Is Multiplayer ruining FPS genre?

  • 66 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by SNIPER4321 (10142 posts) -

I think yes. because of Multiplayer approach developers tend to make mediocre short SP with Mediocre SP. i cant think of any allrounder game that has Good SP and Good MP. either good SP or Good MP or mostly end up terrible.

For Example Crysis series. Crysis 1 was SP oriented. but it has terrible multiplayer. than 2 and 3 came they focus more on MP and thus as a result of mediocre SP and MP.

Best SP FPS are those who are SP focus and MP are those which only MP and has no SP

I hate multiplayer unless its from valve (team fortress 2, Counter strike) and MP is ruining FPS genre.

should dev make SP or MP game and not combine them or all rounder game?

Discuss

#2 Posted by roulettethedog (10923 posts) -

F.P.S. should only be Online from now on. Playing against real people instead of A.I. makes the gendra fun. I.M.O.

#3 Posted by SNIPER4321 (10142 posts) -

F.P.S. should only be Online from now on.

than no wonder why industry is going down the drail.

of course console doesnot have any good SP FPS let alone MP FPS.

console gamer first ever so called "open world" FPS played were Far cry 3 and were blown away by it while for me its extremely mediocre.

#4 Edited by Gaming-Planet (13685 posts) -

They go by what the mainstream audience wants. Too many devs are afraid to innovate.

#5 Posted by djexertive (150 posts) -

So the sniper wants to snipe AIs?

#6 Edited by XxR3m1xInHDn3D (1967 posts) -

Bad devs are to blame. MoH:AA, RTCW, Halo 1 and 2, Ghost Recon 1, CoD 1, Raven Shield, PDZ, F.E.A.R, Serious Sam SE to name a few all had great MP + SP

#7 Edited by Trail_Mix (2021 posts) -

You should add me on Steam, Sniper. We can play some TF2 and find out who's the better player.

#8 Posted by cainetao11 (15598 posts) -

Dev should make what they want. Like film maker, it should be up to creator, what they create. I answer you as you post now on.

#9 Posted by lostrib (31009 posts) -

SNIPER is ruining FPS genre

#10 Edited by Bardock47 (5141 posts) -

Depends on the devs. Games like Battlefield should be MP only (BF 3 SP was meh). Games like CoD or Halo can have really entertaining that can be good popcorn fun (BO, BO2) or actually be a main draw and tell an amazing story (Halo). Or even just a single player game that is awesome (Bioshock, Bioshock infinite, Metro: Last Light)

#11 Edited by treedoor (7478 posts) -

Nah.

Bad devs are ruining FPS games by following poor trends in the industry.

You have games like CoD selling well to the masses of gamers who began playing FPS games this gen, and devs follow that lead despite CoD having some of the most shallow gameplay ever.

Crysis 1 is highly regarded because Crytek was seeking to make an FPS worthy to stand next to the greats of the PC industry. Crysis 2, and 3 are considered abominations because Crytek decided to follow CoD, and failed at doing so.

#12 Edited by lostrib (31009 posts) -

Depends on the devs. Games like Battlefield should be MP only (BF 3 SP was meh). Games like CoD or Halo can have really entertaining that can be good popcorn fun (BO, BO2) or actually be a main draw and tell an amazing story (Halo). Or even just a single player game that is awesome (Bioshock, Bioshock infinite, Metro: Last Light)

the blackops campaigns were some of the worst in the franchise

#13 Posted by SNIPER4321 (10142 posts) -

You should add me on Steam, Sniper. We can play some TF2 and find out who's the better player.

U cant defeat me as Heavy animu avatar.

#14 Edited by lostrib (31009 posts) -

@treedoor said:

Nah.

Bad devs are ruining FPS games by following poor trends in the industry.

You have games like CoD selling well to the masses of gamers who began playing FPS games this gen, and devs follow that lead despite CoD having some of the most shallow gameplay ever.

Crysis 1 is highly regarded because Crytek was seeking to make an FPS worthy to stand next to the greats of the PC industry. Crysis 2, and 3 are considered abominations because Crytek decided to follow CoD, and failed at doing so.

ugh, Crysis 2. Wtf crytek

#15 Edited by CanYouDiglt (7228 posts) -

I think MP has hurt games in general and not just fps. The Single player portion has taken a big hit because of it. Most of the fps mp games feel the same too. IMO most of the games it is not even a matter of skill but more just memorizing things such as maps, weapon drops, hiding spots, ect. A lot of times it just boils down who gets the drop on the other guy first. To be fair when I pvp I prefer MMOs such as WoW. If you duel or pvp against someone in WoW that knows what they are doing then there is far more tactics then who gets the drop on the other guy first.

#16 Posted by airshocker (28039 posts) -

I think you're ruining the FPS genre by your very existence, SNIPER.

#17 Posted by PannicAtack (20837 posts) -

Yeah, Quake and Counter-Strike are a cancer on the genre.

Oh wait, no, you're just an idiot.

#18 Edited by Whiteblade999 (5536 posts) -

No, the level and enemy design is. Quake 1 was an amazing multiplayer game, it set the standard for the genre there. But what really made the game great for me was the singleplayer campaign which had marines, a yeti that shoots lightning, knights, floating serpants, tri-pedal spiders, and a few variations on some of the other things listed. The levels also had a huge range so it was always something different, and the design of those levels was always set up in such a way that you had multiple paths to go through, none of this being pushed down a corridor nonsense.

I'm so fucking tired of shooting Russians and Arabs in my FPS, give me a game with actual variety.

#19 Posted by SNIPER4321 (10142 posts) -

I think you're ruining the FPS genre by your very existence, SNIPER.

why are casual/console gamers so offended easily? did i hurt your feelings??

Yeah, Quake and Counter-Strike are a cancer on the genre.

Oh wait, no, you're just an idiot.

By that i mean newer MP games that carter towards casuals. but yes. SP always been better than MP

Half life was better than Quake in 90s. by far.

#20 Posted by R3FURBISHED (9930 posts) -

What I got out of this is that Battlefield should remove its multiplayer

#21 Posted by SNIPER4321 (10142 posts) -

What I got out of this is that Battlefield should remove its multiplayer

no BF should remove SP and start being PC exclusive.

#22 Posted by lostrib (31009 posts) -

@airshocker said:

I think you're ruining the FPS genre by your very existence, SNIPER.

why are casual/console gamers so offended easily? did i hurt your feelings??

@PannicAtack said:

Yeah, Quake and Counter-Strike are a cancer on the genre.

Oh wait, no, you're just an idiot.

By that i mean newer MP games that carter towards casuals. but yes. SP always been better than MP

Half life was better than Quake in 90s. by far.

perhaps in your opinion. Of course, you've proven time and again that your opinion isn't worth jack shit

#23 Posted by PS360Wii4eva (296 posts) -

Yh MP ruins FPS. I don't see a 10 year old complete Deus Ex. But stop the BS C2 n C3 are great games. If ya go back to C1 it's a huge step back

#24 Edited by mems_1224 (45644 posts) -

No, emo russians like you are ruining fps games.

#25 Posted by SNIPER4321 (10142 posts) -

No, emo russians like you are ruining fps games.

Im not russian

#26 Posted by mems_1224 (45644 posts) -

@mems_1224 said:

No, emo russians like you are ruining fps games.

Im not russian

prove it

#27 Posted by lilnazar (1614 posts) -

No. But FPS games need to get more creative. More customization, more fun ways to play and less military bullshit.

#28 Posted by KillzoneSnake (1617 posts) -

FPS should be mostly online like Killzone. SP is just a bonus if you bored and got nothing else to do. Playing clan match online is 1000000000000 times better.

#29 Posted by SNIPER4321 (10142 posts) -

FPS should be mostly online like Killzone. SP is just a bonus if you bored and got nothing else to do. Playing clan match online is 1000000000000 times better.

and thats the reason why developers are abondone there hardcore fanbase to carter casuals.

bad controlling, cinematic linear SP, etc etc

#30 Posted by sukraj (21470 posts) -

@mems_1224 said:

No, emo russians like you are ruining fps games.

Im not russian

u look like a russion

#31 Posted by danabo (2474 posts) -

Yes.

#32 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38115 posts) -

How did I fvcking know this was a sniper thread on the title alone

Dude.... shut up

#33 Posted by PrincessGomez92 (3203 posts) -

How dare developers make what they want.

#34 Posted by adamosmaki (9340 posts) -

What hurt fps games are games focus on single player the devs spent time to strap on a MP mode just because it aint an fps without MP and they spent resources and time into a MP mode that no one will be playing after 1 week

Same goes for MP games. Devs just strap on a SP mode because gamers got used to it and they think is mandatory and likewise they spent resources and time into the unnecessary SP mode

Imo games like BF should not even bother with SP mode (like TF2 did) and games like Bioshock should not even bother with MP mode ( aka like Metro did )

#35 Posted by djexertive (150 posts) -

Sniper, I can't help but laugh when I see your name and avatar for some reason,...hahahahaa

#36 Posted by airshocker (28039 posts) -

@airshocker said:

I think you're ruining the FPS genre by your very existence, SNIPER.

why are casual/console gamers so offended easily? did i hurt your feelings??

@PannicAtack said:

Yeah, Quake and Counter-Strike are a cancer on the genre.

Oh wait, no, you're just an idiot.

By that i mean newer MP games that carter towards casuals. but yes. SP always been better than MP

Half life was better than Quake in 90s. by far.

Actually, I'm a PC gamer first and foremost. In case you don't remember me making you look like an idiot in the PC gaming section.

You offend everyone on this forum by your very existence. Maybe you should just go away and save us all our sanity?

#37 Posted by kraken2109 (12938 posts) -

Devs need to focus on one or the other IMO. BF and COD are both multiplayer games with terrible SP that doesn't belong there. With the time saved the games could be much better and not have so many issues at launch.

#38 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (8236 posts) -

Local Multiplayer can save anything !

#39 Posted by ShepardCommandr (2065 posts) -

I think MP has hurt games in general and not just fps. The Single player portion has taken a big hit because of it. Most of the fps mp games feel the same too. IMO most of the games it is not even a matter of skill but more just memorizing things such as maps, weapon drops, hiding spots, ect. A lot of times it just boils down who gets the drop on the other guy first. To be fair when I pvp I prefer MMOs such as WoW. If you duel or pvp against someone in WoW that knows what they are doing then there is far more tactics then who gets the drop on the other guy first.

My thoughts

#40 Edited by Mozuckint (773 posts) -

No

See: Battlefield

Battlefield originally was a pretty much multiplayer centric game. It suffered the opposite problems in this gen. Other games were getting flack for incorporating multiplayer modes, Battlefield decided to tack on single player campaigns.

#41 Posted by Wasdie (49257 posts) -

You have an obsession with trying to convince us you're a hardcore gamer yet you just come across as pretentious and just bashing everything modern to keep up some image as a hardcore gamer. Nobody here cares about how "hardcore" of a gamer you think of yourself.

Multiplayer has been a fundamental part of FPSs since Doom and it's arguably the reason it got large in the first place. Quake, Unreal, and even Half Life were driven by their multiplayer communities. Half Life had the multiplayer mods that grew the community and spawned of many game series.

#42 Edited by Planeforger (15392 posts) -

I don't see how. Most of the best shooters of the 90s and 00s had multiplayer alongside their great campaigns.

Current FPS games suck because they're aiming for a wider audience, and they're being developed by less talented/creative/ambitious people. I don't even know if multiplayer is a strong factor here - I can't even remember the last truly great singleplayer-only FPS game!

#43 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (6543 posts) -

I really don't like multiplayer FPS anymore. It's just very boring to me. There are some single player games that are amazing, though. I wish arena style FPS like Unreal Tournament would come back, though. Those games were a lot of fun.

#44 Edited by wis3boi (30811 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

You have an obsession with trying to convince us you're a hardcore gamer yet you just come across as pretentious and just bashing everything modern to keep up some image as a hardcore gamer. Nobody here cares about how "hardcore" of a gamer you think of yourself.

Multiplayer has been a fundamental part of FPSs since Doom and it's arguably the reason it got large in the first place. Quake, Unreal, and even Half Life were driven by their multiplayer communities. Half Life had the multiplayer mods that grew the community and spawned of many game series.

/thread

#45 Posted by heretrix (37227 posts) -

How did I fvcking know this was a sniper thread on the title alone

Dude.... shut up

Hahahahaha..

#46 Edited by nini200 (9320 posts) -

Nope, fanboys are ruining FPS. I won't say devs are ruining it because they are doing what the fanboys want to make money, run and gun, OP SMG's, Spray and Pray, Non-though out maps, and Voice Chat.

#47 Posted by SNIPER4321 (10142 posts) -

I can't even remember the last truly great singleplayer-only FPS game!

it was release this year and that was metro last light....

#48 Edited by Yoshi9000 (376 posts) -

Yes and no. It depends on the game. Call of duty, for example, really bothers me. I don't know why people continue to buy the same game over and over again, it's almost sickening. I believe it has to do with an addiction of shooting people and leveling up, unlocking new stuff. It's not true fun.

However, I believe online multiplayer in FPS can be good if it's the right game with the right people. Halo 3, for example, was lots of fun playing with friends online doing custom games and forge. It was a unique shooter with map building options that created a great social experience. Left 4 Dead online is fun as well because it is more cooperative than mindless competition. I do think though Halo 4 was unnecessary and is taking a turn for the worse with its multiplayer. It feels like it wants to be call of duty.

#49 Posted by Bardock47 (5141 posts) -

@lostrib: Your opinion.I love the cold war conspiracy stuff. and its better than MW3, that entire game is trash. An argument could be made for CoD4 or W@W being better. I don't think you could make the same argument for MW2 though too similar. Black ops is far from the worst, at least it had a brand new, fun, and interesting setting. Use of Reznov bridged the games pretty well. BO2 tried to shake things up with near future, multiple endings, and the strike force missions. MW2, and 3 just don't really try. I will say at least MW2 had a good continuation of the story from CoD4.

#50 Edited by Pffrbt (6311 posts) -

No. Hideously boring gameplay is.