+Nimbus+ Posted January 13, 2002 Posted January 13, 2002 What will you do first? I wanna know cause it's a good question I think.
StephenG Posted January 13, 2002 Posted January 13, 2002 this is the type of stuff people post when the game will be out in a few days. i bet this same topice will be posted again when the game is near released.
+Nimbus+ Posted January 13, 2002 Author Posted January 13, 2002 err sorry, is that bad that I did post it? Sorry I was just a little curious I'm not trying to bug people or nothin
StephenG Posted January 13, 2002 Posted January 13, 2002 nuh, your not buggering me, i just saying. Anyway i always play SP first b4 i play muiltplayer.
TrUeFoRcE Posted January 13, 2002 Posted January 13, 2002 i for one am gonna play a little in single player first, and get used to the new saber controls etc... then it'll be a mix of single an multiplayer from then on.....
Omne Posted January 13, 2002 Posted January 13, 2002 Play through SP first, then move on to MP. Playing SP is the best way to familiarize yourself with the controls and quirks of the game.
wardz Posted January 13, 2002 Posted January 13, 2002 SP for sure, MP is gonna be hard on a 56k. I want to feel competant before I get my ass kicked... wardz
Guest X-Vector Posted January 13, 2002 Posted January 13, 2002 It's all about the singleplayer for me. I will of course take a look at the multiplayer part as well, but I don't have much of an interest in it to be honest.
Scav Posted January 13, 2002 Posted January 13, 2002 Games are always based on the multiplayer function around these times. That's what really aggravates me. Games like Tribes and Tribes 2 were total bombs. The only thing that saved them was their extreme customizing possiblities. If JK2: JO doesn't have a good single player, it's likely I won't be as excited about it. Focus on the multiplayer would seriously kill this game until some good single player campaigns came out. What really worries me is the possibility of JK2 bombing out. It's such an anticipated game, and a valuable addition to the Dark Forces series.
ed_silvergun Posted January 13, 2002 Posted January 13, 2002 What will I play first? Single-player, definitely. After that? Depends on whether I can get my hands on a cable or ADSL line. If I can, I definitely look forward to meeting all you guys for some serious MP action.
Obi Kwan Posted January 13, 2002 Posted January 13, 2002 I was hooked on JK multiplayer (via the demo) before I even purchased the full game; For me I will definately get my feet wet in SP before I tear it up in MP but that is where my real hope is!
+Nimbus+ Posted January 14, 2002 Author Posted January 14, 2002 Single Player seems popular, I know alot of you will play single-player first, but the way Jedi Knight got popular online, it could be the same way, I like the stories and cutscenes alot and you don't have to find someone to play with, but online you can get friends and all.
+Nimbus+ Posted January 14, 2002 Author Posted January 14, 2002 I'm sorry for not including this in the previous post, but I'm really glad the PC didn't receive Obi-Wan because Jedi Outcast can follow the story plus, they couldn't base Obi-Wan off the Quake 3 Engine as far as I know and if they could it'd be more difficult.
[SWS]Strider Posted January 14, 2002 Posted January 14, 2002 I dunno about this one, being a Mac user you guys will have a headstart onme in multiplayer. Although 2-4 months isn't a huge advantage. I'll probably start up single player and play through a bit of it, then go on the net and play. Luckily I will have some help in multiplayer. So I guess my ansewer is I will switch in between depending. I reall hope to see some of you guys on multiplayer on there when it does come out. Look for me once the Mac version is out. Strider
DeathBoLT Posted January 14, 2002 Posted January 14, 2002 I'd go with MP first.. SP whenever I need a break from MP or when I'm unable to get online(or if playing JKII online is too laggy)
StarScrap Posted January 14, 2002 Posted January 14, 2002 I can't shake the appeal of the story. Even if it sucks. Once I start to view it as a game only, that's when I go MP.
pinkpanther718 Posted January 14, 2002 Posted January 14, 2002 Well, I can still say, even in these internet driven days we live in, taht the SP is what makes me buy the game before anything else. The story makes you want to beat it, and find out what happens, and you just get emersed in the whole thing. With that said, let me also say, that MP is just as importatn. MP is what gives the game its replay value. SP gets me hooked, MP keeps me hooked. Finally, let me answer the question, I'll start out with SP, and once I experiment with it a bit, I'll start MP and just switch back and fourth til I beat SP and just stick with MP from there on.
Nemios Posted January 14, 2002 Posted January 14, 2002 First I'll run a "local multiplayer" game to move around and try sabre moves and force powers. Then I'll immediatly play SP. If I don't first try force powers and sabre the risk is to hurry in the firsts levels, to have asap the sabre. Instead I want to fully enjoy every bit of the game calmly and to explore every place while blasting every single enemy. The only exceptions are timed levels, like the falling ship in JK, where you can't go around "singin' in the Force" (Al's DoaCM rulez! )
SlowbieOne Posted January 14, 2002 Posted January 14, 2002 I'll probably play Dark Forces, JK and MotS a day or two before JK2 comes out to get hyped up. Then the day JK2 hits I'll call my friend, tell hit to bring over a big bag of sticky icky, get as stoned as I can get, and fire up the Single Player mode. I plan to take my time on SP, so after we are done with that, we'll hook up our comps and go for some MP. Unfortunately I will probably be playing bots all the time with my crappy 56k.
txa1265 Posted January 14, 2002 Posted January 14, 2002 For me, it is ALL SP. There has to be a compelling story, some thread of logic that runs through that makes me want to play it ... sure killing things is cool, but games like UT run out of steam quickly for me. I just finished RtCW, which I enjoyed quite a bit, but still not as much as JK / MotS, which I'm starting up (again). Mike
Dirth Vedar Posted January 14, 2002 Posted January 14, 2002 Know why single? Because unless you are a very competitive person who takes pleasure out of killing other players, multiplayer just lacks the plot that makes the game interesting. Saber battles are cool, and they are fun if you just want to hop online for a quick game, but it certainly doesn't have the same satisfaction that completing certain incremental goals can provide in SP. That's not to say multiplayer is not enjoyable, I think it is, but in a very different way. Multiplayer is more about challenging yourself to be a better player than finding out what happens. I think games like Diablo2, where they integrate the single player plot element into the game, people find it easier to ignore single player. Really, the only reason to avoid multiplayer on Diablo2 is to avoid lag. What I don't understand is why the industry has not produce a more plot driven multiplayer levels. Team Fortress and the likes with flag captures, and unreal tournament's assult is kinda cool, because you have multiple goals in the level, there's a sense of accomplishment as you reach each way point, but they still lack a true story. How cool would it be if you can play through a single player campaigne that's designed to be multiplayer, to get through the game with friends by your side. But alas, I think the complex level design, and bandwidth issues, and so forth makes this process too hard. Afterall, you have to guarantee that all 8 players gets their share of storm trooper kills, otherwise it just won't be fun. I don't know if there's much of a team element in Alien Vs. Predator 2, but I always thought it'll be kinda cool to be able to suit up with a bunch of fellow marines, and explore a derelict ship properly, as a team. I think in SP, that game has AI bots, that acts in your team, but they are more or less useless.... I seriously doubt that JO will have the team multiplayer with plot. But well... maybe some day.
+Nimbus+ Posted January 15, 2002 Author Posted January 15, 2002 Actually Rainbow 6 had that, but some people wanna play games with multiplayer, Max Payne would be a popular game for people like some of yourselves because it's only Single Player, yeah I like single player levels, but if you ever noticed in the console world those games will be failing because of lack of replay value, multiplayer is fun and makes the game soo much more.
Ushgarak Posted January 15, 2002 Posted January 15, 2002 I really don't like deathmatch very much, so I am a single-player man mostly... but like Vedar above, this is mainly due to the lack of decent team-based multiplayer. I have a LAN at home and LOVE teaming up with my friends for some decent co-op action (Diablo II was PERFECT... and now I think about it, so was Heretic, Hexen, Hexen II and Heretic II. AHEM, Raven??!). And in Star Wars terms, X-Wing vs. TIE fighter was bloody marvellous; a load of my friends brought their computers over and we had fully six players forming half an X-Wing squadron to go in with fully plotted missions. Marvellous! To get a feel like that in JKII would be sweet but iut;s not going to happen. So bearing in mind that it's mostly going to be frenetic deathmatch, I'm choosing single player here. But if people want to start releasing co-op scenarios, then you just try and stop me playing!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.