But considering that instead of making singleplayer only content the developers could have spent that time to make more multiplayer compatible content it counts as a negative for me. That at most makes them net zero neither good or bad. Oh yes the age old argument of "they are not required". Heck, I'm pretty certain they don't even come close to being 'half' of the game, maybe one third at most. They are there, yes, but are by no means required. Originally posted by Draconic Creature:Village quests are also low-rank, so just play with your friends, then go back with high-rank gear and blast through the things to get the extras from there. ![]() Unless someone can point out a legit feature that would not be possible with multiplayer support on a quest then I'm going to say the developers 100% made a mistake when they did not make all the quests multiplayer compatible. World proved that it is possible to have every single quest be multiplayer compatible while still being completely singleplayerable at the same time. There is enough content to play with my friends to justify the price tag.Īnd no "It's been part of the series in the past" is not a good reason for it either. ![]() Village quests are also low-rank, so just play with your friends, then go back with high-rank gear and blast through the things to get the extras from there. However if you play video games mainly to spend time with your friends then having village quests strictly singleplayer is not a good thing. ![]() Originally posted by PunCrathod:Good for you.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |