I figured I'd write this out to get some opinions of other developers out there, but I was also wondering if anyone else noticed this.
Recently, I've been seeing a ton of awesome games out there that seem to fail miserably in certain aspects, and it really ruins the experience for me. Not to say other people don't enjoy it, at this point I feel like I'm the only one feeling this way.
Take for instance Castlevania: Harmony of Despair. This just came out recently and it seems cool. It takes some of the characters and enemies from the past Castlevanias and puts them into an arcade style multiplayer game. However, like a lot of games these days, there is NO local multiplayer, it's all online. And for those of you who own an Xbox like myself, we have to pay for our online multiplayer. For some people $50 a year doesn't sound too terrible, but for people like myself, it's a bit hard to come by, especially just to play online with a bunch of whiny kids I don't even know (not to say all people playing online are whiny, but even still it's not that enjoyable of an experience for myself). The most obnoxious thing about this, is there are certain instances in the game that you cannot get to without having a second player, so that is kind of a kick in the face to those of us not willing/able to purchase an online membership.
Achievements are another thing that seems to be on the rise, although they have actually always been there, just not in this form. I remember games that used to reward you for doing certain things in game with cheats or new costumes and other stuff, some games did this. But now most games only have the console achievement system and reward you with nothing but a few worthless points to show off to more people you don't even know or care about. And to top it all off, there are tons of games that also have achievements that require you to do something online. Not that I really give a crap about that, but it's like, way to throw in a feature that only half your audience can grab.
Borderlands is another awesome game out there that gets more interesting with multiple players, which they did add as a local feature... almost. You are able to get 2 player split screen (as opposed to 4, which the game allows up to 4 players) and you can get a system link. But heres the catch, you CANNOT do both. You would think you could put two split screens on two consoles and get 4 players, but you cannot. You have to get 4 players on 4 different consoles in order to get 4 local players. Major fail.
I could go on and on about different games with different lack of multiplayer concepts, but I'm going to step out of the way and let some of you guys vent your frustrations. But I will say one last thing.
Most of the time when this subject is brought up, pertaining to any feature that is left out of a game, some one always has to chime in with a "well this feature is too difficult to implement". I don't want to hear this nonsense. These are multi-million dollar companies we're talking about, if a feature has been done in the past, they are more than able hire someone who knows how to do it. Difficulty is NOT an issue for a large company. The only reason why a feature would not be implemented is if it was overlooked. The 1,000 people they had working on one project managed to miss something important, go figure. Companies like these will not pay extra money on a game unless there is something that can be fixed quickly that is hindering sales otherwise, if the game is selling copies anyways, they do not care.
/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/
That Really Hot Chick
now on the Xbox Live Marketplace!
I agree with all those points in many ways and levels. My biggest gripe with games these days is the lack of off-line multiplayer in games too, especially the lack of 4-player splitscreen. For all its sins, Call of Duty atleast still champions both 4-player off-line as well as on-line multiplayer and i think that's worth a round of applause. Halo does too, if i'm not mistaken.
Some of my best ever gaming experiences include 4-player splitscreen on games like Quake 3 (PS2 and Dreamcast), Goldeneye (N64), V-Rally 2 (PS1) and Timesplitters (PS2). Other 4-player games that i loved playing off-line include the FIFA's, PES's and Micro Machines of this world. You don't get that kind of experience anymore and i think it's a real shame that newer gamers won't have experienced that now that on-line has taken over multiplayer gaming. Ironically, the closest you get to replicating that kinda feeling of playing against people in the same room is with new technology like Kinect and the Wii. And i get the feeling that younger and older people who have just got into gaming through stuff like this think this is all new!
Oh, and i also remember the days when beating games mean't you got the extra characters or some super cheats, rather than a snotty achievement that means nothing to me.
Maybe we're just wearing our rose tinted specs for too long!
Kinect is neat, although you need ALOT and I mean ALOT of room. That and it's not exactly handicapped accessible for people like me.
/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/
That Really Hot Chick
now on the Xbox Live Marketplace!
However, speaking in terms of online capability and the limit/omission of features: I think many designers are creating games that utilize the online marketplaces due to pressure from the producers. Maybe they've worked out deals with the XBox Live studios; maybe MS themselves is pressuring developers to create games for the online marketplace; maybe it's easier/quicker to develop games for online multiplayer once the platform has been established. Slapping on achievements seems much easier to me than creating actual in-game content that enhances gameplay.
And in terms of paying for the service...Well, let's just say lots of parents are footing the bill for their children; in the case of most older gamers, having a Live account has become a priority in their lives for whatever reason. The target market will find the cash for it somehow.
Meanwhile... My top offline multiplayer games:
Goldeneye on the N64
Star Wars Battlefront on the XBox (two player split-screen with two consoles connected = awesome 2v2 matches!)
I do not think it is rose tinted specs at all . My favourite gaming era was N64/PS1 (mostly) and GC/PS2.
Goldeneye is really really fun split screen, and TimeSplitters 2 is probably still my favourite FPS (I could lay out a serious whooping as the monkey!). PC wise, i loved the fact that Serious Sam SE used to support split screen - I used to play that very often with my best pal. I still dont like CoD (probably me being an old fart!) and I have played it at LAN parties - just does little for me.
I also dislike being forced to use new motion controllers.
Originally Posted by Swiss Hagar I do not think it is rose tinted specs at all . My favourite gaming era was N64/PS1 (mostly) and GC/PS2.
Goldeneye is really really fun split screen, and TimeSplitters 2 is probably still my favourite FPS (I could lay out a serious whooping as the monkey!). PC wise, i loved the fact that Serious Sam SE used to support split screen - I used to play that very often with my best pal. I still dont like CoD (probably me being an old fart!) and I have played it at LAN parties - just does little for me.
I also dislike being forced to use new motion controllers.
Timesplitters 2 by far the best game / most fun i've ever played / had
Oh yeah, i forgot all about split-screen on the PC! There aren't many games that i know of that had that, but i always thought it was cool. Sega Rally 2 was one game i remember was cool to have a split-screen feature on the PC.
And Star Wars Battlefront was cool splitscreen too... hell, it's one of the coolest games all round, IMO!
Actually, the price of Xbox Live went up in November. It's $60 a year now. It sucks, I know.
I don't mind achievements that require you to play online, as I have quite a few friends who I would be able to play with and get the achievements with. What I do mind are achievements that require non-social ranked play, which means having to go into a game by yourself. You know what this causes? Achievement farming. Crafty people will also find a way around the system and just cheat the achievements anyways. It completely ruins the spirit of the game. I hate that.
Originally Posted by HorrendousGames Most of the time when this subject is brought up, pertaining to any feature that is left out of a game, some one always has to chime in with a "well this feature is too difficult to implement". I don't want to hear this nonsense. These are multi-million dollar companies we're talking about, if a feature has been done in the past, they are more than able hire someone who knows how to do it. Difficulty is NOT an issue for a large company. The only reason why a feature would not be implemented is if it was overlooked. The 1,000 people they had working on one project managed to miss something important, go figure. Companies like these will not pay extra money on a game unless there is something that can be fixed quickly that is hindering sales otherwise, if the game is selling copies anyways, they do not care.
Most studios employ no more than 200 people, and most of those people are going to be artists and animators.
Pedantry aside, features are difficult to implement sometimes. It's usually all about money. Publishers, and sometimes developers, will know who their target audience is, and base their features around the needs of that audience. Everything else (like split-screen) is secondary, and getting secondary features in requires a time table; Time is money, remember. And then sometimes features are cut because of technical issues. You know, actual issues like bugs, not knowing how to do it, or the engine not being able to support that feature without a major overhaul; In the case of the last one, the feature will usually make it into the sequel.
Multiplayer action gaming on the PC is dead. The market is dominated by crappy, realistic war games where you move at a snail's pace and die in one hit.
Single player gaming is even worse. Hardly anything violent with an awesome protagonist that spits out hilarious one-liners on a regular basis. GTA IV was the last game I liked.
Not really bothered by a lack of split-screen multiplayer since I never had any friends anyway.
Discarded pizza boxes are an indispensable source of cheese.
Multiplayer PC gaming has more players than ps3 and 360 combined AFAIK, though I do agree that games these days tend to suck ass =/. GET A FREAKING WII. Seriously. The Wii and DS are the only consoles to have a large selection of truly great/fun games. Not saying that there aren't great ps3/360/pc games, but the Wii strays from the circle-jerk that is the games industry.
I really stopped giving you any credibility when you said "GTA IV was the last game I liked." though.
Originally Posted by Hayo You don't have to be a lame douchebag for that but it sure helps!
Always
He can criticize stereotypical war games, but I can't criticize a garbage sandbox gangster wanna-be thug game where you spend more time riding bicycles and flying RC helicopters than you do on the central focus of the game?
I wouldn't call it rose-tinted glasses. I still play a lot of old games more these days. I'm not at all fond of the stuff they're teaching in game design classes now. It's producing worse games, IMO. Games with "gameplay", but no soul. If you enjoy it fine, but I don't.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Originally Posted by marky_2 PC gaming really sucks these days.
Multiplayer action gaming on the PC is dead. The market is dominated by crappy, realistic war games where you move at a snail's pace and die in one hit.
Single player gaming is even worse. Hardly anything violent with an awesome protagonist that spits out hilarious one-liners on a regular basis. GTA IV was the last game I liked.
Not really bothered by a lack of split-screen multiplayer since I never had any friends anyway.
Disagree.
Multiplayer gaming on the PC is far from 'dead'
Borderlands as mentioned, Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead and Quake Live is pretty active as far as I'm aware. Blops is far from realistic as well... try going 'old skool' and playing vanilla Call of Duty where headshots actually killed in one hit... So that leaves what, Bad Company 2? Hardly dominating the market.
Singleplayer is however a different matter, it's not where the money is at so it's bound to receive less attention.
And anyways. Us PC gamers have minecraft. Job done
Advertisement
Post Reply
. My favourite gaming era was N64/PS1 (mostly) and GC/PS2.
Edited by GamesterXIII
