• raptir@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why can’t we just have cool multiplayer modes in games instead of a separate game?

    • Moonguide@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly, I prefer this, as long as the single player option is unaffected by the multiplayer component’s performance, and the resources allotted to the SP game don’t suffer because of the MP.

      • ampersandrew@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Historically, some of the best multiplayer components attached to single player games were done with very few resources in a matter of weeks, like Halo and Goldeneye.

        • Moonguide@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          True, but that was before mtx became the name of the game. Nowadays when a game has a multiplayer component with no bells and whistles and just works, it’s an outlier.

          • ampersandrew@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            And now those games just get shut down with no recourse. Eventually, those companies will realize that they’re better off making a multiplayer game that doesn’t get 5 years worth of updates to chase after bazillions of dollars that never materialize.

        • BmeBenji@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Tack Call of Duty Zombies into that list too, but Moonguide has a point. CoD: BlOps 3 was the last really good zombies experience and that was just as they were starting to turn it into an MTx nightmare.

          • ampersandrew@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sure, and game development in general takes longer than it did 20 years ago, but allocating a proportional amount of resources is all you need. If it’s a hit, it’s a hit. If you want to patch it up a bit to fix some glaring flaws, go ahead. Expecting it to maintain tens of thousands of simultaneous players is going to end up with the dev putting lots of resources into something unlikely to be the next big thing.

    • aperson@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I liked how FEAR did it back in the day. The multiplayer was a separate game you could download for free and play. Then, if you liked the game, you could pay for the single player.

      • Callie@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I definitely don’t mind the multiplayer being separate. I typically buy games years after their shelf life and their multiplayer is usually dead, so having that MP component be a separate download would save me space for something I can’t even play