Support NeoGAF

[DunDunDunpachi]

I can't think of any examples from the last decade where a game offered a multiplayer mode where players swapped turns playing through the single-player content. In old arcade games and in a lot of early console games, multiplayer was shoehorned in by offering a 'Player 2' who could take a turn after the first player died, completed a level, etc. Modern multiplayer games are always some form of simultaneous multiplayer (co-op, or online multiplayer, or MMOs).

Trading turns in multiplayer seems super outdated, but I remember having fun doing this as a kid. My own young kids don't seem to mind, either. They enjoy watching each other play. Plus, they all kind of suck at most games so it's a chance for them to watch and pick up tips. When I was growing up, this was pretty normal.

I wonder if this kind of archaic feature would be appreciated in this day and age.

Should games force 2+ players to "take turns", or is this a pointless restriction? The first excuse that popped into my head was "No, I don't want to watch someone else play", but then I realized I watch strangers play all the time on YouTube or over Twitch. Usually if I have friends over to play some games, one or more of us chills out for a bit and just watches while we chat.

 

[Helios]

I can't think of any examples from the last decade where a game offered a multiplayer mode where players swapped turns playing through the single-player content. In old arcade games and in a lot of early console games, multiplayer was shoehorned in by offering a 'Player 2' who could take a turn after the first player died, completed a level, etc. Modern multiplayer games are always some form of simultaneous multiplayer (co-op, or online multiplayer, or MMOs).

Trading turns in multiplayer seems super outdated, but I remember having fun doing this as a kid. My own young kids don't seem to mind, either. They enjoy watching each other play. Plus, they all kind of suck at most games so it's a chance for them to watch and pick up tips. When I was growing up, this was pretty normal.

I wonder if this kind of archaic feature would be appreciated in this day and age.

Should games force 2+ players to "take turns", or is this a pointless restriction? The first excuse that popped into my head was "No, I don't want to watch someone else play", but then I realized I watch strangers play all the time on YouTube or over Twitch. Usually if I have friends over to play some games, one or more of us chills out for a bit and just watches while we chat.

Wasn't that feature mostly for measuring high scores? Which is another feature that is mostly gone from games today.
If someone is sitting besides me and they want to play I can just hand them over the controller. If they want to start from the beginning they can do so on a different save file.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Wasn't that feature mostly for measuring high scores? Which is another feature that is mostly gone from games today.
If someone is sitting besides me and they want to play I can just hand them over the controller. If they want to start from the beginning they can do so on a different save file.

My friends and I didn't fuss too much about hi-scores (though you are right, you could play it competitively). It was more like... who can get the furthest? Another example would be shmups: 2p Hellfire Genesis and Gradius Nintendo NES were alternating multiplayer and my friends and I played stuff like that all the time and enjoyed ourselves.

To your second point, I also like showing a friend a single-player game (either my handing them my controller and letting them try out wherever I'm at, or by starting them a new save). That's fun too but it's not technically what I am referring to.

 

[Nymphae]

Like Super Mario Bros 3 lol? My Dad and I used to like playing that when I was a kid because it was a very fair back and forth thing.

 

[The Cockatrice]

Seems pointless to me. Locally you can just give the person your m&k/controller and online I'd rather have control.

 

[BlackTron]

Well, in a game like Mario, it's unusual not to do more harm than good with multiple players on the screen. Sure it's fun, but it's also a chaotic mess.

These days you can plow through a Mario game even if it's a chaotic mess, but in the 90's you needed skill and caution. Lives were valuable and couldn't be squandered if you really wanted to progress.

If I was going to take a game of Mario "seriously", I would do it one player at a time. Because technique really mattered, the other player would watch intently while waiting his/her turn. Finding ways to get past each others stumbles (such as a boss) made sense -think about it. You just lost to a boss, of course you'll be watching wide-eyed at your friends attempt.

These days, you could fight the same boss together, but you'd be getting in each others way, have 40 lives, and would just come back in a bubble if you died. It's a totally different but valid form of co-op, but so is the old taking turns way in the context that it was actually used in.

 

[Enjay]

Here's something that'll blow a lot of your minds here: you can take turns on a 1 player game. Cops won't arrest you.

 

[Shifty]

I played a lot of 2-player Super Mario World around a mate's house during my childhood. I wasn't very good at it, so most of my time was spent dying to rookie mistakes and watching him gradually clear the game.

So in that sense, nah man. It's more fun to play simultaneously.

That said, you could probably do something of merit with the hotseat model if you integrated it with some specialized mechanics. Metagame stuff maybe, or letting the off-seat player do something else while the on-seat player is playing.

 

[DrJohnGalt]

Might not be exactly what you're talking about, but the newer Total War games are kind of like that in co-op campaign mode. Each player takes an individual turn, then each AI faction, then back to each player. While it is true that the active player can "gift" units to the spectating ally (or the ally can command his own army if close enough to reinforce), most of the game is players going back and forth. I don't have a problem with this set up for this type of game.

I don't mind taking turns, but I think in general it's more fun to play together at the same time. But a lot of the older games work better in turns.

 

[off duty ninja]

Some of my favorite gaming memories are passing the controller with friends and family trying to beat each other's high scores and such. I really miss this style of play. It is the main reason I'm still nostalgic about Nintendo and their games.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Sharing a controller is like sharing your waifu.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Look around and most games have multiplayer, but I've seen taking turns with single player games generally stage to stage, level to level etc.