Make one of those annoying platform games where you jump from one platform to another, and then make that one platform that the player always misses by a centimeter.

It's bad when you just fall right through the platform. As far as a platform being a centimeter away, I think Braid plays on this pretty well, simply because you can rewind everything until you get it right. But that doesn't fit everywhere.

Have a boss.[/quote]Imagine MegaMan without bosses. Imagine Shadow of the Colossus without any colossi.

Make Duke Nukem.[/quote]Duke Nukem 3D? Duke Nukem Forever? Or the old Duke Nukem platformer?

Make a Game Named Ratchet and Clank.[/quote]You really don't like platformers.

Make it where the player has to find a key. You search ten minutes for a key when you could've blown the door open.[/quote]Try it before you pry it?

Have annoying cutscenes that you can't skip yet have nothing important in them.[/quote]Unskippable cutscenes belong in 1997, and they didn't belong even then.

Make a game where you have to play in the same place every other freakin' level.[/quote]Pong?

Have a boss where he isn't even hard, just where hundreds of enemies decide to come out right then and shoot at you. All of a sudden, when the boss is dead, they stop and go away.[/quote]At least, let the hundreds of enemies have some connection to the boss where it makes sense that they're gone too if the boss is gone. It's cliche, but it works.

Duke Nukem 3D? Duke Nukem Forever? Or the old Duke Nukem platformer?

Duke Nukem Forever.

Pong?

No, like Prince of Persia, or Batman: AA.

At least, let the hundreds of enemies have some connection to the boss where it makes sense that they're gone too if the boss is gone. It's cliche, but it works.

My point, exactly.

Market the game primarily around allowing the player to play a known, totally bad ass character, then make it a weaker version of the same character, making no particular difference in power from the last installment.

Hello Bioshock 2.

-Exo

Make a platformer that has a bug at 3/4 of the game that forces you to start all over again because a platform isn't where it's supposed to be and all your options left are 100 ways to fall into an horrible death. (ie, Prince of Persia Warrior Within, still pretty good tho)

Make a game centered around freedom of choices that suddenly stops caring about what you choose in the most defining moments (Deus Ex Human Revolution, still pretty good tho).

Make a pretty good single player RPG with an awesome lore on a recently founded company with an awesome team of designers while at the same time spending all your money on another pointless "WoW killer" that leaves your company in the dust, every employee on the street and your awesome RPG in Oblivion (Kingdoms of Amalur, pun intended).

Lease a very famous IP of your company to another company. Watch them make a game on a horrible timeframe that is way better than whatever thing you'll ever come with. Never lease them the IP again.

@dt108 - This "Prince of Persia"? I didn't like that game. I didn't really dig walking around in the same area doing nothing like you said, or getting achievements for talking. Never played DNF, didn't feel I needed to. I was addicted to Batman: AA, mostly due to finding items from other Batman characters and collecting biographies. That game captured that part of my brain that gets addicted really quickly to that kind of stuff. Plus, it was the first Batman game in like 15 years that was decent.

That reminds me. Make a game about the World's Greatest Detective with expert martial arts skill, but only let him fight one enemy at a time. When the battle starts, everything else just freezes in place. (Batman: Vengeance on PS2)

I think the biggest issue in the gaming industry is the disconnect between the people making the design document and the ppl coding the final product.

A feature that sounds GREAT on paper can easily be trite or stupid once actually enacted, furthermore the implementation for certain features might be far to costly in man hours then it might seem to a Developer with no programming experience.

Unforseen events which means u gotta cut features as ure nearing release, and we see game after game released with so much potential but just not living up to it.

At the very least all games should count on at least 6 months after the game is finished to tweak polish and add features before a proper release.

-Exo

. I was addicted to Batman: AA, mostly due to finding items from other Batman characters and collecting biographies. That game captured that part of my brain that gets addicted really quickly to that kind of stuff. Plus, it was the first Batman game in like 15 years that was decent.

I liked that game, too. It just felt really reptitive.

When the battle starts, everything else just freezes in place. (Batman: Vengeance on PS2)

Oh my gosh. I have that game for the original xbox sitting on my shelf collecting dust! The graphics are horrific. But since you mentioned it, I might have to pop it in and play it (haven't played it in 5+ years).

Add permadeath and make it simple to die.

Add permadeath and make it simple to die.

...and costly to re-start.

[quote name='Heath' timestamp='1351659981' post='4995700']
When the battle starts, everything else just freezes in place. (Batman: Vengeance on PS2)

Oh my gosh. I have that game for the original xbox sitting on my shelf collecting dust! The graphics are horrific. But since you mentioned it, I might have to pop it in and play it (haven't played it in 5+ years).
[/quote]lol, I had forgotten all about it too. They tried to make a decent game with that, but what was the deal with that stupid battle system? It's Batman! And yeah, the graphics didn't work that well. Maybe if they'd cel-shaded it a bit like Wind Waker, or just done it realistically without the Bruce Timm style.