Remember your first Deathmatch experience? I do. It was playing Quake with friends in 1996.
Guess what!?
Not much has changed in multiplayer gaming since those days.
Now, before you cram a bunch of facts and opinions down my throat about how X game changed X issue, hear me out. The basic gist of multiplayer gaming has traditionally been to spawn a group of players in/on a map and have them kill each other. This stretches all the way back to Doom. It was fun in Doom… and in Quake… and in Golden Eye… and in Halo…
The point is, this type of multiplayer experience is getting stale. As much as I do enjoy my time with Modern Warfare 2 and Bad Company 2, I can only take it in small doses now, whereas I used to be able to play similar games for six hours a day. However, you know what game I can still play online for hours a day? Kane and Lynch. I hated the single player experience, but the online component gives me something that I have been looking for: objective-based multiplayer. In that, I’m not really talking about objectives like capture-the-flag. I’m more so talking about small, story-based objectives. Kane and Lynch online tells a short tale, and it is one that is full of loyalty and betrayal. Another game that fits this category is Demon’s Souls. Though people lament the fact that there is no lobby system or friend invite mechanic, the fact that I can join someone’s ongoing game and choose to help them or hinder them is awesome.
I’m not saying that we should get rid of the tried-and-true multiplayer modes. What I am saying is that they should be better integrated into the games. Perhaps developers should take a tiny hint from MMOs in this regard. Envision a war game in which players begin as a lone operative, fighting their way behind enemy lines. At the end of the first mission, you reunite with your fellow soldiers and a large battle is about to ensue. Now, in my envisioning of this game, you are given the choice to play this battle out with AI friends and foes, or you can enter into multiplayer and a traditional deathmatch (capture-the-flag, domination, etc.) would be initiated. To me, that sounds awesome!
Although I would love to play a game like that, developers don’t even need to try that hard to make it more interesting. All I’m asking for is even the slightest semblance of a story. Instead of just a straightforward multiplayer bloodbath, wrap it in a tale. At the beginning of a match tell me that the island the two factions are on is undergoing a volcanic eruption and there is only one helicopter. Now, instead of just killing each other over and over again, the two teams are killing each other for a purpose, to be on the team on the chopper when it lifts off.Some games have been innovative enough to change things up. The Left 4 Dead series comes to mind, as does Team Fortress 2 (with its payload mode).
I write this realizing that I may be the minority here. Modern Warfare 2 still holds the top spot in multiplayer gaming. However, I do find it interesting that so many people gushed over Red Dead Redemption’s multiplayer mode, before promptly changing their minds and claiming that it was boring two days later. I’m not saying that the Free Roam mode is not boring, but it does tell me that people are looking for something more than the traditional modes. Hopefully the developers see this and begin to push out some amazing multiplayer content in the future.
Popularity: unranked [?]
7 comments