Too scared to play online!
- Thread starter aescuder
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You, are dead on the money as to why a lot of people shy away from online.
It's unfortunate, but the gameplay is just one aspect of why not. A lot of people I've talked to about why they don't play online can conjure up all kinds of horror stories about their interactions with players online. If there was a mode or sanctioned area for noobs to get their bearings in a game, it would be a lot better. Also, a server called "4 noobs only" is the oldest trick in the book, it's a trap.
It's unfortunate, but the gameplay is just one aspect of why not. A lot of people I've talked to about why they don't play online can conjure up all kinds of horror stories about their interactions with players online. If there was a mode or sanctioned area for noobs to get their bearings in a game, it would be a lot better. Also, a server called "4 noobs only" is the oldest trick in the book, it's a trap.
I find this problem too. I don't play much online besides when I play with my friends. Games with good ranking systems so you are placed against players of a similar skill to you are pretty good as you feel you can have a fun time and learn how the game plays without being frustrated.
I used to play TF2 online a fair bit on the PS3, but when I got it for PC I saw there was no ranked match system, and when I found a match I was promptly beaten down by players who knew the new loadouts and tactics. After a few matches of that I decided it wasn't fun, and haven't gone back since.
I used to play TF2 online a fair bit on the PS3, but when I got it for PC I saw there was no ranked match system, and when I found a match I was promptly beaten down by players who knew the new loadouts and tactics. After a few matches of that I decided it wasn't fun, and haven't gone back since.
First of all, props for actually using 'too' and 'to' properly in the title, understanding the right use of them is nearly a superpower these days it seems.
Secondly, start with something less twitchy and pixel-hunty like Team Fortress 2. The classes are all fairly easy to understand and it should only take a little bit of time until you find your favourites. Personally I love the living shit out of the Medic
Good luck!
Secondly, start with something less twitchy and pixel-hunty like Team Fortress 2. The classes are all fairly easy to understand and it should only take a little bit of time until you find your favourites. Personally I love the living shit out of the Medic
Good luck!
No, I don't care too much about my stats and I try not to watch youtube stuff for COD or FPSs. That being said it would have taken me AGES to figure out the ins and outs of: certain maps, item dynamics in LoL, combos in fighting games, proper builds in armored core, or the best way to start using the zerg in SC2.teebeeohh said:
I understand that it's a learning process but losing the entire day in order for me to just play it properly is not fun, and it definitely wouldn't be fun for anyone new to games or new to a certain franchise. Just wish developers would take this into consideration more.
doesn't Starcraft 2 have the beginner league thing? with modified maps that don't allow rushes and thus make having a perfect BO not as important. The thing is that most games on PC allow you to save replays of games and especially in Starcraft it's a lot more helpful to play, loose and then look at the replay and what you did and what your opponent did and why he/she won. just pick up a jack of all trades build order for Zerg, practice the timing against an ai opponent (takes less than an hour) and go. if you only have fun winning rts is probably not the right genre for you.aescuder said:
or find somebody to helps you get on your feet, that's how i learned to play Starcraft in '01.
Sorry, but the multiplayer difficulty setting would be really stupid. loads of 'noobs' would go into the lowest difficulty and then because the vast majority of online players are dicks, all the 'pros' will gg in the same difficulty level to win games easily.aescuder said:
Games companys should just have a multiplayer server that finds other players who are close to your rank in games and sort teams evenly.
Eh, that's mostly true but you need to be prepared to cut an unfamiliar game's multiplayer some slack. For instance I started playing TF2 when it came out with little experience of multiplayer FPS games (though I could noob it up quite well on Wolfenstein ET) and I did not really have a whole lot of fun with the game. This despite TF2 being quite easy to pick up and play in the early days (no unlocks, everyone else was learning the ropes too). Since then I've clocked up more than a month of in game time (on this steam account, probably another 100 hours or so on the first one) and it's one of my favourite games ever.Dirty Hipsters said:
With any "hardcore" game whether that be SP or especially MP you need to be able to throw yourself in and tough it out for maybe 10 hours or so. It may seem like a big time investment but that's where you need to start looking at reviews and what you've heard about the game. I warily circled around the monster hunter franchise for a couple of months before I bought my first title (Tri), after that I bought a PSP and went on to MHFU.
Actually I agree that matchmaking in fps games could be better. In any FPS game an skilled player can ruin a low-level match. I think FPS games should have 2 seperate matchmaking systems. 1-st is by k/d and second is one that anyone can join. Second one can be used to play with your friends/random people who entered matchmaking and first one will put you against players close to your skill level. And to keep out smurfs(LoL term for high lvl player who has made a new account), the game should have a lvl up system, that gives higher lvl players access to better guns and maybe new game-modes so they have a reason to play on their original account.
Only if you take the anonymity out of the whole thing. As long as online is an escape from the real world, where no one has to know if you're Smith from next door or Kim from South Korea. People will utilise the opportunity to act like knobs.
Not all people, not even the majority of people, but enough people that it puts others off.
The only way to put a curb on it would be to seperate players based on their experience and ability - only allow better players into games with similarly ranked players, whilst 'noobs' have their own rooms.
Sure, you're going to get people starting brand new accounts just for easy wins (when I first started playing Age of Empires 2 online way back in the day, this happened quite a bit in the MSN zone), but it'll still make it more accessible for casual gamers like me.
Course, it's always gonna be about perception, and if people perceive that they're not going to have fun online because they'll get battered, then they won't play.
I've never, in my life that I can remember, prepping to play an online game. I just jump in and play if I have a few spare hours. I've never had too many problems.
One of my friends is 8th prestige and he has about 72,000 deaths to 5,000 kills (making it about a 0.2 KD spread, mine is 0.5). Mind you he has over 20 days of play-time and I have less than 10 (maybe close to 10, I don't know).
You earn XP for every game, regardless of if you get a kill or not.
For anyone interested into looking at the exact number of his (or my) stats:
His gamertag: tywm1
Mine: Creator002
I understand your point, but I just thought I'd mention it, prestiging isn't indicative of how good you are. I have never prestiged on Call of Duty. I am currently level 50 with no prestiges on Black Ops because I don't see the point in losing all yout gear just to get a different symbol by your name.aescuder said:
One of my friends is 8th prestige and he has about 72,000 deaths to 5,000 kills (making it about a 0.2 KD spread, mine is 0.5). Mind you he has over 20 days of play-time and I have less than 10 (maybe close to 10, I don't know).
You earn XP for every game, regardless of if you get a kill or not.
For anyone interested into looking at the exact number of his (or my) stats:
His gamertag: tywm1
Mine: Creator002
*tightens rope* No but i know i wont be a top 10.000 anymore and im not realy aiming of becoming a top notch starcraft 2 player, its more that i dont wanna come to the fact by getting a awful loosing streak before realising it. And i lost my cool head i used to have while gaming, now i panic as soon as something doesent go my way, im not realy much of a competetiv player anymore.archont said:That's an odd attitude. In no way am I trying to insult you, but statistically speaking, chances are you won't be one of the 10000 richest/most influential/successful (by any measure) people in Europe. But you probably already know that and aren't looking into suicide because of it, right?TheCrapMaster said:Haha i feel you on this one. I used to play starcraft 1 on dial up modern like hell in my youth, i was even top 10.000 in europe for a period during that time.
Then starcraft 2 came and i waited a month or two after realese so i could upgrade my computer before getting it.
I watched youtube clips of people playing and when i finaly got starcraft 2 and had played through the campaign i....i....i just dident dare to play online
As a thought experiment re-install and play CounterStrike: Source for a bit.
I used to be really quite good at that game (often top 5 in whatever server I played) and really enjoy it. Loaded it up for a nostalgia kick revently and was completely and utterly decimated, my kd was like 5/30 by the end of it...
This probelm seems more prevelent with older games as the only people still playing them are the people that are annoyingly good at them.
I used to be really quite good at that game (often top 5 in whatever server I played) and really enjoy it. Loaded it up for a nostalgia kick revently and was completely and utterly decimated, my kd was like 5/30 by the end of it...
This probelm seems more prevelent with older games as the only people still playing them are the people that are annoyingly good at them.
Personally my major online experience I sometimes have problems with is black ops. I love playing online but I agree with the idea of some kind of sorting system theres 15 prestige levels it could have lobbies set up where all players are 1 or 2 prestiges apart then another just for everyone I think it would make it a lot more enjoyable for new/casual players who want to play with players around there own skill level
This, especially the bolded since it doesn't restrict access. I play CoD online and I'm good, not amazing but I regularly hit top spot and sometimes by quite a long way. Playing it last night (bored of RPG's and wanted a break, I'm allowed okay...) and I was on a killer team, me and 2 others were just dominating the matches in a mercenary moshpit and the game kept us together for ages, the other 3 weren't very good and changed around a lot and there was one decent player on the other team but for the most part us 3 were just tearing them apart and I felt bad for the decent player. He beat me on a couple of straight run ins and was pretty clever but he had no chance because his team was so terrible we'd just tear him up.kittii-chan 300 said:
If it had split so I went over there or even one of the other two on my team it'd be a lot fairer. How hard can it be to shuffle the teams so high performers are split:
Team 1 1st, 3rd, 5th etc
Team 2 2nd, 4th, 6th etc
Especially in mercenary. Or if there are groups or clans then take them as an average and put them where needed to bring it up.
Seriously the algorithms would take a programmer a few minutes if that and it would make games a lot tighter which is more fun, I LIKE it when it's tough, swamping the enemy is kinda dull and being let down by a terrible team is just frustrating.