Black Ops II Designer Thinks Gamers "Should All Play Multiplayer"

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Gearhead mk2:
...is there a single freaking person in the game industry with common sense!?
And before anyone says Valve, if they had common sense, TF2 would actually be a game instead of a hat sim.

Play the game. Enjoy the amazing use of unstable equilibrium, the polished to a mirror shine rocket jumping mechanics (and by extension, sticky jumping and sentry boosting mechanics), the nine completely different classes, each with a marked playstyle and role, the mindgames of being a spy, the "no assault rifles as primary" rule in the game, the damage falloff mechanics that subtly reinforce the close quarter mechanics -- making melee not a desperation move but a viable strategy, two innovative playmodes not present in other FPSs (Payload and Payload Race), the co-op content (Mann vs Machine), airblasting, etc.
For all the jokes about the war-themed hat simulator, the actual game is quite polished, very fun. On PC, at least.

I do think he's being ripped to shreds for a legitimate point-why pick up a CoD not to play the multiplayer?

I understand fun shooter campaigns, but CoD tends to be uninspired or, my most hated, learn which roof the guys are on so you can shoot them first.

Though, I still wish more FPS makers would realize MP only games, or divide the two and sale them for cheaper. It's a fail dream, but I would pick up more, if say, 40$ for MP only, and 20$ for SP early (rough values, just my opinion of most games based on what I feel I would pay for each).

Even add the option to download the other side in game if you bought the other, I.E., you only got the SP campaign, and said, "Hey, I'll check out the multiplayer." and picked it up through a purchasable pass code or download.

Hell, then, if they were smart (or Valve, this sounds Valvish) after so long offer discounts to those who bought one of the halves on the other side of the coin.

Just my thoughts though.

Why? I've played all the other Call of Duty multi player modes, so I'm totally sick of it by this point.

Now Zombies co op mode on the other hand...

And I like people to stop telling me what to do with stuff I buy, but you can't have everything.
Something tells me he'd also like everyone buying those $15 rip-offs they call map packs.

Sit on it and rotate, Vonderhaar. I get enough contact with dickbags out in the real world every day, and I don't need them hurling verbal abuse at me in me spare time.

Meh, I'm not really into playing a Fisherprice baby's first online FPS game.

Furthermore, if it had the support of the devs and wasn't released every year and instead had cumulative content and updates it would be more successful.

You just can't please everyone.

Irridium:
Have you played with the COD community? Why in the world would I want to play with those people?

I'll stick with bots, thank you very much. They're much more pleasant to be around.

Nevermind the community, has he played the games? AIRSTRIKE. GUNSHIP. DRONES. DOGS, DICKS, FUCKING LASER BEAMS AND FLYING SHIT AND OH SOMEONE'S PISSING ON YOUR FACE AAAAAAAAANNNNNNNDDDDDD

NUUUUUUUUUKE!

It's a bit poo, is what I'm saying.

Gearhead mk2:
...is there a single freaking person in the game industry with common sense!?

And before anyone says Valve, if they had common sense, TF2 would actually be a game instead of a hat sim.

Sims can be counted as games.

OT: "But some gamers prefer to explore the campaign solo".

Heh, that's perhaps the most liberal use of the word 'explore' at any point in history.

You know what? I agree with him.

I mean, obviously Call of Duty multiplayer is such a miraculously unique experience that it is absolutely amoral to not stand against the horrors of people that don't play it. Right, guys?

...Guys?

Sniper Team 4:
And it bugs the shit out of me that you included a multiplayer trophy that says I have to get to level 50. So we can't all have what we want, can we? I'll play your multiplayer, but not because I want to. Because I have to. You had it right in Black Ops: one or two trophies for multiplayer that were easy to obtain. Then, if the player decided they liked it, they could keep playing of their own free will. Now, with the trophy that says you must Prestige once, I'm forced to play it all the way to the end. And if sniping someone still takes two to three shots like it did in Black Ops, I'm not going to enjoy it.

Why would you waste hours upon hours of precious life doing something you know you wont enjoy? All that just to get a useless trophy?

Im confused, so very confused...

I'm not interested in any multiplayer except with friends in closed games. I am 35 years old. I work fulltime and then some; my freetime is consumed with things I find far more valuable than gaming, such as my art, study and socialising. If I delve into multiplayer it is to get my arse handed to me by aggressive school kids who'd play 24/7 if they didn't have to eat, sleep and shit. And go to school. That's not fun, not in the slightest and I doubt that any tweaks this developer makes will change that. And ona side note, I don't want to take part in these kinds of games which amount to pro-America war propaganda in my mind. I don't want to shoot 'enemies of America' and drool over all the real weapons and DARPA inventions. I want no part of that power trip.

Yeah, stop making shitty multiplayer to cover up your shitty single player and we have a deal.

As just some statement from a designer, I totally get this, and its no big deal. Consider, after all, that this is one of the people putting a lot of effort into making a really good multiplayer system. He just wants more people to experience that.
I do think, however, that there is more to address than just getting people up to speed skill- and understanding-wise. The CoD multiplayer space is notoriously vile, and I think there are efforts they could make to make it more approachable.
Also, from a little playing of MW3 from the Steam free weekend, the matchmaking stuff leaves something to be desired.

Artlover:
Not so stealthy snip.

Yea well, if you we're Vonderhaar's position, one where you've spent a great deal of time and effort trying to make something for people to enjoy, I'd be sure you'd want as many people as possible to experiance it.
And on another level, it really is a good idea to at least dip your toes into a games multiplayer (Barring lack of an online connection and/or extra controllers) because your at least getting your moneys worth, and you never know, you might end up, heavens forbid, actually liking it.

And ultimatly, thats all he wants here, for more people to try and potentially like something they wouldn't have touched otherwise. And to that, Mr Vonderhaar, I say 'Great job mate, just next time try not to look like as much of an ass.

Well Mr. "If-you-don't-play-multiplayer-you're-shit-to-us" Vonderhaar, not everyone likes Call of Duty multiplayer. I can't stand it because it's extremely repetitive and I hate the community you have. Try this next time: release a $40 multiplayer game and a $30 single player and zombies game. Oh, and don't insult your core demographic.

Ha that's funny a Trearch employee telling me what to how about you stop quoting garbage and make the ps3 version rather than f ing it up like black ops 1.

Captcha: [half done] just like blops 1 for ps3.

Are they alive?

No.

No gamer 'should' play anything that they don't want to play.

Remain bothered by your lack of control over your player base.

Sure it's been said before, but you know what bugs me? douchebagknow it alls who think they can speak for me and what I like. I don't like multiplayer so I don't play it. If Mr. Vonderhar doesn't approve, tough titty for him.

Kmadden2004:
Yeah, I used to find CoD's multiplayer engaging... when it was called GoldenEye 007 on the N64.[flameshield activated]

+1 Flameshield reinforced.

You want single players to play your game's multiplayer in this day and age? Then make playing with bots easy as pie to set up, and don't call it 'training' -that just spits in the face of everyone who'd rather play bots than the snivelling 13 year olds online.

Seriously. If you build it (bots) he (we) will come.

The multiplayer is alright but that isn't all there is to the game. I'll happily choose to play whatever game mode is offered whenever I feel like it.

ummmmm did people not read the entire article or the just headline?

He wants those who play COD single player to experience the COD multi-player by using the combat training to help them get into. Once they know how much fun it can be they'll play it more and bring their friends along for the ride.

EDIT:Zombies with friends is considered co-op multi-player that can get new fans to play COD and enjoy the multi-player section of this game

Translation:
We want to sell more map packs to suckers

I prefer to have fun in MP. So I play Team Fortress 2. It's fast, fun and guess what - all the maps valve released can be played for free...

Funny, I don't like multiplayer, or Call of Duty, guess I'm bugging the shit out of the devs...

...and not a single fuck has been given.

I really used to like CoD back in the day. Cod/United Offensive was amazing and no matter how many times I play it, the mission in CoD 2 when the orchestral music starts and a massive wave of germans start screaming and charging, it always gives me goosebumps. I also enjoyed the multiplayer because it was simple.

Wait what? Simple multiplayer? this must be some kind of heresy. But nope, the reason I dont play modern shooters online anymore is that I dont want a grind in order to be on equal footing with everyone else. I miss when everyone started out with the same options of weapons and everything was based on skill. Now its just whoever has the most time to sit around unlocking ****.

Someone got bad Christmas bonus because not enough $15.00 maps were bought. Boo hoo.

I would have liked a little more love and attention given to the single player in these games. I guess that's proof positive we can't all get what we want.

This would bother me intensely if it weren't for the fact that I was never buying a Call of Duty game in the first place, but the sheer stupidity of this has left one way to summarize my reaction to the stupidity of this:
image

TheMich88:
"They should all play multiplayer, so they can't realize how bad the single player is"

Amen.

With all due respect, Mr.Vonderhaar, go fuck yourself.

CoD developer thinks that gamers should all play multiplayer.
In other news, the sky is blue.

If CoD was meant as an entirely multiplayer game, they should make it so, otherwise, shut the fuck up.

I'd prefer not to have a bunch of retard 12 year olds yelling "Fag!" into my earpiece, so I think I'll stick with my single player games.

Vondehaar fails to realize that there's always going to be a place for single-player content. Not everything needs to have a competitive edge thrown in, because games are primarily designed to be a distraction. Leisure.

If you're competing, it's not leisure anymore. It's a task. Not necessarily a job unless you're in the MLG circuit, but a task. Something that needs doing.

Not everyone wants to consider their gaming hours as something that requires precision, focus and dedication. A lot of us just want to goof off on our own to relieve the pressure of Real Life stuff.

CoD can be fun - as long as you've found a group of friends that don't take it seriously in the slightest. Approach BlOps like it's Team Fortress 2, have a chuckle with close buds who aren't playing it for the sake of racking up their player levels, and you just might have some fun.

Problem is, it feels like the stereotypical modern gamer, as designed by companies by Activision, is a person who's so consumed by productivity that another guy being a little more casual about it is grounds for an immediate barrage of swear words.

Well, I'd imagine the bottom line is that single player games take more effort, as opposed to creating and (maybe) testing multi-player maps. You could spend millions of dollars producing a few hours of single player gameplay that's entertaining, but in comparison multiplayer content you can sell for $15 a pop can be produced for a fraction of that.

It doesn't surprise me that the guys doing shooters kind of wish they could just skip over the single player (although he's not coming out and saying that) which would mean less work for as much or more money.

That said, not everyone who plays video games has a game playing peer group, all stereotypes aside, a lot of gamers are very solitary. What's more breaking into the needed social infrastructure to do well in multiplayer is not easy due to the elitism and people preferring to stay with their own closed little groups. Then of course you have all the so called "trash talkers" and little kids who get into these games and act obnoxiously.

See, the "human factor" which is the appeal for some people, is also a turn off for others. No amount of training or tutorial practice is going to deal with the negative aspects of dealing with other people.

To be honest it's been my experience that with the way how games have been catering to the lowest human denominatory and the casual audience, that those who are into multiplayer games tend to play them with other people they already know IRL. The whole "Bro Pack" and associated jokes in coming strips and such exists for a reason, and really not everyone wants to deal with that to begin with, and isn't going to insinuate themselves into a peer group to begin with.

Keep in mind that being a lonely, basement dwelling nerd is NOT the only reason to be solitary, though I fit that description nowadays. Back when I was working casino security I had little in the way of a social life because working a real job meant that I wasn't there for just 8 hours guaranteed (I couldn't leave until relieved, if there was nobody to relieve me due to shorts on another shift or special assignments... well), travel time, and then of course exhaustian and stress. I sat down then, especially then, to get the heck away from people, that was kind of the point of gaming. I don't mind multiplayer games (I'm big into MMOs, and was even when I was working to an extent) but that's not something I want all the bloody time.... the guys doing "Black Ops" aren't the first to talk about wanting "multi-player all the time" to be the future of gaming, and really I just hope that whole idea dies. I get concerned that if enough developers/publishers go on about it, they will convince themselves it's what everyone wants, and then make it happen despite what the reality might be.

Frostbite3789:
Dear god, more sensationalist journalism from this place.

The title of the article isn't at all what he said. They created a mode to help ease people into multiplayer, people who wouldn't play because they don't think they're ready or experienced enough.

And it's construed as him saying "ZOMG EVERYONE SHUD PLAY TEH MULTIPLAYER!" Good job.

And I don't even like CoD. But lets not like CoD for reasons it shouldn't be liked, lets not make up reasons to dislike it.

What? Did you even read it? Lemme run it by you again: "As popular as Call of Duty is, there are a lot of people who don't play multiplayer. And quite frankly, this bugs the shit out of us. They should all play multiplayer. And Combat Training helps us get there."

There's not much ambiguity there. The exact words are "they should all play multiplayer". Maybe other people will agree to quit putting words into others' mouths if you'll knock off the witch hunt.

As for me, I imagine a lot of people find it hard to play the game online when a massive portion of the player base is a bunch of asshole teenagers that decide the best place to deal with their inferiority complexes is to be a prick in a video game.

That and I fucking hate snipers.

Well, Vogon Borg Director David Vonderhaar, get this:

Some people really enjoy single player, and they want to buy your titles to experience a rich single player experience, and then sell the game on with not intent of ever taking it online.

Oh, I see.

Well, that explains a lot, I guess.

I also think that online multiplayer is what keeps me busy and entertained for most of the time, but if you keep crapping on the single player part of the deal, deal's eventually off, y'know?

I can see where this is going.
"My game isn't bad guys, you're just playing it wrong!"

Wow... all the rage against this guy in the first few comments. Why the hate?

I can totally understand that as a developer if you put a ton of effort and time in to a certain aspect of a game you want people to experience it.
He in no way says that people should just always play online (a la EA) and yet the first few comments make it out to be that this guy is telling non-multiplayer gamers to play all games online.

He just wishes people would play his game online and that's totally understandable.

A lot of work is put in to the single player but just as much effort is probably put in to the multiplayer, so to him as a developer if you're not experiencing either side, it's "time wasted" from their perspective.

People need to chill a little.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here