|
| Welcome to NoE Version 2. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. << Furthermore, adverts like these are removed as you sign up! Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| When did multiplayer games die? | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jun 6 2011, 07:40 PM (512 Views) | |
| falco_the_watcher | Jun 6 2011, 07:40 PM Post #1 |
The fluffy one
|
*raises flame-proof shield* Somewhen between Pong and Call of Halops Reach, I believe multiplayer video games died. At least a little bit. Pong was a beautiful game, where the winner was the one who had the most skill at Pong, essentially a reflex and control based game. Multiplayer games these days far too often have an imbalance in them that corrupts them, and makes one particular class or style favourable. For example: 'camping' in a great number of FPS games, making one of, if not the best strategy into waiting at a particular choke point where the enemy must come through and then kill them without much of a chance to react or fight back. Something else people on here may be more accustomed to is on Mario Kart DS, the idea of 'snaking'. Essentially, excessive powersliding makes for the quickest lap times. But this isn't really playing the game. Not in my opinion, anyways. I think this enfuriates me all the more because Mario Kart has massive potential as a party game by being simple and mad and just because you're in 8th with one lap to go, doesn't mean you've lost. But I can't challenge a bunch of my friends to a game on it without some b*****d snaking and saying it's all part of the game. Maybe, but it saps the fun from it, especially when not everyone can do it. Other games have a sort of teamwork feeling, like Team Fortress 2 or Left 4 Dead. Which on paper sounds brilliant, but it means that if the other team is exceptionally good, then your team is at their mercy. This is made worse when people on your team quit as they don't want to play when there's no chance for victory (understandably so), but it leaves you in a position nearly impossible to win from. When things tip in favour of one team, people flock to that team, leaving people who want a challenge... well, to put it politely, pwn'd. Even one of my favourite forms of game, the beat 'em up, is suffering from some characters simply being better than others. In Soul Calibur, Astaroth's attacks do more than 3 times the damage of some other characters, and while his speed is low, it's not low enough to make up for the fact that if people learn to guard impact (not difficult), he's a beast. In the same series, Cervantes has always been seen as god-tier, because he brings unblockable ranged weapons (gun) to a melee-weapons fight, and can even teleport. People may disagree with me and that's fine because I'm old. But I'll bring up the example of Pong once more, if I can. I've played pong before, bloody loved it, and other retro games like Astro Race and such. Against other people, too. However, I've never been inclined, nor met anyone else who's been inclined, to rage-quit from pong. That's because it's more fair, and fun. I'm not saying we should go back to 70s games, as much as it may sound that way. I'm just disillusioned with the imbalance in a great majority of multiplayer games at the moment (obviously, co-op multiplayer tends to be exempt from this). Not to mention, now with a lot of games being online against strangers, the level of sportsmanship is just... poor. And I know that's the most stereotypically English complaint ever made, but it's true. Anyone who's played any FPS while a child joins the game, or if one person ever makes a mistake, or if a noob joins the game, or if you don't constantly follow the orders of a guy who thinks he's unbeatable, will know what I mean. I was just wondering what the general opinion of people on here was, and if anyone else feels similar frustrations, because I genuinely feel that most competitive games these days are just... poor. And maybe I'm wrong or have missed something, if I have please say, because I'd actually love to be wrong ^_^ Edited by falco_the_watcher, Jun 6 2011, 07:41 PM.
|
 |
 
|
| Takoa | Jun 6 2011, 08:10 PM Post #2 |
Ahoge of Justice
|
I know what you mean about the lack of sportsmanship in online multiplayer games. Like how your opponent repeating the same difficult to avoid attack in a fighting game over and over with no other attacks is very annoying. -.- You can even see it in the Pokémon wifi trades when I offered up something that evolves through trading, asking for something else that evolves through trading back for it. Three out of four times for one Pokémon I got one back where the trader had shoved an everstone on it so it couldn't evolve. It doesn't help or benefit them in any way, all it does is disappoint and piss people off. There's very little honour found in random online gaming. :( |
|
|
|
| falco_the_watcher | Jun 6 2011, 08:16 PM Post #3 |
|
The fluffy one
|
I haven't played pokemon since D/P, but I'm aware of wifi trading and that's just wrong. That's not even for glory or earning points like most of these things are, that's just being spiteful. It's not even that that's a huge setback for you, just a pathetic annoyance... |
|
|
|
| Takoa | Jun 6 2011, 08:23 PM Post #4 |
|
Ahoge of Justice
|
Yeah, since I was always trading like for like I just take the everstones off and offer the same trade again. I don't play many multiplayer games nowadays anyway though since a lot of my friends have been away at various unis and my wireless converter thingy for the internet lets out an annoying buzzing whenever I use it, so I usually stick to the wired one and just don't connect my consoles to the net. So I guess multiplayer games have also died in a bit of a different way for me. :p |
|
|
|
| picollo no. | Jun 6 2011, 08:44 PM Post #5 |
Screw the rules I'm Yuri Lowell
|
Bloody Trolls :| My experience of multiplayer is very limited as I'm by nature not a particularly competitive person (well I am but me going one on one with someone rarely ends well) but I have noticed as you said with L4D though the team aspect is fun and on co-op it is a blast I found when playing death match me and my mates were far too easily dispatched by much better players that just kind of limited the fun. But hey thems the breaks I suppose. Been getting a lot more into multiplayer now that I have a decent gaming spec laptop (yeah i know there is no such thing) and have made a steam account. L4D with a few mates is so much fun and a good laugh. Edited by picollo no., Jun 6 2011, 08:45 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Blaze | Jun 6 2011, 08:53 PM Post #6 |
|
I play quite a lot of Halo Reach nowadays, mostly in full teams with my friends. I understand perfectly the imbalance in shooters. The "power weapons" will normally be the main goal at the start, and can make it difficult to pull back a victory if the opposing team has a large lead. Although we tend to manage, it still isn't fun for us. I do enjoy Reach online, but it would be nicer if it was a little more balanced. I rarely see much to do with a team on TF2, mostly because I play with bots. :P When I don't play with bots, you do struggle to find a team which will help each other. It can be done though, and it does make the game much more fun. :) As Andy said, trading in Pokemon is ridiculous. I remember seeing starter Pokemon being traded for legendaries, or even things like a Pidgey for a Dialga. It's plain wrong. But ah well, it's much easier to just trade between friends for me. |
|
|
|
| picollo no. | Jun 6 2011, 08:58 PM Post #7 |
|
Screw the rules I'm Yuri Lowell
|
I've only played one game but Goldeneye Wii's online multiplayer wasn't too bad. Not sure of the calibre of the people I was playing but I wasn't blown out of the water like I was expecting I would be. It's what usually happens if I go anywhere near CoD :| |
|
|
|
| Blaze | Jun 6 2011, 09:00 PM Post #8 |
|
To be honest, I normally just run around Tac-knifing people on CoD... XD Other than that, I use what people refer to as the "broken" UMP-45 and sometimes snipers.. |
|
|
|
| Pokemaniac John | Jun 7 2011, 04:18 PM Post #9 |
Piranha Plant
|
Excepting racing games (Mario Kart, Burnout, Gran Turismo, etc.), I've never really played many things with competetive multiplayer. One exception would be Perfect Dark, which I fondly remember playing with my brother. I also enjoy the Star Wars: Battlefied games for their multiplayer, though I should stress not the online variety. Of course there are some brilliant co-op games. Time Splitters 2 and Future Perfect are a good example. And I must also mention Lego Star Wars, which is among my favourite games. Wow, I'm making a post in a games-related topic. That doesn't happen often. |
|
|
|
| falco_the_watcher | Jun 7 2011, 07:49 PM Post #10 |
|
The fluffy one
|
I believe you mean battlefront, not battlefield, which was indeed a beautiful game. Happy memories. Ironically, in TF2, I had a horrific multiplayer "We have no chance" experience today. The other team had 7 engineers and 1 scout. The Engineers set up sentry guns just outside of our spawn points, the scout got the intelligence. Often, I couldn't even leave our own supply room before I was chewed to death by bullets. |
|
|
|
| Tiptup | Jun 7 2011, 08:02 PM Post #11 |
Funk.
|
My group of friends have developed a ritual of combing pre-drinking with Wii Party. That's actually the only time I ever play Wii, despite owning one. Oh and I still play Conflict Desert Storm co-op, because its hilarious and brilliant. |
|
|
|
| picollo no. | Jun 10 2011, 10:48 PM Post #12 |
|
Screw the rules I'm Yuri Lowell
|
Well I plan to be doing a bit of Baldur's Gate multiplayer over the summer and see how that goes. Chances are I'll be hooked. |
|
|
|
| PJI | Jun 18 2011, 07:59 PM Post #13 |
Wolfos
|
I do agree that imbalance can lead to a loss of fun in multiplayer gaming, but only if it is a major imbalance. I think it's very dependent on the game. Some fighting games like Guilty Gear are rather balanced (and, on that note, very fun). On many servers for Team Fortress 2 there is a team scramble function, so if a team is stacked or a team is losing too badly, a team scramble usually balances the game out. You do make a very fair point for a majority of online multiplayer games though (CoD, Halo, pretty much many FPS games). But I'd only argue that this is the case for online multiplayer games. I always feel that local multiplayer games are fun regardless of balance issues, mainly for the reason that you are enjoying the game with them in the same room. sh!t is always fun, drinking beer and shouting at the screen whether you've won or lost. Also, good to see you, Falc. |
|
|
|
| falco_the_watcher | Jun 21 2011, 12:59 AM Post #14 |
|
The fluffy one
|
I'm glad someone mentioned that, that's why I brought up mario kart. Coz I agree it's more common online but it can be an issue with local as well. For example, my friend A has a house that we go to, to play games sometimes along with Friends B, C and occasionally D. I'm used to it if they only use Pit, Meta-Knight and Ike on super smash bros brawl coz they're stupidly good, but if I bring Friend Z round, who doesn't play brawl as much as us, they'd get pissed off with it and it'd put them off brawl. Which is stupid coz if it was fair play then it's just a zany fighting game. Also, online's ruined by other stuff such as disconnecting and abuse via messages which are basically anonymous and by more basic stuff like lag. Very good to see you too, Mr Iskrycki. |
|
|
|
| PJI | Jun 21 2011, 10:30 AM Post #15 |
|
Wolfos
|
I find online ragequitters to be hilarious, same with abusive messages. But that's a personal response; most people aren't going to like those sorts of players. But yeah, lag sure is a bitch. Yeah, familiarity with a mulitplayer game is a factor here. But surely, even if it were a game of Pong that you were more familiar with and Friend Z wasn't, wouldn't will still have a similar case? This can't just be a factor for modern gaming. |
|
|
|
| Joshytclegg | Jun 21 2011, 02:35 PM Post #16 |
The grail...shall be ours...
|
Desert Storm II, I used to play the Co-op on it religiously with my brother. So much fun going through all the missions. Especially enjoyed the one where you had to defend a bunker from a full on assault. Good times :x . |
|
|
|
| falco_the_watcher | Jun 21 2011, 03:57 PM Post #17 |
|
The fluffy one
|
While I'm not an expert on the subject, there are far fewer hidden tricks to Pong. While skill levels would be different, there wouldn't be any hidden techniques to it. There's considerably more camping in CoD than in Pong :P I love abusive messages, ragequitters are only hilarious to me in games where it doesn't disrupt the game. Left 4 Dead's my main gripe here, as people disconnecting shuts down the server if they're the only player on that team. |
|
|
|
| PJI | Jun 21 2011, 08:37 PM Post #18 |
|
Wolfos
|
Yes, modern games do have more hidden tricks. But doesn't becoming aware of them come through playing the game more, similar to raising your skill at that game? With competitive games, it's almost always going to be that the one who has played the game most will usually beat the other(s). Hmm, mentioning the word 'competitive' made me think about co-op gaming. And thinking about it further, the scenario could be reversed. A newbie most likely would appreciate the skill of a veteran at their side, learning from them as they go along. But a veteran may feel dragged back if tagged up with a newbie. |
|
|
|
| falco_the_watcher | Jun 26 2011, 01:45 AM Post #19 |
|
The fluffy one
|
I think there's a major difference between raising skill and learning the tricks of the trade, as it were. In Pong, my beloved example, you can tell your friend they have to make sure the ball hits the paddle. In Left 4 Dead or something, you tell them to kill the other people, but there's the aspects of teamwork and timing, the best smoker spots, the skill of aiming high pounces with the hunter WITHIN the need to kill the other team, anticipating where they're going to go and mounting an attack, not to mention the dozens of spots where, if you strike correctly, it becomes impossible for the survivors team to help their comrade. If you lose to someone in a racing game (I'm talking more racing sims like Gran Turismo or Forza than Need for Speed or even less realistic ones), assuming one vehicle doesn't vastly outspeed the other, you can generally accept that the other person is just quick. If I lose at Tekken, it could be because the other guy has a better memory for combos, that I got pinned against a wall and couldn't escape or because despite playing and loving the franchise for over a decade, I still don't know how to control my falls. Too much of the battle is done not by the players but the environments and layouts of the game, which I suppose you can argue is just an aspect of the game, but I consider a game to simply be one player against another and I don't count using the environment as part of that. Also, in terms of co-op gaming, and in fact life in general, I rarely learn by watching people who do well, I learn by failing so hard that I am forced to clean up my act :p |
|
|
|
| PJI | Jun 26 2011, 11:26 AM Post #20 |
|
Wolfos
|
I do see your point. I mean, another example I could back you up with is Team Fortress 2, where it's almost expected that you should know the likely location of a sentry nest, good sniper spots, ability to rocket/sticky jump well, and so on. The thing is though, as games have been getting more complex over time, it must be difficult for developers to balance games out and try to limit how well a person performs to their skill level. Also, I think the problem at hand can be quite dependent on the genre. I can imagine sports games, racing sims and some fighting games to suffer less from the problem in comparison to FPS and RTS games. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2