Multiplayer = Hardcore... MAYBE!

[brimstone1392]

I've been kicking this around in my head for a while now, and thought it would be a great conversation starter to present on the greatest of all gaming sites. Umm... excuse me while I clean the pixelated brown from my nose. (Seriously, though - LOVE The Escapist!)

After finally hearing the idea that gaming is being "dumbed down" and why, particularly SO well articulated by those wonderful folks at Extra Credits awhile back, I started thinking about what hardcore gaming actually meant in today's world. More to the point, the idea of appealing to a broader base to maximize potential sales VS making a truly difficult game that appeals only to those ready/willing/able to invest the time and interest needed to perfect it's unique style or quirks.

So indulge me a bit as I attempt to explain my concept of "hardcore" first:

When I was a kid, there was no such label. If you played video games, you could be labeled a gamer, but the idea of a hardcore/casual gamer had yet to be proliferated. I call that the Golden Time... When men were men, girls had yet to corrupt and dominate our lives, and the golden-paved streets where cluttered with visions of the newly-invented flying car. I might be remembering that wrong, but SCREW IT! It's my memory and I'll twist it anyway I like, thank you.

Now, in the Golden Time, every game was a challenge. Each single one pushed us to the point of exhilaration with its own idea of control schemes and vaguely-recognizable humanoid objects. If you were Really good, you could astonish your friends and local politicians by beating Super Mario Bros 3 in under thirty minutes. (Also, I should note, the modern idea of the "speedrun" was obscured by the fact that time actually moved much slower back then - take THAT Dr. Wheelchairman!)

This is actually where the first notion of multiplayer being more difficult came from. Even if you mastered the challenge on your own, bringing a friend into it (2-ply-A-er, as we called it) meant that the challenge was no longer your own. I (unfortunately) remember ONCE publicly -at the time meaning "in front of 1 or more living/not undead human beings"- beating an NES game called Battletoads, only to have my soon-to-not-be-friends try to make me drag them to a victory in this unforgiving game. It didn't end well, ever, period. My childhood was a bit lonely after that. (sadface/single-tear/revenge/alcohol/women/better-times/HOLY-CRAP-I'M-IN-MY-LATE-TWENTIES-WHEN-DID-THAT-HAPPEN!/far more alcohol/today.)

Wow... I'm too young to be this grizzled...

Anywho, The Point: Since singleplayer games are getting easier and easier, one can only assume (EC) that this is because game developers and publishers want to get more people to buy their games and thus mediate the financial risk of making them. So, where can you find your hardcore fix? Multiplayer, (more-than-2-ply-A-er) and here's why:

In Singleplayer, we've become accustomed to always having a point to fall back on. In most SP PC games, there are single function keys for both saving and loading of our progress. The same is not, and frankly cannot be true with MP. TIME doesn't work like that. (damn you Dr. Wheelchairman!) So the only solution is to MAKE yourself better than those you're playing against.

Now, we've ALL played a game where the few who have put in a large amount of personal time Dominate over those who have only enjoyed the game on a small time scale. Pretty much any MP-predominate game fits into this scenario. Name your own examples, if you must. But where does that leave the rest of us, those who only like the initial challenge presented by learning a new skill-set at the behest of an omni-present devolper? Well, SP, IF DONE RIGHT!

I want to wrap this up now, but there are SO many avenues of discussion that this topic could lead to. PLEASE leave your thoughts, if you wish, so future generations can have this same debate and completely ignore them.

Still fun though!

 

[Telperion]

Eschalon: book 1 [http://basiliskgames.com/eschalon-book-i]
Eschalon: book 2 [http://basiliskgames.com/eschalon-book-ii]

 

[brimstone1392]

Really? Given that this is predominately a gaming site (and therefore forum) a topic like this has only garnered one reply?

NOT that the one reply didn't speak volumes... Thanks Telperion. Eloquent, though addressing only a small fraction of my idea!

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I completely see what you are saying, single player games are usually too easy. I play pretty much every single player game on the difficulty above normal unless a game is noted by reviewers for being hard. Hard is basically yesteryear's normal or even easy. So many single player games are offering more of an experience than a game. For example, the COD campaigns are like playing through an action movie, the gameplay is solid but pretty basic and usually only gets hard when the AI grenade spams or becomes ridiculous marksmen who never miss. Way too many damn games have health regen now so you don't have to be nearly as careful as you should or games let you save anywhere. I like have lots of save opportunities (it's convenient) but the save anywhere games allow you to reload after 1 missed shot and you can take that same shot again in seconds.

I guess competitive multiplayer games are harder on average just because you are facing other real people and not AI. However, I really feel most multiplayer games are much easier than they used to be as well, health regen all over the place. All your standard online shooters nowadays are way too easy and have devolved like COD. You can't even lean in FPSs anymore. Even SOCOM is a shell of it's former self, it's basically a 3rd-person COD. I didn't play those tough online PC shooters from back in the day like Counterstrike as I've never been a PC gamer, but I want my online games to be tough and hard to master like those old games. The main online shooter I've played this gen is Metal Gear Online (MGO), which I've been playing weekly for almost 3 years because I've yet to find an online shooter that's better. Anyone that has decent playtime with MGO will tell you it's really hard. You can't just run around and hit R3 to knife someone, knifing takes a lot of skill as you have to cycle from your gun to the knife and execute well. MGO prioritizes skill over everything, you can't camp in a corner and take out high level players just because you saw them first and started shooting first. If you don't get a headshot on a pro (body shots don't do much damage), he's going to be able to turn around and headshot you in a second; if you spray, you're going to die. MGO has a HEALTH BAR, no 1 button nade tossing (1 nade doesn't even kill enemies), and even though it's a 3rd-person shooter, you can shot in 1st-person mode and you can LEAN in 1st-person mode (something you can't even do in any online console FPS).

Back to single player games. There are still some really great and tough single player experiences out there. Bayonetta is so much fun to play and very hard to master; dodge offsetting takes some serious skill and it's a joy to execute as well. Vanquish is tough as well, it's just a straight up hardcore action game that happens to be shooter. Vanquish is just so great because it's a cover shooter that gives you the tools to stay out in the action and not use cover; if you are good enough, you don't have to sit behind cover and play whack-a-mole like in pretty much every other cover shooter. In Vanquish cover is just there to jump over in slow-mo and look badass while doing it or smoke a cigarette. I'm a huge baseball fan and MLB 11: The Show is really tough to play on the highest difficulty and takes some serious hand-eye coordination. Mirror's Edge is probably the best 3D platformer I've played this gen; if you wanna do clean runs or speeds runs, it probably has a pretty damn high difficulty for a 3D platformer, those classic 2D platformers were just so hard mainly because you couldn't save though.

TLDR - Multiplayer games probably have a higher average difficulty than single player games; however, both kinds of games have become easier and more casual.