SP vs MP
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
Which is better and why did both start to suck after 2005?
>>321734635
singleplayer is objectively better
>>321734635
*with very few exceptions like DotA, Portal and Minecraft.
Multiplayer
>>321734635
I think consoles appealing to the lowest subhumans created an industry of shit games and this started with the launch of the Xbox 360.
Nowadays indies and certain AAA studios only offer quality experiences because there is no middle market. You are either AAA with 100 mil dolla budget or indie with lunch money budget. Anything in between is thrown out by a shallow majority of gamers who mostly (mostly) care about golden pixels.
MP are on average better imo because difficulty is directly tied to how good you are compared to other players and because AI is generally pants on head retarded and abuseable.
My favorite games are all single player though and 99% of MP games are destined to slowly leak dry of players or get support dropped.
A multiplayer DMC type game would be fun as hell but I dont think netcode would allow anything as technical to work over the internet.
>>321734635
i like single player or coop multiplayer.
Im not too into the competitive aspect of games, as i know im garbage at most of them. I have no problem with being the big fish in the little pond stocked with AI.
MMOs and games heavily focused on MP do have thier place though. Just not my thing.
I cant esape the feeling that someone emphasis on MP will cause the SP to lack. Battlefront would be a good example. I feel a little left in the cold by no real single player comp-stomping game modes. But i also realize thats not the point of battlefield, not anymore at least, and me projecting my wishes on it as disappoint is entirely my own hangup.
>>321734723
With the exception of bro-op and local multiplayer, which is equivalent to single player in goodness.
>>321734635
MP. only a massive casual can be entertained playing against AI
Reminder the only people who hate multiplayer are shit cunt normies who are to trash to play with real people and have to resort to weak AI.
Co-op > Singleplayer > Multiplayer
>>321738316
This
I fucking hate people.
>>321734635
Multiplayer co-op still reigns supreme. Too bad developers are too incompetent or too jew to provide servers.
1 word: microtransactions
they have killed videogames
Apples and oranges, there's no point to compare them and attempting to do so does nothing but invite shitposting.
That said, I prefer the singleplayer aspect.
Multiplayer gets boring after a few matches of whatever the fuck you're doing. Not to mention most of those are either sports games or rooty tooty point and shooty games which are garbage.
>game is single player
>dev tries to balance every weapon and skill to the point where all feel boring to use
>>321738296
Or, you know, they prefer stuff like RPGs or other games with a story.
SP > MP because time/fun value
Multiplayer:
In two matches your Team is better and steamrolls the enemy -> Boring
In the other two games the enemy steamrolls you -> Frustrating
Only one game that is actually fun
Singleplayer:
You decide what you get
>>321739196
There's multiplayer games without teams you mobashitter.
>>321738316
>>321738316
>>321738316
>tfw no friends to play Marvel ultimate alliance
Multiplayer sucks because companies like EA or Activision miss the point of Multiplayer
The main attraction of multiplayer is the interaction between several players, not only via chatting but also by cooperation and competition, the establishment of bitter rivalries and a sense of brotherhood.
In games like Battlefront or Call of Duty, there's no real connection between the players, no real dependence on each other, people will just go and kill everyone who has an orange name above their heads. The problem with CoD, modern Battlefield (Where the squad system is reduced to a glorified respawn system), Battlefront and many other games is that they're designed so that lone wolfs can have a comfortable experience, when military shooters are meant to be played in teams working together.
Another point to consider is that many of these games disguise their lackluster gameplay mechanics with a Level progression system, do you know why people have fond memories of Counter-Strike 1.6 or Battlefield 2? Because these games had actually good gameplay and map design, and relied on giving an actual multiplayer experience via teamwork both on the chat screen and on the game itself. Level progression in multiplayer FPS games is a way to keep the player "engaged", because if said games didn't have it, the player would have returned the game after an hour.
>>321739329
You can also apply this to 1vs1
-.-
>"Insurgency? uh looks like a better version of CS"
>10 games without a single kill,I cant fucking spot the enemy and they have no trouble spotting me and killing me in one shot
What the hell,I never been this humiliated in multiplayer before.
>>321734635
microtransactions and level up to unlock shit that you already paid for when you bought the fucking game happened.
>>321738928
I love it when devs throw in unbalanced stuff into single player games that you can find if you dig around or sequence-break, and then put in super-bosses that actually require said stuff to beat. By the end it feels like I'm playing a whole other game than what most people finished.
>>321739526gitfriends
>>321739362
>tfw have friends but no ultimate alliance 2 on pc
>>321739526
>looks like a better version of CS
i don't understand what in the fuck makes you people think that
>>321739526
Thats because it plays nothing like CS.
Move slowly, travel with teammates, smoke grenades are a godsend to you and your team.
>>321739704
>One of my friends is a complete shitter at almost every genre of video gamesexcept for racing
>Insurgency is the ONE game where he makes all of us look like shitters instead.
Mind boggling I tell you
casuals, catering to the them dumbs down the game.
>>321740006
Theres usually that one thing someone is good at when they suck at everything else and it would appear your friend has found it. Has he played any other slow more tactical shooters?
>>321739461
then you lose because you deserve to because the other guy was better
single player games have ai that will never try anything new and can be abused
>-,-
get the fuck out
>>321738296
Wouldn't it be normies who like multiplayer, because they have friends?
>>321734754
except all of these suck?
@thread
singleplayer
multiplayer only arent even real games
"hurr i cant enjoy videogames wthout ruining lives of some 12 y olds on the net"
>>321740202
You got it.
Also they dont care about the universe of the games they play so they go and buy the yearly releases for the multiplayer because that is what everyone else does.
>>321734635
>Which is better
I personally subjectively enjoy singleplayer more than multiplayer, and have always done so.
>why did both start to suck after 2005?
I dont feel that way, maybe because I am not a broken, jaded, cynical faggot that only plays video games out of habit and not because its fun.
>>321740107
Nope. It's literally the first game of its kind he's played and he's only played for like 5-10 hours tops and within that time he's done damn good in almost every match we played. Hell, one of my friends stopped playing with us cause he couldn't understand the former being good at a game for once.
>>321738928
>game is single player
>weapons are imbalanced as fuck
>my favorite weapon is underpowered and it feels a waste to specialize in it
D&D games always had many more unique and powerful swords when compared to maces and hammers.
>>321740667
sounds like skyrim
>>321741276
Skyrim is at fault for both. It is unbalanced, as in some weapons are more common and varied, and you are punished for liking others. But its also too balanced, and all weapons feel the same because of it. Worst of both worlds.
>>321734635
>2005
i don't know man i think things went down hill around the 2008-9 mark especially for multiplayer. i swear communities for multiplayer went to utter shit around then.
>>321735329
>the Metro series
>>321740006
>>321740107
I would think from that description that your friend is me.
Except I am not good at racing games.
And I dont actually have any friends.
>>321734635
>why did both start to suck after 2005?
It looks like if there were a good SP/MP game on 2005 and from there everything went to trash. Please enlighten me OP, which game was THAT good back then?
>>321741862
Had to be developed in a third world country where they still care about making games
>>321739526
Insurgency is more like Rainbow Six Siege, but even that isn't quite right.
Whichever you prefer, and both are still greaó. Fuck you.
>>321734635
There was an Eternal September in multiplayer gaming that got started with the 360's release, CoD:MW2, and TF2 turning into a retarded "new weapon every week" where classes only exist for flavor. Games like World in Conflict, where you MUST work as a team because one class can't do everything on its own and players have limited resources to work with, just wouldn't sit with the modern mass MP audience. Which is why Ubi butchered promising devs like Massive and had them slave away at AssCreed lul.
Multiplayer gaming hasn't been this antisocial since ever. People are playing "just for fun" which means they absolutely do not want to associate themselves with or rely on fellow players, they're just there to play a single-player game with human-controlled targets. They play with the single-player attitude that they're the protagonist, and their favorite class and weapons must be able to beat every situation on their own. Look around at any MP game's forums, it's just full of people bitching for "balance" which incidentally translates to buffing whatever they like using in game.
I guess it's a representation of what's happening in the society at large these days, people are picking shallow, short-term satisfaction over the sense of community, forming bonds, and healthy competition. World in Conflict was the last truly great multiplayer game I have played, after that only co-ops have been somewhat worth it. Although with the current playerbase, games like Payday 2 are half unplayable with public MM.
This really depends on what you mean.
FPS today have some of the shittiest single-player's to date, in those cases definetelly multiplayer.
But then there are games when you have multiplayer tacked on where the single-player was definetelly focus.
Then there are games which only can work in single-player, like you know, DMC and whatever
>>321734635
Different experiences.
Singleplayer is for immersing yourself and enjoying a story, multiplayer is for challenging yourself to test your abilities against others in competition, both are good if done right (IE fighting games or games with good stories like the last of us or immersive games like stalker / metro series).
Shit tier games are the ones that are singleplayer but have no real good story or world to explore, or coop games that ruin your immersing experience by having some other sperg player jumping around rushing from checkpoint to checkpoint.
>>321738296
I like multiplayer but all my friends just play DOTA shit
>>321746215
xD that's too bad, a lot of my friends play LoL!!
>>321739196
>not funding crushing the enemy fun
>he gets frustrated over losing
>he doesn't have fun no matter what the result
>>321734635
A well-made multiplayer game can get hundreds of hours of fresh and engaging gameplay. However, singleplayer games are more permanent and easier to evaluate, and thus it's easier to identify good ones. Multiplayer is the height of gameplay and what games are all about, but 80% or more of the games I play are singleplayer (I love RPGs).
>>321740667
>D&D games always had many more unique and powerful swords when compared to maces and hammers.
I don't mind that too much.
Like how Katanas are extremely rare in the sword coast and they warn you that specializing in them may not be a great idea.
Gives you a nice sense of the setting imo.
Multiplayer games are repetitive as fuck, and your success often depends on things outside of your control - your team's skill, the enemy making mistakes etc. In single player games, your success is dependent on you alone, and you don't have to worry about other people judging your performance while you play.
>>321734635
Multiplayer is only consistently fun with friends.
>play online
>get matched against shitters
>win easily, no fun
>get matched against shitters again
>win easily
>get matched against people way better than you
>get crushed, don't learn anything, no fun
>get matched against people better than you again
>crushed again
>actually get a match with someone close to you in skill
>have fun
>repeat endlessly
I'd enjoy MP more if 80% of it wasn't a slog.
>>321748653
>play with friends
>one rages and ruins the game for everyone for a week
>one doesnt show up and we cant continue the save without him
>one has played without the rest and is so far ahead on levels and gears its stupid to play
>one has already beaten the game and keeps spoiling it for everyone else
>one is so bad at the game that its a chore to play with him, and he obviously isnt enjoying it
In multiplayer games, your enjoyment is dependent on other people, which makes them shit most of the time. Your enjoyment of single player games is dependent only on the game designer's skill only
Multiplayer:
>waiting for guys to finish their tasks
>people make you explain stuff even if they don't listen or don't give a fuck
>waiting for people to progress
>if you go play with a more experienced group for a while they get mad at you
>people only want to fool around and show off stuff someone else did get for them
>zero immersion
no thx
