Topic: The big problem with online specific games

So after briefly playing gundam vs around Christmas. I decided to have a proper run through the game last night and its hugely frustrating.

Its brilliant in the horde mode and survival modes, 2 modes which last gen were minor distractions away from a campaign. They are probably the best versions of horde and survival in gaming and are a ton of fun. Playing alone I was competitive and had fun.

The problem is there is no campaign and the meat of the Gundam vs is online fighting other people.

I got into 2 fights in 2 hours. The first fight was so ridiculously slow (like 3fps) I got annihalated. The second fight was more fun and went right down to the wire. So in 2 hours I basically had 1 fight.

Ive got a £50 coffee coaster in my collection. I wont buy another gundam vs game ever again which is hugely disappointing as a closet fan of the Gundam series. Why is there no campaign? There are 80 or so Gundam fully realised with the most menial of game modes to use them in. Such a waste.

Does anybody else have examples of this which has left you frustrated or disappointed?

Not loads as I tend to avoid Online only style multiplayer games but one example was Eve Valkyrie for PSVR. This was an early, near launch title and had some offline playable levels but to be honest, they weren't great and the awesome demo level on the PSVR disc actually ends at the same time as the demo.

What I found was that progress really needed to be made in the online arena style dogfights but they really didnt have the same majesty of the demo and sparse single player missions. The gameplay was pretty good but I lost interest pretty quickly as I felt the game was a bit confusing and I found it difficult to get a feel for the game without a solid solo campaign to teach me the ropes. Now I know there have been loads of patches and changes, including non VR modes but to be honest, I haven't really been back in over six months. I was just desperate for big VR experiences when it first launched and I paid full price for the game.

Of recent memory, there have only been a couple of examples for me, Evolve and Titanfall. I tend to avoid MP focused games as I don't game online much. Evolve was a Games with Gold so I got it to give it a try and it was rubbish, I spent the time running around looking for the objective and then getting wrecked by the other players and Titanfall was a similar experience but had a really poor single player bit that was just pot luck if you could get it as the maps were on rotation and it was just a bad experience.

everyone is forgetting the biggest issue with online only games

when the servers are shut down and the game becomes unplayable, making it completely worthless because you can't even sell it

@FullbringIchigo Yeah but that is not just online only games. If they take away the patches for games, it would render discs pointless as well. Imagine getting The Witcher 3 launch edition and not having all the patches. It basically means that if backwards compatiblity isn't maintained across generations, the retro gaming scene is going to die a death.

@Rudy_Manchego well at the very least for any system from the PS3 era onwards

and you do bring up a good point about patches it reminds me of the last Tony Hawks game, the disc was shipped with ONLY the tutorial section on it because they had to release the game before their licence expired the rest of the game was included in that mandatory day one "patch" so once the servers go down that game will be useless AND because the licence has expired new discs containing all the game can't be released

@FullbringIchigo yes, sorry, I was thinking from PS3/360/Wii generation.

Exactly, I mean I know you can get GOTY editions which often have the latest patched version at time of launch but lots of people buy at launch. In some games, entire modes or content are patched in later. We are already seeing online components of good single player games like Demon Souls or even Gravity Rush 2 being turned off and making trophy lists unobtainable. I fear that patches, or at least the infrastructure to deliver patches will be turned off on older gens like the PS3 and it makes the game unplayable.

@Rudy_Manchego if they turn off online modes in games they should patch out the online trophies too

@FullbringIchigo I don't think there should be online trophies personally - I have several games where I can't get the online trophies because the player base has died.

@Rudy_Manchego yeah at the very least they should be separate and in no way count towards you Platinum and we know games can have separate trophy lists because many already do

@Rudy_Manchego @FullbringIchigo exactly, I cant even get a fight in - let alone grabbing trophies and the game was released 6 months ago

@themcnoisy @FullbringIchigo Yep and this is also why the whole focus on multiplayer or online games as a service from so many major publishers is a poor choice. What tends to happen on most online games is a big community at launch, people move on within 1-2 months and you are left with a core community who are now so blooming good at the game that coming in as a newbie is intimidating. Those people that stick with games and make them profitable tend to stick with only a few games at a time which means that if the market is flooded, there is not way it can support that many games. Not every game can or will be Fifa or Destiny.

I think ever gamer knows that 'online' games will have a limited shelf life compared to the potential life of an offline game. They are certainly 'seasonal' - if you want to play them at their height and very dependent on the community. Of course not all die when they are 'replaced' by newer iterations but they rarely hit the heights they were regularly achieving whilst they were at their most popular.

For me, IF I have a big interest in their online modes, I tend to buy as close to release as possible - even if that means I have to pass on an offline game. Its not that I think the online game is better or that I want it more, its just that the online component is more time sensitive and the offline game will still be just as playable at a later date. The only thing that 'may' ruin an offline game is 'spoilers' but that doesn't affect the playability like having no or few online gamers to play online with. Co-op online isn't quite so bad in my opinion - at least if they still have the servers on. I can still play 'Zombies' online with just myself or 1-3 others - Its not like trying to find a minimum of 7 others to actually have a competitive match and as the enemies are all AI, horde mode or co-op modes can be easier to play. Of course Zombies is better with others but it doesn't necessarily need 3 others to play. Also co-op campaigns can be played Solo and all these co-op games are better with actual friends rather than randoms.

Online covers more than just competitive matches. Whilst some are very dependent on having a active community, there are still a lot of online opportunity for friends too. You can set up custom matches for example against a friend with or without bots, even play alongside 'friends' against bots etc so even if the gaming community has moved on, there is potential for these games to provide some online fun.

Point is, you can't lump ALL online games together and not all are totally dependent on an Active community. Its true that they will still have a 'limited' shelf life - whether its the game or consoles online servers are turned off, they will be turned off at some point. Online aspects will of course die when either the game or console online function gets turned off.

If you want to play with others in a community, its perhaps wise to check if the game has a community if the game is old or whether you have friends with the game if it has co-op or custom matches. You would think fighting games would have the ability to fight against friends rather than against just random others so even if the game is 'dead' online. if you have friend(s) with the game, you can still play the game. Its perhaps easier than couch co-op as that requires you to be in the same room with someone who also wants to play that game. Just because Mario Kart or Goldeneye can still be played in multi-player, doesn't mean you will ever get the opportunity to play these either...

While I can understand most.complants about online gaming the one that gets me is online trophies. People always complain that they shouldn't have online trophies but honestly what does it matter it's a trophy. It's not like you can't beat a single player game if the you'd get the online multiplayer trophy. It's not like Sony is going to send you a million dollar check for getting it. It's just a trophy, just move on to a different game it's not worth getting all worked up over.

@Tasuki Different topic but trophies (or anything for that matter) has value you put into it. Its the ultimate meta game. Its frustrating when you cant grab trophies.

Back on topic though, I understand reading reviews and doing homework prior to picking up a game is important. But not being able to join a game so soon within the games life, how can you account for that? The developers may have lost money - and so have I. May as well build more offline stuff to compliment the online stuff.

@themcnoisy That's why I don't play alot of online MP games with the exception of CoD. Unless you get there right from the start there's no way you are going to catch up. Even if you wait a month or two all the casual players are usually gone and are you have are the hardcore players who just dominate you. That's one reason I don't play fighting games online and why I passed on getting Street Fighter V. By the time I finally do get around to playing it I just can't compeat with the hardcore players.

@Tasuki So in a nutshell - can I get a refund as the game is not as described? Surely there should be bots if a game fails so the people who buy the game can still enjoy all the features.

UnrealTournament had great bots and that was 20 years ago!

@themcnoisy "not being able to join a game so soon within the games life, how can you account for that?"

You can't but by the same token, you can't also force players to keep playing games that they don't want to. The devs don't build these games to last a week or two but hope they build the game to last much longer. If the community don't take to the game, then it dies. Its like starting a TV series where the audience falls away rapidly so it gets cancelled before the end of the series. If you come at it late and enjoy the first few then find its cancelled, then 'tough' - that's the way the industry is. You can bet the person making the show thought they would at least make it to the end of the season. There are a number of series that end on cliffhangers that then get cancelled too.

Its like joining a local sports club, whether its a solo sport (like Tennis) or Team sport (like football) but if the members leave, you may not actually get to play a match. There may not be enough people playing at the times suitable to you to even play a solo match. Team sports also can have matches cancelled if they can't get a full team together - whether its 'your' team or the opposition. Both situations may well have had the ambition to last the season but if the members don't stay for the season, they die too.

If you back the 'underdog' in a genre that's well stocked, then the chances are it won't last - especially with big name franchises all currently offering an option. In the fighting Genre with games like SF5, Injustice, Capcom vs Marvel, Tekken etc, any 'new' game has to be something special to not only take those players away from those games but keep them and stop them migrating back to their favourites. Unless they capture the audience, especially in a crowded market-place, they won't last. DB fighterz lost 80% of its community in 2 weeks (on PC anyway) - something that took Tekken 2months to do.

@themcnoisy I have to agree with @BAMozzy here. Do you honestly expect companies to think he this game will only last a month or two. No they don't. Take Lawbreakers for example or Battleborne if companies could predict that then more then likely they wouldn't even bring the game out. You can't honestly blame the developers on this one if people just don't want to play the game.

Honestly the best way to avoid this is research on your own. Take to the forums see if others around here play the game on a regular basis and of they do ask them how the player count is, if there is anything more to do then online multiplayer etc.

@Tasuki I agree but then again it is a kind of a vicious circle when it comes online games that require a community to work. With so many releasing, many people have a wait and see attitude which in turn means a less players which then puts off new players. Apart from the big names, new entries or IP's are going to struggle unless they have a very unique IP and/or are adopted by online influencers.

I can see the reward for devs is great if a game is adopted - you sell a base game and can extend revenue generation for a far longer period but then I would say the risk of flopping is far higher then a game that is single player or has a an offline mode since people won't bother purchasing further down the line.

I really miss bots.