Instalează Steam
conectare
|
limbă
简体中文 (chineză simplificată)
繁體中文 (chineză tradițională)
日本語 (japoneză)
한국어 (coreeană)
ไทย (thailandeză)
български (bulgară)
Čeština (cehă)
Dansk (daneză)
Deutsch (germană)
English (engleză)
Español - España (spaniolă - Spania)
Español - Latinoamérica (spaniolă - America Latină)
Ελληνικά (greacă)
Français (franceză)
Italiano (italiană)
Bahasa Indonesia (indoneziană)
Magyar (maghiară)
Nederlands (neerlandeză)
Norsk (norvegiană)
Polski (poloneză)
Português (portugheză - Portugalia)
Português - Brasil (portugheză - Brazilia)
Русский (rusă)
Suomi (finlandeză)
Svenska (suedeză)
Türkçe (turcă)
Tiếng Việt (vietnameză)
Українська (ucraineană)
Raportează o problemă de traducere
No one had any cash, board games only had to be bought once (people who couldn't afford even that made honest to god bootlegs of games like monopoly). I
t was a difficult time & being able to spend a few hours connecting with people you cared for and having fun? Helped a lot of people through a tough part of history.
I say these things not to in any way undermine your point(s), but because this is something that's being forgotten as it fades from living memory. (also cause stories about how people weathered tough times in the past can be encouraging when current times are also tough)
So yeah, total nonsequetor. Sorry.
Just for myself, we have 4 computers and game together regularly to both teach kids how to socialise as a team, and as family time.
The entire game from the ground up has clearly been designed as a single player game.
There is likely no networking supported in the code, no balancing considerations for having to have twice as many of certain resources, certain game mechanics would straight up need to be entirely re-worked for coop vs solo, need all new animations/graphics/etc, content would be consumed faster and everyone would demand more of the devs. Is the server persistent or does it require both players to be online?
All this translates to a more expensive game for everyone, for a game simply only ever intended to be played solo. Will 90% of the playerbase agree to a $3 cost increase for a feature used by 10% of the playerbase?
There are already so many multiplayer survival games out there, why can't there be a single player one?
All in all if you want to play multiplayer, go for it and find games that cater to that. Just asking that you stop requesting dev's to change their dream to fit yours. As to why most hate multiplayer games, top answer: Tired of others trying to off me and steal my stuff just for their amusement. Can attest to this, even in No Man's Sky while on the posted quest, twice had players stalking a portal and offing anyone coming to finish a quest. Why? Not like you can plunder the body. If you truly wish for games to be multiplayer than by all means learn how to code and develop/release your own game. Until then enjoy the fruits of others.
it's better to have a good singleplayer experience than a mediocre coop game imo. like you said, it was created only with 1 person in mind.
baffles me when people request or sometimes even demand coop in solo game.
They made 4 games, one of them with multiplayer (Freaky_Awesome)
https://store.steampowered.com/developer/mandragora/#browse
If the multiplayer experienced programmers are still in the team, they could have made it multiplayer.
But I see that those games were mixed. Maybe the programmers left and new ones came.
This one is the first very positive rated game.
Please include a coop in the next game.