Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)
I joined Xbox Live shortly after my first cable modem was installed and
ready (3/1/05). I used the 2 month freebie coupon that came with Halo 2
and since then I've bought a head-set as well.
Here's the problem as I see it...
The online component of all the games is essentially the same.
The idea of a death match was cool back when Doom did it. It was a
unique experience, but it didn't take long for it to get boring.
There's no story to it, there's no sophistication... throw a bunch of
guys in a room and let them shoot each other. Yes, yes, there are
variations, capture the flag, oddball, blah blah blah, but compared to
the variety of the single player games the multiplayer is still all the
same.
It doesn't seem to matter how interesting or original the actual game
is, the online component is the same... Throw a bunch of guys together
in a room and let them shoot each other. I was greatly disappointed
when even something original like Phantom Dust followed the same
pattern.
I think the reason for this is that it's easier to do than to set up a
multi-player experience as interesting and story driven as the single
playher. Halo and Halo 2 did amazing things with the co-operative play,
so did Phantasy Star Online on the Dreamcast (before they started
charging an extra fee for it.)
Why don't game companies realize that playing co-operatively is far
more interesting than deathmatch? It's not to say there can't be
competition... Gauntlet figured out that players could still be on the
same side and compete for other things, power-ups, number of kills,
etc. The 2nd and 3rd Lord of the Rings movies turned it into a gag with
the Elf and Dwarf in an orc killing contest.
So I don't know what the solution is. Perhaps it's not just a matter of
laziness on the part of the developers, perhaps it's a lack of maturity
in the online industry. They have, after all, decades of experience
developing a single player component but are still relatively new to
developing multi-player games.
- Jordan
I joined Xbox Live shortly after my first cable modem was installed and
ready (3/1/05). I used the 2 month freebie coupon that came with Halo 2
and since then I've bought a head-set as well.
Here's the problem as I see it...
The online component of all the games is essentially the same.
The idea of a death match was cool back when Doom did it. It was a
unique experience, but it didn't take long for it to get boring.
There's no story to it, there's no sophistication... throw a bunch of
guys in a room and let them shoot each other. Yes, yes, there are
variations, capture the flag, oddball, blah blah blah, but compared to
the variety of the single player games the multiplayer is still all the
same.
It doesn't seem to matter how interesting or original the actual game
is, the online component is the same... Throw a bunch of guys together
in a room and let them shoot each other. I was greatly disappointed
when even something original like Phantom Dust followed the same
pattern.
I think the reason for this is that it's easier to do than to set up a
multi-player experience as interesting and story driven as the single
playher. Halo and Halo 2 did amazing things with the co-operative play,
so did Phantasy Star Online on the Dreamcast (before they started
charging an extra fee for it.)
Why don't game companies realize that playing co-operatively is far
more interesting than deathmatch? It's not to say there can't be
competition... Gauntlet figured out that players could still be on the
same side and compete for other things, power-ups, number of kills,
etc. The 2nd and 3rd Lord of the Rings movies turned it into a gag with
the Elf and Dwarf in an orc killing contest.
So I don't know what the solution is. Perhaps it's not just a matter of
laziness on the part of the developers, perhaps it's a lack of maturity
in the online industry. They have, after all, decades of experience
developing a single player component but are still relatively new to
developing multi-player games.
- Jordan