List: Most frequent game design flaws in modern games

ScottNCSU · 2005-08-16T18:28:40

I figured a compiled list of common game design flaws in modern games could help out us indies the most, as working in a small team we are going to be the most blind to see them. These flaws should be easy to fix or bypass for the most part if you aren't too far along in your game/engine. This list is for design flaws that hurt the game for mostly everyone. In other words, the fact that they are a flaw is a universal truth, rather than an opinion. Silly complaints like "you shouldn't lose EXP on death in an MMO" don't belong here. Also, make sure if you suggest a flaw that it is in "flaw format". Read through some flaws listed and try to follow that format before posting one. If your flaw doesn't have a solution, don't mention it. If your flaw is vague, give an example of a game where it takes place. This isn't a list for things you'd like to see more of in a game, its a list of things that should not be in a game. If someone wants to start a thread on things they'd like to see more of in a game, then I pity whoever has to update it ;) Edited for updates, keep them coming. All games: -Making large levels with little variation in order to increase game length. Short but sweet with replay value is better than long and drawn out with no replay value. It really isn't hard to add replay value to a game these days. (SephirothEX) -Bad implementation of one button performing different actions depending on the situation. In Splinter Cell, the action button would both pick up a body and turn on the light, and it is hard to choose between the two actions when the body and light are close to each other. (Vampyre_Dark) -Bad camera positions that put your enemies or jumping platforms out of view. This is an advanced flaw without an easy fix, but a very frequent one. (Vampyre_Dark) -Inconsistency in the interface. If hitting escape closes a menu or screen in one place make it the same every where. (monkey8751) -Poorly implemented user interface/inventory systems. Rather than design your own, its generally better to find a game like yours that had a great interface and copy it. If something you interact with every other second has flaws, you're killing the gameplay experience. (monkey8751) -Don't tack on a feature to a game just to spice it up and spend no time implementing it right. Badly integrated or chosen features will ruin a game, either by turning it into a mish-mash of ideas or by leeching off development time on the other more important features. Example: the odd poorly implemented stealth level in a primarily shoot everything that moves game. (Trapper Zoid) -Don't try to make your game do everything. It is a game, and it doesn't need to be a messenging system, email system, voice chat system, and accountant. There are specialized programs that can do this work just as well. If you ARE going to put some kind of IM in your game, make it very simple and make it work. (Extrarius) -Don't make up your own poor AI methods when you can find working methods in books like "AI Game Programming Wisdom #", "Game Programming Gems #", online at sites such as CGF AI, and many other places. The resources are there, and all you need to do is dedicate some time to using them. (Extrarius) -Intro movies/cutscenes without some form of skip option. Being forced to watch these really hurt replay value. Also, I've seen a lot of games made by indies these days with pre-menu screen intro movies without skip buttons, and it boggles my mind why they don't forsee that as a serious annoyance. -Games that create an Internet popup window that resizes your default Internet window. -Games that try to(and sometimes succeed!) in overwriting your Windows *.DLLs. Put them in your game directory and your *.exe file will look for them there first. -Lack of ability to bind keys or change mouse sensitivity -Not really even worth putting here, but: hidden adware. Platform games: -Blind jumps that can lead to death. Nuff said. -Simplistic and unresponsive jumping controls. If the game revolves around timed jumps, then you need to have a well thoughtout jumping system. Despite that Mario is ancient, famous and got this right the first time, we still see platformers with horrible jumping control schemes. Adventure/RPG games: - Having that one stat that is completely useless except in one part of the game. If you're going to have Charisma as a stat, do it right. (monkey8751) -Games that expect you to know where to go next. This is usually because the creator didn't test the final product on people other than those that tested throughout the development phase. You can't test you're own explorable adventure game yourself because you are subconsciously biased towards what you know and what you think the player knows. If your game is decent, you shouldn't have trouble finding a new playtester. -Long side-quests that yield horrible rewards or EXP relative to the main quest. If I spend 5 hours side-questing for that rare Masamune, it better have stats I can respect. -Building up your character for the entire game, usually in your own unique way, then "morphing" into something completely different for the final boss fight. This new morphed version usually has nothing to do with your current stats/equipment. This is bordering close to that of opinion rather than universal truth, but I've never met someone that didn't feel ripped off when they experienced this in a game. FPS games: -Headshots recieving the same damage as bodyshots in modern FPS games. Our generation now used to being rewarded for head shots, and its painful when that reward is taken away. -Mazelike levels with very little variation in environment, and no map screen. No one enjoyes getting lost in an action game then backtracking for 20 minutes with nothing to shoot at. - Badly implemented jumping puzzles. You can't see your feet in most of them so it's hard to judge where you are going to land. These felt natural in Half-Life, but painful in Turok. Have someone test your jumping puzzle and if it doesn't feel natural, take it out. It will only hurt the game. (monkey8751) Sports games: - Computer Assistance that you can't turn off. If you don't know what computer assistance is, it's when one team starts to get too far behind in a sports game the computer will make the game easier for them in one way or another. A basketball game might make more shots go in. A football game might make your recievers more likely to hold on to the ball. (monkey8751) Racing games: -Again, a large genre, but I've got nothing. The game design of cars speeding up as you pass them to keep things interesting can't really be a flaw, as it is both aggrivating when they do this but boring when you get laps ahead of them at the same time. [Edited by - ScottNCSU on August 15, 2005 2:29:25 PM]

Game Design and Theory Game Design

Started by ScottNCSU August 14, 2005 10:58 PM

21 comments, last by Extrarius 19 years, 5 months ago

sunandshadow

7,435

August 15, 2005 06:55 PM

Quote:
Original post by Anonymous Poster
When you win/lose based solely on the equipment you carry, rather than forcing an opponent to make a mistake.

What games actually allow you to force an opponent to do anything? Normally you win (against an equal opponent) by acting more efficiently, e.g. by dealing more damage more quickly than your opponent.

I want to help design a "sandpark" MMO. Optional interactive story with quests and deeply characterized NPCs, plus sandbox elements like player-craftable housing and lots of other crafting. If you are starting a design of this type, please PM me. I also love pet-breeding games.

Ned_K

175

August 16, 2005 11:40 AM

Quote:
Original post by ferr
MMORPG, This should only be considered very loosely related to the RPG genre in its current state, right now it is the Grindfest Genre. You shouldn't ever have to say something like, "Finally, level 40!" while playing an RPG.. the usual conversation should be along the lines of:

Person 1: "I just got to the part where you find out EnemyX is your long lost brother!"
Person 2: "What level are you?"
Person 1: "30-something, I think."

After a while, once you've explored and played through the game with a character or two, many of the people that stay with an RPG-like/MMO/MMORPG/etc. type game do so for the "extras", like PvP or item finding/crafting. PvPers (and others) tend to try out many different builds in order to find the best mix. Thus, they are forced to grind. Playing the same quest for the 18th time in order to bring up a new PvP style is pure grind and will almost almays get you comments like, "Finally, level 40!". These people don't want to level. They've already leveled time and time again.

Extrarius

1,412

August 16, 2005 06:28 PM

Quote:
Original post by sunandshadow
Quote:
Original post by Anonymous Poster
When you win/lose based solely on the equipment you carry, rather than forcing an opponent to make a mistake.

What games actually allow you to force an opponent to do anything? Normally you win (against an equal opponent) by acting more efficiently, e.g. by dealing more damage more quickly than your opponent.

In every single MMO I've played, the easiest way to win was to have better equipment, because bonuses from equipment are larger than any bonus possible from player skill.

I believe by "forcing an opponent to make a mistake" the AP meant that you had outlast your opponent until they make a mistake, and then take advantage of that mistake.

"Walk not the trodden path, for it has borne it's burden." -John, Flying Monk

List: Most frequent game design flaws in modern games

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

List: Most frequent game design flaws in modern games

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Reticulating splines