Co-op, Solo or Competetive?

Recommended Videos

Siris

Everyone's Favorite Transvestite
Jan 15, 2009
830
0
0
Solo games. Everyone seems to suddenly suck at games when you play with them
 

StickManRampage

New member
Sep 18, 2008
172
0
0
I like Co-op just cuz its like u and one other person and i can really get into a game to the point that i can start shouting at it and i think its funny as hell when there is some1 else there to mess around with.
 

Legendel

New member
Jun 26, 2008
96
0
0
Depends, I do like co-op, but when the mission structure changes or the difficulty is not increased then I don't see the point. Co-op should the same experience for a team as an individual, not a cutout version. =P
 

Smashking

New member
Apr 2, 2008
122
0
0
Psychosocial said:
"Our gamers do not want multiplayer".
seydaman said:
Psychosocial said:
Maybe every developer believes in what Nintendo says?

"Our gamers do not want multiplayer".
what. nintendo is tripping on acid then
Actually it's more a case of they TELL us we don't want multiplayer because they don't want to put it in. It's that kind of logic that makes people hate developers. I think it's time everyone re-evaluated their standards.
 

phar

New member
Jan 29, 2009
643
0
0
I used to be a solo type of guy. But now I have some boobs that likes WW2 shooters.. so I really have fun playing CoD WaW all night with her. Only problem is that on 360 the split screen posiitions are horrible.

I am very dissappointed with alot of coop games though. We got L4D out the other week for a spin and the framerate was horrible.. maybe ive been spoilt playing it on pc for so long.. but I would have thought the 360 would have easily been able to handle the HL2 engine.

What I think they want you to do these days is get 2 consoles and network them together.. that way they sell 2 consoles and 2 copies of the game. Nintendo are the only company that seem to get multiplayer games right over and over.
 

jaammiie

Master of the Universe
Jun 3, 2007
289
0
0
I prefer co-op if anyone wants to play with me and I can communicate. Also co-op online (so co-op and competitive for that one). Also, if I am far better than someone at a game, solo.
 

wordsmith

TF2 Group Admin
May 1, 2008
2,029
0
0
I prefer Co-op, but Co-op presumes one thing:
All of your customers and their mates will buy the game.

L4D works because there is no story. You can jump in, start it up and do a campaign. If you add a story, suddenly you have to wait for that person to be free.

Most games now-days are competitive, with the introduction of online play.

Solo games can be played whenever, without the dependancy on anyone else. Remember, when L4D came out, people bitched for DAYS about the rubbish Single player campaign.

A useful parallel is the old Gameboy multiplayer. You had to have the game, a friend had to have a game and you had to have a link cable. The only game I saw that it actually worked with was Pokemon. Now, with the introduction of Download and Play, it doesn't matter if your friend doesn't have the game, they can still play alongside you (for example, 7 of my mates using my one gamecard playing MarioCart. By the end of the month, we had 6/8 players with their own cartridge).
 

dnadns

Divine Ronin
Jan 20, 2009
127
0
0
I prefer co-op as done in Resistance 2.
Story is very light and you can just jump in/out whenever you feel like it.

Sadly my time for playing is very irregular and only a couple of friends even own a console,
so playing split-screen local co-op is actually the worst type of experience for me.

Solo being the "must have" for every game (preferably with a good story) and the good old counter-strike, team-based approach with one life per round comes after that.
 

Smashking

New member
Apr 2, 2008
122
0
0
Co-op is mostly dead, think of the Fable 2 Co-op. It was made out to be really good, but ended up feeling like an odd gimmick that they threw in at the last week of development.
Co-op players deserve equal rights, not just a clone who's tied to you.