Yes, especially if it doesn't have online multiplayer.
Yes, especially if it doesn't have online multiplayer.
ALL HAIL THE 1 2 P
Originally Posted by THE 1 2 P
Fixed.
Yeah because Call of Duty games would sell so much more if they didn't include online multiplayer or co-op multiplyer
ALL HAIL THE 1 2 P
No. j_factor was correct. The topic is is about video games losing their appeal over time. What happens in 20 years when these games are no longer playable on XBOX Live or PSN? You can't play with 16 people over at your home, the most you'll have is four people for the 360 or six people for the PS3. So they'll eventually lose their appeal. The PC version will still be playable with player ran servers.Yeah because Call of Duty games would sell so much more if they didn't include online multiplayer or co-op multiplyer
Everything in the above post is opinion unless stated otherwise.
Haven't you ever heard of lan parties? Anyway, I'm referring to games of the last and current gen in this internet multiplayer age. Old school games can lose their appeal much faster without any reply value such as online multiplayer(even though they never had it in the first place).
For me personally I am much more likely to keep playing games with some sort of multiplayer component over and over again. But if you are talking strictly old school pre-online multiplayer games then my philosophy is alittle different. I can still play those games but they lose their appeal much faster because once you complete them theres not much left to do unless they happen to have a few easter eggs. And the ones that did have multiplayer(like Contra) can still be quite fun to play.
ALL HAIL THE 1 2 P
I'm sorry, but I have to agree with J_Factor here. It seems that games designed specifically for multiplayer gameplay, whether it be on PC or console, simply lose their appeal over time. If they didn't, the fanbase wouldn't die out over time and people wouldn't stop playing them, and sequels wouldn't have to be made.
The problem is that regardless of how many mods people make for the games, or how many fan improvements there are, it all boils down to how long it takes to be playing the same gametypes before the game gets boring. I used to be a big fan of Star Wars Jedi Knight III: Jedi Academy, used to stay up on school nights from 12 to about 2-3 AM playing, and whatever I would play in the daytime. Then one day I just stopped playing it and just didn't go back, the game just lost it's appeal. A new coat of paint is needed every so often so they don't get stale. The problem is, they make each game so similar to the last one in series like this BECAUSE of the online multiplayer to keep the fanbase, that they become stale even if sequels are made. Just look at Call of Duty. That series hasn't been good since the first one came out IMO. There's nothing particularly unique about any of the sequels, nor is there anything particularly fun.
Online multiplayer does nothing for games except give a different kind of social experience with video games. Sure it's nice to be able to play games with your friends without leaving the house, but it only serves to make video games uncreative, boring, and bland. A new sequel simply becomes a means to get the consumer for another $50 for minimal changes. There's no creativity anymore, no reason to make a sequel to a video game that goes in a different direction.
Online multiplayer in video games has and will continue to age horribly. And it still doesn't have shit on the experience of a few friends together in a house playing multiple games. More social, more fun, more exciting. I'll play Blades of Steel 2-player any day over most of the nonsense on XBL or PSN.
Last edited by Baloo; 05-04-2011 at 05:13 AM.
Online play is so New Flavor.
Some Online New Flavor trend breakers (held appeal):
Diablo 1/2
Starcraft/BW
PSO
Any others?
Last edited by Icarus Moonsight; 05-04-2011 at 07:54 AM.
This signature is dedicated to all those
cyberpunks who fight against injustice
and corruption every day of their lives
I don't know
i had a 20 y/o chick with me at Fun Spot this past weekend
I watched her play MK1 and played Mk2 against her.. and then watched her play Pacman.
she looked like she was having a blast to me
So i say they have their appeal.
A game is gonna be fun regardless. If its a year old or 30 years old its gonna remain fun. Its not like dynamics of it have changed ever
The kids that don't get it these days are the ones who IMHO are not true gamers.. All they care about graphics and online play and not the actual fun aspect of a game.
It could be a garbage game but as long as its got good graphics and i can kill my best friend in a online match. then its gonna be amazing.
basically putting it Facebook in FPS format. You can chat with your friends while killing them..
One of the reasons why some people like WOW so much
Last edited by Collector_Gaming; 05-04-2011 at 09:50 AM.
I could get into some online PSO gameplay had I the means.
I don't think they do on an objective basis.
But I do find my standards change.
As a kid, I really loved Battletoads. Nowadays though, I can't get past how absolutely B.S. that game is at points and just can't play it anymore. On the other hand, six years ago I would not have even touched Metal Gear Solid because I thought stealth games were "stupid," but now MGS is practically the only game I play.
It's all personal, when you get down to it.
It depends on the game. I'm writing a book about retrogaming and I've been reviewing a bunch of old games that I never played before because my experience back in the day was pretty limited (living in the middle of nowhere + not getting many games growing up = tons of stuff missed). Sonic Spinball is a ton of fun if you enjoy pinball games (I do), but I hated Mega Man 1 because even with infinite lives and infinite health, the game is so hard it's unplayable. No joke, I tried for a solid hour to get past the first part of level 2 and couldn't do it. Mega Man 2's difficulty is a bit more forgiving and I enjoyed it a lot more.
Theres nothing wrong with you agreeing with J_Factor but for me multiplayer games get played much more then single player games. Star Wars: Knights of The Old Republic was an amazing game that I enjoyed all 42 hours that it took me to play thru it. But once I was finished, despite my fond memories of it I never picked it up again. On the flip side, I bought Halo 2 at the midnight launch back in 2004. And I played it up until the day they ended the original Xbox's online servers last year in 2010. Thats 6 straight years of playing the same game due to online multiplayer. Had it only been single player I probably wouldn't have played it since 2005.
Of course different games are made with different experiences in mind. And while I was specifically talking about online multiplayer from this and last gen, theres still some old school games I can pick up and go back to(like Nes Tetris). But today, because I have over 600 games I'm much more likely to play something with online multiplayer(where human players behave differently then simple AI ones) over an extended period of time then I am to play a single player game after I initially beat it. It doesn't mean I'll never go back to any single player games but they lose their appeal to me not very long after I beat them.
ALL HAIL THE 1 2 P
Why thank you!
But it's still lost its appeal now, hasn't it? In any case, most games with online multiplayer aren't Halo. Almost every other original Xbox game with online multiplayer was a wasteland online long before they pulled the servers. I bet you didn't try to play Whacked! in 2007.but for me multiplayer games get played much more then single player games. Star Wars: Knights of The Old Republic was an amazing game that I enjoyed all 42 hours that it took me to play thru it. But once I was finished, despite my fond memories of it I never picked it up again. On the flip side, I bought Halo 2 at the midnight launch back in 2004. And I played it up until the day they ended the original Xbox's online servers last year in 2010. Thats 6 straight years of playing the same game due to online multiplayer. Had it only been single player I probably wouldn't have played it since 2005.
But you don't go back to old school games with online multiplayer. You'll play NES Tetris, but you won't play The Next Tetris: Online Edition (or you will, but not for the online part). You may play games with online multiplayer more nowadays, but the topic isn't about whether games lose their appeal over time played, it's whether games lose their appeal over the years. And online multiplayer tends to disappear with time, either by servers going offline, or a simple lack of players.Of course different games are made with different experiences in mind. And while I was specifically talking about online multiplayer from this and last gen, theres still some old school games I can pick up and go back to(like Nes Tetris). But today, because I have over 600 games I'm much more likely to play something with online multiplayer(where human players behave differently then simple AI ones) over an extended period of time then I am to play a single player game after I initially beat it. It doesn't mean I'll never go back to any single player games but they lose their appeal to me not very long after I beat them.
OK, I see what you're saying, getting more value for your buck. But let's be honest here, which game did you really enjoy more? I'd rather play a game once that I enjoyed every second of, than an online game that I played for months or years and not getting that same sense of satisfaction, only playing because SOMETIMES it was fun or some modes were fun or my friends were playing it too. For me multiplayer is definitely not making or breaking the game as to how good it is. There has NEVER been a game that I've played online that I've always had fun playing while playing it. There's always fucked up teams, a screwed up connection, a boring gametype, glitches, something to screw up that session or match of the game. There always is. It's not consistent. And once the servers are gone for these games, half of them you literally CANT go back to. The single player is so barebones that it's not worth playing, and the online aspect is gone.
Exactly. I'm going to still find myself coming back to the games I enjoyed immensely and played through once or twice in the past but after I get burned out on the multiplayer or the servers go down, or even most of the fanbase moves onto something else, the game has lost all its appeal. Do you find yourself using your Saturn Netlink, or X-Band these days?
Multiplayer for me definitely doesn't make a game better or worse, just simply gives you more things to do with it. The actual gameplay itself is what really matters, and that's what games are lacking today. Call of Duty, Halo, Gears of War, these games may be fun now, but in all honesty. Are you really going to go back and play the Single player modes of these games? Is this something you'll look at 20 years from now and recommend to all of your friends to go buy if they have this system, will they become instant classics?
No.
Last edited by Baloo; 05-04-2011 at 08:33 PM.
Yeah.....six years later. I can't complain about getting 6 years worth of solid gameplay from an online capable game that had a very strong active community for four straight years and continued to keep a dedicated community of online gamers for it's last two years.
I just reread the first post. If we're talking about strictly old school pre-online multiplayer games then my answer is still the same. I have a long list of games I loved to play back in the day and may pick up once every few years but in general I don't feel as compelled to go back and replay 8 bit or 16 bit era(for example) games as I was back then. So yes they have lost some of their appeal to me.You may play games with online multiplayer more nowadays, but the topic isn't about whether games lose their appeal over time played, it's whether games lose their appeal over the years.
They were two different experiences that I enjoyed for different reasons. But like I already said, I'm much more likely to go back to an online multiplayer game than a purely single player one.
And thats your perogative but I'm on the other side of the spectrum. Don't get me wrong, I still love my single player games like Alan Wake and Batman: Arkham Asylum. And luckily the advent of achievements have given me even more reasons to go back to them. But once I have beaten the game and found all of the achievements I pretty much move on to the next game.I'd rather play a game once that I enjoyed every second of, than an online game that I played for months or years and not getting that same sense of satisfaction, only playing because SOMETIMES it was fun or some modes were fun or my friends were playing it too.
If you are talking about that in relation to the single player portion of multiplayer games then I agree. I view them seperate but I also look at them as two halves to a whole. So I may love the single player in a game like F.E.A.R.(which I did) but find that the multiplayer portion was lackluster. I'll still tell people I thought it was a good game but lacked compelling multiplayer. Or it could be the reverse.For me multiplayer is definitely not making or breaking the game as to how good it is.
But to conclude this, I do feel that old school games can lose their appeal over time. This doesn't mean that I now think they are all bad(I still like sporatically going back to Nes games among others). However, games from systems before the Nes have virtually no appeal to me. My first two consoles were the Atari 2600 and 7800 and today I can't play anything on those systems without great distain. They have lost any kind of appeal they once held over me as a child.
ALL HAIL THE 1 2 P
I think the point here is that you are discussing what is probably the most popular game on the Xbox, maybe even more popular than any single game on the Xbox 360. Of course there were plenty of players. Of course you got a lot of value for your money. Online games need a critical mass of players to stay active, otherwise they fade away.
I played EverQuest for four years and it was well worth the money and time, but there were dozens of other MMORPGs that fizzled after a few months. Dark Age of Camelot was fun at first, but three months later it was left behind for the next new game.
I think the current multiplayer games have such a short life due to so many sequels and so much competition. I can't help but picture that image showing "the state of the video game industry" where it shows three almost identical screenshots from three different developers of three different games. Are people still going back to play Call of Duty Modern Warfare 1? Hell, are they still playing Modern Warfare 2?
This is the Classic Games board.
Six years isn't even classic yet.Here's the place to go to talk about all things "classic". Today, classic means "before PlayStation 2"
That's kind of beside the point. My point is, a large part of that game's appeal was the online multiplayer, and that is now gone. Other games from that time that didn't rely on online multiplayer still have the same appeal that they did back then (for the most part). Therefore, online multiplayer is detrimental to a game retaining its appeal.I can't complain about getting 6 years worth of solid gameplay from an online capable game that had a very strong active community for four straight years and continued to keep a dedicated community of online gamers for it's last two years.
You're only playing relatively new games, then. These are games that will lose their appeal over time. They're just not that old yet.They were two different experiences that I enjoyed for different reasons. But like I already said, I'm much more likely to go back to an online multiplayer game than a purely single player one.
Of course games can lose their appeal, either on a personal level (as some have mentioned-the whole single player/online multiplayer debate, not being able to play anything older than say NES, etc.) or on a broader scale (the whole "music" game genre like Guitar Hero and such, SCHMUPs seemingly becoming so niche, platformers are few and far between, etc.). There will always be some titles or concepts that resonate with gamers young and old and will always be the quintessential "classic" like a Pac-Man, Super Mario Bros, Tetris, etc.
That doesn't really matter, it was relevant to the point I was making about the game I was discussing before we decided to talk strictly old school gaming.
Yes it's gone but I've also played thru the single player campaign multiple times so it's not like the game is unplayable without the online play in the way that certain versions of Phantasy Star Online are.My point is, a large part of that game's appeal was the online multiplayer, and that is now gone.
There you go trying to assume your opinion is fact. Thats simply not the case in an opinionated thread(where the OP is asking each respondant their opinion) like this. Now that Halo 2's multiplayer is no longer live I compare it's single player campaign to that of the single player games back then that had no online component. And from there it's decided rather they have lost their appeal based on rather I still play them or not, not based on if they lost a portion of their gameplay.Other games from that time that didn't rely on online multiplayer still have the same appeal that they did back then (for the most part). Therefore, online multiplayer is detrimental to a game retaining its appeal.
Unless you can forsee the future(and you can't) you have no idea what games will lose their appeal to me. I do play a majority of games from this gen but ever since we decided to narrow this discussion down to old school games(pre 6th generation I guess) I've already stated my opinion on how many of those games have already lost their appeal to me to the point where I'd rather play something more current.You're only playing relatively new games, then. These are games that will lose their appeal over time. They're just not that old yet.
I'm really not sure why you are still going on about this. You aren't going to get a "you're right" because you aren't right in relation to how I feel about games that lose their appeal, rather thats games from the last six years or the last 25 years.
ALL HAIL THE 1 2 P
He didn't just solicit for opinion (belief with or without backing). The OP left it open to rational discussion as well. OP is also banned... Hope they don't mind.
This signature is dedicated to all those
cyberpunks who fight against injustice
and corruption every day of their lives
Posting Permissions
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Similar agreements apply to other advertising or affiliate programs such as those from eBay, Google, etc.
Copyright © 1991 - Present of Digital Press. All rights reserved.
Reply With Quote
