When reading a game’s description (on the Steam store page for example), what is something that immediately kills your interest in the game? Any words or phrases that describe the gameplay? Perhaps some form of DRM? Do you dislike these things enough that you wouldn’t play a game you otherwise think you might like?
I’m sure I could think of more, but these are what came to mind immediately. The term “metroidvania” is a pretty quick turn off for me. I don’t have anything against the gameplay style, but it just seems like everything is a metroidvania game these days, especially on the indie side. I’ve played more than my fill of them by this point. I’m also kind of over the 8-bit and 16-bit graphic style. There are some exceptions, but typically if I see that, I’m probably not going to play it.
While usually not enough to immediately stop me from considering playing the game, anything that requires something like Origin or BattleNet is a tougher sell for me these days on the PC. Basically, if I can’t just play it straight from Steam, I sometimes don’t play it at all. If a game is multiplayer only, that’s typically a hard no for me, although ironically iRacing has been this year’s gaming obsession for me. But I typically want a single player experience of some kind first and foremost.
I’m sure I could think of more, but these are what came to mind immediately. The term “metroidvania” is a pretty quick turn off for me. I don’t have anything against the gameplay style, but it just seems like everything is a metroidvania game these days, especially on the indie side.
It's funny how things can change. I remember commenting on Guacamelee! a few months after it came out, and basically what I said was: "this is pretty good, not amazing, but they don't make carefully crafted Metroidvanias anymore, so given that context this game was a blast."
This was before Axiom Verge, Hollow Knight, Bloodstained, etc. The influence of Dark Souls 1 on the industry at large was also only just coming into view.
Guacamelee is 6 years old, but that moment feels to me like it 'just happened.'
8-bit - it gets a bit too abstract for me, I don't see they beauty or usefulness souls like - I don't want to waste my time to git gud in a game that is hard to care about on my own walking sim - usually is likely to make me feel like I am playing a concept demo season - can mean a live game relying on constant revenue stream
all of these are turn off terms even though I can name off games that do have these keywords that I like.
I just found out Canada isn’t real Turns out it was all mapleleaf.
Adult content -- if the game highlights this aspect, then I suspect it will be gratuitous and pandering. Probably offensive, over-the-top, out-of-place, and unnecessary. I'm just not interested in this type of game -- regardless of what type of adult content it was.
Paid in-game content -- not looking to constantly drop money into any game. Somebody will, and the game will be a game those who have and those who have not. Not fun. I chose purchasing a game so I could play it as often as I wanted WITHOUT having to drop quarters in it all the time. I have no interest in reliving the fiscal cost of playing in an arcade experience at home.
"Drizzle, drazzle, drozzle, drome; time for this one to come home."
Pretty much everything others have mentioned above is a turn-off to me too.
In addition, my spirit is a little bit dampened by "real-time." It's rare that I find a real-time game I like a lot, and even when I do I find I don't usually stick with it in the long run.
The word "action" is an immediate deal-breaker, unless I'm in a very unusual mood. Same with any other action words ("FPS," "hack and slash," and so forth).
"Deck-builder" puts me off a bit too, as I've never found a deck-building game I care that much for. Spectromancer is pretty cool, though.
"Multiplayer" isn't necessarily a turn-off, as long as it's just an option I'm completely free to ignore. But in strategy gaming, all too often reviewers or commenters will truthfully say, "Single-player is OK for just learning, but the game only shines in multiplayer mode." That's when I jump ship.
For World Of Warcraft, they mention that since developers are constantly updating the game... "the epic quest never ends". O1H, it's nice that you get new stuff. For example, on the forums for StarCraft2 Coop, they're constantly wanting new Commanders (aka characters) and Missions (aka maps). This in addition to "quality of life" improvements, bug fixes, and other features. OTOH, I've learned those can be "too good of a thing". It just sounds like a ginormous time sink. It's also a money pit in the sense that you pay a subscription to continue paying, although AFAIK, when you pay the $15 a month, or cheaper via discounts, promos, and buying more at once, they won't (or are MUCH LESS likely to) hit you with additional MTX. More so the stuff that's "essential", as opposed to cosmetic.
The spirit is willing, but the flesh is spongy and bruised!
Massively multiplayer online and Souls-like. I've enjoyed MMOs on and off over the years but they lose my attention quickly and I generally dislike most of their elements. My younger brothers are huge From Software fans. I tried. I did. I enjoy a challenge but wading through molasses and having to fight the environment at the same time is not my thing. Funnily enough, I still really enjoy Dead Cells and Salt and Sanctuary.
Any time a game description tells you how great the game is, that's kind of a red flag. Yellow flag at minimum. You should know that from playing it*. If it's an advertising thing, then I highly doubt people were going to let THAT alone sway them.
That said, I am a hypocrite, as I did get into 7th Saga (SNES) around the time it got released. In my defense, 1) it was free since I borrowed it from a friend, 2) I couldn't really just "buy my own games", and 3) it's not like there was much else back then (so to speak)...
* On related notes, not unlike how a restaurant needs to remind you that their food is great, or a employee is such a great worker.
I'd much rather have PvE with cooperative groups, or be playing a solo game.
I was intrigued at gettomg into League Of Legends, but am NOT interested in the PvP aspect of it. That said, I don't know if there's a big coop/PvE scene, or if playing vs. AI is only for training. Even then, I've known people who got too hooked on it, so probably for the better that I don't bother.
Case in point was one of my neighbors ended up cutting out home internet anyways since he was playing too much LoL. His main reason was his ISP pissed him off due to some billing issue. Not being able to play LoL was merely a bonus. He ended up also not using his home laptop anymore. If he wants to do internet and computing stuff, he'll either use his work computer, or personal cell phone.
On a 2 related notes (LoL and "game descriptions"), anybody notice A LOT more ads for LoL on YouTube? I can't tell if they're doing well, getting desperate to expand/retain their player base, or.. both? Last I heard, the community's gotten overall toxic (well, above average even for a typical online gaming community). There are great people there, but they're being overshadowed by the not-so-good-apples make up more of the majority of the community.
Used to be a modern game with 64 bit graphics. Sometimes a company can pull off this look for artistic reasons, but most of the time, it's just a JRPG-style game made on the cheap.
However, this mood killer has been outpaced by a new one: Epic Exclusive.
After proudly paying for all of my games (or winning them/receiving gifts), I'm contemplating piracy. On the one hand, I believe in paying people for their hard work. On the other hand, I'm not knowingly downloading spyware to play a game. And the guy in charge of Epic has admitted to the spyware, saying "Oh, it's the result of us wanting to get the store set up fast. I'm the only one who is looking at your private data." Ummm... yeah. Cutting corners to get this store set up fast means that in the end, I don't trust the company. Maybe the private data goes to China as some people worry, maybe it just stays within Epic, maybe it's sold off to marketing and research companies like a lot of personal data mined from computers is. Whatever the case, there is nothing Epic can do at this point to make me trust them.
Yeah. Specifically, the "wrong kind". For example, I don't mind that Legend Of Zelda uses Rupees, how Super Mario Odyssey uses coins, or how the SNES Final Fantasy games uses Gil. They're implemented in a non-hostile way.
There are some games (freemiums for one) where you can buy extra in-game currency with real $$, but the game is paced designed that you'll need none of it, or minimal of it. Perhaps you can spend real $$ for cosmetic effects.
However, when a freemium/free-to-play has "gems" or "diamonds". Literally by those names, then it's a red flag that the game dabbles in premium currencies that are tightly controlled, and may require you to spend lots of real $$, or grind excessively to get. And they're usually much less optional than you'd like since they're very progress/gameplay relevant. I quit Plants Vs. Zombies 2: It's About Time. It had gems, but ended up also having additional types of currencies... "Gauntlets" and "mints"
Castlestorm: Free To Siege had gems. You know it's bad when the name of the game tells you it's a freemium. OTOH, it IS a great game. I would just pay the $15 it costs on PC/Steam (cheaper if you can wait for discounts), or $9 without the 2 expansions. NO GEMS. No ads. Just a "premium experience".
Every week I look at the Nintendo Switch eShop to see if there are any new games that I would like (usually there aren't any; more often I look at games coming soon). I know you're not supposed to judge a book by its cover, but I can instantly tell by the Switch's eShop game images that it's not my type of game. As for the description, "challenging" is out of the question, M-rated is always out of the question, T-rated is almost always out of the question, a gimmick like motion controls is out of the question.
What!? I finally get my very own video game, but it's a mobile game?!
"Rogue-like" is an instant killer for me. (I don't even know what "Souls-like" means...) "Retro" is usually a turn off. And when I see "Indie" I think "Short and Unpolished."
Rogue-like or Rogue-lite (not sure which one it's supposed to be honestly) is definitely a bad one for me.
What that means to me is "This game will be brutally difficult in a such a way that you won't possibly succeed at first, but you may get a teensy bit better after each time you die."
I've played a few of these types of games, and one of them, Tangledeep, was a game that I really wanted to like, but just couldn't get past how crazy difficult it was. I was never able to get past level 9 because every time I died, it would remove all the experience I had gained since hitting level 9. I couldn't go to weaker areas to level up because the game made it so fighting weak enemies didn't give me experience.
If rogue-like was an episode of New Girl, it would be this scene
Too many things to mention. (I'm surprised to read that "Metroidvania" turns people off; for me, that's a ping to interest. Pixel graphics can also be highly well done (and it can be crap, but I'm old enough to see the difference)).
Stuff I don't like in games are so many (pick any genre I don't like to play, for example, or any art that I don't like), but if I limit myself to things that might be mentioned in the descriotion as a sort of brag, but that I find kills my interest, it's probably something along the lines of:
* "hundreds of gaming hours" – I don't have time to play more than one 100+ hour game per year, so no. * "unlimited customizability" – for me to customize something, I need to learn it, and learn it rather fully, and that threshold takes time. And I don't find much joy out of it. * Free to play: This means I have to pay with my time instead, so it's either just a grind-fest or pay-to-win.
But I rarely read the descriptions – I look at the screen shots. Screenshot-wise, a typical turn-off is when I see a game with enticing Japanese art and then it's either a a) visual novel or b) a superduper complex screen that makes it obvious it's some sort of custom-your-army tactical RPG.
I am still in the toddler phase of video gaming, but I am starting to branch out, slowly but surely. I still can`t get myself to buy shooting games, or fighting games. And some adventure games appeal to me untill I see the battle scenes.
Now, I am not weak around blood. I have read pretty bloody stories, lots of chopped limbs, entrails falling out... But reading it is different from playing it. And I get easily stressed to the point I might get violent towards my computer, or have a total melt down. So I don`t touch the games. I learnt my lessons from my Tekken period.