Sign in to follow this  
arrr_matey

Features all games should have

Recommended Posts

I'm playing Splinter Cell right now and I'm getting really freaking annoyed by cutscenes that can't be bypassed, even after you've seen them twelve times since you keep getting killed by freaking Georgian terrorists. Why? Why would any designer do this? Why not just make them skippable?

It made me think that it seems like some designers just don't pay attention to what other games have innovated. There should be some kind of standard feature list that gets added to every time a game figures out something cool. Here's two that I think should be implemented in every game right away.

1) Always make cutscenes skippable *and* pausable. I hate having to choose between answering the phone and watching a crucial plot development scene. Why not make them pausable? Is that so hard to do technologically?

2) Every game, but especially stealth and horror games, should have a "look behind you" feature like the GTA games do. It's simple. On pS2 it would just be clicking L3 or R3 like in GTA. Most of the time, those buttons aren't used anyway. How hard can it be?

Anybody got others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree. Skippable cutscenes are a total crime, but thankfully most games include this feature. Pausable cutscenes, however, haven't really caught on at all - which is a real pain.

It's particularly irritating in Metal Gear Solid. Whilst the cutscenes are beautiful and interesting to watch, they can drag on for freakin' ages. We're talking ten minutes here - not ideal if your favourite tv show is about to start. I have to choose between watching the entire cutscene (which I really do want to do, and missing it in MGS results in major plot confusion) or skipping it and having to revert to a (usually, much earlier) saved game. Agh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1) Always make cutscenes skippable *and* pausable. I hate having to choose between answering the phone and watching a crucial plot development scene. Why not make them pausable? Is that so hard to do technologically?
You, sir, have made a very good point. I have never really thought of a pause button, but now that you mention it... YES, I'd like that very much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

microsoft and sony both require the rolling demos to be skippable, but sadly not cutscenes, although they do frown on them occasionally.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anybody got others?

Quickstart and quickquit. Plenty of games have this sort of feature, and it's great, but those that don't need to have their programmers burn in hell.

I'm playing Indiana Jones & the Emperor's Tomb right now, and honestly it's about 6 or 8 clicks / over a minute of stupid animated menu screens before you can start your last saved game. It's ridiculous. There needs to be a "resume last saved game" right there on the launcher.

Similarly it's about 4 or so clicks to get back to the desktop at the end of the game. You should be able to hit the quit button, have one "are you sure" confirmation then be dumped to the desktop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like a button that physically disconnected the clock generator from all processors and chips in the computer, so that everything would be pausable, no matter what. Also, I would think it would be easier to implement a pause function than a skip function in cut-scenes. I mean, with a pause you only have to stop all simulations and sounds and what have you, until you press pause again. With skip you have to move everything to where it's supposed to be at the end of the cut-scene, and modify the game state properly (doors opening and whatnot). I'm no professor, but that's what I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the game can implement it with out ruining the mood, a PC or Xbox game are usually greatly improved with an in game MP3 player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get the custom music stuff in newer games. I mean, has the music guy in a game ever really sucked so much as to warrant playing Metallica .mp3s or whatever instead of the music that's specifically made or chosen for the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game I didn't mind not being able to skip the cutscenes was Final Fantasy VII (can't explain why), but most of the time (if they're not important and not done well) they're quite annoying.

Although I agree with you Thrik re: MGS -- I used to play it on my lunch break when I games tested and I'd get a little way through and a massive conversation or something would occur and I'd be forced to turn it off before it ended and thus losing what I did so far - argh! (Still, great game when you have the time! :))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Co-op co-op co-op

Amen. Particularly with an FPS, the level of enjoyment taken from a game is multiplied tenfold when you're bustin' skulls with a buddy. Even The Library (the level from Halo that critics and gamers repeatedly put down and call "repetitive") is amazingly fun with co-op.

And if what I hear is correct, Splinter Cell 3 with co-op will, without a doubt, kick some serious tail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amen. Particularly with an FPS, the level of enjoyment taken from a game is multiplied tenfold when you're bustin' skulls with a buddy. Even The Library (the level from Halo that critics and gamers repeatedly put down and call "repetitive") is amazingly fun with co-op.

FOr sure. Randomly enough, I just played The Library on co-op the day before yesterday. And yeah, it was a blast. That level is indeed repetitive, but it really gets you on edge and gets the blood pumping. It'll be totally quiet, then out of nowhere a hojillion guys will bust out of the wall. You have to be in the mood for it, but if you are it's good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Co-op co-op co-op

Yes, yes, yes. Which is why my summer game (coming soon from LaceyWare.com ;) ) will feature single-PC co-operative play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, yes, yes. Which is why my summer game (coming soon from LaceyWare.com ;) ) will feature single-PC co-operative play.

It sounds good, but I've yet to find a modern computer that can handle two players using the same keyboard without problems.

edit:

I'm guessing it's the keyboard that's the problem, and not the computer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It sounds good, but I've yet to find a modern computer that can handle two players using the same keyboard without problems.

edit:

I'm guessing it's the keyboard that's the problem, and not the computer.

Are PCs still bad at single-PC multiplayer gaming? With joysticks and joypads now being USB, there is no excuse for not having as much multiplayer flexibility on the PC as on concoles (other than the obvious problrms of having to crowd around a tiny monitor instead of a heaving behemouth of a TV). Anyway, even without multiple reaal controllers, one player on the keyboard and one on a joystick served us well in the bygone Amiga days.

Also, on 'custom' music, I don't think it's anything to do with the in-game music being bad, it's just about adding longevity. No matter how good GTA3's soudntrack is, I got tired of it. Being able to stick my massive wadge of MP3s into the mix made it a little bit more fun for longer. And in fact, having an 'MP3' radio station actually gave me a real reason to play GTA3, because I was getting the chance to hear long-lost MP3s when, erm, setting up a random playlist in WinAMp was too much effort or something.

Also my spelling is up the spout, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GTA is a really bad example though, since the music is just a random bunch of songs and its music isn't really linked to any specific event, mood or time in the game at all. It has little relation to the actual gameplay other than plugging up the silence.

I think toblix was referring to games with a more specific soundtrack - such as, say, Beyond Good and Evil. I cannot really imagine the dramatic moments when you discover something dodgy and such being quite so dramatic if you've got (as he exampled) Metallica blasting all the way through it. Quite why anybody would want to do that is beyond me.

But yeah, that's probably why a lot of single player games don't have an mp3 player - they want the music they created specifically for that part of the game to play to keep with the mood they intended to set. I'm all for an mp3 player in games which don't really use the soundtrack in specific situations though - primarily, multiplayer games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are PCs still bad at single-PC multiplayer gaming? With joysticks and joypads now being USB, there is no excuse for not having as much multiplayer flexibility on the PC as on concoles (other than the obvious problrms of having to crowd around a tiny monitor instead of a heaving behemouth of a TV).

Crowding in front of a monitor shouldn't be a problem either with modern PC's.. most new ones will have S-Video out or RCA out and you can link directly to any decent new TV (especially the large expensive ones). I used my RCA out to my TV for a second monitor when I was in my dorm, so that I would have more real-estate for 3d modelling without the hassle of two monitors. The same can be done as a substitute monitor - or possibly you could split each player onto their own display, which brings me to my feature request; seperate displays for multiple players on computers that will support that option.

I would think that with 3d being around for so long now that developers would take advantage of that freedom more often, but we still do have a slew of games with no back view, peeking around corners and etc (though sometimes peeking around the corner would be totally useless). Being able to zoom in on stuff more often would be nice too, but it's an understandable hinderance, using textures that are hi-res enough to support that would be very taxing on the computer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It sounds good, but I've yet to find a modern computer that can handle two players using the same keyboard without problems.

edit:

I'm guessing it's the keyboard that's the problem, and not the computer.

The controls should be simple enough, and it will support keyboard, joystick and mouse. Plenty to choose from ;)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding multiplayer on a single PC: You guys have played You Don't Know Jack, right? Come on, surely you have. That's probably the best single-PC multiplayer success story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Regarding multiplayer on a single PC: You guys have played You Don't Know Jack, right? Come on, surely you have. That's probably the best single-PC multiplayer success story.

Heh, yeah. Those YDKJ games rock. Especially when you're S-M-R-T, smart.

Though 3 big red game-show style buttons on a single USB port would really rock.

I used to play slicks-and-slide with my brother on 386 back in the day, one on numeric keypad, and one on some other left-alpha keys combo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YDKJ was awesome, but hardly needed much for multiplayer capabilities.. I mean, you just pressed a button to buzz and then a number for the answer. In any game where you're competing in a shooter or something you would need much more control than that, making it more cumbersome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want fast save/loads for action games. If it takes 20 seconds to quickload a game, then it's not quickload. Look at American McGee's Alice for a well implemented quickload system. It takes fraction of a second to load a game if you're already on that level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I want fast save/loads for action games. If it takes 20 seconds to quickload a game, then it's not quickload. Look at American McGee's Alice for a well implemented quickload system. It takes fraction of a second to load a game if you're already on that level.

Agreed. Games like Return to Castle Wolfenstein employed clever coding to all but eliminate quick-loading times (or so I remember). It really shouldn't be that difficult to retain constant data (such as the level layout itself) in memory, rather than reloading it on a regular basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed. Games like Return to Castle Wolfenstein employed clever coding to all but eliminate quick-loading times (or so I remember). It really shouldn't be that difficult to retain constant data (such as the level layout itself) in memory, rather than reloading it on a regular basis.

Good point! Apply that to any situation where you have to wait for no reason. As an example, take Burnout 2 on the Gamecube and its endless "Please wait" messages - which appear when it saves your 'progress' to the memory card (which it does even when you haven't made any) and when it reloads the level you're already on. A small irritation, but it all adds up. Mrrrgh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this