In this day and age where millions of people play online on different games, has Multiplayer become and aspect to a game what is expected?
IMO games should focus on co-op more than competitive mp.
I think it's all preference. Competitive multiplayer really got me into video games and that's the main reason I play.
Nope its just that the novelty of online gaming hasn't wore off for console gamers. Similar to pc gaming 10 years ago. With the online experience continually getting worse by the year thanks to console gamers and their dlc. If this is the consoles golden era of online gaming. I only shudder at the thought of how its going to be 10 years from now.
I disagree. PC gaming's biggest franchises are driven by multiplayer: Crysis, Team Fortress, World of Warcraft (one of the largest online communities in the world), Civilization, Starcraft (and just about any other real-time strategy game), Half-Life, etc. Also, DLC has been around since the '80s, not much longer than the PC, so it's nothing recently invented. Plus, how does gaming on consoles affect PC gamers?
co-op is a waste of time. It's fun for a little while but before you know it you won't touch it again. competitive is the way to go.
You seem to be expressing a personal feeling as a general statement. Watch: Of the twelve days I've spent in Uncharted multiplayer, nine of them were in co-op. That, theoretically, discredits you. The way YOU or the people you know feel is not always so.
that was only because uncharted 2 multiplayer is terrible. Well not terrible but mediocre when it decides to work.
What happened to hanging out with friends and playing video games? Nowadays, in order to play games with your friends you have to remain in seperate houses. Where's the fun in that? This is why games like borderlands, RFOM and soon Resistance 3 are such gems to me. Gaming was, and always should be about playing with friends, but due to the online craze, this is being lost to us. This all of course takes a back seat to Singleplayer.
Competitive MP should be in every FPS, every RTS, and every RPG. That is my opinion. I do agree that Co-op play is awesome as well. I wish more games would support 4 player co-op like Borderlands and Left4Dead series.
Not to me
Single player and coop for me first. Then mutiplayer.
Singleplayer experiences is the main drive for me. Example: Halo Reach - 2 Playthroughs on Legendary, Less 5 Hours Multiplayer. Uncharted 2 - 3 Playthoughts, Less than 5 Hours Multiplayer. Crysis - 5 Playthroughs, Less than 15 Hours Multiplayer. Some of my favorite games of all time include Oblivion, Legend of Zelda and GTA. Multiplayer has its place such as Team Fortress 2.
It depends on the game. Games like SOCOM, Battlefield, COD... multiplayer is more important. Uncharted, Dead Space, Metal Gear (even though MGO is pretty good) and other story driven games don't need multiplayer in my opinion.
I think there's been a range of titles that have proved that. L.A. Noire will be one of the future titles to prove that again.
At the moment, yes. Since the release of the Xbox, PS3 and Wii people have now been able to play against each other online without having to buy an extremely expensive gaming PC which you need to upgrade every few months along with all the computer knowledge, for years its always been just you and you alone and the occasional friend for a co-op game or an arcade type game where you take turns.
If your mindless idiot,yes. If you are a proper gamer who likes a little diversity in their games, no
single player is what sells games not the multiplayer
Call of Duty says "hi".
I hate it when people say things like "Oh this game needs CO-OP/Multiplayer like Elder Scrolls Skyrim where it's not needed. Uncharted wouldn't be good with CO-OP, Resident evil 5 shouldn't of had CO-OP fullstop, I don't think Dead Space 2 or Singularity needs nultiplayer. But the thing which bugs me the most is the Multiplayer/Co-Op freaks who live for those two things in games would moan on about a game not having them but if they did finally put it in a game like Skyrim they'd be on it for a month then go back to COD/Halo and let the single player lovers suffer with a not so good Single player experience.
Come on now in Skyrim Co-op would be soo bad ass. Being able to teamup and loot dungeons and take down a dragon or 2 would be epic. You gotta admit that.
No it wouldn't it would ruin the single player aspect of the game. Some games arn't meant for Co-Op My advice buy Two Worlds II....I heard the games only good if your playing with friends online
uncharted wouldnt be good co-op? .....what? how exactly would co-op spoil the single player experience?
because you would always have to have someone there with you. In uncharted you go on your own for several chapters. I don't want someone with me for all of the game. Look at RE5, they had a ton of Co-Op team things you had to do and when you were playing by your self it was annoying
to each his own I guess but if It had co-op I wouldnt see how it would adversly affect the game in any way, if anything the characters could play.
No i love single player games loved uncharted 1 and many more before it these day people want multiplayer games for everything
In This day & age, gamers find it too hard to buy a single player game because it has no multiplayer, they feel like it will games will be too short with little replay value & they're missing the value of 60$. 1 player games are to give players Great storytelling, outstanding characters, music, fun gameplay, immersive graphics & environments & enough content to bring em back for more. Not all games have this, but games like Uncharted 1,2, Bioshock 1,2, Fallout 3, New Vegas, The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion & Mass Effect 1&2 are worth every damn penny. U don't get that focus with Multiplayer! Just Obnoxious kids who live online 2 blow your head off & scream in the microphone. But I get it though; Far more hrs of gameplay, fun with everyone including friends, trashtalking with a side of T-Bagging & a kickass experience. I'm disappointed in today's gaming society. All they know is multiplayer, or GTFO, like they don't already have enough multiplayer games. It's the reason 1 player games are ALWAYS underappreciated and why devs feel they must join the crew to guarantee sales even though the game doesn't need it.
Yes. that´s why im not very interested in KZ3 right now actually
If you pay 60 bucks a year then yes. If you pet baby tigers while you chat with your buddies playing Halo, for 60 bucks a year then yes.
Wait you guys smell that? *sniff* * sniff*....... I know that smell..... it smells like a........ like a........ a........ A TROLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I hope not, back with nintendo :D wooo no online and now its I wont play that games cause there's no online or no versus BLEH BLEH BLEH lol 2 each there own tho. Online indeed is fun at most times but its made me a better player.
I really think it matters on how the game is designed. If the focus is on single player, then that's where the meat of the game should be. If the focus is on multiplayer, then it should be deep enough to warrant the weight of the purchase of the title. The problem is, that there are many single player franchises that are trying to tack on a multiplayer for longevity, and that's exactly how it feels- tacked on. Too many developers are trying to give players both, and in turn, end up falling short in both.
Single player please.
IMO multi player just adds to the value. there are some games i buy that don't have multi player (fable 3, dead space) and some that have multi player but i just rarely play them online b/c it's not what i enjoy. And lastly there are some games i buy just for online (CoD, BFBC, MoH). Me personally, i love online. It gives me more of a challenge, computers are predictable and repetitive. Humans always react differently. To me, that is what add hours upon hours to the replay.