PixelJunk™ Shooter

PixelJunk™ Shooter

View Stats:
HappyWulf Oct 6, 2013 @ 5:32pm
Needs online Multiplayer
Title.

Is it so hard, developers?
< >
Showing 1-15 of 32 comments
MuncleUnky Oct 7, 2013 @ 2:55pm 
No online?? No buy.
Just invite them to your place and play and eat some food together.

Hamachi might also work
sauce Oct 19, 2013 @ 5:13pm 
It's local coop. That doesn't mean LAN, that means on the same machine.

Also is creating a multiplayer matchmaking system easy? Hell NO!
Try to add online to this game and see what you come up with....That's right I didn't think you could also.
I'm Not Sue Oct 26, 2013 @ 11:01pm 
The original didnt have online (source: I own it), I imagine the game is not programmed with the netcode in mind. From my understanding, it is usually difficult to put online play in after the fact.
PupZival Oct 28, 2013 @ 2:52am 
The PSN version of this game didn't have online co-op either, only online leaderboard functionalities.

Pixeljunk Shooter 2 has an online competitive mode however.
GoodVrGames Nov 8, 2013 @ 6:15pm 
TeamViewer can help you.
I'm Not Sue Nov 9, 2013 @ 12:58am 
The original didn't have it. Research your games. -.-
MrStevns Nov 11, 2013 @ 8:01am 
It's hardly worth the time for the developers if they "would" make multiplayer. The game would die after a small amount of time and by design this game was never intended to have multiplayer which means they would have to invest a lot of work in it.
Dmitry Nov 11, 2013 @ 9:37am 
Thats just a port
ein Nov 11, 2013 @ 1:20pm 
This game is almost four years old.

Q-Games added proper online multiplayer to Monsters, charged more for it, and people bought it. That they could not have taken the same route with this game is nonsense.

It is absurd to argue that a feature cannot be added to a game with more time, more staff, and more money than was needed to create the whole game from scratch in the first place. If what you really want to tell us is that Q-Games is bleeding money, laying off staff, and struggling to meet deadlines, let's hear it.
SuperLuigiBros Nov 11, 2013 @ 1:22pm 
Yes, it is so hard! To add a feature as big as multiplayer (!) would take months of design, developing and testing. That would cost lot of money, which almost certainly wouldn't be feasible. Also consider that there is a sequel which they may bring out which already has multiplayer. This game near perfect without it, anyway.
GT Nov 11, 2013 @ 1:26pm 
My understanding is that while Q-Games spent time developing Monsters further (for the PSP initially) - Double11, the company releasing the titles on Steam, have been tasked with only porting the Pixeljunk series (to PC/Mac/Linux), rather than doing any extensive development.
Shadrach Nov 11, 2013 @ 1:43pm 
Every game must have ONLINES MULTIPL0XER OR NO BUY!
9€ is too much monkey-cash for me!
Bad Port, BAD BAD PORT!
/sarcasm

Seriously, every game does not need online multiplayer. It's awesome as it is, really enjoying it.

Buntkreuz Nov 11, 2013 @ 1:56pm 
Originally posted by einexile:
This game is almost four years old.

Q-Games added proper online multiplayer to Monsters, charged more for it, and people bought it. That they could not have taken the same route with this game is nonsense.

It is absurd to argue that a feature cannot be added to a game with more time, more staff, and more money than was needed to create the whole game from scratch in the first place. If what you really want to tell us is that Q-Games is bleeding money, laying off staff, and struggling to meet deadlines, let's hear it.
To implement Online Multiplayer after a game is made that far (finished) means they would have to kill the whole code and rebuild the game from ground up new because the Netcode has to be implemented first so you can add the rest of the stuff on your bedrock version. It is not just to add something to the game. If you want to implement Online Multiplayer afterwards you have to plan it before developing,coding the game. Many developers implement the feature in their bedrock, to have the opportunity to add it later or not. But some dont do that because this also means they have to do more work and may have bugs caused by a feature they may never implement.
So yes, it is "impossible" to add it later. Not impossible per se, but it would need much time, much work, and a lot lot, very lot of money to do that and maybe get something no one needs.
It is a Coop/Solo game. All Multiplayer games were local Multiplayer games in a distant past (remember the days on your SNES or Master System?I do). And i have to say, i prefer Local MP. Means i only need ONE Version of the game, ONE Account on Steam and also just ONE PC. Plug in two controllers and have fun is much easier, more comfortable and has many advantages. Online Coop has advantages too, but just if you want to play with people you dont know because you dont have one to play with, or the people you know are that far away you cant get local. Live with it. Its still a great game. Or buy a PS3 and get Shooter 2.
ein Nov 11, 2013 @ 2:13pm 
Originally posted by Shadrach:
Every game must have ONLINES MULTIPL0XER OR NO BUY!
9€ is too much monkey-cash for me!
Bad Port, BAD BAD PORT!
/sarcasm

Seriously, every game does not need online multiplayer. It's awesome as it is, really enjoying it.

It's a basic Gravitar/Jetman shooter with a nice water-fire-gas mechanic and brilliant coop. I wonder if anyone defending what amounts to its omission has actually experienced the coop, or grasps why it is different from the basic game.

Pixeljunk games are among the few ever made in which coop is significantly more difficult than singleplayer NOT because of artificial changes a la Diablo/Borderlands, but because of how the presence of another player naturally affects the gameplay. This is especially true of Eden which also left out multiplayer.

If you want to tell me local mp only is fine for a PC, that is really no different from saying it's ok to leave local coop out of a console game, and require it to be played over the Internet. One of the biggest differences between the platforms is who we can most readily play with because of where the device usually resides in the home. SteamOS may change that. Thinly veiled snobbery won't, especially when that snobbery involves not owning a PS3 and keeping your gaming rig in a de facto man cave.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 32 comments
Per page: 1530 50