this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
357 points (98.4% liked)

Games

16785 readers
820 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 50 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I'm betting the majority of us older gamers enjoy coop games with friends more than anything.

[–] lazynooblet@lazysoci.al 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yep. Even a bad game can be good when played coop.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I'm one of those that will check if a game is coop first before anything else. Games are just better with friends.

Edit and you're absolutely right, even a shit buggy game can have us rolling in laughter for hours.

[–] ghost_towels@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Omg yes!!! My husband and I just want to play a long form rpg game together. No shooting, just wandering around together. Man I wish Skyrim had a console coop mode. Sigh.

The best times were hanging out with your friends playing games together. Now if I want to do that I’ve got to have a whole nother setup. Wtf.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Console coop is tough, if you ever get into PC gaming. There is a lot more coop games available, even Skyrim has a coop mod, which works pretty well now.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Macaroni_ninja@lemmy.world 43 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Its just not sustainable for my adult life to log in to whatever live service trash daily and compete agains faceless humans, who have more free time and advantage against a casual player.

Also the state of live service games is pure trash for decades now. Everything needs to be a copy of the 3 most popular titles with some kind of rpg progression and cosmetic items for real world money.

[–] Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Not only that, but the competative multiplayer scene is dominated by games appealing to professional game teams with high skill ceilings. Excuse me game devs; I have 1hr and 12min to play and I'd rather goof around than try to learn map layouts.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] quant@leminal.space 7 points 1 month ago

I enjoy occasional co-op gaming with people I know personally. Faceless strangers teabagging me and throwing racist insults like raging 13 year olds who just got addicted to Mountain Dew? No thanks bud, I'd rather spend an entire day scrolling through Netflix catalogues without actually watching them or something.

[–] Siathes@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 1 month ago (3 children)

What about the folks that like playing multiplayer games solo? I enjoy the busyness/fullness of people running around the world and having small interactions, while getting into groups only when really necessary for content or items.

The bulk of wow players play that way myself included (back in the day, im clean now)

[–] anomoly_@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

This is it for me. I like that a multiplayer world is something dynamic I'm a part of even when I'm not interacting with it directly.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago

Same, humans make virtual worlds so much more compelling to me over entirely scripted singleplayer experiences. Even when I dont directly interact with other humans around me, it still makes a virtual world feel so much more alive.

I love singleplayer games too tho and I would hate it if all games were multiplayer affairs, I just think it is worth pointing out that pleasure of sharing virtual spaces with other people is something deeper than just a desire to directly connect and interact. Sometimes it feels more like the pleasure of visiting a new place and enjoying being alone and anonymous while people watching at a cafe in a busy city square.

[–] simple@lemm.ee 32 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Saw this article before and the title is very misleading. 53% is barely "most", and the biggest takeaway from it is that gamers age 16-24 greatly prefer multiplayer games while people aged 25-34 prefer multiplayer as much as singleplayer. Those age groups are probably most of the market.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 39 points 1 month ago (3 children)

53% is barely "most"

This is a really bizarre point to try to make, to me. The headline doesn't say "the vast, overwhelming percentage of gamers"... It says most. 53% is most.

The bigger problem I had was with the categories, really.

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"Most" in more than a simple majority in my understanding of English as a non-native speaker. "More" would be a better word for it. I'd also take "single player is the most popular" of two game modes which is true but still implies more than 6% difference.

Are you Spanish or Arabic speaking by any chance?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Vent@lemm.ee 30 points 1 month ago (1 children)

People with lots of time and friends prefer multiplayer games more than people with little time and friends. Go figure.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

I would assume people with lots of friends and little time will like them even less.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sag@lemm.ee 28 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Multiplayer is only enjoyable when I play with my homies.

And since I have young kids, I don't play with my homies much anymore. So single player and couch coop (with kids) it is.

[–] ogmios@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'd like multiplayer a lot more if they still made games with user-driven match making, instead of opaque algorithms hellbent on ensuring that everyone maintains a perfect 50/50 win rate. That and the death of custom game modes/lobbies have really killed all the fun of online multiplayer.

[–] assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago (17 children)

As much as that may be true for you, on average people enjoy MP games with SBMM more than without by a decent margin. Studies have shown that people play more matches and play longer sessions when SBMM creates more balanced matches.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Are you sure that that is not just the people who are left since all the others left the game?

[–] assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

It's based on overall usage metrics - number of active users, number of matches played per user, length of a session per user, etc.

It does account for people quitting.

[–] BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago

personally not for me once i start getting destroyed by people leagues above my skill level i just stop playing

there's rarely ever games that are even, i either cream the opposing noobs or get creamed by the opposing pros. no in between

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] CompostMaterial@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago

I dislike people enough in my day to day life. Why would I want them in my video games?

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 18 points 1 month ago

This whole article sucks. Here were the choices for player preference:

  • PVE
  • Couch co-op
  • Online PVP
  • Single player

Is it true that most players prefer single player games? Maybe. Last year's unanimous game of the year was largely considered a "single player game", but while it's definitely not live service, it also won the award for best multiplayer. What does Halo count as? Halo 2 and 3 are single player, couch co-op, online co-op, couch PVP (not an option in this survey), and online PVP. If Halo 2 is your favorite game, it could be for any of those reasons, but they also all play off of one another to form a richer game as a whole. I wouldn't want to exclude one of those things in favor of another.

Single-player games are a safer bet for new games...Make no mistake: the costs to make AAA single-player, non-live service games have inflated to astronomic levels. Leaks from Insomniac showed that PlayStation’s AAA flagship games, like Spider-Man 2, have budgets in the hundreds of millions of dollars. But there is a growing opportunity for AAA studios to make leaner single-player games.

Look, especially when you factor in costs, like the paragraph after this does, it's correct to say that a safer bet is the one that can be made more cheaply, but even these examples of successes are cherry-picked. I could just as easily bring up Tales of Kenzera: Zau, Immortals of Aveum, or Alone in the Dark to show why offline single player games are risky.

[–] teft@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

If randoms were less toxic and if a guild could stay together I'd prefer multiplayer but alas people are generally toxic asshats and most guilds don't last very long any more.

Thankfully there have been a bunch of good single player games lately.

[–] modifier@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 month ago

I love all types of games but for real immersion and escape nothing beats a single player FPS

[–] TheMightyCanuck@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 month ago

I'm an adult who doesn't have time or friends anymore..

It's not because they aren't fun, I just can't dedicate time or play them the way they were designed to be played

[–] missingno@fedia.io 15 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I guess I just don't get the tribalism here. Both are cool in different ways.

Singleplayer games offer a more curated experience. A story and a set of hand-crafted challenges. But that generally means finishing one and moving onto the next, rather than really sinking my teeth in it.

Multiplayer games offer a neverending challenge. There's always a better opponent. And I've made a lot of good friends through these communities.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Multiplayer games offer a neverending challenge. There’s always a better opponent.

But that is exactly the problem with it. The vast majority of people don't have the free time to spend on a given game to compete with those who do spend most of their time on it.

[–] missingno@fedia.io 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm not expecting to beat Daigo Umehara any time soon. I'm just aiming to beat the next guy in front of me. And the next. And the next. No matter what my skill level, there's always a challenge. That doesn't mean I have to be the very best, quite the opposite.

[–] Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago

That's fair. I love the gunplay of Apex (and can ignore all the battlepass monetization) but I could never just goof around in that game like I could in Halo 3 multiplayer, Planetside2, or TF2. I often ended up back in the queue after matching with people with thousands more hours of expierience. The alternative gamemodes were the most fun because I got to have fun while losing, which is less of the focus in today's shooters due to the super high skill ceilings. Competative games are mostly made with professional teams in mind now. That's what I want a return to and why I like Helldivers 2 so much.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago

Sure... but that is what skillbased matchmaking is for, to set you up with a game with people precisely on your level.

99% of people playing a multiplayer game with good matchmaking are always going to have a winrate trending towards 50%, that is by definition the function of skillbased matchmaking!

[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Maybe I'm doing it wrong or I'm just too shy to socialize with strangers in these games, but as someone who has fond memories of my favorite TF2/killing floor community servers, I feel like there is basically no sense of community in these games now that matchmaking is king and private hosting is a thing of the past

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Never enjoyed multiplayer or coop stuff. Subjective but I don't get it. I'm not competitive and don't care about 'git gud' just for the sake of it, or bragging rights, or something.

A good campaign is what I want. Major bonus points for a campaign that is so good its got multiple run replay value.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Player preference only factors into the development decision in so much as it affects profitability. Meaning that even if more people prefer single player, they will still make a multiplayer game if they feel they can charge more, and earn more money from it.

[–] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Then WoW is released and everyone and your mother is a gamer now.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TriflingToad@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I disagree. I like GOOD games. It just so happens that 90% of the good games are singleplayer. Deep Rock Galactic and Minecraft are pretty much the only 2 multiplayer games I think are better with other people (strangers, not like playing with family).

Also I MUST bring this up every chance I get. Lemmy.world has a Minecraft server that isn't pay to win and I need people to play with. Am lonely, please join. :)

load more comments
view more: next ›