I think that a lot of game design flaws come from doing things because other games have done them. This runs counter to my opinion that every aspect of a game should be implemented to benefit some central purpose.
Some examples:
Minecraft: When I think about Minecraft, I think about two things: Building/Crafting and Mining. That is the heart of the game. So, when you get to the End and fight the Ender Dragon, why does the game suddenly decide to only focus on its extremely sub-par combat system? Why not build bosses that rely more on your ability to solve problems with game logic (ex. Making obsidian vs making cobblestone with different lava/water configurations), working more with your pickaxe than your sword or building something like a TNT cannon etc.
The Order: I'll pick a fairly arbitrary point here. The HUD. While the HUD is nice looking, why do we need a HUD? I personally don't think the information of how many bullets your gun has is important in the least. In fact, the only thing it really accomplishes is cluttering up the screen. I personally think that having players count their bullets would be a really interesting way of working in immersion. This stretches even further to the insistence on showing you button prompts and tutorial prompts for the simplest activities that you have done hundreds of times as players.
Examples like this stretch on for days and I often find myself thinking that if a game just did what its core purpose suggested, it would have a much more defined identity and be a better game for it
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
