Video game pet peeves.

[Sonygamer455]

Also, how on earth are the AI seemingly godlike in the wet on some games? You the player are aquaplaning depending on how much power you put down at once while the AI is on a unmovable rail.

That’s a good question. I can remember when I was hacking in GT5 once, I eventually figured out how to disable the flag preventing karts from racing on rain. When I did a go kart race in the rain, despite them not being intended to be used in this condition, the AI drove through it like it was nothing. You’d think they were running from the police because I for the life of me could not catch up to them.

 

[Sonygamer455]

Having to manually shift into drive at the start of the race, even with automatic transmission.
The Need for Speed and Rally Cross both have it where even if you select automatic, pressing the accelerator won't shift your car into drive. Instead, you are forced to press another button to shift into drive if you expect to move, otherwise, you won't get anywhere. It's not a huge annoyance, but it's just an unnecessary extra step that I'd be happier wasn't there. Especially since it could confuse new players and/or non-gamers who aren't accustomed to the game yet.

 

[Com Fox]

Mandatory Collectibles in an A to B Platformer.

It's the main reason why I dropped Sonic Unleashed. Not only does it take 20 to 30 minutes to complete mundane Night stages but if you miss enough Sun/Moon Medals, youll have to go back and replay them as they are required to progress the story. The 3 to 4 minute Day stages don't nearly have enough. The Wii/PS2 versions don't have the medals be mandatory, only for optional goodies so what happened with the 360/PS3 versions to make them mandatory to progress the story?

Super Mario 3D Land and Super Mario 3D World also have this problem and I do hate it there as well. Though I can look past the annoyance since a lot are in your face and you don't need a lot, still don't like it and wish it was just optional

 

[Wolfe]

Not having to shift into 1st/drive at the start of the race, even with manual w/ clutch.
With no input required, race starts become a peeve, no better than repeated unskippable cutscenes, worsening with extra cinematic flair. Even automated launch control systems in modern slushbox performance cars involve timing your input, if you are beholden to a timed start. Getting a perfectly-timed start is an art; half the value in drag racing. Getting a jump ahead with a fully-manual start in a sim like PCARS2 without triggering a penalty is way more fun than sitting through a starting sequence for no practical reason.

 

[RandomCarGuy17]

Getting a perfectly-timed start is an art; half the value in drag racing. Getting a jump ahead with a fully-manual start in a sim like PCARS2 without triggering a penalty is way more fun than sitting through a starting sequence for no practical reason.

...

---
Okay, here's something that actually still peeves me. Bad default control mapping in games and not being able to customize my controls at all.

The first game I think of immediately is The Crew 2 and no, I don't want to let this issue go. It's so stupid that Ivory Tower won't do something so simple that games as far back as the PS1 have managed to do; actually change my control setup. I hate that the accelerator and brake are right next to the shift buttons. It's so awkward to a point where I think about just using automatic. I hate it!

but the controls are the least of that game's worries.

 

[Wolfe]

@RandomCarGuy17 -- Gah. The fixed shoulder button shift controls in TC2 put a bullet into the game's longevity when it struggled enough already. And to fix it with the PS4's button remapping means screwing up the menu controls and flight controls.

A whole open world driving game mostly played with automatic shifting, because screw it. What a waste.

 

[Sonygamer455]

I'm annoyed slightly with Enthusia Professional Racing for breaking away from the standard menu controls on a PS2 game. With every other game I played on my PS2; it's been programmed into my mind that Triangle is "go back". However Konami for some reason decided for this game to make it the square button. I know it lists the controls on the menu screen, but I still end up not listening due to my muscle memory.

Although I have talked about this pet peeve already, I got The Need for Speed recently and it's a new one I could add to this. It ironically also uses the square button to go back on the menus and I don't think it can be changed. While it doesn't surprise me much given it's an early PS1 release, it still bugs me a little.

Even worse is they made the square button the accelerator and X as the brake when driving. Thankfully this can be changed, but I wish that wasn't the default setting.

 

[NotThePrez]

Okay, here's something that actually still peeves me. Bad default control mapping in games and not being able to customize my controls at all.

I was actually getting ready to post the same thing, and The Crew 2 was one of the first things that came to mind as well. BioShock 1 also comes to mind with this as well, and as does the MG Wolfenstien games (namely the inability to swap melee and crouch/slide).

Conversely, another pet peeve (though quite rare in my experience) is when games have so many commands that buttons have to be used multiple times or in different patterns for other actions, which for some games makes customizing controls in a useable way a major chore, if not impossible. Star Wars Squadrons has basically collected proverbial dust in my collection because the buttons are needed for so many different things, and I'm unable to come up with a control scheme similar to Ace Combat that also works with the contextual actions sprinkled in the game.

Imo, every game should at least have the option for customizable controls, and I've yet to see a good reason for why not (outside of standard development time/resource issues).

 

[Wolfe]

@Sonygamer455 -- On the race starts, I was mainly just yanking your chain over the fact that my game does starts like that. I couldn't resist, sorry. 🐺

Imo, every game should at least have the option for customizable controls, and I've yet to see a good reason for why not (outside of standard development time/resource issues).

This is an example of a double-edged sword in learning to develop a game (a newer peeve for me). Discovering how easy it can be to implement some things...and discovering how ****ing easy it is to implement some things. I'm in a weird place in relation to driving/racing games these days.

Probably the best excuse for not offering customizable controls is the sort of complexity you mentioned -- though that evaporates somewhat on PC, where a keyboard can catch the spillover that cannot fit on a gaming device.

 

[Sonygamer455]

@Sonygamer455 -- On the race starts, I was mainly just yanking your chain over the fact that my game does starts like that. I couldn't resist, sorry. 🐺

Oh, it's all good, my reaction was intended to be humorous anyway. I can understand where you're coming from though because choosing manual and then having it shift into drive for you seems a bit contradictory if you ask me.

 

[Com Fox]

True Endings

It kills a story for me to have the ending of the game I got invalidated because there's a "true ending". This is worse if to get the True Ending I have to get every other ending.

I hear the defence for these that the game is just trying to get you to piece the story together and see the story from every characters perspective. I have 2 problems with this.

1. The game gets very repetitive of subsequent playthroughs if not much has changed or I don't care for the character involved with the ending and it turns the game into a chore more than an experience especially when I'm only doing it for an ulterior motive.

2. You don't need a True Ending. Fire Emblem Three Houses proves you can have multiple endings with different character perspectives while not dangling in a True Ending. You can play one ending and be done and satisfied with it, or play them all and piece it together if you want. Three Houses doesn't force you to, you do it if you want to and I respect that a lot.

 

[Sonygamer455]

Repetitive Dialogue.

Theirs some more examples I failed to mention that I feel are worth noting, not sure how I missed them. 🤔

Spoiler: More examples

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Been a long time since I played this game again, but I can remember the characters had lines of dialogue that would play every time you performed a move. I don't think it's as bad as one would expect, I think you eventually get used to it. However, I am not sure I would feel about it now as an adult but it's an example either way and I kind of would be happier if they didn't do this as much.
TNN Motorsports Hardcore 4x4.
The announcer in this game comments a lot on what you do and can get pretty repetitive after a while.
Lego Star Wars The Force Awakens.
One the most recently released games I know for this. There are various places in the game where the characters repeat themselves way too much. While not technically dialogue I guess, most examples of this are grunts, screams, or something to that effect and it's at the very least related. Perhaps the most annoying one is when you're in the same room as C-3PO on Millennium Falcon. He will constantly nag you to play Dejarik Battle if you're nearby and he never stops unless you walk out of the room or choose to play the game. It would make sense if where he was contained a lot of stuff you might unlock over time and he wanted to notify you something new was there, but it's not and it's just pointless and annoying nagging instead. Why they did this, I don't even know.
NASCAR Racing 2003 Season. Played this one again recently and found the spotters are even worse at repeating themselves than that of NASCAR '99. Most notably, if it gets 3 wide, the spotter will likely tell you this as many as 3 or 4 times in about 5 seconds. To be fair you can adjust the frequency in which they speak, but even on the lowest setting, I still found him repeating himself a bit too much.

Like, I get the spotter is intended to help you, but he can get way too repetitive at times saying the same things over and over again.

 

[RACECAR]

True Endings

It kills a story for me to have the ending of the game I got invalidated because there's a "true ending". This is worse if to get the True Ending I have to get every other ending.

I hear the defence for these that the game is just trying to get you to piece the story together and see the story from every characters perspective. I have 2 problems with this.

1. The game gets very repetitive of subsequent playthroughs if not much has changed or I don't care for the character involved with the ending and it turns the game into a chore more than an experience especially when I'm only doing it for an ulterior motive.

2. You don't need a True Ending. Fire Emblem Three Houses proves you can have multiple endings with different character perspectives while not dangling in a True Ending. You can play one ending and be done and satisfied with it, or play them all and piece it together if you want. Three Houses doesn't force you to, you do it if you want to and I respect that a lot.

I think the overall problem lies in the execution rather then the concept. It feels to me like the way those are implemented as you described are at best a lazy way to keep you playing while not giving you any tangible or reasonable gains other then "There's this ending I need to get". I think it could actually be done well if you got one ending, then it opened new things in the other playthroughs as well as some new Objectives that actually added something meaningful to the storyline. That way, there would be an actual meaningful reason to do another playthrough. If this includes different perspectives, then have things like special powers or collectibles that are specific to each one so that there is an actual reason to go back and playthrough. Also, I think "True Ending" is a name that needs to be ditched as it simply comes off as making your effort for beating it once feel meaningless.

 

[Jimlaad43]

True Endings

It kills a story for me to have the ending of the game I got invalidated because there's a "true ending". This is worse if to get the True Ending I have to get every other ending.

I hear the defence for these that the game is just trying to get you to piece the story together and see the story from every characters perspective. I have 2 problems with this.

1. The game gets very repetitive of subsequent playthroughs if not much has changed or I don't care for the character involved with the ending and it turns the game into a chore more than an experience especially when I'm only doing it for an ulterior motive.

2. You don't need a True Ending. Fire Emblem Three Houses proves you can have multiple endings with different character perspectives while not dangling in a True Ending. You can play one ending and be done and satisfied with it, or play them all and piece it together if you want. Three Houses doesn't force you to, you do it if you want to and I respect that a lot.

Play the Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic games. They have many different and totally legitimate endings depending on how you play the game, and all make sense and are rewarding.

Of course, there is a "canon" story which was determined by the writers and Lucasfilm after the game's release, so it's not part of the game to intentionally direct you towards it.

 

[Com Fox]

I think the overall problem lies in the execution rather then the concept. It feels to me like the way those are implemented as you described are at best a lazy way to keep you playing while not giving you any tangible or reasonable gains other then "There's this ending I need to get". I think it could actually be done well if you got one ending, then it opened new things in the other playthroughs as well as some new Objectives that actually added something meaningful to the storyline. That way, there would be an actual meaningful reason to do another playthrough. If this includes different perspectives, then have things like special powers or collectibles that are specific to each one so that there is an actual reason to go back and playthrough. Also, I think "True Ending" is a name that needs to be ditched as it simply comes off as making your effort for beating it once feel meaningless.

It might the execution, if it makes it clear. My prime examples have been:

1. Shadow the Hedgehog, 10 non-canon endings just to get the true ending in a separate mode. Can't even tell which levels or pathway to get to the true ending was even canon. And playing the first level 10 times is a pain

2. Angels with Scaly Wings, my first attempt at a Visual Novel. It actually tried to explain why you are getting the true ending after your first playthrough but that doesn't fix the problem in the first place. I got the Neutral ending on my first playthrough and only really wanted to replay it for Lorems ending since Lorem was my favourite character though the fact it doesn't count cause of the true ending existence sucks. I did do the other endings and while I did enjoy playing through Bryces eventually until the ending was just used to serve as a red herring. The other 3 were a drag to get through, also doesn't help unlike Bryce and Lorem who were pretty independent routes, the other 3 are all connected to each other and you had to do things in all 3 routes to get each of the endings. The True ending was not worth it at all especially when Lorem actually was an afterthought and Bryce barely did anything for the sake of the other 3 characters I couldn't care for but even if it was worth it, the fact all the stories I did up to the point were redundant would leave a terrible taste

When I told my friend who has an interest in Visual Novels my displeasure with how the game goes about things when it had a good set up at the beginning, she defended by claiming "all Visual Novels are like that", not sure if true but that makes me not want to pick up another Visual Novel.

Play the Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic games. They have many different and totally legitimate endings depending on how you play the game, and all make sense and are rewarding.

Of course, there is a "canon" story which was determined by the writers and Lucasfilm after the game's release, so it's not part of the game to intentionally direct you towards it.

If only I had the means to play it. I don't really mind a "Canon ending" established after the fact as that's just executive meddling and no fault of the actual game writing

 

[Sonygamer455]

Upon revisiting Hot Wheels Velocity X for the first time in forever, I was reminded of a pet peeve I had long forgotten about. When you're playing challenge mode and have to avoid hitting the barrels, it doesn't disqualify you right then and there, you have to pause the game and restart it in order to start over. It kind of relates to that pet peeve I had earlier about having to constantly respond to menus, but the frequency of which you have to do it depends on player experience. I imagine the reason it doesn't stop you in your tracks when you fail is so that way you can analyze the rest of the challenge so you know what to do next, but I'd really prefer it if it wasn't like that. Like, I get it, I failed the challenge, can you not just stop right then and there instead of me having to do it myself?

 

[mika haka]

Lack of controller mapping and poor controls

Many a good game is ruined by wonky controls and the lack of remapping it to make it bearable.

Considering it takes a dev 5 mins to do theres is no excuse but still a lot of games dont implement this function.

Considering how big an audience you are trying to reach you would think it would be standard to appeal to as many people as possible

 

[Sonygamer455]

So yet another pet peeve I have with Hot Wheels Velocity X, similar to what I said about NFS Carbon earlier, is when I boot the game, it will check if a valid memory card has been inserted, but doesn't do anything beyond that. It checks for it and makes a note when it finds one, but then won't load whatever save game(s) I have on it. Instead, if I want to load one, I have to navigate to "Load Game" on the main menu to do this.

Okay, why can’t it just ask to load my save game instead of forcing me to navigate the menus? If it’s not going to ask to load it there, why have it check the memory card? The game already does that when you select “Load Game”, so what is even the point in doing this anyways?

 

[Com Fox]

So yet another pet peeve I have with Hot Wheels Velocity X, similar to what I said about NFS Carbon earlier, is when I boot the game, it will check if a valid memory card has been inserted, but doesn't do anything beyond that. It checks for it and makes a note when it finds one, but then won't load whatever save game(s) I have on it. Instead, if I want to load one, I have to navigate to "Load Game" on the main menu to do this.

Okay, why can’t it just ask to load my save game instead of forcing me to navigate the menus? If it’s not going to ask to load it there, why have it check the memory card? The game already does that when you select “Load Game” anyways, so what is even the point in doing this anyways?

Pokémon Colosseum and XD do it as well.

It doesn't necessarily annoy me but, why?

 

[Sonygamer455]

Pokémon Colosseum and XD do it as well.

It doesn't necessarily annoy me but, why?

Exactly! It's so pointless, it confuses me.

I sometimes will wander into the game thinking it's already loaded, only to realize it isn't and then I have to go all the way back to the main menu to load it.

 

[Sonygamer455]

Long Passwords.
This is mostly relevant in older games rather than newer ones since password systems eventually became obsolete later on. I have mixed feelings about password systems in video games, they can be useful in some cases, but in others, they can be kind of annoying, and impractical compared to just having a save option. If the passwords are only a few characters long, that's not too bad and can be easily memorized. However, when they're pretty dang long, too hard to remember, and are a lot to write down, that's where I have a problem with them.

Some examples I encountered:

Spoiler

Spongebob Squarepants Legend of the Lost Spatula. Growing up as a kid, I hated how long the passwords were in this game. They were 10 characters long and I really struggled to remember them and what made it even worse is I didn't always have a means of writing them down. So keeping track of my progress was a bit problematic and even as an adult it still is. Why this game couldn't have just had a save option instead of this password system, I don't even know.

Crash Bandicoot. Oh man, this game is arguably the 2nd worst I have seen. It has regular passwords for those that don't have any gems, which are just 8 characters long, not too bad I guess. 🤷 Then you have the super passwords for those who do have gems, which are 24 characters long! Okay, I understand not everyone was on board with the idea of having memory cards at the time of its release, so the use of a password system makes sense and I can imagine why they're as long as they are. Still though, 24 characters is pretty obscene and is the longest I have ever seen to date.

Fortunately, this game also supports saving to a memory card, so it can be avoided if needed provided you have a memory card.

GT Advance Championship Racing. The most infamous one I have seen yet and one I think many who have played the game can agree on. This game has passwords that are 16 characters long. Okay, it may be less than Crash, but Crash has 4 different buttons that can be entered. GT Advance however has a whole slew of letters, numbers, and other random things in its passwords including upper and lowercase letters. I love this game, but I couldn't even be bothered to play it for a while simply because of the absurd passwords this game had. Which is a shame because its password system is a nasty stain on an otherwise great game.

What makes all this an even bigger kick in the gut is the Japanese release of the game has an actual save function. However, when it was later released in other regions, it was replaced with this crummy password system, which some think was a cost-cutting measure. This might just be one of the worst revisions made for a game I have ever seen. They had it right the first time and then chose to do this. 👎

 

[Com Fox]

Fortunately, this game also supports saving to a memory card, so it can be avoided if needed provided you have a memory card.

Barely. You have to complete a Tauna or Brio bonus stage or get a Gem to save.

 

[Sonygamer455]

Barely. You have to complete a Tauna or Brio bonus stage or get a Gem to save.

Indeed, this also applies to getting your password as well. Whether you wanted to get your password or save it to a memory card, the save system was implemented very badly in this game. Fortunately, the devs for The N'Sane Trilogy understood this and ditched the password system entirely, and made it much easier to save.

 

[TPGRacing75]

Theirs some more examples I failed to mention that I feel are worth noting, not sure how I missed them. 🤔

Spoiler: More examples

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Been a long time since I played this game again, but I can remember the characters had lines of dialogue that would play every time you performed a move. I don't think it's as bad as one would expect, I think you eventually get used to it. However, I am not sure I would feel about it now as an adult but it's an example either way and I kind of would be happier if they didn't do this as much.
TNN Motorsports Hardcore 4x4.
The announcer in this game comments a lot on what you do and can get pretty repetitive after a while.
Lego Star Wars The Force Awakens.
One the most recently released games I know for this. There are various places in the game where the characters repeat themselves way too much. While not technically dialogue I guess, most examples of this are grunts, screams, or something to that effect and it's at the very least related. Perhaps the most annoying one is when you're in the same room as C-3PO on Millennium Falcon. He will constantly nag you to play Dejarik Battle if you're nearby and he never stops unless you walk out of the room or choose to play the game. It would make sense if where he was contained a lot of stuff you might unlock over time and he wanted to notify you something new was there, but it's not and it's just pointless and annoying nagging instead. Why they did this, I don't even know.
NASCAR Racing 2003 Season. Played this one again recently and found the spotters are even worse at repeating themselves than that of NASCAR '99. Most notably, if it gets 3 wide, the spotter will likely tell you this as many as 3 or 4 times in about 5 seconds. To be fair you can adjust the frequency in which they speak, but even on the lowest setting, I still found him repeating himself a bit too much.

Like, I get the spotter is intended to help you, but he can get way too repetitive at times saying the same things over and over again.

The spotter for the new NASCAR 21: Ignition game is so bad at times he gives the infamous Flame Hyenard from Megaman X7 a run for his money in the department of "randomly spam the same 2 or 3 phrases over and over so fast you cut yourself off."

 

[Com Fox]

Canon Names for Protagonists you can name.

I don't like because it takes away the whole idea of the Protagonist being an extension of yourself via naming them by just labelling a canon version. Especially have this peeve in Pokémon, I have no clue who this "Red" guy is or where he came from because from what I recall the guy who took down Giovanni had a Raichu, and didn't have all the Kanto starters...

There is also the opposite end of spectrum where the whole game series is told based on this canon protagonist, what's the point of giving us the option to name them and might as well just make them an actual character. Like Legend of Zelda, whole game franchise is centred around the idea of the incarnations Link and Zelda, why bother naming Link anything else until BotW where that was no longer an option.

Undertale is really the only one that did this right with the naming screen serving a completely different purpose

 

[GTracer38]

Two that have popped up recently;

- Getting a 'free-kick' at the start of the game.
For instance, having your first car in a game being a McLaren Senna or something of that type.
For me, it kills any interest in actually playing through the story/career to try and build up to the fast stuff, even if I opt not to use it for the career.

- Every car being the 'ultimate' version of itself
If there is a BMW 3-series in a game, its an M3. If there's a Merc A-Class, its the AMG. If there's a...
It's nice to have some 'lesser' cars in a game both for their own quirks and enjoyment, and to make the 'hero' cars more impressive.


And just a brief thought, the rise of e-sports seems to have made a lot of people taking everything a bit too seriously all the time (online racing) and seemingly not able to just have a casual race.
Even in public lobbies people seem to think they are fighting for a spot in McLaren Shadow and that any battling is punishable by death.

I don't know if driver/safety ratings help or cause that. Getting further up should make things cleaner, but the fact they are there suggest that the races aren't for casual fun, but more for serious racing.

 

[Sonygamer455]

Confusing track layouts.
What I mean by this is that there are some tracks that are set up in a way that doesn’t do a very good job at letting you know where you can and can’t go and can confuse the player into going somewhere they shouldn’t. Although I don’t see this very often thankfully, it can be pretty annoying and disorienting at times, to the point it can ruin an entire race.

Some examples I could name:

Spoiler

TNN Motorsports Hardcore 4X4. This game is one of the worst games I have played in recent years and the track layouts are a huge part of why I think so. Literally all the tracks in the game generally do not do a good job at separating the playable area from its scenery. I sometimes find myself driving into what I thought was another pathway, only to learn it’s a solid wall instead. Hades Highway and Arctic Inferno are the worst in the game for this because they have really bad color separation and the walls are even harder to notice than the other tracks. And all this is made even worse if you try to play the tracks at night with weather turned on. The track designs in this game are simply not good and confusing if you don’t already know them.

GT Advance Championship Racing.
I love this game, but the city tracks, namely Main Street, Dash, Running Free, Yellow Post, Good Line, and Barracuda, are the worst I have seen yet for this. To be fair, the game does have a map and arrows on the HUD to help guide you, but this is not enough. The layout of these tracks is so confusing, I have found myself needing to practice on them a few times in order to get familiar with it enough to race on it. You have various intersections on the tracks with no visible walls or anything on the track to let you know you shouldn’t go there other than some yellow stripes on the pavement. I’m sorry, but painting stripes on the road is just not good enough to let the player know it’s off-limits. I don’t expect much from a GBA game, but if they can put trees, road signs, billboards, and even statues on the track, what’s stopping them from adding visible walls to let the player know it’s off-limits?! They don’t have to be big, just enough to keep the player from driving there and make it easier to navigate.

Gran Turismo 5. Although it’s probably a low blow to put this track here since I feel it’s not the devs fault and they just wanted to make it as close to the real thing as possible, the Top Gear Test Track is another example of this. When I first got the game, I sometimes got confused on where to go at certain points due to how the track is designed and I think even now I sometimes mess up still.

It’s not nearly as bad as the other examples I mentioned, but it’s not one I can ignore either.

One could argue a lot of this could just be inexperience, but I really feel like some of these are simple things that shouldn’t be a problem to begin with and could have been designed better. It really shouldn’t be that hard to know where to go on a racetrack, especially on a closed circuit.

 

[Com Fox]

Precision Levels.

They have their fans but I don't like them. Often seen in Platformers or games with custom Levels. They always felt like they were made by someone who is good at the game but still doesn't know how to make a good level and Precision is the only challenge they can think of.

They aren't aesthetically pleasing, they're just tight blocks placed around a mostly empty void. There is no incentive to replay it to try something new or explore, it's often finish it and never touch it again.

If I wanted a frame perfect challenge, I'd just try and perform frame perfect glitches

 

[ULTRAVIOLENZZ]

Some modern Japanese games specially JRPG's empty, lifeless, generic worlds.

 

[MedigoFlame]

I was worried I wouldn't enjoy Halo Infinite's open world nature that feels a bit too much like Far Cry (even though I never played any). But surprisingly, I rather enjoyed the gameplay and side objectives despite the fairly repetitive nature.

However, I am getting really tired of most modern games having stories that are mostly told through audio logs and the main antagonist monologuing about how much better they are than you. Sure, I'm supposed to hate the main bad guy, but having him constantly go on and on about how superior he is just doesn't make me care. The audio logs end up more as an annoying background noise during gameplay than something I'd feel invested in. Always enjoyed Halo's story telling, even if it wasn't the best at times, but Halo Infinite's story telling felt rather poor to me.