What would make you hate a game genre less/or even like it if you could change something(s) about it?

Example Many hate souls games for being hard...so ill take that one out of the equation and say make them have modifiers for difficulty waypoints and the ability to coop the entire time and save states maybe even a story that's more straight forward. It wouldn't be like souls for many but I think it would be more assessable and scare less away like Elden Ring did. Maybe I just described soul clones XD.

I already enjoy card games, but I would absolutely LOVE it if they weren't all about paying way too much to keep up on cards. Every card game I've quit, I've done so because I didn't want to deal with whatever inane card collection system they were using.

Roguelikes, I’d like the option to not have to start from the beginning again.

I don't like boss fights for me they are either ridiculous set piece moments to finish a game/level like in Mass Effect 2 & Dead Space or tedious road blocks in Bloodborne.

I want battle royales to be more random so it's less about learning the map and mechanics and more of a roguelike experience. Like the original Battle Royale, you should go in with no knowledge. Procedurally generated maps, random loadouts. Like Minecraft Hunger Games.

I second battle royals. The idea of running through a world map and collecting weapons, armor, and different buffs, just to get taken out by some player with a sniper rifle or some other janky method is a huge turn off. Its even worse when you play solo and you're going against a lot of players who have people they're communicating with. I think Apex Legends is the best of them, because at least you can start off with a random three man team, but still that's nothing against a team who knows what they are doing and are in constant communication with each other.

I think Rumble Verse was a good idea for a battle royal game, because it was melee wrestling based and not another shooter based one. So success depended a lot on how well you could fight and you didn't have to worry about getting ganged up on by a coordinated team, through they could still happen randomly. But of course, it didn't take off in popularity, because that would be too good for this world. But the makers of the game was on to something that I think other developers should examine.

Military shooters= less paid DLC, less proxy coins/cash to buy in game items.

Narartive based games = too few chcies for interactiosn beyond shout or shoot. When such games have relationship NPC they are always lame and you interactions with them are always sex instead of ANY other hauns interaction like talking, holding hands, sharing a meal...I can think of only oen game where you could play a guitar for you date/spouse.

RPGs/Any Character creation game = Character creators are always bad and too simplistic unless you want muscles, boobs, or tattoos. Too few closths to have on you character; clothes you can have come in one color; tone/tiber/base/treble of voice between feminine and masculine not available - those are especially true in wRPGs.

I'll pick a couple of games rather than genres.

X-Com: Percentages that make sense. Or would that ruin X-Com's whole gamble?

FIFA needs to be more enjoyable to play against the AI for me to get back into it. I feel like that game loves to keep things on the ground so you rarely seem long balls hoofed forward by the AI or human opponents. PES understood there was more than two ways to win a game of football and teams played with a distinctive style that felt their own. FIFA settles on playing like Barcelona/peak Liverpool regardless of which team you're playing against.

Get that right and I'm back onboard.

I like RPGs, but rarely finish them due to getting bored of the grind. Most of these games would be better if the grind between bosses and mission objectives was cut in half. Same goes for open world games. Really anything that stuffs in a bunch of copy/paste padding should tone it down.

And speaking of toning things down, Mortal Kombat's X-Ray attacks have grown elaborate to the point that they interrupt the flow of the game.

I just can't with Souls-like combat. I need quick and snappy combat, not slow and deliberate moves. Let me jump in, get a hit, jump out. Give me big glowing weak points and a nice flashy response to hits, ala Zelda. Telegraph enemy attacks more so I have a chance. I don't mind difficult games, but I need to have some control over what's happening. See: Metroid Dread, Hollow Knight, God of War, Spider-Man. Too bad, because the world design from Elden Ring seems so interesting.

I would like roguelikes if they weren't roguelikes.

The core of Soulslike design philosophy is to intentionally create situations where any normal player would fail, and then harshly punishing them for doing so. That means the best way to improve the Soulslike genre is to gut the very core of the thing and only keep the surface level trappings. Doing that gives you something along the lines of Jedi: Fallen Order, which is a game I imagine most Souls fans casually disdain.

I guess that means Soulslikes would be better if they were Soulslites. I just now realized I hate this entire discussion.

@borgmaster: Can't tell if you were responding to my post above or to what extent that was sarcasm or sincere. But I think the essence of Soulslike gameplay is to put the player in difficult, put surmountable, situations, and to put an added layer of tension by extra punishment for losing, so that the feeling of accomplishment is great. I have no problem with any of that, personally. I just don't like Souls-style slow, heavy control schemes.