The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
If I mention Doom anyone who hasn't been locked in a cupboard and then buried in a concrete hole will know what I’m talking about.
Doom made us focus on something which had existed before the game’s release, but Doom brought it to the mainstream, what am I talking about? Internet gaming. Whether it is network or modem, it spans a large majority of followers.
Through the passage of time, the single player aspect of games has almost always taken a back seat to multiplayer opportunities. Games are now being developed solely for the purpose of multiplay, for example Turok Rage wars or unreal tournament.
Now whilst Doom gave players a good challenge with nice levels, and monsters with decent AI, it was always the multiplayer which kept you up until 3.00AM, the opportunity to frag a few friends, or even complete strangers was more satisfying than completing single player, largely because a human opponent is almost always more challenging than a computer sapient.
However where Doom introduced the deathmatch, in 1996, Quake revolutionised it. That was over 4 years ago. There have been definitive changes in the industry, but still people think that the industry has taken a step backward.
The recent increase in online RPGs, has steered gaming into the unstable world of online gaming, however your view on whether this is good or bad depends on how you look at the situation as a whole.
The majority of the FPS have a multiplayer option as standard, like a radio in a car, they just look like they should be there.
Moreover, not since the release of Everquest last year, has the online gaming fad really hit store shelves. I use the word fad, because at the moment that is all it really is, something that has got really big, really fast, remember Furby?
In all of this relative chaos, is it not then possible for a crash? Well in theory it could happen, now companies are not just milking the licenses, but the genre as a whole. When you get too many of one thing, people get bored, and the more you have the quicker the boredom sets in.
Still with the recent (well sort of) releases of Unreal Tournament and Quake 3, the genre has exploded with life, and even more high quality releases will send the genre into uncharted territories.
Multiplayer may be the future of gaming, with faster connections, lower pings and less lag online gaming can rocket into a new dimension. If there were more support from companies more high quality products will be released, there is money to be made here, as we have seen in gaming networks.
In my opinion I would be deeply saddened if online gaming were a mere fad, however there is opposition in the face of developers. High school accidents in America have seen an increase in shootings, stabbing, etc...And still politicians see killing your friend online as an act of self-less violence.
As it stands now, online multiplayer is here to stay; however it could go either way. Multiplayer joins people together in a fun environment, and unites different ethnic groups, different nationalities, and different races in a way that no other can. It is a place where you can express yourself in a non-violent way, and in the future, this could become very important.
Thanks for reading. CM :)
Doom made us focus on something which had existed before the game’s release, but Doom brought it to the mainstream, what am I talking about? Internet gaming. Whether it is network or modem, it spans a large majority of followers.
Through the passage of time, the single player aspect of games has almost always taken a back seat to multiplayer opportunities. Games are now being developed solely for the purpose of multiplay, for example Turok Rage wars or unreal tournament.
Now whilst Doom gave players a good challenge with nice levels, and monsters with decent AI, it was always the multiplayer which kept you up until 3.00AM, the opportunity to frag a few friends, or even complete strangers was more satisfying than completing single player, largely because a human opponent is almost always more challenging than a computer sapient.
However where Doom introduced the deathmatch, in 1996, Quake revolutionised it. That was over 4 years ago. There have been definitive changes in the industry, but still people think that the industry has taken a step backward.
The recent increase in online RPGs, has steered gaming into the unstable world of online gaming, however your view on whether this is good or bad depends on how you look at the situation as a whole.
The majority of the FPS have a multiplayer option as standard, like a radio in a car, they just look like they should be there.
Moreover, not since the release of Everquest last year, has the online gaming fad really hit store shelves. I use the word fad, because at the moment that is all it really is, something that has got really big, really fast, remember Furby?
In all of this relative chaos, is it not then possible for a crash? Well in theory it could happen, now companies are not just milking the licenses, but the genre as a whole. When you get too many of one thing, people get bored, and the more you have the quicker the boredom sets in.
Still with the recent (well sort of) releases of Unreal Tournament and Quake 3, the genre has exploded with life, and even more high quality releases will send the genre into uncharted territories.
Multiplayer may be the future of gaming, with faster connections, lower pings and less lag online gaming can rocket into a new dimension. If there were more support from companies more high quality products will be released, there is money to be made here, as we have seen in gaming networks.
In my opinion I would be deeply saddened if online gaming were a mere fad, however there is opposition in the face of developers. High school accidents in America have seen an increase in shootings, stabbing, etc...And still politicians see killing your friend online as an act of self-less violence.
As it stands now, online multiplayer is here to stay; however it could go either way. Multiplayer joins people together in a fun environment, and unites different ethnic groups, different nationalities, and different races in a way that no other can. It is a place where you can express yourself in a non-violent way, and in the future, this could become very important.
Thanks for reading. CM :)
Page:
AliBoy wrote:
> What I would like to know is if the on-line features in the game
> will affect the res of the game.
Nope... graphics, an all are all stored locally...
all you send it your position, what your doing, which direction you rheading, how fast, etc...
That kinda thing...
Will the code to allow you to play
> on-line take up space that could have been used to put in extra
> levels/characters/weapons/vehicles. Or even improve the graphics or
> gameplay.
MMOLRPG generally offer auto bugs anf ifxs, also extra features and objects, also complete version upgrades of their software for free
Im quite happy to sit at home playing multiplayers with
> mates and don't see the point of going on-line and playing someone
> else and having to pay money for it.
I know this appeals to some
It depends what you mean? If your playing counter stricke, then you shouldnt need to pay to play someone else...
If you mean Everquest, Ultima online, then your playing on a persistant state world... which is a whole different kettle of fish
> What I would like to know is if the on-line features in the game
> will affect the res of the game.
Nope... graphics, an all are all stored locally...
all you send it your position, what your doing, which direction you rheading, how fast, etc...
That kinda thing...
Will the code to allow you to play
> on-line take up space that could have been used to put in extra
> levels/characters/weapons/vehicles. Or even improve the graphics or
> gameplay.
MMOLRPG generally offer auto bugs anf ifxs, also extra features and objects, also complete version upgrades of their software for free
Im quite happy to sit at home playing multiplayers with
> mates and don't see the point of going on-line and playing someone
> else and having to pay money for it.
I know this appeals to some
It depends what you mean? If your playing counter stricke, then you shouldnt need to pay to play someone else...
If you mean Everquest, Ultima online, then your playing on a persistant state world... which is a whole different kettle of fish
console gaming.
Aliboy, are you talking about console gaming or PC gaming?
What I would like to know is if the on-line features in the game will affect the res of the game. Will the code to allow you to play on-line take up space that could have been used to put in extra levels/characters/weapons/vehicles. Or even improve the graphics or gameplay. Im quite happy to sit at home playing multiplayers with mates and don't see the point of going on-line and playing someone else and having to pay money for it.
I know this appeals to some people, the chance to play against people all over the world. I think when they get it set up in Japan and we see what its like then we will be able to tell just how popular it will be.
I know this appeals to some people, the chance to play against people all over the world. I think when they get it set up in Japan and we see what its like then we will be able to tell just how popular it will be.
Armitage Shanks wrote:
The
> question here is (as cookie pointed out) ether online gameing will
> fad away... and multiplayer games will once again become split
> screen entertainment & Lan games?
Thing is, with quicker connections playing over the 'net will be alomost the same speed as playing over a LAN so developers may as well include 'net play as I doubt the code is that much different from the LAN code.
The
> question here is (as cookie pointed out) ether online gameing will
> fad away... and multiplayer games will once again become split
> screen entertainment & Lan games?
Thing is, with quicker connections playing over the 'net will be alomost the same speed as playing over a LAN so developers may as well include 'net play as I doubt the code is that much different from the LAN code.
AliBoy wrote:
> On-line gaming may be the future but not the close future.
>
Consoles like the PS2, DC, GCN and X-Box seem to all have modems
> or plan to have modems but what ISP's will allow us to connect?
Online gameing may not be a bing thing yert with consoles...
But been going a quite a while for PC gamers...
Although I'm refering to online gaming really beginning in 1997 with Ultima online, given that Doom, etc.. was still, much more popular as a LAN event at that time, I'm not discounting MUDs, but since they are 15+ years old now, I'm fairly sure they'll screw up everyone theories? (they do mine :) )
So, in a sense, On-Line gaming long ago stopped being a future concept years ago...
The question here is (as cookie pointed out) ether online gameing will fad away... and multiplayer games will once again become split screen entertainment & Lan games?
> On-line gaming may be the future but not the close future.
>
Consoles like the PS2, DC, GCN and X-Box seem to all have modems
> or plan to have modems but what ISP's will allow us to connect?
Online gameing may not be a bing thing yert with consoles...
But been going a quite a while for PC gamers...
Although I'm refering to online gaming really beginning in 1997 with Ultima online, given that Doom, etc.. was still, much more popular as a LAN event at that time, I'm not discounting MUDs, but since they are 15+ years old now, I'm fairly sure they'll screw up everyone theories? (they do mine :) )
So, in a sense, On-Line gaming long ago stopped being a future concept years ago...
The question here is (as cookie pointed out) ether online gameing will fad away... and multiplayer games will once again become split screen entertainment & Lan games?
Congrats Cookie!
On-line gaming may be the future but not the close future.
Consoles like the PS2, DC, GCN and X-Box seem to all have modems or plan to have modems but what ISP's will allow us to connect? Sony are set to try on-line gaming at the end of the year in Japan then in USA. Im not sure the demand in the UK and europe is high enogh yet and our technology isn't up to standard here yet.
Think of the PS2 i-link. What internet acces is going to be able to cope with such powerful consoles to allow the game to run smothly. For those who have tried the i-link you will know that its quick and when you do something on the controller the game does it exactly the same time, this won't be poosibe on-line as its not quick enough Yet.
Also how many developers are going to add features to their games to allow on-line game playing. Only a few have shown any interest. I can't see on-line gaming being here for a few years and even then im not sure if it will be that popular.
Consoles like the PS2, DC, GCN and X-Box seem to all have modems or plan to have modems but what ISP's will allow us to connect? Sony are set to try on-line gaming at the end of the year in Japan then in USA. Im not sure the demand in the UK and europe is high enogh yet and our technology isn't up to standard here yet.
Think of the PS2 i-link. What internet acces is going to be able to cope with such powerful consoles to allow the game to run smothly. For those who have tried the i-link you will know that its quick and when you do something on the controller the game does it exactly the same time, this won't be poosibe on-line as its not quick enough Yet.
Also how many developers are going to add features to their games to allow on-line game playing. Only a few have shown any interest. I can't see on-line gaming being here for a few years and even then im not sure if it will be that popular.
cookie monster wrote:
When i read this post, i couldn't belive it, thanks
> everyone for posting your replies and making a great topic, also
> thanks to SR for picking me, its my first win and im really chuffed.
> I can't believe i have won...
Hey... Top stuff man!
If all your posts are of this quality, then you'll soon have plenty more wins to follow this one!
Congrats! :)
When i read this post, i couldn't belive it, thanks
> everyone for posting your replies and making a great topic, also
> thanks to SR for picking me, its my first win and im really chuffed.
> I can't believe i have won...
Hey... Top stuff man!
If all your posts are of this quality, then you'll soon have plenty more wins to follow this one!
Congrats! :)
RastaBillySkank wrote:
> Ncie post, congrat on your win Cookie!
When i read this post, i couldn't belive it, thanks everyone for posting your replies and making a great topic, also thanks to SR for picking me, its my first win and im really chuffed. I can't believe i have won...
> Ncie post, congrat on your win Cookie!
When i read this post, i couldn't belive it, thanks everyone for posting your replies and making a great topic, also thanks to SR for picking me, its my first win and im really chuffed. I can't believe i have won...
Page: