Is online important For games to have

PrinceLUDA21

PrinceLUDA21

New Member
Registered
Apr 18, 2006
1,143
0
0
38
Philly
Ok I been hearing a lot about you guys playing games on line. I play online to. So my questions is is it important for Games to have online play or not. Should everygame that gomes out have online or just the multiplayer ones. I dont need onlie play for any of my games even the ones tha are multiplayer.
 
I've struggled with this. Personally, I do not have internet at home. I'm on it all day here at work. I hate it when games pretty much require me to go online and play or to really enjoy it. The game should be able to stand alone, offline.
 
I couldn't agree more. Xbox has been pushing that for the longest and ppl are eating it up. I think the more ppl think online is the only way to go the more we see the downfall of good games or games that only become dependent on online. Like HALO. I want so much from the next one but if they think that I will settle for just the online aspect the are worng. And I think a lot of ppl can agree with me on that.
 
i think that online play should be a feature for most games outside MMOs witch the exsperancce cant be had without it. with that said if the online play is ment for replay value like say a shooter i belive it should be second on the agenda. i want the sengle player aspedt to be much more invoved and pollished then the online or multiplay aspect. i dont like it when a crew spend more time polishing there online play more then the game.
 
Well, I think that fighting games and FPSs, and anything that is squad-based NEEDS online multiplayer. Everything else...maybe needs it.
 
Well, I think it depends on the game. I think there's a place for online play, whether the game is exclusively online (WoW) or just sometimes online (Mario Kart DS).

However: gaming for me (and many others) is also a solitary pastime, and therefore, it is very important that there is an ample supply of single-player, offline games.

Having said that, I do wish I played more games with others. The trouble is I only have one gamer friend, and he's moving away. I have high hopes for the Revo on this. Right now, my fiancee is chiefly interested in old Sonic the Hedgehog games. I'm counting on Nintendo to bring out some games for the Revo that will bring her up to date, so to speak, and hook her.
 
The answer is a firm... DEPENDS.

Not to be evasive, but the entire way a game works is fundamentally influenced by whether or not a game is played online. If a game is "stand alone" and works without a net connection, then you can simply do things that would not be possible in an online environment. Take Morrowind, for example- you could mod the hell out of it, make yourself all-powerful, add weapons, graphics, sounds, dungeons, etc. etc. etc. etc. because it was ONLY YOU playing. if they ever tried putting out a "Morrowind Online", then everythig would have to be "balanced" so that the game is "fair" for everyone.

MMOs, as good as they are, suffer from a HUGE lack of expandable content- unless the developer makes it (and carefully, one might say even almost OBSESSIVELY "balances" everything) then it can't exist in-game. MMOs also get changed all the time, "nerfing" some character classes that are found to be unfairly powerful or that have an exploitabe feature. And let's not forget that the moment a Publisher stops paying their server bills, then you can no longer play, no matter how big a fan you are, so you had better hope that the game's popular.

I dream of the day that someone will publish an MMO with expandable, user-written content. I can imagine walking into a cave, and having a warning flash: "You are leaving the world you know for a user-made instance- please be aware that the rules as you know them as well as the ESRB rating of the content might go by the wayside. Do you want to proceed (Y/N)?". God knows *I'd* play it, seeing as how most of the best content I've ever experienced in a game like Morrowind or Neverwinter Nights was written BY fans FOR fans. I won't hold my breath, however...

A game that *I* thought worked equally well in Single-Player and Multiplayer was the Unreal Tournament series... Botmatch on a stand-alone PC was very challenging and multiplayer was equally fun, but you really never HAD TO do one or the other- it was totally up to you. User-made maps, total conversions and everything else was possible for both audiences, since the game used a client/server model that relied on the users' PCs to run game instances.
 
Last edited:
I think that a game should focus on either offline/single-player or online/multiplayer gameplay, UNLESS they have the resources, skill, and time to focus on both (IMO, the Halo series). Metroid Prime: Echoes did not need multiplayer, and the time and energy should have been directed towards the single-player design. Metroid Prime: Hunters probably had too much devoted to its online gameplay. Similarly, some games that started out as great online or multiplayer games probably shouldn't tack on a single-player campaign, though this seems to be more rare than the other scenario.
 
basilmunroe said:
I think I agree with Roach on this. In a lot of cases, I think I'd rather have extra single player play than online play in most of my games.
Click to expand...

Great point... adding in multiplayer DOES add huge development and budgetary overhead, and that's sometimes dollars that would have been better spent on more writers, single-player mappers and other creative content. :cookiemon
 
It is for me. I will not buy a non-online game, it get's boring after you beat it.
 
But still is it a need. I really dont see the need for every game to have it. Well maybe just Xbox games. But not everygame needs it. Budget or not. I dont think it is important to have. Yes it is a great add on but it should not be what drives the game. See to me the more ppl ask for online the more developers dont want to waste time on the Single player asspect. Burnout did well with a balance of both. Need for Speed did nothing. Call of Duty Sucked online and PDZ was ok.


The demand for more online is whats husts sales of greate single player games. And in a way it lessens the games i like to play. For the reason delopers feel as if they dont need to make anything else but online games. Simalir to how the market is being over run by FPS games. Not every other game that comes out need to be FPS or online There should be balance.
 
Well, development and game sales IS a business, so lots of developers will go where the money is. But it's not all about online play to all developers. Remedy (of Max Payne fame) is showing Alan Wake again at E3 this year, a title that's stubbornly, gloriously singleplayer/storyline focused... Bethesda just put out Obliviion, which I've heard called "The best game ever for the 360" as well as a simultaneous release on the PC... the point is there ARE developers that feel that single-player action and story over action is the golden medium for games- you just have to look a bit.
 
Well, PrinceLuda, there is no committee out there that regulates genre diversity or gameplay diversity, as if games were regulated by the government to provide the citizens with equal exposure to all types of gameplay. As long as market forces demand it, the need for integrated onling gaming and FPSs and the like will exist. The market forces change when a developer introduces something fresh or new and the masses take to it. Then there' s a shift. Of course there will always be the niche markets and developers to supply it. The answer becomes evident.
 
online only helps with the replay value which then makes a game worth buying cuz u find yourself playing it a lot more than a game not online. the games that aren't online i usually rent. plus the cost of games is getting ridiculous lol i dont have that kind of money to be tossing around for games. i do miss those good old school games that didnt need online play to consume hours of needy play.
 
Yea I look i hang out at a Gamestop and I used to work there. So i know the crap that i'm being forced feed and the stuff i like. Oblivian is god and you can lose your life in it. but i'm not big on the First Person Perspective stlyed games. I know you can switch from third to fisrt but the game dosen't feel right. Maybe it's just me. I more enjoy a Action game were i dont need both thumb sticks..........Ninja Gaiden style..............Alan Wake looks great an I'm gonna check it out. Dead Rising looks like a lot of fun. But after that nothing i'm look for. gears of War might be be good but i could care less. I have XBL and I only play Burnout online................So many rivals...........Sony is pushing online. nintendo may psuh it but i don't need it. I need hot games And most of the Online ones i've come across just flat out suck.
 
PrinceLUDA21 said:
Alan Wake looks great an I'm gonna check it out.
Click to expand...

We have an appointment for a closed-door sneak-peak at Alan Wake at E3 this year, so keep checking back in May for our E3 coverage and our E3 preview of the title.

I saw Alan Wake last year, and the things they're doing with the engine are BREATHTAKING. they didn't have anything much to show story- or character-wise last year, and Remedy is notoriously close-mouthed about letting details leak, but I have every confidence that the game will be chock-full of horror, humor, creepiness and deep characterization.
 
You see I knew i shoud've never quit GameStop I could've went for free DAMNIT. o well guess i'll just have to crash the party this time
 
Hehehe... You could have gotten in the show, but not into the Sneak Peak- it's by appointment for certain press only. You'll just have to come back later in May and read all abut it here.

Wait till you see our... um.... EXTENSIVE Booth Babe "un-Coverage" this year. It's a tough job, but some poor slob has to do it.

Who loves you, baby? That's right... MYGAMER does. Everything we do, we do for YOU. :cookiemon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom