Posted: 4/9/2013 9:18:12 PM EDT
|
Is anyone else fed up with the emphasis placed on multiplayer in video games now?, there are even some games that are multiplayer only (They also typically do not make that clear on the box). It used to be that they actually focused on making a GOOD game, and the multiplayer was just an extra, but now they make the games for the multiplayer, and if there is a single player at all it's poorly executed, and you can bear it in 5 hours. Is anyone else tired of this?
I hate multiplayer, I tried it for awhile but after about 2 years I stopped. It was unplayable, the servers are over run with whiny 12 year olds, who can't play worth a damn, and do nothing but hog chat with trash talk, and complaining. It seemed like 90% of them were Dutch at times, and they were the worst, they did all of the above times 10, and when they weren't doing that they were America bashing non stop, half the time you heard/read nothing but German in chat, it got to the point where I would like to ban thier entire country from the internet. Other than the 12 year old Dutch kids, there were the general morons, the guys who would just randomly run around, team kill, get killed in the first 30 seconds, or fall off cliffs, all while hogging the best weapons/classes so people who were any good couldn't have them. Then there is the ever popular camper/idle player, they don't move, they just sit there, they usually hog weapons/classes, and never use them, they will block stairways, and hallways so you can't get passed because they are to busy sucking their boy friends dick to actually play the fucking game, them finaly everybody is killed in an elimination match, but the next round can't start until the timers up because some idiot is just standing there. The grenade spam is lovely to, you gotta love the idiots that just randomly throw/launch grenades everywhere on the off chance they will get lucky, and hit someone, these are usually the same idiots that get killed in 30 seconds, so what if they kill half there own team? Nothing like waiting 20 minutes for the next round to start (after the timer is forced to run out because of the campers) because "deder_fuckface_12" decided it would be a good idea to spam a grenade, and wipe out half his own team right before he bunny hops off a cliff 30 seconds after the round starts. You then get to hear him bash America for the next 20 minutes. Speaking of bunny hoppers, how real is that?, I want to take all bunny hoppers, and break their legs. Would it be that tricky to design a game where jumping is disabled in multiplayer?, or so you can't just keep doing it? You also must deal with the teams, these are the guys who actually know what they are doing, and work as a team, unfortunately they are always on the other side.Want to join a team yourself?, unless you know people in real life that is not going to happen unless you are willing to play on their schedule, by there stupid rules, and use only what they tell you to, even if the game allows you to use something better, oh, and odds are English will not be thier first language. Then there were the cheaters, it seemed every server had at least 1, or 2 cheaters on it, software designed to bust cheaters is a joke, there is always someone who can get a head shot with 1 shot every time through fog, and a wall while running, and bunny hopping from the other side of the map. Someone who won't be phased if you empty an entire magazine in to thier chest, or a rocket in to thier testy, or someone that will ghost a rocket through the floor. In all multiplayer sucked. Can we get some good single player games?, or at least a decent skirmish mode against the AI if you insist on emphasizing multiplayer? |
|
Woah, slow down there
I can't read that much at once EDIT- read it all finally, I do play MP, but we all hate the same things you do, what I do to help is drink a shit load of beer, plug my mic in and have a good time just pissing people off Cliff notes: OP just learned about trollers, little whiney kids, and clans, still will remain a COD and BF3 hater |
|
Quoted:
Woah, slow down there I can't read that much at once EDIT- read it all finally, I do play MP, but we all hate the same things you do, what I do to help is drink a shit load of beer, plug my mic in and have a good time just pissing people off Cliff notes: OP just learned about trollers, little whiney kids, and clans, still will remain a COD and BF3 hater I played the first battlefield, after that I had no desire to play any of the sequels, that was the multiplayer only game that didn't say that on the box I aluded to, I bought it expecting a World War 2 shooter game, I was pissed when I realized there was no single player game whatsoever, and the multiplayer was terrible, it sucked a bag of dicks. I love COD, I just don't do the multiplayer, unfortunately the single player is way to short, the campaighn needs to be at least 4-5 times longer. I can beat the game in about 5 hours. |
|
Wait a minute. BF 1942 actually had a great singleplayer campaign thing. It was simply every multiplayer map with bots instead of people. Worked well because the game was relatively simple at that point.
BF 2, they gave up figuring out a competent AI for it so it was purely multiplayer. BF 3 has a singleplayer campaign but I've never heard of anybody who's actually played it, haha. I've got 130 hours into BF 3 and only 4 minutes of them are singleplayer. But BF 3 multiplayer tends to attract a smarter player base. 85-95% of pub teams are still clueless fucktards who are too busy remembering how to breathe to actually figure out a viable strategy or communicate with their team. But 5-15% of players on decent servers will be competent and responsive. Switch to their team if you don't start out on it. Even if they're losing. And if the server doesn't let you switch, find one that does. Note that this advice ONLY counts for the PC experience. If you play on console, you're going to get a console kiddy experience. ETA: Awesome, long, singleplayer games in recent years have been Skyrim, Far Cry 3, Just Cause 2, and several others. You can very literally and very easily get lost in those games for tens of hours. Bioshock Infinite is much much shorter but not without merit. There are some other good singleplayer experiences floating around as well. Deus Ex Human Revolution is a fantastic game. Red Dead Redemption on consoles as well. All of these should also be pretty cheap by now, except for Bioshock. |
|
Community is extremely important when playing multiplayer. Unfortunately one of the most accessible services(Xbox live) has the absolute worst community.
The grenade-spam in Call of Duty was a conscious decision to lower the skill level requried to get kills. It adds randomness and since low-skilled players can easily score against more experienced players they can enjoy themselves more easily. The multiplayer sucking might also have something to do with the FPS games you are playing; there are a few shooters out that that don't even have a jump feature. Try Armed Assault 2 and find a decent community that's more mature, but not too uptight. For single player shooters, if you don't mind the really dated graphics you can get the original Rainbow Six on gog.com, also the Rogue Spear series if you can find a copy. The first Ghost Recon also has old graphics but it's much slower paced, has a lot of mods and some good single player missions; that's all on steam right now. |
|
I'll have to agree with the sentiment that far too much emphasis is placed on multiplayer, and that all in all the multiplayer experience usually sucks.
Honestly, I really prefer high realism simulations over first person shooters. There's essentially always a good single player experience built in because the developers know the multiplayer crowd is probably going to be rather small. Multiplayer games tend to feature realistic tactics and behavior, cheaters aren't very common, and neither are children. Even when I do play first person shooter games, I prefer ones that include features like accurately modeled sights/optics instead of simple crosshairs, weapons that become horribly inaccurate when you try to fire from the hip or while running, and things like the ability to flip the selector switch over to semi instead of constant full auto. I used to play a few games a while back with a group of guys who liked to do cooperative multiplayer FPS games of 'humans vs. the AI'. When the objective is "don't get humiliated by getting your ass kicked by the computer" instead of "be an interwebz badass", things tend to be played a bit differently I guess. They would actually stack up on doors before opening, tossing in a grenade, and rushing in in correct order. Never saw anybody bunny hop. |
|
Quoted:
Wait a minute. BF 1942 actually had a great singleplayer campaign thing. It was simply every multiplayer map with bots instead of people. Worked well because the game was relatively simple at that point. It did, but I do not consider that to be single player it's just a skirmish mode, multiplayer, but with AI instead of people, though to be fair if I must play multiplayer, this is the way I prefer it. BF 2, they gave up figuring out a competent AI for it so it was purely multiplayer. BF 3 has a singleplayer campaign but I've never heard of anybody who's actually played it, haha. I've got 130 hours into BF 3 and only 4 minutes of them are singleplayer. But BF 3 multiplayer tends to attract a smarter player base. 85-95% of pub teams are still clueless fucktards who are too busy remembering how to breathe to actually figure out a viable strategy or communicate with their team. But 5-15% of players on decent servers will be competent and responsive. Switch to their team if you don't start out on it. Even if they're losing. And if the server doesn't let you switch, find one that does. Note that this advice ONLY counts for the PC experience. If you play on console, you're going to get a console kiddy experience. ETA: Awesome, long, singleplayer games in recent years have been Skyrim, Far Cry 3, Just Cause 2, and several others. You can very literally and very easily get lost in those games for tens of hours. Bioshock Infinite is much much shorter but not without merit. There are some other good singleplayer experiences floating around as well. Deus Ex Human Revolution is a fantastic game. Red Dead Redemption on consoles as well. All of these should also be pretty cheap by now, except for Bioshock. |
|
My personal pet peeve? My whole family plays VGs. I would love to find a great, sandbox, open world game ala Fallout3 or Skyrim/Oblivion that allowed our family to work together, but without the uncensored input of just complete strangers who can do whatever the fuck they want in our game.
We used to play a lot of BF2142 together, and had a blast...but the cheating got to be incredibly annoying. We loved playing Diablo III together...but I'm only good for that kind of stuff once. I prefer RPGs, as does the family. Bethesda--are you out there? Are you listening to me? Make Fallout4 a co-operative experience, without the bullshit "online multiplayer" crap! |
I hate how multiplayer is moving toward online only. What happened to sitting down with a few buddies (in the same room!  ) and playing split screen games? The best times in junior high-ish were when we would cram 2 TVs and 2 Xboxes into my friend's living room and play Halo with 8 players. 
|
|
Quoted:
I hate how multiplayer is moving toward online only. What happened to sitting down with a few buddies (in the same room! ) and playing split screen games? The best times in junior high-ish were when we would cram 2 TVs and 2 Xboxes into my friend's living room and play Halo with 8 players. Console deathmatch is responsible for the downfall of video games. Nobody to blame but yourself. ...actually that's not true....unless you played Goldeneye on N64. Then it's all your fault. |
|
Yep, parts of Borderlands 2 are damn near impossible without online mulitplayer. Actually, there's one part that is impossible without multiplayer, but it's not a mandatory boss.
Bugs me and it's the reason I don't buy many games these days. I like multiplayer ok but my main focus is on single player. I'm old school. |
|
Quoted:
Is anyone else fed up with the emphasis placed on multiplayer in video games now?, there are even some games that are multiplayer only (They also typically do not make that clear on the box). It used to be that they actually focused on making a GOOD game, and the multiplayer was just an extra, but now they make the games for the multiplayer, and if there is a single player at all it's poorly executed, and you can bear it in 5 hours. Is anyone else tired of this? I hate multiplayer, I tried it for awhile but after about 2 years I stopped. It was unplayable, the servers are over run with whiny 12 year olds, who can't play worth a damn, and do nothing but hog chat with trash talk, and complaining. It seemed like 90% of them were Dutch at times, and they were the worst, they did all of the above times 10, and when they weren't doing that they were America bashing non stop, half the time you heard/read nothing but German in chat, it got to the point where I would like to ban thier entire country from the internet. Other than the 12 year old Dutch kids, there were the general morons, the guys who would just randomly run around, team kill, get killed in the first 30 seconds, or fall off cliffs, all while hogging the best weapons/classes so people who were any good couldn't have them. Then there is the ever popular camper/idle player, they don't move, they just sit there, they usually hog weapons/classes, and never use them, they will block stairways, and hallways so you can't get passed because they are to busy sucking their boy friends dick to actually play the fucking game, them finaly everybody is killed in an elimination match, but the next round can't start until the timers up because some idiot is just standing there. The grenade spam is lovely to, you gotta love the idiots that just randomly throw/launch grenades everywhere on the off chance they will get lucky, and hit someone, these are usually the same idiots that get killed in 30 seconds, so what if they kill half there own team? Nothing like waiting 20 minutes for the next round to start (after the timer is forced to run out because of the campers) because "deder_fuckface_12" decided it would be a good idea to spam a grenade, and wipe out half his own team right before he bunny hops off a cliff 30 seconds after the round starts. You then get to hear him bash America for the next 20 minutes. Speaking of bunny hoppers, how real is that?, I want to take all bunny hoppers, and break their legs. Would it be that tricky to design a game where jumping is disabled in multiplayer?, or so you can't just keep doing it? You also must deal with the teams, these are the guys who actually know what they are doing, and work as a team, unfortunately they are always on the other side.Want to join a team yourself?, unless you know people in real life that is not going to happen unless you are willing to play on their schedule, by there stupid rules, and use only what they tell you to, even if the game allows you to use something better, oh, and odds are English will not be thier first language. Then there were the cheaters, it seemed every server had at least 1, or 2 cheaters on it, software designed to bust cheaters is a joke, there is always someone who can get a head shot with 1 shot every time through fog, and a wall while running, and bunny hopping from the other side of the map. Someone who won't be phased if you empty an entire magazine in to thier chest, or a rocket in to thier testy, or someone that will ghost a rocket through the floor. In all multiplayer sucked. Can we get some good single player games?, or at least a decent skirmish mode against the AI if you insist on emphasizing multiplayer? You need to drink a few beers, take a few bong hits, and then try playing. |
|
1) Welcome to 10 years ago.
2) It's not nadespam if you know the chokepoints on the map 3) Hopping isn't really an issue except maybe in Halo - corner-jumping, however, is hilarious as fuck. 4) Seriously, though, why U mad, bro? 5) There are plenty of gaming teams out there to join, but you'd better have 3 hours a night to play. |
|
How the fuck else do you use grenades other than throwing them and hoping to get someone (or multiple someones)? If you know the pattern of the enemy movement you can make reasonable assumptions as to where people are going to be and you throw a grenade for the possibility of some easy kills. I don't play anything online anymore but I played the fuck out of Socom II in the early-mid 2000 era and I played to win not for everyone to tell me "Good game good game, nice playing with you" at the end. I liked people to come into the lobby frothing at the mouth because I fragged them repeatedly and won in any legal way I could. This same bullshit was alive and well back then. The guy who got killed repeatedly by the same guy using the same gun would whine and bitch into the mic about how using that gun was cheating blah blah. The argument you use on teams telling you what you can and can't use within the game is the same bullshit you're applying to grenades. They're in the game and I'm going to use them to kill the fuck out of you. |
|
Quoted:
How the fuck else do you use grenades other than throwing them and hoping to get someone (or multiple someones)? If you know the pattern of the enemy movement you can make reasonable assumptions as to where people are going to be and you throw a grenade for the possibility of some easy kills. I don't play anything online anymore but I played the fuck out of Socom II in the early-mid 2000 era and I played to win not for everyone to tell me "Good game good game, nice playing with you" at the end. I liked people to come into the lobby frothing at the mouth because I fragged them repeatedly and won in any legal way I could. This same bullshit was alive and well back then. The guy who got killed repeatedly by the same guy using the same gun would whine and bitch into the mic about how using that gun was cheating blah blah. The argument you use on teams telling you what you can and can't use within the game is the same bullshit you're applying to grenades. They're in the game and I'm going to use them to kill the fuck out of you. So you threw grenades not actually knowing if an enemy was there, basicly just throwing blind as in grenade spam, is that the way you would do it in real life? It's stuff like that that spoils the game, you don't actualy get to play it right because someone is doing stuff like that, instead of playing the game the right way they are lazy, and just want the points. It's particularly annoying when that person is on your own team, and blows you up with their spammed grenade, so now you get to spend the rest of the match in spectator mode just so that lazy SOB can get a few more points. As far as teams go let me give you an example. I was playing the original Medal Of Homer game, and the only team online when I was that actually spoke English, and was recruiting insisted that I not only played the game at wierd hours, but that I use the Rifle which was the worst weapon in the game. Now bear in mind this game had no restrictions on what weapon you could select what so ever, everyone could even use the same thing, it did not matter, so there insistence on the rifle was completely arbitrary, that's what I was refering to. |
|
There is nothing better in BF3, than a row of people trying to stop me and I just keep hopping along til I stab them all. Stangely enough, this never happens to me anymore. Perhaps I learned how to defend against it.
Same as in real life. You employ tactics until the other side learns them, and then you change it all up again. |
| I don't mind multiplayer-only if it's a large enough scale that I can get lost in the crowd vs. dueling, like Planetside2 vs Halo and such. Most games I get for the storyline, to be entertained while being the main character. I put so many hours into Justcause 2 and Skyrim that its spooky |
|
Pick up the Bioshock series. The new Tomb Raider --- if your comp can support it --- is GTOY quality and one of the biggest surprises I've had in 30+ years of gaming. Farcry Crysis Deus Ex They still make great SP experiences. Just stop shopping the mass market MP titles. |
|
I think multiplayer has made some games standalone modes suffer, but that is what has evolved, and playing online is fun....if you're good at it.
I get pissed because there aren't more games with multiplayer CO-OP in storyline. I don't really care to play through a game with some total stranger, but I do enjoy playing through one with my friends when co-op works fantastic. Left 4 Dead was pretty awesome in that regard, and we spent a lot of hours killing zombies. There were a few other shooters that had a sweet co-op set up, but nothing fantastic. I have been out of the gaming loop for some time now though, hopefully I can jump back in when my kid gets a little older. |
|
Quoted:
I don't really care to play through a game with some total stranger, but I do enjoy playing through one with my friends when co-op works fantastic. Left 4 Dead was pretty awesome in that regard, and we spent a lot of hours killing zombies. That one was a huge hit with my family. Four computers set up in the same room, and we could yell to each other for assistance when neccessary. Good times! |
|
Quoted: Quoted: How the fuck else do you use grenades other than throwing them and hoping to get someone (or multiple someones)? If you know the pattern of the enemy movement you can make reasonable assumptions as to where people are going to be and you throw a grenade for the possibility of some easy kills. I don't play anything online anymore but I played the fuck out of Socom II in the early-mid 2000 era and I played to win not for everyone to tell me "Good game good game, nice playing with you" at the end. I liked people to come into the lobby frothing at the mouth because I fragged them repeatedly and won in any legal way I could. This same bullshit was alive and well back then. The guy who got killed repeatedly by the same guy using the same gun would whine and bitch into the mic about how using that gun was cheating blah blah. The argument you use on teams telling you what you can and can't use within the game is the same bullshit you're applying to grenades. They're in the game and I'm going to use them to kill the fuck out of you. So you threw grenades not actually knowing if an enemy was there, basicly just throwing blind as in grenade spam, is that the way you would do it in real life? It's stuff like that that spoils the game, you don't actualy get to play it right because someone is doing stuff like that, instead of playing the game the right way they are lazy, and just want the points. It's particularly annoying when that person is on your own team, and blows you up with their spammed grenade, so now you get to spend the rest of the match in spectator mode just so that lazy SOB can get a few more points. As far as teams go let me give you an example. I was playing the original Medal Of Homer game, and the only team online when I was that actually spoke English, and was recruiting insisted that I not only played the game at wierd hours, but that I use the Rifle which was the worst weapon in the game. Now bear in mind this game had no restrictions on what weapon you could select what so ever, everyone could even use the same thing, it did not matter, so there insistence on the rifle was completely arbitrary, that's what I was refering to. Yes, I was playing to win, if I have grenades and suspect you are coming through a certain area I'm going to try to time the explosion of my grenade to coincide with that moment that you think "oh fuck, a grenade". You're looking for civility, rules and "fair play" and forget that you are playing a game in which the objective is to kill everyone on the opposing team. If you were in the battle of Mogadishu, tied down and surrounded but knew (or could reasonably assume) that when they come in to put the finisher on you they are all going to bottleneck into an alley would you or would you not throw a grenade or many grenades into that alley? Team killing with grenades is a whole nother animal, when some asshole does that repeatedly he gets his ass handed to him then he gets ejected from the game and rightfully so. I never played with any teams that mandated a certain rifle but I was in clans who had rules against certain rifles, mainly because people are such bitches that they grasp for any excuse to explain you relentlessly killing them over and over (because they suck) with the same rifle. So when that rifle happens to be 1 of the 2 or 3 guns the online community deems "too lethal" everyone starts glitching and then the game becomes pointless and annoying. |
|
Quoted:
My personal pet peeve? My whole family plays VGs. I would love to find a great, sandbox, open world game ala Fallout3 or Skyrim/Oblivion that allowed our family to work together, but without the uncensored input of just complete strangers who can do whatever the fuck they want in our game. We used to play a lot of BF2142 together, and had a blast...but the cheating got to be incredibly annoying. We loved playing Diablo III together...but I'm only good for that kind of stuff once. I prefer RPGs, as does the family. Bethesda--are you out there? Are you listening to me? Make Fallout4 a co-operative experience, without the bullshit "online multiplayer" crap! Borderlands, and Borderlands 2 are what you seek. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
My personal pet peeve? My whole family plays VGs. I would love to find a great, sandbox, open world game ala Fallout3 or Skyrim/Oblivion that allowed our family to work together, but without the uncensored input of just complete strangers who can do whatever the fuck they want in our game. We used to play a lot of BF2142 together, and had a blast...but the cheating got to be incredibly annoying. We loved playing Diablo III together...but I'm only good for that kind of stuff once. I prefer RPGs, as does the family. Bethesda--are you out there? Are you listening to me? Make Fallout4 a co-operative experience, without the bullshit "online multiplayer" crap! Borderlands, and Borderlands 2 are what you seek. Borderlands was a freaking riot. Haven't had a chance to play 2 yet, but I heard it was a bit of a grind fest when looting for good gear. |
|
Quoted:
...is that the way you would do it in real life? Holy shit, are you serious? 
Quoted:
... and the only team online ... and was recruiting insisted that ... I use the Rifle which was the worst weapon in the game. OK, noobsauce, here's how you join a gaming clan. General rule: treat this endeavor like you're trying to find a date, which is essentially what you're doing. You want their goals, intensity, and personality to match yours, or at least be compatible. 1) Look in common ground areas - get involved with a message board or such, and play with the people on there. 2) Go to a few gaming events/convensionts/etc. and meet people there. 3) Always understand that you can start your own group - you just need a half dozen other friends. 4) Fuck rules - You should play with people because you enjoy playing with them. Try-outs, K/D floors, that kind of shit... that's for pseudo-serious teams that are trying to compete. If they don't compete, and they still do that shit, they're doing it only to fuck with you. 5) Have a common meeting ground that's outside of the game - a Facebook group, some shit like that. Talk together and build the relationship. Seriously, you'll have more fun and you'll play better together if you play with actual friends (whether or not you knew them before the game launched is irrelevant). Yeah, it's work. You're literally talking about finding and making new friends. Don't want to do that? Enjoy pounding around with trolls and dickwad stoners. Not really much of a choice, there. |
|
I was on a competitive clan for a number of years. It was fun, but it takes a lot of your time. I'd spend a couple hours a day in the practice servers, 5-8 more in clan game servers. Occasionally we'd roll into a pub server for a laugh. All the guys with clan tags would hook up on one side. Thirty to forty good players playing together versus a bunch of random pub players is a slaughterhouse. |
|
I'm a huge fan of the Fallout/Elder Scrolls/Mass Effect games. They are great for single-player fun. Quoted: Yep, parts of Borderlands 2 are damn near impossible without online mulitplayer. Actually, there's one part that is impossible without multiplayer, but it's not a mandatory boss. Bugs me and it's the reason I don't buy many games these days. I like multiplayer ok but my main focus is on single player. I'm old school. I played through BL2 single-player with no serious problems. The indestructible super bonus boss, I had to skip, of course, since he was level 50, and I was only about 38. I'll have to try him when I finish my second playthrough. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: My personal pet peeve? My whole family plays VGs. I would love to find a great, sandbox, open world game ala Fallout3 or Skyrim/Oblivion that allowed our family to work together, but without the uncensored input of just complete strangers who can do whatever the fuck they want in our game. We used to play a lot of BF2142 together, and had a blast...but the cheating got to be incredibly annoying. We loved playing Diablo III together...but I'm only good for that kind of stuff once. I prefer RPGs, as does the family. Bethesda--are you out there? Are you listening to me? Make Fallout4 a co-operative experience, without the bullshit "online multiplayer" crap! Borderlands, and Borderlands 2 are what you seek. Borderlands was a freaking riot. Haven't had a chance to play 2 yet, but I heard it was a bit of a grind fest when looting for good gear. 2 is far superior to 1. It fixes the stuff that was broken, and it doesn't screw with what worked. Better story, more interesting quests, better gun variety, good interface improvements, etc. I never really did any grinding. I just did quest after quest. I never felt the need to redo anything. |
|
BL2 is definitely superior to BL1. The writing alone of BL2 is some of the best I've ever seen in games.
As to nade spamming, COD treats nade spamming not as a tactic but as a tool for leveling out the playing field. Maps are EXTREMELY small and grenades are EXTREMELY destructive. It's just as easy for noobs as skilled players, and there are few defenses. Another poster in this thread made the same argument. Nade spamming is just one of many ways that the COD series makes the game accessible and casual. Since there's little opportunity for or benefit from strategy or tactics, players are just spawning and twitching. AND BEING REWARDED FOR IT. That's why the gaming experience in COD is so unrewarding. It's a sandbox. It's the rubber padded room of gaming. Serious players who want to win team-based games do not play COD. And COD players who try to transition to harder games end up crying because they can't just spawn and hold the fire button down and get points. In three more years, COD will be nothing but 64 players spawning in the same small room and calling in random airstrikes. They won't even have guns or movement keys. Just a spawn key and an airstrike key. It's multiplayer "Ow! My Balls!" |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
They need to come out with a new SWAT game, single player and multiplayer. Make it for the consoles too. The most recent one, sadly, is SWAT 4...And I don't think they're making a new one, the kids don't want to play those kinda games. I loved that game, you actually had to think, and use some tactics. If I had to design a multiplayer game this would be it: You do not play individually, each player gets a squad of 4 AI players that follow them around, and behave inteligently using real tactics, and hit targets of oportunity, and basically cover the players back, just like any real squad, or functioning team would. The player functions as not just a member of the squad but also as the squad leader, and can issue the squad commands, such as "stack up", "cover", "breach, and clear", "frag, and clear", "flash, and clear", "suppressing fire", "hold position", "take position", "spread out", etc. Basicly function as a real squad. This would allow everyone to have a functional team, even if everyone else on the server is a moron, and prevent some of the stupid, unrealistic, and annoying behaviors (start running around bunny hopping, randomly throwing grenades, and holding the trigger down like an idiot, prepare to get blown to bits). If a player is killed, instead of just respawning they will take control of the "next in command" of thier AI squad, if their entire squad is killed then they are out until the next round. Maybe even creat some more interesting game modes than elimination, death match, and capture the flag, but introduce some actual objectives. It would make multiplayer feel like single player, and would be a great COMPLIMENT to a good single player game, and that is what multiplayer should be a compliment to the single player, not the focus, it would preserve the same game experience online, or offline, it would be more of a co-op game, than multiplayer. That is a multiplayer I would play. That is a lot like SWAT 4. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They need to come out with a new SWAT game, single player and multiplayer. Make it for the consoles too. The most recent one, sadly, is SWAT 4...And I don't think they're making a new one, the kids don't want to play those kinda games. I loved that game, you actually had to think, and use some tactics. (Clipped for brevity) That is a lot like SWAT 4. I have to admit I modified the hell out of that game to put some new weapons in it, and still play it with a few friends now and then. Honestly it doesn't make a bad tactics teaching tool. Do something stupid and the AI will whack you. Get lost from your team, and the AI will whack you. It gets harder in multiplayer IMHO because you can't run around bunny hopping, the AI has you horribly outnumbered most of the time, and all of the 'bots' want to kill you. If I could do anything I'd find a way to hook it up to a gunnery simulator... 
|
|
Quoted:
So you get killed alot then? Nope, I was usually one of the top players on the server, I just got fed up with the stupidity, 12 year old Dutch kids, and the cheaters, they made the game unplayable. The worst was "America's Army" the amount of cheaters on there was out of control, I think MOST players were actually cheating at times. There were idle players, and campers galore, and team killing was rampant, and the overall stupidity was insane, it also had the highest percentage of America haters. I'll give the Army credit, they built a good game, and really tried for realism, but the execution sucked, their cheat blocking was non existant, the servers were laggy, they allowed class hogging, and the lack of a decent ranking/matching system insured that there were always idiots on every server. I also feel they should have restricted it to US players only. |
|
Quoted:
So you get killed alot then? I think he prefers games where players use real tactics rather than just run around hopping like a bunny and spraying accurate unaimed fire from the hip. SWAT 4 was one of those. Gameplay basically consists of moving in small teams, remembering to slice the pie, always stacking to the side before opening a door, being able to shoot accurately only in short bursts or semi-auto (Select fire weapons have functional selectors) and only when stopped or walking because you can't shoot accurately when running, and conserving the few grenades you have rather than running around tossing them one after another because you don't get to carry a baker's dozen. Oh, you also spend a lot of time thinking about how to not get shot, because quite often one or two hits will kill or cripple you. Back in the day they called them "tactical" first person shooters. Often times there's also ROE involved. Shooting your teammates or killing non combatants means "game over". Edited because I derped and quoted the wrong post. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you get killed alot then? I think he prefers games where players use real tactics rather than just run around hopping like a bunny and spraying accurate unaimed fire from the hip. SWAT 4 was one of those. Gameplay basically consists of moving in small teams, remembering to slice the pie, always stacking to the side before opening a door, being able to shoot accurately only in short bursts or semi-auto (Select fire weapons have functional selectors) and only when stopped or walking because you can't shoot accurately when running, and conserving the few grenades you have rather than running around tossing them one after another because you don't get to carry a baker's dozen. Oh, you also spend a lot of time thinking about how to not get shot, because quite often one or two hits will kill or cripple you. Back in the day they called them "tactical" first person shooters. Often times there's also ROE involved. Shooting your teammates or killing non combatants means "game over". Edited because I derped and quoted the wrong post. This. |