Retarded mechanics/features that never works out

[karoliner]

Crafting, random encounters, forced stealth sections in non-stealth games.

 

[†††]

Romance.

 

[Zlaja]

forced stealth sections in non-stealth games

Followed by an instant game-over/death if you get discovered.

 

[octavius]

Romance.

Romance is more like a feature that should not be included in the first place

 

[smaug]

I guess it would be more appropriate to call it an incomplete feature, but dialogue and alternative combat options are almost always reduced down to clicking an option in a menu without any agency on the players part.

It’s boring.

 

[Snorkack]

Is this the yearly 'Features I don't like because they're en vogue and I'm an elitist snob' thread?

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

1. Level scalling:
I don't know which game started with this idea but from the get go it was one hell of a stupid feature. They tried to explain it by stating that it would provide user with constant challenge and the world would level up with you, what it really lead to is that the same bandit that you could beat as complete newbie is still same threat as when you're knight in plate armor, everything becomes bloated, including your mother and all the fun of leveling is gone. It almost as communism where everyone is "equal", that in reality means everyone gets shit. I think I encountered it first in Oblivion but I bet it was there way before that.

It can be implemented in a different fashion by spawning new enemy types as you level up, e.g. you cleared the cave full of goblins a while ago, and now that same cave is occupied by bears or other stronger enemies. Another alternative is to make enemies 'smarter' by unlocking new abilities or giving them additional gear -- for example, a small percentage of bandits 'learns their lesson' and starts carrying healing items / poisonous darts / shields to slightly increase their chances of survival, but within a reasonable limit.

It's not the same as your example of level scaling, as my example focuses less on providing 'constant challenge' which neuters the feeling of progression, but rather on subtle changes to the game world.

 

[Butter]

1. Level scalling:
I don't know which game started with this idea but from the get go it was one hell of a stupid feature. They tried to explain it by stating that it would provide user with constant challenge and the world would level up with you, what it really lead to is that the same bandit that you could beat as complete newbie is still same threat as when you're knight in plate armor, everything becomes bloated, including your mother and all the fun of leveling is gone. It almost as communism where everyone is "equal", that in reality means everyone gets shit. I think I encountered it first in Oblivion but I bet it was there way before that.

It can be implemented in a different fashion by spawning new enemy types as you level up, e.g. you cleared the cave full of goblins a while ago, and now that same cave is occupied by bears or other stronger enemies. Another alternative is to make enemies 'smarter' by unlocking new abilities or giving them additional gear -- for example, a small percentage of bandits 'learns their lesson' and starts carrying healing items / poisonous darts / shields to slightly increase their chances of survival, but within a reasonable limit.

It's not the same as your example of level scaling, as my example focuses less on providing 'constant challenge' which neuters the feeling of progression, but rather on subtle changes to the game world.

This is how Oblivion did it, and it was anything but subtle.

 

[ValeVelKal]

Yes, level scaling can work well. A good example is Morrowind : the more you level up, the more "blighted" monster you encounter. It works well because :
- It is tied to the setting, with the blight getting more and more powerful
- Level scales slower than you, so you still grow in power relatively speaking
- There is "max scaling" depending in the arena, eg nothing scales above level 8 in the wilderness and level 15 in this or that type of cave.

 

[Alienman]

6. Random encounters
Especially when they are as boring and useless as in Solasta or Wasteland 2. They don't bring anything to the table, it's just a time waster oh hey some random, good for nothing bandits attacked you while you were camping 212131233th times and they didn't learn anything from last 23232323232 attemps where they failed, quess it's pointless combat again Woooohoooo. I think the only game where it kind of worked were first two Fallouts but even though those random encounter could be just areas to visit and then they could removed all together. Even if they did removed completely nothing of the value would be lost.

It's funny how random encounters in Solasta also screws the balance. I had so many encounters I was overleveled for the main missions, and it ruined the challenge.

 

[Kev Inkline]

I'm an elitist snob' thread?

Sir, this is Codex. Please use the rear entrance.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

1. Level scalling:
I don't know which game started with this idea but from the get go it was one hell of a stupid feature. They tried to explain it by stating that it would provide user with constant challenge and the world would level up with you, what it really lead to is that the same bandit that you could beat as complete newbie is still same threat as when you're knight in plate armor, everything becomes bloated, including your mother and all the fun of leveling is gone. It almost as communism where everyone is "equal", that in reality means everyone gets shit. I think I encountered it first in Oblivion but I bet it was there way before that.

It can be implemented in a different fashion by spawning new enemy types as you level up, e.g. you cleared the cave full of goblins a while ago, and now that same cave is occupied by bears or other stronger enemies. Another alternative is to make enemies 'smarter' by unlocking new abilities or giving them additional gear -- for example, a small percentage of bandits 'learns their lesson' and starts carrying healing items / poisonous darts / shields to slightly increase their chances of survival, but within a reasonable limit.

It's not the same as your example of level scaling, as my example focuses less on providing 'constant challenge' which neuters the feeling of progression, but rather on subtle changes to the game world.

This is how Oblivion did it, and it was anything but subtle.

Oblivion did a lot of things badly, doesn't mean the mechanic can't work if handled by a competent designer.

SaGa series have level scaling implemented in a similar fashion, but it works fine because (1) it only punishes you if you grind like crazy and (2) you get better rewards for fighting tougher enemies, so it evens out.

And this is coming from a guy who loathes level scaling, SaGa series might be the only exception where it worked for me.

 

[Decado]

Random encounters work just fine in a game like the Bard's Tale, or the variety of Final Fantasy games that relied on them for decades.

 

[jungl]

Level scaling is nice if it doesn't go full retard. Baldurs gate 2 lich being in a dungeon if the party level is high. If your murder hobo is growing in power in the world let there be other mystery niggas growing in power also but not everyone. Some games add new enemies and content with new difficulty modes which make for a amazing fun experience but they are few far and in between. Balance is cool when more stuff is relevant and there isn't a cookie cutter must haves like pozzfinder and outflank for martials make for boring builds.

 

[Hobo Elf]

Picking your stats and skills before playing the game and knowing what you like, or in worst cases what is actually viable. I mean, suppose it does "work out" in the end, particularly in replays. It's it's not uncommon for RPGs to front load a player with all the important decisions before they know anything about the game.

1. Level scalling:
I don't know which game started with this idea but from the get go it was one hell of a stupid feature. They tried to explain it by stating that it would provide user with constant challenge and the world would level up with you, what it really lead to is that the same bandit that you could beat as complete newbie is still same threat as when you're knight in plate armor, everything becomes bloated, including your mother and all the fun of leveling is gone. It almost as communism where everyone is "equal", that in reality means everyone gets shit. I think I encountered it first in Oblivion but I bet it was there way before that.

SaGa series have level scaling implemented in a similar fashion, but it works fine because (1) it only punishes you if you grind like crazy and (2) you get better rewards for fighting tougher enemies, so it evens out.

And this is coming from a guy who loathes level scaling, SaGa series might be the only exception where it worked for me.

There is no level scaling in SaGa, except for Scarlet Grace. It's encounter scaling. You aren't fighting an infinitely scaling mook. The enemies periodically get replaced with new, tougher enemies that require different tactics. It's basically the method of how you scale encounters in D&D vs the party level. You look up the bestiary and see what's level appropriate. Also bosses, with some exceptions, are static, which means that you can't avoid combat or else you will lose, so you still have a sense of progress when your characters gain power.
There are lots of systems in SaGa that work to make the scaling function well. Sad that the west has no idea how it could be done, but I guess it would require more effort than making enemy HP and damage variables that go up each time the player levels up.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

There is no level scaling in SaGa, except for Scarlet Grace. It's encounter scaling. You aren't fighting an infinitely scaling mook. The enemies periodically get replaced with new, tougher enemies that require different tactics. It's basically the method of how you scale encounters in D&D vs the party level. You look up the bestiary and see what's level appropriate. Also bosses, with some exceptions, are static, which means that you can't avoid combat or else you will lose, so you still have a sense of progress when your characters gain power.
There are lots of systems in SaGa that work to make the scaling function well. Sad that the west has no idea how it could be done, but I guess it would require more effort than making enemy HP and damage variables that go up each time the player levels up.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[deuxhero]

Crafting

There's a few examples of good crafting, but they're by far the minority. Off the top of my head, I can think of Fallout: New Vegas (Crafting is an application of otherwise useful skills and used either to make consumables that wouldn't make sense as loot directly from junk you can find anywhere but is too heavy to practically stockpile, or as a way to turn unique/unusual items unique/unusual equipment when it wouldn't make sense to get that equipment as loot directly), Knights of the Old Republic 2 (except for very basic weapons that are a small help in the opening dungeon, crafted items are all about making existing unique items stay relevant against more threatening foes. Only one type of crafting material for equipment crafting, and its obtained by turning unwanted items into it), the Swordcraft Story games (MC is a swordsmith of a tradition that will only fight with their hammer or a weapon they made themselves. Series is all about finding new materials and recipes to make weapons out of.).

 

[perfectslumbers]

The only feature I truly believe shouldn't exist is forced stealth sections with invincible enemies who one shot you. There was a Zelda game on the DS I played as a kid that was entirely based around this called Phantom Hourglass, I was 7 years old and got so mad at it that I threw the cartridge in the trash.

 

[SomeGuyWithAnOpinion]

Imagine considering balance and save limitation to be bad design.

This thread sucks and you suck for posting it.

 

[Maxwell's Demon]

6. Random encounters
Especially when they are as boring and useless as in Solasta or Wasteland 2. They don't bring anything to the table, it's just a time waster oh hey some random, good for nothing bandits attacked you while you were camping 212131233th times and they didn't learn anything from last 23232323232 attemps where they failed, quess it's pointless combat again Woooohoooo. I think the only game where it kind of worked were first two Fallouts but even though those random encounter could be just areas to visit and then they could removed all together. Even if they did removed completely nothing of the value would be lost.

Random encounters are really a holdover from the days when getting from point A to point B required traversing a hex grid terrain map cell by cell, and rolling on an encounter table each time. Part of what made the mechanic work was that sometimes the party would encounter threats far stronger than the PCs that would require the party to use their heads. This helped foster the illusion that there was a world beyond the PCs' story. However, take away the survival gameplay and random encounters just stop making sense.

 

[Dadd]

Crafting can be interesting if the crafting process is kept quick and simple, and if there are lots of useful interrelated recipes where items you craft can be used to create, modify or break down more items. Trying to simulate the real-life process of crafting is a pointless endeavor because all you're doing in video game crafting is click some buttons, which can't adequately imitate the much more complex process of crafting in real life.

The old Median XL mod for Diablo II does crafting well in this sense; it allows you to add modifiers, transmute, and reroll items without delay or cooldowns with easily acquired items, many of which you would need outside of crafting anyway. Many useful recipes that you can use from the get-go without the game dragging its feet trying to make you understand how special its crafting system is, or how exceptional the occasion to craft is, or hiding crafting behind numerous fetch/other retarded quests, or pointless cooldowns and delays to ineffectively simulate the time-consuming process of making things in real life.

 

[Sjukob]

RtWP is the worst combat system to ever be implemented, you should either make the game full real time or a proper turn based.

You know, WC3 fan made RPG campaigns that have you control a squad of heroes in a full real time mode with no pause, like chosen ones or to the bitter end, have better combat than any RtWP game, and those campaigns were made in 2004-2008 period. So I have no idea why has it never been mainstream or why do some people think that real time tactics do not exist.

 

[Rean]

RTwP

 

[Atrachasis]

And what if the palyer doesn't want to follow these virtues? How do things play out?

Never played it personally.

As far as I can tell you have no choice. The reason U4 is referenced as a good "morality play" is because progress often doesn't involve violence, which in 1985 was apparently hot shit to players.

The virtues themselves are cute. I remember reading cRPG Addict saying he used U4 as a perdonal basis for his ethics during his 20s...which is utterly absurd, but whatever. Kid wanted to stick to old-man Christianity I guess

Sounds kinda shit, honestly. I don't see how this makes a good morality system.

I think the most interesting aspect of the system was figuring out how the virtue "scores" were actually tied into gameplay mechanics, and balancing them properly. For example, Honor would require you to frequently engage in combat (thereby making those pesky random encounters actually worth something), but slaughtering fleeing enemies would lower your Compassion. The conditions for raising or lowering your virtue stats were quite complex and not telegraphed to the player. That's still pretty unique up to today. Most developers would probably play it safe and tie such a scoring system to more obvious conditions such as dialogue choices.

 

[Falksi]

Some of the gripes the OP makes I can agree with. However...

The difficulty mode complaint is one of the gayest I've ever read. You're definitely playing shit games here, because well-crafted ones change up stuff like the amount of enemies and enemy AI. Harder modes often give a game so much more replayability.

And random encounters again offer more replayability to games, because you aren't churning through the same rigmarole each time you play, you get a slight bit of variety. Even if it's the same mobs only a few steps apart, it's still slightly different and less predictable.

The OP reads like he likes to play shit games once through, as opposed to great games over & over.