ITT: games that are more inconvenient than they are challenging

>>381643778
SH3 was worse in that regard than SH2, at least from what my feeble brain can remember.

>>381643778
SH2 is completely brain dead in terms of combat.
Also the enemy variety is dismal, no excuse for that really.

>>381643778
I remember I played this up to getting in that creepy ass hotel. Couldn't find out what to do next. Between that and everyone saying the hd remake was shit I dropped it.

>>381643868
This. Even cheating with cloud saves doesn't help

wasn't it the point?

>>381645676
If you have a pair of balls and aren't scared of polygons moving around on a screen, the actual gameplay is just annoying

File: cd7bb8ade7c306cc9ec91a1a5d3864a2.jpg (3MB, 3100x2600px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3100x2600px

>>381643778
To be fair, survivor horror games from that era were meant to be beaten in less than 3 hours once you got good at them. Keep in mind you was playing a (mostly) predetermined scenario rather than a sandbox, so once you memorized where the monsters were placed and the puzzles then of course the challenge turns into inconvenient tedium. The bad controls of the era didn't help either, making things that you know are suppose to be straight forward but aren't because the character controls like shit combined with bad camera angles.

>>381645887
What about
>>381643868
How is the tedium of sitting through load screens, backtracking and farming items considered challenging?

What a disgusting thread

File: 1497932785341.png (597KB, 663x856px) Image search: [Google]

597KB, 663x856px

>>381646332
Nobody is arguing that design choices like backtracking, etc. aren't more tedious than they are challenging. Even the game designers know this. My point is games from SH2's era at least had some reasonable excuses like the limitations of the technology vs what they was trying to accomplish, or the fact they was still trailblazing things like how cameras should work in 3D environments. Also I have no idea why you brought up loading times. Yes, they can be inconvenient but that's a different topic.

>>381648123
Ok I can accept that for Silent Hill, good point. What do you think about modern games that do it though?

I don't understand what you mean by a game being inconvenient

>>381649364
Instead of something needing practice or skill to beat, it just adds something tedious or overly cumbersome.

>>381649545
>it just adds something tedious or overly cumbersome.
and what was that in Silent Hill 2?

File: 874.jpg (68KB, 1092x648px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1092x648px

>>381648321
Off the bat, modern games haven't escaped the "limitations of the technology vs what they are trying to accomplish" bit, but I think the problem nowadays has to do more with shit like having to meet deadlines, development time/costs going through the roof, etc. so naturally the sacrifices in game play developers make have to do more with that rather than having a shitty amount of ROM and slow CPU to work with and all that. There's also always going to be the eternal factors of game designers that are just bad/lazy at designing fun games.

>>381649827
well nothing now that it's been explained in >>381648123

>>381650035
interesting, thanks

Silent Hil 2 is an experience. Silent Hill 3 is a video game.

File: 300px-Zeldawindwaker01[1].jpg (23KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 300x225px

>>381643778
I got you covered, op

Im happy i beat sh2 when i did, i tried it again more recently and i just couldnt get into the combat specifically . I just hit the first enemy with a pipe a billion times then died and gave up

Dork Souls.