Space Hulk > General Discussions > Topic Details
Onomoki Dec 5, 2013 @ 8:36pm
Do NOT buy this game for the Multiplayer.
First thing first, i love the game. Absolutely love it. I think they have done an amazing job, and would prompt everyone to buy it, except for one (pretty big) issue.

If you have bought this game for the singleplayer mode, than this doesn´t apply. But if you have bought this game for the multiplayer mode mainly... well you´re screwed.

You, in MP the missions are LOCKED. And you can´t unlock them by playing through the MP campaign. The only way is to trudge through the singleplayer campaign.

This might not seem like a big issue at first glance... but it has absolutely ruined the game for me. I bought it for myself and my brother, so we could play a campaign against eachother. Only to realize, the game didn´t ALLOW us to do that, because we haven´t unlocked the missions in singleplayer mode.

So, now one of us HAS to play through the game, learn all the maps, and get an unfair advantage. Not to mention, the joy of experiencing new missions together completely gone. Worse is, we bought it because of the awesome asynchronous multiplayer, because we don´t have that much time to play. And we sure as heck don´t have the time to trudge through a whole singleplayer campaign.

Absolutely ridicilous. Great idea you guys, sell us a digitalized board game but remove the feature to PLAY TOGETHER as you want. Just imagine buying Monopoly, only to realize there is just ONE playable piece. You call up Hasbro and tell them that the other pieces are missing, so now you can´t play with your friends, and you ask Hasbro to send those pieces to you. And Hasbro answers: "sure, of course we understand you wanna play with your friends, we will send them out, but first you must play the game ALONE for ten hours!! Only THEN CAN YOU PLAY WITH YOUR FRIENDS!! MUHAHAHAHA!!!"

Honestly, this is such a stupid design decision it boggles my mind, and i almost want a refund. I bought it because it promised me multiplayer, and what i got was a fraction of multiplayer, and the rest LOCKED BEHIND BARS.

Just patch it, or release a "unlock all missions" DLC for 5 dollars. I don´t care. Just fix it. I´m sorry for my rude tone, but i´m quite annoyed.
Showing 1-15 of 24 comments
< >
Drain Dec 5, 2013 @ 9:07pm 
Seems like a small issue to get so upset over. Just have one of you play the maps when the other isn't around or is doing something else. Are you guys attached at the hip or something?

Btw, you should not make a second thread that is about the same exact thing. This forum is already bloated enough with pointless sticky threads. We don't need duplicates on top of it.
Last edited by Drain; Dec 5, 2013 @ 9:08pm
IntelligentGuardsman Dec 5, 2013 @ 9:15pm 
Knowing the maps isn't much of an advantage.
Gwion Dec 5, 2013 @ 9:32pm 
MP is realy great. I nearly only play MP now.
Playing the first campaign in SP to unlock the maps is pretty quick.
That said I understand your issue.
Last edited by Gwion; Dec 5, 2013 @ 9:33pm
datguy13 Dec 5, 2013 @ 9:41pm 
You'll both know the maps anyway when you start playing Multiplayer, as there is a tactical map you can look at showing an overview of an entire gameboard. It also only takes you a quick scroll-around to see the whole map. So there really isn't an actual advantage to having played the campaign first, aside from maybe knowing the terminators a little bit better. You can avoid that by having the guy who unlocked the maps play Genestealers first. Or, you could both just play the single player game so you both have the same understanding of the terminators and a basic understanding of the genestealers. After all, unless you're playing Hotseat, you need two accounts to play.

I'm sorry, I just don't understand why this is a dealbreaker for you. It's a very odd expectation.
Onomoki Dec 5, 2013 @ 11:10pm 
You guys seems to be missing the point... arguing about how much the forced single player campaign ruins one subjective experience of the MP is absolutely pointless. For me, it really ruined it. I wanted to experience the game fresh with my brother-

None of you guys (except Gwion) adressed the real issue. WHY ARE WE FORCED TO PLAY THE SINGLE PLAYER CAMPAIGN IN ORDER TO FULLY EXPERIENCE THE MULTIPLAYER? There is absolutely no sense in that design choice. It has no advantages what so ever.

Unlockable content can be rewarding when it is done right. Like the banners for example, they enhance the experience when you unlock more combinations and are a great incentive to playing single player, but their lockable status doesn´t restrict the player. Locking the entire MP mode, behind a single player campaign is mindnumbing stupid. If one could unlock things by playing the MP mode, there wouldn´t be a problem... but now...

Imagine playing Call of Duty multiplayer, and all of your progression their didn´t make a difference. You didn´t unlock anything. They only way you could raise in level was playing Single Player!

"A very odd expectation?" Are you serious? Have you stop following the game industry beyond 1995? It´s not like Street Fighter came shipped with only two characters, and the rest of the cast needed to be unlocked in order to use in multiplayer. Even in the early Tekken games, with loads of locked characters, the main base of MP wasn´t a crippled 2-3 character mess like this Space Hulk thing.

madhh Dec 6, 2013 @ 12:29am 
Well this did not happen to me. Maybe they changed it, but I remeber the first time I played the second campaign was in multiplayer. I did not play any of the second campaign maps in singleplayer, still I could play them in multiplayer. Maybe I'm missing something, or maybe you do?
Zuggi  [developer] Dec 6, 2013 @ 1:45am 
I think people should chill a little when making these posts....feel free to point out if you'd like something to be different, but posts like these just get me in a bad mood ...sorry.

Maybe we should take a second look at this yes...will take it to the team at least. I'm not the designer, but I personally think it's good to complete the maps before playing them in MP with others...if they we're unlockable in MP you could just race though letting the other part win and such..

As said...I will talk to the team...BUT...SERIOUSLY..don't want to see these type of posts!
Last edited by Zuggi; Dec 6, 2013 @ 1:51am
Tendoncutter Dec 6, 2013 @ 1:54am 
Yeah. Maybe give the devs a chance to answer the 2-3 posts made before starting one of the DO Not BUY posts. Given that this, and the other thread, was posted at about 5 am in the morning in Denmark, I assume you're located in a different timezone, Psyk.dag? At least give them a chance to get to work and reply before advising others not to buy their game..
Last edited by Tendoncutter; Dec 6, 2013 @ 2:21am
datguy13 Dec 6, 2013 @ 2:21am 
Originally posted by psyk.dag:
You guys seems to be missing the point... arguing about how much the forced single player campaign ruins one subjective experience of the MP is absolutely pointless. For me, it really ruined it. I wanted to experience the game fresh with my brother-


"A very odd expectation?" Are you serious? Have you stop following the game industry beyond 1995? It´s not like Street Fighter came shipped with only two characters, and the rest of the cast needed to be unlocked in order to use in multiplayer. Even in the early Tekken games, with loads of locked characters, the main base of MP wasn´t a crippled 2-3 character mess like this Space Hulk thing.

That's a bad comparison. This is scenario maps, not characters. It would be more like saying "Mortal Combat only had you start with Three stages and you had to unlock the rest". Except... that's exactly what one of the Mortal Combat games did. It worked out for Midway.

I get what you want- to play with your brother and be surprised. It's not a common, prolific expectation. Most people would just shrug, do a quick run-through of Easy mode and then take the time to watch their sibling react and enjoy that. I know I would, if I actually was lucky enough to have a sibling that was interested in this stuff.

And that's why I don't understand the outrage. You actually have a sibling you can *play* the game with. Isn't that enough? Why do you have to go ballistic about having to do a run-through to unlock the maps first when you actually have someone like that at your disposal?
Gwion Dec 6, 2013 @ 5:21am 
I agree that the ranting tone and the angry "dont buy" title was not needed.
I totally understand the issue (and the frustration) but not the super angry outrage.
Originally posted by Zuggi:
Maybe we should take a second look at this yes...will take it to the team at least. I'm not the designer, but I personally think it's good to complete the maps before playing them in MP with others
I also think it good to play the map in SP, but if some players want to try the game firstly in MP maybe it should be their choice. :)

The thing is that by default we think about MP as playing VS random players while some players just want to play MP between two friends. So for them discovering the map together is just like doing it while learning the boardgame together. I understand that some players are firstly interested by the game to play together in MP without playing with random players (and are not interested by SP). Just like if they had buyed the boardgame.

Originally posted by Zuggi:
...if they we're unlockable in MP you could just race though letting the other part win and such..
I understand the idea, but I think that it should be the player choice to cheat himself or not by unlocking all the map in MP by being let to win. I mean this have no impact on oher players. If somebody want to do this it ok. I don't care if someone unlock all the maps like this. It like the undo button in SP, you can also abuse it if you want.


Last edited by Gwion; Dec 6, 2013 @ 6:35am
tarasis Dec 6, 2013 @ 5:29am 
Personally I'd prefer to have all the MP levels unlocked, but it really doesn't bother me that much. That said psyk.dag this is a very common practice in console based games, where much of the MP stuff is locked until the SP campagin is finished.
Palmer_Eldritch Dec 6, 2013 @ 5:29am 
I do agree with the first post. (though not how they went about it)

Long story short, my gf bought us a two pack then we gifted another copy to a good friend so we could all play on our livestream. At the end of the day I'm the one everybody is waiting on to unlock more multiplayer maps and I've got a huuuge amount of games on my plate.

If there were a tick box, (and hell even if it invalidated achievements), we'd all click it and be off playing online. As it stands we're kinda dead in the water unless we want to play the first three maps again.
Onomoki Dec 6, 2013 @ 7:54am 
Originally posted by Zuggi:
I think people should chill a little when making these posts....feel free to point out if you'd like something to be different, but posts like these just get me in a bad mood ...sorry.

Maybe we should take a second look at this yes...will take it to the team at least. I'm not the designer, but I personally think it's good to complete the maps before playing them in MP with others...if they we're unlockable in MP you could just race though letting the other part win and such..

As said...I will talk to the team...BUT...SERIOUSLY..don't want to see these type of posts!

Honestly, is this the way you handle your customers? When a customers comes to you with a product they have bought and are very unhappy with, to the point where they are obviously in a mood, you respond to this by complaining about HOW YOU FEEL?!! You have sold me a product, which i find insufficient in it´s content, and when i bring this up you just go "now this puts me in a bad mood?" What kind of PR planet are you living on?!

Now, if my complaints were just random negativity, i could see your point and maybe even respect you response. But my complaints was VERY specifik, and concerned a VERY specifik design choice. I even started off by telling you how much i adore your game! I feel so frustrated because i love the game, and i bought it for the multiplayer, which you have locked away from me!

My complaint was very valid, and it concerned you not deliviring what was promised. You sell the game on such claims as:

-"The game is a 3D digital turn based strategy game that recreates the classic claustrophobic board game experience in both singleplayer and multiplayer."
- Multiplayer head-to-head recreating the board game experience against a friend!"

You have marketed the attempt to recreate the boardgame experience as a main selling point. Well the board game DIDN`T FORCE YOU TO PLAY ALONE BEFORE YOU COULD PLAY WITH YOUR FRIENDS!! I would of course not be so stupid to claim this being marketing fraud, or suggest that i have some kind of right of a refund...

But the fact that you respond to my frustrated feelings, about the game not allowing me to use the content that i have bought, with my friends as i please... with a sigh and a "I don´t want to read things like this, because that puts me in a bad mood" is MIND BOGGLING DISRESPECTIVE!!

I even offered some constructive advice of how to fix it with payable DLC, like every other game with locked content now adays offer. My complaint was filled with negative emotions, yes, because that was how i felt. But in no way what so ever, do i deserve this kind of treatment. You can bet your ♥♥♥ i´m gonna mail Destructoid about this. P.R people have gotten fired for less, i´ll let you know. You put your whole company in a bad light here, just so you know.
ken.allen.1976 Dec 6, 2013 @ 8:12am 
Your point is valid and Zuggi acknowledged it. It's just the way you went about reporting it. You could have left it as a polite suggestion, this then would allow others to comment and agree or disagree with it. Then, based on the public demand the developers could make an informed decision and may very well implement your idea. Being disrespectful will put people in a bad mood. Seeing that someone has posted "don't buy this game" on their site is most upsetting. Be patient, the developers have said multiple times that they are only a small group and therefore things have to make priorities.
Last edited by ken.allen.1976; Dec 6, 2013 @ 9:29am
Onomoki Dec 6, 2013 @ 8:18am 
Originally posted by datguy13:
Originally posted by psyk.dag:
You guys seems to be missing the point... arguing about how much the forced single player campaign ruins one subjective experience of the MP is absolutely pointless. For me, it really ruined it. I wanted to experience the game fresh with my brother-


"A very odd expectation?" Are you serious? Have you stop following the game industry beyond 1995? It´s not like Street Fighter came shipped with only two characters, and the rest of the cast needed to be unlocked in order to use in multiplayer. Even in the early Tekken games, with loads of locked characters, the main base of MP wasn´t a crippled 2-3 character mess like this Space Hulk thing.

That's a bad comparison. This is scenario maps, not characters. It would be more like saying "Mortal Combat only had you start with Three stages and you had to unlock the rest". Except... that's exactly what one of the Mortal Combat games did. It worked out for Midway.

I get what you want- to play with your brother and be surprised. It's not a common, prolific expectation. Most people would just shrug, do a quick run-through of Easy mode and then take the time to watch their sibling react and enjoy that. I know I would, if I actually was lucky enough to have a sibling that was interested in this stuff.

And that's why I don't understand the outrage. You actually have a sibling you can *play* the game with. Isn't that enough? Why do you have to go ballistic about having to do a run-through to unlock the maps first when you actually have someone like that at your disposal?

No, i´m sorry but your comparison is the bad one. I know that sounds childish, but i can back it up. Your comparision doesn´t work because the stages in Mortal Kombat doesn´t affect the gameplay in any way, it is just an aestethic option. Aestethic options like different dresses or customizable accessories are commonly used as lockable content, because their omission doesn´t restrict the player in any way, but their presence enhance the experience.

The different maps and missions in Space Hulk is NOT purely aesthetic thing. The different missions, the different maps are THE MEAT OF THE GAME. Your comparision makes no sense what so ever. You are basicly saying that all racing games would suffice with one track, because the different tracks = the different stages in Mortal Kombat? In Space Hulk, the characters are constistent throughout the game, it is the different Missions that DIFFERENTIATE the experience.

And once again, your opinions on wether you find my subjective experience rational is utter relevant. It´s like arguing with a crime victim, about how they experienced the crime. It´s not valid. Me and my brother felt very unhappy that we couldn´t play the game we bought, and that´s it. What IS up for discussion, is the design choice in question. If you have something to say about this, then you are contributing to the topic of the thread, and not trolling. (And no, i am not comparing my experience to being a victim of a crime. Of course not. I just used that as an example of how pointless it is to try to invalidate my experience as a customer)

And on that matter, like Gwion said, i dare anyone to come up with ONE POSITIVE THING about this design desicion. The developers motivation that if you could unlock the maps in multiplayer, then you could just cheat your way through the campaign is simply inane. Look, if someone would be interesting in unlocking all the maps in the singleplayer campaign by cheating... THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN THE SINGLE PLAYER GAME TO BEGIN WITH. If a person wants to skip through the campaign, they are going to do so, it ISN`T near a good enough incentive to alienate the MP focused audience. ESPECIALLY NOT SINCE YOU HAVE MARKETED THE MP AS A HEAVY FEAUTURE!! What you basicly are saying is that if you buy a board game, one shouldn´t be able to play through it with your friends because you might cheat! No, you MUST play it first with a representive for the company over the phone!

If this was a heavily focused single player game, where the game was designed from the ground up to reward players for their struggle against the game, then i would have no problem with it. If Dark Souls had everything unlocked in the beginning, it would take away the point of a game. But since this is a boardgame, a heavily touted recreation of a game that could ONLY BE PLAYED BY TWO PLAYERS... removing the option to do so, is borderline insane.

And no, i am not trolling or spamming as some suggest. Yes i created two threads, but they had completely different topics. My first thread was a question about how the game work. My second thread was about how i felt abouth the game design, i had recently learned about. Question. Feedback. Two completely different things.

Showing 1-15 of 24 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50
Date Posted: Dec 5, 2013 @ 8:36pm
Posts: 24