Feeling More Alien To Gaming Day By Day

RL and getting older are factors but they do not deter me at all.

What deters me from gaming every other day is the multiplayer-ization of every other beauty we have in hand.

I don't like connecting a server and playing online. I don't like other people in my game. I just don't. Human factor -as long as I do not know the guy personally- repels me from a game.

That's why I hate MMORPGs and any game of which the feature "online battles!!!11" is promoted. Not that I didn't like DotA or CS at all but...

I want a singleplayer experience so I can taste what the authors of the game wanted me to feel about it. It feels as if human-oriented game loses its ambience/epicness/fun because it's not AI somebody designed to entertain me.

Do I need to see a psychologist or could we have a Singleplaying Den where we can speak to ourselves as we get raided by some undead lord in HOMM ?

Events nearer to home of late are probably also darkening your mood -- quite understandably.


I think you have a good point though -- more and more of the effort of the gaming industry is being devoted to multi rather than single player platforms. Since this mode enhances their ability to protect intellectual property and increases direct advertising dollars at the same time, I do not see a decrease in the trend.

I do take your point though. There I times I would like to take on a game, preferably a challenging one, without the need to interact with people who think "rape" may be used as a positive verb; that "victory or death" is the only set of solutions to a battle problem; and that fast "finger twitch" synaptic reactions constitutes skill.

No psychologist is needed -- just a few old-fashioned griping sessions with your pals at the org (perma-thread at the moderators option).

In some ways I agree with you and in others, I disagree.

The issue isn't multiplayer in itself. I really love multiplayer, especially co-op multiplayer and I have always done so as a kid. Sat there on the Sega Megadrive on Sonic 3 was one of the best gaming experiences I had when younger. One of us playing sonic, the other tails, supporting eachother whilst tackling the content, even able to do things together which couldn't be done by yourself, such a ferrying Sonic to secret locations, hidden on the level.

Consoles were a great drive for co-op gaming and I personally enjoy it. A single-player game with a tiny bit of work can result into an enjoyable co-op experience to share with a friend. Imagine a game like Skyrim, but having your friend alongside with you when storming a castle or taking on a dragon.

Unfortunately, what has been occurring in the game industry is "MMO" fixation, seeing it as a mythical milk-cow and even worse than that, they make it really unfun by turning everyone to a level of a scrub and you have minimum/no-impact at all in the entire game compared with the more grandiose single-player variation. Then there is the competitive scene where people buy £200 mice, £500 headphones, etc to have the 'maximum experience' and they are outright rude and hostile, cesspit environments.

I miss a lot from the good old days of single player games: I miss neverwinter-nights/baldurs-gate/dragons-age-origins style RPGs. I miss the original Mass effect. I miss Black and White 2 era god games. I miss decent command and conquer games. I wish there were more games that did good first person combat like dark messiah of might and magic did. I miss the good sim city games. I wish the elderscrolls games kept the imperial city surrounded by jungle and protected by mercenary red dragons. I miss non MMO star wars games. But what I really miss is an ubisoft that weren't copyright nazis because they're the only ones that still seem to make games like the olden days but they're huge dicks about it.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both. AIs can be really silly, especially if the developers hardly care, but even if they (pretend to) do.

On the other hand, humans cheat, and will use any advantage they can get. You may be able to find roleplayers or casual people here and there, but the remaining players will do anything they can to get a sense of superiority and win. From glueing aim points to the middle of their monitor to disabling graphics features and manipulating game files, buying mice with adjustable weights and counting their actions per minute. And I fully agree with Seamus that this stuff mostly doesn't constitute skill in the sense I understand it. Especially when the game calls itself a strategy game and APM have a serious impact on your performance in the game.

And I loathe getting the feeling that I would have to resort to such measures as well if I want to perform somewhat decent in a game, it usually leads to me not playing that game anymore or not getting it in the first place.

On the plus side of MultiPlayer, you actually do have challenging opponents, which is especially good if the developers are good at preventing them from using gamey tactics to cheat their way to the top and destroy the immersion on the way. I know the feeling of not wanting to bother with other people, but I got used to it over time, World of Tanks probably helped me a great deal with that because it retains a certain anonymity and when people call me names over a 15 minute session, I just laugh at them. With strategy it's a bit more complicated if you have to coordinate and sessions take longer (no fan of 5 minute-coffee-break-RTS like C&C anyway) as well, although in Wargame for example, I found that 10vs10 matches are quite fun because it again is a bit more anonymous with so many people and there is less social pressure on a single player to perform like an ace.

Generally I'm not a fan of having pressure to perform, because that removes the fun out of the game usually, but there are Multiplayer games where this is not as present as it may be in others.

There are different kinds of multiplayer, and I do think that makes a difference. A lot of games focus on purely competitive MP. While that can be greatly entertaining for many people, and provides a level of competition far beyond what most AIs can handle, it's not for everyone. Personally, I enjoy MP mainly for the social aspect of it. Our Mobius gaming crew play MP together, but for the most part there's relatively little actual in-game interaction going on, and when it does it occur 95% of the time it's cooperative. The fun for me is simply being able to sit there and chat with another person about the game you're playing. It has all the enjoyment of single player, but with a shared experience that makes it a more interesting way to spend my time. It's a group of people gaming together, rather than a group of people gaming against one another.

I agree with LEN. Not that I hate multiplayer per se, I hate the fact that games nowadays are built around it. I've started to hate the words "patch, balance, nerf..." with a passion. What's the point of balancing everything? It is especially evident in RPG's and strategy games, two genres that I play the most. Personally, I blame MMO's.

I love singleplayer. I love multiplayer. And I expect vastly different things from the two.

There is no getting around that the MP aspect of gaming is what's in focus with delevopers. It's also easy to understand why. People want games they can play with other people, and a solid MP spreads effectively which increases sales. With (functional) MP you can also mash in some "needed" DRM which will reduce SP-piracy by quite a lot (whether this increases sales or not I don't know, and I don't care, what matters is that from a production standpoint this is important). With MP-games being so successful, and people being okay with a tacked-on, weak SP if the MP is strong (like the CoD series) surely the main development focus will be on good MP games.

However, even though I do agree that the SP-side of things is on the back foot compared to earlier, the SP market is still in the business of creating excellence. I've been very pleasantly surprised by a lot of good SP games in the last few years. The market is far from stagnated. Ubisoft was mentioned, and while the Assassin's Creed series is plagued with.... "various degrees of quality", there are still some strong 30+ hour singleplayer games there. Same with Heroes of Might and Magic 6. Not only was it a bold revamp of a lot of the core game that made HoMM 3 the most well known and universally played video game I know of (except maybe Mario Kart), but the focus is clearly on singleplayer and unlike HoMM5 they actually put some effort into it. Not flawless, but functional and fresh.

There are also quite a few other 3rd person action games doing decently. Something like the Arkham series is doing perfectly. They actually managed not only to revolutionize the genre with Asylum, but to then improve on it in City, which left me quite impressed.
I was never a fan of fantasy RPGs and have never played Dragon Age, but I sunk 100 hours into Skyrim and I plan to sink another 100 into it once I have time to mod it properly.
Then there's the TBS-side of things. I don't think they will ever make another Warlords 3, but they made Shadowrun Returns, and they made XCOM: Enemy Within - a masterpiece in game design, including the inclusion of a fun, functional and very 2nd priority multiplayer. I will not spend less than 1000 hours on this game, its expansion and the modding. I doubt more than 20 of those will be on MP.
There have been things like Trine, Braid, Bastion, FTL, Papers Please and other excellent smaller games.

Portal 2. Far Cry 3. Bioshock: Infinite. Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Games I can talk for hours about with other people who had different experiences in the same game.

Then there was Spec Ops: The Line. What a genius way to make a simple shooter legendary. I really wished this game went beyond succesful and became influential, but at least it was an excellent throw-in into the SP market. Interestingly, the developers disliked forcing a (unplayable) MP into the game, and it cost hugely on the review scores that it was even included.

To utterly misquote "trekkie" Mike Stoklasa of Red Letter Media when he's talking about the script problems of the new Star Trek movie:
"I am not so naive as to believe they will ever make another Star Trek: The Motion Picture. But - you can have a modern-day action Star Trek movie, where the script isn't... garbage".
That's how I feel about the SP genre. No, they won't ever make another Deus Ex, Thief: TDP or Thief 2. They might make another Half-Life, but that's as far as my imagination goes. But a lot of "recent" games have shown me that while the development focus has shifted, the potential in SP games is huge and there are some very talented people doing very talented work on it.

So I am excited to say that I do not share in the scepticism. My biggest gripes are with SP-to-MP moves, tacked-on multiplayers at the expense of the singleplayer, and console-focused SP games at the expense of the game's quality as a PC game (Thief: Deadly Shadows). I get that the console "problem" is unavoidable today, but at least this isn't always game breaking and a properly ported game is perfectly fine. It's the MP-shift of solid SP-series that can bring me to tears. Who said Elder Scrolls Online?

I guess I made my point a bit vague to a point where I meant I hate another human being on the same game.

No I don't. Best thing in life alongside Baldur's Gate - couple of beers and snacks, a "hot seat" and Football Manager.

Best thing after that: DotA with at least 2 more friends at the same place and wreaking havoc on other guys on the server till morning.

I don't hate multiplayer. I just loathe the multiplayer-orientation trend. I'm still looking for the Call of Duty I Don't Remember Whichwarfare thrill I got from running and shooting through and over Brazilian suburbs on an adrenaline bomb escape. Look where best FPS's have come to. 3 hour-long retakes of "betrayed soldier" singleplayer stories which obviously prefers shoving "64 SLOTS MULTIPLAYER WHERE YOU CAN TASTE HOW IT FEELS LIKE IF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD SUDDENLY GETS NAPALMED RATHER THAN A TRUE AMBIENCE OF WARFARE. WE EVEN GOT A MULTIPLAYER MAP DLC UPCOMING FOR $4.99 EACH. AND A DOG SKIN TOO !" in your face.

Multiplayer with people you know is great. The problem for me is, the older I get the fewer gamers I know. :no:

The one with Brazilian suburbs was Modern Warfare 2, and I found it really silly, so much so that I stopped playing the SP in the Brazil part somewhere. Some of my favourite SP experiences were in Gothic and Gothic 2, Total War games were also not bad back when they didn't seem so outdated yet. Jagged Alliance games are also quite nice, as is Skyrim. I do agree somewhat that a focus on competitive MP is often a really, really bad thing because it usually means everything is somehow mirrored (I hear in StarCraft it's not and it's still balanced) or the same with a different look etc. On the other hand, as I said, if this is not the case, you often end up with relatively bland gameplay because everybody piles onto the overpowered things to get the upper hand and all variety is lost. So IMO there is a very human component in why things are done this way or that way and it's not just the companies trying to ruin our fun to make more money. It's the capitalist players ruining the fun of the commie players by min-maxing their own effectiveness to stay competitive, a trait highly valued in our western societies. :beatnik:

sc2 suxorz aoe3 rulez!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine

I don't hate multiplayer. I just loathe the multiplayer-orientation trend. I'm still looking for the Call of Duty I Don't Remember Whichwarfare thrill I got from running and shooting through and over Brazilian suburbs on an adrenaline bomb escape. Look where best FPS's have come to. 3 hour-long retakes of "betrayed soldier" singleplayer stories which obviously prefers shoving "64 SLOTS MULTIPLAYER WHERE YOU CAN TASTE HOW IT FEELS LIKE IF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD SUDDENLY GETS NAPALMED RATHER THAN A TRUE AMBIENCE OF WARFARE. WE EVEN GOT A MULTIPLAYER MAP DLC UPCOMING FOR $4.99 EACH. AND A DOG SKIN TOO !" in your face.

---

There are a LOT of single player only, or single player focused, games being made these days. They may not be AAA games, but these days that's actually a good thing. Don't be put off from all of gaming just because the most popular games are of a kind you dislike... there's something out there for everyone.

The point though is where is the industry focused. The reason that matters should be obvious.

Steel Panthers, HoMM 1-4, TW: Medieval - time-sucking vampires one and all! would probably give them all as much time again were I to redo it all