Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Do We Really Need Multiplayer?

multiplayer single player video games news

  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#41
Katphood

Katphood

    (11) Wizard

  • Members
  • 1668 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer


So you want to have "continued success", eh? Similar to...let's say, GTA V?!

Dear CDPR: please don't. :(
  • EbonyBetty likes this

#42
Belle Sorciere

Belle Sorciere

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 173 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

 

A lot of multiplayer only games today have very simplified and streamlined designs that can be understood and tweaked in spreadsheets. They also rely on various addictive techniques such as what some call "loot chests" which are essentially virtual slot machines. Those are problems that need not apply to a role play game.

If you mean like the pinatas in games such as Fortnite, this is almost strictly for free-2-play games that happen to be multiplayer. Either way, it's a horrible gambling systems that people sink money into to get a 0 return 90% of the time. It's worse than paying for cosmetic dlc's.

 

 

 

Ah, the halcyon days of last August. :(



#43
PathofStars

PathofStars

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 5 posts

OFC we need Multiplayer. Do you remember playing HOMM III in Hot Seat mode? Now you do not have to leave the house and you can play with your friends. After HoMM I do not know any other game that I could play in singleplayer. Thanks to multiplayer I can play RL and PoE, and this is my favorite game



#44
Gizmo

Gizmo

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 846 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

The only kind of multiplayer that I would want, is the clever use of another (network) player, by the server, to aid the NPC AI.

 

Imagine two or more players, playing their own instances of a game, where the server pits them against each other—unbeknownst to either.

 

Each person might be playing the hero & co, but the server presents each player to the other as the opposing army—(of goblins & wargs & trolls, and such); making allowances for unit special abilities.  In effect, adding a human component to the AI.  The first hero sees their opponents dividing and flanking—and reacts. The second hero (different game) is doing the divide & flank, and sees them react.

 

**Of course it should be tempered by a competent local AI that gambles on user advice—but not blindly; and preferably one that switches to some other player for hints, if the last one kept causing costly losses. :p


Edited by Gizmo, 19 November 2017 - 09:33 AM.


#45
Mamoulian War

Mamoulian War

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3132 posts
  • Location:Slovakia
  • PSN Portable ID:mamoulianfh
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

OFC we need Multiplayer. Do you remember playing HOMM III in Hot Seat mode? Now you do not have to leave the house and you can play with your friends. After HoMM I do not know any other game that I could play in singleplayer. Thanks to multiplayer I can play RL and PoE, and this is my favorite game

 

Well, the leaving house to meet your friends at their place was the biggest draw in of multiplayer. Taking Hot Seat and Local LAN multiplayer away from games, turned me into single player gamer, and coop tabletop player.



#46
213374U

213374U

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 5086 posts
  • Location:PIGS
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

So you want to have "continued success", eh? Similar to...let's say, GTA V?!

Dear CDPR: please don't. :(

 

Untitled.jpg

 

It's got to be the worst possible time to let it be known that they may be considering even a slight shift to the games-as-a-service approach.

 

The cheap shot at EA was too easy, though.



#47
Orogun01

Orogun01

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3588 posts
  • Location:somewhere over the rainbow

 

So you want to have "continued success", eh? Similar to...let's say, GTA V?!

Dear CDPR: please don't. :(

 

Untitled.jpg

 

It's got to be the worst possible time to let it be known that they may be considering even a slight shift to the games-as-a-service approach.

 

The cheap shot at EA was too easy, though.

 

Video that they were replying



#48
SonicMage117

SonicMage117

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1107 posts
  • Location:Texas, United States
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

A lot of multiplayer only games today have very simplified and streamlined designs that can be understood and tweaked in spreadsheets. They also rely on various addictive techniques such as what some call "loot chests" which are essentially virtual slot machines. Those are problems that need not apply to a role play game.

If you mean like the pinatas in games such as Fortnite, this is almost strictly for free-2-play games that happen to be multiplayer. Either way, it's a horrible gambling systems that people sink money into to get a 0 return 90% of the time. It's worse than paying for cosmetic dlc's.


Ah, the halcyon days of last August. :(
Lol Is it sad that I can't even remember writing that? :p
  • Belle Sorciere likes this





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: multiplayer, single player, video games, news

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users