOLMAGIC) and make a clear distinction between the sword and the spell. When a monster is weak against sharp weapons as opposed to blunt weapons, make it known, and make it obvious. This is super-easy to do in rm*, attribute-wise. If you have the capability (CBS or scripting), adding more than SWORD/SPELL to your set of basic DEF stats is great. The more DEFENSES you have (not elements; they are an add-on to an actual DEFENSE and too many elements get in the way of the player's understanding of the game), the more exploits against them you can create. Perhaps you have WeaponDEF, SpellDEF, and PsychicDEF? Maybe you copy the evasion defenses of D&D--4e is terrific at this--and make your WEAPON EVASION, WEAKNESS EVASION, TRAP EVASION and MIND-CONTROL EVASION stats.
Wow craze that would be in a bible ;D
author=Craze link=topic=2479.msg55038#msg55038 date=1231642800
4) If you throw Jerkwad monster types at your player, you suck. Stop making games.

I made an enemy once and when I was testing some enemy party AIs I realized that this one enemy could make one enemy party harder than every boss in the game. Maybe I should do something about that.




Nahhhh....

Let's see...

-Levelling up. That the main reason I don't love RPGs.
-Random Encounters. They have to be in the game, or else you couldn't levelup! But it is really annoying when you are in a high level and they come out of no where!
-Run away fail. No comments.
-Asking "do you want to pull this switch?". This is a problem with people who are new to making RPGs. I mean, there is a switch, of course you want to pull it! If you change your mind, pull it again!
-NPCs saying nothing important! This is excuseable in "real" Rpgs because
it always has been like that. But I think RPGmakers should make them say better things like a NPC in a church saying "Hello i belive in god".
They could atleast say "Hello do you belive in god?" or something like that.
-TYPOS! SPELLCHECK! My first language is not English, but I spell check. You should too, even if your first language IS English.
author=Craze link=topic=2479.msg54738#msg54738 date=1231524290
Bosses should drop tangible rewards--toys--instead of intangible rewards exclusively. The reason is that difficulty is ramped up and characters are more likely to die. So, unless EXP is gained despite status, levels are lost. A revived character can still wield a dual-edged +6 voral chainblade, however!

If you think that dead characters should suffer because they died (haha), think about these concepts:

-Your player beat the boss, regardless. That should be highly rewarded.
-The player wants to have a good time, not be punished if the boss whips out some crazy death throe attack right before the EXP is dished out.
-Did you give the player a potentially weak/under-leveled character? If so, when they inevitably die they still won't get stronger. CHAOS: THIS SORT OF THINKING IS NOT A FEATURE THIS IS BAD GAME DESIGN*



In summary: Go play Etrian Odyssey 2 and take notes.

oh yes! I really agree that exp. should be awarded regardless of if a charecter does it or not and have fixed the scripting in my game to allow for this

not only because my game specifically demands for this to happen because of the way I do monster battles in this game (no random battles and the monsters fight you once) it is required to have this or else the player is screwed for the entire game, but I think ALL games should have this, requiring a charecter to be alive when the battle ends in ordr to gain the exp. is just asinine, and if you have an "anti grinding" game, it will kill the type of game you are intending


*This is referring to some terrible reasoning he had a while back involving a boss fight in that western game.

Yes! I agree with this completely

I believe that every game should award the exp. to every charecter when a battle is won regardless of whether they are dead or not

this is the way I have it in my game, not only because being a game where there isn't any random encounters and the monsters will only fight you once, it is required to prevent totally screwing over the player for the whole game, but also because I think that every game should do this. Not giving charecters the exp. because they died before the battle was won is just asinine, and if you are making a game with a "no level grinding" philosophy, it will completely kill this intention, or render the game unplayable, depending on how you go about not having random encounters

also I hate games where I have to level grind
Wait. So, by default in RM, dead characters don't get exp. when they level up? Damn. Where's the script that fixes this?
all that is required is a very small edit to the game's script

I don't know what that is because I got someone to do it for me, if I find it I'll PM you
author=GoldenYoshi link=topic=2479.msg58237#msg58237 date=1232877575
-Levelling up. That the main reason I don't love RPGs.

It's hard to represent immaterial growth without a leveling system. Usually, you end up with some kind of puzzle-type gameplay that you'd never pick up again after you beat it.
I really hate games which have no challenges at all, or have challenges that are basically tutorials in terms of difficulty, like for example those games where you're actually told by the game itself to "go here, jump up there, hit this button when you get there" and so on.

On the other hand, I hate the exact opposite too. If there's a part of a game so hard and repetetive that I cannot pass it, it pisses me off and I most likely give up on that game for a very long time.
I hate games with slow walk speeds, arbitrary dialogue, and needless, stylish melodrama.

Wait, no. I love all those things!
Max McGee
with sorrow down past the fence
9219
Over time I have discovered that I hate RPGs where you don't have enough skills. I want to have at least three skills per character by the time I've leveled up three times, and if not, chances are I will get bored and quit.
RPG Maker games starting with the words "Tales of." Don't do that unless you're making a Tales fangame.
author=TooManyToasters link=topic=2479.msg58888#msg58888 date=1233171929
RPG Maker games starting with the words "Tales of." Don't do that unless you're making a Tales fangame.

That's why i didn't download "Tales of Worlds" by Dark Gaia