Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Yeah, that's why I think doing solo with added coop is the best way to do it. If there's good playerbase you'll find mates to play the game with, if the game is going through downtime you can still play solo...
...but this? I mean I get that all devs want the success of Helldivers, L4D, Tarkov etc. but those are few games in a sea of others that failed to keep the playerbase together.
The Cycle is great example. A FREE game with great things going for it... closed because playercount was too low.
I'm sure they'll add a form of solo play at some point, after all, we have games like DRG that feature solo play, but online co-op (even though the co-op element is what most ppl roll with).
We've also seen Sea of Thieves recently do a solo option for those not wanting to get involved with it's PVP side of things.
The thing you gotta remember is that these devs didn't know HD2 was gonna be a smash hit. These devs likely took their own dev time making what they wanted, and hardly got to know much of what the HD2 studio was cooking up during their own time in dev.
The looter shooter part does remind me more of Borderlands/Tarkov, but seeing as how it's post apocalyptic and you're scavenging around, it'll possibly follow less of that extraction trend chase that some AAA's are going after.
The most important aspects new games need to really nail for a game to really lift of would have to be the price point, gameplay loop, and general mechanics/difficulty. Nail most of those and you'll be golden, but mess up most and you'll go out faster than a lit match in the rain.
We've seen multiple AAA's in recent years come out with horrid price points, bogus gameplay loops (the kind that disrespects the players time and giving them less agency over their own personal choices), and focusing more on repetitive gameplay to get the user to purchase MT's from their in-game store.
This game hasn't shown it's full hand yet, but once it does, we'll likely be able to discern if it's merely trend chasing, or that it wants to be it's own game with a nice price, good gameplay loop and something for everyone to jump into (like how HD2 managed to nail all those points).
Single player should always be the focus and coop be a secondary option..
If you're looking for a solo game just move on and keep looking?
Coop shooters still do incredibly well.
People need to get comfortable with not playing a game if doesn't suit what they're looking for rather than just whining about it.
The point is to co-op with your friends?
You play other games when they're not on.
Are you stupid?
I am not paying hundreds of dollars Australian on a game i might play occasionally.. Also all friends need the game and might not be interested.. No its a waste.
I don't even enjoy playing games with friends..
Objectively this is wrong.
Then don't play it? Ahahaha.
That's like complaining monopoly needs more than four players. Some games are meant to be played with friends.
The game will most likely let people play solo anyways so you'll get to enjoy spend your hundreds of Australian dollars on it.