---
Tell me to get back to rewriting this site so it's not horrible on mobileYodariquo said:I think it's already been an unwritten rule that this happens regardless. Online shuts down when nobody plays it anymore. Servers being taken down physically inhibiting the process is just a formality.
Yeah pretty much this right here. There's been the very rare occassion where a game's online servers where shut down by the time I got around to picking it up, MGS4 comes to mind. Personally though I buy so many games that older game servers shutting down don't really bother me. I stop playing previous CoD games whenever the latest one comes out. Same with Halo, Gears, etc. and those games still have most of their online servers running. By contrast when I bought Tomb Raider which was still quiite new it's online was already a ghost town.
As a preservationist I think it is absolute shit.
If you are paying full price for a product you expect it to work for the life of that product. And it's not like we are paying $10 or $15 for these games, it;s a significant amount.
The worst affront in the last few years was when I paid over $60 USD for the latest Sony baseball game only to find out that the multiplayer was locked behind a large download that would have denied me use of the internet for a month.
Then you have games like Destiny and Titanfall that will rely on a constant internet connection. Fuck that. Books FTW.
I always thought pretty much along the lines of Raven. I'm a single player only gamer. I'm a "never play online" gamer. But then games come along for which I do enjoy that aspect. Like Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, Animal Crossing, Endless Ocean. Where it feels like it's part of the whole experience and without it something is taken away forever.
It angers me and disappoints me and makes me want to become more old-school
I'm not much of an online gamer, so I can't really say it affects me. I suppose it's something to be expected though as long as there is enough interest in a game I really do think the servers should be there. Something like Killzone 2 should probably be supported longer than something like Anarchy Reigns. In Sony's case (which I suppose is what inspired this) I really do think they're jumping the gun. But they've always offered free online, so I can understand why they want to push people towards the new console and a paid service rather than just supporting the older games.
It does make me wonder if when these games get their inevitable digital "classics" release, if they'll have servers set up for online modes.
Ravenprose said:I don't play online, so as long as the SP still works, I'm happy.
Same here I don't really play online.
It's inevitable on consoles. On many PC games people can set up their own dedicated servers.
For console P2P games I don't really see why the functionality needs to be switched off, though.
I thought some games connected peer to peer so it work as long as you guys are online?
gamingeek said:I thought some games connected peer to peer so it work as long as you guys are online?
Tell that to EA.
I may have to have a Killzone 2 fortnight before the multiplayer's gone. Killzone games are some of the very few games I play online, so it tends not to affect me.
By Miu Watanabe.
Té_Rojo said:I may have to have a Killzone 2 fortnight before the multiplayer's gone. Killzone games are some of the very few games I play online, so it tends not to affect me.
I wish that there was some way to turn it over to peer to peer or whatever. It's such a sad thing when a vibrant online community is killed. Especially Halo 2 and Killzone 2.
Also games like Demon Souls and Dark Souls where the multiplayer is an integrated part into the single player experience not something different or additional. So removing that leaves the game feeling a bit hollow even if strictly speaking it can still be played in off-line mode
bugsonglass said:Also games like Demon Souls and Dark Souls where the multiplayer is an integrated part into the single player experience not something different or additional. So removing that leaves the game feeling a bit hollow even if strictly speaking it can still be played in off-line mode
The way I operate, I'd always build in back doors, with documentation, for hackers in the inevitable event that the publisher turned off the fun.
bugsonglass said:Also games like Demon Souls and Dark Souls where the multiplayer is an integrated part into the single player experience not something different or additional. So removing that leaves the game feeling a bit hollow even if strictly speaking it can still be played in off-line mode
Demon Souls is one thing, but what about the new gen of consoles? Games like Destiny and Titanfall? Without online servers, those games will only be a shadow of what they were intended to be. Losing a multiplayer component to a single player game is one thing, but having the experience be heavily and eternally altered after a couple of years? I don't know how I'd feel about that.
aspro said:As a preservationist I think it is absolute shit.
If you are paying full price for a product you expect it to work for the life of that product. And it's not like we are paying $10 or $15 for these games, it;s a significant amount.
The worst affront in the last few years was when I paid over $60 USD for the latest Sony baseball game only to find out that the multiplayer was locked behind a large download that would have denied me use of the internet for a month.
Then you have games like Destiny and Titanfall that will rely on a constant internet connection. Fuck that. Books FTW.
This. A hundred times this. I try to not let it bother me. A game with a massive amount of MP is alright, but for games that are mostly SP and have some dumb MP elements thrown in for little good reason (like Dead Rising 2, which I'm replaying at the moment) it's really dumb.
As far as online games go, in my experiences, by the time the servers have been shut down I've already lost interest and stopped playing. In a few rare cases, like Runescape Classic, and Dark Forces II, where the communities live on, they usually find a way to create private servers and whatnot.
Now when cartridge-based games have their batteries die and the save systems get killed, that makes me sad. I don't think there's many functioning copies of Pokémon Gen 1 games anymore. Yay for emulators I guess?
Listen to Iced Earth and play Doom
Coopersville said:As far as online games go, in my experiences, by the time the servers have been shut down I've already lost interest and stopped playing. In a few rare cases, like Runescape Classic, and Dark Forces II, where the communities live on, they usually find a way to create private servers and whatnot.
Now when cartridge-based games have their batteries die and the save systems get killed, that makes me sad. I don't think there's many functioning copies of Pokémon Gen 1 games anymore. Yay for emulators I guess?
Most of those cartridge batteries are very easy to replace if you have that special screw-driver
With the advent of online gaming for console came also came the shutdowns of dedicated servers. In effect rendering in some cases one aspect of a game (sometimes major sometimes minor), and in other cases the whole game useless.
How do you feel about it? Do you think it's a bitter pill we just have to swallow and try to make the most of these while they last and learn to live with the fact that they are going to be very ephemeral? Do you think there is a way around it (I know there is if you are a PC games but let's not go there)? Is it even a problem for you?
Personally I don't much play online but I like to think that the option is there if and when the spirit moves me. So this annoys me as a matter of principal as I feel it affects my statutory rights as a consumer. But what about those of you who are directly effected. Foolz how will you feel when KZ2 gets shut down. Archie how will you feel when COD server's start getting taken down? Uncharted? Dark Souls etc etc
___
Listen to Wu-Tang and watch Kung-Fu