Misused: Anti Frustration Features

I've tried this before, but it got shot down due to lack of evidence. Which I presume means I needed to do the ol' wick check, so here we go.

I mainly see two types of misuse of this trope: the literal type (where people think it refers to any feature that makes the game less frustrating than it would otherwise be, even if it's a regular part of the game and not a response to a specific situation), and the sequel type (where it's used to refer to sequels making game mechanics from previous games less frustrating- which might even include removing features rather than adding them). There are currently 1187 links to it, so let's just check the A's:

• A Bear's Night Out: Seems to be a literal example, though it might be right depending on how often it happens. It looks to be just automating functions (moving items into and out of the inventory) that the player can do themselves, not bending the game rules.
• Acceptable Breaks from Reality: Summarizes the trope correctly in the description. However, lower down it generalizes Puzzle Reset as an example, when it might not necessarily be so (for instance, Mole Mania does it in basically every room, so it's not a response to a specific circumstance)
• Action-Adventure: A couple of mentions when talking about Sly 2: Band of Thieves.I don't know enough about the game to really know if it's a correct example- however, the fact that both examples boil down to "when you have to collect a certain number of items during a mission, you keep the ones you've collected if you fail" seems to indicate a literal example. If you did lose collected items on most missions and only kept them on a few really hard ones, it would be a correct example.
• A Dark Room: Really just Mercy Mode, though I guess it could also qualify for this as well since it requires very specific methods of death.
• AdventureQuest: The first example I'm not sure of: again, it depends on how things work in other parts of the game. The second example though, is clearly a literal one- if it's a system that has a name, it's probably not a rare occurrence!
• After Burner: Literal example: they're just unlockable cheats, most of which apply to the entire game, not parts of it.
• After the War: Literal example; all it's saying is that the game has a lot of checkpoints.
• Age of Wonders 3: I think this works as an example: you can set the game up so that, in a specific circumstance (that being when the player lets the computer run a fight for them), the rules are different than when the player does the same thing- though,it might be less of an example if the player did that regularly. The later part of the example is just "the game saves itself a lot", which is just literal.
• A.I. Roulette: A literal example from FTL: Faster Than Light. It's the result of randomness, and not even apparently weighted randomness to benefit the player when they need it the most.
• Alien: Isolation: The first example is a literal one. It's an always-available option to change the difficulty. The thing about save points could be considered an example, depending on how rare it is to have enemies around the save points. There's also an aversion, which would technically be valid regardless of whether it's averting the correct definition or the literal one, but seems more like "this was a frustrating game mechanic".
• All Deaths Final: Casual Mode in the Fire Emblem franchise is a literal example. If you play on that mode, the game works like that all the time.
• All Your Base Are Belong to Us: Seems to actually be a valid example in XCOM: Enemy Unknown: it's the one case where the Final Death Mode lets you try again.
• Alpha Bounce: Kind of debatable. It's a special weapon that you can normally only use as a powerup, but appears when you have only a few blocks left to allow you to clear them out. It seems like it might be a bit too up-front to be an example though- there's a power meter for it right on the screen.
• Alpha Protocol: Looks like a literal example (though used as a sub-point of Acceptable Breaks from Reality). The game lets you implausibly do damage to an enemy with a weak weapon, because the weapon that should be able to damage it is limited. The example doesn't indicate whether or not the pistol is properly ineffective in other circumstances; it certainly doesn't sound like you can only use the pistol when you've exhausted the supply of rockets.
• American McGee's Alice: Both seem to be valid examples: replenishing items that only appear during boss fights, and only some pits keep you from dying.
• American Truck Simulator: Literal example, it's an option you use yourself, not something the computer does.
• Amorphous+: Literal example. There's a form of Mercy Invincibility and a quirk of hitboxes, that both happen all the time, not just in certain circumstances.
• Angry Birds Epic: Literal example. The game has AI partners who help you when you're not playing multiplayer; you can presumably play the whole game that way.
• Animal Crossing: Sequel example, mentioning the ways later games made it easier to catch bees.
• Animal Crossing: Mostly sequel examples.
• Annoyance Tropes: ...is a trope about trying not to be annoying considered an Annoyance Trope?
• Annoying Video Game Helper: An example from The Journeyman Project Pegasus Prime, which is a literal one. It's just an option to skip certain speeches, not any kind of change in the game rules.
• Another Metroid 2 Remake: Sequel examples (or rather, one remake example and one patch example).
• Another World: Correct example. Normally the game changes your save password when you progress, but if you missed something vital, the game will keep your password at the earlier point so you can reload to a point where you can fix it. It's specific and out of the way: definitely works for the trope.
• Anti-Frustration Features: The page itself. Looking down, there are a lot more valid examples on the page as opposed to those on other pages, though there's still a lot of misuse. Presumably people are more likely to read the description when they're going to edit the page itself. On the other hand, the page image is a literal example: it's a map that you can access, not a change in the rules!
• Anti-Frustration Features: The laconic puts more emphasis on the Acceptable Breaks from Reality aspect rather than breaking the game's rules.
• Anti-Idle: The Game: The FCG part seems valid, but the rest seem literal.
• An Untitled Story: Not sure if it's valid or literal; it kind of depends on how much this happens to the player.
• Aperture Tag: The Paint Gun Testing Initiative: Literal. There's a button you can press to skip a hard part of the game. It's the player's choice, not done by the computer.
• Aperture Tag: The Paint Gun Testing Initiative: Same literal example as above.
• Aquapazza: Infinite continues in all of story mode? Definitely literal.
• Aquaria: Literal. This can happen any time and probably will happen a lot, in my experience.
• Arbitrary Headcount Limit: Monster Hunter example is literal. Two large monsters all the time, it's consistent.
• Arcuz: Sequel example. Having a healer character is clearly not changing the rules.
• Armor and Magic Don't Mix: A literal example from a pinball game. Powerups that the player has to earn clearly don't qualify.
• Artistic License – Statistics: Discussing inaccurately-displayed probabilities in Fire Emblem. It's close, but since it's consistent it's a literal example, not a correct one. It's not even that good of a literal one since the player can't tell the real probability.
• Assassin's Creed: Seems closer to a literal example than a correct one, given how mundane the circumstance involved (enemies having their backs turned) is.
• Assassin's Creed III - The Assassins: Literal example, it's powerups you get through the story.
• Assassin's Creed Rogue: Literal example under Never Hurt an Innocent. Making enemies kill innocent people doesn't count as you killing them yourself, but (especially considering that the example itself says that they didn't count in other games either), there's no reason for the player to expect that they would count, and this is a consistent behavior.
• Atelier Escha & Logy: Alchemists of the Dusk Sky: A couple sequel examples.
• Atelier Shallie: Alchemists of the Dusk Sea: More sequel examples.
• Atlus: Some mentions of literal and sequel examples, nothing correct.
• Atom Zombie Smasher: Literal example. It seems to be an option you can set for the game yourself, similar to a difficulty setting.
• Attack the Light: More a form of dynamic tutorial, the game itself doesn't get any easier.
• Auto-Save: Preventing the save file from breaking doesn't have anything to do with game difficulty!
• A Very Long Rope to the Top of the Sky: A sequel, or rather patch, example with the difficulty being lowered globally.

So... yeah, there is indeed a lot of misuse here.

Wick check is decent enough to open.

First, it may be prudent to change the laconic, which incorrectly describes this trope as an Acceptable Break from Reality.

It's really more about an acceptable break from established game mechanics.

Why not just broadening it to cover those examples? The name encompasses quite a lot.

A sequel improving on old frustrating features to make X easier would be a different trope unto itself, one that could be flamebait since any changes like that tend to piss off the harder core fanbase.

I believe the definition should be expanded to cover the misuse. Either that, or the cases for when sequels change, fix, or remove mechanics from previous entries to make the game less frustrating should be made its own trope if anyone feels it's worthy of being a separate trope.

I second broadening the description, though I also agree that the sequel-based misuses may need to be split off. It is possible to do both.

The name "Anti-frustating features" is misleading.

There are two types IMO

• Patched Out Frustrating Features or Patched Quality Of Life Upgrades: Game patched out x frustration feature. The frustrating feature is gone, bye bye
• Sequel Upgraded Quality Of Life Features: The sequel changed certain features that made THAT game easier when compared to the original. The original is left completely intact.

Now hidden features like Blizzard's so called "Pity Timer" where each X you do you get your odds of getting a good drop increased would be just an anti-frustation feature.

edited 18th Dec '16 7:59:26 PM by Memers

The sequel version is probably covered by Sequel Difficulty Drop already.

Not really, I mean say adding a button that will let you go to the world map instead of having to go all the way to the edge of the zone like Persona 4 and Persona 3 Portable did to address one of the complaints about Persona 3 isnt a difficulty drop its just a quality of life change.

I think there's a difference between, "feature that makes the game more comfortable to play," and, "feature that breaks established game mechanics for the purpose of ensuring the player doesn't get stuck or avoiding things being needlessly frustrating." The trope's defined as the latter, but is often used as the former, probably because of the missing supertrope syndrome.

Expanding the definition could work, but there still needs to be some sort of guideline for what counts and what doesn't. Just any beneficial mechanic seems too broad.

Usually, there has to be an element of frustration first, that the feature directly fixes.

Yes. The game has to detect the player has become stuck or otherwise in a situation they can't resolve and actively help.

For that reason, I would not consider the page quote about mid-boss checkpoints to be an AFF, because it's not done in reaction to player performance. They're there from the start, they just make the game easier altogether and simply designing an easy game is not an Anti-Frustration Feature.

Also we should erase the parentheses equating this to "quality of life" patches. It's misleading. Qo L is generally used to refer to things which don't affect gameplay.

Quality of life changes do affect gameplay like revamped spell rotations to make them easier or less frustrating, revamping the UI so you have less bag space frustrations, removing elements of RNG from the game etc.

But those are typically patch or sequel changes which would be the trope that I think needs to be split off from this.

Perhaps some of those examples would be in Author's Saving Throw instead.

No, that's about a plot twist and the like that makes a plot or characters and such.

It is certainly not any of these tropes.

Sounds like the trope should just be broadened to me. Maybe we should require sequel examples to mention complaints about a disliked feature that was removed/made easier in the sequel though.

Clock expired; closing.