Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chino tradicional)
日本語 (Japonés)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandés)
български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Danés)
Deutsch (Alemán)
English (Inglés)
Español - España
Ελληνικά (Griego)
Français (Francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandés)
Norsk (Noruego)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugués - Brasil)
Română (Rumano)
Русский (Ruso)
Suomi (Finés)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Informar de un error de traducción
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
6 
Denunciar este mensaje
Yeah it's so much fun to "booted by host" for absolutely zero reason after you play through a bunch of level with them. I'm really enjoying the forced multiplayer experience.
gotta make friend and host your own game
but there should be a multiplyer for running with less players as you have less equipment and survival rate
Isn't that...Kind of proving their point? Some people struggle significantly with social anxiety and on top of that don't have many people they can interact with that have a capable computer, free time, the same game, etc. I wouldn't oppose a function that counts the number of players and adjusts parameters in some way for smaller parties. How does that affect your own gameplay experience for them to be able to enjoy themselves alone? It wouldn't affect your full parties.
Don't worry, OP. I'm very much the same way, in that I usually only play either completely in silence and try to just fulfill my role in peace in public games, or cooperatively with at least one friend present because I have really bad social anxiety. Silence is not a good fit for a game like this, or other team-oriented games in general, so rather than be a burden on my team I usually go solo if none of my buddies are online to play with me. Add that to the fact that, as they said and you agree, public lobbies can be VERY unfriendly even if you play competently and are a good teammate. It's something that I struggle with Lethal Company a bit with too, haha. It's both a little more interesting, but also much more unfair (albeit self-imposed unfairness, of course), so I would actually be pleasantly surprised to see such a function offered as an option.
Dark Souls doesn't cater to baddies by making the game easier, why should the devs invest in the single player experience when that's not their target audience?
I don't like PvP games but that doesn't mean I should request a PvE mode. I simply don't play the game.
Sorry, but the easy solution here is for you guys to work on yourselves. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain by trying.
I don't have anxiety issues or a problem with playing with others...but sometimes I do want to play on my own, or sometimes my availability doesn't line up with others...
I think there are more reasons for scaling than against....fairness being the main one.
The expectation of what I should be bringing in as one person on a team of one should be equal to the expectation of what I should be bringing in as one person in a team of 2 or 8 or anything in between. But the game alleviates what the player needs to bring in by the increase of players.
If your objective is to reach 30k (no custom settings touched), it's heavily more difficult to do solo than with a team. While I appreciate them increasing the max players to 8...it would be more scalable to set the quota and amount per person times number of people.
The Outlast Trials does an amazing job at this by increasing the number of enemies and traps pending on the number of people on the team for the trial.
Don't get me wrong, I love this game (and quite frankly it's WAY more fun with friends than solo) but as friends drift from game to game (everyone's on REPO now, which is also fun), it would be nice to be able to play headliners solo fairly.
Having social anxiety does not mean you automatically mean actively avoid everything. It means it makes you uncomfortable and often takes much more energy and effort out of you than it does a normal person. When you come home from work, where you most likely already have to put in extra mental effort to get through if you have social anxiety, it's nice to be able to just chill and do your own thing. They're not asking for a single player mode at the expense of the cooperative mode, since you can already play in single player. They're asking for a perfectly reasonable scalar function that would benefit everybody, including the cooperative squads from 2P to 4P. Like, really, why get prickly with somebody when their request isn't even something only they would benefit from? They're being considerate of your own experience in addition to their own, not just asking for the game to be made into a cakewalk.
What even is the purpose of gatekeeping somebody else's ability to enjoy a game you like? Wouldn't you appreciate the community having a higher userbase and thus the game succeeding more? The whole argument against this suggestion is more full of holes than swiss cheese. There are a myriad of benefits from this feature and a multitude of reasons why one would have less players available to them well beyond just the circumstance of preferring to play alone. I don't expect the devs of Helldivers 2 to simplify Helldive difficulty for a solo player, but they did the courtesy of not dumping four players worth of enemies on the field if there's only one player. The experience is still just as difficult, just not unfairly so. It's just a QoL courtesy for the end user's benefits to maximize the experience, so I really cannot comprehend why you seem so vehemently opposed to the suggestion. Again, one of you even said yourself you refuse to play with random players, so you're really arguing against your own self-interests here too. This would make the game tailor itself to one, two, three, OR four players, not exclusively dumb it down to a baby mode. Suggesting otherwise is nothing more than a strawman argument and not trying to debate in good faith.
practically every game of this genre is mp, deal with it or deal with your anxiety too bad
Games should work solo, period.
So many heavy heavy cooperation based games work fine solo. Theres no need to tell people to "work on your anxiety". Sometimes I don't want to play with others, maybe I need to leave soon, maybe I'm feeling a bit sick or something right now.
There are literal THOUSANDS of reasons of why you may want to prefer solo over multiplayer.
What we CAN do to fix solo:
1. Add scaling for less players
2. Give solo players extra chances (more runs, more health etc)
3. You could also add an increased military prescence, resulting in more score and less danger.
What we CANT do to fix solo:
"work on your anxiety" and then don't play solo?????
Honestly man just f*ck you. Seriously.
It really wouldn't be a big deal for them to add a scaling factor as the party decreases in size, so you guys should stop acting like it's some major ask. You just come into this thread to deliberately sh!t on people who prefer to play solo and that is infantile behavior.
You're actually proving THEIR point by insulting them immediately.
You also illustrate why people like you have the problems they have.
The egg and the hen - you know.