What is multiplayer missing?

[smearyllama]

We all love multiplayer. Whether it's online deathmatch or co-op with friends, it's fun to play together.

Sadly, though, it seems like multiplayer is starting to inbreed-
We're seeing a lot of online rank-based PvP, which originated somewhere in the FPS genre, around BF2 and Modern Warfare.

While the FPS isn't the only genre, it's the most egregious example.

What can we do to bring some new ideas into multiplayer gaming?
Do you think that there actually is an issue in the first place?
Thoughts?

 

[Judgement101]

It's missing: A story, a reason for a battle (besides THEY IS EVIL!), and many other things

 

[baddude1337]

A proper co-op campaign with a story where you all have your own agenda, not just the other people tagging along with the main character. And ultimately a few of the players die or something. (They could always play the enemy so they don't get bored).

Perhaps you could all play different stories that intermingle at some point.

 

[Kakujin]

Yeah, a reason for and some form of motivation to do it, other than just proving that you are better than someone else. (Also, for the record, I hate multiplayer)

 

[smearyllama]

A proper co-op campaign with a story where you all have your own agenda, not just the other people tagging along with the main character. And ultimately a few of the players die or something. (They could always play the enemy so they don't get bored).

Huh. The whole dying and playing as the enemy was played with in Resident Evil: Outbreak.
It'd be cool to implement that into more games.

 

[baddude1337]

A proper co-op campaign with a story where you all have your own agenda, not just the other people tagging along with the main character. And ultimately a few of the players die or something. (They could always play the enemy so they don't get bored).

Huh. The whole dying and playing as the enemy was played with in Resident Evil: Outbreak.
It'd be cool to implement that into more games.

Yeah but the story was kind of lame.

It would just be cool if all the characters you plated each had their own missions and you occasionally share a mission or something, then in the end you ultimately fight each other or something.

 

[smearyllama]

A proper co-op campaign with a story where you all have your own agenda, not just the other people tagging along with the main character. And ultimately a few of the players die or something. (They could always play the enemy so they don't get bored).

Huh. The whole dying and playing as the enemy was played with in Resident Evil: Outbreak.
It'd be cool to implement that into more games.

Yeah but the story was kind of lame.

It would just be cool if all the characters you plated each had their own missions and you occasionally share a mission or something, then in the end you ultimately fight each other or something.

Well, thus is the price of innovation.
Take the elements that work and combine them with others until you find a new winning formula, then repeat.

 

[Chewyjazz]

Different modes of multiplayer, I'm sure that some developers out have some new ideas other than "hey, lets try and kill everybody as fast as we can" I'm not ragging on the multiplayer we already have, just asking for more varied ideas.

 

[water_bearer]

Depth.

Multiplayer is always jump in, kill or get killed. The challenge is always straight up a test of skill with some randomness or luck in the mix, always a game of conquest basically.

What I'd really like to see are multiplayer games with much more depth and challenge, objectives that require ACTUAL teamwork and collaboration, maybe even complicated collaboration. But alas, multiplayer games with complicated objectives means it becomes less accessible, which is usually a big NO-NO.

 

[MrGalactus]

Story, Motivation, Immersion, Pacing, Set pieces, Characters. I'm sure there's more.

 

[SirAroun]

like portal?

 

[ScoopMeister]

And ultimately a few of the players die or something. (They could always play the enemy so they don't get bored).

Personally, I wouldn't like this. Why would you want to work towards defeating the bad guy, only to have to become them when you die? It would make anything you'd done before then completely redundant.

In my opinion, multiplayer is missing a lot of depth and innovation. I can't really get any more specific, since I'm not entirely sure what I'm looking for. I'd know what it is if I saw it.

 

[Lokithrsourcerer]

cookies!

but seriously better co-op would defiantly be a good way forward interlocking stories is an interesting idea but i think rather than that a game that had say 4 main characters each with their own agendas that you could either play though each one single player or play simultaneously as co-op
you would mainly go to the same maps but have different objectives for the different characters

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Depends on the genre, FPS multiplayer isn't all multiplayer like so many people think, see below:

Depth.

Multiplayer is always jump in, kill or get killed. The challenge is always straight up a test of skill with some randomness or luck in the mix, always a game of conquest basically.

What I'd really like to see are multiplayer games with much more depth and challenge, objectives that require ACTUAL teamwork and collaboration, maybe even complicated collaboration. But alas, multiplayer games with complicated objectives means it becomes less accessible, which is usually a big NO-NO.

Depth exists in multiplayer, it just doesn't exist in most modern FPS-multiplayer.



Ever try to get into a deep fighting game? Ever see a detailed description of the happenings of a high-level match?

 

[Tohuvabohu]

Idea:

A coop class based RPG revolving around a party of fully voice-acted customized characters chosen by the players. Character backgrounds and attitudes could be chosen by players as well with all dialogue revolving around an Alpha Protocol type system where players choose tones for their responses. Setting, overall game story, doesn't matter.

It needs a background story unique to each character, and during cutscenes some characters may be taken away from the rest of the party to experience story elements unique to only them. (Players should be advised to keep these story elements to themselves for the full experience)

As the game progresses, these unique "secret" story elements unique to those character may be revealed to everyone eventually, developed by the decisions made by each of those individual characters. One person may turn out to be a secret bad guy, 2 people may conspire to kill off another person who is then replaced with another party member for him to control. And so on.

THESE ARE JUST MY IDEAS, DON'T HIT ME.

 

[smearyllama]

cookies!

but seriously better co-op would defiantly be a good way forward interlocking stories is an interesting idea but i think rather than that a game that had say 4 main characters each with their own agendas that you could either play though each one single player or play simultaneously as co-op
you would mainly go to the same maps but have different objectives for the different characters

That's a frakking good idea!
You get a cookie.

Though, I must ask, how would all of the single-player campaign variants be different?
IF all of the characters have different skillsets, them the levels are going to have to be extremely different for each campaign.

Say there's a sniper character who covers the other three players from afar in co-op.
Will he be with a team of AI allies in single-player?

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Idea:

A coop class based RPG revolving around a party of fully voice-acted customized characters chosen by the players. Character backgrounds and attitudes could be chosen by players as well with all dialogue revolving around an Alpha Protocol type system where players choose tones for their responses. Setting, overall game story, doesn't matter.

It needs a background story unique to each character, and during cutscenes some characters may be taken away from the rest of the party to experience story elements unique to only them. (Players should be advised to keep these story elements to themselves for the full experience)

As the game progresses, these unique "secret" story elements unique to those character may be revealed to everyone eventually, developed by the decisions made by each of those individual characters. One person may turn out to be a secret bad guy, 2 people may conspire to kill off another person who is then replaced with another party member for him to control. And so on.

THESE ARE JUST MY IDEAS, DON'T HIT ME.

A good idea, but freaking crazy hard to make...Basically impossible, and pretty much guaranteed not to profit with it's less wide-spread appeal.

A non-voiced, low budget version might be possible, though. And likely shit, sadly.

 

[LordLundar]

Nothing. It's fine the way it is. You want a motivation other than "That's the enemy, kill them,"?

GO PLAY SINGLE-PLAYER.

I would if SP wasn't anything more that a quick training session with a lame-ass story slapped on.

 

[DaHero]

How about fun? Multiplayer has been missing fun for a VERY long time.