• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

skeezx

Member
Oct 27, 2017
20,279
info dump tutorials. especially when it's like 10 xeroxed, full screen wall of text overlays interrupting you every half minute.

i know games are more complicated now, but man. introducing mechanics is game development 101 stuff, essential in easing the player into your game loop, sometimes it's like i'm being actively encouraged to shut it off after 10 minutes
 

Fadewise

Member
Nov 5, 2017
3,210
*looks at every problem Anthem is experiencing*

These were solved problems Bioware. There's so much I want to say about this but being on a phone is shit so I'll have to wait until later but goddamn EVERY PROBLEM WAS ALREADY SOLVED BUT ANTHEM STILL EXISTS.

Anthem really is a case study in this on multiple levels, from basic UI/UX elements to specific manifestation of loot shooter mechanics, Bioware seems to have willfully ignored every lesson that the genre learned over the past decade. It makes me wonder if these types of things are really done out of ignorance or a willful arrogance that they know better than the iterated wisdom of prior games.
 

Nairume

SaGa Sage
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,989
Option menus with subtitle options that you can toggle before actually starting a game, which seems like the most absurdly basic thing to have available in any game that actually has subtitles. It stings especially hard for me because most of my gaming is done at night (meaning I usually need to have the volume low to begin with) and I have just enough of a hearing loss that I typically need them on to begin with. It's such a downer of an experience when games force you to watch through the intro and sometimes even play the tutorial before you can actually turn subtitles on, which means I'm often missing important exposition.

Also the existence of real time with pausing combat in WRPGs. It was just an inelegant solution to turn based combat being seen as clunky, but now we've since figured out that it was just older turn based RPGs having poor implementation of those ideas and modern RPGs have since figured out how to to tb combat without any of the old jank of the Goldbox games. Meanwhile, RTwP just feels like it's only around because we are too nostalgic for the late 90s.
 

Jawmuncher

Crisis Dino
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
38,709
Ibis Island
While not a design issue I guess, clipping on character models on cutscenes is always a big one. Especially since I've heard it's usually just a matter of some editing to fix.
 

Deleted member 8860

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
6,525
it was just older turn based RPGs having poor implementation of those ideas and modern RPGs have since figured out how to to tb combat without any of the old jank of the Goldbox games

What? Modern turn based RPGs have awful UI/UX/combat implementations compared to the elegance of the Gold Box games.
 

Zukuu

Member
Oct 30, 2017
6,809
  • Having a game start right into the intro without the ability to do basic configuration like resolution, subtitles etc
  • FOV set at 50-70 by default. God why do they do this? Have mercy and do 90 at least.
  • Auto-saves BEFORE a cutscene instead of afterwards
 

Nairume

SaGa Sage
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,989
What? Modern turn based RPGs have awful UI implementations compared to the elegance of the Gold Box games.
They had clear UIs, but they definitely had their issues with movement options being stilted and taking combat actions causing a character's turn to end on the spot (though, that may be something that was only present in the Goldbox games I played, maybe others allowed you to attack then move). In part, that is because they were sticking closely to old D&D rules, but both D&D and turnbased RPGs have better solved those issues.
 

Aeron

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,156
Climbing was near-perfected by tomb raider and shadow of the colossus yet somehow in 2019 were still just tapping the jump button and pointing in a direction.

Don't think this really counts but it seems like developers have gone backwards in regards to photosensitivity, epilepsy and eye problems in general.
Noticing more and more games with blinding light effects and flashing images in them than the recent-past.

It may be just a side effect of clearer resolution and higher graphical fidelity but the lack of options to turn those light effects off or turn them down is really annoying.
 

GusFacsimile

Member
Oct 25, 2017
128
'Exiting to main menu now will lose any unsaved progress, continue?'

For games with autosave why can't every game tell you exactly when it was last saved? Still hit or miss.
 

Phantom88

Banned
Jan 7, 2018
726
Supreme Commander invented strategic zoom where you can zoom in and out with the mouse wheel to see the entire map and no other RTS game uses it. It was and still is a breakthrough.

Look up "Mechanized Assault & Exploration". I think thats the game which invented it. Also Homeworld 1 had it. And a bunch of other clones over the years.

But yeah, SupCom really perfected this. Cant believe Ashes of the Singularity launched without such a function. Then when they finally added it, its much worse. What the hell?
 

Pata Hikari

Banned
Jan 15, 2018
2,030
Climbing was near-perfected by tomb raider and shadow of the colossus yet somehow in 2019 were still just tapping the jump button and pointing in a direction

Tomb Raider and Shadow of the Colossus made climbing core parts of their gameplay. It makes sense that the systems involving them would be more involved. Other games don't need that because climbing isn't important.
 

Jaded Alyx

Member
Oct 25, 2017
35,516
750NDnf.jpg


Player 1 and 2 using the same character, wearing the same outfit, using the exact same colours.

This was solved at the beginning of the genre.
 

Aeron

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,156
Tomb Raider and Shadow of the Colossus made climbing core parts of their gameplay. It makes sense that the systems involving them would be more involved. Other games don't need that because climbing isn't important.
Plenty of games use climbing frequently throughout and it amounts to nothing more than pushing a direction and jumping.
The likes of Assassin's Creed, Uncharted, TR reboot , etc don't have an excuse.
 

medyej

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,480
LEARN HOW TO USE A MOUSE, GAME DEVELOPERS

I am so tired of buying games which have broken mouse input.
The mouse is a precise input device capable of 1:1 control.

If the mouse resolution is set to 800 CPI (counts-per-inch) it sends 800 'counts' for every inch that it is moved.
That means it will move 800 pixels on-screen if it is moved an inch.
It doesn't matter how quickly or slowly the mouse is moved, if it is moved by one inch, it sends 800 counts when set to 800 CPI.

In first/third-person games, counts are essentially translated to degrees of rotation, and the amount the view turns per count received is set by the game's sensitivity option.
So you might have a mouse pad which is 10" wide, and adjust the sensitivity so that one swipe across it will turn the view 360°, or someone may prefer a different sensitivity and set that to do a 180° turn for example.
People have -literally decades- of muscle-memory built up for this, because it is how mouse input has always worked.

And yet now, in the past few years, game developers keep fucking this up.
They're adding acceleration to mouse input, like it's an analog stick:
The faster you move the mouse, the faster the view turns, and the slower you move the mouse, the slower it turns.
Or worse, the game suffers from "negative acceleration" where the view turns slower the faster you move the mouse.

Here's an example of "negative acceleration" in Dishonored 2 at launch, before they patched the game. Slow movements with the mouse will complete five 360° turns, while fast movements barely turn the view 90°:


So now there's no way to reliably control input in the game, because input speed affects aim in addition to the distance the mouse moved.

Another big problem is when the game adjusts mouse sensitivity based on actions that you are doing. Prey (2017) is an amazing game, but they fucked up the mouse input.
When you sprint, the mouse sensitivity is cut down by ~1/3. So if you are sprinting away from something, you have to move the mouse more than you normally would.
Maybe that doesn't sound like a big deal, but if I have decades of muscle memory knowing that if I move the mouse X amount my view turns Y amount, and the game suddenly changes that in the middle of playing, my brain hates it. I get nauseated/motion sick immediately when this happens.

They also have sections where you are in zero-g and it cuts down the mouse sensitivity by maybe 1/2. Unlike the sprinting, this does not make me motion sick because it doesn't happen right in the middle of an action-heavy sequence.
What does happen is that I can't turn around without lifting up the mouse because the distance I have to move it is now doubled - meaning that the mouse would have to go off the edge of my desk to make those turns.

These things may work with an analog stick, but not with a mouse.
Fortunately there is a mod that can fix these things, but it should never have happened in the first place.


And some games manage to be even worse:
Rez Infinite has a problem where, if you move the mouse too quickly, the aim cursor slows down and lags really badly.
It's like the game has a limit on the number of inputs it can process at once and queues them up, but they didn't realize that mice can send hundreds or thousands of 'counts' with fast movements.

Resident Evil 2 (2019) and Yakuza 0 have deadzones for their mouse input. If you don't move the mouse fast enough, the game just ignores your inputs!
RE2 suffers from "negative acceleration" as well, so if you move the mouse too fast your view will turn slower.

Vanquish is laughably bad. It has three separate sensitivity sliders in the game, and I had to set them to: 1 / 46 / 80 for them to match. On top of that, there are weapons in the game which do not use any of those values, but scale their sensitivity off one of them - so there's no way to have reliable aiming in the game.

EDIT: Another issue common to third-person games is having actions that lock out the camera control while the animation plays out. Maybe that's fine with a gamepad, but it's not something you should do with mouse inputs.

Something else a lot of developers get wrong is that their base mouse sensitivity is too high, so with a sensitivity of "1" the view turns far too much unless you reduce the mouse resolution (CPI/DPI) to a very low setting like 400.
This means the view does not turn smoothly and produces quantized/stair-stepped movements. For example:


Ideally games would either have a very wide scale for sensitivity, or allow very precise sensitivities to be entered manually.
For example: 400 CPI at a sensitivity of "3" should have the exact same turning speed as 12,000 CPI with a sensitivity of "0.1" but the higher resolution will produce smoother inputs.
If the game only lets sensitivity be set as low as "1" that limits the mouse to 1200 CPI resolution - any higher would increase the turning speed.


PREACH!!

I have no idea how games come out still today with mouse input broken. Especially when there is specifically something like raw mouse input to get around that. Watch Dogs 1 having aim assist on the mouse making it constantly changing your sensitivity every time you moved your cursor near an enemy was the worst.
 

laxu

Member
Nov 26, 2017
2,783
Field of view slider.

It's actually important for a number of reasons. The most important is that people play games with different setups. A few meters away on a couch with a big TV, right in front of a small desktop display or maybe right in front of a massive 40+ inch desktop screen. In these situations different amounts of FOV can be beneficial. On the desktop you want wide FOV because you are close up, you want to see more things. On the couch, you are further away so high FOV might mean you have difficulty seeing far away objects. Low FOV on the desktop feels like having binoculars on.

Next up is performance. Wider FOV, more things rendered. As console games are mostly played on the couch low FOV is a boon to developers.
 

Plum

Member
May 31, 2018
17,320
LEARN HOW TO USE A MOUSE, GAME DEVELOPERS

I am so tired of buying games which have broken mouse input.
The mouse is a precise input device capable of 1:1 control.

If the mouse resolution is set to 800 CPI (counts-per-inch) it sends 800 'counts' for every inch that it is moved.
That means it will move 800 pixels on-screen if it is moved an inch.
It doesn't matter how quickly or slowly the mouse is moved, if it is moved by one inch, it sends 800 counts when set to 800 CPI.

In first/third-person games, counts are essentially translated to degrees of rotation, and the amount the view turns per count received is set by the game's sensitivity option.
So you might have a mouse pad which is 10" wide, and adjust the sensitivity so that one swipe across it will turn the view 360°, or someone may prefer a different sensitivity and set that to do a 180° turn for example.
People have -literally decades- of muscle-memory built up for this, because it is how mouse input has always worked.

And yet now, in the past few years, game developers keep fucking this up.
They're adding acceleration to mouse input, like it's an analog stick:
The faster you move the mouse, the faster the view turns, and the slower you move the mouse, the slower it turns.
Or worse, the game suffers from "negative acceleration" where the view turns slower the faster you move the mouse.

Here's an example of "negative acceleration" in Dishonored 2 at launch, before they patched the game. Slow movements with the mouse will complete five 360° turns, while fast movements barely turn the view 90°:


So now there's no way to reliably control input in the game, because input speed affects aim in addition to the distance the mouse moved.

Another big problem is when the game adjusts mouse sensitivity based on actions that you are doing. Prey (2017) is an amazing game, but they fucked up the mouse input.
When you sprint, the mouse sensitivity is cut down by ~1/3. So if you are sprinting away from something, you have to move the mouse more than you normally would.
Maybe that doesn't sound like a big deal, but if I have decades of muscle memory knowing that if I move the mouse X amount my view turns Y amount, and the game suddenly changes that in the middle of playing, my brain hates it. I get nauseated/motion sick immediately when this happens.

They also have sections where you are in zero-g and it cuts down the mouse sensitivity by maybe 1/2. Unlike the sprinting, this does not make me motion sick because it doesn't happen right in the middle of an action-heavy sequence.
What does happen is that I can't turn around without lifting up the mouse because the distance I have to move it is now doubled - meaning that the mouse would have to go off the edge of my desk to make those turns.

These things may work with an analog stick, but not with a mouse.
Fortunately there is a mod that can fix these things, but it should never have happened in the first place.


And some games manage to be even worse:
Rez Infinite has a problem where, if you move the mouse too quickly, the aim cursor slows down and lags really badly.
It's like the game has a limit on the number of inputs it can process at once and queues them up, but they didn't realize that mice can send hundreds or thousands of 'counts' with fast movements.

Resident Evil 2 (2019) and Yakuza 0 have deadzones for their mouse input. If you don't move the mouse fast enough, the game just ignores your inputs!
RE2 suffers from "negative acceleration" as well, so if you move the mouse too fast your view will turn slower.

Vanquish is laughably bad. It has three separate sensitivity sliders in the game, and I had to set them to: 1 / 46 / 80 for them to match. On top of that, there are weapons in the game which do not use any of those values, but scale their sensitivity off one of them - so there's no way to have reliable aiming in the game.

EDIT: Another issue common to third-person games is having actions that lock out the camera control while the animation plays out. Maybe that's fine with a gamepad, but it's not something you should do with mouse inputs.

Something else a lot of developers get wrong is that their base mouse sensitivity is too high, so with a sensitivity of "1" the view turns far too much unless you reduce the mouse resolution (CPI/DPI) to a very low setting like 400.
This means the view does not turn smoothly and produces quantized/stair-stepped movements. For example:


Ideally games would either have a very wide scale for sensitivity, or allow very precise sensitivities to be entered manually.
For example: 400 CPI at a sensitivity of "3" should have the exact same turning speed as 12,000 CPI with a sensitivity of "0.1" but the higher resolution will produce smoother inputs.
If the game only lets sensitivity be set as low as "1" that limits the mouse to 1200 CPI resolution - any higher would increase the turning speed.


Great post! Might I also add:

LEARN HOW TO USE AN ANALOG STICK, GAME DEVELOPERS

Still there are so many games I've played where analog stick aiming is much, much worse than it has any right to be. Shit like putting massive deadzones, forcing ridiculous acceleration, input lag and, the most common offense, making it so that the X and Y axis are prioritised above 360 degree motion.

Halo got that right 20 years ago yet it's 2019 and I'm still dropping games because they can't do analog controls correctly. Dishonored 2 was the absolute worst contender for this, and I've heard Metro Exodus on consoles has the same problems as well.
 

laxu

Member
Nov 26, 2017
2,783
Non configurable controls on consoles. I don't know what the situation is on Xbox but it's shit on PS4. Global configuration option hidden deep in a menu is completely ridiculous when it should be per game mapping with ability to see exactly the actions relevant to the game (e.g. map X to action "jump"). So are preset control options when you could just as well map anything just the way you like it and have the correct prompts come up where needed.
 

Shrikey

Member
Oct 27, 2017
673
Holding X to sprint/freerun/climb in third person games that control the camera with the right stick.

I have never once gotten a satisfactory explanation to this. We have analogue controls, we generally have four shoulder buttons. So why would we limit players access to camera controls while traversing? Especially if a shoulder button is dedicated to a weapon wheel or something, that could work equally well on a face button or d-pad.
 

LumberPanda

Member
Feb 3, 2019
6,417
Does this count as "design"? Not having gyro aim support. Aiming with just analog sticks has been an atrocious experience, and it was solved over a decade ago. Yet when you boot up a game like Uncharted 4 you're stuck with that unjustifiably awful aiming experience.
 

Valkerion

Member
Oct 29, 2017
7,265
I believe the intent is to prevent you from easily accessing a chest in the middle of combat with enemies, to force you to either take out the enemy first or somehow find a safe window to open it.

However a lot of games don't even really use it that way and you just end up with chests scattered around in areas where there is no enemy combat, thus making it pointless time wasting.

God of War series is the biggest offender to me, has chests all over the place after combat moments but I still gotta watch Kratos go "UUUUUUURRRRRAAAAAHHHH GAHHHH!!!!" for 5 seconds to open a chest for some orbs. Or open a door.

It's nonsense. Even if you want to emphasize it taking strength to open something, don't make me hold a button or mash like it opens it faster to do it.

Or in stuff like Destiny or Anthem, why do I have to hold a button to "scan" or "access" this point just for my little AI guy to go off until I finish the combat segment it activates. Just make it a single button press, its literally nothing extra by holding it.

These are the kinds of things I mean. I understand if it was mid combat, but none of these are and they are EVERYWHERE in these games lol.
 

Syril

Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,895
Does this count as "design"? Not having gyro aim support. Aiming with just analog sticks has been an atrocious experience, and it was solved over a decade ago. Yet when you boot up a game like Uncharted 4 you're stuck with that unjustifiably awful aiming experience.
It's so annoying because if you use the PS4 controller on PC it has really good gyro capabilities.
 

Dr_Biscuit

Member
Oct 28, 2017
288
France
Does this count as "design"? Not having gyro aim support. Aiming with just analog sticks has been an atrocious experience, and it was solved over a decade ago. Yet when you boot up a game like Uncharted 4 you're stuck with that unjustifiably awful aiming experience.
I can handle joystick aiming quite alright but I become less and less tolerant of this oversight (specially in FPS) as the time goes.
As Pargon mentions with the mouse there are also still some devs that manage to mess up joystick control.

It better be there nextgen.
 

Fatmanp

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,440
All the old FPS games had it right from the start. Full speed running by default, with an optional "walk" key for weirdos. Nowadays we have to hold an extra button to sprint, and it stops us from shooting? Who thought of this crap

So much this. Can I take a guess and say you are an old school Halo player? Most of us who despise sprint think like this.
 

jotun?

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,515
So much this. Can I take a guess and say you are an old school Halo player? Most of us who despise sprint think like this.
Nah, PC shooters. Doom, Quake, Tribes, UT, etc

I had some interest in Halo... when it was originally supposed to be a PC game and looked like it might be similar to Tribes.
 

HardRojo

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
26,204
Peru
Games not letting you use the D-pad to navigate menus and UI. Why would I EVER use the analogue stick for that.
I'll add another one regarding menus.
Not being able to go to the lowest option by pressing up when you're highlighting the highest option and vice-versa. Same for left/right.
 

Syril

Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,895
All the old FPS games had it right from the start. Full speed running by default, with an optional "walk" key for weirdos. Nowadays we have to hold an extra button to sprint, and it stops us from shooting? Who thought of this crap
People trying to make shooters more accessible to controllers by slowing the speed that firefights take place at, similar to Halo having way slower movement and jumping compared to PC shooters of the time.
 

Zombegoast

Member
Oct 30, 2017
14,255
The Weapon Wheel was a godsend.

AssCreed 2 had it
iu


But then AssCreed 3 got rid of it for this
iu



And it kept getting worse
15fq6qg.jpg
 

Don Fluffles

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,077
Nonlinear mission choice and difficulty. Mega Man X3 did this well.
Just introduce more minibosses in levels you later tackle.

Chantelise - MP-free magic sytem in action-RPGs. You pick up randomly dropped magic stones. When you have at least one, you hold the magic button for your fairy sister to queue the stones. The kind of spell, its strength and even its effects depend on the sequence of stones and how long you hold the button. Meanwhile, you can freely move around and dodge enemies you're targeting.
 

Barn

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,137
Los Angeles
Repeating significant sections of a game that you've already successfully completed dozens of times just for one more chance to make an attempt at the tiny slice of the game you're actually struggling with.

It sucks. It's not fun, it was never fun. It wasn't fun 30 years ago, but it was excused because save methods weren't as advanced, playtesting wasn't as thorough, and developers were still cheaply extending the length (and correlated "value") of games using arcade-inspired, quarter-munching tactics. Today, it usually just feels like antiquated design. It's exhausting, and I find no joy in it; it begins to feel like work after a certain point.
 

Pata Hikari

Banned
Jan 15, 2018
2,030
Repeating significant sections of a game that you've already successfully completed dozens of times just for one more chance to make an attempt at the tiny slice of the game you're actually struggling with.

It sucks. It's not fun, it was never fun. It wasn't fun 30 years ago, but it was excused because save methods weren't as advanced, playtesting wasn't as thorough, and developers were still cheaply extending the length (and correlated "value") of games using arcade-inspired, quarter-munching tactics. Today, it usually just feels like antiquated design. It's exhausting, and I find no joy in it; it begins to feel like work after a certain point.

This is not a design issue. The challenge is clearing the entire stage at once. Save states every five seconds just ruins any sense of pacing and difficulty for a lot of games.
 

Barn

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,137
Los Angeles
This is not a design issue. The challenge is clearing the entire stage at once. Save states every five seconds just ruins any sense of pacing and difficulty for a lot of games.

No one's asking for "save states every five seconds" (though I do love accessibility options) in every game, but I'd argue that creating "challenge" through rote, autopilot repetition of tasks you've already completed numerous times is not very creative, enjoyable or necessary design. Some repetition is, of course, innate to the whole concept of a game, but the over-reliance on repeating the same long guantlet to re-attempt a singular vertical slice of game is often a pretty hollow and dated variety of challenge -- and, to the thread, one that many games have figured out how to avoid for many years. There are folks that enjoy it, but I have more respect for games that offer challenge in more satisfying or creative ways.
 

Clowns

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,886
Repeating significant sections of a game that you've already successfully completed dozens of times just for one more chance to make an attempt at the tiny slice of the game you're actually struggling with.

It sucks. It's not fun, it was never fun. It wasn't fun 30 years ago, but it was excused because save methods weren't as advanced, playtesting wasn't as thorough, and developers were still cheaply extending the length (and correlated "value") of games using arcade-inspired, quarter-munching tactics. Today, it usually just feels like antiquated design. It's exhausting, and I find no joy in it; it begins to feel like work after a certain point.
This sums up why I hated Hollow Knight.
 

Fadewise

Member
Nov 5, 2017
3,210
This is not a design issue. The challenge is clearing the entire stage at once. Save states every five seconds just ruins any sense of pacing and difficulty for a lot of games.

There's a difference between a game that derives the difficulty from the gauntlet of challenge throughout the stage culminating in the boss fight (ie, Dark Souls, and old-school stuff like Contra) and one that just throws trash mobs at you on the way. The former is indeed a legitimate form of challenge, while the latter is just busywork to get back to the actual challenge that you may need to repeat to get good at.
 

Rodney McKay

Member
Oct 26, 2017
12,266
Longish load screens with no interactable elements.

I think Namco had a patent on on putting mini games in load screens, but I'm pretty sure that that expired ages ago.

Even stuff as simple as a graphic element you can mess around with (like in Warframe how you can move the Ship around a bit)
 

RoninChaos

Member
Oct 26, 2017
8,349
Don't put durability in games for weapons.

Pokémon fire red with the recap of what you've done. All RPGs should do this. Witcher III did it great.
 

eyeball_kid

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,262
OP, I'd go further. The ladder has always been a failure of movement design in FPS games, disorienting and inefficient. It was terrible in Half-Life 1 where it was first introduced, and it's still terrible today in games like No Man's Sky who haven't learnt that lesson.
 

Fadewise

Member
Nov 5, 2017
3,210
Longish load screens with no interactable elements.

I think Namco had a patent on on putting mini games in load screens, but I'm pretty sure that that expired ages ago.

Even stuff as simple as a graphic element you can mess around with (like in Warframe how you can move the Ship around a bit)

For all the complaints that I have about certain aspects of Destiny 2's UI, the fact that you can fully interact with your inventory and loadouts during loading screens absolutely needs to become a standard thing.
 
Dec 18, 2017
356

Barn

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,137
Los Angeles
This sums up why I hated Hollow Knight.

I shit you not, I just posted the exact same thought in the Hollow Knight community thread a few days ago -- I'm halfway through the game, and it brought this issue right to the forefront of my mind.

It's a downer because I enjoy almost everything else about the game, but as I said in that thread, it's just an absolute slog to have to repeat the same 5-minute chunk of gameplay -- the same trial I've completed 10 or more times already -- over and over and over, just so I can have another brief swipe at the real challenge at hand (i.e. a boss). And, largely because you really need to learn the game's bosses via repetition, it steps right over the line from challenge into joyless frustration real quick. It turns me off from the game for days at a time.

On the topic of whether or not this qualifies as "bad" design, I asked folks in that thread if there was some sort of justification for this decision -- people have really studied Hollow Knight deeply, so I thought maybe there was some sort of design intention that could shed light on why it had been made this way. No one could really come up with anything satisfactory (and, no, "challenge" doesn't cut it; we get that from the game's individual trials, not repeating the journey to them). I still like the game overall, but I find it a really good example of what I think is an antiquated design principle.