So everyone is raging over no Multiplayer in the Order

  • 124 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by cfisher2833 (1543 posts) -

I don't consider a bunch of jackasses at NeoGAF to representative of "everyone." Single player games should stick to being single player; that being said, it's a tad silly that they didn't incorporate co-op. The first trailer of the game strongly implied that it was a four player co-op style game. Doesn't really matter though: it'll turn out to be a 8-10 hour movie game with generic gameplay, which will of course be ignored because of its graphics. It was never even on my radar as something worth buying for $60. Maybe in 3-4 years I'll pick it up when it's like $10 at gamestop.

#52 Edited by LegatoSkyheart (24546 posts) -

To be completely fair.

This game does seem to be the kind of game that would benefit for Multiplayer. Santa Monica isn't exactly new to Multiplayer either.

Now The Last of Us on the other hand, didn't need a Multiplayer option at all.

#53 Posted by ReadingRainbow4 (13058 posts) -

Did tomb raider need Multiplayer?

#54 Posted by Zaibach (13430 posts) -

the game would have gained more than it would have to at-least have some form of co-op.

people talk as if you can't have a good SP and MP, it has to be or the other, ridiculous notion

#55 Posted by blackace (19996 posts) -

Sony users butt hurt they can't have Gears of War.

Maybe....

#56 Posted by silversix_ (13883 posts) -

'IF' the game is 6-8h long and has no multiplayer it'll be an epic failure and you can bitch as much as you want about it. But if the game is 20h long (longer than TLOU) then multiplayer isn't needed at all. At the same time a 2 players co-op would be absolutely amazing and should be in the game.

#57 Posted by blackace (19996 posts) -

Did tomb raider need Multiplayer?

Tomb Raider is all about Lara Croft. Did any of the previous Tomb Raider games have multiplayer? This is one of the reasons gamers were baffled that Uncharted 2 had multiplayer. It definitely didn't need it. That game was obviously being represented as a single play game.

The Order 1886 on the other hand had 4 other characters in the trailer ready to battle.Obviously you are expecting that other players would be controlling these other characters. It seems like they may rotate which players you will use in each Act or something. Not exactly sure how they will incorporate all these characters into the game. Maybe some of them will be AI bots that assist you like in Gears of War single player game.

Gamers who are saying "it's not needed" is just damage controlling the negative response people are having toward it not having multiplayer or co-op.

#58 Posted by Gue1 (9369 posts) -

Really? Most of the comments I've read on other sites have showed relief that the campaign was the focus.

in the interwebs you see everybody hating on the COD series left and right yet it's one of the best selling video game franchises of all times.

#59 Edited by Couth_ (9973 posts) -

That guy is a huge drama queen. He said it himself in the video - "Not every game needs multiplayer".. End of discussion there.

#60 Edited by CrashNBurn281 (391 posts) -

System Wars hypocrisy at its best.

Im sure the same people that are saying that multiplayer isn't needed for a single player focused game, are the same ones saying single player is needed in a multiplayer game like Titanfall.

And it goes both ways. If you were defending Titanfalls no single player and are bashing the Order for not having multiplayer, your a tool.

The game will have to justify its position. Is the multiplayer is good enough, or if the single player is good enough, then they will not need the other. The Order hasn't been released yet, we will not know any of the information until it is released. If its single player is stellar and has decent replay value and or length, no one will remember it didn't have multiplayer.

#61 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69619 posts) -

I do not get at all why people are even mad about this

#62 Edited by Stevo_the_gamer (42578 posts) -

I could care less about no multiplayer. In fact, I'm pleased by the news of no multiplayer so long as the campaign is worth the price of admission.

#63 Posted by Mkavanaugh77 (20732 posts) -

Goldeneye for the n64 had amazing multiplayer plus a solid single player campaign. (no reason why The Order cant do the same)

sounds like this game is being rushed.

LMAO at cows acting like no multiplayer is a good thing haha!

If im spending 60$ on a game i want as much content as possible, even if multiplayer is tacked on.

Not everyone is gonna enjoy it but at least its there for those who might enjoy it.

Good devs can make a excellent sp game with a just as good multiplayer mode like halo or Gears of War for example.

Cows on that damage control!

#64 Posted by Solid_Link22 (5591 posts) -

I don't mind any multiplayer. Sometimes I don't even play the multiplayer in a game.

#65 Edited by ni6htmare01 (888 posts) -

Cool! Don't care about MP anyway! Same reason why I'm not upgrading to PSN+ and Gold member of live with my 360!

#66 Posted by getyeryayasout (7032 posts) -

When you say "everyone", do you mean "no one"? Because that is closer to true.

#67 Posted by sherman-tank1 (8096 posts) -

@Mkavanaugh77: Why do we even talk about Gears anymore? That IP went down the drain after 3. And it is a good thing. Games like Uncharted, TLOU, GOW:A, AC, are some good examples of games that have MP that shouldn't. Those resources could have been put somewhere else. Even if you do disagree, this whole argument is absurd anyways. Only SW could make this such a big deal.

#68 Edited by tymeservesfate (1493 posts) -

@sherman-tank1 said:

@Mkavanaugh77: Why do we even talk about Gears anymore? That IP went down the drain after 3. And it is a good thing. Games like Uncharted, TLOU, GOW:A, AC, are some good examples of games that have MP that shouldn't. Those resources could have been put somewhere else. Even if you do disagree, this whole argument is absurd anyways. Only SW could make this such a big deal.

save the resources to use elsewhere? the game runs at 30 fps and doesnt even have local co op, much less multiplayer O_o

smh

#69 Posted by speedfreak48t5p (6560 posts) -

Cool.

#70 Edited by Nonstop-Madness (9466 posts) -

Developers shouldn't have to resort to adding things that don't actually make the game better. Slapping on MP and Co-Op adds value in relationship to the cost of the game BUT it does not make it a better game. I personally don't give a shit about God of War MP or Assassins Creed MP or The Last of Us MP but I'm be more than happy to $60 for SP.

#71 Posted by Ghost120x (3681 posts) -

I'm surprised that there is no co-op but If they can make the game a great experience well worth the $60, then I'm game. But if they have no multiplayer and the game is only 4 hours of linearity, then I'm not touching it.

#72 Posted by FoxbatAlpha (6037 posts) -

Bad news is abundant for Sony fans. Delays pushed well over a year away and no multiplayer options on several new titles coming out. How do they expect to make money on PSN+ with no damn MP games?

#73 Posted by CrashNBurn281 (391 posts) -

I'm not worried about the multiplayer really. I have heard a rumor that the game is very linear, that is what would kill it for me. We shall see.

#74 Posted by PinkieWinkie (1364 posts) -

@Foxbatalpha: care to elaborate on "well over a year away"?

#75 Posted by killatwill15 (845 posts) -

@Foxbatalpha: care to elaborate on "well over a year away"?

his ass lips aren't as fast as his fingers and half as articulate

#76 Posted by killatwill15 (845 posts) -

Goldeneye for the n64 had amazing multiplayer plus a solid single player campaign. (no reason why The Order cant do the same)

sounds like this game is being rushed.

LMAO at cows acting like no multiplayer is a good thing haha!

If im spending 60$ on a game i want as much content as possible, even if multiplayer is tacked on.

Not everyone is gonna enjoy it but at least its there for those who might enjoy it.

Good devs can make a excellent sp game with a just as good multiplayer mode like halo or Gears of War for example.

Cows on that damage control!

I used to be hurt that gears was on xbox only,

until I played uncharted 3 last week,

I had it for a year (it was a pack in that is worthless to trade)

I popped it in, been playing steady since it is no foe pussies.

my cousin brought his 360 over because I wanted to play gears 3 in 3d,

and I don't know,

I feel out of it mayne,

gears is fucking stale compared to uc3 mp mayne,

and please to don't use gears story as barometer of story telling

#77 Edited by Mkavanaugh77 (20732 posts) -

A crappy multiplayer is better than no multiplayer.

Especially when games cost 60$

ive played some games with crappy mp and had alotoffun.

#78 Posted by killatwill15 (845 posts) -

A crappy multiplayer is better than no multiplayer.

Especially when games cost 60$

ive played some games with crappy mp and had alotoffun.

nah brah, mp has to be top notch,

even games with well thought out mp turn out terrible

gta online,

sometimes games just shouldn't have it

#79 Posted by Mkavanaugh77 (20732 posts) -

Killatwill

Games should have some mkind of Multiplayer if im paying 60$

Doesnt matter if its bad or not, the option of playing Mp is there.

#80 Posted by cooolio (433 posts) -

@Mkavanaugh77: Not every game. We need amazing games that can stand without multiplayer.

#81 Edited by GrenadeLauncher (3645 posts) -

No one's mad except for lems pretending to be mad because they're slowly realising that MP is over rated and that's the only thing that Xbone has going for it.

#82 Posted by Dreams-Visions (26569 posts) -

Hey guys...

....not every game needs multiplayer.

#83 Posted by nintendoboy16 (26087 posts) -

Hold on a damn minute. When I say something like Mario 3D World doesn't need online (which I'm still a believer of), I'm considered an apologist, but some of the same people who blasted that game for lacking such a feature is giving Order a pass? From what I saw of the game, it looks like a co-op WOULD be ideal, but like 3D World lacking online, it doesn't bother me, but what DOES bother me is the logic of some people here.

#84 Edited by brut_fruit (91 posts) -

only fake boy lemmings are mad

good move by RAD keep those tacked on lame Xbone mp trash away from The PlayStation 4™

#85 Edited by loosingENDS (11775 posts) -

Noone is mad, only PC people that also play a lot of MMOs

Noone else cares for resolutions/fps and online really, single player games are usually 10 million billion times better than the best MMO, so thank god it has not got multplayer, now it may actually be a good game

As for 30fps, it is more than fine, like 720p is more than fine too

I dont reemember enjoying Zelda, Bravely Default, Demons Souls, Dark Souls, FF7-9, Ultima, Baldurs Gate 2 etc etc etc any bit less because of frame rate or resolution, this is again only something non gamer PC people talk about to justify selling three houses to keep their PC upgrading habbit and bragging rights

Such people rarely play games, because even the strongest PC will never play a new next gen game at its best, usually you need to wait years and years to play maxed properly

In fact it is new games that focus on resolution, 3D effects and graphics that fail miserably, like FF13 series

#86 Edited by SirSlimyScott (266 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride: It's not everyone, it's just this stupid bell-end. For the 30 FPS thing it doesn't matter; as long it doesn't chug to around 25 you'll get a nice experience.

#87 Posted by AmazonAngry (945 posts) -
#88 Posted by bezza2011 (2306 posts) -

@bezza2011 said:

because it's the only thing Lems have to go on for an argument at this time, no one cared for multiplayer on every game last gen, theres just not much to argue over so it's come to this lol

#23 Posted by Riverwolf007 (22921 posts) - 1 minute, 15 seconds ago

you have to admit that a shooter with no co-op or deathmatch or whatever is pretty strange.

that would immediately move this game from a "buy" to a "rent" for me because who wants to pay $60 for a short shooter type single player campaign.

multiplayer is shooter 101, how is it even possible it got out of the design stage with no mp plan???

This is probably the funniest thing i've read ever, multiplayer isn't a shooter 101 lol and how the hell is it strange a third person game with a story not having multiplayer where have you been for the last 3gens lol

Multiplayer games are best suited to

  • MMO
  • FPS
  • Racing
  • Fighting
  • Sports

not every third person adventure game needs a multiplayer

golly! who would expect mp in a shooter! golly!

lulz, you dudes crack me up.

look man, i seriously don't care if it is in there or not all i am saying is this game goes from a buy to a rent because i'm not shelling out $60 for a 6 to 12 hour shooter campaign.

and yet last gen we all went out and bought lots of single player shooters :S I mean so Tomb Raider is a buy and not a rent because that has multiplayer :S I buy a game because of the quality of the game not because i get loads for my money, we don't even know what it's truly about yet we've seen a small snippet of it, its a third person shooter not every third person shooter needs a tacked on multiplayer just because you think it should.

Co-op is probably the only argument for this game.

but people forget it takes time and man power to put a multiplayer aspect in a game, already the cost of just making the game have gone up, companies are struggling, but yet people still want more even if it's a crappy MP part. I never bought gears of war because of the multiplayer, I never played the first 2 halo's because i thought about multiplayer,

  • I never played uncharted because of the multiplayer.
  • I never played the last of us bescause of the multiplayer.
  • I never played metal gear solid because of the multiplayer.
  • I never played Hitman because of the multiplayer.
  • I never played GTA 1,2,3,4,5 because of the multiplayer.
  • I never played resident evil 1,2,3,4,5,6 because of the multiplayer.
  • I never played super metriod because of the multiplayer.
  • I never played lego marvel or any lego game because of a multiplayer.

There has been no point in my life where i went into a game shop for a game i wanted and thought hold on, has it got multiplayer. What i'm not understanding is why it's strange all of a sudden that a game is single player :S I mean we just been through a whole 3/4 gens of consoles without being that bothered about a game not having multiplayer.

So of course this uproar is because we have nothing better to talk about because non of these systems have any games,

#89 Posted by BeardMaster (1580 posts) -

maybe some considered it the spiritual competitor to gears? Though i can see why people would be upset that sony only releases one and done single player games while MS focuses on multiplayer games that have years worth of replayability.

People obviously prefer multiplayer based games these days.

#90 Posted by Vecna (3369 posts) -

They couldn't put in multiplayer in if they wanted. They cant even fill the whole screen with pixels. Black bars with every game purchase!

#91 Edited by GrenadeLauncher (3645 posts) -

A crappy multiplayer is better than no multiplayer.

Especially when games cost 60$

ive played some games with crappy mp and had alotoffun.

"I like to eat shit therefore everyone should have the chance to eat shit"

Lemmings.

#92 Posted by shellcase86 (1934 posts) -

I rather they focus on the SP.

#93 Edited by Northernboxer (1666 posts) -

No multiplayer in a game: That's great, now they can focus on making an amazing single player game!!

No single player in a game: That's a ripoff!! Who would pay for that pos!!

#94 Edited by Allicrombie (25114 posts) -

MP focused games tend to suck anyway.

#95 Edited by blackace (19996 posts) -

@Dreams-Visions said:

Hey guys...

....not every game needs multiplayer.

No one said they did. Some games got MP that didn't need it at all. This game was showcased like it would be a multiplayer game. That's really the only issue I have with it. I'm just curious as to how the other 3 characters will be involved within the story, if it's just a single player game. We still need more info. Is the game open world or closed and linear? How do the other characters get involved? Who will be the lead character we play as? How long in the campaign?

*******************************************************

@Northernboxer said:

No multiplayer in a game: That's great, now they can focus on making an amazing single player game!!

No single player in a game: That's a ripoff!! Who would pay for that pos!!

A lot of people bought Warhawk & MAG which were multiplayer online only.

#96 Edited by Wanderer5 (25658 posts) -

Hm seemed great for some co-op action, but whatever, if the SP is a wonderful experience then it won't be a big deal, and better having no MP than a tacked on one.

#97 Edited by Northernboxer (1666 posts) -

@blackace said:

@Dreams-Visions said:

Hey guys...

....not every game needs multiplayer.

No on said they did. Some games got MP that didn't need it at all. This game was showcased like it would be a multiplayer game. That's really the only issue I have with it. I'm just curious as to how the other 3 characters will be involved within the story, if it's just a single player game. We still need more info. Is the game open world or closed and linear? How do the other characters get involved? Who will be the lead character we play as? How long in the campaign?

*******************************************************

@Northernboxer said:

No multiplayer in a game: That's great, now they can focus on making an amazing single player game!!

No single player in a game: That's a ripoff!! Who would pay for that pos!!

A lot of people bought Warhawk & MAG which were multiplayer online only.

I was just pointing out Titanfall hypocrisy. I don't think games need both.

#98 Posted by iambatman7986 (394 posts) -

The announcement trailer and the concept scream coop mp like left 4 dead. My hype for the game had now plummeted with a lack of coop.

#99 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69619 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride: It's not everyone, it's just this stupid bell-end. For the 30 FPS thing it doesn't matter; as long it doesn't chug to around 25 you'll get a nice experience.

That's what i think aswell. People are raging over nothing