Too many multiplayer games

[repiV]

Something that's been bugging me lately is that there are so many damn games out these days and the market has gone so casual that no single game manages to make an impact and become a real experience anymore.
Back in the days before Quake III, there were only two FPS games that were played to any real extent online - Quake and Quake II. Both games still had loyal followings and communities for years after Quake III was released.
Of course there was also Tribes, and later, Tribes II, that had their own smaller but very dedicated communities - and these games filled a niche all of their own.
Then Quake III and Unreal Tournament came out at about the same time, and this was probably the highlight of competitive online gaming IMO. Broadband connections and sub-100 pings were becoming increasingly common, Quake III had refined the FPS to near perfection while UT provided a more accessible, more colourful, more varied game that pulled in a large, dedicated fanbase all of its own.
Nowadays, UT and Quake games are considered so similar that all the long-time Quakers are moving to UT3 because it's the only game of its type that actually has a future. But UT and Quake are completely different games that cater to completely different types of players, and when there weren't hundreds of different games on the market, we could afford that distinction. These days, we just have to take what we can get - UT or Quake.
Quake III in particular had a massive modding community aswell, there were so many different competition mods, CTF variations, maps, total conversions...that it really evolved into several different games. It still had a very active community for six years after it was originally released, and what a ride it was - but these days, games just don't last like that.
UT2004? Died out within a year.
UT3 has a decent enough playerbase, but half of it will disappear when Quake Zero comes out.
Nobody seems to really play Quake Wars.
There are just so many multiplayer games on the market that none of them really manages to capture enough players to have a healthy and vibrant community. And they're increasingly designed to attract casual gamers - Quake III was a completely unforgiving game aimed squarely at competition use, just like a real sport. Today's rabidly popular games like Battlefield 2 are aimed primarily at newbies and public gaming.

This was pretty long-winded actually, I'm just wondering if we'll ever see the glory days of Q3 and UT again.

 

[repiV]

I agree. I'm more of a single-player fan myself, so I guess I'm against all these multiplayer-centred games for different reasons. It annoys me that developers are building so many massively multiplayer games, despite the fact that everyone who wants to play one is already playing one, and most people cannot afford, time- or money-wise, to play more than one anyway. My guess is just that it's easier, but I'd much rather see a well-constructed single-player experience than the endless grid-fests that every other game these days turns out to be.

Yeah, that's another good point. I'm a big single-player fan too, but for completely different reasons. I consider them to be two separate experiences - singleplayer is more like reading a book, whereas I treat multiplayer as a team sport.
And they just don't make singleplayer games like they used to either. COD4 was fantastic, but it's the first game I've really enjoyed since Neverwinter Nights 2 (and that had a lot of faults). Games of that calibre and higher used to come out all the time.

Maybe it's just that PC gaming and especially multiplayer gaming was the preserve of hardcore players a few years ago, but now it's too mainstream - and most of the games we get are joint console releases. I've almost completely given up on gaming because there's just not much out there that's very interesting anymore.

 

[99.vikram]

Maybe it's just that PC gaming and especially multiplayer gaming was the preserve of hardcore players a few years ago, but now it's too mainstream - and most of the games we get are joint console releases.

As cliche as that argument sounds, I agree 100%. When games weren't expected to earn so much $$ they actually used to care more about quality. But now companies don't have to depend on the niche gaming community for income anymore. There's a world of people out there who'll buy any game as long as it's advertised the right way.

EDIT: I didn't mean that games today are of lesser quality. The production values are more top notch than ever. But games simply don't try to be different from the pack anymore.

 

[VirusType2]

I just don't buy games that require an internet connection to play, or games that don't have any single player component short of playing against bots.

I agree with everything.


I used to LOVE online games, but now I can't stand them - possibly for the reasons stated. Too many of them.


Online gaming has some serious problems that need to be constantly addressed. Problems like cheating, spending way too much time forming a party that may or may not stick together long enough to get anything done (WoW), lag, and unbalanced teams, not to mention dealing with shit-heads from hell, or annoying people.

I just don't want to deal with it. I just want to have fun the whole time I'm hooked into a game. I don't want to spend 3 hours of shit, to have 15 minutes of fun, which is more often the case with online games.

However, I have a lot of fun playing CoD 4 single player, and I imagine it's pretty fun playing multiplayer, I haven't even tried it, for the reasons stated.


One of the best online multiplayer experiences I've had was with Street Fighter *.*. That is a game that just doesn't mean anything when you play against the computer.

I'd like to see the ultimate SNK/ Street Fighter Online game come out for the PC. An Xbox version had a really cool feature where you could customize the colors of your fighters.


My main gripe is with Steam. I'd like to play Half Life 2 episode 2 and Bioshock, as well as all my other Steam games that I bought when I had the internet, but I don't have an internet connection, so I can't even install it and play the offline component. I got Episode one for $20, and now it and all of my other Steam games don't work in offline mode. Thx bye.

Hey, why even bother making an offline mode, if you need an internet to play it. **** yourselves with sandpaper.

 

[Kadayi]

For a person without internet you have managed to rack up a considerable number of posts.

 

[repiV]

As cliche as that argument sounds, I agree 100%. When games weren't expected to earn so much $$ they actually used to care more about quality. But now companies don't have to depend on the niche gaming community for income anymore. There's a world of people out there who'll buy any game as long as it's advertised the right way.

Yeah. Multiplayer games aimed at competitive gamers used to be commercially viable, because most people who had the requisite technical knowledge and money that was needed to play online were competitive gamers. Now, any muppet with an Xbox can play online.
UT3 isn't even really aimed at the competition market - it's very lacking in basic functionality in that sense. Everything is far too dark, there are no brightskins and no match functionality. Not one of the maps is worthy of mention, and the weapon balance is terrible. It needs a lot of work before it will be a game truly worth of high-level play.
I'm sure TF2 is good in its own way, but it's not my bag. Far too slow for a start...

 

[Citrus]

I agree with some of what you're saying, but there are still some great single-player games out there. Half-Life series, Bioshock, Crysis, Oblivion are just a few.

I hate EA and how they f*cked up the BF series. They messed up 2142 so badly. A single player campaign would of been great for it because of the back-story to the game, but they just give you 6 or so maps with bots..

This problem will most certainly get worse over the coming years, as more and more people will be using the internet with games.

 

[VirusType2]

For a person without internet you have managed to rack up a considerable number of posts.

But, I've gotten only about a dozen posts in the past ... 8 months?

I used to have the internet.

 

[99.vikram]

But, I've gotten only about a dozen posts in the past ... 8 months?

I feel for you, but IMO Steam is the way of the future. It did a decent job of slowing down HL2 piracy and it's in-game and community features, stat tracking, and online purchase options are awesome. HL2 couldn't have had all those updates and patches without Steam.

 

[repiV]

I agree with some of what you're saying, but there are still some great single-player games out there. Half-Life series, Bioshock, Crysis, Oblivion are just a few.

I didn't really enjoy ep1 or ep2 tbh. They just didn't grip me, got pretty bored. In fact I just got out of that cave thingy with the vortigaunts etc. in ep2 and I haven't played it any farther than that. The whole experience of the episodes feels far too contrived. HL2 was very good, but it's no Deus Ex.
Not played Bioshock or Crysis, my graphics card doesn't support Bioshock and it would probably be pointless trying to play Crysis on my rig. Oblivion was fun, but it's a really shallow game...the only thing it's really got going for it is the novelty of being able to go wherever you want to do whatever you like. Once you're over that, it's dull.
Now KoToR, there's a game...pity the sequel was released in a half-finished state.

I hate EA and how they f*cked up the BF series. They messed up 2142 so badly. A single player campaign would of been great for it because of the back-story to the game, but they just give you 6 or so maps with bots..

I actually really enjoyed BF2, although I never saw it as anything more than a fun diversion. Certainly not a game to be taken seriously. Although the vast majority of my enjoyment came from playing the demo, where people had a clue and actually worked as a team. It was absolutely amazing, but the retail was full of morons and there was rarely any enjoyment at all to be found.
The problem with BF2 is it's a game that requires large-scale teamwork yet it's not suited to competition. You're never going to get to play it in an ideal situation.
I wish I'd been into Tribes 2, clan games were typically played 12v12 or 14v14 - although running such a clan and organising those matches were surely a logistical nightmare. It's difficult enough getting five people together...

This problem will most certainly get worse over the coming years, as more and more people will be using the internet with games.

Yeah...

 

[Dalamari]

I don't think the abundance of MP games is the problem, it's the problem of "let's make a solid multiplayer game with single-player there just cause" and I think with games like Bioshock and Mass Effect we're seeing a return to some good ol' late 90's single-player gaming

 

[Seagull]

I never got into Quake during it's prime. I wish I had - I got into Tribes, though. Still an amazing game today.

Hoping we'll see some more competitive DM games fill the scene - HL2DM filled it for me for a long time, but lately it's just been bland. TF2 seems to be too casual-oriented with a really low skill ceiling for individuals, but the team-ceiling is pretty decently-high up.

 

[Raziaar]

There's not enough good coop games.

 

[Viperidae]

There's not enough good coop games.

QFTSIGGEDQFEADINFINITUMETC

Yeah.

 

[repiV]

I never got into Quake during it's prime. I wish I had - I got into Tribes, though. Still an amazing game today.

I have some amazing memories of Quake III. It was actually my first real foray into online gaming, because we'd always been too poor to afford the internet or a half-decent PC. I got a P3 450 the same month Q3 came out though and I got that and UT to go with it. I took to it pretty naturally, people asked me if I used to play Quakeworld and shit...I spent hours every day just playing. I got so into the rhythm I could sit and play Rocket Arena for hours on end without even realising I was playing - thinking about something else entirely, and I would be at my best when I was in that state.
Amazing times with the clans, won a few leagues here and then...probably the best moment was when I fired the winning shot of the Barrysworld RA3 division 1 final.
Nothing has EVER matched Q3, or even come close. It was damn near perfect, and so was the community. The thing about Quake is that all the players are hardcore gamers - the average level of skill amongst Quake players is far higher than in any other game, and the participation in competition near-universal.
My skills are nowhere near what they used to be either, which is a shame. My reflexes are nothing like they were then, and the whole thing just doesn't come quite so naturally to me. Plus, I think the average skill level has improved considerably since the early days of Q3 so I'm up against much better competition too.

I tried Tribes 2 briefly but it ran like shit, looked like shit, and seemed really slow to my newb self so I gave up. I did play Tribes:Vengeance from birth until death but it died within a few months, which is a shame because I thought it was a pretty neat game.
The thing I hate about Tribes though is the community. Hands down, it's the most vile, arrogant, elitist, vicious, disgusting group of people I've ever encountered in my life. The kind of people you just want to shoot dead.

Hoping we'll see some more competitive DM games fill the scene - HL2DM filled it for me for a long time, but lately it's just been bland. TF2 seems to be too casual-oriented with a really low skill ceiling for individuals, but the team-ceiling is pretty decently-high up.

Well, at the moment the only real option is UT3. It's not a bad game by any means, it's just no Quake III. Why don't you play it? My Quake 4 clan has moved onto UT3 now, pretty much.
Quake Zero is about a year away - it's basically a free version of Quake III. I'm hoping it will take the online gaming world by storm. You might also want to try Warsow, which is a free FPS that uses a jazzed up version of the Quake 2 engine and looks like Tron. It plays very much like Quake III, a fair number of people play it.

You pretty much hit the nail on the head with the "low skill ceiling for individuals" comment, that's always been my beef with CS and other Half-Life based online games, Battlefield and so on...
Quake has a limitless skill ceiling for both individuals and teams. I played Q3Fortess for a couple of years, and simple TDM requires far more teamwork than any Fortress game ever could. Simple game design creates depth - the more options you add into the game, the more you force the game to be played a certain way. There's only really one or two ways to play TF, but limitless ways to play TDM.
Simply I believe that Quake-based Team Deathmatch is the most competitive game out there. It makes no concessions to individual OR team skill. It's totally uncompromising.