Forums - Gaming Discussion - Always Online Gaming is the bane of my Existence

Does Always Online Requirements bother you?

Yes, It does. 32 72.73%
 
Not bothered by it. 12 27.27%
 
Total:44

Like Seriously. Can this just stop?

Every big title wants to force online play upon you. Even when interacting with others isn't even necessary. I haven't played it yet but from what I hear from friends Anthem is a game that can definitely be enjoyed Solo.....yet it must maintain a connection to play.

My internet is highly un reliable in my area. No matter how fast the speeds are it still occasionally goes out in the late hours. I have also had to go long stints with no internet access in my home. With the way games are trending, gaming will be inaccessible if not tethered. I really hate this trend.

I was transitioning between places and had the internet cut off. I prepared for that moment by downloading any games  I might want to play, storing up for the tech winter. Come to find.... half of my games were not playable. Why? Because the "Primary Account" option had somehow been switched off on my system during one of the updates. Still, I keep a lengthy library of games on disc. I pop out my Dragon Age Inquisition and put it in only to find I do not have access to my save files because they were loaded with DLC.

W.....T.....F?!

Traditional game series I have always enjoyed playing untethered like Fallout have also gone into the persistent connection required train. Fallout 76 in particular. How is it that No Man's Sky which has an almost identical online room setup can be played offline but Fallout 76 can't?This is a core reason of why I have shy'd away from most big 3rd party titles.

Destiny, Anthem, Division, For Honor, Gran Turismo Sport, Star War Battlefront, The Crew, Need for Speed,. I swear this power play has outright ruined some genres like racing.

Its not even like I am not usually connected, I just resent the notion of being forcefully joined at the hip when the product doesn't/shouldn't necessarily require it to function. Grand Theft Auto V does it just fine having a thriving microtransaction rich game, but held separately from it's singleplayer content. Souls/Bloodborne series have had a thriving multiplayer community without requiring being connected. Monster Hunter World is the same way.

They say most people today prefer online play(prob true) but then why does it feel so heavy handed the efforts these devs take to keep me connected? I am definitely not the only one who has faced this issue. I have to explain to consumers daily about what that little box means on the front of the game cover. Many turn their nose up at it as well. Many older gamers have the same mindset as me, and crave singleplayer experiences that don't require connection to enjoy.

The gaming base seemingly was very against this at the start of the Gen, all that backlash towards MS. Yet we have completely duped by the fact the developers are doing the same thing from their side. Nothing really changed in that plan. I would point out that still to this day an Xbox One is inoperable without connecting to the internet the first time for updates. I have seen many people turn it down on this notion alone. Why are we not raging about Devs forcing this?



      

      

      

Greatness Awaits

PSN:Forevercloud (looking for Soul Sacrifice Partners!!!)

Around the Network

It's especially bad with 20-year-old games like Final Fantasy VII and VIII on PC. Always-online is probably the only reason I haven't bought FFVIII on PC yet (and might never do).



It doesn't bother me at all .



Zkuq said:
It's especially bad with 20-year-old games like Final Fantasy VII and VIII on PC. Always-online is probably the only reason I haven't bought FFVIII on PC yet (and might never do).

Of course you can play Final Fantasy VII and VIII offline on PC.

Either in Steam offline mode (download version) or the retail version on CD-ROMs.



I would've been bothered by it 10 years ago, but now? I'm indifferent to it.



Around the Network
Conina said:
Zkuq said:
It's especially bad with 20-year-old games like Final Fantasy VII and VIII on PC. Always-online is probably the only reason I haven't bought FFVIII on PC yet (and might never do).

Of course you can play Final Fantasy VII and VIII offline on PC.

Either in Steam offline mode (download version) or the retail version on CD-ROMs.

Hmm, I looked it up a bit more and turns out you're... sort of right. Sounds like you need to disable cloud saving, after which you can play offline after you've played played it online once... and maybe registered a Square Enix account? So it's basically an online activation plus some extra hassle if you want to play offline after the activation. Steam Cloud ought to be good enough for the game, and as far as I know, it doesn't require you to be online always when you play, so this game probably shouldn't either. Anyway, that makes it a bit better, but it still sounds pretty bad so I think I'll pass for now.

That's a good one about the original PC release! Well, it looks like availability is actually pretty good and prices aren't too bad either, but I shouldn't have to buy a 20-year old retail release that probably requires some tweaking in 2019 if I want to play a game.



yes, I hate it nba2k has this bs always online tied to your vc on my player. I had to make an offline profile because of a stupid error I was consistently getting that prevented me from connecting my game online.



I despise always-online. I refuse to invest in any game that is completely dependent on having an online connection. It requires more than just a game, system, and the electricity to power them. It also necessitates that the triad of your connection, the game's servers, and the online service you're using to all be up and running, and if any one of those three go down for any reason, the game is absolutely useless to you. And eventually the game's servers will be shut down for good, rendering your game a $60 coaster (or a waste of HDD space if you purchased it digitally).

What's especially annoying is that many games that force always-online could have easily been tweaked to where they'd be able to be played offline perfectly fine. For example, Bungie could have easily tweaked Destiny to be playable offline, as most missions are playable solo. Likewise, I don't see anything that could have prevented Ubisoft from making The Crew playable as an offline single-player title (Forza Horizon does the open world racer just fine without online).

It seems to me that always-online games are designed specifically to hook players into a social gaming experience, one that they'll sink more hours into than they would for other types of games, one where the player is making some kind of recurring payment to the publisher (subscription fees in MMOs, and now microtransactions/F2P systems in "live service" games). AAA publishers increasingly want to make fewer games, games that get the player hooked and then milk them for as much money as possible.

Honestly, a lot of the bullshit we've seen out of the AAA publishers over the past two generations is due to the advent of online connectivity. And it's that bullshit that sometimes makes me wish the internet as a popular communication/distribution tool should have never existed. I can't say online is all bad, and it has done some good things. Playing with others online is far more convenient than getting a LAN session together, plus you have a larger pool of players, and the ability to patch a game after launch, while it may also encourage devs & publishers to be complacent and develop a "Just ship it even if it's broken since we can fix it later" mentality, can keep a game that's broken at launch from being broken forever.

But far too often it's done some things that are absolutely horrible for gamers. Even something seemingly innocuous and super-popular can have far-reaching impacts on an industry that's all to eager to chase trends and centralize control over the product. For example, PUBG and especially Fortnite has convinced publishers that battle royale games should be their primary goal. A popular online-only, multiplayer-only game where they can hawk microtransactions. But there can only be so many of those kind of games that can be successful. Resources that could have funded quality single-player experiences are instead funneled into making the next Fortnite or the next Destiny or whatever. Single-player games that are playable offline are still popular, but they can't be monetized post-launch, so the likes EA and Activision continue to pursue "live services" at the expense of other kinds of games.

"Live services," loot boxes, and all the other insufferable bullshit we've seen this generation was enabled by and probably an inevitable consequence of the ability to play games online. Publishers found new revenue streams, and sought to exploit them for all they're worth. Fortunately you still have companies like Nintendo, Sony, and even some third parties like Bethesda that continue to invest heavily in quality single-player experiences, which, despite some protestations to the contrary from some big AAA third parties, are still doing exceptionally well, as 2018 clearly showed.

Last edited by Shadow1980 - on 28 February 2019

Yes, it's annoying and lead to me not being able to call my horse Hoarse in RDR2 in the campaign, as apparently that's a profinity. Why filter it in the campaign I dunno. First we had to shoe horn multiplayer into every game. Now we have to shoe horn multi player 'features' and requirements into the single player side, or just ditch the single player entirely.

I love GT Sport but it has taken the online requirements too far. The game is completely bare bones without online and constantly keeps asking to reconnect. Yet gamers have taken it on themselves by messing around with save files and car duping in gt5 and gt6. Not that it really matters, there are still plenty of ways to cheat.

Plus my pro is the secondary ps4 in the house and my kids have the primary so they can use my ps+. However that means that when we temporarily lose internet access, I can't play my VR games. Sucks.



Doesn't bother me specifically because my internet is stable. But conceptually it's not a good thing for single player games.