Video games, once a captivating force in entertainment, seem to be losing their grip on the collective consciousness. While the industry is still massive, a sense of waning enthusiasm permeates discussions around gaming. It’s not that video games are disappearing, but rather, the fervent passion and widespread cultural relevance they once held appear to be diminishing. Why is it that fewer people seem to genuinely care about video games in the way they used to?
One key aspect to consider is the shift in player motivations, particularly in the realm of cooperative play. Traditionally, discussions around multiplayer games heavily emphasized balance and challenge. Developers poured resources into ensuring fair competition in Player vs Player (PVP) modes and carefully calibrated difficulty in Player vs Environment (PVE) experiences. However, this focus might be fundamentally misaligned with what many players actually seek, especially in cooperative settings.
The original notion of cooperative PVE, separate from main campaigns, was often about shared experiences rather than overcoming grueling challenges. Think of games where the cooperative mode is distinct from the single-player narrative, such as titles like Toukiden: Kiwami or Mass Effect 3‘s multiplayer. Players engaging in these modes with friends aren’t primarily driven by a desire for intense difficulty. The core appeal isn’t about conquering insurmountable odds together. Instead, the game serves as a backdrop, a shared space for social interaction and casual enjoyment.
The real “game” in cooperative PVE, for many, is the social interaction itself. Friends gather online not necessarily to test their gaming prowess, but to connect, converse, and unwind together. The game becomes a facilitator for these social interactions, an excuse to spend time and share laughs within a virtual environment. When games prioritize punishing difficulty or overly complex mechanics in cooperative modes, they inadvertently detract from this primary purpose. The frustration of repeated failures or the need for intense concentration can disrupt the flow of conversation and diminish the overall enjoyment of playing with friends.
Consider a game like FUSE by Insomniac Games. While not a critical darling in terms of single-player experience, it stood out as an exceptional cooperative game. Its appeal wasn’t rooted in groundbreaking gameplay or a compelling narrative, but rather in its accessibility and casual nature. FUSE offered serviceable mechanics, decent visuals for its time, and a story that didn’t demand deep engagement. This combination created an environment where players could relax, chat, and enjoy the game without feeling overly stressed or challenged. The fact that it wasn’t a commercially massive single-player hit is irrelevant in the context of its cooperative strength. It provided an ideal platform for friends to connect and have fun, even if the game itself was somewhat unremarkable in other aspects.
The point of friction arises when a game’s difficulty curve clashes with the social dynamic of cooperative play. Moments where players are forced to halt conversations and focus intensely to progress due to challenging encounters can be jarring in a cooperative context. While demanding gameplay is expected and even welcomed in single-player experiences, it can feel counterproductive in cooperative settings where the social aspect is paramount. The game, in such instances, inadvertently pulls players away from their primary goal: enjoying time and conversation with friends.
Developers often strive to avoid labels of “too easy” or “forgettable.” However, in the realm of cooperative PVE, these qualities might not be detrimental. The single-player mode is where games are typically judged on their individual merits, their narrative depth, and their mechanical innovation. Cooperative modes, on the other hand, should prioritize the cooperative experience itself. This means focusing on creating an environment that facilitates social interaction and shared enjoyment, even if it means sacrificing extreme difficulty or complex systems.
Another factor contributing to potential player disengagement is the rigid adherence to certain multiplayer norms, such as the four-player team structure. While four-player teams have become a standard in online cooperative and PVP games, deviations from this norm can create logistical inconveniences for established player groups. When a game limits cooperative modes to two or three players, it disrupts pre-existing social circles and forces players to make difficult choices about who to include or exclude.
The rationale behind these player limitations often stems from concerns about game balance. Developers might worry that accommodating four players would make the game too easy. However, as previously argued, the pursuit of perfect balance in cooperative PVE is often misplaced. Players aren’t primarily seeking a grueling challenge in these modes; they are seeking a fun and social experience with friends. Therefore, prioritizing player convenience and social cohesion, even if it means slightly reducing the difficulty, could be a more effective approach.
Ghost of Tsushima: Legends serves as a recent example. While lauded for its quality and engaging gameplay, its story mode’s two-player limitation is a point of contention for some. The cooperative gameplay itself is enjoyable, and the light narrative structure perfectly complements the social focus. However, restricting it to two players when many player groups are accustomed to four-person squads feels like an unnecessary constraint.
Ghost of Tsushima: Legends offers both a two-player story mode and a four-player survival mode. While both have their merits, the story mode’s gameplay loop might be more appealing to players seeking a narrative-driven cooperative experience. However, the survival mode, with its wave-based structure, can sometimes simplify gameplay and remove some of the nuances present in the story mode and the base game. For players who appreciate strategic approaches and varied gameplay styles, the survival mode might feel somewhat limited.
The core gameplay of Ghost of Tsushima revolves around the duality of honorable samurai combat versus stealthy “ghost” tactics. This choice is brilliantly integrated into both the narrative and the gameplay. The two-player cooperative story mode retains this element of choice, allowing players to adopt either approach. However, the four-player survival mode, by its nature, often pushes players towards a more straightforward, combat-focused playstyle, potentially diminishing the appeal for those who favor stealth and strategic gameplay.
Limiting the cooperative story mode to two players, likely due to concerns about balance, inadvertently forces players to compromise. Groups of four are compelled to split up, and smaller groups might find themselves unable to include all their preferred players. Even if the story mode were slightly easier with four players, the enhanced social experience and the ability to play with a full squad would likely outweigh any minor difficulty adjustments. The focus should be on facilitating enjoyable cooperative experiences, and sometimes, that means prioritizing social accessibility over rigid difficulty balancing.
Ultimately, the issue boils down to a potential disconnect between developer priorities and player motivations, particularly in cooperative PVE games. Overly emphasizing difficulty and balance, while neglecting the social and experiential aspects, might be contributing to a broader sense of player disengagement. While challenging gameplay has its place, cooperative modes often thrive when they prioritize fun, social interaction, and accessibility. By focusing on creating environments that foster these elements, developers can reignite player enthusiasm and ensure that video games remain a cherished and engaging form of entertainment for years to come.
