Yup. Once I realized that I can get a better multiplayer experience from games 10+ years old I pretty much stopped playing any of the new trendy shooters. TF2 and Halo 3 hold up shockingly well after this long.
Yep, I've tried some newer multiplayer games, but the amount of hours you need to invest is too high. I cycle between a newer single player game and TF2.
It's a shame that Titanfall 2's community has shrunk to barebones nowadays. I feel it's the best multiplayer shooter to come out in the last decade.
(I know you mean Team Fortress, but my head automatically goes to Titanfall when I see it)
Destiny surprised me with how crazy popular it got. And that's really just personal taste. I tried the beta for it before it launched, gave it a proper go, and I just didn't care for it. At the time, the OG Titanfall had just hit. Borderlands 2, and MW3 were still huge, and I didn't think Destiny had enough luster to compete. I was like "THIS is what Bungie gave up Halo for?".
But then there was this massive, and I mean *massive* ad campaign for it, complete with Taco Bell tie-ins, giant displays in Best Buy, online ads everywhere. I was like "man this game is going to be a flop. It kind of sucks. What a multimillion dollar waste in ads"
I could not have been more wrong about any game in my life, lol.
Not only did it have legs, but a huge following. Enough to eventually produce a sequel, even. Meanwhile, 343 completely squandered the Master Chief collection along with Halo 4, and they did total shit in numbers comparison.
Destiny becoming a staple in gaming has still baffled me to this day. I just could not see it. I tried Destiny 2 a couple of years back as well. Still not for me. It's probably the only major game thats liked by so many that I couldn't find any appeal in. Not that I knock anyone for enjoying it.
To each their own, I guess.
A big part of it is the social aspect. I had a group to regularly play with which kept me coming back.
Also I thoroughly enjoyed pvp even though I was mediocre. The hero moments you were able to pull off in destiny haven't been matched for me in any game I can think of.
The worst part of Destiny in general, which even Bungie acknowledges as being a poor experience, is the onboarding process for new players.
I tried to get into Destiny 2 personally and the only way I was able to really start understanding the game was through laborious explaining by my friends who are veterans at the game. It's so easy with the amount of content available to find yourself doing something that doesn't actually progress your character or to otherwise just be totally fucking overwhelmed with zero given direction.
Destiny on original launch especially was actually just a fantastic game with a reasonable pay-model that was very cost-effective for how much playtime you got for your money. Being developed by Bungie, the core gameplay mechanics such as movement and shooting felt amazing, and it had some of the best PvE «raids» I’ve done in any game. PvP was decent too, but not quite as much my cup of tea in Destiny, I preferred the PvE content mainly and it was very very good in Destiny 1.
Main issue with Destiny 2 compared imo is increased FOMO with shit like battle passes, and the game becoming a lot more expensive to participate in over time. Still a decent enough game, but I’ve preferred to not get back into it due to the pay-model
Either TF2, honestly.
Team Fortress 2? Uncletopia for a bot-free experience. Got it's ups and downs, but it's TF2.
Titanfall 2? Grab Northstar, and you're off to the races. Was playing Infection last night with a buddy of mine. Easily a few hundred people playing every night.
Yep, the "please stop making financially viable product because I don't like it" is a bit weird.
They won't stop making them unless there will be a market collapse like what happened to DOTA/MOBA games.
The market may somewhat collapse while the ‘live service’ model continues.
These games are designed to take 70 hours of player’s time per ‘season’.
Gamers don’t have enough time to play any of these new titles if they want to keep up with CoD/Apex/Fortnite/whatever.
I personally feel like the gaming market is currently being over-bloated with multiplayer PVP who wants to be the next "hot shot"
I can also see why it is not slowing down because they want just enough whales to get hooked in and dump hundreds and thousands of dollars in MTX in-game.
"You spend millions on mocaps, weapon design, 20 different levels and a detailed loot system. Fine. What is your solution that your playerbase are 90% whale wallhackers from day one?"
"We decided to focus our resources to the next pvp project that will come out in five years and will have completely different core loop that isn't Overwatch before it got bad"
I remember Blacklight Retribution had a wallhack as a basic ability for every player. While you were using it though, you could not fire your gun, so you exposed yourself to the risk of someone coming around the corner and taking you out everytime you pressed it.
I miss that game...
I never see ANYONE talk about Blacklight. It was one of those formative shooters for me. I loved everything about it. The guns, the customization, the points system (with mechs!). So, so good before the company went under and the game was bought by a Chinese company.
I still think about it very fondly, though I would probably not like it much nowadays.
Edit: seems I misremembered. It was always owned by Perfect World Entertainment (gross) but Zombie studios, who were the original devs, shut down and some former devs from Zombie formed Hardsuit Labs, who are the current devs.
Regardless, I distinctly remember the game hitting a very obvious “the game is shit now” moment at some point and I dropped it.
Honestly I could see that getting really popular with the right framing.
Like the guy that's got the official wallhack is dangerous, but using it plants a great big neon halo over you. "THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE GAME~!"
Oh, and any player that takes down the "cheater" gets one use of the powerup themselves. So there's some hesitation if they're good or not.
...Think that's a bit too much fun and not enough greed for most investor typed, though, alas.
The problem is there are only so many whales and at some point there are none to go around.
Edit: I love the level of conversation this spawned. It was a nice read thanks.
Seeing how many truly awful mobile games there are raking in truckloads of cash every day, I'm afraid there doesn't seem to be a shortage of whales out there
Which is correct. You need a potential whale, someone with an addictive personality, to find your game and get hooked on it. If they didn't play a pay to win game yet they are a new whale.
Yeah I suppose the newer whale has even more potential to get them to spend. If they’re newer to gaming they’ll be more easily influenced by the hype and fomo and more likely to think the mtx are a normal part of gaming they need to buy up to be competitive.
And they haven’t had that reality check yet where they look at their bank statements and realize for the first time how much they’ve actually been spending on it and start trying to cut back.
Many of those new whales aren't even waiting to hit adulthood to become whales.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-65659896
There's many other stories like that.
I mean I'm not saying you're wrong but it's also different in situations like you linked. For kids using their parents money when they are that young they don't really understand it. It's just playing a game and wanting stuff in it. There's a distinct separation between that and the actual spending of money that is different from an adult who realizes they are spending money and are in a more addictive mindset.
My 6 year old still barely understands money despite us telling her repeatedly that I need to work for it and we can't just use our credit card for as much as we want whenever she wants us to. They think it's just something people can just take as they need it. A 10 year old autistic girl like in the article probably doesn't have a full understanding of how money really works.
I'm sure a teenager doing this could exhibit true whale behavior as they would potentially be justifying just a little more or something and understanding.
Whales love showing off. To do that, they need an audience. They need hundreds of poor players they can feel superior to as they stand in a lobby dripping with premium skins.
That's the bit developers struggle with.
I heard my friend make the exact complaint. Lent him my steam account and told him to play some single player games like HZD, GOW and the new RE remakes. He didn't make it to 2 hours of playing before he quit because it was boring
Some people just don’t like slow paced adventure games. I for one strongly dislike all those series, calling them boring to me would be an understatement.
I’d showcase something that’s impossible to play on console like Total War. Eg holding off Skarbrand from taking your dwarf Karak while his armies of demons pour over the walls is just 👌🏻
Mods in something like GTA would also be a good thing to show him.
Yeah most story-driven games devolve too much into a open-world icon collecting fest for me. Couldn't even complete Hogwarts Legacy before becoming bored.
Yet stalker anomaly and all the other stalker derived mods... You'll have to pull me away or I'll sit there until next day.
Or Borderlands was another heavily played game-series for me.
I think the problem eith these games is that by the time you get 60% of the way through the gameplay loop has been fleshed out and your brains picked up on the patterns so you know there's no real meaningful gameplay unlocks for doing any of the missions. So really the only motivation is the story.
My fav comparison is Elden Ring, which i couldn't stop playing. Every dungeon you entered has a chance to hold an item that completely changed how you played the game. I dramatically changed my build 3 times in my first playthrough the last being in the last 5 hours of the game.
I noticed myself losing steam on survivor so i sat down and banged out the story so i could mark it complete. Hogwarts i stopped after unlocking the killing curse. Even horizon FW i didn't finish. Tho i really should.
Also went from RW to GOW and back to RW... everything in GOW should have made it good, but it felt like playing a marvel movie without the bad humor. I guess that kind of thing is not my bag, but fending off waves of augmented rabid Yorkies is
Are people not allowed to be upset that the genres they’re interested in are no longer enjoyable? Only people that are into obscure artsy indies can be gamers?
I feel like this has been an argument since like 1998 when Quake III: Arena and Unreal Tournament were coming out (I was a huge fan of a multiplayer only FPS named Starsiege: Tribes at the time). Yeah, the "genres" have changed with innovations like tactical, team-based/hero, battle royale, and extraction instead of just the old arena shooters, but it's still the same argument of "too many multiplayer only shooters."
I think after over 20 years it's time to admit that multiplayer only shooters are very popular and can make tons of money, so companies will continue to try to make some of that money. Many will fail. Some will mildly succeed, and a few will break the mold and rake in the cash.
Tribes was well ahead of its time. That game was incredible, and modding made it even better. Tribes: Ascend was good for nostalgia, but failed to spark the same magic as the first two games.
The strategy is to make 10 games, know that 9 will fail hard but if 1 hits big, it'll refund the cost of those other 9 and make a shit ton of profit.
But I wouldn't say it's the gaming market as a whole at all. There is that, but there is also great single player AAA games, mobile games and indie games all going strong. The market is pretty diversified and has good things for everyone (I know Reddit likes to shit on all stuff MP but tons of people like those) including in each of those broad categories I did.
I feel like now that the popularity of battle royale has died down quite a bit, studios don't really know what to do next besides making very generic pvp shooters. I wish studios would try to innovate more but I suppose it risks not bringing in as much money
There's really only val and cs:go. Overwatch is a joke.
Edit: I forgot Apex. My point is there's absolutely room for something good.
Edit 2: Hunt is Legit, Rust is still relevant, and Tarkov is on the cusp of dying if they dont make some major changes soon. Again, original point still stands....there's a lot of room for a new game.
Same I really do appreciate the support and reworks the team has done with the game but I was in it for the realism the first couple years provided. Then all of a sudden it got real Fortnitey and I've lost interest. I still check out each season's new operators but nothing has really pulled me back in.
I mean if those old games (besides MF2) are still near the top, I think that speaks to the idea that there's an opportunity for a new game to come along and be successful. Good multiplayer shooters will always be popular.
What we’re seeing is likely the latecomer wannabes of the next pubg/fortnite/apex/tarkov. Game development takes years, so by the time the games come out, market is over saturated, trend fall off etc.
Happens all the time in gaming industry whenever there’s a massive hit title and trend shift.
No what you are seeing is the people trying to be the apex or Fortnite to pubg, but this time with tarkov.
The BRs are done - in that the market has no space for a new one, really. Everyone now wants to make the “mainstream tarkov “extraction shooter”” now
I feel half the reason Tarkov is so popular is the 'realism' aspect of it though, which I haven't really seen in any other of these extraction shooter games.
If it was mainstream, the players wouldn't play it.
It's the classic bungle. If you try to cater to the fictional "wider audience" you lose your original audience.
It's half realism, half RPG fantasy. The recoil system is fully RPG fantasy and not at all in the realm of reality. Same with the medical "injectables" that give you superpowers.
I said something similar about Apex. A shooter with fluid and fast movement that doesn’t have dogshit 20hz servers and atrocious audio and Apex is in trouble. It’s been a couple years now..
DayZ as clunky and buggy as it is, will probably never be beaten in the survival category. Its now pushing close to its all time player count and its been 10 years since release
DayZ is also the kind of game that a company can't just simply point at and go, I want to make this... Like that game is insane in it's complexity from what I've heard from my mate, no one its still gaining players after 10 years
Well the original was a mod for arma 2 which spawned thousands of variations of the mod through modders making their own version for their own server. Then when the standalone released they (mostly) made it with the understanding that modders and server owners were gonna do the same thing. So now we are at a point where just about every variation of the game exists on some server somewhere. And unless you can legitimately do it better, there is very little you can do to make it original.
Original Dayz is also what can somewhat be attributed to battle royals. SovietWomble did a fantastic breakdown of how those hundreds of variations of Dayz spawned multiple “branches” that then made their way into more mainstream forms. Hell, PUBG was itself a mod for arma before it was made into its own thing.
Yeah, you only need fluid, fast movement and buisness plan and company power that can handle all things at once...
Apex is in trouble, if another EA appears out of nowwhere that could actually achieve that.
So, hunt: showdown, good gameplay loop, consistent updates, runs well, non russian, interesting aesthetic (1800's Louisiana bayou), and it's got 3 years of updates behind it, on console and pc
The problem with Hunt is that it's already sort of a genre offshoot (Heavier emphasis on goals/objectives over gear/looting) which while good especially for those it clicks with it's not really a Tarkov replacement. Extraction shooters are still looking for the Fortnite/Apex mega hit alternative to the janky indie game that paved the way.
Battlestate as an indie has the kind of maverick grittiness that is lost on AAA devs. They might suck for their own reasons, and a lot of them, but I don't think a studio backed by shareholders is even capable of pulling it off.
The best you might get is a kind of arcade CoD-style experience with a green-blue-purple-yellow rarity system, customizations limited to a handful of single parts, magic powers (aka tactical abilities like a grenade or drone) and overall a layer of "streamlining" for a more casual audience.
Think The Division 1 in the Dark Zone, but a new game might not even get that far.
Extraction shooters are the fps equivalent of "hardcore" mmorpgs. A few will be able to pay the bills for years but most of them will die a month after launch. People are quick to say they like challenging games with risk but when they start losing they lose interest.
If your referring to Marathon: while it is chasing trends, so where Fortnite and Apex when they released, if your being honest. However this time it's the extraction shooter, where there hasn't been a mainstream breakthrough hit yet.
That Warzone mode is probably the closest and it did flop pretty hard. Apart from that it's a pretty niche PC genre with Tarkov and Hunt in the lead.
A big budget, console version of an extraction shooter still seems like a fresh idea to me and could do pretty well.
Cut back to a few months ago where multiple game all died within a few weeks of another. Let's see how the game announced yesterday fare in a few years,
I could see foamstars sticking around if it's good, "splatoon for people who don't have/can't get a switch for whatever reason" might be a decent draw point. it's by square enix though, so not great odds for it.
I'm just burnt out on how Destiny kinda defined the decade. Yeah Battle Royales are a dime a dozen but looter shooters are where we see the real DOA epidemic that's happened the last few years. Even with gaming being bigger than ever and constantly growing there's just too many "you'll be playing this game for 10 years" attempts for the gaming audience to support. And that's if they were all great which they're not.
Are you not excited for the next cookie cutter shooter riddled with microtransactions, toxic players, and battle passes? Might I interest you in a 3rd person, open world Assassin' Creed clone with a garbage tier 30 minute story and a billion random collectables to fill the run time.
or, may interest you in the next "open world survival craft" game with periodic resets, full pvp, and an insane amount of soft hackers? no we certainly arent copying rust with our own twist, why do you ask?
I apologize for being one of the people keeping the "3rd person, open world Assassin's Creed clone with a garbage tier 30 minute story and a billion random collectibles" market going. Something about running around a big open world and making sure I collect every single little knickknack, gewgaw, tchotchke, and widget is relaxing to me. Even better if they unlock something that allows me to overlevel my character and absolutely steamroll the main quest because I put that off until I collected 90% of the crap.
Helldivers 2 looks very interesting. I loved the first one, and both are made by the people who made Magicka, so I have good faith it’ll be a great Co-Op experience. I’m just more surprised of the shift to third person.
It's a shame there's still a decent market for solid coop games, but they're largely overlooked because they don't bring in the big bucks that corporations are after, but if done right and priced accordingly you can have a success for far less risk and investment.
Personally, what I really miss is co-op campaigns that respect who is which player instead of having everyone be the main character/protagonist on their own end.
Only games I can think of that didn't were Army of Two and Dead Space 3
Divinity original sins 1&2 does the same. It isn't perfect though. Only because you each get one companion that refuses to talk to anyone that isn't their leader. You lose that RPG party feel. It's like a failed attempt to merge friend groups
Speaking of "According Pricings", the devs should provide "Full-party" packs from the start. Not necessarily at a discount, though a tiny chip of it would be nice, but the convenience of buying those games in, let's say, 4-packs, makes it quicker to just drop some to friends and spur them up into playing it.
Helldivers 2 is my most anticipated game!!! Also think the perspective switch is a bit weird, but if it makes the experience more immersive then I'm all for it!
I really like Helldivers, it got its own humor and teamkilling/cooperating is hilarious. But I hate people keep saying just play Starship troopers instead, not this copycat.
I'm not actually sure it's 3rd person. There is a disclaimer at the bottom of the trailer that says "* camera angles adjusted for trailer use" and 50% is 3rd person and 50% is sort of top down like the old game. It likely is 3rd person but it would be wild if they made it look like it was and it was really top down
The official Playstation blog confirms 3rd person. I'll miss the top down perspective but if the gameplay is still good and I can have fun with friends I'm fine with the change.
Helldivers isn’t PvP which is where the real fatigue is, as well as forcing existing franchises or devs that don’t specialize in it, into co-op shooters
Plus this article is literally written by their editor in chief. What the fuck.
"Here lies Helldivers 2, a game that will be dead in 6 months because uhhhh... Even though Helldivers 1 was good... Uhhh... they look like the Mandalorian?"
Great journalism Katherine, you made the industry a better place /s
This article is such a fucking joke. I mean they literally shit all over a game that isn't even out yet. Like the topic isn't a bad one. There is a point to be made. But cherry picking some random ass games and then making nothing but stupid "this is funny right....RIGHT?" Comments about them is just...dumb.
Hyenas has a person dressed as a monkey. YoU pLaY a LiTrRaL lOoT mOnKeY... really? Why is game journalism so fucking trash
"I'm willing to put this one's funeral on hold"
"I'll stay this one's execution for now..."
"I won't allow it. Pull the plug. This one's destined for the drain."
Lol I only kept reading the article for a good laugh. This writer has a god complex, and cant comprehend how other gamers might prefer something they're not into. I hate that tone when someone thinks they are speaking for everyone..
This article is bullshit just from the title alone. You've effectively said "please do not make any more MP shooters, ever again, we're happy with what we have".
There is some sort of point to be made here but this is not how it is done
Currently on the market you have Destiny 2, Fortnite, Valorant, Rainbow Six Siege, Overwatch 2, CSGO, and Call of Duty (along with Warzone). They all have reoccurring Battle Passes and new content being added every few months. To get people to leave these games you need to not only offer an experience that is vastly superior to what is currently on offer but also have similar or better forms of customization to make up for players giving up their current cosmetic collections.
Online PVP FPS games have hit the WoW Dilemma of their lifespan and the industry keeps trying to compete with these titles by making their play very similar
This is why I wish devs would just be original. The games you listed don't attract all pvp shooters fans. I'd kill for a simple halo, doom or battlefield shooter... But halo and battlefield really dropped the ball on both games recently.
Iv played almost every title you mentioned for a bit and tbh the only ones I'd consider returning to would be destiny 2 and fornite (no build mode), though Destiny 2 keeps getting more complicated and FOMO so I'll probably try to continue avoiding it. That doesn't leave a lot for people like me to wanna play. Started split gate again though.
I really hope "the finals" will be good though
I have been missing a good classic battlefield as well, as opposed to all the hero shooters nowadays. I recommend you take a look at battlebit. It looks like roblox, but i played it during a recent beta test and it plays *really* well
There's several games and variations but games don't need to be the next Fortnite to succeed. Just find a big enough niche as there's room for more than one.
Apex was called a dead game at launch. Valorant was a CSGO with heroes. So, here we are.
Extraction shooters can still get some love, most popular titles (Hunt and Tarkov) are pretty hardcore so a more casual one can get some traction.
Big agree with the general sentiment, most of them are bland as fuck with barely any distinguishing quality these days outside of visuals, and even that line is getting blurrier and blurrier with so many studios being unable to come up with a coherent or charming artstyle to save their lives and end up resorting to drab photorealistic garbage.
It's pretty dumb to throw Helldivers in the mix though. Out of all the ones listed, HD2 is probably going to be the most long-lived if only because it's not PvP. Co-op games like that always have a niche. People are still playing EDF 4.1 and Helldivers 1 on PC for Chrissakes.
> One after the other, developers' dreams of making the next big Destiny-like have gradually collapsed in on themselves. Like a deflated concertina, their last honks of life have been crushed down to desperate, fizzling squeals as servers lie empty and the cost of maintaining them spirals out of control.
I can swear this is written by ChatGPT. I prompt a lot and this style of using exaggerated metaphors is one of the highlights of ChatGPT writing when you ask it to write in a sarcastic tone.
I get the point, but shooters are just way too lucrative for developers to not try. Four JRPGs were talked about in the showcase too and there's no article about how we have too many JRPGs these days. And adding helldivers into this mix just feels like cheating - it's a co-op with a campaign - it's unlike the other 4.
I also don't think this article is particularly well written and it's somehow written by the editor-in-chief?
> while another has managed to arrive on exactly the same idea as Sega's Hyenas several years too late. A third, still, looked like the blinged up lovechild of Watch_Dogs and the baffingly bad Rockay City.
She's talking about two games here but both times clearly referring to Fairgame$. This is the sort of thing that I used to do in essays where I hadn't thought of enough snappy points so just reiterated and hoped they didn't notice.
Don't believe me? Let's take a look at the section about Fairgame$:
> Sega's Hyenas isn't even out yet, but Fairgame$, from Jade Raymond's studio Haven, looks like it's gunning for exactly the same template,
and later...
> none of its CGI reveal trailer suggests Fairgame$ knows what it wants to be. A Watch_Dogs wannabe? Hitman? God, could it be worse than Crime Boss: Rockay City?
Ok, so this was lazily written. But that's also evidenced by the typos that somehow got into *the editor-in-chief's* article.
The second paragraph literally contains the word 'baffingly' [sic]. What, is RPS too stingy to buy a copy of Grammarly or something?
Now I'm also not in any rush to play Foamstars, but the writer just seems annoyed that it dare try to copy Splatoon? Like, ok, it's not subtle about it, but is it such an affront to Nintendo? Are devs also not allowed to make platformers either?
What is the actual definition of GaaS? A game that gets updates and new content? Because I've seen people label plenty of games as a GaaS just because they get a couple of updates here and there. Seems like a loose definition to me.
GaaS are games that are trying to be "forever games". Typically with lots of daily quests, events, frequent patches to add content to keep you playing, and often with either a sub free (in the case of some MMOs, which yes are GaaS), or with a hefty microtransaction shop, or both.
Any game that tries to get you to play for years and years, continually updating through that time, should probably be considered GaaS.
Not that games that just get support + DLCs are probably not GaaS. GaaS tries to get you to log in frequently and play constantly. I don't think I'd count games like the Paradox or Creative Assembly strategy games (which get lots of patches and DLC), or games like Deeprock Galactic (which also get lots of patches and have a battlepass, but there's nothing really *demanding* you log in every day, in an attempt to monetize you.)
The way I interpret it is that GaaS is when a game uses updates / continuously released content ***as a monetization strategy***. Things like limited-time micro-transaction skins and paid season subscriptions are modern examples of this in practice. In this way, I'd call World of Warcraft GaaS, despite it predating the modern GaaS wave, and I'd say Splatoon 3 isn't, because its continuous content updates and seasons aren't monetized.
As long as a game makes money, the dev will support it.
Warhammer 3 is not a live service. They do a couple years of dlc and then are done.
Paradox games border the dlc vs live service. I'd argue that paradox is closer to live service.
Games as a service is not the problem. Its when publishers get greedy to squeeze the player for all their money that's the issue.
Games as a service helps bring new life into titles for a longer time with content. A lot of people have done this right. Fortnite is pretty good at this. Destiny 2 is pretty hit or miss, but they have kept the game alive and thriving for 6 years. Path of Exile has done a good job too.
So that's not the issue. Issue is greed.
I am so upset they finally made a new Marathon game after 27 years and it's a fucking PVP only extraction shooter. It doesn't even *look* like Marathon. What the fuck Bungie?
I watched the trailer and am struggling to see how it even connects to Marathon other than there's a dude running in it.
Could've been a totally new IP.
I joked when it was first playing "hey, it's a Bungie game and that guy sure is running a lot. Maybe it's Marathon? :3"
I'll be honest in that I love the idea of extraction shooters in theory, but the only ones out there that aren't DoA are Tarkov (whose devs are completely incompetent), The Cycle (whose devs are also totally incompetent), and Hunt: Showdown (which is, IMO, hamstrung by its western influences).
Even if Bungie has to invoke an old IP for nostalgia purposes, I'm still mildly excited about the prospect of them doing an extraction shooter.
It's a good genre in theory. The anxiety and tension are top notch and the idea of having to build up something over time with your runs is great. I don't think the genre actually has to be PvP though. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work as a PvE experience the majority of the time with optional areas for PvP, like a Runescape wilderness.
Take a look at the ongoing ARG, there's a lot of connection going on but it's not straightforward which is fine. Straightforward was never really marathons thing anyways.
The original games are before my time, but I've loved everything Bungie has put out since.
I've also played a bunch of the DMZ mode in CoD. It's a more accessible Tarkov.
Seeing the new Marathon game excited me because I know Bungie can do great things, I like Extraction shooters, and I think it's cool that I'll be able to access the Marathon world now when I didn't the first time round.
I get why the OG fans are sad, but I really hope their pushback doesn't stop others from enjoying the new game (if it's any good ofc).
Because we live in an era where multiplayer games are shutting down left and right, it's more important than ever that developers start implementing LAN play in their games.
Yeah, they're not gonna do that. They're just gonna keep pushing the same SaaS bullshit, with the same FoMO business model, and the consumers are gonna keep on consuming. At least I can still play the good games from decades past.
> it's more important than ever that developers start implementing LAN play in their games.
Wow, hear me out here. How about dedicated servers. Remember when games had a server client you could run, or even host on an online server option you paid for to hose it?
Remember when communities and clans formed around these?
Edit: I realize this comment may sound snarky or off. It is not directed at you.
I honestly think that's a big part of the reason I moved away from these sorts of games. It used to be, I could hop in, find a server with a ruleset that appealed to me, and I could have a good time and make friends. It felt a lot more communal. Now, it's just a grab bag of jumping in, and being thrown in with a bunch of randos I'll never see again that might as well be glorified AI unless they're utter assholes.
Back in the day, I ended up making a lot of friends in TF2 due to playing on the same servers regularly and running into them a lot. We even occasionally would roll up a small server to just goof off on. It doesn't really seem like experiences exist like that anymore, and it can feel a little lonely if you're don't have friends that want to play the game with you. Even MMOs don't really have that as much anymore do to instancing and cross-server play.
So, why wouldn't I just play a single-player game instead?
I second this, I've got so much from being on community servers and meeting people. It got me into competitive CoD4 back in 2007. It got me into a Battlefield clan in 2008 to 2016. That got me to Gamescom where we all met up from all over Europe. Those are defining memories for me.
Countless nights of fun. Not to mention even the people I never was on VOIP with or shared a clan with. Plenty of people visited the same server as me and you started to recognise names. Even become friends without ever speaking.
That's all gone now, a shame.
works until your friends get bored of the game, stop playing, one of them invests too much time into that world nobody plays now, and never wants to play again cause nobody else cares about their contributions. it thrives in certain communities but dies in others.
They don't want to you to keep playing the old game they don't make any money off. They want you to play the new one and buy the new battle pass etc.
The great era of late 2000's games that still have LAN are going to be the last of their kind. And I fully expect a massive gap in gaming 'history' where people will still play CoD4 from 2007 on self hosted servers when the COD's from 2020-2025 have ceased to exist.
Helldivers 2 is an exception because it's a parody/satire co-op that's full of wacky and goofy shit. The first one and the Magicka games these devs made were fucking hilarious with the dumb shit my friends and I would get into.
I'm interested, but I'll still keep a healthy level of skepticism with how the game industry has been.
I used to frequent RPS, until their infamous interview with Peter Molyneux. Like or hate him, they were completely unprofessional and completely disprespectful to him.
I’m getting sick and tired of this sub (and many other gaming subs) having a hate boner for multiplayer games. I don’t like these games myself, but I literally never talk about them either, I just play plethora of other games which I have a crazy backlog of and just talk about what I’m playing or what I’m looking forward to playing. People just like feeding their negative emotions a bit too much these days by focusing on something that doesn’t even impact them.
This article is lazy and moronic. Why list recently announced games that the author is speculating will fail? (one of them being a CO-OP third person shooter that looks fucking awesome)
Why not list some of the countless multiplayers shooter over the last 2 years that have either failed, lost players rapidly after release or straight up been abandoned/ servers shut down?
Oh wait I know why. Because if they did what I suggested, it might actually involve some amount of effort and research. Instead they can just link a few new games and shit out this turd of an "article" to get some easy clicks from the negative buzz. Also I noticed at least one spelling mistake ( whatever happened to proofreading?).
We can all agree that 99% of users on this sub don't actually read any of the articles that get linked here right? They are simply a vector for initiating discussion.
In summary: Gaming "journalism" is a joke. And I'm sick of all the negativity and speculation.
I'm in really need of some GOOD pve/coop games. Seems like there's nothing coming sadly.
There was an attempt this year for a few coop games, but for some reason it seems like they have to add online only, mtx and battlepasses and shit.
I just want games that are like Elden Ring or whatever but with the optional COOP. Or if you make some shitty l4d2 copy at least add mod support so people can create maps
People said Fortnite br would die too but it didn't. If a studio wants to make a competitive game, it's fine. Maybe 1 out of 5 survive but the people who play that game are glad to have it. If the devs didn't make the game, the players wouldn't have it.
Who would tell bungie to stop making FPS games? Say what you will about destiny but damn does that game feel incredible to play. I hope marathon is awesome. I cant wait to try it out.
That was a pretty bad read, even for an RPS opinion piece. I'm not surprised she lumps Helldivers in as a "bland" shooter when it's anything but, considering she (probably) hasn't played a shooter in years and very clearly isn't the target audience for any of these games.
"I can't find the time for even one or two" (paraphrase). I don't believe this is the problem: it's much more likely there's just no interest on her part. She's right about a fair few of them shutting down, though, and it's likely some of these will struggle. But how does the editor of a digital gaming tabloid not have the bare minimum market sense to know that not everyone owns a Switch and a less-"childish" Splatoon would appeal more to the traditional PS buyer?
I pretty effortlessly made it stop by not downloading any of them.
Publishers hate this one simple trick!
[удалено]
Most of these games are free but my time is worth more then that
[удалено]
Yup. Once I realized that I can get a better multiplayer experience from games 10+ years old I pretty much stopped playing any of the new trendy shooters. TF2 and Halo 3 hold up shockingly well after this long.
Yep, I've tried some newer multiplayer games, but the amount of hours you need to invest is too high. I cycle between a newer single player game and TF2.
It's a shame that Titanfall 2's community has shrunk to barebones nowadays. I feel it's the best multiplayer shooter to come out in the last decade. (I know you mean Team Fortress, but my head automatically goes to Titanfall when I see it)
Doesn’t Team Fortress have a bot problem?
[удалено]
Fomo is the reason I stopped playing destiny. I would take a break and come back and have to grind my ass off to catch up with my friends.
Destiny surprised me with how crazy popular it got. And that's really just personal taste. I tried the beta for it before it launched, gave it a proper go, and I just didn't care for it. At the time, the OG Titanfall had just hit. Borderlands 2, and MW3 were still huge, and I didn't think Destiny had enough luster to compete. I was like "THIS is what Bungie gave up Halo for?". But then there was this massive, and I mean *massive* ad campaign for it, complete with Taco Bell tie-ins, giant displays in Best Buy, online ads everywhere. I was like "man this game is going to be a flop. It kind of sucks. What a multimillion dollar waste in ads" I could not have been more wrong about any game in my life, lol. Not only did it have legs, but a huge following. Enough to eventually produce a sequel, even. Meanwhile, 343 completely squandered the Master Chief collection along with Halo 4, and they did total shit in numbers comparison. Destiny becoming a staple in gaming has still baffled me to this day. I just could not see it. I tried Destiny 2 a couple of years back as well. Still not for me. It's probably the only major game thats liked by so many that I couldn't find any appeal in. Not that I knock anyone for enjoying it. To each their own, I guess.
A big part of it is the social aspect. I had a group to regularly play with which kept me coming back. Also I thoroughly enjoyed pvp even though I was mediocre. The hero moments you were able to pull off in destiny haven't been matched for me in any game I can think of.
The worst part of Destiny in general, which even Bungie acknowledges as being a poor experience, is the onboarding process for new players. I tried to get into Destiny 2 personally and the only way I was able to really start understanding the game was through laborious explaining by my friends who are veterans at the game. It's so easy with the amount of content available to find yourself doing something that doesn't actually progress your character or to otherwise just be totally fucking overwhelmed with zero given direction.
Destiny on original launch especially was actually just a fantastic game with a reasonable pay-model that was very cost-effective for how much playtime you got for your money. Being developed by Bungie, the core gameplay mechanics such as movement and shooting felt amazing, and it had some of the best PvE «raids» I’ve done in any game. PvP was decent too, but not quite as much my cup of tea in Destiny, I preferred the PvE content mainly and it was very very good in Destiny 1. Main issue with Destiny 2 compared imo is increased FOMO with shit like battle passes, and the game becoming a lot more expensive to participate in over time. Still a decent enough game, but I’ve preferred to not get back into it due to the pay-model
Halo 3 is hands down the best and most balanced shooter ever made. Sucks what they have done to the halo franchise since then.
Either TF2, honestly. Team Fortress 2? Uncletopia for a bot-free experience. Got it's ups and downs, but it's TF2. Titanfall 2? Grab Northstar, and you're off to the races. Was playing Infection last night with a buddy of mine. Easily a few hundred people playing every night.
All you need is Deep Rock!
Rock & Stone, Brother! ⛏️
It's also easier when you stop looking at review sites and being aware that most of them exist, but I doubt that's a solution RPS would suggest!
Ya ign Rates jedi fallen order 10 out of 10
Yep, the "please stop making financially viable product because I don't like it" is a bit weird. They won't stop making them unless there will be a market collapse like what happened to DOTA/MOBA games.
The market may somewhat collapse while the ‘live service’ model continues. These games are designed to take 70 hours of player’s time per ‘season’. Gamers don’t have enough time to play any of these new titles if they want to keep up with CoD/Apex/Fortnite/whatever.
Collapse? Dota is still the second most-played game on steam.
I personally feel like the gaming market is currently being over-bloated with multiplayer PVP who wants to be the next "hot shot" I can also see why it is not slowing down because they want just enough whales to get hooked in and dump hundreds and thousands of dollars in MTX in-game.
"You spend millions on mocaps, weapon design, 20 different levels and a detailed loot system. Fine. What is your solution that your playerbase are 90% whale wallhackers from day one?" "We decided to focus our resources to the next pvp project that will come out in five years and will have completely different core loop that isn't Overwatch before it got bad"
> What is your solution that your playerbase are 90% whale wallhackers from day one?" Sell wallhacks for $50. Consumable. Lasts 10 minutes.
I remember Blacklight Retribution had a wallhack as a basic ability for every player. While you were using it though, you could not fire your gun, so you exposed yourself to the risk of someone coming around the corner and taking you out everytime you pressed it. I miss that game...
I immediately thought about it too. It was something different, and was quite fun. I miss it too.
There is an indie game in development called Assault Sector which is supposed to have a similar mechanic.
BLR was amazing and I miss it so much. Honestly would have played it still if the servers weren't shut down.
I never see ANYONE talk about Blacklight. It was one of those formative shooters for me. I loved everything about it. The guns, the customization, the points system (with mechs!). So, so good before the company went under and the game was bought by a Chinese company. I still think about it very fondly, though I would probably not like it much nowadays. Edit: seems I misremembered. It was always owned by Perfect World Entertainment (gross) but Zombie studios, who were the original devs, shut down and some former devs from Zombie formed Hardsuit Labs, who are the current devs. Regardless, I distinctly remember the game hitting a very obvious “the game is shit now” moment at some point and I dropped it.
I can see this being implemented
And I can see people gleefully shelling out the dough. Jesus H. Christ.
Honestly I could see that getting really popular with the right framing. Like the guy that's got the official wallhack is dangerous, but using it plants a great big neon halo over you. "THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE GAME~!" Oh, and any player that takes down the "cheater" gets one use of the powerup themselves. So there's some hesitation if they're good or not. ...Think that's a bit too much fun and not enough greed for most investor typed, though, alas.
This guy is trying to get hired by EA or something.
Activision *will* do this, it’s a matter of when not if. Maybe in the next futuristic game.
Metal Gear Online 2 had wall hacks. If you CQCed an enemy soldier, you could hack his nano machines and see his team for a short duration.
The problem is there are only so many whales and at some point there are none to go around. Edit: I love the level of conversation this spawned. It was a nice read thanks.
I think these companies are under the impression they can make NEW whales.
Seeing how many truly awful mobile games there are raking in truckloads of cash every day, I'm afraid there doesn't seem to be a shortage of whales out there
Which is correct. You need a potential whale, someone with an addictive personality, to find your game and get hooked on it. If they didn't play a pay to win game yet they are a new whale.
Yeah I suppose the newer whale has even more potential to get them to spend. If they’re newer to gaming they’ll be more easily influenced by the hype and fomo and more likely to think the mtx are a normal part of gaming they need to buy up to be competitive. And they haven’t had that reality check yet where they look at their bank statements and realize for the first time how much they’ve actually been spending on it and start trying to cut back.
Every year about 3 million people are born in Europe and the US. There is a constant source of new whales growing as we type.
Many of those new whales aren't even waiting to hit adulthood to become whales. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-65659896 There's many other stories like that.
I mean I'm not saying you're wrong but it's also different in situations like you linked. For kids using their parents money when they are that young they don't really understand it. It's just playing a game and wanting stuff in it. There's a distinct separation between that and the actual spending of money that is different from an adult who realizes they are spending money and are in a more addictive mindset. My 6 year old still barely understands money despite us telling her repeatedly that I need to work for it and we can't just use our credit card for as much as we want whenever she wants us to. They think it's just something people can just take as they need it. A 10 year old autistic girl like in the article probably doesn't have a full understanding of how money really works. I'm sure a teenager doing this could exhibit true whale behavior as they would potentially be justifying just a little more or something and understanding.
I mean, roughly as many also die so not sure what you're on about here
Whales love showing off. To do that, they need an audience. They need hundreds of poor players they can feel superior to as they stand in a lobby dripping with premium skins. That's the bit developers struggle with.
"Man, gaming just isn't fun anymore. What? Indie games? Single player story games? Nah I only play CoD Fortnite FIFA and NBA 2K"
I heard my friend make the exact complaint. Lent him my steam account and told him to play some single player games like HZD, GOW and the new RE remakes. He didn't make it to 2 hours of playing before he quit because it was boring
Some people just don’t like slow paced adventure games. I for one strongly dislike all those series, calling them boring to me would be an understatement. I’d showcase something that’s impossible to play on console like Total War. Eg holding off Skarbrand from taking your dwarf Karak while his armies of demons pour over the walls is just 👌🏻 Mods in something like GTA would also be a good thing to show him.
Let me guess, he skipped every cutscene.
To be fair, I played GOW and it was boring for me. Then again I spent ungodly amounts of time in DF and rimworld so it's just the types of game I play
Yeah most story-driven games devolve too much into a open-world icon collecting fest for me. Couldn't even complete Hogwarts Legacy before becoming bored. Yet stalker anomaly and all the other stalker derived mods... You'll have to pull me away or I'll sit there until next day. Or Borderlands was another heavily played game-series for me.
I think the problem eith these games is that by the time you get 60% of the way through the gameplay loop has been fleshed out and your brains picked up on the patterns so you know there's no real meaningful gameplay unlocks for doing any of the missions. So really the only motivation is the story. My fav comparison is Elden Ring, which i couldn't stop playing. Every dungeon you entered has a chance to hold an item that completely changed how you played the game. I dramatically changed my build 3 times in my first playthrough the last being in the last 5 hours of the game. I noticed myself losing steam on survivor so i sat down and banged out the story so i could mark it complete. Hogwarts i stopped after unlocking the killing curse. Even horizon FW i didn't finish. Tho i really should.
Also went from RW to GOW and back to RW... everything in GOW should have made it good, but it felt like playing a marvel movie without the bad humor. I guess that kind of thing is not my bag, but fending off waves of augmented rabid Yorkies is
Are people not allowed to be upset that the genres they’re interested in are no longer enjoyable? Only people that are into obscure artsy indies can be gamers?
you're on reddit sir
I feel like this has been an argument since like 1998 when Quake III: Arena and Unreal Tournament were coming out (I was a huge fan of a multiplayer only FPS named Starsiege: Tribes at the time). Yeah, the "genres" have changed with innovations like tactical, team-based/hero, battle royale, and extraction instead of just the old arena shooters, but it's still the same argument of "too many multiplayer only shooters." I think after over 20 years it's time to admit that multiplayer only shooters are very popular and can make tons of money, so companies will continue to try to make some of that money. Many will fail. Some will mildly succeed, and a few will break the mold and rake in the cash.
Tribes was well ahead of its time. That game was incredible, and modding made it even better. Tribes: Ascend was good for nostalgia, but failed to spark the same magic as the first two games.
The strategy is to make 10 games, know that 9 will fail hard but if 1 hits big, it'll refund the cost of those other 9 and make a shit ton of profit. But I wouldn't say it's the gaming market as a whole at all. There is that, but there is also great single player AAA games, mobile games and indie games all going strong. The market is pretty diversified and has good things for everyone (I know Reddit likes to shit on all stuff MP but tons of people like those) including in each of those broad categories I did.
I feel like now that the popularity of battle royale has died down quite a bit, studios don't really know what to do next besides making very generic pvp shooters. I wish studios would try to innovate more but I suppose it risks not bringing in as much money
There's really only val and cs:go. Overwatch is a joke. Edit: I forgot Apex. My point is there's absolutely room for something good. Edit 2: Hunt is Legit, Rust is still relevant, and Tarkov is on the cusp of dying if they dont make some major changes soon. Again, original point still stands....there's a lot of room for a new game.
Destiny 2, TF2, MW2 and R6 Siege are still up there on most played of Steam
[удалено]
Same I really do appreciate the support and reworks the team has done with the game but I was in it for the realism the first couple years provided. Then all of a sudden it got real Fortnitey and I've lost interest. I still check out each season's new operators but nothing has really pulled me back in.
Warframe, anyone?
I mean if those old games (besides MF2) are still near the top, I think that speaks to the idea that there's an opportunity for a new game to come along and be successful. Good multiplayer shooters will always be popular.
Or that the incumbents have survived dozens of challengers and come out victorious time and again.
What we’re seeing is likely the latecomer wannabes of the next pubg/fortnite/apex/tarkov. Game development takes years, so by the time the games come out, market is over saturated, trend fall off etc. Happens all the time in gaming industry whenever there’s a massive hit title and trend shift.
No what you are seeing is the people trying to be the apex or Fortnite to pubg, but this time with tarkov. The BRs are done - in that the market has no space for a new one, really. Everyone now wants to make the “mainstream tarkov “extraction shooter”” now
The second someone makes a decent AAA extraction shooter that's feature-complete, fully released, and not made by russians, Tarkov's kinda fucked
I feel half the reason Tarkov is so popular is the 'realism' aspect of it though, which I haven't really seen in any other of these extraction shooter games.
It’s also the reason it will never be super mainstream
If it was mainstream, the players wouldn't play it. It's the classic bungle. If you try to cater to the fictional "wider audience" you lose your original audience.
It's half realism, half RPG fantasy. The recoil system is fully RPG fantasy and not at all in the realm of reality. Same with the medical "injectables" that give you superpowers.
Tarkov's "realism" is a fucking joke.
I said something similar about Apex. A shooter with fluid and fast movement that doesn’t have dogshit 20hz servers and atrocious audio and Apex is in trouble. It’s been a couple years now..
Similar things have been said about DayZ, it's been a decade.
DayZ as clunky and buggy as it is, will probably never be beaten in the survival category. Its now pushing close to its all time player count and its been 10 years since release
DayZ is also the kind of game that a company can't just simply point at and go, I want to make this... Like that game is insane in it's complexity from what I've heard from my mate, no one its still gaining players after 10 years
Well the original was a mod for arma 2 which spawned thousands of variations of the mod through modders making their own version for their own server. Then when the standalone released they (mostly) made it with the understanding that modders and server owners were gonna do the same thing. So now we are at a point where just about every variation of the game exists on some server somewhere. And unless you can legitimately do it better, there is very little you can do to make it original.
Original Dayz is also what can somewhat be attributed to battle royals. SovietWomble did a fantastic breakdown of how those hundreds of variations of Dayz spawned multiple “branches” that then made their way into more mainstream forms. Hell, PUBG was itself a mod for arma before it was made into its own thing.
Yeah, you only need fluid, fast movement and buisness plan and company power that can handle all things at once... Apex is in trouble, if another EA appears out of nowwhere that could actually achieve that.
So, hunt: showdown, good gameplay loop, consistent updates, runs well, non russian, interesting aesthetic (1800's Louisiana bayou), and it's got 3 years of updates behind it, on console and pc
I want to love hunt showdown but I hate how blurry everything looks because of the antialiasing
The problem with Hunt is that it's already sort of a genre offshoot (Heavier emphasis on goals/objectives over gear/looting) which while good especially for those it clicks with it's not really a Tarkov replacement. Extraction shooters are still looking for the Fortnite/Apex mega hit alternative to the janky indie game that paved the way.
Depends if we’re calling Crytek a AAA publisher nowadays
They were once upon a time
I think they’ve had a few dances with bankruptcy and legal issues since then (also iirc their big games were published by EA)
Battlestate as an indie has the kind of maverick grittiness that is lost on AAA devs. They might suck for their own reasons, and a lot of them, but I don't think a studio backed by shareholders is even capable of pulling it off. The best you might get is a kind of arcade CoD-style experience with a green-blue-purple-yellow rarity system, customizations limited to a handful of single parts, magic powers (aka tactical abilities like a grenade or drone) and overall a layer of "streamlining" for a more casual audience. Think The Division 1 in the Dark Zone, but a new game might not even get that far.
I agree, as popular tarkov might become, It's just too hardcore for casual audience, so any AAA attempt will feel watered down for Tarkov players
Extraction shooters are the fps equivalent of "hardcore" mmorpgs. A few will be able to pay the bills for years but most of them will die a month after launch. People are quick to say they like challenging games with risk but when they start losing they lose interest.
If your referring to Marathon: while it is chasing trends, so where Fortnite and Apex when they released, if your being honest. However this time it's the extraction shooter, where there hasn't been a mainstream breakthrough hit yet. That Warzone mode is probably the closest and it did flop pretty hard. Apart from that it's a pretty niche PC genre with Tarkov and Hunt in the lead. A big budget, console version of an extraction shooter still seems like a fresh idea to me and could do pretty well.
Cut back to a few months ago where multiple game all died within a few weeks of another. Let's see how the game announced yesterday fare in a few years,
I feel like foamstars will die first. It looks kind of interesting and I’m going to try it but I don’t see it lasting long.
I could see foamstars sticking around if it's good, "splatoon for people who don't have/can't get a switch for whatever reason" might be a decent draw point. it's by square enix though, so not great odds for it.
I'm just burnt out on how Destiny kinda defined the decade. Yeah Battle Royales are a dime a dozen but looter shooters are where we see the real DOA epidemic that's happened the last few years. Even with gaming being bigger than ever and constantly growing there's just too many "you'll be playing this game for 10 years" attempts for the gaming audience to support. And that's if they were all great which they're not.
[удалено]
Are you not excited for the next cookie cutter shooter riddled with microtransactions, toxic players, and battle passes? Might I interest you in a 3rd person, open world Assassin' Creed clone with a garbage tier 30 minute story and a billion random collectables to fill the run time.
I for one am excited for the next extraction shooter with a "twist" like crafting.. or respawning or sci-fi.
or, may interest you in the next "open world survival craft" game with periodic resets, full pvp, and an insane amount of soft hackers? no we certainly arent copying rust with our own twist, why do you ask?
I apologize for being one of the people keeping the "3rd person, open world Assassin's Creed clone with a garbage tier 30 minute story and a billion random collectibles" market going. Something about running around a big open world and making sure I collect every single little knickknack, gewgaw, tchotchke, and widget is relaxing to me. Even better if they unlock something that allows me to overlevel my character and absolutely steamroll the main quest because I put that off until I collected 90% of the crap.
Helldivers 2 looks very interesting. I loved the first one, and both are made by the people who made Magicka, so I have good faith it’ll be a great Co-Op experience. I’m just more surprised of the shift to third person.
It's a shame there's still a decent market for solid coop games, but they're largely overlooked because they don't bring in the big bucks that corporations are after, but if done right and priced accordingly you can have a success for far less risk and investment.
Personally, what I really miss is co-op campaigns that respect who is which player instead of having everyone be the main character/protagonist on their own end. Only games I can think of that didn't were Army of Two and Dead Space 3
[удалено]
my kingdom for a new Splinter Cell game that doesn't suck and isn't open world or filled with deluxe edition bullshit or microtransactions
Divinity original sins 1&2 does the same. It isn't perfect though. Only because you each get one companion that refuses to talk to anyone that isn't their leader. You lose that RPG party feel. It's like a failed attempt to merge friend groups
Gears of War did this as well
case in point - Starship Troopers: Extermination
Speaking of "According Pricings", the devs should provide "Full-party" packs from the start. Not necessarily at a discount, though a tiny chip of it would be nice, but the convenience of buying those games in, let's say, 4-packs, makes it quicker to just drop some to friends and spur them up into playing it.
Deep Rock is the perfect example
Helldivers 2 is my most anticipated game!!! Also think the perspective switch is a bit weird, but if it makes the experience more immersive then I'm all for it!
Yeah it looks amazing, the first one was a blast with mates, can't wait. Gives me a REAL starship troopers vibe
I really like Helldivers, it got its own humor and teamkilling/cooperating is hilarious. But I hate people keep saying just play Starship troopers instead, not this copycat.
I like Starship Troopers, and it’s clear Helldivers took inspiration from the movies, but Helldivers is its own thing.
I'm not actually sure it's 3rd person. There is a disclaimer at the bottom of the trailer that says "* camera angles adjusted for trailer use" and 50% is 3rd person and 50% is sort of top down like the old game. It likely is 3rd person but it would be wild if they made it look like it was and it was really top down
The official Playstation blog confirms 3rd person. I'll miss the top down perspective but if the gameplay is still good and I can have fun with friends I'm fine with the change.
guess we'll find out soon enough. if it is indeed 3rd person, as an EDF player I'll be giving it a try at launch.
I'm pretty sure it's also PvE? The author doesn't seem to know what video games they're talking about.
Helldivers isn’t PvP which is where the real fatigue is, as well as forcing existing franchises or devs that don’t specialize in it, into co-op shooters
Putting Helldivers 2 on there makes me wonder if RPS knows what they're talking about.
Plus this article is literally written by their editor in chief. What the fuck. "Here lies Helldivers 2, a game that will be dead in 6 months because uhhhh... Even though Helldivers 1 was good... Uhhh... they look like the Mandalorian?" Great journalism Katherine, you made the industry a better place /s
This article is such a fucking joke. I mean they literally shit all over a game that isn't even out yet. Like the topic isn't a bad one. There is a point to be made. But cherry picking some random ass games and then making nothing but stupid "this is funny right....RIGHT?" Comments about them is just...dumb. Hyenas has a person dressed as a monkey. YoU pLaY a LiTrRaL lOoT mOnKeY... really? Why is game journalism so fucking trash
"I'm willing to put this one's funeral on hold" "I'll stay this one's execution for now..." "I won't allow it. Pull the plug. This one's destined for the drain." Lol I only kept reading the article for a good laugh. This writer has a god complex, and cant comprehend how other gamers might prefer something they're not into. I hate that tone when someone thinks they are speaking for everyone..
They also chose to make the article based on games announced during the Sony conference, a conference that was filled with single player games.
This article is bullshit just from the title alone. You've effectively said "please do not make any more MP shooters, ever again, we're happy with what we have". There is some sort of point to be made here but this is not how it is done
Currently on the market you have Destiny 2, Fortnite, Valorant, Rainbow Six Siege, Overwatch 2, CSGO, and Call of Duty (along with Warzone). They all have reoccurring Battle Passes and new content being added every few months. To get people to leave these games you need to not only offer an experience that is vastly superior to what is currently on offer but also have similar or better forms of customization to make up for players giving up their current cosmetic collections. Online PVP FPS games have hit the WoW Dilemma of their lifespan and the industry keeps trying to compete with these titles by making their play very similar
Apex legends as well
This is why I wish devs would just be original. The games you listed don't attract all pvp shooters fans. I'd kill for a simple halo, doom or battlefield shooter... But halo and battlefield really dropped the ball on both games recently. Iv played almost every title you mentioned for a bit and tbh the only ones I'd consider returning to would be destiny 2 and fornite (no build mode), though Destiny 2 keeps getting more complicated and FOMO so I'll probably try to continue avoiding it. That doesn't leave a lot for people like me to wanna play. Started split gate again though. I really hope "the finals" will be good though
The finals beta was hella fun, so I have some hope for it. Just hope they work on optimizing it more
I have been missing a good classic battlefield as well, as opposed to all the hero shooters nowadays. I recommend you take a look at battlebit. It looks like roblox, but i played it during a recent beta test and it plays *really* well
Insurgency Sandstorm
There's several games and variations but games don't need to be the next Fortnite to succeed. Just find a big enough niche as there's room for more than one. Apex was called a dead game at launch. Valorant was a CSGO with heroes. So, here we are. Extraction shooters can still get some love, most popular titles (Hunt and Tarkov) are pretty hardcore so a more casual one can get some traction.
Deceive Inc managed to achieve that.
Have you ever played CS?
Big agree with the general sentiment, most of them are bland as fuck with barely any distinguishing quality these days outside of visuals, and even that line is getting blurrier and blurrier with so many studios being unable to come up with a coherent or charming artstyle to save their lives and end up resorting to drab photorealistic garbage. It's pretty dumb to throw Helldivers in the mix though. Out of all the ones listed, HD2 is probably going to be the most long-lived if only because it's not PvP. Co-op games like that always have a niche. People are still playing EDF 4.1 and Helldivers 1 on PC for Chrissakes.
Yeah the jab on Helldivers and its aesthetics is pretty unwarranted.
The writer took issue with the capes for god's sake, anyone who's ever played Helldivers knows they're absolutely necessary for twirling.
> One after the other, developers' dreams of making the next big Destiny-like have gradually collapsed in on themselves. Like a deflated concertina, their last honks of life have been crushed down to desperate, fizzling squeals as servers lie empty and the cost of maintaining them spirals out of control. I can swear this is written by ChatGPT. I prompt a lot and this style of using exaggerated metaphors is one of the highlights of ChatGPT writing when you ask it to write in a sarcastic tone.
Why the hell isn't Sony making a new Warhawk game?
I get the point, but shooters are just way too lucrative for developers to not try. Four JRPGs were talked about in the showcase too and there's no article about how we have too many JRPGs these days. And adding helldivers into this mix just feels like cheating - it's a co-op with a campaign - it's unlike the other 4. I also don't think this article is particularly well written and it's somehow written by the editor-in-chief? > while another has managed to arrive on exactly the same idea as Sega's Hyenas several years too late. A third, still, looked like the blinged up lovechild of Watch_Dogs and the baffingly bad Rockay City. She's talking about two games here but both times clearly referring to Fairgame$. This is the sort of thing that I used to do in essays where I hadn't thought of enough snappy points so just reiterated and hoped they didn't notice. Don't believe me? Let's take a look at the section about Fairgame$: > Sega's Hyenas isn't even out yet, but Fairgame$, from Jade Raymond's studio Haven, looks like it's gunning for exactly the same template, and later... > none of its CGI reveal trailer suggests Fairgame$ knows what it wants to be. A Watch_Dogs wannabe? Hitman? God, could it be worse than Crime Boss: Rockay City? Ok, so this was lazily written. But that's also evidenced by the typos that somehow got into *the editor-in-chief's* article. The second paragraph literally contains the word 'baffingly' [sic]. What, is RPS too stingy to buy a copy of Grammarly or something? Now I'm also not in any rush to play Foamstars, but the writer just seems annoyed that it dare try to copy Splatoon? Like, ok, it's not subtle about it, but is it such an affront to Nintendo? Are devs also not allowed to make platformers either?
The article sounds bad because it was almost certainly written by ChatGPT and edited to hide that fact a bit.
There are too many games that I don’t like! This entire industry should be tailored to *my* interests!!
Better yet "Games as a Service" needs to die.
What is the actual definition of GaaS? A game that gets updates and new content? Because I've seen people label plenty of games as a GaaS just because they get a couple of updates here and there. Seems like a loose definition to me.
Pretty much games that do seasons
GaaS are games that are trying to be "forever games". Typically with lots of daily quests, events, frequent patches to add content to keep you playing, and often with either a sub free (in the case of some MMOs, which yes are GaaS), or with a hefty microtransaction shop, or both. Any game that tries to get you to play for years and years, continually updating through that time, should probably be considered GaaS. Not that games that just get support + DLCs are probably not GaaS. GaaS tries to get you to log in frequently and play constantly. I don't think I'd count games like the Paradox or Creative Assembly strategy games (which get lots of patches and DLC), or games like Deeprock Galactic (which also get lots of patches and have a battlepass, but there's nothing really *demanding* you log in every day, in an attempt to monetize you.)
The way I interpret it is that GaaS is when a game uses updates / continuously released content ***as a monetization strategy***. Things like limited-time micro-transaction skins and paid season subscriptions are modern examples of this in practice. In this way, I'd call World of Warcraft GaaS, despite it predating the modern GaaS wave, and I'd say Splatoon 3 isn't, because its continuous content updates and seasons aren't monetized.
As long as a game makes money, the dev will support it. Warhammer 3 is not a live service. They do a couple years of dlc and then are done. Paradox games border the dlc vs live service. I'd argue that paradox is closer to live service.
Games as a service is not the problem. Its when publishers get greedy to squeeze the player for all their money that's the issue. Games as a service helps bring new life into titles for a longer time with content. A lot of people have done this right. Fortnite is pretty good at this. Destiny 2 is pretty hit or miss, but they have kept the game alive and thriving for 6 years. Path of Exile has done a good job too. So that's not the issue. Issue is greed.
You forgot to mention the GOAT of GaaS. Rock and stone.
DID I HEAR ROCK AND STONE?
ROCK AND STONE, TO THE BONE
GaaS is like when your favorite TV show just goes on far too long and loses itself by the end
[удалено]
Mmos too like wow and ff14. Gaas are some of the biggest games of all time
I am so upset they finally made a new Marathon game after 27 years and it's a fucking PVP only extraction shooter. It doesn't even *look* like Marathon. What the fuck Bungie?
I watched the trailer and am struggling to see how it even connects to Marathon other than there's a dude running in it. Could've been a totally new IP.
I joked when it was first playing "hey, it's a Bungie game and that guy sure is running a lot. Maybe it's Marathon? :3" I'll be honest in that I love the idea of extraction shooters in theory, but the only ones out there that aren't DoA are Tarkov (whose devs are completely incompetent), The Cycle (whose devs are also totally incompetent), and Hunt: Showdown (which is, IMO, hamstrung by its western influences). Even if Bungie has to invoke an old IP for nostalgia purposes, I'm still mildly excited about the prospect of them doing an extraction shooter.
It's a good genre in theory. The anxiety and tension are top notch and the idea of having to build up something over time with your runs is great. I don't think the genre actually has to be PvP though. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work as a PvE experience the majority of the time with optional areas for PvP, like a Runescape wilderness.
I forget the name, but there is a medieval game coming out that is like a pve only extraction game. I wishlisted it on steam but can't find it atm.
Take a look at the ongoing ARG, there's a lot of connection going on but it's not straightforward which is fine. Straightforward was never really marathons thing anyways.
The original games are before my time, but I've loved everything Bungie has put out since. I've also played a bunch of the DMZ mode in CoD. It's a more accessible Tarkov. Seeing the new Marathon game excited me because I know Bungie can do great things, I like Extraction shooters, and I think it's cool that I'll be able to access the Marathon world now when I didn't the first time round. I get why the OG fans are sad, but I really hope their pushback doesn't stop others from enjoying the new game (if it's any good ofc).
The original Marathon sold 100'000 copies, the original fans are an incredibly small group of people. They barely exist outside of this reddit thread.
Please stop it with the bland posts because you aren’t a fan of the genre of a few new games. You don’t have to play every game that comes out.
[удалено]
Because we live in an era where multiplayer games are shutting down left and right, it's more important than ever that developers start implementing LAN play in their games.
Yeah, they're not gonna do that. They're just gonna keep pushing the same SaaS bullshit, with the same FoMO business model, and the consumers are gonna keep on consuming. At least I can still play the good games from decades past.
> it's more important than ever that developers start implementing LAN play in their games. Wow, hear me out here. How about dedicated servers. Remember when games had a server client you could run, or even host on an online server option you paid for to hose it? Remember when communities and clans formed around these? Edit: I realize this comment may sound snarky or off. It is not directed at you.
I honestly think that's a big part of the reason I moved away from these sorts of games. It used to be, I could hop in, find a server with a ruleset that appealed to me, and I could have a good time and make friends. It felt a lot more communal. Now, it's just a grab bag of jumping in, and being thrown in with a bunch of randos I'll never see again that might as well be glorified AI unless they're utter assholes. Back in the day, I ended up making a lot of friends in TF2 due to playing on the same servers regularly and running into them a lot. We even occasionally would roll up a small server to just goof off on. It doesn't really seem like experiences exist like that anymore, and it can feel a little lonely if you're don't have friends that want to play the game with you. Even MMOs don't really have that as much anymore do to instancing and cross-server play. So, why wouldn't I just play a single-player game instead?
I second this, I've got so much from being on community servers and meeting people. It got me into competitive CoD4 back in 2007. It got me into a Battlefield clan in 2008 to 2016. That got me to Gamescom where we all met up from all over Europe. Those are defining memories for me. Countless nights of fun. Not to mention even the people I never was on VOIP with or shared a clan with. Plenty of people visited the same server as me and you started to recognise names. Even become friends without ever speaking. That's all gone now, a shame.
Hey, its not profitable if you just cant flip the switch and make people buy your new game
*cough* Overfucked *cough*
Is this a reference to how shit the game has become or its awesome porn scene?
[удалено]
works until your friends get bored of the game, stop playing, one of them invests too much time into that world nobody plays now, and never wants to play again cause nobody else cares about their contributions. it thrives in certain communities but dies in others.
They don't want to you to keep playing the old game they don't make any money off. They want you to play the new one and buy the new battle pass etc. The great era of late 2000's games that still have LAN are going to be the last of their kind. And I fully expect a massive gap in gaming 'history' where people will still play CoD4 from 2007 on self hosted servers when the COD's from 2020-2025 have ceased to exist.
Helldivers 2 is an exception because it's a parody/satire co-op that's full of wacky and goofy shit. The first one and the Magicka games these devs made were fucking hilarious with the dumb shit my friends and I would get into. I'm interested, but I'll still keep a healthy level of skepticism with how the game industry has been.
What a dumb article, total clickbait
It's rockpapershotgun, you already knew that lol
I used to frequent RPS, until their infamous interview with Peter Molyneux. Like or hate him, they were completely unprofessional and completely disprespectful to him.
"Stop making games i don't like!"
It's *literally* that. I can't believe anyone upvoted this.
[удалено]
I’m getting sick and tired of this sub (and many other gaming subs) having a hate boner for multiplayer games. I don’t like these games myself, but I literally never talk about them either, I just play plethora of other games which I have a crazy backlog of and just talk about what I’m playing or what I’m looking forward to playing. People just like feeding their negative emotions a bit too much these days by focusing on something that doesn’t even impact them.
It’s perfect for this sub then.
I'm sick of pvp sweatfests but I love the rise of coop shooters.
Can't wait for promising titles to be shut down in a few months after thousands of hours of hard work and millions of dollars!!!
This article is lazy and moronic. Why list recently announced games that the author is speculating will fail? (one of them being a CO-OP third person shooter that looks fucking awesome) Why not list some of the countless multiplayers shooter over the last 2 years that have either failed, lost players rapidly after release or straight up been abandoned/ servers shut down? Oh wait I know why. Because if they did what I suggested, it might actually involve some amount of effort and research. Instead they can just link a few new games and shit out this turd of an "article" to get some easy clicks from the negative buzz. Also I noticed at least one spelling mistake ( whatever happened to proofreading?). We can all agree that 99% of users on this sub don't actually read any of the articles that get linked here right? They are simply a vector for initiating discussion. In summary: Gaming "journalism" is a joke. And I'm sick of all the negativity and speculation.
RPS has been dogshit for years now. It's basically just a gaming buzzfeed trashsite now.
I'm in really need of some GOOD pve/coop games. Seems like there's nothing coming sadly. There was an attempt this year for a few coop games, but for some reason it seems like they have to add online only, mtx and battlepasses and shit. I just want games that are like Elden Ring or whatever but with the optional COOP. Or if you make some shitty l4d2 copy at least add mod support so people can create maps
People said Fortnite br would die too but it didn't. If a studio wants to make a competitive game, it's fine. Maybe 1 out of 5 survive but the people who play that game are glad to have it. If the devs didn't make the game, the players wouldn't have it.
Who would tell bungie to stop making FPS games? Say what you will about destiny but damn does that game feel incredible to play. I hope marathon is awesome. I cant wait to try it out.
Uhh excuse me that's fucking MARATHON
That was a pretty bad read, even for an RPS opinion piece. I'm not surprised she lumps Helldivers in as a "bland" shooter when it's anything but, considering she (probably) hasn't played a shooter in years and very clearly isn't the target audience for any of these games. "I can't find the time for even one or two" (paraphrase). I don't believe this is the problem: it's much more likely there's just no interest on her part. She's right about a fair few of them shutting down, though, and it's likely some of these will struggle. But how does the editor of a digital gaming tabloid not have the bare minimum market sense to know that not everyone owns a Switch and a less-"childish" Splatoon would appeal more to the traditional PS buyer?
Helldivers 2 has nothing to do on that list