60°

Successful Single Player Series? Don't Add Multiplayer

Simon looks at the recent announcement of Tomb Raider's multiplayer and says why games which are renowned for single player shouldn't give into multiplayer.

Read Full Story >>
gamentrain.com
StrongMan4115d ago

Multi player is a necessary evil these days with all the kids screaming "I won't pay $60 for a 10 hour game with no multi player". That puts devs in a position were they HAVE to put in multi player.

I'd rather pay $60 for a great 10 hour game than an open world repetitive game that is just go to point A and kill this person and come back to point B and I'll give you money missions over and over and over again.

8bitHero4113d ago

i dont pay $60 for a 10 hour game. multiplayer doesnt make me reconsider my option neither. i personally think $60 is too much of an asking price for a 10 hour game, and multiplayer doesnt make me reconsider since most multiplayers seem forced. ill be honest, if games cost $40 ill be willing to spend my money on it if its 10 hours. if the game is $30 chances are ill even impulse buy the game. but $60? your game better be near perfection for that price. (hint: not many games fall under near perfection)

but thats just my 2 cents. you see anarchy regain? im really really interested in it because it looks cool and its only $30. now lets say that same game was $60 and had "super realistic graphics" i wouldnt give it the time of day until it gets a price drop. its all about the price for me.

MikeMyers4113d ago (Edited 4113d ago )

Why are so many games $60 to begin with? A game like Starhawk might have been far more successful if they priced it maybe $40 for online only. How much is Call of Duty worth just for the single player experience?

There are so many issues at stake that nobody really wants to deal with. Why don't the platform holders offer a rental service for example? What they seem to be doing now with online passes and adding DLC and online multiplayer is trying to keep the consumer interest and stay with that product longer. Gamers have changed and probably play more games now per year than ever. So they cycle through them but by offering online play they stick around longer and feel like they are getting more value.

You can have a great single player experience but if it's only 8-10 hours long some see the $60 price out of reach. When you compare how many hours they spend on a game like Call of Duty then that $60 price seems way more reasonable.

krisq4113d ago

Yeah, and sometimes even platform holder can 'suggest' to add multiplayer to the game or else.

ZodTheRipper4114d ago

I would rather get both in one package since there are enough games out there that offer both. And with a very good single player campaign I can overlook a lame MP and judge the game as if it were a SP game.

ziggurcat4113d ago

just think of how much better that single player campaign would be if they hadn't siphoned resources away to produce a mediocre multiplayer component.

there are ways of adding replay value to single player game without resorting to tacking on multiplayer.

vickers5004113d ago

"just think of how much better that single player campaign would be if they hadn't siphoned resources away to produce a mediocre multiplayer component."

I always hear this argument, but it still doesn't really make sense for most SP games that tack on multiplayer, considering most developers put different teams on both single player and multiplayer. You might say "oh, well both teams could work on sp", but the thing is, chances are high that the team they hired for mp, are ONLY good at multiplayer, people who have never done a single player game in their life (or have never done a good one).

Then you say "it would be so much better". Really? I highly doubt it. It might be a little bit longer by about 4 or 5 hours, but honestly it's probably just going to be the same repetitive 5 hours over and over again. I hear people using Bioshock 2 as an example. Bioshock 2 was great, but nowhere near as amazing as the first. Bioshock 2 sp didn't fail to meet expectations because there wasn't a highly lengthy campaign, it failed to meet expectations because it wasn't as good as the first Bioshock. Adding 4 or 5 more hours of killing splicers/big sisters, and item fetching wouldn't have made it MUCH better, it would have just made it longer, and a little bit better.

If you look at a game that tacked on mp (that used a single studio and didn't outsource the mp)and look at the sp and forget for a second that the mp even existed, if it's an amazing game, then yeah, you can probably make the case that the game suffered because of the multiplayer. But if you look at the game as if the mp never existed and it's not amazing, then chances are very high that the game wouldn't have been significantly better without mp, it would have just been a longer version of the same average quality game.

I do want devs to stop "tacking it on" if what they're tacking on is just going to be average, but if they put a lot of effort into it, I'm all for adding mp to a lot of games. I'm glad Mass Effect 3 added mp, because they did it right, they made it amazing and addictive and extremely fun. I'm glad Uncharted 2 added multiplayer because that was really fun as well. I'm not glad that Dead Space 2 added mp, but the campaign didn't really suffer for it, so no harm no foul there.

I'm not against devs adding mp, just as long as they do it right and put a lot of effort into making it good. If it's just some half assed attempt at checking off some box of features or trying to attract cod addicts, then I want none of it.

Ken Levine at Irrational Games had the right approach. They actually had several working multiplayer modes, but he realized they didn't work/fit and weren't good enough to be in Infinite, so it was scrapped.

CanadianTurtle4113d ago

There are many games out there that have both online, but a spectacular single player offering. In fact, you could just get the game for the offline portion only, and still have a blast.

These include Uncharted 2 and 3, Gears of war 1-3, Resistance 1-3.

NukaCola4113d ago

Why is Tombraider taking so much flack for adding some MP that looks decent so far? Pretty much every game now a days has co-op or some form of MP.

8bitHero4113d ago

i believe thats the problem, not every game needs MP, and tomb raider definitely didnt need it, especially since the multiplayer seems to be an uncharted clone. im sure the game will be awesome, but why add mp that no one asked for, especially if you're gonna play it safe and just make it a copy of uncharted's.

bluetoto4113d ago

Funny, that's exactly what was said about UC's mp and now it's being "copied" by a series that perceded it.

DoctorNefarious1234113d ago (Edited 4113d ago )

Multiplayer adds replay value to a game. So as long it doesnt damage the single player experience I'm all for it. Just look at uncharted 2.

Show all comments (15)
130°

70 percent of devs unsure of live-service games sustainability

With so many games fighting for players' attention and interest losing out over time, time sink games are at risk of eventually losing steam.

Read Full Story >>
gamedeveloper.com
thorstein1d 21h ago

It was worrisome to begin with.

It's a niche genre with only a handful of hits that can stand the test of time.

Cacabunga1d ago

I like the sound of that!! I will for sure never support these gaas games.
Sony must be shocked at gamer's reaction, making them cancel a few of these and hopefully go back to the good heavy hitters they had us used to..
now bring on that PSPro reveal and show us some SP 1st party awesomeness.

CrimsonWing691d 20h ago

What’s to be unsure of!? Look at the ratio of success to failure!

DarXyde1d 3h ago

It's pretty ridiculous.

Imagine having a breadth of data at your disposal to see the statistically low success rate of these games, only to be laser focused on the exceptional case studies.

shinoff21831d 19h ago

Yes. Stop all the live service bs.

jznrpg1d 18h ago

Only a few will catch on. You need a perfect storm to be successful in GaaS and a bit of luck on top of that. But a potential cash cow will keep them trying and some will go out of business because of it.

MIDGETonSTILTS171d 18h ago

Helldivers 2 manages just fine…

Keep production costs low… don’t just make custscenes until the mechanics and enemies are perfected first.

Make so much content that you can drip extra content for years, and the game already feels complete without them.

Most importantly: make weapons, enemies, levels, and mechanics that will stand the test of 1000 hours. This might require more devs embracing procedurally generated leveled, which I think separates Helldivers 2 from Destiny’s repetitiveness.

Show all comments (15)
60°

The Battle Pass Is The Worst Thing To Happen To Modern Gaming

Nameer from eXputer: "Some exceptions aside, I don't think the battle pass is a net positive for gaming with how they're implemented in most live service titles."

got_dam1d 23h ago

Battle passes AND meta gaming both.

DivineHand1251d 21h ago (Edited 1d 21h ago )

I like the way Helldivers 2 does battle passes. It allows you to make purchases on each level of the battle pass and gives you the option of choosing which item to unlock first. The more purchases you make using medals the further you progress. There is no timer and you can earn medals towards purchasing stuff via personal orders and Major orders.

I haven't played much live service games that have battle passes but I remember some games that have battle passes where you progress through it linearly using an exp system. What makes it really bad is that the battle pass will have like 50 or more levels with the cooler stuff being closer to the end. They also have an in-game shop that sells exp boosters so you can reach the end of the pass before it refreshes. Everyone ilse will have to grind their way through.

lucian2291d 20h ago

battle pass in fortnite is perfect; buy one and it buys the rest for every other season as it gives you more money than the first cost. so 8.50 and season ends with you getting 13.00, it pays for the next and you have some pocket change to save up for cash shop. All of which is optional

470°

PS5 Pro specs leak video taken down by Sony

Sony is taking actions as video by Moore’s Law is Dead, has been issued with a copyright claim.

Read Full Story >>
videogameschronicle.com
andy852d ago

And people say it's all fake because Sony haven't said anything 😂 conveniently forget the PS4 Pro was only announced 2 months before release.

BeHunted2d ago

It's fake. There's no factual evidence other than his own made up specs.

Hereandthere2d ago

What were the specks Sony was afraid of showing?

Shikoku2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Digital foundry put a video out saying what he leaked was exactly what they also knew about the PS5 PRO. So no it's not just stuff he made up

Babadook72d ago (Edited 2d ago )

If it’s fake what copyright does MLID infringe upon?

😂

andy852d ago

Aye because they'd go to the effort of copyright claiming it if it didn't exist 🙃😂 you'd have to be a special kind to be thinking its not a thing by now

Cacabunga2d ago

They need to reveal it with uncharted killzone or a heavy hitter like this

Ironmike2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

U mean the specs that we'll established digital foundry which said these are the actual specs published a video on 2 weeks ago I mean they are only one of most trusted sites for tech information but they just made up a video for the sake of it

Christopher1d 21h ago

I would love for it all to be fake, but lots of people are saying they've seen/heard the same thing. But, man, we 100% don't need mid-gen upgrades when we're failing hard to optimize current hardware.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1d 21h ago
Seraphim1d 17h ago (Edited 1d 17h ago )

if I recall Sony lowered sales expectations for PS5 earlier this year. if that is the case we won't hear anything about a Pro until next year or shortly before/when it's dropping. After all, if the Pro was dropping this year/fiscal year they wouldn't have lowered expectations.

As for squashing rumors. Yeah, shit like this prevents potential buyers from adopting now, just like slim rumors in the past. It only makes sense to keep things under wraps from a business perspective. Despite living in a technological age of unfettered access to information we don't need to know whats going on behind closed doors be that at Sony, Nintendo, MS, or amongst any development studios. When the steak is done we shall feast.

JackBNimble1d 16h ago

By the time games are actually made to take advantage of the pro spec's the ps6 will be released or close to it.

jznrpg2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Just announce it already! I want to preorder one asap. But in reality they don’t want to lessen PS5 sales until Pro is ready to launch so I understand the business part of it. September is probably when they announce it with an early November launch like the PS4 Pro

Ironmike2d ago

Pro won't lessen sales sames ps4 pro never and the ps4 pro was more relevant at the time cos move to 4k this not needed

RaidenBlack2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Yea, my brother got his PS4 (coz of a good deal) after the PS4 Pro's release.

darthv722d ago

^^same here. I got a base 4 for only $100 off a guy who bought the Pro. then a few months later I found a guy on craigslist selling a pro for $100 because it was left behind by his former roommate who moved out. That was the beginning of my obsession to buy up the different variants of the PS4 that were released.

As of now I am really only missing the 500m one and the gold slim but otherwise I have pretty much all the other retail ones. https://consolevariations.c...

crazyCoconuts1d 18h ago

Anyone with 4K that appreciates 60fps is gonna disagree about it not being needed.
DLSS is a god send for Nvidia, and there's been nothing like it for AMD...yet ...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1d 18h ago
DeadlyFire1d 23h ago

They will announce it around E3 timeframe about May-June whenever they do a showcase for the year.

neutralgamer19922d ago

Just announce it this thing will sell well

Ironmike2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

I don't think it will pll still haven't seen the potential of ps5 yet

Cacabunga1d 21h ago

agreed, but it might sell if they announce some 1st party games to lead the way. if people see the difference with the base version they can move on. for my sake I am still gaming mainly on PS4 (still not finished with RDR2 due to lack of gaming time). I have a huge backlog on PS5 I am hoping to get into.

mark3214uk2d ago

why? game makers havnt even come close to maxing out current spec yet, were getting al lthese new TFlops and game maker are making crappy remakes not worthy of the ps3

Minute Man 7212d ago

The guts of the 5 and X are 5 years old

fr0sty1d 19h ago

People keep saying that, yet we still have games running at near HD resolutions, 30fps, and ray tracing features turned off.

PRIMORDUS2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

I would take that video and upload a torrent of it, fuck that copyright bullshit. If your going to do something that has a chance of being taken down, make a torrent first share it. Then Sony or any other company is helpless and you can laugh in their faces, taunting them to try to take it down 🤣

LoveSpuds2d ago

With kind of analysis and advice, you could be a lawyer for Trump!🤣

tronyx122d ago

As much as the PS4 Pro didn't represent a major % in the playerbase, announcing a 'better' model will hinder sales from the 'base' model. They are right, business-wise.

Show all comments (36)