People's need to have the same basic co-op or deathmatch system in everything is even weirder especially as we see most of those types of people tend to stay on 1 or 2 games for years.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
[WCCFTech] Saber Interactive Approached Sony About Making the Multiplayer Component of Days Gone
- Thread starter Aokiji
- Start date
People's need to have the same basic co-op or deathmatch system in everything is even weirder especially as we see most of those types of people tend to stay on 1 or 2 games for years.
This game will live or die on the huge horde zombie mechanics they are building. If tracking and hunting and fighting and running away from them isnt Inherently fun it will be lame with 1 or 100 people...
All that said it looks like the kind of game me and my best friends would love if we could play it together.
All that said it looks like the kind of game me and my best friends would love if we could play it together.
Don't see how a multiplayer component would have really hurt the game. Tomb Raider 2013 technically had multiplayer, and it was ass so no one played it. Didn't really affect review scores or sales negatively. Sheesh, the way some of y'all act toward anything multiplayer. If Saber did it, it wouldn't even have taken away development resources. If TLoU didn't have multiplayer in the original, and they announced it for the sequel, y'all would be cynical as fuck, but people love TLoU multi.
It's not weirder to think a game would benefit of multiplayer, nor do I think that's an honest assessment about what people would like to see, nor do I think there's any way to gauge that they're the same people. I play many games a year and I think some single-player games would benefit greatly. A multiplayer mode in Horizon 2, for example, allowing you to tackle large/legions of enemies with another player in an arena (like some gladiator coliseum), would be great and wouldn't conflict with the main story since it would be a separate feature. They already experimented with multiplayer for the first one but dropped it, but I can easily see a co-op system working in some form for the sequel.
Some people hear multiplayer and they go nuts, and I don't get it. So many games I've played with multiplayer, from Resogun to Bloodborne to Uncharted, have great single-player modes, and the multi-player can be completely avoided if you want. Even Gravity Rush 2 had an interesting idea with the hidden apples and pictures.
Absolutely, I'm not into cinematic experiences so much and I vastly prefer what 1st party studios did last gen.
Truth is that players in this gen want single player experiences and Sony delivers them those, we can't really blame Sony if they wanna focus on what's more profitable for their pockets.
Don't know why Sony is so adamant about not having multiplayer in their games, especially since they now charge for online play. You'd think they'd want to give people an additional reason to pay for it instead of it just being paying for multiplats. Where is Socom, Warhawk, Twisted Metal, or Resistance?
Because GOW, Horizon and Spiderman are more popular than those games? They want money.
I'm sure TLOU 2 will have a great "zombie" MP experience for those who want it. Why they would force Bend to do something they don't want?
Ah yes, the critically acclaimed multi million sellers such as... Twisted metal and Socom.
I really do wonder why they haven't made any new games for them. One of the world's biggest mysteries.
You really shouldn't be sarcastic with facts seeing as Socom has sold multiple millions.
OK then let's be real. Are you actually unsure as to why Sony is not making the games you listed anymore? The studios for most of those games don't even exist to begin with. They've been shut down due to poor sales and critical reception.
What's the point of creating multiplayer games when there's so many third party studios doing it for them? They focus on their strengths, which is single player story driven games. Sure they may have the odd multiplayer game here and there such as Uncharted and TLOU, but what exactly is the point of competing in such an over saturated market?
Maybe to make it so paying for online multiplayer has some kind of reason instead of them just deciding to charge for something they previously didn't while giving no actual reason why you should pay for it now? Might as well be saying why make Horizon Zero Dawn when Ubisoft already made an open world robot dinosaur game.
I feel like some people are overthinking this. Most multiplayer components from Sony's first party titles are done in-house. If Bend or Sony wanted MP in the game, they probably would have tried and make it themselves.
Or you can flip it and think of it like they arent only/majority making games that have huge chunks of them gated off because you dont pay for PS+
Lol if anything Sony is giving a people a reason to not subscribe due to the fact that most of their games are single player.
And yet they still have a shit ton of subscribers to PS Plus. Why exactly do you think that is? You really need to stop overthinking this.
So in other words it offers no reason to pay for it over the competition?
The developers themselves wanted to make this.
Hell they killed the freaking main protagonist off. That's how much they wanted to do something new.
No multiplayer is a death sentence with a zombie shooter these days. You need to have a streameable component to your game. If youtubers and streamers cant play with/against other people there is no tension. Sony just shot themselves in the foot. The age of Sony is done. Ya'll think I'm playing. Watch this game bomb. You have to listen to what the gamers want. Because that's who you're making the game for. And the gamers have spoken: WE. WANT. MULTIPLAYER.
WATCH OUT.
WATCH OUT.
Wouldn't have cared for a MP mode at all, but I would be a lot more interested in purchasing the game If it had coop with your buddy Boozer for the 2nd player.
I'm confused, are you arguing for more games that require subscriptions? Having fewer games that require the service to fully enjoy is a benefit over the competition imo
I wonder how a MP mode would play in this game. I can already think of some cool modes or scenarios.
I don't understand why so many are adamantly against this or happy said no. I would understand if it would pull resources from Bend, but that would be unlikely with another studio working on it. This may be a purely budgetary reason, with Sony not wanting to pony up extra cash, instead of them holding firm to some single player only goal.
I don't understand why so many are adamantly against this or happy said no. I would understand if it would pull resources from Bend, but that would be unlikely with another studio working on it. This may be a purely budgetary reason, with Sony not wanting to pony up extra cash, instead of them holding firm to some single player only goal.
hmm, not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, a multiplayer mode could end up being good, but on another, do we really need yet another multiplayer zombie game? At least with Days Gone it can stand out since there aren't really any single-player open world zombie games.
Socom was a massive hit though...
The PS3 Socom game failed because 1.) Zipper fucked it up and 2.) it released during the PS3 outage.
Socom was a massive hit though...
The PS3 Socom game failed because 1.) Zipper fucked it up and 2.) it released during the PS3 outage.
Some people just remember the dark ages of last gen where every game had to have shoehorned multiplayer modes in them that would die off months after launch if anyone even played it in the first place.
In this situation though, multiplayer is kinda common/expected with zombie games and Saber have a decent enough pedigree so I think Sony should've given them a chance.
Are you implying that a GOW, Horizon and Spider-Man with some multiplayer component wouldn't have netted them money? Possibly even more than what they earned as single player games?
And it's not safe to assume the single player quality of those games would've taken a hit if they had multiplayer, just in case you were going to try arguing that.
I'm glad Sony said no thanks. Let Sony Bend Studio finish their dream game the way it was intended to be. It's already been delayed so just let these developers finish their game. If they wanted to add multiplayer elements that's cool, but add that stuff later on. PS4 still has multiple huge exclusives to launch so adding some tacked on Multiplayer would make this a late 2020 game.
I'm not a fan of disjointed multiplayer modes in games made by completely different teams, so this seems like the right choice.
All TLoU2 needs is a continuation of the first games multiplayer without the shit microtransactions and that shit will be hot fire.
Because forcibly adding multiplayer to a SINGLEPLAYER game is not what the concept of the game intended. Games aren't just made up as they go along - they are completely pre-designed, scripted and features are planned out well in advance. Throwing on multiplayer, especially if it isn't even by the same dev team, is a bad thing to do pre-release. Adding multiplayer to a singleplayer game does not make it a "more complete" game - that's an extremely ridiculous viewpoint.
You keep talking as if it would be obvious that the potentially added multiplayer component sucks or would be lower quality. There is nothing that suggests this. If they know that beforehand - of course this would be a bad idea then, that's an obvious statement.
Anyway. We will never know. Days Gone will be a singleplayer only game and that's alright. I would've loved to see a multiplayer component though and if done right it would've helped the game massively.
Perhaps it's been a while since you've watched the first hour of gameplay? Several story beats on display would be problematic if co-op was introduced.
They kind have very similar kind of zombies and zombie behaviour tbh, as for the tone...I don't really know what kind of tone it's going for even now. Whether it's going for a TLoU tone (which had a multiplayer too mind you despite its cinematic and isolationist tone and it was even well regarded) or something else we'll see.
From a previous part in the video that I timestamped.
Last edited:
Are people making up their own words?
I don't see anything where Sony said no or refused or rejected
They have a time frame to get a game out and that's all
I don't see anything where Sony said no or refused or rejected
They have a time frame to get a game out and that's all
obviously and some of my fav games were deemed to be in the 70's by most critics. From what I have played tho it could be missed and picked up during a sale later in the year, other games this early in the year that would deliver a better time imo.
That being said it was only 2 seperate missions of the entire game so It could turn out to be worth it, for now it will stay on the rental list for me.
Everything doesn't need multiplayer.
Also, the publisher that is in first place doing primarily single player games.