First off, they always seem to enable the worst of game companies trying to financially ruin their players.
Second off, I'm in my 40s and my reaction time isn't what it was when I used to play UT or Quake. You can't improve an aged reaction time nearly as easily, yes, because it's gotten slightly worse with age, but also because you become less willing and / or able to dedicate the sheer volume of time that you would need to to improve. Getting repeatedly stomped isn't fun, and quite simply, I've got better and more important things to do.
Third off, I don't like the constant recycling of content that you see in multiplayer games. A handful of maps are expected to last you infinite plays. I like changes of scenery, storylines, and varied experiences. Doing the same thing over and over again is just boring.
Fourth off, player communities in some games are aggressively dogshit and I really don't want to interact with them at all.
It's unlikely your reaction time has changed much in your 40s. You probably have well over a decade before that starts to happen. On your first couple of tries, reacting to something is going to seem impossible. After you've seen the same stimuli and practiced what you should do in response, you'll be right around where teens and 20-somethings are. If you don't want to put the time in to make that happen, that's fine, but don't think it's unattainable to get good at a given multiplayer if you were otherwise interested in doing so. E-sports are now old enough that we've seen enough folks age into their 40s and remain top talent, as long as that remained an ideal career choice for them when so few are going to be able to support themselves in that career.
Watching NakeyJakey’s video on competitive shooters put into perspective how hard it really is. I knew I wasn’t cut out for it, but that just demonstrated how not cut out for it I was.
In my own experience, now in my 50s and having played games since my teens, including a long period of RPGs and FPS online, reaction times start dropping in your 30s.
It's a tiny bit and you only really notice it when you're operating near your limits (same for intelligence, by the way - if you're using it near capacity, you'll notice that your capabilities start falling at around your mid 20s).
However, you can compensate it with experience, smarts and even wisdom - for example in FPS games you use the environment against other players, lead them into doing something predicable and get them then and/or prefer play styles that don't depend on reaction speed.
(IMHO, the world top people at for example sports, are the ones who already early in their careers combine top physicallity with experience, smarts and wisdom)
It's just a fact of life that physical and mental capacities do decay with age and far earlier than you seem to think, and whilst if you keep on using them it's not that much, if you're using them at a near peak-level it's noticeable if you pay attention as you can't just reach the peaks you could reach before.
And in my experience, having gotten into fighting games in a serious way for the first time at age 30 (I'm now 37), people tend to attribute atypical "good reaction times" to what are actually smart input buffering techniques. In a crowd populated by mostly 20-somethings, I still routinely end up in the top 15% in a given game, and those opponents that beat me never feel like the difference was reaction time. Going from memory from a link I'll surely never be able to find again, so take this with a grain of salt, the US Air Force had a vested interest in studying how reaction times change as we age and found that it didn't really start to decay in any meaningful way until long after 40.
The overwhelming majority of competitive games, across any genre, are determined predominantly via knowledge and skill rather than raw mechanical speed until the very highest level of play. Players who dedicate themselves to laddering will not get filtered by lack of mechanical speed until they're already among the very best in the game.
Games that would be determined primarily by speed would become very boring to watch after the first few rounds. So developers generally don't design games around it.
This also applies for some single-player games as well. I'm 48 and I had to "git gud" on Expedition 33 in order to progress - learning how to time parries is pretty critical for getting through the tougher fights.
I used to have 50ms reaction time 15+ years ago as a teenager. Now I have 300ms reaction time according to the previously linked test. I'm not sure if it's age or laziness though. I really really wanted to beat Zombie Goku back then and actually trained hard for it
Doing the same thing over and over again he’s boring.
That's also a factor in the gameplay itself.
Competitive multiplayer games will always develop a 'meta' that you have to adhere to or respond to in order to be at all competitive.
In single player games, you can make a replay interesting by playing it a different way, trying different strategies even if they're non-optimal, just to have the novel experience of playing the game a different way. Things like, "I think I'm going to try doing a no-vehicles run in Subnautica." or "I think I'll try Cyberpunk with a melee-focused solo build this time." But stuff like that just isn't viable in competitive multiplayer. You will be defeated early and often if you stray too far from the meta.
So not only are you playing the same few maps over and over, you're playing the same few tactics and strategies over and over, making things boring from that angle as well.
I've been having so much fun lately using shit like this to add a little spice to the games I've been playing.
Now, I'm a complete sucker for overpowered MC energy in any media I consume. So it makes sense that getting to personally act out that power fantasy appeals to me. As with most art/entertainment, not everyone will get the same enjoyment out of doing this that I do. But that's ok! It's why I love single player games, those that want to have the vanilla experience and work within the rules can, and those that want to cheese the system and goof around can too, and no one is worse off for it!
Being a meta slave is a mindset, not often reality. There are countless examples of players taking "useless" characters or builds far in the professional scene across many different genres and games.
I'm 32. I just recently started getting better aim than I ever had throughout my entire 20's. When it comes to gaming, age doesn't really matter as much.
Well, I'm in my 50s and the previous poster is totally right about reaction speed - there comes a point were your aim is as good as it gets, but so is the aim of the kids doing the same FPS 10h/day and they're faster than you.
That said, with age comes experience (well, can come, if you're trying - plenty of people age but don't learn) so you can beat the kids with smarts and wisdom (things like leading them into situations which are traps, using the environment in your favor and, more generally, just playing in ways were your reaction speed doesn't matter).
That said, I've been out of the FPS genre for a decade now. Like the previous poster I simply don't get enough fun from a game if it's low complexity, which tends to be the case for fast paced games that require fast and/or precise moves.
Twitch reaction time isn't particularly important in most games. Quake and UT, sure, but even in those most twitchiest of shooters strategy will still carry you into the upper echelons of players.
Counterstrike is almost entirely based on spray control and map knowledge. Twitch reactions have only a minor role to play.
Even games like Starcraft are determined primarily by strategy and not mechanical speed. You could probably play at a professional level before a lack of speed compared to your peers would actually begin holding you back.
Plus... you can train reaction time and multitasking. An actual physical impairment like RSI might stop you, though.
The whole "ohhh I can't do games because I have the olds" is such a nonsense cop-out. The rest of your post is pretty accurate, though.
Oh. It's clear you haven't played multiplayer games for a long time, otherwise this false statement would not have come up:
Third off, I don't like the constant recycling of content that you see in multiplayer games. One map is expected to last you infinite plays. I like changes of scenery and story.
Maps rotate constantly and change, active and passive maps, community maps.
Oh I obviously understand that there are multiple (if not dozens of) maps, but how many times are you expected to play those maps over and over again? Without plot progression, I just don't find it interesting.
The problem isn't the maps being static and finite, it's that nobody designs maps for emergent and dynamic gameplay anymore. CoD might have dozens of maps but they're all designed for perfect sterile balance with the same lane concepts.
Some of my favorite multiplayer games have only 3-4 maps but each is distinct and plays well to different tactics. Usually they're based around strong points and webs of approach which gives more options for fresh experience each time you play ("wow never noticed that flank" - "oh this window gives a great angle over this courtyard" - "oh a grenade can be thrown just perfectly over that building" - etc...)
In a sense, good progression isn't flat mechanical unlocks but building up game and map knowledge. You can choose to explore different facets of the game and it always stays interesting. Competitive ranked multiplayer ruined this because going off meta means losing the game for your team.
Yes, it's a peaceful life.
It sucks when i finally can sit down in the evening and start up a game and then getting insta killed by teenager who has nothing to than practice all day.
Or team based PvE games where it's just trying to keep up with the speedrunners farming.
In addition getting 30 min of uninterrupted time can be a luxury, so pause feature is a must have.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a pause feature in most souls-like games? Or is this because its the boss battles that take up the most time and pausing in those is a death sentence?
Sorry if this is a newby question, I don't play souls-like games. I've tried, they just are not for me.
Got drunk and played megaman 11 with siblings, passing around the controller, cracking jokes about how megaman’s ow sound seemed weirdly gay and horny in this one. I was so bad I kept getting him hurt and it sounded like a gay porn.
My sister asks “isn’t that supposed to be a robot child?”
Me: “He’s been a child since the 80s and his voice is lower now. He’s a megaMAN now, and how dare you demean the short king fighting for your safety over his robo masochim kink and short stature.”
Brother: “yea he can’t help he was built that way. You’re a monster. Don’t kink shame”
Me and bro: -glare-
Sister (who is in a poly relationship and very much the alternachick of the family): “….what the fuck is happening here?”
Single player games are still fun when played together.
I'm in my early 40s. Back then, I used to play Quake 3, UT 99 and Tribes 2 competitively. Not anymore. Life is stressful enough, and I don't want to add to that by playing competitively. I want to relax by playing story-based games. I also play a lot of games on easy mode so that I can truly enjoy the story.
There was a brief period where I played Tribes: Ascend, and it was actually really good and reminiscent of the old games. Then, I don't remember specifically what happened but it only took one update to kill it. Pretty sad.
My friends and I used to play Unreal Tournament in programming class when the teacher wasn't paying attention lol
Difficulty doesn't really have anything to do with story. Playing games on easy can even rob you of the enjoyment of the full gameplay mechanics. Noah Caldwell-Gervais' recent video covering RE4R and RE9 is a good example, where some of their conclusions regarding gameplay design were only because they typically play on easier settings. Some of the things in question make more sense or have stronger legs when the game's played on a reasonably challenging setting.
Of course, it really depends on the game. For example, I preferred playing Borderlands 3 on normal mode because I enjoyed the mayhem, whereas I played the Horizon series on easy difficulty because the story was engaging and the world atmosphere was awesome.
So it really depends. Often, if a game is not an FPS and is really story-driven, I'll play it on easy mode to enjoy the story. The more full and deep the game's story is, the more likely I am to play it on easy mode to fully enjoy it after a stressful day.
Yeah, I get that. I'm on the opposite end where I want to be challenged and enjoy the feeling of beating a tough room or encounter. Sadly not all games are balanced well and increasing difficulty might not actually make much difference, in which case you might as well just play on easy.
About the same, but I would love to go to a lan party every now and then and actually game. I stopped going when people were more interested in sharing their puddle deep political takes instead of gaming and that was before gamergate. I can only imagine how bad it would be now.
People were more relaxed at lan parties and open server browser games. Rank tracking and matchmaking made everyone a sweaty gamer.
The live service model has been a plague on gaming and has basically killed every bit of enjoyment I'm getting out of multiplayer game nowadays. Shit's like having a job. You leave for two weeks and you might as well be playing a different game. Leave for a month? Maybe the game don't even exist anymore. It's exhausting.
It's also why they keep dying. All of them operate off a walled garden model while simultaneously demanding "this is probably the only game you can play for a while" levels of time investment and using unlockables as the carrot.
So is it surprising that players don't want to jump ship and leave all their skins and "look at me I'm special" shiny equipment behind for something that's not much different than what they got already?
It's the same thing as when every Tom, Dick, and Harry were sure they'd be the next WoW. Execs never learn.
Sometimes I think at least 500 of those hours are just me loading into the game after a long week, finding an isolated spot on the map, and just staring into the sunset while the wind howls in my headset.
I really love the atmosphere of skellige. Something about it is so nostalgic, the blowing wind, the clouds that look like a huge storm is about to roll in.
This is something I’ll do with an especially pretty game. Find a pretty view and just set up camp watching the world. Works even better with weather and night/day cycles in the game.
Don't forget all the new CoD, battlefield, and even tarkov (soon) is requiring TPM 2.0, secure boot, and actively blocking linux making it impossible to even play them.
I've yet to find a game I couldn't play on Bazzite in the year since I've switched from Windows. I know that says something about my gaming preferences, but it is also high praise for the folks who have worked on Wine and Proton over the past years
Somehow, living next to a country which is invading one of its neighbours, and seeing a bunch of actual real war footage from real wars on the daily basis, made me reconsider if shooters actually qualify as "fun" these days.
I felt the same when my friends made me play Call of Duty Modern Warfare. Civilians dying around me is supposed to be fun? Should I feel like a hero while people die like flies around me? That is a hard pass from me!
I miss split screen. Too many games nowadays, in order to play with my kids, I have to buy multiple copies, finagle multiple PCs and accounts just to play multiplayer. Finally my ancient laptop collection has a use
I miss community servers. Each had its own identity and you could pop in and out without being penalized. Being locked in to a 30+ minute sweatfest with people I don't know, or like, has never been appealing to me.
Like so many things involving the internet, things were a lot better 15-20 years ago. Dedicated servers with active admins beat the pants off anonymous "skill based" matchmaking services we're required to use now. Yeah, it'd take some time before you'd find a server that fits you but the search was worth it - and if you wanted to put in the money and effort yourself, you could just pay a service for server space and host your own!
No need to rely on AI chatbots to take out the trash, either. If someone was breaking the rules - which were set by the server! -, the admins would just ban them. Quick as you please. Players were anonymous like they are now, but you could ban their SteamID and it didn't matter how many times they changed their name and thumbnail, and most other games had similar options. People that stuck around made friends and built a community, while others would move on and find a home somewhere better suited to them.
If I wanted to be the target of homophobic insults, I could just do it to myself in front of a mirror, though granted, I can't really emulate the voice of a 12 year-old so it's not quite the same experience bouquet.
Beyond that, multiplayer is almost like working - you're supposed to relentless keep at it, on somebody else's timings even if you're in a guild: done it in EVE Online and WoW and, frankly, for the experience of work I have real-life were I actually get paid for it rather than the other way around.
Then there's the whole creepy monetisation shit - I'm not really interested in the constant sales pressure, especially when it's "buy this or else you're handicaped vs those who did" (EA is still in my shit list since they did it with a DLC in one of the older Battlefield titles), especially nowadays when I've managed to mainly remove advertising from my life.
So I just stopped doing multiplayer a decade ago and pretty much avoid it like the plague.
Maybe I'll try Guild Wars 3 if it's in the same style as Guild Wars 2 (which came out before the monetisation era).
I thoroughly enjoy single players games. I like being able to explore the world at my own pace, make my own decisions, and draw my own conclusions. It's like reading a book, if turning the pages involved solving puzzles and beating monsters. Relaxing, if you're good, challenging if you're not.
Cooperative games are a close second. I like PvE, it means that I get to help my friends. The objective isn't rank and competition, it's winning together. It's why I like Starbound, Minecraft, and D&D.
Genuinely? I despise PvP. It's the trash talk and the aggressively competitive assholes who have nothing to do with their time. I hate dealing with people who like to hurt strangers by humiliating them. Who the hell enjoys that?
PvP can be honorable and joyful and rewarding too, if you don't play with assholes.
Often times, even losing the match may leave you with a sweet aftertaste. Like, yeah, they got us, but it was beautiful and honorable and your teammates were there for you. With you.
Once you get the right people, every match will be like this. With randoms...it's very occasional, but it happens, too.
Yeah, right. I seem to be a slow player too - at the mo I'm 160 hours into baldur's gate 3 and still only just in act 2. I think Amy multiplayer game with me in it would be frustrating for everyone. I prefer doing my own thing at my own pace.
Competitive multiplayer games are a big no, but I love cooperative multiplayer games. I'd much rather play one of them with a friend or two than play something by myself. I couldn't tell you the last time I've actually beaten a single player game, I tend to get bored and lose interest half way through.
I wish split screen/couch co-op was back in fashion.
Everyone wants everyone to buy 2 copies and set up 2 computers right next to each other just to play, and it's not happening. I'll just move on. Take Two seems to be the only sane one - I'll pay for full price for it since it has a free coop copy.
There are a lot of Couch CooP Games with only one copy and Gamesystem needed- but mostly indie games. Some friends and I get together from time to time and have a great time.
I've always preferred single player games. I hate multiplayer, all those strangers running around in my TV, chaos everywhere. I want to relax and explore, but multiplayer is stressful. I don't want to deal with other people.
This is going to be extremely niche, but I find the surf mini game in Counter Strike Source to be incredibly relaxing and rewarding while also being a quasi multiplayer game. The community is quite helpful and friendly and there are almost 1000 different maps of all skill levels so there is something for everyone if you are into movement based mechanics.
I personally mostly use video games as a means of an escape from real life. And to me multiplayer pulls to much of real life back into games and it can be unenjoyable.
Sometimes I force myself to try multiplayer, but other than Gran Turismo, Last Of Us factions and Gears of War, I never found how it could be considered as enjoyable.
And even these games are way better as single player games.
It’s also making my move to Linux gaming way easier.
Once any game gets big enough it's all downhill. Games are the most enjoyable when they're new, before they're ruined.
I've had so many childhood games get popular, the content creators come in, change the game to their liking and then leave when the toxic following they've brought destroys the community and the fun of it.
Helldivers 2. It’s at a point now, where you can make your build, drop in for 45 min and then leave. Most folks are super cool. No screaming profanities and racist shit in the lobby. It’s great.
Online multiplayer games used to be fub but they have really gone downhill recently.
The most fun I have ever had in a video game was hunting a bear in RDR2 to make clothing with the pelt. It took several days but I think that's what made finding the bear so satisfying.
I used to be pretty good at the usual stuff like COD, CS, Battlefield… but each game got fucked up in its own unique way. Stuff became just too sweaty and annoying, all the while the sense of community faded. COD back in the 360 days was fun. Now it’s just annoying.
These days, I’m fully single player. It’s just not worth the price of modern games to deal with all the multiplayer bullshit.
Back in the days of COD on 360, voice chat was a relatively new thing. And everyone wanted to have a go. Since it was novel to talk to people far outside your own country, they did what humans do: teach each other naughty words and slurs. And whether you were from the Netherlands, Greece, the US or wherever, that was fun!
Now, obviously there was verbal abuse. But the thing people don’t really grasp unless they were there is: everyone gave as good as they got. Someone calls you X, Y or Z, well you insult their mom in three different languages back. Especially European lobbies were great fun since you’d get teams of all different nationalities.
And since voice chat was pretty much uncensored, nobody thought anything of it. Like I said, we all gave as good as we got.
With modern games, there’s so much censorship that people take voice chat off game. Barely anyone talks anymore, and certainly not outside their own group. Because one slightly offensive word can get your account banned.
So yeah, I’ll take an uncensored, chatty community over a completely silent one.
Only multiplayer games I still play are deep rock galactic and the occasional MMO. The former has the best online community around and the latter I can filter who I play with easily
Recently I rediscovered StarCraft 2 for me. Am I ever to reach a top ladder placement? Hell no. But the games in platinum league are fun and it is often surprising what tactics other people come up with. Especially because almost anything can work on that level when it is decently executed. No need to play the same optimal openings all the time like the pros.
Never got into StarCraft, but WarCraft 3 was one of a handful of early online games for me (as long as Mom didn't need to use the phone lol), and I never played at a competitive level, but some of the strategies I'd see other people pull were so creative that I would watch the match replay to find out how the fuck they were able to rush my base with like 15 wyverns so early into the game, etc. Then I'd try to do it myself, sometimes successfully. Really fun stuff.
No real difference. Kind of a shit patch overall but I respect the effort. If they actually cared about the game'a economics they could have just re-read the essay written about it over at TL during the LotV beta. But Blizzard almost never admits fault, unfortunately.
It feels strange and interesting. Although I started playing again only a few weeks before the patch, everything feels kind of off. All the feeling for passage of time is gone and has to be relearned. But overall it gives a few more seconds of breathing room at the start of the game to set everything up.
As I am playing Zerg, the most interesting part is that with the new patch I suddenly have the option to stop spending larvae for a bit. So it is not only drone as much as possible and see what money is left an what you can afford, but actually a decision, when to build the first hatch etc.
Yeah, SC2 and RTS in general is - surprise surprise - about strategy way more than mechanical speed. You'll see that with people taking a nostalgia trip in AOE2, too. You will eventually reach a point where lack of mechanical speed will hold you back in SC2 but that's quite literally like the C and B tier professional bracket - you would already be at the point of being able to win a free dinner here and there in tournaments.
I get it, but my favorite multi-player game is mobile suit Gundam battle operation 2. Try it. The community has really been pruned of trolls and bad actors. The game makes it more frustrating for them, but more fun with people who just wanna play giant robots. Sure sometimes you get stomped because of a whole ducking clan attacking at once, but I find the wide range of mechs with lots of different playstyles counter the stomping.
Meh, I found that being good at competitive games felt more like work than fun. I play the fun way and get trounced before it could really get fun, so I switch to advance in leaderboards and maybe I could, but it just sucked because the fun stuff tended to be the less strategically wise way to go.
Even non-competitive gaming "hey, let's all get together at 7 pm to do something on the game", now I have "meetings" to worry about.
Single player is there when I want it, for however long or short as I want it, and can play in a fun style rather than an effective/efficient style.
I've recently been playing Tales of Maj'Eyal and it's such a nice vibe. There's an in-game chat for people just going about playing their single-player adventures, generally filled with kind and intelligent people. The game is complex enough that being able to ask questions in the chat is a nice option.
Single player games are so great, but it does get lonely sometimes. There's a whole genre that needs to be invented : multiplayer city-builders. For instance in Going Medieval it would be dope to be able to visit other players' settlements for trade or raids on your server
The game loop itself antagonizes. It's funny b/c in some single player games you can see that mechanic, they use it narratively and sparingly for humor.
I used to play on my college’s Overwatch team. I did the grind. I hit GM. I put in 5000 hours. It has forever made me despise competitive games/gaming. 2 years ago, I tried valorant for a few weeks and was immediately accused of smurfing just because I was pub stomping the lobbies.
I still have good fps fundamentals and pretty much any one I touch is trivially easy, but I stick to single player games now.
Eh. They can be fun for a bit, but it’s either super easy or require too much active attention. I got a full time job now and I’m just not looking for an “all gas” game when I actually have time to sit down and play one. If I play any shooter nowadays, it’s gotta have something else besides running and gunning to keep me engaged while I play.
Might give CULTIC a try, then. It's essentially a Build engine game along the lines of Blood with large maps that typically allow for some degree of nonlinearity and exploration. You end up with quiet periods of sneaking around and exploring to break up the combat segments.
Otherwise I'd say you can't hardly beat the new Wolfenstein games. Varied gameplay, an actually decent plot, and when has shooting Nazis not been as American as apple pie? The first one hasn't aged as well as the second on PC though. I get occasional frame drops and other oddities, but I suppose that could be an Intel drivers thing. Those idTech engines haven't aged super great.
I used to enjoy playng online in mc servers and occasuionally gmod and cs:go, but only with friends on those last 2.
Nowadays I would never open cs:go because I wouldn't be able to find it fun, especially since I can guatantee I'd be mass reported for not being good at the game. And gmod ain't fun with strangers, IMO.
Any more I just find so much more fun im singleplayer titles and maybe games like Oaken Tower and Krosmaga ( the only PVP games I play anymore ) where it's not skill based PVP. I just find exploration, my own choices being why I lost, and other such singleplayer type of things so much more enjoyable than losing because someone had a wired internet connection or a lag switch or simply a higher level/better equipment from playing longer or better hardware or whatever.
Nintendo is basically the only one who can get me to play multiplayer/online games like Mario Kart or my personal favorite that I did play competively, Splatoon. Literally that's it. I would get into fighting games if I wasn't ass because I do want to know more about their storylines, but I feel like a bitch if I just watch it.
The man thing that sets Splatoon apart is the fact that the voice chat is basically non-existant, so you don't have to hear the endless slurs and rage from your teammates. The characters, plot, music, and art also really set it apart for me, but tbf those can be subjective and applicable to multiple games. But it's a special game to me and our fanbase is rabid lol.
But yeah I absolutely love and almost solely play singleplayer games. JRPGs ftw!!!
What recent games on the single player side? In the RPG side, content has fallen off.
We’re still waiting for Witcher 4 ten years later. Dragon Age killed itself. Mass effect trilogy is a one off. Spiders never really got to finish the Greedfall sequel before being shut down. The newest thing right now is Baldurs Gate 3.
Well there's GoW: Ragnarok and Tears of the Kingdom as sequels for two of the games on there, for starters. You could then replace one of the other two with Baldur's Gate 3, and maybe even Tainted Grail even though it's indie.
Hot take: single player games are lame, co-op is where it's at. That's not to say there aren't good single player games or I didn't enjoy them in the past, but my evolving tastes and circumstances make me mostly skip them.
Games in general have no respect for my time, so if I'm getting on for an extended session it's going to be with my friends. If they do respect my time, why should I pay $40+ for an 8 hour experience when I could buy a dozen used books for that price and get more content and variety?
Even games with compelling storytelling suffer because there's a core conflict between who's in control of the pacing and scene focus. What do I gain from holding a controller during the 8 hours of cutscenes in MSG4? Why play Dark Souls if I manage to miss out on 80% of the subtle world building? Does having a branching plot really make a story better?
Putting aside narrative, games without a human element are either dopamine toys or simulators. Most games aren't honest about that and are a palette swapped Total War, a tweaked 2D platformer, a fighting game with [gimmick], etc... It's very rare to see innovation because innovation is hard. Even harder when you're spending time on assets like character art, music, and world lore instead of the one thing that make games games: mechanics.
I'll still play the odd rogue like or crusader kings to kill time, but I generally don't feel the need to expand my catalogue unless a game looks fun as a platform for social play (friendslop as some might say).
Co-op games pretty much always suffer from the fact that adding additional humans makes each player generally worse at paying attention and learning. So the game has to be designed as if it's for a class of slow 8 year olds.
133 replies
I don't play multiplayer games anymore.
First off, they always seem to enable the worst of game companies trying to financially ruin their players.
Second off, I'm in my 40s and my reaction time isn't what it was when I used to play UT or Quake. You can't improve an aged reaction time nearly as easily, yes, because it's gotten slightly worse with age, but also because you become less willing and / or able to dedicate the sheer volume of time that you would need to to improve. Getting repeatedly stomped isn't fun, and quite simply, I've got better and more important things to do.
Third off, I don't like the constant recycling of content that you see in multiplayer games. A handful of maps are expected to last you infinite plays. I like changes of scenery, storylines, and varied experiences. Doing the same thing over and over again is just boring.
Fourth off, player communities in some games are aggressively dogshit and I really don't want to interact with them at all.
It's unlikely your reaction time has changed much in your 40s. You probably have well over a decade before that starts to happen. On your first couple of tries, reacting to something is going to seem impossible. After you've seen the same stimuli and practiced what you should do in response, you'll be right around where teens and 20-somethings are. If you don't want to put the time in to make that happen, that's fine, but don't think it's unattainable to get good at a given multiplayer if you were otherwise interested in doing so. E-sports are now old enough that we've seen enough folks age into their 40s and remain top talent, as long as that remained an ideal career choice for them when so few are going to be able to support themselves in that career.
Watching NakeyJakey’s video on competitive shooters put into perspective how hard it really is. I knew I wasn’t cut out for it, but that just demonstrated how not cut out for it I was.
Link please?
Probably this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbJIbdcLn6M
In my own experience, now in my 50s and having played games since my teens, including a long period of RPGs and FPS online, reaction times start dropping in your 30s.
It's a tiny bit and you only really notice it when you're operating near your limits (same for intelligence, by the way - if you're using it near capacity, you'll notice that your capabilities start falling at around your mid 20s).
However, you can compensate it with experience, smarts and even wisdom - for example in FPS games you use the environment against other players, lead them into doing something predicable and get them then and/or prefer play styles that don't depend on reaction speed.
(IMHO, the world top people at for example sports, are the ones who already early in their careers combine top physicallity with experience, smarts and wisdom)
It's just a fact of life that physical and mental capacities do decay with age and far earlier than you seem to think, and whilst if you keep on using them it's not that much, if you're using them at a near peak-level it's noticeable if you pay attention as you can't just reach the peaks you could reach before.
And in my experience, having gotten into fighting games in a serious way for the first time at age 30 (I'm now 37), people tend to attribute atypical "good reaction times" to what are actually smart input buffering techniques. In a crowd populated by mostly 20-somethings, I still routinely end up in the top 15% in a given game, and those opponents that beat me never feel like the difference was reaction time. Going from memory from a link I'll surely never be able to find again, so take this with a grain of salt, the US Air Force had a vested interest in studying how reaction times change as we age and found that it didn't really start to decay in any meaningful way until long after 40.
The overwhelming majority of competitive games, across any genre, are determined predominantly via knowledge and skill rather than raw mechanical speed until the very highest level of play. Players who dedicate themselves to laddering will not get filtered by lack of mechanical speed until they're already among the very best in the game.
Games that would be determined primarily by speed would become very boring to watch after the first few rounds. So developers generally don't design games around it.
This also applies for some single-player games as well. I'm 48 and I had to "git gud" on Expedition 33 in order to progress - learning how to time parries is pretty critical for getting through the tougher fights.
I'm 50 and it's started getting noticeable in the last year or two.
I used to have 50ms reaction time 15+ years ago as a teenager. Now I have 300ms reaction time according to the previously linked test. I'm not sure if it's age or laziness though. I really really wanted to beat Zombie Goku back then and actually trained hard for it
That's also a factor in the gameplay itself.
Competitive multiplayer games will always develop a 'meta' that you have to adhere to or respond to in order to be at all competitive.
In single player games, you can make a replay interesting by playing it a different way, trying different strategies even if they're non-optimal, just to have the novel experience of playing the game a different way. Things like, "I think I'm going to try doing a no-vehicles run in Subnautica." or "I think I'll try Cyberpunk with a melee-focused solo build this time." But stuff like that just isn't viable in competitive multiplayer. You will be defeated early and often if you stray too far from the meta.
So not only are you playing the same few maps over and over, you're playing the same few tactics and strategies over and over, making things boring from that angle as well.
In single player games you can also cheat a little,bug abuse and glitch the game for giggles without ruining the exp for others too
THIS. 1000% THIS!
I've been having so much fun lately using shit like this to add a little spice to the games I've been playing.
Now, I'm a complete sucker for overpowered MC energy in any media I consume. So it makes sense that getting to personally act out that power fantasy appeals to me. As with most art/entertainment, not everyone will get the same enjoyment out of doing this that I do. But that's ok! It's why I love single player games, those that want to have the vanilla experience and work within the rules can, and those that want to cheese the system and goof around can too, and no one is worse off for it!
Being a meta slave is a mindset, not often reality. There are countless examples of players taking "useless" characters or builds far in the professional scene across many different genres and games.
I'm 32. I just recently started getting better aim than I ever had throughout my entire 20's. When it comes to gaming, age doesn't really matter as much.
Well, I'm in my 50s and the previous poster is totally right about reaction speed - there comes a point were your aim is as good as it gets, but so is the aim of the kids doing the same FPS 10h/day and they're faster than you.
That said, with age comes experience (well, can come, if you're trying - plenty of people age but don't learn) so you can beat the kids with smarts and wisdom (things like leading them into situations which are traps, using the environment in your favor and, more generally, just playing in ways were your reaction speed doesn't matter).
That said, I've been out of the FPS genre for a decade now. Like the previous poster I simply don't get enough fun from a game if it's low complexity, which tends to be the case for fast paced games that require fast and/or precise moves.
Twitch reaction time isn't particularly important in most games. Quake and UT, sure, but even in those most twitchiest of shooters strategy will still carry you into the upper echelons of players.
Counterstrike is almost entirely based on spray control and map knowledge. Twitch reactions have only a minor role to play.
Even games like Starcraft are determined primarily by strategy and not mechanical speed. You could probably play at a professional level before a lack of speed compared to your peers would actually begin holding you back.
Plus... you can train reaction time and multitasking. An actual physical impairment like RSI might stop you, though.
The whole "ohhh I can't do games because I have the olds" is such a nonsense cop-out. The rest of your post is pretty accurate, though.
Doesn't highly competitive Starcraft boil down to most clicks per second wins?
At the S tier level it's both strategy and speed. Lower than that, as in like over 99% of players, strategy is more important than anything else.
Oh. It's clear you haven't played multiplayer games for a long time, otherwise this false statement would not have come up:
Maps rotate constantly and change, active and passive maps, community maps.
Oh I obviously understand that there are multiple (if not dozens of) maps, but how many times are you expected to play those maps over and over again? Without plot progression, I just don't find it interesting.
Especially when there's map voting. Fuck that.
Believe it or not, another 2fort \ mirage
The problem isn't the maps being static and finite, it's that nobody designs maps for emergent and dynamic gameplay anymore. CoD might have dozens of maps but they're all designed for perfect sterile balance with the same lane concepts.
Some of my favorite multiplayer games have only 3-4 maps but each is distinct and plays well to different tactics. Usually they're based around strong points and webs of approach which gives more options for fresh experience each time you play ("wow never noticed that flank" - "oh this window gives a great angle over this courtyard" - "oh a grenade can be thrown just perfectly over that building" - etc...)
In a sense, good progression isn't flat mechanical unlocks but building up game and map knowledge. You can choose to explore different facets of the game and it always stays interesting. Competitive ranked multiplayer ruined this because going off meta means losing the game for your team.
Yes, it's a peaceful life. It sucks when i finally can sit down in the evening and start up a game and then getting insta killed by teenager who has nothing to than practice all day.
Or team based PvE games where it's just trying to keep up with the speedrunners farming.
In addition getting 30 min of uninterrupted time can be a luxury, so pause feature is a must have.
One of my younger coworkers was just complaining about that and I had the pleasure of informing them they were now an old man.
Yeah exactly. I need a game I can just pickup and put down on a moments notice.
Was gonna say having kids is incompatible with souls like games.
I mean, generally in those games you'll pick up exactly where you stopped. You just have to take the extra step of quitting to the menu.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a pause feature in most souls-like games? Or is this because its the boss battles that take up the most time and pausing in those is a death sentence?
Sorry if this is a newby question, I don't play souls-like games. I've tried, they just are not for me.
Maybe in more recent “-like” games but most of them do not actually.
Dark Souls 1-3, Elden Ring, Lies of P and others typically do NOT let you pause. So you can’t stop in the middle of a fight.
I think this is slowly going away but a handful of clones still do this.
Got drunk and played megaman 11 with siblings, passing around the controller, cracking jokes about how megaman’s ow sound seemed weirdly gay and horny in this one. I was so bad I kept getting him hurt and it sounded like a gay porn.
My sister asks “isn’t that supposed to be a robot child?”
Me: “He’s been a child since the 80s and his voice is lower now. He’s a megaMAN now, and how dare you demean the short king fighting for your safety over his robo masochim kink and short stature.”
Brother: “yea he can’t help he was built that way. You’re a monster. Don’t kink shame”
Me and bro: -glare-
Sister (who is in a poly relationship and very much the alternachick of the family): “….what the fuck is happening here?”
Single player games are still fun when played together.
Your family sounds fun lol
I'm in my early 40s. Back then, I used to play Quake 3, UT 99 and Tribes 2 competitively. Not anymore. Life is stressful enough, and I don't want to add to that by playing competitively. I want to relax by playing story-based games. I also play a lot of games on easy mode so that I can truly enjoy the story.
Exact same. I can pause when needed and handle priorities. Fuck MP games that drive up my blood pressure. The only MP games now are co-op, like L4D2
SHAZBOT!
I AM THE GREATEST!
Tribes 2 was so fun.
There was a brief period where I played Tribes: Ascend, and it was actually really good and reminiscent of the old games. Then, I don't remember specifically what happened but it only took one update to kill it. Pretty sad.
My friends and I used to play Unreal Tournament in programming class when the teacher wasn't paying attention lol
Tribes Ascend had at least two periods where it was good bordering on great and Hi-Rez fucked it up both times.
That company's sheer incompetence is noteworthy. Global Agenda had serious first-mover potential and they bungled that too.
Difficulty doesn't really have anything to do with story. Playing games on easy can even rob you of the enjoyment of the full gameplay mechanics. Noah Caldwell-Gervais' recent video covering RE4R and RE9 is a good example, where some of their conclusions regarding gameplay design were only because they typically play on easier settings. Some of the things in question make more sense or have stronger legs when the game's played on a reasonably challenging setting.
Of course, it really depends on the game. For example, I preferred playing Borderlands 3 on normal mode because I enjoyed the mayhem, whereas I played the Horizon series on easy difficulty because the story was engaging and the world atmosphere was awesome.
So it really depends. Often, if a game is not an FPS and is really story-driven, I'll play it on easy mode to enjoy the story. The more full and deep the game's story is, the more likely I am to play it on easy mode to fully enjoy it after a stressful day.
Yeah, I get that. I'm on the opposite end where I want to be challenged and enjoy the feeling of beating a tough room or encounter. Sadly not all games are balanced well and increasing difficulty might not actually make much difference, in which case you might as well just play on easy.
I see. Well... I guess I've had enough beating back then to just take it easy now!
About the same, but I would love to go to a lan party every now and then and actually game. I stopped going when people were more interested in sharing their puddle deep political takes instead of gaming and that was before gamergate. I can only imagine how bad it would be now.
People were more relaxed at lan parties and open server browser games. Rank tracking and matchmaking made everyone a sweaty gamer.
The live service model has been a plague on gaming and has basically killed every bit of enjoyment I'm getting out of multiplayer game nowadays. Shit's like having a job. You leave for two weeks and you might as well be playing a different game. Leave for a month? Maybe the game don't even exist anymore. It's exhausting.
You're not supposed to leave! Subscribe to the Steam iv nutrition service and stay focused!
It's also why they keep dying. All of them operate off a walled garden model while simultaneously demanding "this is probably the only game you can play for a while" levels of time investment and using unlockables as the carrot.
So is it surprising that players don't want to jump ship and leave all their skins and "look at me I'm special" shiny equipment behind for something that's not much different than what they got already?
It's the same thing as when every Tom, Dick, and Harry were sure they'd be the next WoW. Execs never learn.
I have over 1500 hours into The Witcher 3.
Sometimes I think at least 500 of those hours are just me loading into the game after a long week, finding an isolated spot on the map, and just staring into the sunset while the wind howls in my headset.
I really love the atmosphere of skellige. Something about it is so nostalgic, the blowing wind, the clouds that look like a huge storm is about to roll in.
I want to live on Aard Skellige. It's so beautiful, you have everything, ocean, forest, mountains, meadows, cliffs, creeks/waterfalls, all of it.
Sounds like New Jersey.
I'm not even kidding lol. If you know, you know.
This is something I’ll do with an especially pretty game. Find a pretty view and just set up camp watching the world. Works even better with weather and night/day cycles in the game.
every time it rains i think or sing to myself "it's rainin', it's pourin', emperor emhyr's whorin'"
Don't forget all the new CoD, battlefield, and even tarkov (soon) is requiring TPM 2.0, secure boot, and actively blocking linux making it impossible to even play them.
I've yet to find a game I couldn't play on Bazzite in the year since I've switched from Windows. I know that says something about my gaming preferences, but it is also high praise for the folks who have worked on Wine and Proton over the past years
To make it a bit more clear, they are actively blocking access to the game via anti cheat that doesn't support linux or in many cases, not enabled.
I have zero issues on arch. I find linux works better out of the box, is more reliable, faster, and doesn't actively farm your data.
I was initially so mad when they blocked League of Legends on Linux. Then I was grateful 😂
I used to play mostly shooters online.
Somehow, living next to a country which is invading one of its neighbours, and seeing a bunch of actual real war footage from real wars on the daily basis, made me reconsider if shooters actually qualify as "fun" these days.
I felt the same when my friends made me play Call of Duty Modern Warfare. Civilians dying around me is supposed to be fun? Should I feel like a hero while people die like flies around me? That is a hard pass from me!
I think the friendslop trend is great. It brings the couch gaming experience into the modern era after a long time in coma.
I miss split screen. Too many games nowadays, in order to play with my kids, I have to buy multiple copies, finagle multiple PCs and accounts just to play multiplayer. Finally my ancient laptop collection has a use
I miss community servers. Each had its own identity and you could pop in and out without being penalized. Being locked in to a 30+ minute sweatfest with people I don't know, or like, has never been appealing to me.
Like so many things involving the internet, things were a lot better 15-20 years ago. Dedicated servers with active admins beat the pants off anonymous "skill based" matchmaking services we're required to use now. Yeah, it'd take some time before you'd find a server that fits you but the search was worth it - and if you wanted to put in the money and effort yourself, you could just pay a service for server space and host your own!
No need to rely on AI chatbots to take out the trash, either. If someone was breaking the rules - which were set by the server! -, the admins would just ban them. Quick as you please. Players were anonymous like they are now, but you could ban their SteamID and it didn't matter how many times they changed their name and thumbnail, and most other games had similar options. People that stuck around made friends and built a community, while others would move on and find a home somewhere better suited to them.
I miss it.
If I wanted to be the target of homophobic insults, I could just do it to myself in front of a mirror, though granted, I can't really emulate the voice of a 12 year-old so it's not quite the same experience bouquet.
Beyond that, multiplayer is almost like working - you're supposed to relentless keep at it, on somebody else's timings even if you're in a guild: done it in EVE Online and WoW and, frankly, for the experience of work I have real-life were I actually get paid for it rather than the other way around.
Then there's the whole creepy monetisation shit - I'm not really interested in the constant sales pressure, especially when it's "buy this or else you're handicaped vs those who did" (EA is still in my shit list since they did it with a DLC in one of the older Battlefield titles), especially nowadays when I've managed to mainly remove advertising from my life.
So I just stopped doing multiplayer a decade ago and pretty much avoid it like the plague.
Maybe I'll try Guild Wars 3 if it's in the same style as Guild Wars 2 (which came out before the monetisation era).
I thoroughly enjoy single players games. I like being able to explore the world at my own pace, make my own decisions, and draw my own conclusions. It's like reading a book, if turning the pages involved solving puzzles and beating monsters. Relaxing, if you're good, challenging if you're not.
Cooperative games are a close second. I like PvE, it means that I get to help my friends. The objective isn't rank and competition, it's winning together. It's why I like Starbound, Minecraft, and D&D.
Genuinely? I despise PvP. It's the trash talk and the aggressively competitive assholes who have nothing to do with their time. I hate dealing with people who like to hurt strangers by humiliating them. Who the hell enjoys that?
PvP can be honorable and joyful and rewarding too, if you don't play with assholes.
Often times, even losing the match may leave you with a sweet aftertaste. Like, yeah, they got us, but it was beautiful and honorable and your teammates were there for you. With you.
Once you get the right people, every match will be like this. With randoms...it's very occasional, but it happens, too.
Yeah, right. I seem to be a slow player too - at the mo I'm 160 hours into baldur's gate 3 and still only just in act 2. I think Amy multiplayer game with me in it would be frustrating for everyone. I prefer doing my own thing at my own pace.
Competitive multiplayer games are a big no, but I love cooperative multiplayer games. I'd much rather play one of them with a friend or two than play something by myself. I couldn't tell you the last time I've actually beaten a single player game, I tend to get bored and lose interest half way through.
Too bad you need friends to do that
This is what drew me to Minecraft. Common goals or just solo'ing. And other people take great pride in showing their builds. So chill.
I wish split screen/couch co-op was back in fashion.
Everyone wants everyone to buy 2 copies and set up 2 computers right next to each other just to play, and it's not happening. I'll just move on. Take Two seems to be the only sane one - I'll pay for full price for it since it has a free coop copy.
There are a lot of Couch CooP Games with only one copy and Gamesystem needed- but mostly indie games. Some friends and I get together from time to time and have a great time.
I've always preferred single player games. I hate multiplayer, all those strangers running around in my TV, chaos everywhere. I want to relax and explore, but multiplayer is stressful. I don't want to deal with other people.
This is going to be extremely niche, but I find the surf mini game in Counter Strike Source to be incredibly relaxing and rewarding while also being a quasi multiplayer game. The community is quite helpful and friendly and there are almost 1000 different maps of all skill levels so there is something for everyone if you are into movement based mechanics.
I personally mostly use video games as a means of an escape from real life. And to me multiplayer pulls to much of real life back into games and it can be unenjoyable.
I miss multiplayer video games. I wish someone still made them.
Sometimes I force myself to try multiplayer, but other than Gran Turismo, Last Of Us factions and Gears of War, I never found how it could be considered as enjoyable.
And even these games are way better as single player games.
It’s also making my move to Linux gaming way easier.
I sometimes miss counter-strike, but i lack atleast the time and the people to play it on a level where that game is fun and probably the reflexes.
The alternate modes like arms race or demolition are fun and quick.
and not what i'd want from the game ;)
it's either a 5vs5 in a serious setting or in service of getting better at that, otherwise it's not the game i miss.
Cheating and involving money ruined multiplayer gameplay.
Once any game gets big enough it's all downhill. Games are the most enjoyable when they're new, before they're ruined. I've had so many childhood games get popular, the content creators come in, change the game to their liking and then leave when the toxic following they've brought destroys the community and the fun of it.
I only stopped playing multiplayer games because all the current MP games suck shit.
Deep rock galactic. Best multi-player game i played recently other then stardew valley. Sometimes a multi-player game gets better with someone else
Elden Ring Nightreign has been my jam. Deep Rock Galactic and DRG Rogue Core are also fun.
But yeah otherwise a lot of MP games are ass nowadays. Too much lootboxes and hostile policies and not enough focus on fun.
Helldivers 2. It’s at a point now, where you can make your build, drop in for 45 min and then leave. Most folks are super cool. No screaming profanities and racist shit in the lobby. It’s great.
Online multiplayer games used to be fub but they have really gone downhill recently.
The most fun I have ever had in a video game was hunting a bear in RDR2 to make clothing with the pelt. It took several days but I think that's what made finding the bear so satisfying.
I used to be pretty good at the usual stuff like COD, CS, Battlefield… but each game got fucked up in its own unique way. Stuff became just too sweaty and annoying, all the while the sense of community faded. COD back in the 360 days was fun. Now it’s just annoying.
These days, I’m fully single player. It’s just not worth the price of modern games to deal with all the multiplayer bullshit.
The community
Yes, that exactly!
Back in the days of COD on 360, voice chat was a relatively new thing. And everyone wanted to have a go. Since it was novel to talk to people far outside your own country, they did what humans do: teach each other naughty words and slurs. And whether you were from the Netherlands, Greece, the US or wherever, that was fun!
Now, obviously there was verbal abuse. But the thing people don’t really grasp unless they were there is: everyone gave as good as they got. Someone calls you X, Y or Z, well you insult their mom in three different languages back. Especially European lobbies were great fun since you’d get teams of all different nationalities.
And since voice chat was pretty much uncensored, nobody thought anything of it. Like I said, we all gave as good as we got.
With modern games, there’s so much censorship that people take voice chat off game. Barely anyone talks anymore, and certainly not outside their own group. Because one slightly offensive word can get your account banned.
So yeah, I’ll take an uncensored, chatty community over a completely silent one.
I just don't want to compete with other people. I used to play a lot of quake and team fortress, but it just feels kind of pointless now.
I was pvp hardened in Eve Online, exactly because of that I will probably never touch anything multiplayer again.
EVE Online is old man friendly though… and still here.
The closest thing to multiplayer I touch now days are Fromsoft invasions.
I play exclusively on consoles, and enjoy a slower pace to gaming.
Have a huge backlog of games I haven't touched, and a few that I just keep coming back to.
Really gotten into permadeath gaming, which slows things down even more, but makes every decision and hour of gaming truly count.
Factorio, Cities Skylines, Far Cry 2, Subnautica, the Fromsoft catalogue, Mass Effect, I'll do a full play through at least once a year.
Finally playing the Witcher III while listening to the book on audio.
I get why people enjoy multiplayer games, but it hasn't been for me for a long time.
I think the last one I really spent any time on was America's Army around 2006.
Every time I'm like "ughhh goddammit..."
But I never turn the feature off lol. No chat def helps.
The odd ways players come up with to communicate without text is definitely an endearing part of the design!
Reminds me of the game Journey a little bit.
That game is a magical experience if you have like 2 hours to kill.
https://ani.social/pictrs/image/acfb6522-e363-4830-a456-d2b781536642.webp
Multi-player is fun at a good old fashioned Lan party and not much more.
Only multiplayer games I still play are deep rock galactic and the occasional MMO. The former has the best online community around and the latter I can filter who I play with easily
Single player games for life baby.
Let's sort this skill issue out in Quake Live, Apex boy.
I’ll never forgive Apex for denying me a Titanfall 3. Titanfall 2 is a masterpiece
Recently I rediscovered StarCraft 2 for me. Am I ever to reach a top ladder placement? Hell no. But the games in platinum league are fun and it is often surprising what tactics other people come up with. Especially because almost anything can work on that level when it is decently executed. No need to play the same optimal openings all the time like the pros.
Never got into StarCraft, but WarCraft 3 was one of a handful of early online games for me (as long as Mom didn't need to use the phone lol), and I never played at a competitive level, but some of the strategies I'd see other people pull were so creative that I would watch the match replay to find out how the fuck they were able to rush my base with like 15 wyverns so early into the game, etc. Then I'd try to do it myself, sometimes successfully. Really fun stuff.
How does it feel to have 4 less starting workers
No real difference. Kind of a shit patch overall but I respect the effort. If they actually cared about the game'a economics they could have just re-read the essay written about it over at TL during the LotV beta. But Blizzard almost never admits fault, unfortunately.
It feels strange and interesting. Although I started playing again only a few weeks before the patch, everything feels kind of off. All the feeling for passage of time is gone and has to be relearned. But overall it gives a few more seconds of breathing room at the start of the game to set everything up.
As I am playing Zerg, the most interesting part is that with the new patch I suddenly have the option to stop spending larvae for a bit. So it is not only drone as much as possible and see what money is left an what you can afford, but actually a decision, when to build the first hatch etc.
Yeah, SC2 and RTS in general is - surprise surprise - about strategy way more than mechanical speed. You'll see that with people taking a nostalgia trip in AOE2, too. You will eventually reach a point where lack of mechanical speed will hold you back in SC2 but that's quite literally like the C and B tier professional bracket - you would already be at the point of being able to win a free dinner here and there in tournaments.
Kingdom Come
I get it, but my favorite multi-player game is mobile suit Gundam battle operation 2. Try it. The community has really been pruned of trolls and bad actors. The game makes it more frustrating for them, but more fun with people who just wanna play giant robots. Sure sometimes you get stomped because of a whole ducking clan attacking at once, but I find the wide range of mechs with lots of different playstyles counter the stomping.
Yikes that game has some troubling reviews.
I’m not opposed to playing multiplayer games. But I’m not going to be playing the vast majority of modern multiplayer titles.
Most of the time I wonder if there is even another player on the other end of modern game, or if it’s just bots
I like playing old games organized on discord and sites like game date
Meh, I found that being good at competitive games felt more like work than fun. I play the fun way and get trounced before it could really get fun, so I switch to advance in leaderboards and maybe I could, but it just sucked because the fun stuff tended to be the less strategically wise way to go.
Even non-competitive gaming "hey, let's all get together at 7 pm to do something on the game", now I have "meetings" to worry about.
Single player is there when I want it, for however long or short as I want it, and can play in a fun style rather than an effective/efficient style.
I've recently been playing Tales of Maj'Eyal and it's such a nice vibe. There's an in-game chat for people just going about playing their single-player adventures, generally filled with kind and intelligent people. The game is complex enough that being able to ask questions in the chat is a nice option.
Single player games are so great, but it does get lonely sometimes. There's a whole genre that needs to be invented : multiplayer city-builders. For instance in Going Medieval it would be dope to be able to visit other players' settlements for trade or raids on your server
The problem is multiplayer competition, which is comparable to gambling addiction.
The game loop itself antagonizes. It's funny b/c in some single player games you can see that mechanic, they use it narratively and sparingly for humor.
I used to play on my college’s Overwatch team. I did the grind. I hit GM. I put in 5000 hours. It has forever made me despise competitive games/gaming. 2 years ago, I tried valorant for a few weeks and was immediately accused of smurfing just because I was pub stomping the lobbies.
I still have good fps fundamentals and pretty much any one I touch is trivially easy, but I stick to single player games now.
How do you like boomer shooters?
Eh. They can be fun for a bit, but it’s either super easy or require too much active attention. I got a full time job now and I’m just not looking for an “all gas” game when I actually have time to sit down and play one. If I play any shooter nowadays, it’s gotta have something else besides running and gunning to keep me engaged while I play.
Might give CULTIC a try, then. It's essentially a Build engine game along the lines of Blood with large maps that typically allow for some degree of nonlinearity and exploration. You end up with quiet periods of sneaking around and exploring to break up the combat segments.
Otherwise I'd say you can't hardly beat the new Wolfenstein games. Varied gameplay, an actually decent plot, and when has shooting Nazis not been as American as apple pie? The first one hasn't aged as well as the second on PC though. I get occasional frame drops and other oddities, but I suppose that could be an Intel drivers thing. Those idTech engines haven't aged super great.
I really liked Fortnite when it was a single player zombie game. Well coop, but that was fun.
Until your horse gets blown in half…
I mostly only play single player games too but of the four used in this meme I only thought one of them was any good.
I used to enjoy playng online in mc servers and occasuionally gmod and cs:go, but only with friends on those last 2.
Nowadays I would never open cs:go because I wouldn't be able to find it fun, especially since I can guatantee I'd be mass reported for not being good at the game. And gmod ain't fun with strangers, IMO.
Any more I just find so much more fun im singleplayer titles and maybe games like Oaken Tower and Krosmaga ( the only PVP games I play anymore ) where it's not skill based PVP. I just find exploration, my own choices being why I lost, and other such singleplayer type of things so much more enjoyable than losing because someone had a wired internet connection or a lag switch or simply a higher level/better equipment from playing longer or better hardware or whatever.
Nintendo is basically the only one who can get me to play multiplayer/online games like Mario Kart or my personal favorite that I did play competively, Splatoon. Literally that's it. I would get into fighting games if I wasn't ass because I do want to know more about their storylines, but I feel like a bitch if I just watch it.
The man thing that sets Splatoon apart is the fact that the voice chat is basically non-existant, so you don't have to hear the endless slurs and rage from your teammates. The characters, plot, music, and art also really set it apart for me, but tbf those can be subjective and applicable to multiple games. But it's a special game to me and our fanbase is rabid lol.
But yeah I absolutely love and almost solely play singleplayer games. JRPGs ftw!!!
At least update the meme with more recent games
What recent games on the single player side? In the RPG side, content has fallen off.
We’re still waiting for Witcher 4 ten years later. Dragon Age killed itself. Mass effect trilogy is a one off. Spiders never really got to finish the Greedfall sequel before being shut down. The newest thing right now is Baldurs Gate 3.
Well there's GoW: Ragnarok and Tears of the Kingdom as sequels for two of the games on there, for starters. You could then replace one of the other two with Baldur's Gate 3, and maybe even Tainted Grail even though it's indie.
Hot take: single player games are lame, co-op is where it's at. That's not to say there aren't good single player games or I didn't enjoy them in the past, but my evolving tastes and circumstances make me mostly skip them.
I'll still play the odd rogue like or crusader kings to kill time, but I generally don't feel the need to expand my catalogue unless a game looks fun as a platform for social play (friendslop as some might say).
Co-op games pretty much always suffer from the fact that adding additional humans makes each player generally worse at paying attention and learning. So the game has to be designed as if it's for a class of slow 8 year olds.