I hate battle royale games. Every time I play them i get anxious and nervous, I cant take it anymore
I have played Apex Legends since it came out and I have about 900h between both steam and origin (mostly played during covid).
Since I stopped playing this rage games I feel much better
Tell me what you think of battle royale games in the comments if you want
Not hating on people who like and enjoy PvP games, but to me it feels like it’s a good way for a developer to make a game that doesn’t actually have that much substance. Lacking content? Nothing to actually do in the game? NPCs are difficult to make interesting to fight? Just have players shoot each other. It’s basically content that creates itself, not to mention (if you have good matchmaking) the difficulty ramps up naturally without you having to write better enemy AI.
I just want to fight stuff alongside other people, rather than potentially making another person’s day just a little worse because I shot them before they shot me, you know? Is that too much to ask?
Dev difficulties are still there and not the same. Don’t understimate netcode, or just simply gun feel, balancing, map design, sound design. Those are very difficult to get right even if you do not have to write a story or code NPCs. Each games have different challenges.
Netcode, gun feel, balancing, map design, sound design, … all things that are present in co-op shooters as well. Don’t get me wrong, I agree with what you’re saying, but I feel like you have misunderstood what I was trying to communicate. (Which might be my fault.)
And yes, there are things that are unique (or more critical) to PvP shooters, but my point was: It’s overall less work, for developers and artists, to just have players fight each other over and over again, than to create content for players to cooperatively enjoy.
I AGREE
I feel it’s less of a cop-out and more of a matter of economy and the current state of video games.
The thing with game development is that the visuals always take the most resources and therefore the most effort (concept art, sculpting, retopologizing, modeling, texturing, rigging, animating, materials, particles, environment art).
You hit the nail on the head when you say that multiplayer is content that creates itself, and compared to singleplayer games for the same amount of “content/entertainment”, it does require exponentially less work in visuals and just a tiny bit more in engineering. In a singleplayer game, once you beat a level, you’re basically never seeing that map and all the love poured into it ever again. Replayability adds value to the visuals in a game, and what adds more replayability than multiplayer?
And that sort of transitions into the state of video games now, where these multiplayer games allocate all those extra development resources into the maintenance and expansion of the game by adding new seasons and firearms and skins and maps every few months, all to keep their playerbase playing and raking in the microtransaction revenue. It just makes economical sense to focus on the multiplayer.
You have a point about less content development time. But don’t underestimate the complexity of getting the netcode right and balancing the PVP system.
It’s more like trading one set of problems for another, than it is a cop-out.
Plenty of games that lack substance in any category.
I did want to mention that, but left it out to keep my comment short. Yes, game development is very difficult and complex. Getting anything working out there is a huge accomplishment for everyone involved.
I have a feeling many companies found that the ratio of work (and thus investment) involved compared to the potential profit generated, especially with predatory MTX added to everything nowadays, means it’s pretty much a no-brainer to them to create PvP games rather than co-op ones. On top of that, Netcode and balancing aren’t non-existent in co-op games. But creating engaging gameplay systems and keeping things fresh for players is (I’d say) undoubtedly more difficult than just plotting players against one another.
Just take a look at the cancelled Blizzard MMO project “Titan”, which was partially repurposed to become Overwatch.
I think your right that’s its a lot easier to monetize a pvp game than a pve or single player game (especially these days when players expect ongoing support even for single player games) but I think your comparison is a bit unfair when it comes to creativity to actually create the game bit.
The battle Royale (and previous trends before it like bomb defusal, team death match etc) are mature game modes with well understood mechanics and limitations. That does indeed make things a lot easier to make. But it’s also a lot easier to push out yet another assassins creed game than to create an interesting single player game. I think creating a novel pvp game is just as difficult as a single player or pve game.
I think triple a games in general suffer from a lack of creativity due to a huge aversion to risk and a misallocation of resources to asset development rather than gameplay mechanics. And unfortunately creating a successful indie multi-player game is insanely hard because of how robust the player vase has to be.
Yes now that they have proven gameplay formulas, and engines that work “good enough” (but not really), they can grind out garbage/predatory stuff. Sad to see PVP reaching the common ground of those farming games, and ad-crapware like bejeweled spam clones. I guess my overall point is just that it’s not correct or fair to single out PVP.
Yeah the nice thing about co-op games is that the cost of the extra effort to add co-op to all that probably doesn’t give the garbage producers a good ratio of financial returns like you were saying. So seeing co-op in a game is like a symptom of a good game and a big plus to see on one.