Games are jumping on the multiplayer bandwagon but is this necessarily a good thing? I want to know what the community thinks.
Uncharted 2 is a perfect example of how to add a fun unique multiplayer while not getting in the way of the single players development However... Uncharted 3 is a perfect example of how not to go over board with your multiplayer when doing a sequel. They added "COD" like changes....sorry I mean everyother multiplayer changes and it ended up not being as fun as Uncharted 2. It's become an unbalanced mess. I think U2 was more fun since it was just your skill and your two boosters...nothing more, nothing less.
Also, some single player games create new unique multiplayer experiences, for example Assassin's Creed. However it is a shame when that great formula gets CODed. I loved Uncharted 2's multiplayer and Assassin's Creed Brotherhoods. But I couldn't stay long onto U3 and ACR.. which is a shame
You want to know the sad part, ND will never go back to the old changes. Sure they might add a classic mode but they'll still add something like loadouts or maybe keep the kickbacks...something which will still be a problem NDs problem is that they always fix the stuff which isn't broken and keep the things that are broken. For example we never asked for these changes only for things like the Situation awareness booster to be removed...yet in U3 it's been spilt into three boosters. I wish they would just keep the customization and expand on it...if they remove weapon mods then allow us to change the look of our guns so even though we'll all start with an AK and a pistol there will be different variations. Problem is people wouldn't mind these changes but wouldn't actually tell ND on the forums that they want this to happen. I mean if your fine with U3 multiplayer but wouldn't mind it going back to what U2 was like then I don't see why people don't support the idea.....least then everyone wins. Hell ND said that hardcore mode would satisfy U2 players and it's worse then the deathmatch...
They said the last of us would have a multiplayer component, maybe we can find love again? I liked Uncharted 3's mp, but like I said I played 2's a lot longer. I wonder what TLOU's mp will be like Im also mixed on Ac3's mp. A lot of the community hates revelations which is a shame, since Ezio should go out with a bang, rather than a whimper... but 3 feels like revelations... they even use the same music(probably due to the fact that its alpha), kill animations and character models.... which is irritating me. AC3 is going to be an incredible single player experience, multiplayer on the other hand I do not know AC3: http://www.youtube.com/watc... ACR: http://www.youtube.com/watc...
^ Agreed completely with Mike Uncharted 2 is a rare exception of a game where multiplayer was built fantastically, and Uncharted 3 was an example of them adding too much. That said, Uncharted is the only series which I cannot imagine without the Multiplayer, and I think everything else has been a lazy effort to try and cash in on the multiplayer scene. Bioshock, Dead Space, Mass Effect, Assassin's Creed, all highly rated single player games that added a multiplayer component that never truly shines and sustains. I feel God of War will be similar, but I am intrigued when I hear small comparisons to Power Stone, and as a huge fan of Power Stone, I have become more interested in following Ascension.
MP games are just becoming unbalanced messes. Overloading the game with perks, classes, weapon addons, kill streaks, death streaks. Its worse than the blue turtle shell. Mario Kart is actually LESS random than modern shooter MP. While i don't want games to be as simple as quake and UT3, i do want skill to make a comeback in multiplayer. watching an XP bar go up and earning red dot scopes doesn't keep me interested. Learning the maps, perfect weapon combos, weapon placement, choke points, and skill keeps me playing good MP games. We like to play games afterall. Why not play for the fun of playing rather than for the next rank up.
Also the whole "60 dollars for 500 hour skyrim, vs 60 dollars of 10 hour God of War" is ridiculous. Lets just compare the endless lollygagging of Minecraft to Uncharted next. Skyrim is a slow paced game designed to let you get what you want out of it. I could personally only stomach the main quest, everything else was useless. Uncharted 2 on the other hand was an excellently made campaign with great combat, pacing, story, and visuals. Both worth 60 dollars for different reasons. Do you really want to hack n' slash on god of war for 500 hours? The time-for-money argument is lame. Some games are great, long, and drawn out. Some are great exciting 10 hour campaigns.
My favorite game of all time is mgs1. For me, that 10-12 hours was worth far more than any 500 hours in Skyrim.
I know I'm in the minority on this, but I really liked U3's multiplayer -- I didn't expect to, but I ended up getting 20 or so hours out of it. But that's the exception. I honestly can't think of any other franchise that a) started out as SP-only, b) added a multiplayer mode to a subsequent entry in the franchise, and c) said online mode not sucking. I'm sure there are others that I'm unaware of, but they sure as hell aren't Bioshock, Dead Space, or Mass Effect.
This is why I respect the Dishonored team and their vehement stance on, "No, this is a single player game...GTFO." It's why I will be picking up their game.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.