Multiplayer:Killing us slowly or best thing ever?

aenemic said:
then we have games like Dungeon Siege 3. I've played through half or so alone, but I just keep thinking that this is a game that is supposed to be played with at least one more person. but the only thing I hear from people who've played it in co-op is how badly it works. and this game tries hard to be an "rpg", with lengthy dialogues and a lot of lore to read up on - no one wants that in a multi-player game, there's always someone who can't be bothered with it and will grow bored.
Click to expand...

The problem with DS3's coop is the bad camera and that everyone must stick together in a group, etc. It's impossible to play like that with more tha 1 player, as the camera zooms big into the players, you can't see what's in front of you, range combat becomes useless, etc. I doubt the game would be so bad in coop, if it wouldn't have this issues.
 
Reason #80 to hate multiplayer:idiot who text you after,take a gander a this gem I recieved:Q:What did the unemployed cancer cells decide to do?A:They got jobs.Must have stayed up all night thinking up that one.Someone give me a good comeback before I block him.
 
Halo:Reach campian.These guy where to busy killing each other to do much of anything!Oh well, it my fault for trying matchmaking anyway.Should have known better than to trust a bunch of strangers.
 
If a game was designed for multiplayer to start with, I don't have that much problem with it. The biggest problem for me is the fact that a lot of single player games are dragged into the MP universe just for a me too moment. I really, and sincerely hate single player games requiring multiplayer or online elements to access certain part of its content. DLC are barely tolerable for single players games but as long as the content provided isn't something necessary for the continuation of the game, or providing essential story lines that you need to make sense of the story, I can live with it. I feel that there is more and more of MP moments for games just because it's there.

A while back, it was sort of expensive and novel for some kind of online content or play. PS 2 required additional hardware and some knowledge to get it running smoothly. RE: Outbreak 1 & 2 was kinda fun and amusing. It wasn't true MP as a lot of people complained but it was fine. But the funny thing is, now online is cheap and available, you don't see another Outbreak.

Online play is a fine thing. Shooting games, racing games, sports games, fighting games and etc all benefit from a larger pool competition or cooperation. There are dedicated MMOs for people who like such things and have the time for it. Trophies and online rankings help boost some people's ego and make them feel good about themselves, that's great too. But leave my other games alone, please.
 
I used to play a lot Goldeneye 64, World Cup 98 and Mario Kart 64 back in the days of n64. But nowdays I am not that much into multiplayer. It isn't really that much fun anymore. :shrug:
 
I've been of the opinion that a strong multiplayer component was the best deterrent to piracy. For example, even though the first Starcraft was pirated to hell and back, the people who torrented it got a seriously gimped game since they couldn't get into what turned into its biggest feature: the competitive multiplayer circuit.

I like me some multiplayer competitive RTSes and pick-up co-op matches in Rainbow Six 1 through Raven Shield. As for the crappy people you occasionally meet online, though. Well... life's about getting the good with the bad.
 
The best deterrent to piracy is a very good game with good gameplay etc, not some arbitrary multiplayer.
 
Walpknut said:
You should have known better than to play Halo, amrite?
Click to expand...
To be fair,It was about 1:00AM,and you`ll meet weird people at this time:I remeber a guy in are squad who blasted music through his headphones.And for some reason he likes to jump on peoples heads and bob up a down.Naturaly he takes a liking to me.So I kill him;and he comes running back and doing that dance,geting me killed.(This was team snipers)Before I finally quit the game,he sends a friend request,and a message:Frrrreeeeeennnnndddddd
 
I will never be an MMO player but Multiplayer often adds a lot of life to a game. Take Dynasty Warriors 3, an old PS2 game. It gets bland on your own but when you play with a partner, it becomes fun to strive for the 4th Level Weapons.

Something like Fallout is fun as hell even without multiplayer, which puts it in an elite like Zelda or Mario. However, even those had some semblance of multiplayer like the Tingle Tuner from Zelda Wind Waker. I would not be opposed to something like that in Fallout.
 
Neither. I think multiplayer games will co-exist peacefully alongside singleplayer games as I don't think singleplayer is going anywhere. Of course you can argue whether or not online verification of games is due to multiplayer games' popularity. Since Duke and Doom LAN matches, I always liked the idea of playing the games I love with friends or larger community. There was chat and then suddenly I could slay monsters while chatting (mud/torp). Add some years to that, we have WoW. Now, I never understood the appeal of this game, even if you got friends/people to play with, boring as hell to me. There are also games that I'd only enjoy in singleplayer, like Fallout, that I play for mainly for the story and multi would only prove to be a distruction for me.
 
Well, to be fair god created Multiplayer thinking exclusively of strategy games. If you haven't played a strategy game in multiplayer, well you haven't tried multiplayer at all.
This is the only genre where multiplayer isn't at all an artifice, it's just the way they are played since the origins of time, and it's fucking great.

Warcraft, Starcraft, Total Annihilation, Sudden Strike (WW2 strategy game), that many strategic experiences I'm never gonna forget.

You could argue role playing games existed too, but there is to date no way to emulate the real-time storytelling of the game master. It may come one day, but that's still something to invent. Until then multiplayer role playing games don't really exist to me.
 
Starcraft and Starcraft II are great games for online gaming! However, I'll have to disagree with the statement that you haven't tried multiplayer if you haven't tried online strategy games. Other genres can be equally fun. Shooters and sport games proved that.
 
On a side note, PnP multiplayer is a load of fun.

And has anyone tried Mercenaries 2? I've not played co-op, but as I passed through the story it became pretty clear how it would easily merge with singleplayer.

I also remember playing Might and Magic 3 with some friends on the Europe map (and then later on with my bro). In my opinion, fighting against each other in strategy game is much more hurtful than in a shooter or a racer or a sport game, as you take time and thought building your empire/base/army, so playing co-op is a tad more fun.
 
The same could even be said when multiplayer games try to have a single player campaign thrown in. Games such as UT and BF have always struggled with in the single player departments. and it's probably why games such as Halo and Call of Duty deliver such ho-hum single player experiences, as well. I think the lesson should be don't include something else in when it isn't the focus. It dilutes the entire product.
 
MP used to be about skill and not about unlocking/ "xp".
Funny how mainstream gaming has declined into brainless entertainment.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z39X-5RuOVo[/youtube]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top