I miss when multiplayer was simple...

Call of Duty is the game that changed it all, bringing killstreaks to the table with all kinds of perks and the ability to spawn with any gun that your level lets you unlock. Now, every game takes this approach, every game feels like you need to be given this huge advantage over new players and that more is better. I don't think it is.

Uncharted 2's multiplayer was simple 5 vs. 5. There were some perks, but generally everyone started out on a near level playing field. I really enjoyed it, the shooting was fast and intense, but with a game like plunder my teams were coordinating, it was a slow enough game where you could plan your next move and, before a certain patch, you had enough health to turn around and take down an enemy who got the first shot. The platforming added a new dimension to the game and hiding was a successful option. Knowing the map layout was hugely important too, knowing where to find the best guns, where players would clutter, where to run when your outgunned, the fastest and sneakiest way to flank your enemies, all helped you.

Then we get Uncharted 3, they add a sprint button and a buddy spawn system, destroying any sense of intensity. Picking up the treasure in plunder is a damn death sentence, the game is not nearly as forgiving to new players, and although the maps are well designed, all you have to do is make a bee line to wherever you want to be and THAT is faster and just as quiet as taking a longer approach. There is no skill other than your ability to aim. There is no more strategy.

Why can't we have slower multiplayer game that aren't about twitch reflexes or your level (or less about your level) and more about knowledge of the map and coordination? It was more intense and more fun. The most fun games of BC2 or Uncharted 2 I've had aren't the ones where my team slaughtering the other team just talking about life and having some far out discussion about what it means to exist. The best games are the ones where we loose trying to keep the other team from returning the last treasure in a game of plunder, or barely edging out the other team in a game of conquest thanks to an amazing helicopter deployment at their base.

While we're at it, why don't games have better matchmaking or separate the teams based on a skill rating.

Killzone 1, and Battlefront 2 were some of the best multiplayer games ever.

Call of Duty is the game that changed it all, bringing killstreaks to the table with all kinds of perks and the ability to spawn with any gun that your level lets you unlock. Now, every game takes this approach, every game feels like you need to be given this huge advantage over new players and that more is better. I don't think it is.

Uncharted 2's multiplayer was simple 5 vs. 5. There were some perks, but generally everyone started out on a near level playing field. I really enjoyed it, the shooting was fast and intense, but with a game like plunder my teams were coordinating, it was a slow enough game where you could plan your next move and, before a certain patch, you had enough health to turn around and take down an enemy who got the first shot. The platforming added a new dimension to the game and hiding was a successful option. Knowing the map layout was hugely important too, knowing where to find the best guns, where players would clutter, where to run when your outgunned, the fastest and sneakiest way to flank your enemies, all helped you.

Then we get Uncharted 3, they add a sprint button and a buddy spawn system, destroying any sense of intensity. Picking up the treasure in plunder is a damn death sentence, the game is not nearly as forgiving to new players, and although the maps are well designed, all you have to do is make a bee line to wherever you want to be and THAT is faster and just as quiet as taking a longer approach. There is no skill other than your ability to aim. There is no more strategy.

Why can't we have slower multiplayer game that aren't about twitch reflexes or your level (or less about your level) and more about knowledge of the map and coordination? It was more intense and more fun. The most fun games of BC2 or Uncharted 2 I've had aren't the ones where my team slaughtering the other team just talking about life and having some far out discussion about what it means to exist. The best games are the ones where we loose trying to keep the other team from returning the last treasure in a game of plunder, or barely edging out the other team in a game of conquest thanks to an amazing helicopter deployment at their base.

While we're at it, why don't games have better matchmaking or separate the teams based on a skill rating.

It was even better before this gen began. I'm sure that in the future some games go back to its roots with the multiplayer.

I just hate it that all these games recently make the people who have been playing longer have better weapons and the like. It makes it hard to start up if you pick the game up later.soulitane

In COD you just have different weapons.Not better.You can kill a level 80 as easy as you can kill a level 1 player.

[QUOTE="soulitane"]I just hate it that all these games recently make the people who have been playing longer have better weapons and the like. It makes it hard to start up if you pick the game up later.Firebird-5

[QUOTE="Firebird-5"][QUOTE="soulitane"]I just hate it that all these games recently make the people who have been playing longer have better weapons and the like. It makes it hard to start up if you pick the game up later.soulitane

Thats what I LOVED U2 multiplayer, it was simple, balance, skills were required, just simple fun. I loved the fact that everyone starts every game with the basic guns, and if you want a a sniper rifel, RPG, shot gun, grenade launcher,or a Desert eagle you had to go out and look for it in the map. U2 multiplayer was the best one I've played this gen. U3 added alot of cool things, but it just not very fun to me as U2 was.

Multiplayer games just have too many things that can ruin things. Just becuz they have alot of crazy cool stuff doesnt make if better, just becuz you give players so much liberties and options doesnt make it better.

I miss the days of endless CS LAN play..

I just hate it that all these games recently make the people who have been playing longer have better weapons and the like. It makes it hard to start up if you pick the game up later.soulitane

which is why i like halo's weapon pickup system. it feels more balanced.

I agree with TC about uncharted 2 tho, ND has a problem of making things worse then it should. Seriously look at the MP of UC2 and UC3. Each patch they have a tendency to **** something else up in the process when they could have just left it alone.

No way, I hate simplicity in games.

[QUOTE="soulitane"]I just hate it that all these games recently make the people who have been playing longer have better weapons and the like. It makes it hard to start up if you pick the game up later.eboyishere

which is why i like halo's weapon pickup system. it feels more balanced.

I agree with TC about uncharted 2 tho, ND has a problem of making things worse then it should. Seriously look at the MP of UC2 and UC3. Each patch they have a tendency to **** something else up in the process when they could have just left it alone.

People like being rewarded, as simple as that. I personally think getting better and better at games was a rewarding enough, but appearantly that isnt the case for everyone.

I dont mind cosmetic unlocks though, however, anything unlocks that actually affect gameplay take it too far.

I like the days of pick ups on a map. Find the weapons you want, health, armor. It was simple yet required skill. Now something like Halo & Gears is the closest thing we have to that in todays world.

Eventually every game is going to have an extremely complicated ranking up & unlocking system, with killstreaks & perks to break & unbalance the game is many ways. there are already many broken games with this design * cough, Cod*.

This is why my favorite MP games are older titles. Eventually i will proably just stop playing MP because its headed in the wrong direction.

sounds like a personal problem to me

Yeah, this garbage has even crept into the Halo series. Halo 2 was quite possibly my favorite MP game of all time, and now we have Reach with unlocks. Just give me skill matching and a level playing field (no perks), and I'll be happy.lowe0

The only unlocks in Reach are armour permutations which are completely cosmetic. :?

If you're referring to armour abilities, everyone starts with the exact same choices.

Halo is still about as "level" as they come.

People like being rewarded, as simple as that. I personally think getting better and better at games was a rewarding enough, but appearantly that isnt the case for everyone.

I dont mind cosmetic unlocks though, however, anything unlocks that actually affect gameplay take it too far.

Maroxad

This

While all the perks and that are fun and such, I kinda understand where the TC is coming from.

After all, my all-time fav multi-player game is probably Left 4 Dead, which I feel that game flat out proves that simplicity in games can be a GREAT thing.

In fact, it was when they tried to add in a ton of **** in L4D2 they ruined it for me. The added weapons and items completely RUINED the balance of the game and the new characters and levels fell flat on top of that leaving it one giant heap of disappointment.

The original L4D however was just such a blast. It was VERY barebones but it really let how great the core gameplay was shine.

Yeah, this garbage has even crept into the Halo series. Halo 2 was quite possibly my favorite MP game of all time, and now we have Reach with unlocks. Just give me skill matching and a level playing field (no perks), and I'll be happy.lowe0

Reach's unlocks consist of armor permutations...which do nothing to aid you in a fight.

Complex multiplayer is good fun, silly

I just hate it that all these games recently make the people who have been playing longer have better weapons and the like. It makes it hard to start up if you pick the game up later.soulitane

I like choosing guns and perks. That's fun for me by itself.

Creating classes is the best thing about CoD.

I never really played much multiplayer games before. I think my first online multiplayer game was like Resistance or Call of Duty 3

I like choosing guns and perks. That's fun for me by itself.

Creating classes is the best thing about CoD.

I never really played much multiplayer games before. I think my first online multiplayer game was like Resistance or Call of Duty 3

good_sk8er7

Resistance was really mine, unless you count Mario Kart DS :P

But that is Call of Duty. Good for Call of Duty, because you know what, in 2007, every single game was a WW2 setting with the same old generic weapons and basic bare bones multiplayer. Call of Duty changed the game, adding perks, weapon unlocks, your level meant something. I admire that they took that change, but now, every game does it! Why are games like Uncharted and Resistance copying CoD when what they've done has been great (Well, R1 had the best MP imo). Uncharted 2's was beautiful, it was this simple shooter which packaged in platforming to make it smart.

I don't think games should go back to just giving the player 20 guns to choose from and play around with, no levels, no upgrades, ect. I want to see leveling evolve into tactical coordination (which MAG did I think), I want leveling to change how you earn XP, you earn more at first for kills, then more for team work. I don't think CoD is evil, every success gets copy cats, but how many of these games that have been copying CoD have been successful. I think that we can argue the most successful MP games this gen (Battlefield, Halo, and Gears. I'll throw in Killzone 2) while all FPS games, each did their own thing.

All that "customization" is just superficial. It doesn't alter the core experience. Multiplayer games should get more complicated. A FPS should also be a RTS (a la Savage II), and other elements from different genres should be included to make it more than just a throwaway experience that every game has. Personally, I really haven't been into MP games since late 2005 when Day of Defeat Source came out. Though, after playing some MW3 with a friend, I wouldn't mind getting back into some online experiences.foxhound_fox

Actually, this is a good point. Starhawk is the kind of game that I'm excited about because it does something different. I used the word "simple" poorly. Starhawk is a simple TPS with a multiplayer that is intensely deepened by the build and drop system (looks like an RTS!). That's what I want to see from MP games!

[QUOTE="Firebird-5"][QUOTE="soulitane"] Then I guess the likes of BC2 and UC3 are bad games then :Psoulitane

Magnum ammo, and I agree, it's complete bullcrap.

Don't worry guys the real multiplayer fps will becoming for us and that's Counter-Strike Global Offensive.

I simply miss the days of having a health bar. Finding a corner to hide in just makes me feel awkward.AirGuitarist87