The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
“Next-Gen” means a lot of things to a lot of people, be it fancy graphics, polygon count or the ability to provide better game AI. But surely the one thing that has improved games more than any of these is the Online element?
The original Xbox and, to a smaller extent, the PS2 really introduced Online gaming for consoles to a new audience. The PC, of course, had been swimming in online gaming for some time, but many gamers hadn’t had experience of this due to complicated setups or lack of a decent PC.
The 360 and PS3 looked like furthering the cause of online gaming, being more powerful platforms to take care of larger multi-player games and learning to improve from their previous incarnations, which they both did to some extent. But now, it seams, many big titles are resting on their laurels when it comes to online options or simply not including them at all.
Surely as a new generation of titles makes better use of the technology we should see more Online content and availability rather than less? Downloadable maps and packs are good and all very useful for prolonging a game (sometimes even necessary when a game is lacking content from the off, such as Motorstorm) but it’s the online play which needs to be addressed.
The situation shouldn’t be a choice between Online Co-operative or VS, it should be both and more besides. Just as new off-line ways of playing are being invented, Online play should evolve as well. Simply playing against a human opponent is rewarding, but how many ranked matches are set up for beginners only or for the elite? Why not have a better system altogether to pick the type of person you want to play against? Choose by country, age, ability etc to get your perfect match. Few games will allow you to do this, yet it seems to be the most obvious way to organise an online game.
And with sandbox games giving you the ability to go anywhere and do things in your own time, surely a drop-in-and-out element of online play should also be present, making the world even more lifelike? It could be a separate mode where you have ever changing objectives which anyone can complete (and some need groups of people to complete together).
In fact, the only Online game I can see challenging the norm is Little Big Planet, and that is getting so much hype I fear that it might not be able to live up to its name. So hopefully developers will take heed and think up new ways to use Online elements and truly show us what Next-Gen means for online gaming.
The original Xbox and, to a smaller extent, the PS2 really introduced Online gaming for consoles to a new audience. The PC, of course, had been swimming in online gaming for some time, but many gamers hadn’t had experience of this due to complicated setups or lack of a decent PC.
The 360 and PS3 looked like furthering the cause of online gaming, being more powerful platforms to take care of larger multi-player games and learning to improve from their previous incarnations, which they both did to some extent. But now, it seams, many big titles are resting on their laurels when it comes to online options or simply not including them at all.
Surely as a new generation of titles makes better use of the technology we should see more Online content and availability rather than less? Downloadable maps and packs are good and all very useful for prolonging a game (sometimes even necessary when a game is lacking content from the off, such as Motorstorm) but it’s the online play which needs to be addressed.
The situation shouldn’t be a choice between Online Co-operative or VS, it should be both and more besides. Just as new off-line ways of playing are being invented, Online play should evolve as well. Simply playing against a human opponent is rewarding, but how many ranked matches are set up for beginners only or for the elite? Why not have a better system altogether to pick the type of person you want to play against? Choose by country, age, ability etc to get your perfect match. Few games will allow you to do this, yet it seems to be the most obvious way to organise an online game.
And with sandbox games giving you the ability to go anywhere and do things in your own time, surely a drop-in-and-out element of online play should also be present, making the world even more lifelike? It could be a separate mode where you have ever changing objectives which anyone can complete (and some need groups of people to complete together).
In fact, the only Online game I can see challenging the norm is Little Big Planet, and that is getting so much hype I fear that it might not be able to live up to its name. So hopefully developers will take heed and think up new ways to use Online elements and truly show us what Next-Gen means for online gaming.
“Next-Gen” means a lot of things to a lot of people, be it fancy graphics, polygon count or the ability to provide better game AI. But surely the one thing that has improved games more than any of these is the Online element?
The original Xbox and, to a smaller extent, the PS2 really introduced Online gaming for consoles to a new audience. The PC, of course, had been swimming in online gaming for some time, but many gamers hadn’t had experience of this due to complicated setups or lack of a decent PC.
The 360 and PS3 looked like furthering the cause of online gaming, being more powerful platforms to take care of larger multi-player games and learning to improve from their previous incarnations, which they both did to some extent. But now, it seams, many big titles are resting on their laurels when it comes to online options or simply not including them at all.
Surely as a new generation of titles makes better use of the technology we should see more Online content and availability rather than less? Downloadable maps and packs are good and all very useful for prolonging a game (sometimes even necessary when a game is lacking content from the off, such as Motorstorm) but it’s the online play which needs to be addressed.
The situation shouldn’t be a choice between Online Co-operative or VS, it should be both and more besides. Just as new off-line ways of playing are being invented, Online play should evolve as well. Simply playing against a human opponent is rewarding, but how many ranked matches are set up for beginners only or for the elite? Why not have a better system altogether to pick the type of person you want to play against? Choose by country, age, ability etc to get your perfect match. Few games will allow you to do this, yet it seems to be the most obvious way to organise an online game.
And with sandbox games giving you the ability to go anywhere and do things in your own time, surely a drop-in-and-out element of online play should also be present, making the world even more lifelike? It could be a separate mode where you have ever changing objectives which anyone can complete (and some need groups of people to complete together).
In fact, the only Online game I can see challenging the norm is Little Big Planet, and that is getting so much hype I fear that it might not be able to live up to its name. So hopefully developers will take heed and think up new ways to use Online elements and truly show us what Next-Gen means for online gaming.
The original Xbox and, to a smaller extent, the PS2 really introduced Online gaming for consoles to a new audience. The PC, of course, had been swimming in online gaming for some time, but many gamers hadn’t had experience of this due to complicated setups or lack of a decent PC.
The 360 and PS3 looked like furthering the cause of online gaming, being more powerful platforms to take care of larger multi-player games and learning to improve from their previous incarnations, which they both did to some extent. But now, it seams, many big titles are resting on their laurels when it comes to online options or simply not including them at all.
Surely as a new generation of titles makes better use of the technology we should see more Online content and availability rather than less? Downloadable maps and packs are good and all very useful for prolonging a game (sometimes even necessary when a game is lacking content from the off, such as Motorstorm) but it’s the online play which needs to be addressed.
The situation shouldn’t be a choice between Online Co-operative or VS, it should be both and more besides. Just as new off-line ways of playing are being invented, Online play should evolve as well. Simply playing against a human opponent is rewarding, but how many ranked matches are set up for beginners only or for the elite? Why not have a better system altogether to pick the type of person you want to play against? Choose by country, age, ability etc to get your perfect match. Few games will allow you to do this, yet it seems to be the most obvious way to organise an online game.
And with sandbox games giving you the ability to go anywhere and do things in your own time, surely a drop-in-and-out element of online play should also be present, making the world even more lifelike? It could be a separate mode where you have ever changing objectives which anyone can complete (and some need groups of people to complete together).
In fact, the only Online game I can see challenging the norm is Little Big Planet, and that is getting so much hype I fear that it might not be able to live up to its name. So hopefully developers will take heed and think up new ways to use Online elements and truly show us what Next-Gen means for online gaming.
Nintendo still needs to shape up muchly, friend codes make me weep.
Although I'm hearing rumours of sixteen player online Mariokart :O
Although I'm hearing rumours of sixteen player online Mariokart :O
pb wrote:
> Simply playing against a human opponent is rewarding, but
> how many ranked matches are set up for beginners only or for the
> elite?
Do you have a particular game in mind for this whole post or sentence? I've recently discovered in WoW that I get challanged to a dual by all sorts of other players. None that I know of so far who I could beat so I just decline all challanges.
> Why not have a better system altogether to pick the type
> of person you want to play against? Choose by country, age,
> ability etc to get your perfect match.
In general I don't think that would be a better system. In fact I think that would be very restrictive and a step backwards. The beauty of online games is the interaction between differing players. It makes no difference which country you live in or what your age is. I can just imagine all the 12 - 17 year olds setting age parameters which would exclude me 99% of the time! That would be a joke and mean that I get excluded from joining parties to complete certain tasks but at least I'd get to save the £20+ I pay in subs for my online games every month..
Want to choose by country, age, ability? Just multiplay offline with your friends.
> And with sandbox games giving you the ability to go anywhere,
> do things in your own time, surely a drop-in-and-out element of
> online play should also be present, making the world even more
> lifelike? It could be a separate mode where you have ever
> changing objectives which anyone can complete (and some need
> groups of people to complete together).
Again I'm slightly confused (sorry and I've no idea what a 'sandbox game' is :)). So again - did you have a particluar game in mind when you posted? While I'm not online with any console I do play online with the PC and the 'drop in / drop out' or 'join a party' aspects are very much in evidence. In fact there are no other ways to play the online games. Some elements you can do yourself, some elements need to be done in a group to complete.
> Simply playing against a human opponent is rewarding, but
> how many ranked matches are set up for beginners only or for the
> elite?
Do you have a particular game in mind for this whole post or sentence? I've recently discovered in WoW that I get challanged to a dual by all sorts of other players. None that I know of so far who I could beat so I just decline all challanges.
> Why not have a better system altogether to pick the type
> of person you want to play against? Choose by country, age,
> ability etc to get your perfect match.
In general I don't think that would be a better system. In fact I think that would be very restrictive and a step backwards. The beauty of online games is the interaction between differing players. It makes no difference which country you live in or what your age is. I can just imagine all the 12 - 17 year olds setting age parameters which would exclude me 99% of the time! That would be a joke and mean that I get excluded from joining parties to complete certain tasks but at least I'd get to save the £20+ I pay in subs for my online games every month..
Want to choose by country, age, ability? Just multiplay offline with your friends.
> And with sandbox games giving you the ability to go anywhere,
> do things in your own time, surely a drop-in-and-out element of
> online play should also be present, making the world even more
> lifelike? It could be a separate mode where you have ever
> changing objectives which anyone can complete (and some need
> groups of people to complete together).
Again I'm slightly confused (sorry and I've no idea what a 'sandbox game' is :)). So again - did you have a particluar game in mind when you posted? While I'm not online with any console I do play online with the PC and the 'drop in / drop out' or 'join a party' aspects are very much in evidence. In fact there are no other ways to play the online games. Some elements you can do yourself, some elements need to be done in a group to complete.
Sandbox - as in a free roaming open game. Crackdown went some way to provide something like this, but only in co-op.
I don't think allowing people to adjust settings would be too restrictive as there would still be plenty of people who would still choose an open game.
I don't think allowing people to adjust settings would be too restrictive as there would still be plenty of people who would still choose an open game.
pb wrote:
I tend to agree (although I didn't really think about it before I hit 'post' last time) that plenty of people would still choose an open game which is probably why adjusting the settings in the way you suggest isn't incorporated yet for the few who may wish to use it.
Hmmm... I'm thinking that I'm looking at this from a totally different angle / experience to you. It was the 'setting parameters' idea that shocked me into replying originally.
I don't actually play games where I 'murder' other players :D
I tend to agree (although I didn't really think about it before I hit 'post' last time) that plenty of people would still choose an open game which is probably why adjusting the settings in the way you suggest isn't incorporated yet for the few who may wish to use it.
Hmmm... I'm thinking that I'm looking at this from a totally different angle / experience to you. It was the 'setting parameters' idea that shocked me into replying originally.
I don't actually play games where I 'murder' other players :D