Why can't developers get multiplayer gaming right?

Dualshockers: Online multi-player gaming has, for me, completely eclipsed the single player experience so much so that it takes a rare gem such as God of War 3 to pull me away from my buddies on the virtual battlefield. That said, nearly every multi-player game I play has some kind of bizarre aspect built into it for no apparent reason other than to make it a pain in the ass to enjoy. Now I’m not talking about game-play mechanics here or unbalanced maps. I’m talking about design choices built into the multi-player setup – let’s look at some examples.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
tdogchristy902593d ago

they had it right a long time ago. O the days of golden eye and halo 2. The days when you could play online and or splitscreen with your buddies. If anything they just kind of pushed it too far, mucked up the water persay. KISS, keep is simple stupid.

Chadness2593d ago

I agree. I think part of the problem is getting away from split screen and focusing too much on online aspects. Not that there is anything wrong with that in and of itself, but I long for the days of people actually wanting to get together with friends in the same room for a night of Golden Eye.

Perjoss2593d ago

devs are too stubborn to copy Halo matchmaking, this is why they are failing. To this day you can log onto a Halo3 game as a noob and play against other noobs, instead of getting mowed down by veterans.

Winter47th2593d ago (Edited 2593d ago )

Matchmaking is the worst thing that ever happened to online gaming. I'd take a server browser + filters any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Lich1202593d ago


I completely agree, I don't know why they feel the need to add matchmaking to games... Gears 1 had a better system than Gears 2. Let me pick my gametype, don't assign me to one vaguely similar to the one I actually want.

ECM0NEY2593d ago

Agreed Winter. Gears 3 better have a server filter like 1.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2593d ago
Hitman07692593d ago

I'm gonna go ahead and say online gaming rules. Party systems have really been a serious let down for a long time now and these are some prime examples of game design gone horribly wrong in this particular feature set. Why would you ever create a game with so many players as 16, 32, or even 256 and then limit the parties to groups of 4, 8, etc?

I am totally 100% with Rob on this one. It really is not rocket science to have bigger amounts of friends joining up together, it has been going on in the PC gaming world for longer than online gaming has existed in the console realm.

Looks to me like maybe everyone is playing catch-up still to the old concepts...

Ninferno2593d ago

KISS... my teachers used to use that on me, but i agree... just keep it simple.

DarkSpawnClone2593d ago

Eww, you're teachers use to kiss you ?

IaMs122593d ago

Hey i wouldnt complain if some of my (Girl) teachers kissed me :)

PopEmUp2592d ago

that some after school kiss :P

DA_SHREDDER2593d ago (Edited 2593d ago )

I think MAG has the best online for fps on consoles, but most of you guys are so blind for your love of COD and Bad Company that you guys have yet to realize the answer is right before your eyes. Sver 4 life!

Nicaragua2593d ago

You clearly didnt read the article. Its not talking about which is the best FPS and for what it is talking about then MAG is one of the worst offenders.

Trroy2593d ago (Edited 2593d ago )

MAG has a clan system coming in like a month.

And the VAST majority of MAG players are NOT affiliated with clans at all -- so 8-man squads WAS a good idea.

Honestly, the game's biggest flaw is the lack of a "just you and your buds" chat channel. The rest of the game is really fun, IMO. The clan support, although it will be cool when it comes (and it is coming soon -- they talk about it all the time on the MAG boards), will still not address the buddy chat issue.

Yeah... that's not a feature in any other game either. MAG could have been an even more phenominal MP shooter with it, however.

Chewy1022593d ago (Edited 2593d ago )

Zipper is working on upping the group limit in the next patch or 2 when clan wars come. (damn Trroy beat me to it)

Id also like to put out that neutral maps are coming in SUP and SABO soon (the 64 player modes). Zipper tested them last night by making the SABO maps neutral for a few hours. You should have see the forums when they slipped that in without telling anyone.

RedDead2593d ago

I don't think the shooting mechanics are great compared to KZ or Cod

Nicaragua2593d ago

Wow, thats just great! As long as they are just "talking" about upping the limit just 6 months after launch...well if I had only known that i would have kept my mouth shut! Hopefully it will be part of a DLC pack that i will have to pay for - YIPPEEE !!!

God forbid that they just include these features at launch - thanks for sharing this great bit of news.

Garnett2593d ago

MAG is awful, just because its exclusive to the Trey doesnt make it better than Too human.

Both are isht!

Chewy1022593d ago

I agree that the 8 man limit on groups was a bad move in MAG and it needed to be 32 max. But why the hell did you have to respond like a total ass and bring DLC into this? There is no why Zipper is going to charge for the clan wars or upping the group limit. They said it on their forums and (I think) in one or two of the Zipline podcasts.

Also the way Zipper does DLC in MAG isn't like most other games. Most other games you only download the DLC if you buy it. In Mag you download the DLC in the patches/updates and you get an unlock code from the store. Just like MGO.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2593d ago
Blaze9292593d ago

They are the only ones who get this multiplayer stuff right especially with TrueSkill:

"TrueSkill is a Bayesian ranking algorithm developed by Microsoft Research and used in the Xbox matchmaking system built to address some perceived flaws in the Elo rating system."

Bungie is only taking it to the next level with Halo Reach and it's multiplayer innovations, UI, and matchmaking. With them, it actually WORKS.

On a second note, is this an Xbox LIVE exclusive feature or something? It's damn awesome and more games need to use it.

gamerzBEreal172593d ago (Edited 2593d ago )

the next level with halo reach? by doing what adding sprint? better graphics? jet packs? how will they raise the bar next? aiming? xD /sarcasm

PirateThom2593d ago (Edited 2593d ago )

TrueSkill is amazing in theory, at the end of the day, you're still matched to whoever happens to be waiting in a lobby. It may filter it more, but you're still going to have a mix of good and bad players every game... the theory behind it is fantastic though, it just needs to be applied more heavily for players who do want a similar skill challenge, which is undone entirely by matchmaking anyway.

Lich1202593d ago

I hate trueskill (not really, but kinda). Let me tell you why.

I loved Halo 3 while I was in the low levels. Getting a steak dinner every team deathmatch is tons of fun. Sure enough, after I ranked up a bit (high 40's) I found that I'd hit my skill cap. That is to say, I had to fight with everything I had to pull out a win. Im not a great halo player after all. I was glad when they reset the rankings so I could relax for awhile.

It gets stressful having to actually try every game, sometimes you want to just relax and play some people that are terrible.

pustulio2592d ago

TrueSkill is retarded.

Me and a bud where both 49's in Team Doubles we won 48 matches, Fourty Fucking Eight! and we never went up to 50 then we lost one against two 50's and we went down to 48.

I will always remember that day, it was a kick in the nuts. Hard one.

Marquis_de_Sade2592d ago (Edited 2592d ago )

Lich, that's the single most idiotic comment I have seen on this site. If you want to chill out and trash people, then just play unranked games, to complain about TruSkill putting you in a game where you have to actually try to win is plain stupid, that's what it does, match you with others of a similar skill range.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2592d ago
dinkeldinkse2593d ago

Bubble for the picture of my hero George Patton.

mantisimo2593d ago (Edited 2593d ago )

until uncharted 2 and love it, there's rarely a problem with the servers, the players are well balanced and I think its great fun, could do with a couple of new maps now though.

WLPowell2593d ago (Edited 2593d ago )

I hate being grouped with level 40-pluses from foreign countries who don't know how to play coop!!! Voice chat or not you're screwed at that point.

It's funny because a lot of matchmaking MP games are trying REAL hard to basically be the lobby system by giving all these extra "preference" selections. Just be the Lobby system and work like it used to.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2592d ago
Nicaragua2593d ago

I just think that somewhere in the complexity of squads and parties and all that crap they have skipped the part where they just make a simply intuitive multiplayer setup.

What the hell was wrong with just picking a server from a list and then joining a game? Why am i being forced to play with guys from Bangladesh just because the matchmaking wants me to ?

Multiplayer needs to go back to basics, the PC had it right.

Games4M - Rob2593d ago

Totally agree. I got into gaming playiing Counterstrike a looooong time ago and the system of just picking a game works fine.

Party systems are all well and good but they should exist as a supplement to a server list, not instead of.

LiquifiedArt2593d ago

Lobbies are NOT the answer to "Intuitive" multiplayer designers.
Wrapping it into a party/matchmaking system is far more streamlined for the average user.

I will agree that Lobbies give more fidelity to MP options, but its really for the serious gamers, not the average gamer/casual gamer.

Games4M - Rob2593d ago

Then surely the best option is to have both in order to keep everyone happy ?

Party up systems are fine but when they put a limit on the number of friends you can play with then where is the benefit? Its not like casual players only have 4 friends.