| Lulz said: Games would be a lot more boring and have less replay value without multiplayer. |
It's because of Multiplayer online that replay value and content have been cut.
I shitty dark place that I dread to think about
Without order nothing can exist - without chaos nothing can evolve.
"I don't debate, I just give you that work"- Ji99saw
Xxain said:
|
For games with a big online component, maybe, but what about single player games? A lot of ostensibly offline games rely on DLC to prolong their life, or patches to solve problems not caught in testing.
I believe in honesty, civility, generosity, practicality, and impartiality.
| Mythmaker1 said: It's hard to imagine a world where it would not, since the effects of that one change are so wide-spread and pervasive, but I'll try my best. For one, the original Xbox might not have been made, and if it was, it probably would have failed. XBL was a big part of their strategy for consoles (and still is), and helped drive the success of latter Halo games, which helped sell the early platform. Without XBL, the Xbox as we know it would not exist. In addition, DLC and patches would not exist on consoles. Games would either ship hopelessly broken or with inflated debugging periods. Games would come less frequently, and what can be fixed simply today with a day-one patch would be catastrpohic. Without DLC and balance-patches, local multiplayer would be the only way to play, and without a way to add content, would be far less long-lived. Without the social-aspect of online for consoles today, the multiplayer scene would be much smaller, and eSports as we know it would not emerge on consoles until much later, if it ever did. To compensate, more on-disk locked content so publishers could get the effect of DLC, but without the benefits it provides. The same sort of online seen on consoles would evolve on PC, albeit smaller. PC would eventually kill consoles, as the lack of online would be too stifling for publishers compared to the advantages offered on that platform. Sony would eventually shutter its EE division, though Nintendo would press on, with their handheld systems keeping their sales afloat. Gaming quality would not appreciably improve, since the realities of consoles that produced much of the oft-spoken complaints of the industry are just as much, if not more true, of PC. Gaming would be much more exclusive due to the realities of PC gaming, and digital distribution would have taken hold much faster, with predictable results for Gamestop. Microsoft would be in a dominating position, due to them being the only significant platform holder. |
The console will still be online capable, I meant online multiplayer in games. What if multiplayer wasn't as big or didn't exist at all in games..... sorry
“Don’t follow the hype, follow the games”
| — |
Here a little quote I want for those to keep memorize in your head for this coming next gen. By: Suke |
Suke said:
|
Online not evloving on consoles at all, I can fathom. That ONLY online multiplayer would not arise is simply insane.
You can't make guesses or assumptions about a premise that is fundamentally irrational. It's like posing the question of "what if people never drank water?"
I believe in honesty, civility, generosity, practicality, and impartiality.
Xxain said:
|
Incorrect. Online multiplayer for a lot of people, myself included, is the most fun and addicting aspect of any game. I don't care how much money or time a dev dumps into a single player campaign, there is no way they are going to be able to give me the same value I got from playing literally thousands of hours of online multiplayer on games like Halo 3, MK Wii, and MK 7.
Just because your own personal preference is for single player games/campaigns it doesn't mean that everyone feels that way. There's a reason that COD, Mario Kart, and Halo are currently the 3 biggest franchises on the planet. They deliver multiplayer thrills better than most games. People play them for the multiplayer aspect. You can even include Gran Turismo in that bunch of games because most people that dump hundreds or thousands of hours into a racing game aren't just trying to beat their own best times. They're racing against other people because competition is fun.
That's "my opinion".
No DLC, that means good or bad. No longer would you see half of a game missing and sold as DLC in the war against the evil Deceptic-I mean, pirates.
No multiplayer focused games outside of couch co-op, meaning a lot of games would have a cheaper development and would probably be better for the money and focus being put into them, then split up for a tacked on multiplayer, but also games that focus on Multiplayer alone would be worthless in this world.
No longer would you hear kids swearing at you over games.
XBox Live wouldn't exist, nor would PSN so you'd never need to pay a company to play your games after you bought them.
You wouldn't get patches to games with glitches, so this could probably ruin the sales of a lot of games and piss off a lot of gamers.
Indie developers for consoles would be screwed, as they'd have to make games on disc and sell them in stores.
No friends list
No sharing profiles
No point to trophies/achievements/gamer score except to show to yourself and friends
Mii Plaza would never exist
The Wii Mini wouldn't suck as much
To be honest, I'm kinda wishing we lived in this world. Sure we lose some things, but to never have to deal with companies selling me pieces of the game I just bought, paying the company that owns my console just to get the full use of my game, no B.S. DLC and Map Packs to try and push Pre-orders/Special Editions, no need for huge GB's of space on a system, allowing for cheaper consoles, no XBox One fiasco and no Project 5$ crap, I'd be willing to put up with.
Oh, one important thing:
You'd never have to hear about the magical, mystical, Godly power of the freakin' Cloud.
Mythmaker1 said:
Online not evloving on consoles at all, I can fathom. That ONLY online multiplayer would not arise is simply insane. You can't make guesses or assumptions about a premise that is fundamentally irrational. It's like posing the question of "what if people never drank water?" |
The Wii seems to have done well without online multiplayer evolving.
I haven't played online on the WiiU yet either, games seem to work fine without.
Anyway without digital distribution, instead of season passes, small DLC expansions, map packs, car packs, hat packs, we would still have worthy disc based expansions that add 30 hours to the game.
More indie games would have disc based releases. After being succesful on PC compilation discs would make it to consoles. Maybe we would still have games magazines sold with discs full of demos and indie games.
The AA game would not face extinction. With money not going to online passes, DLC, map packs, online fees etc to support the few big titles that are played year round, more people might be inclined to try some new games.
Games shops would be doing a lot better and not need to milk the 2nd hand market to stay alive.
Better single player campaigns instead of half assed 10 hour single player experiences where all you do is go into cover, reload and shoot.
We would have more story intense single player campaigns that would last more then 8hrs. Sure multiplayer online is fun but I feel everything is starting to become online focused and good quality single player modes/campaigns are gettin shafted, which I find dissapointing.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
