Why do developers shy away from problems instead of fixing them?

This really bothers me. Why do developers just coast by and ignore problems that have basically been there since the birth of 3D gaming?

Why is that player characters still don't change animations when walking in a set of stairs?

Why won't characters use their arms when opening doors instead of opening them with mental powers?

Why do swords still work like blunt weapons in most games?

How the hell is invisble walls still a viable way to close things off?

How big are pockets in gaming? Seems they can fit rocket launchers, machine guns, grenades and anything in between.

In fantasy games, why do weapons float on a characters back?

Does no one know how to climb? This is a huge problem in Skyrim. Why can't the player character just grab the ground to climb?

How is that main characters in every RPG can carry 50 swords, 200 potions and 500 keys, but none of it shows on their bodies? How about a bag and authentic limit?

Some of these things might be hard to do, other things are not hard at all. But if no one challenges these preset notions, then how the hell are we going to have any progress? I hate the notion of "everyone else does it, so why should we change it?". Ugh, developers, get your fucking shit togheter. They're fucking wizards with tech and coding, so why can't they just fix a few of these things?

Do you guys have anything like this that really grinds your gears?

@sthusby said:

This really bothers me. Why do developers just coast by and ignore problems that have basically been there since the birth of 3D gaming?

Why is that player characters still don't change animations when walking in a set of stairs?

Why won't characters use their arms when opening doors instead of opening them with mental powers?

Why do swords still work like blunt weapons in most games?

How the hell is invisble walls still a viable way to close things off?

How big are pockets in gaming? Seems they can fit rocket launchers, machine guns, grenades and anything in between.

In fantasy games, why do weapons float on a characters back?

Does no one know how to climb? This is a huge problem in Skyrim. Why can't the player character just grab the ground to climb?

How is that main characters in every RPG can carry 50 swords, 200 potions and 500 keys, but none of it shows on their bodies? How about a bag and authentic limit?

Some of these things might be hard to do, other things are not hard at all. But if no one challenges these preset notions, then how the hell are we going to have any progress? I hate the notion of "everyone else does it, so why should we change it?". Ugh, developers, get your fucking shit togheter. They're fucking wizards with tech and coding, so why can't they just fix a few of these things?

Do you guys have anything like this that really grinds your gears?

-The stair thing has been fixed for a long time by many games. Look at GTA 4, the Metal Gear games post 2, etc.

-There were games on the N64 that had fixed the door thing. Zelda:OoT did this. Several games have this.

-I don't understand the sword thing.

-Invisible wall aren't ok and many developers have attempted to fix that problem this generation.

-Not all games are meant to be realistic so the pocket thing is fine. Plus, would you like the opposite to be true?

-Not all weapons in all fantasy games float on people's backs. Plus, this isn't just a fantasy game problems.

-I don't get the climbing thing.

-The 50 swords, 200 potions, etc. is there because the opposite end of the spectrum would suck.

A lot of these can be answered with; A) Developers lack the resources, whether that be time or money - some things are simply more important than creating a dynamic system for door opening and mountain climbing, or B) certain things just aren't fun, and, as video games, things that are not fun should be kept to a bare minimum.

Prime A Example: Invisible walls exist because a world without limitations is still largely unfeasible in modern gaming. Even worlds with procedural generation will reach a limit and your game will crash.

Prime B Example: Encumberance sucks. It will always suck. It should never be in games.

@sthusby: Name a game that does everything you like.

Every single one of these things have been fixed in various game.

Those sounds less like problems and more just the nature of video games.

Why is that player characters still don't change animations when walking in a set of stairs?

They do? Pretty much all of rockstars recent games do it. and Uncharted does it.

Why won't characters use their arms when opening doors instead of opening them with mental powers?

Rockstar again, pretty much all their games, you open doors with your arms

Why do swords still work like blunt weapons in most games?

Games exist where swords pretty much win instantly on unarmored enemies(Mount and Blade)

How the hell is invisble walls still a viable way to close things off?

Because it's an easy way to do it and some devs don't feel like making a natural looking wall

How big are pockets in gaming? Seems they can fit rocket launchers, machine guns, grenades and anything in between.

Design choice. Some games don't do it. Max Payne 3 the most recent example.

In fantasy games, why do weapons float on a characters back?

Because of clipping issues

Does no one know how to climb? This is a huge problem in Skyrim. Why can't the player character just grab the ground to climb?

This annoys me too

How is that main characters in every RPG can carry 50 swords, 200 potions and 500 keys, but none of it shows on their bodies? How about a bag and authentic limit?

Because it's just too much to show, and an RPG with real life limits on carry weight would suck dick

@sthusby said:

How big are pockets in gaming? Seems they can fit rocket launchers, machine guns, grenades and anything in between.

How is that main characters in every RPG can carry 50 swords, 200 potions and 500 keys, but none of it shows on their bodies? How about a bag and authentic limit?

Because realistic isn't always fun.

Invisible walls are the best way to limit open world games that are not set on islands.

Invisible walls are the best way to limit open world games that are not set on islands.

Option A: Fix game breaking bug.

Option B: Develop exciting new gameplay system.

Option C: Add realistic stair-walking animation.

Hey look its Jeust.

Well we could add some new environments, work on facial animation and lip syncing, add some more enemy variety, or make it so the protagonist's pockets bulge realistically depending on inventory. Which is the best use of our time?

Whens the last time you played a game? Most of these are no longer problems in games.

Cash money, son. That's all what it boils down to. I'd argue it's more the fault of the industry the way it currently is then the fault of any specific devs, but that's a whole different topic.

We have limited time and resources, and most of the stuff you mentioned don't add to palatable fun for most players.

@sthusby said:

How big are pockets in gaming? Seems they can fit rocket launchers, machine guns, grenades and anything in between.

How is that main characters in every RPG can carry 50 swords, 200 potions and 500 keys, but none of it shows on their bodies? How about a bag and authentic limit?

I'd love to know your solutions to these, ehrm, "problems". Not to mention, of course, that you have just basically killed off any sort of loot-driven game and adventure games.

So, yeah, as someone said, these look not like problems but rather things that go with what a game is. And even if it's a pretty poor counter-argument, go try to fix it yourself. You'll see sometimes it's not as easy as "getting your shit together".

Option A: Fix game breaking bug.

Option B: Develop exciting new gameplay system.

Option C: Add realistic stair-walking animation.

@AhmadMetallic said:

@nintendoeats said:

Option A: Fix game breaking bug.

Option B: Develop exciting new gameplay system.

Option C: Add realistic stair-walking animation.

Uh, all 3 should be obligations for video game development in 2012.

That would be nice, but it's a completely idealistic view. The reality is that 99% of games come out with significantly less features than the developers wanted, and what they cut has as much of an effect on your experience as what they come up with. Of those 3, it's pretty obvious which one can be left by the wayside.

Wow, there are so many of these kinds of topics that pretty much ask "Why aren't games more realistic?"

When something is considered a problem, it's easier to shy away from it than solve it, and in development it's also cost effective.

Because money.  Pay for maps, the stuff that's on the disc you bought, and the privilege of multiplayer.  Freedom is slavery, etc.

@JasonR86 said:

@sthusby said:

This really bothers me. Why do developers just coast by and ignore problems that have basically been there since the birth of 3D gaming?

Why is that player characters still don't change animations when walking in a set of stairs?

Why won't characters use their arms when opening doors instead of opening them with mental powers?

Why do swords still work like blunt weapons in most games?

How the hell is invisble walls still a viable way to close things off?

How big are pockets in gaming? Seems they can fit rocket launchers, machine guns, grenades and anything in between.

In fantasy games, why do weapons float on a characters back?

Does no one know how to climb? This is a huge problem in Skyrim. Why can't the player character just grab the ground to climb?

How is that main characters in every RPG can carry 50 swords, 200 potions and 500 keys, but none of it shows on their bodies? How about a bag and authentic limit?

Some of these things might be hard to do, other things are not hard at all. But if no one challenges these preset notions, then how the hell are we going to have any progress? I hate the notion of "everyone else does it, so why should we change it?". Ugh, developers, get your fucking shit togheter. They're fucking wizards with tech and coding, so why can't they just fix a few of these things?

Do you guys have anything like this that really grinds your gears?

-The stair thing has been fixed for a long time by many games. Look at GTA 4, the Metal Gear games post 2, etc.

-There were games on the N64 that had fixed the door thing. Zelda:OoT did this. Several games have this.

-I don't understand the sword thing.

-Invisible wall aren't ok and many developers have attempted to fix that problem this generation.

-Not all games are meant to be realistic so the pocket thing is fine. Plus, would you like the opposite to be true?

-Not all weapons in all fantasy games float on people's backs. Plus, this isn't just a fantasy game problems.

-I don't get the climbing thing.

-The 50 swords, 200 potions, etc. is there because the opposite end of the spectrum would suck.

- Certainly some games that do it right. LA Noire for example. But I'm talking about the general in general. Most games don't change animations.

- Again, there are a few games that adress this. But when I play Skyrim, Rage, Dragon Age and so on, why can't they just animate a hand opening the door?

- A sword is sharp. Yet in games you just bash swords as if they were maces. Assassin's Creed not withstanding.

- Invisible Walls are poop. Same goes for knee-high obstacles.

- I really liked the way Max Payne did it. If I have to choose, I'd rather have that approach than the GTA approach. RDR was halfway there.

- Not all, but most. And yes ,that is true.

- When you get to a steep slope in a game, you always have to go around. In real life, you'd probably just use your arms and climb up.

- That may be true. But we don't really know because no one has tried.

Over to those of you who want to hear suggestions. Okay, I'll adress what I think would be an interesting twist to the whole inventory thing. Let's say I'm talking about a fantasy game in the vein of Skyrim or The Witcher.

How about making a backack. Let's say that this backpack was clearly visible and not just a mechanic. When encountering enemies you'd drop it when unsheating your weapon. When the fight is over, you would have to go and pick it up if you want your inventory back. Considering the backpack is visible on the characters back, this would also fix the floating weapon issue.

When it comes to storage, I'd imagine having to bundle weapons togheter when looting, and then attaching them to the side of the pack. Let's say you could carry a maximum of 15 weapons marked as loot. On top of that, there could be three active weapon slots. All of these would be visible on the outside of the pack.

When it comes to potions, these would have to be equipped before going into battle. I imagine having 20 slots for potions, and the potions are just tiny vials, and all of these would also be visible on your character whn equipped. Again, the vials would be very small, no bigger than a finger.

As for the amount available to store in the pack, that would have to depend on what is available to loot. For instance, I'd prefer not being able to loot clothing, as I've always found it wierd in games like Skyrim, where the enemies just end up in a naked pile somewhere. In general, I'd like to see being able to loot less, but having the loot being more valuable. Maybe one could do like Torchlight, and add a pet that can go to the nearest town and sell goods.

I think this would make for a much better sense of place, and a much more authentic feeling when playing. Of course this couldn't apply to all games, but at least it could apply for most fantasy games in the vein of Skyrim, The Witcher and so on.

I know I would be interested in a game that tried something like this. I always find it jarring when I go to the shop, and I pull out 20 swords and 50 iron ingots and sell them. It just breaks immersion for me, and I think we have a long way to go.

Because being lazy is cheaper and faster. Intelligent management of time and resources is a major part of the difference between a successful developer and an unsuccessful one.

You know what's incredibly realistic?? Real life.

Mine sucks, how's yours?

Naivety runs rampant in this thread.

@TentPole: amen.

Because making games is really, really, really fucking hard. Making something new and different is even harder.

Because it's easier to say than it is to do.

Lots of those thing have been fixed (Some in as early as Mario 64). Some of the animation ones are just too expensive to expect everyone to be doing. I don't care that there aren't 10,000 stair animations in a Double Fine game. I'm glad they use their resources to make games that play well. And that's really what all the unsolved issues on that list can be chalked up to. Fixing them would be at the cost of fun.

@JasonR86 said:

@sthusby said:

This really bothers me. Why do developers just coast by and ignore problems that have basically been there since the birth of 3D gaming?

Why is that player characters still don't change animations when walking in a set of stairs?

Why won't characters use their arms when opening doors instead of opening them with mental powers?

Why do swords still work like blunt weapons in most games?

How the hell is invisble walls still a viable way to close things off?

How big are pockets in gaming? Seems they can fit rocket launchers, machine guns, grenades and anything in between.

In fantasy games, why do weapons float on a characters back?

Does no one know how to climb? This is a huge problem in Skyrim. Why can't the player character just grab the ground to climb?

How is that main characters in every RPG can carry 50 swords, 200 potions and 500 keys, but none of it shows on their bodies? How about a bag and authentic limit?

Some of these things might be hard to do, other things are not hard at all. But if no one challenges these preset notions, then how the hell are we going to have any progress? I hate the notion of "everyone else does it, so why should we change it?". Ugh, developers, get your fucking shit togheter. They're fucking wizards with tech and coding, so why can't they just fix a few of these things?

Do you guys have anything like this that really grinds your gears?

-The stair thing has been fixed for a long time by many games. Look at GTA 4, the Metal Gear games post 2, etc.

-There were games on the N64 that had fixed the door thing. Zelda:OoT did this. Several games have this.

-I don't understand the sword thing.

-Invisible wall aren't ok and many developers have attempted to fix that problem this generation.

-Not all games are meant to be realistic so the pocket thing is fine. Plus, would you like the opposite to be true?

-Not all weapons in all fantasy games float on people's backs. Plus, this isn't just a fantasy game problems.

-I don't get the climbing thing.

-The 50 swords, 200 potions, etc. is there because the opposite end of the spectrum would suck.

Many games? Some games maybe, not most. And in the case of GTA it looked pretty good but got real janky at times. I would really like to see that stuff be like bump mapping, every game should use that stuff if it uses a third person format. Even if not, there are other characters you'll likely see going up some sort of incline. You're argument of "some games have fixed that!' doesn't really fly, because they are absolutely the minority. Even major titles find themselves without such details given any care.

That said, a lot of this stuff is realism focused, like swords acting differently than blunt weapons. In some games, that would be cool, and probably more could use it and get away with it considering their audience, but it can be crummy or frustrating at times. I am a fan of hyper realism in games, just because it's something no one has ACTUALLY done in any real sense.

Ultimately I think that it's a bit much to be so upset over generally small things. I think that stuff gets annoying sometimes, but for the most part I think it'd be cool to see it fixed, rather than it being a stupid major issue when it isn't.

The real problem is un-skippable cutscenes. I still don't get this one.

@sthusby said:

This really bothers me. Why do developers just coast by and ignore problems that have basically been there since the birth of 3D gaming?

Why is that player characters still don't change animations when walking in a set of stairs?

Why won't characters use their arms when opening doors instead of opening them with mental powers?

Why do swords still work like blunt weapons in most games?

How the hell is invisble walls still a viable way to close things off?

How big are pockets in gaming? Seems they can fit rocket launchers, machine guns, grenades and anything in between.

In fantasy games, why do weapons float on a characters back?

Does no one know how to climb? This is a huge problem in Skyrim. Why can't the player character just grab the ground to climb?

How is that main characters in every RPG can carry 50 swords, 200 potions and 500 keys, but none of it shows on their bodies? How about a bag and authentic limit?

Some of these things might be hard to do, other things are not hard at all. But if no one challenges these preset notions, then how the hell are we going to have any progress? I hate the notion of "everyone else does it, so why should we change it?". Ugh, developers, get your fucking shit togheter. They're fucking wizards with tech and coding, so why can't they just fix a few of these things?

Do you guys have anything like this that really grinds your gears?

Because all video games are set in magical altered worlds from reality.

They just look like stairs. Camera tricks.

Who wouldn't want to open doors with their mind? That would be awesome.

Swords in video games aren't sharpened for the same reason they're not sharp in movies. Don't want to hurt the stuntmen too much.

Walls of Force aren't hard to cast so why not cast permanent ones all over the place just to be a dick? It doesn't take THAT much xp to do it.

Video game pockets are really just epic bags of holding that can hold everything in a deceptively small pouch that can be sown anywhere on your clothing(or body).

Magic.

Because everyone in games are too tired to climb. When's the last time you let your character have a regular 8 hour sleep schedule?

Again: Epic Bags of Holding.

Games have limitations just like movies and tv/shows. Money and time aren't unlimited and sometimes you have to sacrifice the dismemberment budget to make your product.

When a single player game can only be played online.

Because fixing problems requires time, money and resources.

What I want to see is a 3rd person shooter game where one hit and you're dead but You can keep the regenerating health mechanic just have the bullet miss and let the screen go grey or red as if you were dying .The more you're exposed or outside cover the closer you are to being killed just like you would be if you were getting shot in any other game

You could call it a exposure meter or something .Man I'm really sick of games where you get shot a million times but in a cutscene one shot and you're wounded or it's suppose to have an impact or meaning it takes you out of it right away . It would make the cutscenes have more impact, and it would be so much cooler when you're running around having all the bullets traliing behind and hitting all the things around you like an action movie.

So this post can be summed up as this -- " I saw this problem recently in a game, so clearly it's endemic to video games as a whole! Why are video games broken?!"

Take a look at those games again, particularly the ones you enjoy. Now how many of those games do things that are completely beyond the boundaries of reality and belief; things that you are completely willing to accept within the fiction of the game. Things like regenerating health or health potions, picking up an item without having to bend over and physically pick it up and put it away, or how about the simple act of being able to save your game? So your problem is your ability to accept some tropes like these but not others like an infinite bag or an invisible wall (which itself has been remedied in the most mundane way possible -- conveniently placed rubble down every path you're not supposed to go. Yippee).

As for your complaints about trivial animations like stair or door animations, those things have been fixed in games for a long time telling me, as I said, you merely witnessed them in one game and decided to generalize.

And as for your follow up suggestion post thinking that it should be a physical backpack you pick up and put down and you bundle weapons... It sounds like what you want is a holodeck, not a video game. That sort of tedium might sound really appealing to you and a very small niche of people (the kind that make such mods for Oblivion or Skyrim, you should check some of em out sometime; they've got "Realistic survival and encumbrance" mods aplenty) but for the average player it would just be seen as completely pointless busy work that detracts from the game.

@jonano said:

What I want to see is a 3rd person shooter game where one hit and you're dead but You can keep the regenerating health mechanic just have the bullet miss and let the screen go grey or red as if you were dying .The more you're exposed or outside cover the closer you are to being killed just like you would be if you were getting shot in any other game

You could call it a exposure meter or something .Man I'm really sick of games where you get shot a million times but in a cutscene one shot and you're wounded or it's suppose to have an impact or meaning it takes you out of it right away . It would make the cutscenes have more impact, and it would be so much cooler when you're running around having all the bullets traliing behind and hitting all the things around you like an action movie.

So true man. I think this would be a solution as how to make swords feel like swords as well. Been thinking about that a lot, and if I'm not mistaken, the original Brothers in Arms did that to a degree. Only game I can think of.

And to those of you guys saying it's hard to develop these things. So fucking what? If no one is pushing boundries, we're not going anywhere. And I can't imagine it would be such a resource hog for Bethesda to actually animate a hand that open a door. Considering all doors in Skyrim swing inward, it would literally be enough to just make the character raise his hand with his palm towrds the door.

@sthusby:

because they're games that's why....

It's simple... they already have my money and I am still playing their game

because it's haaaaarrrrrdddd *stomps feet*

@sthusby said:

Over to those of you who want to hear suggestions. Okay, I'll adress what I think would be an interesting twist to the whole inventory thing. Let's say I'm talking about a fantasy game in the vein of Skyrim or The Witcher.

How about making a backack. Let's say that this backpack was clearly visible and not just a mechanic. When encountering enemies you'd drop it when unsheating your weapon. When the fight is over, you would have to go and pick it up if you want your inventory back. Considering the backpack is visible on the characters back, this would also fix the floating weapon issue.

When it comes to storage, I'd imagine having to bundle weapons togheter when looting, and then attaching them to the side of the pack. Let's say you could carry a maximum of 15 weapons marked as loot. On top of that, there could be three active weapon slots. All of these would be visible on the outside of the pack.

When it comes to potions, these would have to be equipped before going into battle. I imagine having 20 slots for potions, and the potions are just tiny vials, and all of these would also be visible on your character whn equipped. Again, the vials would be very small, no bigger than a finger.

As for the amount available to store in the pack, that would have to depend on what is available to loot. For instance, I'd prefer not being able to loot clothing, as I've always found it wierd in games like Skyrim, where the enemies just end up in a naked pile somewhere. In general, I'd like to see being able to loot less, but having the loot being more valuable. Maybe one could do like Torchlight, and add a pet that can go to the nearest town and sell goods.

I think this would make for a much better sense of place, and a much more authentic feeling when playing. Of course this couldn't apply to all games, but at least it could apply for most fantasy games in the vein of Skyrim, The Witcher and so on.

I know I would be interested in a game that tried something like this. I always find it jarring when I go to the shop, and I pull out 20 swords and 50 iron ingots and sell them. It just breaks immersion for me, and I think we have a long way to go.

I can understand that some technical aspects of games (like changing how you walk depending on the surface) may be achieve better or worse depending on the game, but all of those suggestions sounds terribly boring and dragging. I wouldn't play a game where every single stupid mechanic has to be justified with an awkward and forced in-lore reason. And you're arbitrarily deciding what is "jarring" and "breaks immersion" and what doesn't. Why aren't we advocating perma-death in all games? Because dying and being able to repeat that section as if nothing had happened completely break immersion for me...

It seems to me that you're just trying to impose your own tastes on gaming on everyone else. If you don't want to have so many items in your inventory, don't pick up so many items.

@sthusby: 10 million units sold at $620 million made on Bethesda's Skyrim. I don't think your complaint of animating a hand is gonna justify the amount of sales they just made off a new engine utilizing older resources. That isn't an issue of design or gameplay, it is animation. I don't get mad at Ed McMillen because he didn't design toes for Super Meat Boy.

Stop playing games if your expectation is increased reality and less about if it actually fun to play, and yes it is really hard to program arithmetic expressions using arrays, methods and implementing index values as coordinates. So no, this isn't fruity loops where you can just recycle something with a drag and drop. Programming a game is a difficult and strenuous process, one that involves hundreds of people for blockbuster titles and sometimes not being able to animate a hand wrapping around a door knob isn't on someones mind when they are working at a major studio, hoping their next paycheck doesn't bounce (I.E. 38 studios, vahalla knights, silicon knights).

Some cause they are not worth the investment, some are not even that regular anymore and some are just for plain fun and playability.

Funny thing is nothing you have said are "problems" games don't claim to be just like reality and if they did then yes, they would be problems but you're talking about video games, designed to be fun and created within the limitations of the hardware, funding, time and skill they have or have been given.

Assassin's Creed does all of that. I'm sure Uncharted does some of that as well. But these are all big budget games where traversal itself is a huge part of the gameplay. It simply doesn't matter that much in RPG's.

Can't understand the people who say it's okay because it's hard. Of course it's hard. But if someone were to actually do something about this stuff, say 5 years ago, then it wouldn't be hard today. Opening a door with a hand shoudln't be hard. Making feet move in a somewhat realistic fashion shoudln't be hard.

I can get that some of you dislike my opinions on inventory managment and stuff like that, but that's just my opinion. But how can anyone argue that it should be fucking mandatory to use hands to open doors? I don't get it. And for the love of fuck, it shouldn't be to hard to make it so that weapons don't float on your back.

I like playing video games, but I also would like them to evolve. In some respects, it hasn't evolved one fucking bit since the original Playstation and Nintendo 64. I just don't get how people use "it's hard" as an exuse. It just feels so much better when you actually fix it. And again, it shouldn't be hard to make a first person shooter where the character actually used his hand to open doors.

But considering all the negativity in this thread, it's no wonder developers don't give a fuck. People are obviously okay with just doing the same thing they did when playing on fucking SDTV's. Everything else changes, but the gaming industry has been at a fucking standstill since early 2000's. It's a damn shame I think.

@sthusby:

Do you actually have any experience with game development? Because I've had a similar conversation with somebody who has, and the discussion led to the unstated conclusion that it's too difficult a problem to solve, especially in terms of the payoff.

@sthusby said:

Can't understand the people who say it's okay because it's hard. Of course it's hard. But if someone were to actually do something about this stuff, say 5 years ago, then it wouldn't be hard today. Opening a door with a hand shoudln't be hard. Making feet move in a somewhat realistic fashion shoudln't be hard.

I can get that some of you dislike my opinions on inventory managment and stuff like that, but that's just my opinion. But how can anyone argue that it should be fucking mandatory to use hands to open doors? I don't get it. And for the love of fuck, it shouldn't be to hard to make it so that weapons don't float on your back.

I think people are just put off by your complete ignorance in regards to how games are made and why these decisions are settled on.

@sthusby said:

I like playing video games, but I also would like them to evolve. In some respects, it hasn't evolved one fucking bit since the original Playstation and Nintendo 64. I just don't get how people use "it's hard" as an exuse. It just feels so much better when you actually fix it. And again, it shouldn't be hard to make a first person shooter where the character actually used his hand to open doors.

But considering all the negativity in this thread, it's no wonder developers don't give a fuck. People are obviously okay with just doing the same thing they did when playing on fucking SDTV's. Everything else changes, but the gaming industry has been at a fucking standstill since early 2000's. It's a damn shame I think.

Also, you are a fucking nut job.

@TentPole said:

@sthusby said:

Can't understand the people who say it's okay because it's hard. Of course it's hard. But if someone were to actually do something about this stuff, say 5 years ago, then it wouldn't be hard today. Opening a door with a hand shoudln't be hard. Making feet move in a somewhat realistic fashion shoudln't be hard.

I can get that some of you dislike my opinions on inventory managment and stuff like that, but that's just my opinion. But how can anyone argue that it should be fucking mandatory to use hands to open doors? I don't get it. And for the love of fuck, it shouldn't be to hard to make it so that weapons don't float on your back.

I think people are just put off by your complete ignorance in regards to how games are made and why these decisions are settled on.

@sthusby said:

I like playing video games, but I also would like them to evolve. In some respects, it hasn't evolved one fucking bit since the original Playstation and Nintendo 64. I just don't get how people use "it's hard" as an exuse. It just feels so much better when you actually fix it. And again, it shouldn't be hard to make a first person shooter where the character actually used his hand to open doors.

But considering all the negativity in this thread, it's no wonder developers don't give a fuck. People are obviously okay with just doing the same thing they did when playing on fucking SDTV's. Everything else changes, but the gaming industry has been at a fucking standstill since early 2000's. It's a damn shame I think.

Also, you are a fucking nut job.

Amen.

By the way SDTVs or CRTs as we in the real world used to call them, were lag-less compared to the evolved form of current televisions. Hence the reason that the "contemporary" fighting game fans, still use some of them today since it didn't make the game into a buffer fest.

I realized that this just seems to be a troll more than a serious issue with current generation formatting, someone just lock this thread so we don't get any more dribble over it.

Okay, tell me how gaming has really evolved since the last generation? I can't really think of anything. Most of the games you're playing today, could just as well have been played on the previous generation of consoles. How is for instance Skyrim a vastly different game than Morrowind? It's not. Sure there are aspects of Skyrim that are much better thanks to improved technology, but it's basically the same game, and most of the stuff could just as well have been in Morrowind.

Same thing with Battlefield 3. Aside from graphics, what is it about BF3 that is drastically different from BF2? Nothing. Same goes for Call of Duty, Super Mario, Zelda, Mass Effect, GTA, and basically every other game out there. Dragon Age: Origins could just as well have been released in 2000, and the same goes for the sequel. I think it's a damn shame. That's not to say there arent't games that really only could have been realized on this set of consoles, but I'm hard pressed to think of many.

If some games manage to animate the player characters hand opening a door, then why can't all? It's just lazy. Can't understand why people are going insane over this. As I've said before, yes I can understand that people don't like the inventory stuff I'm talking about. But how can anyone argue that every game should be able to handle the mundane task of opening a door?