• Ace T'Ken@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    134
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    I don’t play multiplayer games anymore.

    First off, they always seem to enable the worst of game companies trying to financially ruin their players.

    Second off, I’m in my 40s and my reaction time isn’t what it was when I used to play UT or Quake. You can’t improve an aged reaction time nearly as easily, yes, because it’s gotten slightly worse with age, but also because you become less willing and / or able to dedicate the sheer volume of time that you would need to to improve. Getting repeatedly stomped isn’t fun, and quite simply, I’ve got better and more important things to do.

    Third off, I don’t like the constant recycling of content that you see in multiplayer games. A handful of maps are expected to last you infinite plays. I like changes of scenery, storylines, and varied experiences. Doing the same thing over and over again is just boring.

    Fourth off, player communities in some games are aggressively dogshit and I really don’t want to interact with them at all.

    • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 days ago

      It’s unlikely your reaction time has changed much in your 40s. You probably have well over a decade before that starts to happen. On your first couple of tries, reacting to something is going to seem impossible. After you’ve seen the same stimuli and practiced what you should do in response, you’ll be right around where teens and 20-somethings are. If you don’t want to put the time in to make that happen, that’s fine, but don’t think it’s unattainable to get good at a given multiplayer if you were otherwise interested in doing so. E-sports are now old enough that we’ve seen enough folks age into their 40s and remain top talent, as long as that remained an ideal career choice for them when so few are going to be able to support themselves in that career.

      • otacon239@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        8 days ago

        Watching NakeyJakey’s video on competitive shooters put into perspective how hard it really is. I knew I wasn’t cut out for it, but that just demonstrated how not cut out for it I was.

      • shadedmagus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        This also applies for some single-player games as well. I’m 48 and I had to “git gud” on Expedition 33 in order to progress - learning how to time parries is pretty critical for getting through the tougher fights.

      • Zarobi@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        I used to have 50ms reaction time 15+ years ago as a teenager. Now I have 300ms reaction time according to the previously linked test. I’m not sure if it’s age or laziness though. I really really wanted to beat Zombie Goku back then and actually trained hard for it

    • DraconicSun@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      I’m 32. I just recently started getting better aim than I ever had throughout my entire 20’s. When it comes to gaming, age doesn’t really matter as much.

    • OwOarchist@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Doing the same thing over and over again he’s boring.

      That’s also a factor in the gameplay itself.

      Competitive multiplayer games will always develop a ‘meta’ that you have to adhere to or respond to in order to be at all competitive.

      In single player games, you can make a replay interesting by playing it a different way, trying different strategies even if they’re non-optimal, just to have the novel experience of playing the game a different way. Things like, “I think I’m going to try doing a no-vehicles run in Subnautica.” or “I think I’ll try Cyberpunk with a melee-focused solo build this time.” But stuff like that just isn’t viable in competitive multiplayer. You will be defeated early and often if you stray too far from the meta.

      So not only are you playing the same few maps over and over, you’re playing the same few tactics and strategies over and over, making things boring from that angle as well.

      • Axolotl@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 days ago

        In single player games you can also cheat a little,bug abuse and glitch the game for giggles without ruining the exp for others too

        • jamesrandysghost@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 days ago

          THIS. 1000% THIS!

          I’ve been having so much fun lately using shit like this to add a little spice to the games I’ve been playing.

          Now, I’m a complete sucker for overpowered MC energy in any media I consume. So it makes sense that getting to personally act out that power fantasy appeals to me. As with most art/entertainment, not everyone will get the same enjoyment out of doing this that I do. But that’s ok! It’s why I love single player games, those that want to have the vanilla experience and work within the rules can, and those that want to cheese the system and goof around can too, and no one is worse off for it!

      • grinning_serpent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 days ago

        Being a meta slave is a mindset, not often reality. There are countless examples of players taking “useless” characters or builds far in the professional scene across many different genres and games.

    • grinning_serpent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      Twitch reaction time isn’t particularly important in most games. Quake and UT, sure, but even in those most twitchiest of shooters strategy will still carry you into the upper echelons of players.

      Counterstrike is almost entirely based on spray control and map knowledge. Twitch reactions have only a minor role to play.

      Even games like Starcraft are determined primarily by strategy and not mechanical speed. You could probably play at a professional level before a lack of speed compared to your peers would actually begin holding you back.

      Plus… you can train reaction time and multitasking. An actual physical impairment like RSI might stop you, though.

      The whole “ohhh I can’t do games because I have the olds” is such a nonsense cop-out. The rest of your post is pretty accurate, though.

      • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Doesn’t highly competitive Starcraft boil down to most clicks per second wins?

        • grinning_serpent@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          At the S tier level it’s both strategy and speed. Lower than that, as in like over 99% of players, strategy is more important than anything else.

    • PapstJL4U@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      8 days ago

      Oh. It’s clear you haven’t played multiplayer games for a long time, otherwise this false statement would not have come up:

      Third off, I don’t like the constant recycling of content that you see in multiplayer games. One map is expected to last you infinite plays. I like changes of scenery and story.

      Maps rotate constantly and change, active and passive maps, community maps.

      • Ace T'Ken@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        8 days ago

        Oh I obviously understand that there are multiple (if not dozens of) maps, but how many times are you expected to play those maps over and over again? Without plot progression, I just don’t find it interesting.

        • shoo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          The problem isn’t the maps being static and finite, it’s that nobody designs maps for emergent and dynamic gameplay anymore. CoD might have dozens of maps but they’re all designed for perfect sterile balance with the same lane concepts.

          Some of my favorite multiplayer games have only 3-4 maps but each is distinct and plays well to different tactics. Usually they’re based around strong points and webs of approach which gives more options for fresh experience each time you play (“wow never noticed that flank” - “oh this window gives a great angle over this courtyard” - “oh a grenade can be thrown just perfectly over that building” - etc…)

          In a sense, good progression isn’t flat mechanical unlocks but building up game and map knowledge. You can choose to explore different facets of the game and it always stays interesting. Competitive ranked multiplayer ruined this because going off meta means losing the game for your team.