Decline Why are multiplayer-only games such a hard sell?

[deuxhero]

Valve really has trouble selling TF2, Dota2 and CS:GO let me tell you.

They only actually sell one of those...

 

[J1M]

Multiplayer only games have an expiration date.

Mulitplayer-only game ~2500 years strong.

I see you wish to debate technicalities.

In that case, I will remind you that you can play Go against yourself. Good luck doing that in Tabula Rasa.

 

[No Great Name]

I see you wish to debate technicalities.

In that case, I will remind you that you can play Go against yourself. Good luck doing that in Tabula Rasa.

I see you wish to debate technicalities.

In that case, I will remind you that any multiplayer-only game can be played by yourself if you are capable of filling in for the other spots. This is, after all, one of the main ways people can practice for multiplayer-only games.

 

[Perkel]

Because multiplayer games have one basic problem:

- you need to play with other people

Back in early days of internet multiplayer mostly meant LAN parties where you sat in one room with friends and did something cool like UT matches. Most of the fun came from actually playing and talking to friends.

Now multiplayer games are mostly about sitting in one room alone talking or chatting via communicator to someone from other side of planet that doesn't give a shit about you, watching your internet fame aka some number going up in leaderboard or unlocking new paragon level which is at this point aped by almost every game.

Above is mostly about shooters but each gengre have more or less the same problem.

Take for example old MMORPGs. No auction houses, no other stuff that made people talk to each other. Clan/guild back then was mostly about you and your friends doing stuff together where now those are mostly threted as buffs for starting characters. Worlds that aspired to something were dumbed down to point where you can buy lvl 90 character and "play raids"

Like someone said already. Quality players make multiplayer awesome which makes game popular among other plebs. If designers will catter to casual crowd quality players leave game and what is left is those XIXIXIXDeAtHlOrD21212XIXIXI players and some sane people. So sane people don't want to play with shitty players and XIXI leaves because he can't annoy anyone now.

EVE and counter strike are probably best examples of above. Game were not dumbed down and still are played. Even old UT99 or Q3 still have strong communities. Just last month i played UT99 multi and upon clicking multi it had like 500 servers full of people + ~1000 empty servers (probably timezone).

 

[Gerrard]

The problem isn't really that they require people. it's that people are shit, especially on the internet.

 

[JarlFrank]

He completely misses the point. MP games don't need any fucking leveling up bullshit, its is GOOD when you can try out the most powerful gear right away rather than having to work for it because sometimes you just wanna jump in and play a few hours of shootan other players rather than working to get better gear like in an MMO (not to mention it unbalances the game by giving experienced players better stuff while noobs are stuck with the shitty beginner shit).

What killed this game was probably sucky gameplay, or gameplay that is on par with more popular rivals therefore making it obsolete, and of course one thing I read in this thread: only 6v6 players maximum on a map. Seriously? Lol. No thanks I'd rather go on a big map with 30 or 40 players in a Battlefield game, thanks.

 

[SCO]

Multiplayer is verbotten in my house

 

[Metro]

Didn't read the article. Obvious answer is they provide no-content other than multiplayer. And there are tons of multiplayer-only/centric games out there. Why would I shell out $50+ or even $20+ on sale knowing a game will probably be dead/yesterday's news in a matter of months?

Just look at Evolve. Game is such a trainwreck they recently modified their Steam Forum Discussions to prevent people without the game from posting there.

 

[Tehdagah]

Because multiplayer games have one basic problem:

- you need to play with other people

Back in early days of internet multiplayer mostly meant LAN parties where you sat in one room with friends and did something cool like UT matches. Most of the fun came from actually playing and talking to friends.

Now multiplayer games are mostly about sitting in one room alone talking or chatting via communicator to someone from other side of planet that doesn't give a shit about you, watching your internet fame aka some number going up in leaderboard or unlocking new paragon level which is at this point aped by almost every game.

Above is mostly about shooters but each gengre have more or less the same problem.

Take for example old MMORPGs. No auction houses, no other stuff that made people talk to each other. Clan/guild back then was mostly about you and your friends doing stuff together where now those are mostly threted as buffs for starting characters. Worlds that aspired to something were dumbed down to point where you can buy lvl 90 character and "play raids"

Like someone said already. Quality players make multiplayer awesome which makes game popular among other plebs. If designers will catter to casual crowd quality players leave game and what is left is those XIXIXIXDeAtHlOrD21212XIXIXI players and some sane people. So sane people don't want to play with shitty players and XIXI leaves because he can't annoy anyone now.

EVE and counter strike are probably best examples of above. Game were not dumbed down and still are played. Even old UT99 or Q3 still have strong communities. Just last month i played UT99 multi and upon clicking multi it had like 500 servers full of people + ~1000 empty servers (probably timezone).

"You need to play with other people" is pretty much the requirement of any online game.

This is why local multiplayer exists.

 

[Perkel]

The problem isn't really that they require people. it's that people are shit, especially on the internet.

that was irony if you missed it.

Problem is that multi games paint everything perfect but reality is just so shitty mainly because people don't give a fuck.

 

[chestburster]

Biggest problem with Titanfall was that it was limited to 6v6 players with bunch of harmless bots running around so that maps wont feel empty,

It's got bots so low-skill players get to kill something and won't feel too bad about themselves. But then it has alienated everyone else when 80% of the time you are just shooting dumb bots it gets boring.

Blacklight: Retribution,

Blacklight still has players because it's free so you always have new players joining in, and the gears take a long, long, long time to grind.

 

[Destroid]

Because multiplayer games have one basic problem:

- you need to play with other people

Back in early days of internet multiplayer mostly meant LAN parties where you sat in one room with friends and did something cool like UT matches. Most of the fun came from actually playing and talking to friends.

Now multiplayer games are mostly about sitting in one room alone talking or chatting via communicator to someone from other side of planet that doesn't give a shit about you, watching your internet fame aka some number going up in leaderboard or unlocking new paragon level which is at this point aped by almost every game.

Above is mostly about shooters but each gengre have more or less the same problem.

Take for example old MMORPGs. No auction houses, no other stuff that made people talk to each other. Clan/guild back then was mostly about you and your friends doing stuff together where now those are mostly threted as buffs for starting characters. Worlds that aspired to something were dumbed down to point where you can buy lvl 90 character and "play raids"

Like someone said already. Quality players make multiplayer awesome which makes game popular among other plebs. If designers will catter to casual crowd quality players leave game and what is left is those XIXIXIXDeAtHlOrD21212XIXIXI players and some sane people. So sane people don't want to play with shitty players and XIXI leaves because he can't annoy anyone now.

EVE and counter strike are probably best examples of above. Game were not dumbed down and still are played. Even old UT99 or Q3 still have strong communities. Just last month i played UT99 multi and upon clicking multi it had like 500 servers full of people + ~1000 empty servers (probably timezone).

Modern multiplayer gaming systems are also anti-community. It used to be to play a game you had a server browser and a lobby where you could talk to people, organise games etc. Now most games use an automated matchmaking system coupled with a 'friending' system that is quicker to get you into a game but much worse for communicating and organising with the people you are playing with.

 

[Sranchammer]

I didn't know Titan came out

 

[Perkel]

Because multiplayer games have one basic problem:

- you need to play with other people

Back in early days of internet multiplayer mostly meant LAN parties where you sat in one room with friends and did something cool like UT matches. Most of the fun came from actually playing and talking to friends.

Now multiplayer games are mostly about sitting in one room alone talking or chatting via communicator to someone from other side of planet that doesn't give a shit about you, watching your internet fame aka some number going up in leaderboard or unlocking new paragon level which is at this point aped by almost every game.

Above is mostly about shooters but each gengre have more or less the same problem.

Take for example old MMORPGs. No auction houses, no other stuff that made people talk to each other. Clan/guild back then was mostly about you and your friends doing stuff together where now those are mostly threted as buffs for starting characters. Worlds that aspired to something were dumbed down to point where you can buy lvl 90 character and "play raids"

Like someone said already. Quality players make multiplayer awesome which makes game popular among other plebs. If designers will catter to casual crowd quality players leave game and what is left is those XIXIXIXDeAtHlOrD21212XIXIXI players and some sane people. So sane people don't want to play with shitty players and XIXI leaves because he can't annoy anyone now.

EVE and counter strike are probably best examples of above. Game were not dumbed down and still are played. Even old UT99 or Q3 still have strong communities. Just last month i played UT99 multi and upon clicking multi it had like 500 servers full of people + ~1000 empty servers (probably timezone).

Modern multiplayer gaming systems are also anti-community. It used to be to play a game you had a server browser and a lobby where you could talk to people, organise games etc. Now most games use an automated matchmaking system coupled with a 'friending' system that is quicker to get you into a game but much worse for communicating and organising with the people you are playing with.

Basically this.

 

[JarlFrank]

Because multiplayer games have one basic problem:

- you need to play with other people

Back in early days of internet multiplayer mostly meant LAN parties where you sat in one room with friends and did something cool like UT matches. Most of the fun came from actually playing and talking to friends.

Now multiplayer games are mostly about sitting in one room alone talking or chatting via communicator to someone from other side of planet that doesn't give a shit about you, watching your internet fame aka some number going up in leaderboard or unlocking new paragon level which is at this point aped by almost every game.

Above is mostly about shooters but each gengre have more or less the same problem.

Take for example old MMORPGs. No auction houses, no other stuff that made people talk to each other. Clan/guild back then was mostly about you and your friends doing stuff together where now those are mostly threted as buffs for starting characters. Worlds that aspired to something were dumbed down to point where you can buy lvl 90 character and "play raids"

Like someone said already. Quality players make multiplayer awesome which makes game popular among other plebs. If designers will catter to casual crowd quality players leave game and what is left is those XIXIXIXDeAtHlOrD21212XIXIXI players and some sane people. So sane people don't want to play with shitty players and XIXI leaves because he can't annoy anyone now.

EVE and counter strike are probably best examples of above. Game were not dumbed down and still are played. Even old UT99 or Q3 still have strong communities. Just last month i played UT99 multi and upon clicking multi it had like 500 servers full of people + ~1000 empty servers (probably timezone).

Modern multiplayer gaming systems are also anti-community. It used to be to play a game you had a server browser and a lobby where you could talk to people, organise games etc. Now most games use an automated matchmaking system coupled with a 'friending' system that is quicker to get you into a game but much worse for communicating and organising with the people you are playing with.

Yeah, whenever I hear a multiplayer game has no free server browser, it kills any interest I might have had in it.

 

[a Goat]

Yeah, because Enemy Territory(if only ET alone) lived for like 5-6 years with huge, active community. Exactly. Community.

As far as I remember, Brink didn't had dedicated servers. Neither does Titanfall. Dunno about Evolve.
Same goes for map editors/sdk.

Woah, how it's possible that they couldn't build up a community while they've didn't have content nor gave the community possibility to create it.


CoD can live on paid map packs because it has established community that will buy its yearly instance, season pass, map packs, everything without thought. All those not-really contenders don't have community. If there's not enough content and you have to pay for it, sure as fuck the game's gonna bomb.

Being jew requires methodical approach. Valve understands it and hardly ever bombs. Activision understands it and hardly ever bombs. EA doesn't understand it, so they bomb with every new franchise they release.

 

[chestburster]

Multiplayer constantly hemorrhages players because half of the player base have negative K/D and those players quit as it's no fun getting rekt. In the end only the elites are left and the skill gap is small enough that everyone gets a K/D of around 1.0.

If the game launches with a large community, the elite group remaining may be large enough to sustain a critical mass, otherwise the game just flat lines.

 

[Destroid]

Multiplayer constantly hemorrhages players because half of the player base have negative K/D and those players quit as it's no fun getting rekt. In the end only the elites are left and the skill gap is small enough that everyone gets a K/D of around 1.0.

If the game launches with a large community, the elite group remaining may be large enough to sustain a critical mass, otherwise the game just flat lines.

I suppose a skill based matchmaker helps with that, although I only like them for 1v1 games like starcraft, and even then the algorithm has by very good for it to all work smoothly.