View Single Post

Default 

September 24th, 2008, 18:16
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I'm sorry, but I don't follow that logic at all.

For a lot of people, having a multiplayer mode is essential for our enjoyment of the game - as it is in my case and the case of several of my friends.

You might as well say that having no character customization isn't a bad thing, or that having no powers (ala Dungeon Siege) is just a design choice. It's not a bad thing if you don't find it adds much to the game, but if you do it's quite bad.

The whole thing is about expectations, which is why the only logic I would go along with, was if the genre standard was singleplayer only, in which case there's really no reason to expect it. However, action RPGs are pretty much associated with cooperative multiplayer - as it was introduced with Diablo (or arguably, Gauntlet) and having - at MINIMUM - the same feature set is something not unreasonable to expect of a modern Diablo clone.

In short, having no multiplayer in a modern action RPG is a negative.
Well my opinion differs from yours as well

I've played many ARPGs over the years and I hardly ever play them MP even if it's an offered feature.

If a game has MP then it's certainly not a draw back, but it's not a feature I look for or judge whether or not to purchase a game or not.

Many people, and the vast majority of those I discuss such things with, enjoy the freedom of playing ARPG/RPG in SP.

Look at The Witcher, solid, perfect RPG with only SP, Dragon Age coming out with only SP…

Even games like Titan Quest, I've only gone online once, Sacred, Dungeon Siege, Diablo 2, Loki, NWN/2…I play all 99.9% SP

Heck I even play Guild Wars with only Henchmen lol

So while you may prefer a game to have MP and look at the lack there of as a negative, that's not everyone's position

No offense intended, just different opinion and tastes

Regards
Roland is offline

Roland

Watchdog

#11

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 175