298 réponses à ce sujet

[Night Prowler76]

steelfire_dragon wrote...

I'll stay with the single player.

rpgs dont exactly make good co-op games.

simulaters and 1rst person shooters do.

Fable 3:>

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Lol. Multiplayer the future?

Bioware has only become a single player company post KotOR.

In Bioware's case, multiplayer is the "ancient past that nobody likes" because it was in the Baldur's Gate games and NWN.

Seriously though, some games do well with multiplayer, others don't. It depends on how it's handled more than anything. However, if the multiplayer portion negatively affects the SP portion in a single player centric game, well then, I'll be an unhappy camper.

[Callidus Thorn]

Mr Mxyzptlk wrote...

Callidus Thorn wrote...

You said "Show me a game where the single player part of the game suffers because of an added multiplayer feature" Halo 3 has less single player and more multiplayer modes than Halo 2. It's something of a pet peeve of mine.

Ask a silly question and you'll get a silly answer.

But the whole highlight of the Halo series is its multiplayer, it is the main reason people buy the game and pretty much the only reason I play the games. I really dont see how the single player portion of the game was any better in the previous games nor do I see any way in which the multiplayer part of the game had any nagative effects the single player portion.

The multiplayer side became the highlight with Halo 2. In Halo the multiplayer was via splitscreen or system link, neither of which really makes for a highlight. Halo 2 had multiplayer via Xbox live as well, which was when the multiplayer side of Halo took off.

[Melca36]

Aurvan wrote...

The people that hate multiplayer... is it because of the people, or the gameplay? I can understand it if it's the people... most random people I play with online makes me lose faith in humanity. But when you play with people you know are not morons, online games are just as great as singleplayer games.

If I want to play games with my friends, I'll log into my Guild Wars account or start a locked Left For Dead 2 Server.

A multiplayer would take away resources from the single player and further dumb it down.

[Savber100]

If the developers can create an unique MP experience without being a generick MP knockoff while having it created by a separate team than I'm all for it.

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

I like a lot of the design concepts (implementation notwithstanding) going on in CRPG's these days (many of the ones other RPG players don't like, in fact). Steering them toward multiplayer is one of the things I don't like. At all.

[Sabriana]

Melca36 wrote...

Aurvan wrote...

The people that hate multiplayer... is it because of the people, or the gameplay? I can understand it if it's the people... most random people I play with online makes me lose faith in humanity. But when you play with people you know are not morons, online games are just as great as singleplayer games.

If I want to play games with my friends, I'll log into my Guild Wars account or start a locked Left For Dead 2 Server.

A multiplayer would take away resources from the single player and further dumb it down.

Yes Melca, I agree. I don't want to play with people I don't know. I do however, love to play with people I do know, like, and enjoy being around. I don't want to play with people I know nothing about. I hate to have to cooperate with people I detest.

Making evey game a multi? Have fun. GoG.com will love it.

[Night Prowler76]

Sabriana wrote...

Melca36 wrote...

Aurvan wrote...

The people that hate multiplayer... is it because of the people, or the gameplay? I can understand it if it's the people... most random people I play with online makes me lose faith in humanity. But when you play with people you know are not morons, online games are just as great as singleplayer games.

If I want to play games with my friends, I'll log into my Guild Wars account or start a locked Left For Dead 2 Server.

A multiplayer would take away resources from the single player and further dumb it down.

Yes Melca, I agree. I don't want to play with people I don't know. I do however, love to play with people I do know, like, and enjoy being around. I don't want to play with people I know nothing about. I hate to have to cooperate with people I detest.

Making evey game a multi? Have fun. GoG.com will love it.

But your sassiness would be perfect for MP games Sab:>

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Callidus Thorn wrote...

Mr Mxyzptlk wrote...

Callidus Thorn wrote...

You said "Show me a game where the single player part of the game suffers because of an added multiplayer feature" Halo 3 has less single player and more multiplayer modes than Halo 2. It's something of a pet peeve of mine.

Ask a silly question and you'll get a silly answer.

But the whole highlight of the Halo series is its multiplayer, it is the main reason people buy the game and pretty much the only reason I play the games. I really dont see how the single player portion of the game was any better in the previous games nor do I see any way in which the multiplayer part of the game had any nagative effects the single player portion.

The multiplayer side became the highlight with Halo 2. In Halo the multiplayer was via splitscreen or system link, neither of which really makes for a highlight. Halo 2 had multiplayer via Xbox live as well, which was when the multiplayer side of Halo took off.

Just because the original Halo lacked an online component doesnt mean that the multiplayer portion wasnt a vital part to the games success, or did you think the highlight of the Goldeneye game on N64 was its single player portion as well?

[Guitar-Hero]

I'll stick to singleplayer thank you very much, if i want to spend my day playing with an **** just looking to screw up my day, i'll play whilst holding a mirror.

[Night Prowler76]

Mr Mxyzptlk wrote...

Callidus Thorn wrote...

Mr Mxyzptlk wrote...

Callidus Thorn wrote...

You said "Show me a game where the single player part of the game suffers because of an added multiplayer feature" Halo 3 has less single player and more multiplayer modes than Halo 2. It's something of a pet peeve of mine.

Ask a silly question and you'll get a silly answer.

But the whole highlight of the Halo series is its multiplayer, it is the main reason people buy the game and pretty much the only reason I play the games. I really dont see how the single player portion of the game was any better in the previous games nor do I see any way in which the multiplayer part of the game had any nagative effects the single player portion.

The multiplayer side became the highlight with Halo 2. In Halo the multiplayer was via splitscreen or system link, neither of which really makes for a highlight. Halo 2 had multiplayer via Xbox live as well, which was when the multiplayer side of Halo took off.

Just because the original Halo lacked an online component doesnt mean that the multiplayer portion wasnt a vital part to the games success, or did you think the highlight of the Goldeneye game on N64 was its single player portion as well?

I agree, the component that made Halo as a franchise a huge success, was the MP component.

[Night Prowler76]

Steffen wrote...

I'll stick to singleplayer thank you very much, if i want to spend my day playing with an **** just looking to screw up my day, i'll play whilst holding a mirror.

Or you could just play it with a real friend lol

[Guitar-Hero]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

Steffen wrote...

I'll stick to singleplayer thank you very much, if i want to spend my day playing with an **** just looking to screw up my day, i'll play whilst holding a mirror.

Or you could just play it with a real friend lol

But playing with myself is allways soo much better.. Oh wait..

[Sylvius the Mad]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

Or you could just play it with a real friend

I'd much rather play alone.  My friends have teir own interests.  in order to play games with friends, I would need a group of friends for each game I might want to play (those groups might overlap), and then I would need to manage those relationships.

No.  Being alone is better.  Being alone is almost always better.

[Night Prowler76]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Night Prowler76 wrote...

Or you could just play it with a real friend

I'd much rather play alone.  My friends have teir own interests.  in order to play games with friends, I would need a group of friends for each game I might want to play (those groups might overlap), and then I would need to manage those relationships.

No.  Being alone is better.  Being alone is almost always better.

I understand where you are coming from, but gaming in general has become more social, even when im playing DA or TES games, im usually in a party with friends, and we are chatting about the games, we dont have to play the same games at the same time, in fact, we all play a bunch of games that are different from each other as well as playing games with each other:>

I guess I just like being more sociable than some on here.

[Melca36]

Sabriana wrote...

Melca36 wrote...

Aurvan wrote...

The people that hate multiplayer... is it because of the people, or the gameplay? I can understand it if it's the people... most random people I play with online makes me lose faith in humanity. But when you play with people you know are not morons, online games are just as great as singleplayer games.

If I want to play games with my friends, I'll log into my Guild Wars account or start a locked Left For Dead 2 Server.

A multiplayer would take away resources from the single player and further dumb it down.

Yes Melca, I agree. I don't want to play with people I don't know. I do however, love to play with people I do know, like, and enjoy being around. I don't want to play with people I know nothing about. I hate to have to cooperate with people I detest.

Making evey game a multi? Have fun. GoG.com will love it.

This is what I get when I enter a server of strangers............


Player #1: You suck

Player#2: You suck worse uber newb

Player#3  "makes burping sound you hear with headset"

Player#4  Dumba** newb

Player#5  Griefer one shotted me, No fair! Stupid Lamer Griefer!


The majority of gamers are like that and it takes FOREVER to find decent people to play with.

I have a group of friends I playe Guild Wards with. When Guild Wars 2 come out, I'll be playing that. What makes it fun is that I know these people. 

[Cowboy_christo]

skipped all the squabble.

It all boils down to either the game is meant for multiplayer or for singleplayer. There is no inbetween w/o sacrificing part of the other. Studios should concentrate on either one of them and never both.

I like multiplayer in games that are meant multiplayer, but dont use budget meant to polish a single player game just to tack on a horrid multiplayer on it.

+ sometime you just want to get away from all the pressure that multiplayer online gaming can do. This is where singleplayer game comes in.

[Melca36]

Cowboy_christo wrote...



+ sometime you just want to get away from all the pressure that multiplayer online gaming can do. This is where singleplayer game comes in.

THIS!!! Singleplayer games help me to relax.:happy:

[MistySun]

DBL post mix up

Modifié par MistySun, 12 mai 2011 - 11:27 .

[MistySun]

Sabriana wrote...

That's why I prefer co-ops. Or PWs. Online games, as far as I can tell, are loaded with people you don't know. MMOs are not my cup of tea. MMOs (such as WoW) don't hold any interest for me. Playing with people I know is a whole different cup of tea.

However, when it's all said and done, I prefer the SP game. I play to get away from my everyday stress. I play them to immerse myself into a different world. I don't want people around who tell me what to do, or insult me, flame me, whatever, because they simply "feel like it". I play video games to get away from people, and become someone else. I  have a very stressful job. Burn-out is a reality. I need to get away. I will never let go of the SP game, ever. Of course, this is only my personal opinion. YMMV.

I still play Perfect World, but only with myself just for the fun of it. But only on occasions when i got no other game to play. DA:O kept me busy enough....and after 10 playthroughs i still wanted more. 

But then DA2 came out. I played till the end. And that was it. Not worth another playthrough...ugh.
But Sabrina, i agree with everything you say 100% and also +50 approval.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Lol. I think Sabriana meant Persistant Worlds (the player hosted servers with custom content for Neverwinter Nights 1/2), not Perfect World the MMORPG.

Just a little fyi.

[MistySun]

mrcrusty wrote...

Lol. I think Sabriana meant Persistant Worlds (the player hosted servers with custom content for Neverwinter Nights 1/2), not Perfect World the MMORPG.

Just a little fyi.

Oh mrcrusty what a silly being i am.  Thank you for pointing that out. And an apology to Sabrina...i'm sorry Sabrina...please don't shoot me, stab me, throw a fireball at me, or whatever other thing you can think of.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

MistySun wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

Lol. I think Sabriana meant Persistant Worlds (the player hosted servers with custom content for Neverwinter Nights 1/2), not Perfect World the MMORPG.

Just a little fyi.

Oh mrcrusty what a silly being i am.  Thank you for pointing that out. And an apology to Sabrina...i'm sorry Sabrina...please don't shoot me, stab me, throw a fireball at me, or whatever other thing you can think of.

Her preferred weapon of choice.

[Dragoonlordz]

... mass effect mmo makes sense according to biowares casey hudson While it's not going to be in ME3 it looks like might come after. Dragon Age will probably head down the same route sooner or later after all we are talking about EA with the (full or partial) purse strings.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 12 mai 2011 - 09:35 .

[xkg]

Mr Mxyzptlk wrote...

xkg wrote...
"I really dont understand what the problem is with game developers adding some sort of multiplayer portion in their games"
Problem is - resources they have are limited. I rather see them focusing on single player part.

Show me a game where the single player part of the game suffers because of an added multiplayer feature and then I might take such statements seriously however until then I will just treat such posts as pointless whinging.

I was talking about "limited resources" and how they can affect any game.

You don't need to look far - DA2 is the best example of what limited resources (be it time or money) can do. I dont even want to think how would this game look like if they spend part of their already limited development time to implement multiplayer into DA2. Maybe there would be only 1 cave instead of 3.

And if there is a whiner here it must be you - whining that people dont want multiplayer in their singleplayer games.
Tears on your pillow

Mr Mxyzptlk wrote...

xkg wrote...
"I mean its not like they are getting rid of the single player portion of the game"
But they did that already with KOTOR serie. Thats why i wont even look at this new online TOR abomination.

Thats the stupidest thing I have heard today, are Bioware not allowed to branch off and make different types of games? Yes Bioware is making an MMO but I dont know how you got from that that Bioware are now ditching single player games and content and focusing soley on the MMO market. As far as I know Bioware are still making games with a heavy single player focus so your fear that Bioware now plans to turn every new game they make into an MMO seems unfounded.

Lol is my response stupid ?. Look at yours.
Yes Bioware is alowed to make different types of their games and i guess i am allowed to ignore these games just as i said, dont you think ? Does it sound stupid to you ?

Modifié par xkg, 12 mai 2011 - 10:25 .