Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Multiplayer - Wave of the Future or simply overrated?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 8:33:21 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Hi,

I'm just curious what this group thinks of Multiplayer games. Is it
necessary for a game to have multiplayer capabilities? Sure some games
benefit greatly from multiplayer.. 'Doom' series 'Quake' series
'Unreal Tournament'.. but outside of FPS's do other genres benefit
from the multiplayer experience? Now i'll admit that my own
multiplayer experience is limited.. i've played the 'Doom', 'Quake'
'Unreal Tournament', 'Battlefield 1942', 'Counter Strike', 'Half-Life
2', and even 'Diablo' online but i'll also admit that those
experiences weren't pleasurable, in fact most of the time i play these
games online it really pisses me off.. and it comes down to one thing
- the rampant cheating that goes on. I know that companies are trying
their best to curb it, even fans have written their own anti-cheating
software that they've released.. but to me it isn't working. I can't
tell you how many times i've unloaded clips and clips of ammo on some
dick in a game only for me to see them just stand there and kill me
with 1 shot.. or you get those idiots who disconnect from the game
when it's clear they are going to lose.. hate those people.
Honestly, i for one, now won't buy a game whether it's PC or console
if it's just online multiplayer.. i don't see the point. But it seems
obvious that the next-gen of consoles are clearly geared towards
online multiplayer.. you've only got to see the specs of the 360 and
PS3 to see that.. And then we have MMO games.. 'World of WarCraft',
EverQuest' and 'City of Heroes' to name a few.. why pay $40-50 for the
game and then have to pay anywhere between $10-20 to play it! If
you're a hardcore player i guess the cost is justified but for a
casual player that additional $120-240 just to play it online is
steep.
So, let me know, i curious as to what you guys think. And forgive my
rant - i like multiplayer - to a certain point it's just that i don't
see as the most important part of game...

toadie
May 22, 2005 10:48:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 22 May 2005 16:33:21 GMT, toadie05@sbcglobal.net wrote:

>experiences weren't pleasurable, in fact most of the time i play these
>games online it really pisses me off.. and it comes down to one thing
>- the rampant cheating that goes on.

That is down to the people you are playing with. If you find a good
friendly clan to play in the online experience is transformed.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 2:40:58 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

x-no-archive: yes

toadie05@sbcglobal.net wrote:

<snip>

hi toadie!
very good post!
i totally agree with you

i don't like multiplayer games either
and i don't play them period
the only type of pc games i buy and play are single player

and you are absolutely right about why developers/publishers
want to "force" multiplayer in pc games... its to have much
higher revenues... its making us pay more to play pc games
making us pay monthly fees to play is the dream the industry
is having for some years now...

multiplayer is yet another menace to affordable pc games and
it forces the escalation of costs adding
.. the need to have a internet connection to play
.. the need to maintain a internet connection
.. the need to pay monthly fees

so the question is...
will we let them make us pay superfluous fees?
will we let them turn pc games into a expensive entertainment?
will we let them turn us into submissive controled consumers?

i can only talk for me, and my answer is very clear... in me
they will have a pc gamer that will fight till the end to keep
pc games cheap affordable democratic!
long live single-player pc games!

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 4:32:50 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

toadie05@sbcglobal.net wrote:

> I'm just curious what this group thinks of Multiplayer games.

Multiplayer isn't just PvP, it's also coop. So if a game with a
single-player campaign features a nice coop-mode... me likes it.

Dennis
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 8:18:16 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 22 May 2005 22:40:58 -0700, "steamKILLER" <sayNO2steam@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> x-no-archive: yes
>
> toadie05@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> hi toadie!
> very good post!
> i totally agree with you
>
> i don't like multiplayer games either
> and i don't play them period
> the only type of pc games i buy and play are single player
>
> and you are absolutely right about why developers/publishers
> want to "force" multiplayer in pc games... its to have much
> higher revenues... its making us pay more to play pc games
> making us pay monthly fees to play is the dream the industry
> is having for some years now...
>
> multiplayer is yet another menace to affordable pc games and
> it forces the escalation of costs adding
> . the need to have a internet connection to play
> . the need to maintain a internet connection
> . the need to pay monthly fees
>
> so the question is...
> will we let them make us pay superfluous fees?
> will we let them turn pc games into a expensive entertainment?
> will we let them turn us into submissive controled consumers?
>
> i can only talk for me, and my answer is very clear... in me
> they will have a pc gamer that will fight till the end to keep
> pc games cheap affordable democratic!
> long live single-player pc games!


YAH! I'm not the only one!

I too do not play multi-player of any game I have (34 and counting).
It's really, really comforting to know I'm not an odd ball, at least
not the only one.



==== Tecknomage ====
Ah...Amerikanski humor.
Is most funny.
We bomb now.
Anonymous
May 23, 2005 9:30:20 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Dennis Schamne wrote:

> toadie05@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > I'm just curious what this group thinks of Multiplayer games.
>
> Multiplayer isn't just PvP, it's also coop. So if a game with a
> single-player campaign features a nice coop-mode... me likes it.
>
> Dennis

Agreed Serious sam 2 was great in that co-op mode.
I also like playing rts games in multiplayer mode
the entire Red alert 2 series for example, C&C generals, zero hour.
I even played a multiplayer version of Simcity2 once, that was great.
Basicly you had 2 players on the one map, build fast or run out of room
lol. Pity it was so unstable :( 

--
DalienX
May 23, 2005 8:34:26 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Tecknomage wrote:

>>i can only talk for me, and my answer is very clear... in me
>>they will have a pc gamer that will fight till the end to keep
>>pc games cheap affordable democratic!
>>long live single-player pc games!
>
>
>
> YAH! I'm not the only one!
>
> I too do not play multi-player of any game I have (34 and counting).
> It's really, really comforting to know I'm not an odd ball, at least
> not the only one.
>

You find it comforting to compare yourself to sayno2??


--
It's a bit of a jump isn't it? I mean, er, chartered accountancy to lion
taming in one go.
You don't think it might be better if you worked your way toward lion
taming, say, via banking...
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 7:06:24 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

x-no-archive: yes

Tecknomage wrote:

> I too do not play multi-player of any game I have (34 and counting).

first a big salute to a proper true pc gamer!
now...
we are among millions! yes we are the majority!
the way majority of pc gamers don't play multiplayer games
but you must realize we are in the internet so its obvious
the majority of the internet posters in this group play
multiplayer, but the majority in this group is a miniscule
insignificant MINORITY in the PC GAMERS UNIVERSE!
single player pc games FOREVER!

--
post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam
Anonymous
May 24, 2005 7:35:06 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

steamKILLER wrote:
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> Tecknomage wrote:
>
> > I too do not play multi-player of any game I have (34 and
counting).
>
> first a big salute to a proper true pc gamer!
> now...
> we are among millions! yes we are the majority!
> the way majority of pc gamers don't play multiplayer games
> but you must realize we are in the internet so its obvious
> the majority of the internet posters in this group play
> multiplayer, but the majority in this group is a miniscule
> insignificant MINORITY in the PC GAMERS UNIVERSE!
> single player pc games FOREVER!

"proper true PC gamers" play proper true PC games in multiplayer mode
as well.

The only person who thinks differntly is you, SayNO. Everyone else
decides whether they enjoy playing online, and if so, whether they
enjoy it enough to pay for the internet costs. Then they choose to play
or not play.

But they do not brand single-player gamers as heretics.

You should just accept that some people like multiplayer - and some
don't. Neither group does any harm to the other. Many people are in
both groups. Put together, they are all promoting the PC as a gaming
platform, and encouraging developers to create challenging, interesting
and original new games.

Personally, I tried Counter Strike a few times and got er... "pwnd" I
think the phrase is, so many times and so quickly, that it stopped
being fun. I like the idea of goal-based games like CS, rather than
mindless all-against-all shootouts, and I also like the idea of teams
with different classes (eg. DoD) where you need to work together. But
I'm rubbish at it and I don't have the time to practice enough to beat
the l337 kiddies.

Lack of time is also the reason I don't play MMORPGs. I can't spend a
couple of hours every night pursuing a quest, so it isn't worth my
while to spend the monthly subscription.

Having said that, I think online play is the future. The advancement of
broadband and technologies such as P2P are making it easier and easier
to link PCs together. Another human will always be a more satisfying
opponent that a bot, because of the element of unpredictability, and
also becasue you can play against your friends. I predict we will see
more online games.
May 24, 2005 2:41:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 24 May 2005 03:35:06 -0700, "Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Personally, I tried Counter Strike a few times and got er... "pwnd" I
>think the phrase is, so many times and so quickly, that it stopped
>being fun.

That is why I like playing with/against the bots in CS:CZ or CS:S, I
am too old to keep up with the kiddies online and don't have the time
or inclination to put in hours of practice.

>Lack of time is also the reason I don't play MMORPGs. I can't spend a
>couple of hours every night pursuing a quest, so it isn't worth my
>while to spend the monthly subscription.

Guild Wars was created for those of us who think that, I am enjoying
it.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
!