Why is it that I routinely regret buying games?

[fuzzybabybunny]

Bought Batman Arkham Asylum. Spent the next hour just getting the game to work with that Microsoft Live Games shit. Had to try and recover my password but in the end just created a new account. And I'm going to forget the username for that account again because I don't use Live for anything. Anything. Played the game for a couple hours and lost interest. Didn't finish.

Bought Battlefield 3. Realized quickly it's just another Counterstrike time waster with no substance and lots of hackers.

Bought the entire Company of Heroes collection. COH is a complete exercise in frustration with the stupid 75 population cap. And the only trainer out there that works to increase population requires me to subscribe to CheatHappens. There's no way to even do a double pronged flanking strategy with 75 pop cap unless you're willing to just have massive losses all the time. Plus the tanks and units are SO frustrating to command. Infantry routinely run into the line of fire. Tanks frequently expose their weak backside when retreating from enemy fire. I'm halfway through the first campaign and find myself fuming and screaming at the stupidity of the level cap and AI during the game. I honestly think I should just adopt a cannon-fodder play style rather than the real-world "let's try to minimize casualties" play style I prefer, especially for a WWII game... the tactics and strategy don't mean shit if the AI isn't up to even basic tasks. I refuse to re-open the game until I can at least get a higher population cap. It's a shame to uninstall a game played only 20% of the way through.

Nowadays I feel like there's such a high chance of wasting money on games that do the exact opposite of bringing you happiness.

/vent

 

[Anteaus]

For me it depends on the game. I regret games that I know I normally wouldn't buy but the hype or excitement draws me in just to find out that my first instincts were right. As much as I would like to say I'm immune to hype and good reviews, it's simply not true sometimes. Also, while I do buy full priced titles from time to time, 80% of my games come from Steam when they are really cheap, so that definitely lowers the regret curve.

 

[Azeroth101]

I'm afraid you've completely missed the point in Company of Heroes. Brother, if you want a shitload of units on the map and have no idea whats going on, buy Gratuitous Space Battles. The smaller amounts of units in Company of Heroes makes you focus individually on each unit more, and you actually start to care about each of your squads a lot. The tanks move a little wonky, yes, but the game is from 2006. In addition, the audio in the game is incredibly immersive and informative. If a rifleman's whole squad is getting shredded to hell by a MG-42, without even looking in that area of the map, he'll tell you whats going on. An overall fantastic game that maybe you're just not well suited to. (Maybe you're just picky)

 

[tcG]

How dare you compare BF3 to Counter-Strike...

 

[Baptismbyfire]

Hmm... CoH is one of the best RTS I've played, and its strength lies in the unit cap, and the relative high cost of units. Since, units gain traits as they gain experience, you can neither afford to sacrifice your unit veteran units in a blind charge, or offer your units up as sacrifice to the opposing enemy and watch them vet up. In that game, 3-level infantry can easily chop up 1-level infantry, but then that is somehow balanced by the fact that a well-landed artillery shell can wipe out their infantry units in one hit and that your typical rifleman stands no chance against a tank. I do agree that AI is less than stellar, but then what games nowadays actually have good AI? The game truly shines in multiplayer though, and you have to think on your feet as you try to flank enemy MG nests, try to cut off their resource points, and try to dodge enemy grenades that are thrown at you.

 

[Dumac]

I went through similar stuff with Arkham City.

Had to deal with GFWL for like an hour (it is still annoyingly slow when loading up the game). Then I had to spend another hour trying to figure out why the game kept crashing after the first cutscene.

After I got that fixed and got to the actual game though, I had a blast. Arkham City seems like it is gonna be great, aside from the initial troubles.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

I'm afraid you've completely missed the point in Company of Heroes. Brother, if you want a shitload of units on the map and have no idea whats going on, buy Gratuitous Space Battles. The smaller amounts of units in Company of Heroes makes you focus individually on each unit more, and you actually start to care about each of your squads a lot. The tanks move a little wonky, yes, but the game is from 2006. In addition, the audio in the game is incredibly immersive and informative. If a rifleman's whole squad is getting shredded to hell by a MG-42, without even looking in that area of the map, he'll tell you whats going on. An overall fantastic game that maybe you're just not well suited to. (Maybe you're just picky)

That's exactly how I'm playing it! I'm trying to conserve every single fucking unit but when you've got so many territories to protect with some artificially limited population it's infuriating. My main attack force is split in two because I want to do a pincer attack, which means ZERO units defending my base or my supply points (I don't call a machine gun nest a defense because they can't do shit against anything with armor). It's lovely to have two parties miles away while an enemy tank and APC attack your main base, and you have no cap to train even a rifleman squad to defend it. You've got to send a couple slow-ass tanks to go ALL THE WAY over to the base, and then I have to wait until they kill the invaders, slowly get back to the front line, get repaired, and then I'm good to go.

Either that or spend hours laying mines absolutely everywhere imaginable. And then I have to come back anyway to shoot the intruder once because the mines never finish the job.

Basically, there's just a lot of waiting in this game because of the pop limit. If you want to preserve your units like I do, there's a TON of waiting around as they slowly go back and forth defending the base from time to time and going back to the front line.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Hmm... CoH is one of the best RTS I've played, and its strength lies in the unit cap, and the relative high cost of units. Since, units gain traits as they gain experience, you can neither afford to sacrifice your unit veteran units in a blind charge, or offer your units up as sacrifice to the opposing enemy and watch them vet up. In that game, 3-level infantry can easily chop up 1-level infantry, but then that is somehow balanced by the fact that a well-landed artillery shell can wipe out their infantry units in one hit and that your typical rifleman stands no chance against a tank. I do agree that AI is less than stellar, but then what games nowadays actually have good AI? The game truly shines in multiplayer though, and you have to think on your feet as you try to flank enemy MG nests, try to cut off their resource points, and try to dodge enemy grenades that are thrown at you.

The problem is that it's not resource limited. Ok, maybe in the very beginning, but after you control half the map resource isn't an issue. Pop cap and distance is. If my main party is all the way at the front lines and my base starts getting attacked, I'll just tell my tanks to kill one of my own tanks to free up population just to save me from sending a tank and waiting forever for it to get there to kill whatever the invaders are. I can then just produce a tank instantly at the base with my already queued up tank and the result is that my resources are still more than I can ever hope to spend. I've never played a strategy game where you have ZERO base defenses and ZERO supply point defenses because the pop cap is so low. It's not "strategy" to run tanks back and forth to neutralize weak little raiding parties while your main attack force (and you) just waits ten minutes for that round trip to complete.

 

[shurato]

OP, I hear you. I bought Arkham Asylum and fussed with live for a bit, finally played for an hour and then I haven't touched it in months. Bought BF3 and had issues with Origin and only played for 15 minutes and then never had any interest in playing it again.

Bought the recent CIV V expansion pack and haven't touched it since 3 games into it. I've also recently bought a bunch of old classic games like syndicate, longest journey, dreamfall, etc and never touched them.

I blame alcohol and the ease of purchasing a game in a few seconds with Steam. I just keep buying crap that I don't touch.

What sucks is that because of the convenience of Steam and digital downloads, I can't even resell these games I don't play like I used to be able to when they came in a box in a store.

 

[FalseChristian]

These are the reasons that my favourite games that I enjoy playing are old games like GLQuake, Quake II and Unreal.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

OP, I hear you. I bought Arkham Asylum and fussed with live for a bit, finally played for an hour and then I haven't touched it in months. Bought BF3 and had issues with Origin and only played for 15 minutes and then never had any interest in playing it again.

Bought the recent CIV V expansion pack and haven't touched it since 3 games into it. I've also recently bought a bunch of old classic games like syndicate, longest journey, dreamfall, etc and never touched them.

I blame alcohol and the ease of purchasing a game in a few seconds with Steam. I just keep buying crap that I don't touch.

What sucks is that because of the convenience of Steam and digital downloads, I can't even resell these games I don't play like I used to be able to when they came in a box in a store.

Yeah, Steam, while convenient, needs a resell (not free gifting) and refund policy. Some way to make back your money. Too many games out there that just suck. I don't pay to get frustrated and regretful, and that seems like it's all I'm getting lately. I paid $33 for the entire COH pack and considering the amount of frustrated screaming at the AI I've done I wish I would have just pirated it, played through 2 maps, and uninstalled it. Fuck me, Age of Empires 3 AI was better. Still stupid, but better. Now I feel almost obligated to endure through the crap because I've already sunk money into it.

 

[Azeroth101]

That's exactly how I'm playing it! I'm trying to conserve every single fucking unit but when you've got so many territories to protect with some artificially limited population it's infuriating. My main attack force is split in two because I want to do a pincer attack, which means ZERO units defending my base or my supply points (I don't call a machine gun nest a defense because they can't do shit against anything with armor). It's lovely to have two parties miles away while an enemy tank and APC attack your main base, and you have no cap to train even a rifleman squad to defend it. You've got to send a couple slow-ass tanks to go ALL THE WAY over to the base, and then I have to wait until they kill the invaders, slowly get back to the front line, get repaired, and then I'm good to go.

Either that or spend hours laying mines absolutely everywhere imaginable. And then I have to come back anyway to shoot the intruder once because the mines never finish the job.

Basically, there's just a lot of waiting in this game because of the pop limit. If you want to preserve your units like I do, there's a TON of waiting around as they slowly go back and forth defending the base from time to time and going back to the front line.

The 1v1 maps are small enough so that you can defend usually one side of the map, then it's just a matter of outsmarting whoever you're playing. That being said, what game mode are you playing? I only play Victory Point mode for the very reason that it's very difficult to defend territory in that game. In theory, all you need to do is hold 2 points on the map, and slowly you'll win. If you're playing Annihilation, it's usually gunna turn into a meatgrinder in endgame if you both play correctly, but just my opinion.

 

[Zenoth]

I find myself having more attention span playing Angry Birds than I used to for Diablo III until I decided to take a break from it (D3), which still lasts to this day (and it's been about three weeks by now). Lately all I can and care to play are very casual Indie style games but I actually like them, taking their game-play with a grain of salt and just burning some time, not to mention that most (if not all?) Indie games don't have crap like Games for Windows Live or other stupid DRM to temper with (or against) before actually being able to play the damn thing.

The only "popular" game I still play regularly is TF2, but too many recent (and so called "triple A") games disappointed me, either right from the start or it took me a few hours or days to realize it. From Mass Effect 3 to D3 (and many others prior to ME3 of course, with D3 being the latest disappointment for me), etc. To be honest though right now I'm trying to play less games, overall, I mean anything, just gaming less, it's doing me some long overdue good I think. I'm not completely oblivious to new or upcoming releases, I keep an eye for some (such as Borderlands 2) but I went as far as not even launching Steam specifically to look at this summer's sales event. If I do launch Steam it's because I feel like playing some TF2 for maybe one hour, then I quit and I ignore the sales.

In such a situation I think self-restriction in hours spent playing games would be welcomed, you might want to consider applying the breaks before you hit the wall and think that all of gaming is doomed until a world-wide gaming crash occurs to allow for redemption. That, or do like me, play Angry Birds and express your frustration by catapulting cute birdies into walls of bricks.

 

[Kalmah]

With a disagreement about COH, I feel the same about everything else.

I think it can be contributed to the focus on DLC with most games lately.

D3 pissed me off the most, wasn't happy with BF3 at all. It also seems that most games I've purchased on release this last year or so I've only played for a little while then shelved it out of boredom/discontent. I've also tried several popular indie games and was disappointed.

I need another Arcanum or Dungeon Keeper... or any top-down rpg.(3d ruined rpgs for me. NWN1 and NWN2 were the last that I really enjoyed)

Now you can't count on Bioware for anything anymore since EA got their grubby hands on them. Yeah some games might be fun, but with that "polished turd" feeling to them.

Skyrim... It's a good game in my opinion, but the variety of skills, weapons, strategies is lacking. Shit, that might be decent as well, but it's still the same old thing as what came before it. Being able to create my own spells kept me playing Morrowind for years. It seems like the solution for most developers is if it is a problem get rid of it instead of if it is a problem fix it.

I think I'm going to save my money for sales instead of on release for now on.

 

[Maximilian]

Yeah this is why piracy is so rampant, people are fed up buying utter sh*te and not getting a refund for it so they want to try before they buy.

Only purchase i kind of regret recently was D3, the graphics are good, the gameplay is fun (although maybe in need of tweaking here and there) but the actual game design is totally flawed, play the same game 3 times over (normal, nightmare then hell modes) then grind a 4th time (inferno) to find good items... are you kidding me?! After 10 years they couldn't come up with something better than the normal/nightmare/hell bs, it was fine for D2 but that crap will not fly in 2012. All this before even mentioning the RMAH/lag....

Cant say i agree with your CoH complaint though, honestly i thought CoH was overrated until the 1st expansion came out and i got into multiplayer 2v2's and 3v3's. Its extremely fun but its all about the multiplayer. Campaign is okay but kind of boring, its not the meat of the game. Play some 3v3's on the scheldt map, its easy and enormously fun or 2v2's on lyon/vire river valley, these maps allow you to build up then annihilate eachother with all the cool late game stuff.

 

[Maximilian]

I need another Arcanum or Dungeon Keeper... or any top-down rpg.(3d ruined rpgs for me. NWN1 and NWN2 were the last that I really enjoyed)

I will never ever forgive EA for shelving DKIII for a goddamn harry potter game...

 

[Kalmah]

I will never ever forgive EA for shelving DKIII for a goddamn harry potter game...

I like to imagine a current-gen dungeon keeper as having multi-level dungeons with spiral staircases/elevator lifts, slides..., vertical traps for the multiple levels, GORE... entrails flying, humor, skyrim-detail graphics.

Man, I'd die happy.

 

[Born2bwire]

Yeah this is why piracy is so rampant, people are fed up buying utter sh*te and not getting a refund for it so they want to try before they buy.

I would point out that all Arkham City and CoH have demos that you can download and play (linked to from the store page on Steam).

 

[Nintendesert]

Yeah, Steam, while convenient, needs a resell (not free gifting) and refund policy. Some way to make back your money. Too many games out there that just suck. I don't pay to get frustrated and regretful, and that seems like it's all I'm getting lately. I paid $33 for the entire COH pack and considering the amount of frustrated screaming at the AI I've done I wish I would have just pirated it, played through 2 maps, and uninstalled it. Fuck me, Age of Empires 3 AI was better. Still stupid, but better. Now I feel almost obligated to endure through the crap because I've already sunk money into it.

As already mentioned some of the games you're complaining about have demos. If you bought before trying them, that's on you.

As for the resell portion, that will never happen. Reselling a game is every bit as bad as piracy for the developer. They receive absolutely no money in the transaction and that's why they are working on so many DLC options and now multiplayer activations to cut down on the resale market.

STEAM sales are already good enough to save so much money.

The real crux of the problem may simply be you're getting older and growing out of gaming to some degree. I want to blame gaming, but have had to realize I'm simply not in the same point in my life as I used to be. Recognize that and adjust your purchasing accordingly. Perhaps you'll be less frustrated if you do.

 

[krnmastersgt]

I regret buying games for the same reason I regret buying books, decent reviews, interesting enough cover art/summary to interest me and when it's on sale (like Steam sales) you figure, why not?

Then you get down to actually reading the book/playing the game and find that it has a few qualities, characters, or just overall execution that you regret it. I've bought too many mystery novels and gone through the same process Don't really play many different titles anymore unless people badger me about how good it is, or it's got a decent length demo to try the game out first.

 

[Northern Lawn]

I'm afraid you've completely missed the point in Company of Heroes. Brother, if you want a shitload of units on the map and have no idea whats going on, buy Gratuitous Space Battles. The smaller amounts of units in Company of Heroes makes you focus individually on each unit more, and you actually start to care about each of your squads a lot. The tanks move a little wonky, yes, but the game is from 2006. In addition, the audio in the game is incredibly immersive and informative. If a rifleman's whole squad is getting shredded to hell by a MG-42, without even looking in that area of the map, he'll tell you whats going on. An overall fantastic game that maybe you're just not well suited to. (Maybe you're just picky)

He should check out game replays.com and see how they play it with commentary. I would have a hard time handling one tank. It's all about the micro.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

I've never played CoH, but even I get the feeling you're doing it wrong.

 

[yours truly]

I don't think you'll get much sympathy regarding COH. You seem to have glossed over its good points and focused entirely on the bad. For a game that's 6 years old , the graphics are still good, the gameplay is good, the storyline, pacing and the attention to detail is immense.

I doubt in 2006 there were many rigs that could run COH on ultra settings and it's still reasonably taxing today. If the population cap were set at 150 or 200, PCs today might struggle to run it. Back then it would be unplayable, unless you scaled down the detail.

A well placed sniper or HMG team holed up in a building defending a point will give the enemy something to think about, or sticky bombs to slow tanks down. Having a couple of well placed machine gun emplacements with a vehicle guarding your HQ wouldn't hurt either.

I take your point that the AI can be off. I've had countless times when my tanks would rather drive into each other and slow to a crawl than go forward properly or like you said infantry running out of cover.

Try to enjoy it for what it is.

I also disagree with what you say about Battlefield 3 too. In 300 hours I must of come across a handful of hackers. It can be incredibly frustrating and unbalanced at times but to call it a counter strike time waster with no substance is off the mark.

 

[Rifter]

I completly agree about COH, i wanted to like that game so bad but just couldnt get over the way to low unit cap and the AI. I mean the AI is just beyond dumb, i have had my tanks get into a traffic jam trying to retreat and then get picked apart because they left their backs facing the enemy posistions. Infantry AI also as stupid, leaving cover in the middle of a firefight, seems like a good idea right??? lol. Its so annoying to leave a few vehicles/units to defend your HQ but then have such a small attack force(cause you have 10-25% of your unit cap defending) that you really have to micro manage every move and attack command but yet are rolling in money you cant spend, ive had enough res on hand to build 40 tanks but yet im grinding my way through the map with peanuts for troops because of pop cap. Really its could have been such a good game that was just poorly designed.

 

[imaheadcase]

I think you just don't play a game for what it is and not what you want it to be it makes it fun.