Back in the day....

[Dolk]

This has been bottling up inside of me for quite sometime. For the past 2-3 years developers for video games have started to create a more interactive world with games. When I say "interactive" I do not neccessarly mean a large world for which players can interact with NPCs and experiance a world like never before. I'm talking about Multiplayer options.

In the past, games were soly dedicated to a single player. One on one interaction in the world you are traveling through. The original gamers would find a new game every few weeks; exploring one world after the other. Those were the days.

In the present, games have moved from single player to multiplayer. Whether they are campain mode or just capture the flag with a flame thrower. Now don't get me wrong, I love getting online and pwning some scrubs. Counter-Strike, and Team Fortress 2 are my favorite games to play online right now; and of course I play World of Warcraft only for the raids. But when it comes to campain modes, I don't want to be forced to play with another person when trying to fight off 4 different enemies at once. Red Alert 3 ruined my childhood memories, and the soon Command and Conqure 4 and Starcraft 2, will destory it even further. Why should I be forced to play with a partner? I like trying to do things on my own; and no, I don't want A.I. to help me either.

Right now, it is the trend to keep everything online so that you can "share the experiance". The only experiance I share is the frustration I have when people can't stop being scrubs. There are no more story lines for these future games. Its all about graphics and abilities that you can do inside the game. I want more games like Enchantasy. If you have never heard of that game, I suggest you figure a way to play it on your PC.

Back on topic; I want to see games with better story lines. Right now the only game I look forward to is Diablo III and Dragon Age Origins. Although, I don't know if I can buy from Blizzard again with what they plan on doing with Battle.net 2.

What you guys think? Do you like where games are headed, or do you want to see more offline contant with better story lines.

 

[X0d1@k]

I have to disagree here. One of the best games of last year was Single Player, Fallout 3. I understand what you mean about playing a game Solo, and i enjoy that as well. I think games coming out now will either do Solo or Multiplay very well, but not both. Oblivion before that, and Morrowind even before those 2.

Storylines, brother im all about that! I still fire up Fallout 1 & 2, also Baldurs Gate, System Shock 2 & Civ 3! The game MUST have storyline for me, regardless of the graphics, always has, and always will.

If i dont feel i am part of the game world im in, i dont enjoy it as well. Luckily most of the RPGs i play, are mod friendly. This allows a person to play an experience that NO ONE else will be able too. If you are talking immersion, and what you want from a game, games with huge Mod communities are great to enjoy.

Maybe im missing the point of your post, I never was into C&C, or Starcraft, but maybe you just need to try other genres of video gaming.

Good Luck!

 

[TommyHolly]

In the past, games were soly dedicated to a single player. One on one interaction in the world you are traveling through. The original gamers would find a new game every few weeks; exploring one world after the other. Those were the days.

The first games were all 2 player? The first video game that never made it to the public was a 2-player game called Space Wars, then came Pong (2P), then the Odessy 2000 (2P) then a ton of all those Atari 2-player games like Combat...

The best solo game I have played recently was Burnout Paradise for the PSIII and if you wanted you could play online against others but that didnt effect your solo game at all.

 

[mxthunder]

Im not opposed to games becoming more multi player and all that, I just dont want games to loose there sense of creativity and good story lines. Some games are just so well written IE oblivion, Heroes of might and magic 3, etc. Ill be happy as long as the graphics and physics continue to improve.

 

[Dolk]

@TommyHolly, I'm talking about my generation lols. Original Warcraft, Command and Conquar, Doom, etc.

I just feel there is a lack of story with current games. Don't get me wrong there are games that come out like Oblivion, Fallout3 and couple others that hit the mark. But it seems companies are moving more and more online rather than keeping content offline.

If you haven't heard, C&C4 will have up to 4 people helping out in campain mode. If you want to player single player you have to remain online.

Maybe I'm seeing only top layer, but this is just my personal opinion.

 

[SteveLord]

Anyone notice the tons of commercials you for free MMOs now? Holy moly.

 

[freeagent]

then the Odessy 2000 (2P)

if you can believe it, i have one in my basement right now, afaik it still works, tho the last time it was used was in 1988

 

[mage_x]

and the soon Command and Conqure 4 and Starcraft 2, will destory it even further. Why should I be forced to play with a partner?

You don't need to play with a partner in SC2 (or SC1). There is a rather lengthy single player campaign in both.

 

[shard]

You don't need to play with a partner in SC2 (or SC1). There is a rather lengthy single player campaign in both.

Yes, instead of the small amount of missions that were present in SC1 and SC BW, each race will have 30+ missions apiece in SC2

 

[Dolk]

I thought I read that it was going to have a multiplayer Campaign, could be some other game.

 

[Marshmallow64]

I agree that most games these days have the multi-player mindset in mind when created. But there are still a lot of good single player games such as RPGs. Starcraft 2 should have a single player campaign mode like in starcraft 1.

 

[Naked Mole Rat]

"we didn't have cars back when i was growing up. in those days, we walked 500 miles through the snow to get to school."

heheh sounds like you need to pick up a few books.

come on.. no one gets into games for the story. it's ALL about the graphics, THEN gameplay. story is 3rd or 4th on the list.

that's how we ALL got into games. GFX GFX GFX GFX!

BACK IN THA DAY....... they didn't HAVE stories for the Atari 2600 or Pac Man.

Come on man.

i'm sorry but you are in the minority. no one goes looking for a game with story being first on their mind.

and i'm not trying to dis you but there's really no other way to put it.

Ninja edit: hell, even when i played games that DID have decent story, it was STILL about the graphics and gameplay. Wasteland, Pools of Radiance. The story added to the game to give you a reason for playing it and a goal to want to finish it.

my 2 cents

 

[McTimson]

I disagree, Naked Mole Rat, graphics are definitely not the priority for me. Anything can look nice, but if all it does after playing it is look nice, then it's not a good game. Nice graphics help, but they're definitely not the priority. They get pushed as the priority by hardware manufacturers, because that's what they need to do, but I would think most video gamers go for gameplay quality, not graphics.

I find myself replaying older games all the time because they're fun, even when brand new games look great, sometimes they're just not fun.

And I agree, I prefer single player games for the most part. Multiplayer has its place, but single player is usually my preference.

 

[shard]

I disagree, Naked Mole Rat, graphics are definitely not the priority for me. Anything can look nice, but if all it does after playing it is look nice, then it's not a good game. Nice graphics help, but they're definitely not the priority. They get pushed as the priority by hardware manufacturers, because that's what they need to do, but I would think most video gamers go for gameplay quality, not graphics.

I find myself replaying older games all the time because they're fun, even when brand new games look great, sometimes they're just not fun.

And I agree, I prefer single player games for the most part. Multiplayer has its place, but single player is usually my preference.

I think more the point, more so that mole rat hit on it, is that yes, a good deal of us enjoy the story, and complexity. We are ultimately in the minority when it comes to these things. Just take a look at any of the top games on PC and 360, Call of Duty 4 and 5, Halo 3, this FPS, that FPS, etc, etc. The masses want these, games, and thus they are made. And the developers and publishers see the obvious business decision of making what the people are willing to pay for. A sad truth for people like us.

 

[Hardin]

Well that's why you should avoid the new C&C games. Without Westwood C&C is nothing anyway. But to get to the larger issue I love having a singleplayer campaign and then I'll usually play multiplayer after that. I like coop campaigns the new Mechwarrior game is supposedly going to have 4 player coop. I think it's a good idea. Most of the time your lancemates are bumbling idiots.

 

[BlitzPuppet]

come on.. no one gets into games for the story. it's ALL about the graphics, THEN gameplay. story is 3rd or 4th on the list.

that's how we ALL got into games. GFX GFX GFX GFX!

I would have to HEAVILY disagree with you..

Farcry 2....awesome graphics...**** story. I don't know many people who got into it that much.

People mostly get into games based on how fun they are....if it isn't fun people won't play it. If it is fun and has an awesome story (Original HL) you have a legacy in your hands.

 

[rainless]

This has been bottling up inside of me for quite sometime. For the past 2-3 years developers for video games have started to create a more interactive world with games. When I say "interactive" I do not neccessarly mean a large world for which players can interact with NPCs and experiance a world like never before. I'm talking about Multiplayer options.

In the past, games were soly dedicated to a single player. One on one interaction in the world you are traveling through. The original gamers would find a new game every few weeks; exploring one world after the other. Those were the days.

In the present, games have moved from single player to multiplayer. Whether they are campain mode or just capture the flag with a flame thrower. Now don't get me wrong, I love getting online and pwning some scrubs. Counter-Strike, and Team Fortress 2 are my favorite games to play online right now; and of course I play World of Warcraft only for the raids. But when it comes to campain modes, I don't want to be forced to play with another person when trying to fight off 4 different enemies at once. Red Alert 3 ruined my childhood memories, and the soon Command and Conqure 4 and Starcraft 2, will destory it even further. Why should I be forced to play with a partner? I like trying to do things on my own; and no, I don't want A.I. to help me either.

Right now, it is the trend to keep everything online so that you can "share the experiance". The only experiance I share is the frustration I have when people can't stop being scrubs. There are no more story lines for these future games. Its all about graphics and abilities that you can do inside the game. I want more games like Enchantasy. If you have never heard of that game, I suggest you figure a way to play it on your PC.

Back on topic; I want to see games with better story lines. Right now the only game I look forward to is Diablo III and Dragon Age Origins. Although, I don't know if I can buy from Blizzard again with what they plan on doing with Battle.net 2.

What you guys think? Do you like where games are headed, or do you want to see more offline contant with better story lines.

Well there's a solution to not playing with scrubs: Find some friends. (And if you have friends, and they are scrubs, find BETTER friends.)

First of all, no game that I am aware of, besides Team Fortress 2, FORCES you to play with other people (and I'm obviously not talking MMORPGs). All the games you mentioned (besides counterstrike and those kinds of games) can be played in single player.

In fact, I found Warcraft 3 to be much more rewarding in single player than it was in multi.

But there are more adults playing now, and it's not just you and billy from down the block. Billy is either married and across town or living in Argentina now. And a sure-fire way to get to the bargain bin is to release a game with no multiplayer (dark sector we hardly knew ye...)

Don't get me wrong... there's still a market for strong single-player games. (Look at Infamous, prototype, God of War, et al) but the future was three years ago and now we're living in the after-future.

 

[ratbuddy]

come on.. no one gets into games for the story. it's ALL about the graphics, THEN gameplay. story is 3rd or 4th on the list.

that's how we ALL got into games. GFX GFX GFX GFX!

BACK IN THA DAY....... they didn't HAVE stories for the Atari 2600 or Pac Man.

Many of us got our start on text games with no graphics at all. Back then you had to actually use your imagination. Some people like doing that.

 

[freeagent]

^^^

yeah man, i pretend all the time, it makes my life easier

 

[TommyHolly]

@TommyHolly, I'm talking about my generation lols. Original Warcraft, Command and Conquar, Doom, etc.

I'm only 34 but I feel reeeeeally old now. haha (Quick, someone go get me a hot 21 year old girl so I can catch up to the latest things going on!!) But yeah I know what you mean. I would seperate games into 2 catagories...before the intenet and after because the net is what changed everything.

if you can believe it, i have one in my basement right now, afaik it still works, tho the last time it was used was in 1988

That's funny! Do you have the cheapo cellophane green or orange screen that you are supposed to tape to your TV set to change the game board? I was lucky enough to get one of those when I was 4 years old because my Grandfather was an electronics whiz and bought 2 broken ones and was able to solder the circuit boards and repair it to make one working one. haha

"we didn't have cars back when i was growing up. in those days, we walked 500 miles through the snow to get to school."

heheh sounds like you need to pick up a few books.

come on.. no one gets into games for the story. it's ALL about the graphics, THEN gameplay. story is 3rd or 4th on the list.

that's how we ALL got into games. GFX GFX GFX GFX!

BACK IN THA DAY....... they didn't HAVE stories for the Atari 2600 or Pac Man.

Come on man.

i'm sorry but you are in the minority. no one goes looking for a game with story being first on their mind.
my 2 cents

Back in the day stories is all they had... Every video game for Atari 2600 came with some small story book and usually a comic book explaining what the terrible shapes on the screen were supposed to be. In the game Adventure! your character was literally a square but the book explained you were supposed to imagine him as a brave knight.

Nowadays, gameplay and story are all I care about. Graphics havent had that huge shift where anything looks spectacularly different from each other. The last time I remember graphics being so different that my reaction was WOW! was when the original Playstation came out. Since then there are only minor changes and tweaks every year.