The Daily Grind: What kills your confidence in a game before you play it?
by Eliot Lefebvre 
Nov 2nd 2009 at 8:00AM
Filed under: Bugs, Business models, Culture, Opinion, The Daily Grind
There are elements of games that are turn-offs for all of us. Some of us love PvP, for example, and a world with virtually none of it isn't very appealing. But sometimes we don't event start playing the game before our feelings about it go straight into the dumpster. It's hard to argue that Tabula Rasa's frequent shifts during development inspired players to expect any longevity out of it, and whether or not it's the case Warhammer Online's frequent server merges and population shuffling have given the impression of a game that's struggling a bit.
Sometimes you hear of a developer or project head assigned that makes you cringe, sometimes it's a choice of IP or business models, or sometimes it's just the number of issues you have patching the game to try out the free client. We ask you, readers, what makes you start losing faith before you've even loaded up a game for the first time? It might not be a dealbreaker, and you might even look back at it and laugh, but there are certain things that make you more nervous about committing to a game. What does it for you?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
ReijMan said on 8:26AM 11-02-2009
If the game is (already) out as 'free to play' on the 'eastern market'...
Reply
Knob said on 10:00AM 11-02-2009
I'm going to expand on this and add "anything by NCSoft or Funcom."
cpuser said on 8:31AM 11-02-2009
Layoffs.
Reply
InfamousBrad said on 9:16AM 11-02-2009
I'll go along with that one, and add two related ones: extensive news coverage of their money problems, and/or missing their delivery deadline by a year or more. So far without exception, either one means the same thing: the game will be badly broken (not just incomplete, actually broken) on launch day and will never, ever get fixed.
On an unrelated note, the words "hard core" anywhere in the marketing are also usually enough of a turn-off for me that I lose all interest, because what they usually mean is "PvP with harsh consequences for the losing player," and that's just not my idea of fun.
UltimateQ said on 9:21AM 11-02-2009
I'll third that.
But I'm willing to give any game a legitimate chance. I'll determine if it sucks thereafter.
Laephis said on 1:27PM 11-02-2009
Then you must not be buying products and services from many companies these days because most of them have layoffs.
Ssieth said on 8:36AM 11-02-2009
For me - anything with a heavy PvP focus is a turn-off. And anything described as "fast-paced". That tends to pick it out as an failed FPS/MMO crossover.
Reply
Skuz said on 8:40AM 11-02-2009
It's going to sound racist but Korean/Taiwanese/Chinese games, there are just so many & 95% are utter crap, the market there churns out new games on what seems a daily basis but the production values & quality are overall truly abysmal, every game is made for 1 sole goal in mind - making as much money as fast as possible before players figure out the game is a pile of crud.
There are "diamonds in the rough" that have some good gameplay in them but finding those among the miasma is a demoralising process.
I'm not saying western games don't have their share of crap games but on balance between what gets put out & what is enjoyable to play the west has so far had a hugely better portfolio on quality.
The thing that sucks the most is when it is so immediately obvious and apparent that the game only wants your cash, these games literally ram their item shops down your throat at every possible opportunity & the gameplay itself it's whole design ethic shows that the game was designed primarily to make money & providing fun was a really really long way down the list of priorities.
As an example DDO/Turbine got their "model" spot on, something they must have done was listen to criticisms of item mall games & been very sensitive to it, the Asian developers could definitely take a few leaves out of their book, they need to improve their game quality a whole lot, stop ramming their shop down players throats in so obnoxious a way & build a game people want to play because it is a great & fun game, if it's enjoyable & engaging enough people will want to buy into it without their constant prompting & hardnose pushy salesmanship tactics.
And for goodness sake build the game with entertainment as it's priority & design ethic.
Reply
annual123 said on 8:43AM 11-02-2009
When a developer says they want to try move away from the tried and true holy trinity system (tank, healer, DPS) it's always cringe worthy. I know developers are trying to come up with the next generation of game play but for someone who enjoys group oriented combat, if class synergies don't mesh together, things just fall apart, it's a fundamental component of an MMO imo(like elves having pointy ears). It just works so well. Plus I enjoy playing healers, and always hate when developers sink their claws into us 1st...
Champions Online is a good modern example.
Reply
Nalgae said on 12:00PM 11-02-2009
I actually stay away from any game that has the holy trinity. I've already played that game 10 times before. CO had problems, but the group makeup was not part of it. The grouping interface was stupid, but even then, it was still faster to get a group because you just needed 3-5 people, not any specific makeup. CO's problem was lack of content and power balancing. It was fun for the first month, and then you ran out of content and had your characters nerfed.
But really, any game where you are "looking for healer" or "looking for tank" for 20 minutes? No thank you.
Laephis said on 1:26PM 11-02-2009
It's players like you that are stifling the entire MMO genre by encouraging developers to pump out the EQ clones instead of bringing something new and innovative to the table.
wagedomain said on 8:43AM 11-02-2009
When the release date keeps moving back and moving back without completely clear feedback why. Usually they'll say the old standby "we just want to make sure it's the best product it can be". Then long periods of time go by with no news. Then the game suddenly has a release date.
You can just HEAR the folks working on the game clamoring for money at that point. Usually, the game is released half-finished, or unpolished, etc.
Reply
Scuffles said on 8:43AM 11-02-2009
Anything that looks too graphically similar to SRO ..... because from the few I have tried they all tend to play like SRO.
Also games with rootkits like gameguard are a detractant, that gets to the subject of games that don't play nice with my firewall, to which the companies solution is typically "shut off all your security to play our game" ..... yeah that doesn't fly with me.
Reply
Vulturion said on 8:44AM 11-02-2009
Some of my top ill-omens:
* Lifetime subscriptions only available before launch.
* Advertising that derides competitors or other genres - negativity towards rivals is the crutch of a game that lacks positives itself.
* Any and all references to "hardcore" appeal.
* Claiming well-established genre features as New And Exciting.
* Any game described as level-less without indepth description of what system they do have (e.g. a heavy-object-on-keyboard-overnight system of advancement).
Reply
K.White said on 8:45AM 11-02-2009
Any game that is associated with David Perry.
Reply
Curtis said on 8:45AM 11-02-2009
No Open Beta period! Quite a few releases this year have had the stupid "closed to Fileplanet subs Open Beta!"
How "Open" is that??? I want a chance to try your game before I sink $50 + $15/mo to you!
Reply
axhed said on 11:02AM 11-06-2009
i think you are confusing the terms "open beta" and "free trial."
SpyderBite said on 8:51AM 11-02-2009
Over-Hyped pre-release. A game that people claim will be the MMO that destroys all others. When people start claiming their going to quit their current game and run off to upcoming release title.
Historically, these games are short lived and their bark is much worse than their bite.
Reply
Wisdomandlore said on 9:01AM 11-02-2009
When it's obvious even before launch that they have very little content. Champions Online was a great example of this. Even before launch and even before I got into beta, it was pretty clear they were all going to have five areas, basically no group content, and very little to do at the cap. If I'm paying $15 a month for a game it better have a lot of content.
Reply
Arkanaloth said on 9:06AM 11-02-2009
An over-emphasis on PVP will pretty much kill any interest I have in a game because to me this implies too little story and / or having to do something I hate (PVP) to experience something I love (story).
Reply