I miss multiplayer in PC games being done by joining a server and playing. No match making bullshit, it was fun to be in a server with a mixture of skill levels. As compared with a lot of game snow, when ever your skills improve, you just get thrown into a harder tier of match making until you reach your limit and burn out.
But then newbies would get killed a lot and cry, and stop playing. For some reason, this didn’t happen 20 years ago but now, it’s appearently a big fucking problem if a player doesn’t feel powerful in the first five minutes of the game…
I think gamers are just really entitled now. They expect awards for turning on the game. And God forbid if someone else kicks their butt because they have more experience.
I was playing quake and unreal tournament growing up and I got absolutely wasted in the beginning. Made me laugh so hard. Then I got good, very good, because I had to be to not die.
My match making in Quakeworld late nineties / early two thousands went from LAN with dad and brother at home, to LAN at compsci lab at HS after school, to local PC cafe, to regional LAN tournament to international scene once ISDN & ADSL became ubiquitous.
We were always welcoming newbies to the scene. But then starting 2003 the Nordic players became increasingly cliquey and started refusing to play anywhere further south than servers located near the Stockholm datacentre.
This is because tech bros only read pop-psy without any regard for context or nuance. So they read a bit about Flow state and ranking for gamification, and as usual they just botched it. Most ranking is typically calibrated for engagement, not fun. Mind you, they are two different characteristics. If you graphed difficulty and skill, flow is a band, not a point, of difficulty, in the middle. The idea is that when you are challenged slightly over your skill, there is something in you brain that stimulates you to keep going under the promise that overcoming the challenge will be rewarding. Too high and people rage quit, too low and people get bored. The problem is that they want maximum engagement and for that the difficulty has to be on the higher end of the band. A frustrated person will return, a bored one most likely won’t.
They also want to keep people engaged with random and variable reinforcement. The other psychological theory that drives game design, much how behavioral scientist cheat pigeons to keep them engaged pulling a lever or pushing a button. Mix both theories poorly together and you get the awful implementation we see on multiplayer. People are tricked into believing that just because their brain chemicals are screaming at them to keep doing something, it means they are having fun. But that is obviously not true, just nobody ever occurred that those pigeons might be having a awful time. Ask most people on ranked MP or grinding for builds on MMOs if they are having fun and they have no idea why you’re asking them. It has nothing to do with fun, they just want the carrot being dangled in front of their nose.
I just don’t do online MP anymore because of this. 99% of the time, I’m not having fun. Now if I want to play with my friends or other people, we play tabletop board games. Infinitely more fun and far more satisfying than any online game ever.
It has nothing to do with fun, they just want the carrot being dangled in front of their nose.
This might explain the marketing that seemed to start with mobile games and now infects AAA MP titles:
“PLAY NOW AND GET 34 GAZILLION WORTHLESS EMERALDRUBYGEMCOINS and a RARE DROP POPSICLE MAGIC DOMINO”
Like…a newcomer would have zero idea what the heck they’re even talking about but somehow it seems to work, to entice players with worthless free…server database adjustments?
Hardly any focus is on the games being unique or exciting (Surprise, they aren’t!) It’s all about a reward-based impulse, like training a bunch of rodents to use a casino.
That’s not my experience, and I’m an elder millennial. The only time tiering up has encouraged me to quit a game was when the higher ranked players were just more toxic. Being challenged can be part of the fun.
That’s not to say I think matchmaking is simply better than persistent servers. Having a group of regulars and developing a bit of a server culture is good fun. I guess I like both options depending on the mood.
I miss multiplayer in PC games being done by joining a server and playing. No match making bullshit, it was fun to be in a server with a mixture of skill levels. As compared with a lot of game snow, when ever your skills improve, you just get thrown into a harder tier of match making until you reach your limit and burn out.
But then newbies would get killed a lot and cry, and stop playing. For some reason, this didn’t happen 20 years ago but now, it’s appearently a big fucking problem if a player doesn’t feel powerful in the first five minutes of the game…
I think gamers are just really entitled now. They expect awards for turning on the game. And God forbid if someone else kicks their butt because they have more experience.
I was playing quake and unreal tournament growing up and I got absolutely wasted in the beginning. Made me laugh so hard. Then I got good, very good, because I had to be to not die.
That’s right!
My match making in Quakeworld late nineties / early two thousands went from LAN with dad and brother at home, to LAN at compsci lab at HS after school, to local PC cafe, to regional LAN tournament to international scene once ISDN & ADSL became ubiquitous.
We were always welcoming newbies to the scene. But then starting 2003 the Nordic players became increasingly cliquey and started refusing to play anywhere further south than servers located near the Stockholm datacentre.
This is because tech bros only read pop-psy without any regard for context or nuance. So they read a bit about Flow state and ranking for gamification, and as usual they just botched it. Most ranking is typically calibrated for engagement, not fun. Mind you, they are two different characteristics. If you graphed difficulty and skill, flow is a band, not a point, of difficulty, in the middle. The idea is that when you are challenged slightly over your skill, there is something in you brain that stimulates you to keep going under the promise that overcoming the challenge will be rewarding. Too high and people rage quit, too low and people get bored. The problem is that they want maximum engagement and for that the difficulty has to be on the higher end of the band. A frustrated person will return, a bored one most likely won’t.
They also want to keep people engaged with random and variable reinforcement. The other psychological theory that drives game design, much how behavioral scientist cheat pigeons to keep them engaged pulling a lever or pushing a button. Mix both theories poorly together and you get the awful implementation we see on multiplayer. People are tricked into believing that just because their brain chemicals are screaming at them to keep doing something, it means they are having fun. But that is obviously not true, just nobody ever occurred that those pigeons might be having a awful time. Ask most people on ranked MP or grinding for builds on MMOs if they are having fun and they have no idea why you’re asking them. It has nothing to do with fun, they just want the carrot being dangled in front of their nose.
I just don’t do online MP anymore because of this. 99% of the time, I’m not having fun. Now if I want to play with my friends or other people, we play tabletop board games. Infinitely more fun and far more satisfying than any online game ever.
This might explain the marketing that seemed to start with mobile games and now infects AAA MP titles:
“PLAY NOW AND GET 34 GAZILLION WORTHLESS EMERALDRUBYGEMCOINS and a RARE DROP POPSICLE MAGIC DOMINO”
Like…a newcomer would have zero idea what the heck they’re even talking about but somehow it seems to work, to entice players with worthless free…server database adjustments?
Hardly any focus is on the games being unique or exciting (Surprise, they aren’t!) It’s all about a reward-based impulse, like training a bunch of rodents to use a casino.
I just want games focused on good old fashioned deathmatches. Just roam around the map and shoot whatever you see. No pressure on team tactics.
Playing Half Life multiplayer was so fun during the 25 year anniversary.
That’s not my experience, and I’m an elder millennial. The only time tiering up has encouraged me to quit a game was when the higher ranked players were just more toxic. Being challenged can be part of the fun.
That’s not to say I think matchmaking is simply better than persistent servers. Having a group of regulars and developing a bit of a server culture is good fun. I guess I like both options depending on the mood.
There are still a lot of games that do this. Though you are right about the mainstream titles being burnout generators now.