Video game pet peeves.

Mechanics only lasting for 1 level, stage, segment.

I understand the feel to make each level unique but I hate how they spend effort on a mechanic or a level focused on the mechanic, and we never see the mechanic again making it pointless to pickup any skills for later portions of the game.

Games I've seen this in:

SMG2 - Every returning SMG1 power-up except the Bee Mushroom and Fire Flower exist in 1 mission only, makes it feel kind of stupid to bring them back if you're only using them in 1 mission.

SMW2 Yoshi's Island - While the scenery is epic for the final boss. You litterally have no practice on what the final bosses mechanic is the first time you try making most of the fight actually trying to work out how the mechanic is change instead of testing your skill in the fight.

Sonic Lost World (Wii U) - Hover Wisp returns, only once, in the second-last stage in the main story, what was the point in that? I could also throw Generation under this bus but Generations was a purposeful throwback, Lost World wasn't.

Luigi's Mansion: 2 - Remember the ghost hunting mechanic in the series? Get ready to ditch almost all of it for typical Mario platforming ways to beat King Boo.
 
Recently, I've grown annoyed over the fact that both the new Ratchet & Clank in 2016 and the new Crash Bandicoot due to come out this year are basically just reboots of the originals rather than whole new adventures. I'd rather see the developers of those series bring out some new content again for a change.

Also, the only Crash game that truly needs rebooting anyway is Twinsanity, because of how rushed it was. That's another pet peeve - games getting rushed and losing out on several cool things that could've otherwise made the cut.
 
I actually dropped R&C when they announced the nest game was a reboot. I was expecting a continuation especially since the previous game Nexus ended on a tease like cliffhanger. I also wanted to see them return to Solana since they pretty much abandon it after Tools of Destruction.

Massive pet peeve I have is almost every single player racing game trying to put you in an underdog situation every race by cheap A.I. or mechanic, it gets way too boring and uninterestong. Being forced to start last, rubber banding A.I, rabbit chasing, having the A.I literally gang up you. I want to race just as me against other skilled drivers (in terms of A.I), I hate racing as if its me against the world since everyone is solely against you for some reason.
 
RESHIRAM5
I actually dropped R&C when they announced the nest game was a reboot. I was expecting a continuation especially since the previous game Nexus ended on a tease like cliffhanger. I also wanted to see them return to Solana since they pretty much abandon it after Tools of Destruction.

Massive pet peeve I have is almost every single player racing game trying to put you in an underdog situation every race by cheap A.I. or mechanic, it gets way too boring and uninterestong. Being forced to start last, rubber banding A.I, rabbit chasing, having the A.I literally gang up you. I want to race just as me against other skilled drivers (in terms of A.I), I hate racing as if its me against the world since everyone is solely against you for some reason.
Click to expand...
Also the AI are programmed to get much better starts than you, so you're always playing catch up.
 
Racing Events in single player games being more like level checklists than actual experience.

This probably why I don't like GT6 single player mode. GT3 - GT5 made most events feel unique and have they're own charm making me willing to play them again like they're actually there own championsips. With the exception of a few IA Events, GT6 doesn't have that. Everything felt to samey. Forza isn't any better and doesn't even try to hide it with its FM6 campaign.
 
In racing games it bugs me when the windshield is too dark tinted from the cockpit view. First encountered this in Test Drive Unlimited, certain cars are difficult to see clearly from inside. Noticed it in Forza Horizon 3 as well, driving the F40 in the cockpit view is like putting on sunglasses.

Also, related, the windshield reflections from the cockpit view can sometimes be too much (reflections of the dash, steering wheel, etc). It may be realistic, but certain annoyances in real life should stay out of a game. Just want a perfectly clear windshield in my racing games.
 
Last edited:
SPhilli911
Also, related, the windshield reflections from the cockpit view can sometimes be too much (reflections of the dash, steering wheel, etc). It may be realistic, but certain annoyances in real life should stay out of a game. Just want a perfectly clear windshield in my racing games.
Click to expand...
And in real life you gaze through the reflection, it's not in focus and a "solid" obstruction like it is in games. Similar thing with overdone sun flare effects -- the sun doesn't cast a flare in front of things when it's in your field of view, it's just uncomfortable to have it there.
 
Reminds me of MCLA. I remember it would have an arrow on the mini map itself pointing in the direction you should go and it felt more like a compass than anything else. I still had to pull up the map just to figure out where I was going. Why they couldn't have just put an arrow on the top middle part of the screen is beyond me. I love MCLA, but there are somethings MC3 did better.
 
Last edited:
Carbonox
Recently, I've grown annoyed over the fact that both the new Ratchet & Clank in 2016 and the new Crash Bandicoot due to come out this year are basically just reboots of the originals rather than whole new adventures. I'd rather see the developers of those series bring out some new content again for a change.

Also, the only Crash game that truly needs rebooting anyway is Twinsanity, because of how rushed it was. That's another pet peeve - games getting rushed and losing out on several cool things that could've otherwise made the cut.
Click to expand...

Same situation with Mega Man Legacy Collection I guess? People wanted a new, proper Mega Man game and they got a compilation of 6 NES-era Mega Man games. :confused:
 
When video games don't use certain assets from their demos or prototypes

I can't be for certain that this is bad, but every time I see a trailer from old GT5 2006-2009 I get the feeling it could have been a better game despite taking five years to make the final product, which had secret performance upgrades that were broken and not deleted. It is interesting to see and read about though. I understand that some devs were restricted to a certain date to complete these products that we study or use everyday, but I don't think a company would get away with deleting stuff from the main game itself.

That's my stance about that.
 
I find it annoying that people will hate a game for being too colorful. Like when Gran Turismo 3 or Gran Turismo 4 was out, there were some thinking the colors were too bright or something. I mean... not every game has to be like some gritty action game or first-person shooter to look great. Never am I going to dislike a game for being "too colorful." So (for example), Mario games have to be colored like H1Z1 or Miscreated? Then again, most people will hate almost anything for almost any reason.
 
Collectible hunts

I'm loving Ghost Recon Wildlands at the moment, but sometimes it feels like a chore. The game world is incredibly varied, with everything from dense tropical jungles to arid deserts and snowy mountains - and that's just the parts of the world that I have seen. The problem is that I don't remembet large parts of it. Each province in the game world is full of weapons, upgrades and supplementary story files, and so clearing each province feels like a chore as you go back and forth between locations, looking to get everything rather than enjoy the ride.
 
Piss poor game design when designing difficulty. Nioh is a perfect example here.

Most of the enemies, and especially the bosses, don't adhere to the same rules and limitations that the player has to deal with, leading to most of the deaths being cheap and unfair, rather than genuine mistakes made by the player. It's a shame too, because the game does have some really neat features, such as the guardian spirits, but the abysmal boss design, poor hit boxes and entirely unbalanced difficulty makes the game complete trash.

For the record, I've beaten the game aside from the two last sub missions which take the BS levels to the extreme.
 
Rubberband AI in racing games; this is a practice that needs to stop. It's just a cheap and lazy way to add difficulty to cpu controlled cars by upping their performance in game.

I.E. Forza Horizon 3 has a bad case of this. I'm driving a Dodge Viper ACR and I'm left completely in the dust by the competition on a straightaway. Even by 2 AI controlled Viper ACRs with the same performance number as me. :banghead:
 
RandomCarGuy17
Rubberband AI in racing games; this is a practice that needs to stop. It's just a cheap and lazy way to add difficulty to cpu controlled cars by upping their performance in game.

I.E. Forza Horizon 3 has a bad case of this. I'm driving a Dodge Viper ACR and I'm left completely in the dust by the competition on a straightaway. Even by 2 AI controlled Viper ACRs with the same performance number as me. :banghead:
Click to expand...
The final showdown in Horizon 1 was a major PITA for the same reason. 15 second lead, gone in one turn complex without me crashing. The biggest middle finger is when you get the car and it's a watered down version, plenty fast but not F-U ludicrous speed IT WAS JUST PORTRAYED AS HAVING!!!

Rubberbanding is a big part of why I don't care for arcade games, and knowing this about FH3 I'll likely wait a long while before getting it.
 
Rubberbanding can make for better racing than reaching 1st in the first lap (or corner) and spending the rest of the race by yourself...or lapping 2nd place by lap three. Just sayin'.

Of course it's a constant annoyance when implemented poorly, but with some care it's an effective way to maintain some challenge when the AI are unable to keep up with a player. Blame the developer, not the tool, IMO. :)
 
Wolfe
Rubberbanding can make for better racing than reaching 1st in the first lap (or corner) and spending the rest of the race by yourself...or lapping 2nd place by lap three. Just sayin'.
Click to expand...
Until I play a game where it's actually fun, I'm going to disagree with this.

Wolfe
Of course it's a constant annoyance when implemented poorly, but with some care it's an effective way to maintain some challenge when the AI are unable to keep up with a player. Blame the developer, not the tool, IMO.
Click to expand...
Okay, I'm curious. What racing game have you played where rubberbanding AI is actually fun?
 
Wolfe
Rubberbanding can make for better racing than reaching 1st in the first lap (or corner) and spending the rest of the race by yourself...or lapping 2nd place by lap three. Just sayin'.

Of course it's a constant annoyance when implemented poorly, but with some care it's an effective way to maintain some challenge when the AI are unable to keep up with a player. Blame the developer, not the tool, IMO. :)
Click to expand...
If done well. The only game I can think of that did it well would be Burnout 3. Combine poor implementation with starting at the back of the grid constantly and I've lost my voice again. It can be done well, but it seems no one wants to do it well. FH1 was fine for me, RIGHT UP to the championship event and the last showdown, why was it done with these two things only? My regular go-to, Juiced, still has the worst I can think of because there's three bands: normal AI, Rival AI, betting AI, and none are any good anyway. Lastly, the most blatant example of it...NASCAR Thunder 2003. On the rookie difficulty (I'm too 🤬 to race harder AI, I've tried), if you take the lead straight up, you can actually watch the car you just passed pick up 50 HP in an instant, match then outrun your pace, then one they take the lead they get gimped again. If you pit first, you can catch everyone fairly well, yet if after everyone pits you hold the lead by a lot, you can't even catch 43rd...while running at the exact same pace. Still a decent game though.
 
Oh right, Burnout 3 Takedown did have rubberband AI and it made sense in that game. I didn't mind how the AI was structured and while it was closed minded for me to think it shouldn't be implemented.

However, I still have more frustrating experiences with rubberband AI than fun experiences to the point where the game gave me headaches.
 
I don't mind rubberbanding. In anything with sim value, it forces you to learn how to keep up with the cheating AI in the lead. As a result, you drive faster.
 
RandomCarGuy17
Okay, I'm curious. What racing game have you played where rubberbanding AI is actually fun?
Click to expand...
F-ZERO and FAST Racing Neo are two good examples I think. You have a fair chance of winning if you're skilled enough to take the lead, but the AI is on your tail almost no matter how much faster you go (unless you use exploits). Mistakes still matter and races are still tight, even for an experienced player.

There are other factors that help make it work besides the rubberbanding itself. You can win a cup/championship by points, so getting passed at the very last minute isn't necessarily a middle finger to your progress. It also makes sense in context for the AI to be nipping at your heels when there's a boost mechanic. The AI in FRN get free boost, but that isn't all bad because it means they don't steal all the boost orbs.
 
The worst rubber banding I've encountered was in NFS HP 2010. It made you think you were about to win and then said "Nope!" as an AI blew by at the last possible second, stealing the win. It was especially frustrating on the longer races towards the end of the game that take a decent chunk of time.
 
Wolfe
Rubberbanding can make for better racing than reaching 1st in the first lap (or corner) and spending the rest of the race by yourself...or lapping 2nd place by lap three. Just sayin'.

Of course it's a constant annoyance when implemented poorly, but with some care it's an effective way to maintain some challenge when the AI are unable to keep up with a player. Blame the developer, not the tool, IMO. :)
Click to expand...
The thing is that its not real difficulty. Any effort you put into it will have the same effect, you do everything perfect or half-🤬, you still go through the same stuff, it doesn't encourage practice or mastery of the game losing replayability. It also doesn't create better racing as rubber banding feels more like you vs. world instead of actual racing, no one in racing ever gangs up on 1 person and makes them look like the underdog and it gets repetitive.

The closest I got to tolerating it is Mario Kart 7 which was almost as bad as Mario Kart 64 but on some tracks you could gain more gaps on the A.I with enough skill (unlike MK64).

I'd rather races be difficult by having the A.I actually being skilled, forcing me to actually perform better and practice so I can beat them instead of just sticking to me like clue to matter how much effort I put into it.
 
Games that don't have multiplayer.
Not referring to online play when I say this, I am talking about things like splitscreen and generally the ability to play with someone in the same room. Although it don't bother me as much as it used to, I still hate it when some games don't have this, especially when I feel like they could have easily included it, but didn't. Examples?

Monster Jam Maximum Desruction for the Gameboy Advance.
Loved this game as a kid and as an adult, I still do, but I never understood why this one didn't have it and it used to bum me back in the days. I am no game developer, but I feel like this game could have easily had it, but it didn't. That is about the only thing this game is really missing in my opinion.

007 Tomorrow Never Dies for the PS1
Used to play this when I was 10 and I loved it. However I hated that it was only 1 player, especially since my brother used to pester me to play a 2 player game a lot back then. It would have been great if only it had it because I did enjoy that game back in the days. To make matters even worse, I learned in recent years the game was apparently going to have it, but didn't and that is a real kick in the gut for me.

I am sure more examples exist for me, but these are the two that really bother me.
 
Last edited:
Unnecesarily large amounts of collideable physics props that get in your way.

Game_191.jpg


I really like this game, but good lord I've had so many perfect laps and races ruined by a cardboard box or cone in the road, its infuriating!
 
Spitfiredwod
Unnecesarily large amounts of collideable physics props that get in your way.

Game_191.jpg


I really like this game, but good lord I've had so many perfect laps and races ruined by a cardboard box or cone in the road, its infuriating!
Click to expand...
Made worse when said objects don't consistently do it. I've run over fence sections in a race with no problems, then suddenly I hit one I've run over four times and suddenly I'm 10 feet in the air because the game didn't like the angle or something.
 

Latest Posts

Back