Support NeoGAF

[Shadowstar39]

I use gaming as a fun time , and escape from life.
Its also a means to play D&D style games without other people, ala rpgs or scenario/time period games like the game Thief or Assassins Creed.

I used to play Quake 3 and UT back in the day with friends over at a buddies apartment. He had a Xeon server and 10 pcs lanned together.
We would smoke a J and zone out to Quake 3. Fun times, but that didn't last long as his wife cheated and divorced him. I played multiplayer online some since then.
Mostly Battlefield Vietnam, BF2, Battlefront on psp, Killzone2 and resistance 2 on ps3, warhawk on ps3, socom c on ps3, mag cod 4, mw2, bf4 on ps4.
Somewhere along the line those games stopped working for me. They introduced characters and spiky purple hair, mtx and all sorts of crap i didn't care for.
Cod ww2 and bf1 was a return to form and i played those for a bit, but then stopped.

Haven't really dug into mp since. I play couch co-op with gf like smash , diablo 3, wii-sports, etc...

Those are few in far between though. I would rather play single player or couch co-op then online mp.

I don't want mp mmos to invade single player.
I don't want seeing twitter or resetera jerk types in my games.

I love a good rpg going back to the gold box games and might and magic. I like strategy games like civ. I like going against a cpu.
I love that I can play so many single player games on switch, on the go.

My one friend is the opposite of me. He is a network admin and now all he plays is multiplayer. Especially mmos or survival games. He will find unofficial servers and make them.
I don't find this fun. As they get on and work together but i don't have time to play like they do. I get on and half the outpost is already made.
To me thats not fun. I want to build myself. I want to work for stuff. They run through wow levels to get to end level "where the real game begins" they say.
What about the first part of the game? Thats why i played everquest back in the day, not to rush to max level. I care about the journey not the destination in gaming.
I think our philosophies are different.

My favorite single player games are AC2 , Baldurs gate, Thief, Kotor, Morrowind, Gothic, Ultima Underworld, Might and magic 4 -6, Homm3, Civ4, city skylines, dark souls 1, nioh, re2, dq11, pool of radiance, ff5, ff6, ff8, Vagrant story, Vandal hearts 1/2, suikoden 1/2, ff tactics, all the castlvania games, Shiren wanderer, dungeon crawl stone soup, and tons of roguelikes.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

AI is less of a deciding factor in the types of games I play, there are times when sophisticated AI pays off, just as there are ones where simple AI is best.

So if there are times when simple AI pays off, and there are times when advanced AI pays off, do you cede there could be times when human behavior pays off?

Clever, complex level design is my jam, which is something developers tend to avoid in the modern era, even more so when developing online games.

"Speed is my jam and my horse runs like the wind. I hear these modern automobiles only go 7 mph." - Someone in 1888

Car manufacturers: "Let's get to work."
Game developers: "Let's get to work."

The thing I keep going back to are Bobby Kotick types looking at those two pictures in the OP and saying "What if we did a Fortnite but it was bigger and made more money?"

How does one make a bigger Fortnite? You start by removing the roadblocks found in the OP.

 

[JeffG]

Missing an option for Old Fartism

a) Eyes are not as good anymore
b) reactions are slower
c) give a shit feeling doesn't exist

I do like PvE with a group of friends (for example Halo Warzone)

 

[RexAnglo]

I prefer single player games because they usually have a story, I tend to enjoy story driven experiences.

 

[MetalRain]

I wouldn't mind multiplayer, but being singleplayer allows game to be more complex and varied, there is no need to wait for other players and there is no limits how "unfair" game can be or how I can customize my experience.

Multiplayer games tend to be very structured so that every player has similar options. There are some more asymmetric games like Space Station 13 which are quite interesting, but then other aspects like time usage and waiting are more pronounced.

 

[Bragr]

Clever, complex level design is my jam, which is something developers tend to avoid in the modern era

What? games in the past were made by 3 guys out of college, even a kid could make good 2D levels.

 

[TLZ]

I'm far more interested in a good story and exploration when I play. I'm also a very anti-social gamer; I play games to get away from people. When I want to socialize with friends, I do it in real life.

I'd also like to add, I like taking my sweet time in games. I don't like being rushed.

 

[Shadowstar39]

To have fun? What a completely bizarre statement. So playing a single player game is not wasting time but a multi-player is?

To this day I play UT 99, UT 2004, Quake 3. Sometimes online, sometimes single player with the bots. Loads and loads of fun that is not provided in any other game.

I also love playing single player games too. Yes, for the story, but also because of the fun factor. Because that is the ultimate deciding factor for me to continue to keep playing. If it is not enjoyable to play, no matter how good the story is, it's not worth playing.

Wait ut99, ut2004 , and quake 3 still have players?

Those I would love to jump back into for nostalgia, but never bothered due to trying ut2004 a few years back and it being empty. Ghost town.

 

[elcapitano]

In general I way prefer single player games. They have a more longer lasting impact on me and somehow it feels like a more worthwhile use of time.

But every know and again I love multiplayer games

Rocket league might be my most played game of all time. I have out ungodly hours into that. Finally stopped playin in the last year but that's more down to the fact I didn't have the time to stay as good as I used to be.


Also playing PUBG with my friends was some of the best times I've ever had in gaming.

Multiplayer often feels more generic but when they get it right it's magic.

Though the same can be said for single player. Very few are actually brilliant or anything. Ghost for me was only quite good at best. Nothing to worry home about.

It's only your Red Dead, God of War, TLOU 1&2, Bloodborne and obviously a few others that I consider amazing.

Most fall below that category for me

 

[Neff]

do you cede there could be times when human behavior pays off?

Yes, in fighting games, like I said.

What? games in the past were made by 3 guys out of college, even a kid could make good 2D levels.

And yet, there are countless examples of bland level design in modern 2D games.

 

[ResurrectedContrarian]

I love moving at my own pace in a simulated world. I might walk slowly to admire the visuals, mess around with some crazy physics idea for a while (eg. trying to perfectly launch a tree in BOTW), or try to deliberately approach a situation in an unusual way without any regard to proving something competitively.

I love the idea of stepping into another pocket universe in the game. The last thing I want to see there is real people who only remind me of the real world because I know it's some random jerk sitting in his own living room.

Multiplayer is repetitive as hell. It's like RPG grinding, but where the NPCs are even more annoying than any AI could create. Why would that be enjoyable?

Online-first games have also led to the worst degradation of the medium. Everything is a service, with pointless "seasons" and events, constant patches, and constant annoyance.

Multiplayer is sometimes nice locally, with people in the same room. Otherwise, screw it.

 

[Bragr]

And yet, there are countless examples of bland level design in modern 2D games.

?

Point is, games have gotten more complex, not less.

 

[Neff]

?

Point is, games have gotten more complex, not less.

I'm not talking about games in general, nor is this point relevant.

But for what it's worth, modern level design has simply gotten bigger, not necessarily more complex.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I love moving at my own pace in a simulated world.

This is far and away the most frequent comment found in this thread. This phrase pops up at least a dozen times by different members.

I, a multiplayer centric gamer, value this aspect in my games as well.

Ghost Recon, Hitman, MGSV are some of my favorite single player games because I can take my time, observe the simulation, and make choices without being rushed. (Actually, I find these games diminish once stealth is broken and they turn into action games).

Old multiplayer games (analogous to sports) like League of Legends, traditional Call of Duty, Rocket League...all punish the player for taking their time. You need to produce in order to compete.

New multiplayer (analogous to The Heroes Journey) caters to this playstyle exponentially better. I can sit in a tree in Fortnite for 5 minutes straight, wait for a headshot, and get game ending loot...all due to patience.

Fortnite, which might suck to you, lucked into this playstyle. Designers are going to appeal to gamers like us more and more in these types of games.

 

[Danjin44]

I can sit in a tree in Fortnite for 5 minutes straight, wait for a headshot, and get game ending loot...all due to patience.

??? I dont think thats what people meant when they say they want to take their time in game world.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

??? I dont think thats what people meant when they say they want to take their time in game world.

Not for everyone, but it's certainly an example of taking one's time.

It's really the push for productivity vs giving the players option of choice + pace.