What are you BAD at in games?

Brian Boru

King of Munster
Moderator
Companion thread to 'What are you GOOD at in games?'

Vehicles:
Always a problem for me. I don't like racing games so I've no practice, I've no interest so I avoid vehicles as much as possible—generally only doing the minimum required for some missions, or maybe to grab some perk or experience points. As long as there are a good supply of Fast Travel points in a big map, I'm good on foot.

I remember using the mini-Chopper in Far Cry 4 a lot—I forget why, probably because FT points were sparse. And I still remember the boat ride in the canal from Half Life 2—you shoot out of this pipe way up in a dam [I think?], land with a heck of a thud on the river far below, and then have to dodge a chopper dropping mines in front of you. Typical HL2, so many memorable set pieces.

Melee:
As above, don't enjoy it, so little practice = I'm bad. Only game I've played thru which required a lot of melee was Far Cry Primal, but the significant melee was definitely the least enjoyable part for me.

I role play a lot in games—not in a RPG sense, but in a 'What if I was in this situation?' kind of way. So the last thing I'd do is run into a fire fight blazing away—I don't care how much my inheritors would enjoy the life insurance!

Even in strategy games, I take pride in not losing a unit in a small encounter—kind of Sun Tzu 'never start a war until you have it won'. Similarly in shooters, take over a base without being shot gives me warm fuzzies—and saves on med kits and armor.

Learning new systems:
I avoid lots of games because of the unfamiliar setting. One thing my 3 favorite franchises—C&C, Civ, Far Cry—have in common is I have a good idea what the basic mechanics do. Tanks and planes, trade routes and missionaries, rifles and grenades, grunts and heavies, spears and bee bombs—easy to figure out, so I can get right into playing the game and pick up the nuances as I go along—waddayamean a spearman can defeat a tank? 🥴

But if I have to spend significant time figuring out what each unit does, what each building does, what are the counters to each, etc—too much like work. Hmm, maybe that's it, since learning new systems were a big part of my working life. Waddayaknow, I've achieved work-play balance!

Challenge:
I used to play to beat the game at the hardest level, but not in a decade or so now. I play to enjoy, and conquering difficult situations is not a source of pleasure anymore. I automatically start a new game on Easy. If I like it enough to replay, I'll go to Normal and apply any mods I fancy. Difficulty is only relevant in requiring good planning, presenting fun puzzles, and providing interesting choices.

There, told you this would be longer than my post in the GOOG thread! So own up, where in gaming does it suck to be you?
 
Multitasking

I'm terrible at keeping an eye on the bigger picture. This is especially noticeable in (fast-paced) RTS games, where I'll happily micro 5 units for half an hour before remembering I should probably also do some base building or check in on my units in other parts of the map.
But it also happens in TBS games. It's a good thing that they usually remind me I still have units I haven't moved yet or that I need to pick something new for my cities to produce or whatever, but inevitably there will be a unit on a mode that doesn't give reminders and I'll forget about them for several turns, perhaps even the rest of the game. The Alert of Sleep options in Civilization for example, or a city that has been producing only wealth since the dark ages while the rest are working on a space rocket. Oftentimes I remember about about them after ending my turn and forgetting once the next turn starts.
 
I would consider myself mediocre to bad at shooters. I get through them pretty easily, but it's because of strategy instead of skill. I go slowly and hang back as far as possible, picking enemies off one at a time.

I'm horrific at stealth. I have no patience, and frequently stall out, not seeing a way out of my predicament. Strangely, I actually enjoy trying to be stealthy, but need the game to have a decent alternative when the stealth fails. Games that are predominantly stealth and are punishing if you are spotted, I just avoid. Dishonored? No, thanks.

The older I get the less "noise" I can handle and still function at a high level. RTS games without pause are basically problematic for me.

Edited to add that I'm hopeless at platforming.
 
Last edited:
I'm horrific at stealth. I have no patience, and frequently stall out, not seeing a way out of my predicament. Strangely, I actually enjoy trying to be stealthy, but need the game to have a decent alternative when the stealth fails. Games that are predominantly stealth and are punishing if you are spotted, I just avoid. Dishonored? No, thanks.

I wouldn't say I'm bad at stealth, but that stealth like this is just not a fun game mechanic for me. I don't really care to wait until the perfect moment to precisely navigate from one hiding spot to the next 10 times in a row, having to start from the beginning if I make one mistake along the way.
 

Brian Boru

King of Munster
Moderator
stealth like this is just not a fun game mechanic for me
I agree, the Thief level of stealth was beyond my patience level. The Far Cry kind of stealth is my game, where if you have planned for being spotted, you'll still be fine—tip, slopes are your friend, slide to hide :)

After I pick off the overwatch, I circle installations looking for outliers who conveniently walk behind something which will hide their body. Then I'll often place C4 on something as a reserve decoy if I'm getting hemmed in—maybe proximity mines nearby too to catch some investigators.

You can make a lot of noise and still get undetected bonus :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alm and Pifanjr
I'm horrific at stealth. I have no patience, and frequently stall out, not seeing a way out of my predicament. Strangely, I actually enjoy trying to be stealthy, but need the game to have a decent alternative when the stealth fails. Games that are predominantly stealth and are punishing if you are spotted, I just avoid. Dishonored? No, thanks.

This. I always wind up having a big gun battle in games where you can stealthily take over something or go in guns a blazing. I always start off with stealth and sometimes ill get through but for the most part im either too impatient or i miss something and i just would rather blow stuff up and shoot/stab people than walk by them. Theyre bad guys!
 
I agree, the Thief level of stealth was beyond my patience level. The Far Cry kind of stealth is my game, where if you have planned for being spotted, you'll still be fine—tip, slopes are your friend, slide to hide :)

After I pick off the overwatch, I circle installations looking for outliers who conveniently walk behind something which will hide their body. Then I'll often place C4 on something as a reserve decoy if I'm getting hemmed in—maybe proximity mines nearby too to catch some investigators.

You can make a lot of noise and still get undetected bonus :)

I love playing stealthy in Far Cry as well. Especially trying to do a melee only, stealthy infiltration. It almost never works, but I'll usually get at least half of them before I'm spotted.

I actually loved Dishonored as well. I just didn't reload after being spotted and had no problems killing when necessary or when my patience ran out.

EDIT: I played Splinter Cell and Hitman the same way. I don't have the patience to restart every time I'm spotted until I've gotten a perfect run.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brian Boru and Alm

mainer

Venatus semper
Mages and/or Magic Wielders
In games that have them, I've very rarely ever played them, and when I have tried I died. A lot. Way too squishy for me. So I usually just start over with a different character type. Maybe it's just a certain mind set, but I just don't have it.

Vehicles
Oh, I'm with you there @Brian Boru , I'm just a terror when trying to drive, or fly, in any type of vehicle mechanic a game provides. I've never played any kind of driving game either, so putting me behind the wheel of a land vehicle, or in a cockpit of a flying vehicle I'm basically on a suicide mission. I should have taken a video of my trying to fly the Hammerhead in ME3; I think I hit every cliff face on the map, as well as burning up in lava pits.

Mega-mean, resistant-to-everything, end-level, end-game type Boss Battles
You had a separate post on this, so I won't go into much detail, but overall, I usually just dread them. It really depends upon the game though; as some games have other options, and some are pretty painless if you're prepared. I'm thinking more along the lines of the bullet sponge bosses. Maybe I'm not patient enough to whittle them down, or maybe I panic, but I'm just not good in those situations. Give me an overwhelming hoard of enemies, or even mini-bosses any day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brian Boru and Alm
I have pretty much given up on RTS games. I used to love them but games like starcraft require such quick and clever decision making that I feel I can't keep up.

I guess the other type is anything which requires voice comms or anything where people are likely to get confrontational. I have some type of social anxiety and this affects my online interactions in games.
 

Brian Boru

King of Munster
Moderator
games like starcraft require such quick and clever decision making that I feel I can't keep up
Yeah, I never got into StarCraft either—apart from the syfy setting which doesn't appeal to me, the pace was too fast, to the degree it felt much more like tactics than strategy. Any kind of genre, I need time to think and plan.
Boss Battles
Shush, you said a naughty phrase! I won't repeat what we said in the other thread either, which is here for anyone interested:
https://forums.pcgamer.com/threads/boss-fights—who-needs-em.116288/
 
i certainly have a coupler of weak spots when it comes to gaming, most of them boil down to not playing them or not liking the genre.

The general ones are sports and racing titles, Absolutely awful at them. car mechanics etc no idea about them and i'll be a pretty easy competitor to beat if challenged.

Speaking of technical stuff, flight simulators and their combat based cousins. Can't fly a plane properly and there is a good chance that i'll crash them before i do anything useful. The same goes with Battlefield/planetside 2. Jump into one and chances are i'll crash them very quickly. planetside 2 i just used the fighters as transport that i would spawn to fly near an actual battle, crash the plane and make the rest of the way on foot. Sometimes i would crash it near an enemy sunderer to cause some mayhem/ confusion but that rarely works. if i could fly the damn things and strafe targets with rockets on the other hand....

RTS games. I play Single player most of the time and all those quick keys etc is too much to remember. Its like learning a whole new application. Far too much effort especially when i'm trying to have some fun. Throw in the stress of micro management and yeah, easy prey. Whilst i play the games on normal, sometimes even at that level the AI is able to punish me. COH2 AA springs to mind. As does endless legend. Just too much to handle.

Fighting games. I would LOVE to be good at these but pulling off the moves is just too difficult. Even harder under stress. yeah i could switch to easy move mode but that's sort of cheating. Most fans can do it, so should i. But i can't, so i stay away. Would love to play SF 4 or 5 and MK series but alas no.
 

Sarafan

Community Contributor
Multitasking

I'm terrible at keeping an eye on the bigger picture. This is especially noticeable in (fast-paced) RTS games, where I'll happily micro 5 units for half an hour before remembering I should probably also do some base building or check in on my units in other parts of the map.

I concur to that. Never been able to jump into Starcraft 2 multiplayer because of insane amount of multitasking that has to be done there. The fast pace of this game almost made me quit the official campaigns and I won't probably touch the multiplayer again.
 
I concur to that. Never been able to jump into Starcraft 2 multiplayer because of insane amount of multitasking that has to be done there. The fast pace of this game almost made me quit the official campaigns and I won't probably touch the multiplayer again.

I actually really liked the campaign from Starcraft 2 (I have yet to play Legacy of the Void though), but I just get rushed within 5 minutes of starting a multiplayer game.
 

Zloth

Community Contributor
The whole "lets see how many things you can juggle at once" business isn't something I do well. The game can have plenty of moving parts, but they need to be mostly autonomous.

Really tight timings aren't good anymore. I'm sure that's because the buttons on the old Atari 2600 joysticks were technically superior to anything made today. ;)

Fighting games. I would LOVE to be good at these but pulling off the moves is just too difficult.
I think the way they are set up is that you can beat easy AI opponents just flailing around with whatever (i.e. button mashing). As the opponents get harder, you need more and more complex moves and blocking. You won't be able to do that at first. Or at second. You actually need to practice, and not just three or four times. You've got to spend hours and keep at it for days before you start getting much better - but you do get better. That's one of the big appeals of the games: seeing what you can accomplish when you set your mind to it.
 
Really tight timings aren't good anymore. I'm sure that's because the buttons on the old Atari 2600 joysticks were technically superior to anything made today. ;)

My reflexes are pretty decent, but I had a lot of difficulty with the telegraphing in Dark Souls. I would always roll too late or too early. I did get a bit better over time, but I never really felt like I got a good grasp on it and I had to relearn with every new enemy.

I can't imagine being able to use perfect blocks in that game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zloth

Sarafan

Community Contributor
I actually really liked the campaign from Starcraft 2 (I have yet to play Legacy of the Void though), but I just get rushed within 5 minutes of starting a multiplayer game.

I enjoyed the campaigns as well, but the pace was too fast for me. There was also a problem with the mission structure. Most of them were time limited somehow. I was playing on hard however for most of the time and it was... hard! Without some multitasking there was basically no chance in finishing them. Quite a stressful experience for me, but also satisfying. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pifanjr
I think the way they are set up is that you can beat easy AI opponents just flailing around with whatever (i.e. button mashing). As the opponents get harder, you need more and more complex moves and blocking. You won't be able to do that at first. Or at second. You actually need to practice, and not just three or four times. You've got to spend hours and keep at it for days before you start getting much better - but you do get better. That's one of the big appeals of the games: seeing what you can accomplish when you set your mind to it.


I'm ok with the likes of ryu and can pull off the quarter circle stuff, the problem i think is my lack of precision and being able to chain up moves into a combo of sorts. I did play SFA3 on the GBA and didn't really play it above 4 stars.

The challenge is doing the 360 moves as i seem to jump a lot instead and you've hit the nail on the head; practice makes perfect. Only problem is that sometimes trying to do the same thing with similar disappointing results is like bashing your head against the wall sometimes. Its the amount of effort required like studying move sets, what works as an anti-air, ranges of moves what stuns, breaks guards etc and then you have to do that with the other characters and formulate counters, attacks strats etc. Its stuff like that sometimes makes me stop and think whether that much effort would be best spent elsewhere into something more productive or meaningful.
 
I enjoyed the campaigns as well, but the pace was too fast for me. There was also a problem with the mission structure. Most of them were time limited somehow. I was playing on hard however for most of the time and it was... hard! Without some multitasking there was basically no chance in finishing them. Quite a stressful experience for me, but also satisfying. :)

That's why I chose to play on normal. I wasn't looking for a challenge, I'm fine just mucking about. Plus I really dislike having to restart a RTS mission from the beginning if I lose.
 

Sarafan

Community Contributor
That's why I chose to play on normal. I wasn't looking for a challenge, I'm fine just mucking about. Plus I really dislike having to restart a RTS mission from the beginning if I lose.

I think that on normal the game is too easy. There's a slight problem with the proper balance of the difficulty levels. Hard was too hard for me (but I finished the game despite this), while normal was too easy. I'd certainly like to see something between.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pifanjr

McStabStab

Community Contributor
Optimizing supply chains and layouts in building / management games.

People really hammer down on finding the perfect balance in their supply chains and maximizing the efficiencies of their asset layouts. I don't have the time of day for it, I'll build my cities the way I want. Sure, it's not as efficient, but at least the aesthetic is more natural. I'll never be one of those players who unlocks every map square in Cities: Skylines, or has a 2 million person population in Anno 1800, but I'm still having fun and that's what counts!
 
Optimizing supply chains and layouts in building / management games.

People really hammer down on finding the perfect balance in their supply chains and maximizing the efficiencies of their asset layouts. I don't have the time of day for it, I'll build my cities the way I want. Sure, it's not as efficient, but at least the aesthetic is more natural. I'll never be one of those players who unlocks every map square in Cities: Skylines, or has a 2 million person population in Anno 1800, but I'm still having fun and that's what counts!

I don't think not doing something because it isn't fun for you is the same as being bad at it. That's like saying I'm bad at not driving into pedestrians in GTA because I just love running them over so much.
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts