Home
Feature Article
Why I Have Not Made the Leap To Online

Over the past number of years, as online gaming has become the embodiment of sports gaming, I have caught some heat for being one of the only serious gamers to not get involved in online competition. Friends of mine routinely ask me to sign up for a Xbox Live Gold subscription and join a world of gamers connected world wide under one network. Yet, still to this day, I have avoided the online community. My reasons are straight forward, though they've always received criticism that I do not expect to see go away.

Playing human peers online is a huge shift in video games, and much like 16-bit graphics were a huge push from 8-bit, playing online almost seamlessly with few hiccups is one of the things that has separated next-gen from last-gen. So with this understanding and an increased focus in developers designing for the online crowd, why have I refused to join the party?

I do not like playing the human gamer. There it is, for the whole online world to read. I just do not enjoy it. I rarely enjoyed it on the same console, at home, with a friend. Now, I'm having a hard time enjoying it with a stranger.

I've heard the arguments against this, and the first that stands out is: fear of competition. That may be true for games like Madden, where I know that nine times out of ten I'm going to lose to my opponent; but, the same isn't true in basketball or baseball games. Despite my staying away from the online crowd, I have on rare occasion signed on and played a random somebody over the Internet. I've actually found myself being mostly successful against these gamers and I'd imagine I'd be even better if I spent more time online.

Gamers have argued that there are sim gamers online that give you the same benefits of playing against the CPU, along with the more desirable human traits of competition -- and I will not argue such a claim.

However, no matter the result or reasons for early disconnection, my feelings during the game nearly always recognize the infallible human traits of success at all cause. Human gamers will almost always resolve to playing a particular way to gain a competitive advantage and often times this direction makes a game unplayable. My experience, either online or at home, is that hardcore gamers will give up early if things are not going well for them, and that casual gamers will simply quit, frustrated that their cheesing methods are not working. That leaves me feeling unsatisfied as a gamer and does not even include how I feel during a game when players run-and-gun like the Phoenix Suns and take 3-pointers 75 percent of the time. That is not enjoyable.

It is true that the CPU opponent is not without its faults, but there is something about the predictable nature of the CPU that seems more realistic than the human gamer. Call it lack of chaos, or call it staying true to the team and players it controls. Either way, the CPU experience is much more rewarding for me.

Gamers have argued that there are sim gamers online that give you the same benefits of playing against the CPU, along with the more desirable human traits of competition -- and I will not argue such a claim. I realize that OS has many gamers similar to me, desiring the same in sports video games. But unfortunately for me there are other pressing issues holding me back.

I play for a goal. The goal in sports games is winning a championship, and the only way to do that is to play a franchise or dynasty mode against the CPU. I do not find enjoyment in beating another human gamer. It seems most of the time, beating a human is for bragging rights and since I prefer to play for recreation and a relaxing moment, I can not get excited over beating my loud, unruly buddy during a game of two-player basketball. Now the CPU, that is a different story as the game was designed specifically so that you can play an enjoyable one-player game against lines of code. At least it's supposed to be enjoyable and realistic. That is competition to me. Competition is playing Mega Man 2 on Nintendo and losing all of my lives after reaching the last portion of a level. Competition is knowing that there are 80 more games left to right the ship, and many more opportunities to recover from the loss.

Of course, things have changed over the years and gamers can now enjoy a full season of games striving for a championship, while playing their friends in an online league. That would be the best solution to overcoming my dislike for online gaming, but this bleeds into the third and final reason why I do not play online.

That does not mean I do not play games. Rare for me is only rare because I once played games all day, every day -- if I was not outside playing sports with my friends.


I do not have the time. With a work life, other hobbies, commitments to other fields of work, study, and pleasure, gaming for me has become a luxury. It is now one of those things I can only do on a rare occasion.

That does not mean I do not play games. Rare for me is only rare because I once played games all day, every day -- if I was not outside playing sports with my friends. Today, I am forced to dedicate a small block of time on weekends and occasionally on weekdays just so I can try to complete a full season of games. It is not easy, and after a long week I rather come home, turn on my next-gen system, and enjoy a game at my own pace and time. Playing in an online league would be impossible and I would just end up being that owner everyone waits on and hates.

I know I'm not the only sports gamer that both feels the way I do and experiences the dilemmas I have while playing online. The online gaming network is huge and caters to over a million users, but somewhere in there I am sure other serious gamers have preferred to stay away. Whatever those reasons might be, just know you are not alone. Not everyone has made the leap into the online gaming network and there is no telling if I ever will.


Member Comments
# 1 kerosene31 @ 07/30/08 01:30 PM
Nice article. I agree with many of your comments. While I do play other games online, I almost always stay offline with sports games.

The problem though is I can't help but feel like offline play is not getting nearly enough focus from developers. Plain old season modes are hard to find (not a franchise). Fantasy drafts usually aren't included.

Also, the big problem is that CPU AI does not seem to be advancing along with the games. It seems I end up terribly disappointed in the AI of every sports game I buy. To me, it feels like online is the focus.

With games like NHL 09 coming out, online may be the only mode some people play.

The problem with sports games online is that they are (often) 1 on 1, and nobody wants to play someone who is 10 times better than they are (and I'd guess the good player doesn't want to bother either). In FPS games, you can just be 1 player on a team and blend in. If I join a CoD4 game where every other player is way better, I'll just quietly quit and nobody will care. You can't do that in sports games.
 
# 2 rsnomar05 @ 07/30/08 01:45 PM
I'm going to offer some constructive criticism, but first I'd like to point out that articles like this are the reason people say, "The old OS was better." This has nothing to do with accusations of the site being in bed with EA or anything scandalous, instead it deals solely with the fact that in the past, articles had a purpose, a point. Here, all we have is a person saying that he does not have time to play online. He lists points against online, then lists counter points for online, then simply admits "I do not have time."

There is no hook to the article, nothing to interest readers. Why would people care whether or not the writer has time? In fact, the article could have been shortened to one sentence: "Regardless of the positives (online leagues, sim gamers) and negatives (cheesers, players quitting), I simply do not have time to play video games online." However simple that last sentence may seem, that is all the article says.

I could write an article about how I don't want to go to the mall. They mall has great selection and some killer sales, but I would also have to pay for gas and deal with traffic. In the end, any argument for or against going to the mall becomes irrelevant and pointless, because I do not have the time to go to the mall. Do you see what the problem with the article is? Saying "I do not have the time" makes every other argument useless, because they do not factor in at all. You have an article about someone who can't play online arguing why he won't play online.

Here is how to make the article better: Turn it into an editorial that answers the question: Does single or multi-player give the better gaming experience? Leave out any personal issues like time constraints, or, better yet, leave them in. Mention that playing online against friends means you have to set a specific time and date. Even mention that if you do not have much time during the week to play games, playing online is more difficult. But this time come to an argumentative conclusion, a thesis if you will. Don't take one point (the time constraints) and use it to invalidate everything you have written before. Take it from the third person prospective of both casual and hard-core gamers, with insertions of first person opinion.

I hope this criticism helped. I was an English major, so this is supposed to be what I'm good at.
 
# 3 mgoblue @ 07/30/08 01:45 PM
I'm in a more casual online dynasty in NCAA, but since there are lots of CPU games it makes it go faster/less scheduling. Otherwise I'm not as much of a online gamer, I don't have the time to match up with a lot of people so over the years that is slowly fading. I don't play randoms because they cheese and it's not fun.

I still enjoy playing my OS friends here online, and I'll make a point for some games to play a bit more, but it's tougher with the girlfriend, family, work, etc to make time. Gaming's not the priority in my life it once was.
 
# 4 sportyguyfl31 @ 07/30/08 01:48 PM
I agree mostly.

The thing I find amusing about online gaming is that people talk about the "unpredictable human variable", yet most people play more or less the exact same way.

It's monkey see monkey do.

Ultimately you are always playing against the game.

I also do not like how many people turn into caracitures of themselves, and act like WWE characters in lobbies and voice/text messaging.

I have all communications blocked except for friends list people and friend requests because of this nonsense.

Mostly though, I just have a hard time getting competitive over a video game.

I'm in my mid 30's, was a college athlete, and I am still very physically active, and have many outlets for this, so perhaps that is the reason why.

Maybe I'm generalizing a bit, but I think that perhaps the more someone is involved physically in athletics in some way, the less satisfaction they get out of competing in it, in the virtual online world.

I play online, but for me, its for fun.

Video gaming is a leisure activity for me to enjoy on weekday evening or a weekend afternoon, just as reading a book for an hour, or going swimming might be.

This is why I often tend to lean towards playing more offline in franchise/dynasty modes as opposed to knocking heads with someone online.
 
# 5 ab2c4 @ 07/30/08 02:02 PM
I'm 37 years old and have been playing video games since the Atari days and I have zero interest in ever playing any game online. It's just not going to happen with me. I totally know what this guy is talking about. I enjoy playing against the cpu. To be honest, I don't even enjoy it very much playing a game against any of my kids so I know for sure I won't enjoy playing a game against a stranger.

In fact, even with non sports games I generally choose games that are either completely offline single player games (Bioshock, Oblivion, etc) or games where the single player campaign was what the developer focused on the most.
 
# 6 dustinrr @ 07/30/08 02:32 PM
I tend to shy away from online play as well. The only thing I use it for is the occasional pick up game w/ my brother. I worry sometimes that with the growing popularity of online gaming the developers will start to make the online portion of their games the main focus.
 
# 7 TarHeelPhenom @ 07/30/08 02:41 PM
Awesome article my friend. I definitely play offline more so than online. I will say that my gaming experience varies. For example, I have two people I play with more than anyone else: my cousin and my best friend. My cousin and I prefer to play in Franchises and Dynasty modes together while controlling our own teams. We play our games against the CPU opponents and the only time we go head up is if we are on each others schedules. We do this for the sheer enjoyment of recruiting against one another, chasing the national championship or building our franchises into winners while doing it together. My best friend and I also like to play Dynasty mode and Franchise modes together. However, we prefer to play head up. I will play as his opponent and vice versa and we try and emulate the teams as real as we can.

I've found both ways to be very rewarding and exciting if sometimes nerve racking. My cousin and I were both in the Big 12 one year. he was Texas A&M and I was Nebraska. He beat me in the regular season match-up and again in the Big 12 title game on a last second FG. That was an awesome yet heart wrenching experience. On the flipside my best friend and I have had epic battles over the course of time; anywhere from going 7 games in the NBA playoffs to winning a National Championship against him in Coach K to losing in the NFC Championship as SF to Green Bay. You talk about competition. Imagine how tough it is to win 6 games in a row in the NCAA Tourney to an opponent on a mission to deny you that elusive trophy.

At the end of the day it's about what you want out of your gaming experience. I'm content to play both ways or just enjoy playing the game alone against CPU competition. Either way my experience is enjoyable.
 
# 8 mwjr @ 07/30/08 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsnomar05
I'm going to offer some constructive criticism, but first I'd like to point out that articles like this are the reason people say, "The old OS was better." This has nothing to do with accusations of the site being in bed with EA or anything scandalous, instead it deals solely with the fact that in the past, articles had a purpose, a point. Here, all we have is a person saying that he does not have time to play online. He lists points against online, then lists counter points for online, then simply admits "I do not have time."

There is no hook to the article, nothing to interest readers. Why would people care whether or not the writer has time? In fact, the article could have been shortened to one sentence: "Regardless of the positives (online leagues, sim gamers) and negatives (cheesers, players quitting), I simply do not have time to play video games online." However simple that last sentence may seem, that is all the article says.

I could write an article about how I don't want to go to the mall. They mall has great selection and some killer sales, but I would also have to pay for gas and deal with traffic. In the end, any argument for or against going to the mall becomes irrelevant and pointless, because I do not have the time to go to the mall. Do you see what the problem with the article is? Saying "I do not have the time" makes every other argument useless, because they do not factor in at all. You have an article about someone who can't play online arguing why he won't play online.

Here is how to make the article better: Turn it into an editorial that answers the question: Does single or multi-player give the better gaming experience? Leave out any personal issues like time constraints, or, better yet, leave them in. Mention that playing online against friends means you have to set a specific time and date. Even mention that if you do not have much time during the week to play games, playing online is more difficult. But this time come to an argumentative conclusion, a thesis if you will. Don't take one point (the time constraints) and use it to invalidate everything you have written before. Take it from the third person prospective of both casual and hard-core gamers, with insertions of first person opinion.

I hope this criticism helped. I was an English major, so this is supposed to be what I'm good at.
"Good at?"

And you're an English major?
 
# 9 nolan273 @ 07/30/08 02:48 PM
I agree completely with this post. I do play online occasionally, but this has only developed within the past few weeks.

I'm also in my mid 30s with a family, and gaming for me is a relaxation method. I don't enjoy the whole 'world interaction' theme of online gaming. For me, gaming is a bit more personal. It's 'me time', so to speak. I host a weekly gaming session on Sunday afternoons with my friends at my home, so that's all the social gaming I feel that I need for the week.

Besides, what can be more fun for a sports fan that running a franchise, anyway? I love taking a weak NBA team or NFL team and turning them into champions. While I know that many games are now offering online franchises, I'm not sure if franchises with strangers would give me the same satisfaction as offline franchises. Plus, I'm married with children. I can't really commit to playing 3 or 4 games per week. I have other things to do.

So, with all that being said, until next time, MAKE MINE OFFLINE!!!!
 
# 10 Methlab @ 07/30/08 03:20 PM
I love some online games a lot. For example, Call Of Duty is an incredibly fun game to play online. Factor in the with the Fall update, we will be able to ignore the chatter of everyone but our group of friends and form our own rooms to talk in while playing, and you have a really nice experience void of children who say N and F every 3 seconds because Mommy is not home.

Also, let me add that a major issue with an online sports game is the duration. This is why I believe FIFA soccer will only get more popular if the playablity gets better. It is not a long investment of time to get a game in.

Madden and NBA games are LONG. If you have a cheeser on the other end, you have just locked yourself into committing possibly an hour to playing this person.

I realized this last night when I got Soul Caliber. What a great game for online!! It's maybe the best online game possible because it's just like when you were a kid at the arcade. Some random guy steps up and plays you and the loser sits back in line. Plus, a fight takes 5 minutes or so. It's a minimum commitmentl. A PERFECT game for online. Not much cheese at all, if any, and a ranking system that is addictive and keeps you wanting just one more game.

I upset a level 3 guy my second game and it gave me extra points and got me fired up. Things like that keep me online.
 
# 11 DJ @ 07/30/08 03:29 PM
I'm an offline gamer, too. I tried online but it wasn't for me. Glad to hear I'm not the only one out there.
 
# 12 CMH @ 07/30/08 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsnomar05
I'm going to offer some constructive criticism..
I generally don't like commenting in my own articles because I shouldn't have to explain anything. I also prefer that readers perceive the piece the way they want to. You get what you want out of it.

I just wanted to point out that I do appreciate the feedback. And you're right, to a point, that this is something that could have been done in a thread with one sentence. "I don't play online because I like playing against the CPU and I don't really even have the time to play in online leagues."

This article, however, while written from my perspective is to open commentary on why other gamers have not made that leap. I'm telling you exactly my reasons and even explaining them a bit. Now, it's your turn. Now, you can read this and say, "Wow, I'm not the only one that feels the same exact way. Great to know that there is someone else out there like me when it comes to offline vs. online."

Or maybe you'll say, "Those are not the best of reasons to avoid online. Here's what you can do."

edit:

As for your time argument. I'm not sure if perhaps I wasn't clear enough but I did round out that reasoning by stating I don't want to be that gamer that makes an online league wait. By time, I meant scheduling myself to a dedicated time slot for online gaming. And the only reason someone would be scheduled to play online is to play a game in their online league. I think that makes the point valid while not discrediting the others.
 
# 13 bigfnjoe96 @ 07/30/08 04:21 PM
Get with the times there YP... j/k
 
# 14 rsnomar05 @ 07/30/08 04:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by YankeePride
I generally don't like commenting in my own articles because I shouldn't have to explain anything. I also prefer that readers perceive the piece the way they want to. You get what you want out of it.

I just wanted to point out that I do appreciate the feedback. And you're right, to a point, that this is something that could have been done in a thread with one sentence. "I don't play online because I like playing against the CPU and I don't really even have the time to play in online leagues."

This article, however, while written from my perspective is to open commentary on why other gamers have not made that leap. I'm telling you exactly my reasons and even explaining them a bit. Now, it's your turn. Now, you can read this and say, "Wow, I'm not the only one that feels the same exact way. Great to know that there is someone else out there like me when it comes to offline vs. online."

Or maybe you'll say, "Those are not the best of reasons to avoid online. Here's what you can do."

edit:

As for your time argument. I'm not sure if perhaps I wasn't clear enough but I did round out that reasoning by stating I don't want to be that gamer that makes an online league wait. By time, I meant scheduling myself to a dedicated time slot for online gaming. And the only reason someone would be scheduled to play online is to play a game in their online league. I think that makes the point valid while not discrediting the others.
If it was to be used to open commentary, than that is another story completely. I think the commentary aspect should have been mentioned, or made more clear. When I read the article, I though it was just one person writing why they don't play online (without making an argument as to why a person should or should not), but the purpose of the article changes completely when put in a new context (trying to open up dialogue/commentary).

I also apologize if the feedback came off as too negative. I was trying to be helpful.
 
# 15 CaptainZombie @ 07/30/08 04:38 PM
Nice write up Carlos and don't worry about what rs said about the article.
 
# 16 RaychelSnr @ 07/30/08 04:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by YankeePride
I generally don't like commenting in my own articles because I shouldn't have to explain anything. I also prefer that readers perceive the piece the way they want to. You get what you want out of it.

I just wanted to point out that I do appreciate the feedback. And you're right, to a point, that this is something that could have been done in a thread with one sentence. "I don't play online because I like playing against the CPU and I don't really even have the time to play in online leagues."

This article, however, while written from my perspective is to open commentary on why other gamers have not made that leap. I'm telling you exactly my reasons and even explaining them a bit. Now, it's your turn. Now, you can read this and say, "Wow, I'm not the only one that feels the same exact way. Great to know that there is someone else out there like me when it comes to offline vs. online."

Or maybe you'll say, "Those are not the best of reasons to avoid online. Here's what you can do."

edit:

As for your time argument. I'm not sure if perhaps I wasn't clear enough but I did round out that reasoning by stating I don't want to be that gamer that makes an online league wait. By time, I meant scheduling myself to a dedicated time slot for online gaming. And the only reason someone would be scheduled to play online is to play a game in their online league. I think that makes the point valid while not discrediting the others.
Thought I would highlight the third paragraph of this and comment on it. We generally write articles in a few molds and one is to just basically open up discussion on a certain topic. This article is one of them. While we appreciate the feedback and are continually working to improve our content writing for an English major and writing for a website such as Operation Sports are two completely different animals.

Switching gears, I think I have a very unique perspective to offer. I love playing head to head in king of the couch kind of battles but I don't usually venture online with sports titles. Like Carlos my time with any one game is limited and I do what I enjoy most with games and that is playing franchise mode and trying to build up a team through that. However, other games such as Call of Duty 4, I have put many multiples of times more play time into that game online than I have offline. I guess I'm a living hypocrite in that regard
 
# 17 CMH @ 07/30/08 04:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeonosisX
Nice write up Carlos and don't worry about what rs said about the article.
Haha. You guys make it seem like he hurt my feelings.

I really appreciate his criticism. I wasn't offended in anyway. I think he brought up a good point and whether or not it mattered in regards to this article, it matters in regards to writing and that's something I'll take with me in the future.
 
# 18 Ruffy @ 07/30/08 05:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by YankeePride
Haha. You guys make it seem like he hurt my feelings.

I really appreciate his criticism. I wasn't offended in anyway. I think he brought up a good point and whether or not it mattered in regards to this article, it matters in regards to writing and that's something I'll take with me in the future.
I agree with some of his criticism in a lot of "articles" are not articles but commentary or opinions....which is fine....alot of threads in the forums are started with a commentary just like that one....which I do enjoy reading.

No reason to bash either guy.

Instead of articles you guys should all be referred to as columnists......writing a column has the oportunity to be full of opinions and fun stuff....just a suggestion.

Either way content is a good thing.

I agree the shift to online only for some things is alarming...although NHL 08 was the 1st sports game I strictly played online....sure I encounter a dozen cheats but i just quit and started up again....i played over 500 online games which shocked the hell out of me...i had more wins than losses but i got nailed with a loss alot becuase I'd just quit the second i realized i was playing a cheat in the top 100.

I like some of the things online has brought.....being able to stay in touch with friends who went I went to University with and spent many late nights playing seasons and franchises with....being able to meet online and do that again is what is fun for me so i do enjoy that.

I could care less about the rankings and the leaderboards and think alot of that stuff should be done away with.

I prefer to play most of my sports games offline...I can tweak the sliders so that the comp can just as easily whoop my azz if im not playing well.....like MLB the Show..

I almost never play madden or ncaa online against someone I don't know or have met.

As for OS its a great place to get online with people that want some good fun...realism and comradary and the likes...

A great example is the Monday Night Hot Shots Golf 4 league Im in with a bunch of OSer...we all have different skill levels but its alot of fun to get online and goof off....witnessing great and bad shots....and really giving a game alot of replay value....I definately lookforward to the Monday night meetups.

But in the end its do what makes you happy...offline or offline.
 
# 19 imbout @ 07/30/08 08:11 PM
This is a great testimonial for all us gamers that really don't enjoy all the online stuff. I am in the same boat and I get chastised all the time for playing offline with my sports games. That is the way that I enjoy the game the most and I love it. Great post!!!
 
# 20 demencia_total @ 07/30/08 11:25 PM
I've always been at a crossroads when it comes to online. It can be fun playing with friends, but playing strangers results usually in the same tactics again and again, which is the nature of a lot of gamers as Carlos stated: winning at all cost. And when I say "friend", I mean people who you know in real life or at least come into communication often. The reason I make this distinction is that I've added people online who I've come in contact with but it always results in a futile attempt to start a proper game in games that have more than 1vs1. Everyone wants something different, then starts making their wishes known in a less than civil manner through the mic, and if their wishes aren't met, then they begin to annoy everyone in full force and/or leave the session. Again, It's just people being people, it's not like this doesn't happen in some other form in other facets of life.

I remember the days of playing games like Age of Empires on LAN with a bunch of people who were less than adept at strategy games because we weren't hardcore gamers at all, but that was one of the most enjoyable gaming experiences ever because even in our vast ignorance of pc's and such games that were deemed "too geeky", everyone was on the same page of having fun with whatever it was we were doing. After work, some would stay at the office to use the computers and the Dreamcast and we would just battle it out in Marvel vs Capcom 2, NBA 2k1, Rival Schools, etc.

After that experience, I relived it with Halo LAN parties even if I had no idea what I was doing and kept getting murdered over and over again. Eventually, I got pretty good at it and bought an Xbox and ventured into Halo 2 online, which cemented my feelings on online gaming. When I played with friends, it was awesome and even when you lost, you gained something from the experience. When I played against strangers, it felt like a routine where everyone would use the cheapest tactics while screaming incoherently through the microphone. It didn't matter if they were 12 or 24, it was the most immature crowd of gamers that made me really wary of competition online. I know this isn't the case for ALL games as I realize that example is coming from one of the most overrated - and probably most hyped - games in history, but the trend has continued through sports games and pc gaming, even if to a lesser degree.

In sports it's a little easier to find competitors that are willing to play a more "relaxed" style through sites like OS since it's mainly 1vs1, but now with the addition of 5vs5 in bball and 10vs10 in football, the same problems are going to arise. "YOO STUPID #*&$*&$ IM LABRON!" I can already hear them shouting in the lobby. If I could amass at least five friend gamers that were online pretty frequently I probably wouldn't be writing this, but being in my half 20's, most of my friends don't even own a console, much less ventured online. Most of us have partners to attend to, studies, jobs, some have kids, activities, etc.

Unless you're willing to venture into online socializing, it ain't gonna work for a lot of us. I think online works great for people who are willing to do this and for the younger ones who have all the time in the world and grew up with the newer generations of gaming, but I'll always remain wary of it.
 

« Previous12Next »

Post A Comment
Only OS members can post comments
Please login or register to post a comment.