Five 2011 game releases that may disappoint

Max Payne BETTER not be dissapointing :(

Hahaha, good one! :D

No, but seriously, I think it's going to be an epic disappointment for me. I'm a huuuuuge fan of Max Payne. It's one of my bestest, bestest games I've ever played and look what they've done to it...:( I'm not one to judge on looks, but really, LOOK at it! Looks QaQ! WTF is Max Payne doing in the jungle?! Amg.

Deus Ex is the only one of those that I really, really hope is not a fail.
 
I think we are being a bit hard on the new write.

No! He degraded two (admittedly potentially) fantastic games by comparing them to Diablo and Daikatana respectively. He deserves a lashing!
whip.gif
 
I just think that the DA experience could be a lot more awesome if you could get online and play with buddies. I don't want an MMO, I just want to play through the campaign with my friends, show off my awesome items, etc. I do think it'll be a good game, but the lack of Multiplayer destroys its longevity past one or two playthroughs, which I find disappointing.
 
DA2 might disappoint but it won't be because of lack of multiplayer, if anything this enahances a game for me since resources can be spend on the single player elements. It may disappoint compared to dao because of the lack of opinions ( only human male or female compared to origins human,elf,dwarf male/female and 5 origins) and the use of the dialog wheel as opposed to the tradional dialog system.

But time will judge.
 
sooo no multiplayer means a disappointing game WTF you been smoking.

So many people are banging on about this point, and I'm utterly mystified by all the outrage. He simply said that, after one or two plays through, Dragon Age didn't offer much more as a single player game, and speculated that the second would be the same.

To everybody claiming RPGs should be single-player affairs, have none of you ever played pen-and-paper RPGs (you know, where the genre comes from)? They're almost exclusively multiplayer. I've played a lot of these in my time, and they're immensely entertaining.

There's nothing wrong with preferring single-player, of course, but to declare that games like Dragon Age should remain so is perhaps a little unreasonable. Personally, I disliked most of the characters in the first game, and would much rather have played with a bunch of friends.
 
So many people are banging on about this point, and I'm utterly mystified by all the outrage. He simply said that, after one or two plays through, Dragon Age didn't offer much more as a single player game, and speculated that the second would be the same.

As Stefan9 said:
DA2 might disappoint but it won't be because of lack of multiplayer, if anything this enahances a game for me since resources can be spend on the single player elements.

And I agree, I would much rather play a single-player RPG with an immersive story and a bunch of endings than another... Neverwinter Nights 2 with a half-baked story, half-baked characters, half-baked animations and a godawful multiplayer system.

To everybody claiming RPGs should be single-player affairs, have none of you ever played pen-and-paper RPGs (you know, where the genre comes from)? They're almost exclusively multiplayer. I've played a lot of these in my time, and they're immensely entertaining.

Ah, but the P&P RPGs also had a dungeon master to keep things interesting. There are RPGs like that too, do you remember Icewind Dale? Again, companions had no life of their own, no story, no background because they were just there to be played; not to be loved. It's a nice concept but it doesn't work as elegantly as in a single-player RPG where companions contribute to the believability and the atmosphere. Multiplayer could only ever be an after-thought.

Show me one truly gripping and atmospheric MMORPG that is as driven and immersive as say... Planescape. It doesn't exist.

Keep multiplayer out of RPGs like Witcher, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, etc. Hell, even Dead Space 2's designers refused to implement co-op citing that it would ruin the atmosphere.

I love co-op and I would love more co-op based games but in a game like Dragon Age? No, never. Keep it out. That is the last thing I would want.

There's nothing wrong with preferring single-player, of course, but to declare that games like Dragon Age should remain so is perhaps a little unreasonable. Personally, I disliked most of the characters in the first game, and would much rather have played with a bunch of friends.

I disagree, give me my interesting companions rather than a bunch of friends screwing about, odd disconnections and latency ruining the atmosphere :) I don't want or need that in a game.

On that note, I look forward to seeing what Dungeon Siege III will be like--a multiplayer game with story, depth and consequences. Bearing in mind, I'm getting it for the co-op, not for the story, although that the story is being touted means it's definitely something I'm keen on experiencing.

Edit: As an afterthought, I believe that games like Dragon Age, Wticher, etc don't target the multiplayer market for a reason, because that's not their market :p
 
Last edited:
Okay, but if it's optional, what's the problem? Let those who prefer single player, play single player, and let those who prefer multiplayer, play multiplayer. Just because it hasn't been done properly before doesn't mean it can't.

And a gamemaster is just a storyteller. I don't see how narrative-driven events in video games are all that different.
 
Okay, but if it's optional, what's the problem? Let those who prefer single player, play single player, and let those who prefer multiplayer, play multiplayer. Just because it hasn't been done properly before doesn't mean it can't.

Because that will cost development time and resources which could better be spent elsewhere. This is why I thought I'd add the afterthought--that these games don't target multiplayer gamers because it is aimed at those who are into it for the story and single-player experience.

Dungeon Siege III keeps coming to mind as a game that will bring the best parts of single-player RPGs together with the best parts of MP-RPGs. It's why I'm very interested in getting my hands on it to see how it worked out. The thing is, even then it will still not necessarily be preferable (for some people, myself included) to a single-player experience that games like The Witcher, Planescape, Dragon Age bring to the table.

And a gamemaster is just a storyteller. I don't see how narrative-driven events in video games are all that different.

Dungeon master. I like the dark, dank sound of it >:3

And yes, I know what you mean but as I said above they target and appeal to different audiences and for good reason.
 
A lack of multiplayer may also leave it will leave it cowering in the shadow of RPG gargantuan Diablo 3
sure, d3 could never fail. because en if it's fail... the wow generation would make it non-fail :D

...somehow today's gamers are spoilt brats comes to mind looking at the Demand for multiplayer. if not in game GAME FUCKING FAIL ! lol ?

:edit
i guess witcher was kak too as it didn't had multiplayer. better not get witcher 2 !!! :eek:... o wait quite a list forming that's now kak due to lack of multi player :rolleyes:

of course this means a lot of AAA indie games too.. all failures.


at_comic326.jpg
 
Last edited:
:edit
i guess witcher was kak too as it didn't had multiplayer. better not get witcher 2 !!! :eek:... o wait quite a list forming that's now kak due to lack of multi player :rolleyes:

Hey, now you're taking it a bit far. Calling The Witcher kak (even just to prove a point) is blasphemy! :p
 
So many people are banging on about this point, and I'm utterly mystified by all the outrage. He simply said that, after one or two plays through, Dragon Age didn't offer much more as a single player game, and speculated that the second would be the same.

To everybody claiming RPGs should be single-player affairs, have none of you ever played pen-and-paper RPGs (you know, where the genre comes from)? They're almost exclusively multiplayer. I've played a lot of these in my time, and they're immensely entertaining.

There's nothing wrong with preferring single-player, of course, but to declare that games like Dragon Age should remain so is perhaps a little unreasonable. Personally, I disliked most of the characters in the first game, and would much rather have played with a bunch of friends.

Thanks Tarryn, I'm glad someone actually understood my point :)

I even said that I have no doubt it'll be a good game, but that its lack of longevity due to lack of Multiplayer is disappointing. All I want is to be able to play through it with friends.

Whats the point of blinging items if you can't show them off? :)

Obviously not every game requires Multiplayer, but I just feel like this genre really can thrive on it, and have a much longer life than it would as a purely Single Player experience.

P.S. Tarryn your comment on the article had me in tears.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Tarryn, I'm glad someone actually understood my point :)

I even said that I have no doubt it'll be a good game, but that its lack of longevity due to lack of Multiplayer is disappointing. All I want is to be able to play through it with friends.

Its audience isn't interested in multiplayer, its audience is interested in multiple endings, immersion and atmosphere. Necuno's Dead Space 2 strip hit home on that one.

Whats the point of blinging items if you can't show them off? :)

Play Diablo.

Obviously not every game requires Multiplayer, but I just feel like this genre really can thrive on it, and have a much longer life than it would as a purely Single Player experience.

Titan Quest, Dungeon Siege, Diablo, Sacred. There's a reason why I don't enjoy them and would sooner buy Dragon Age over any of them. DA is not a game that should "zomg thrive off of multiplayer." Dragon Age isn't a multiplayer game because it doesn't (or likely ever intend to) target a multiplayer audience.

We've been through this before -.-'

P.S. Tarryn your comment on the article had me in tears.

She's good at that, yes :)
 
Back
Top