Will we soon see segmented $40 single player, $40 multi-player games? Plus, do developers get incentives to develop Move & Kinect functionality into their games?
How many people actually play single player in a FPS? I know mostly just jump into online
I do and it is really nice to find a single player that has an interesting grounded story that isn't some shoddy elaborate tutorial. It is a shame a lot of FPS games spend time on multiplayer than single player.
I do. In fact, I'm sometimes more tempted to jump back into the campaign after trying out all modes.
I am not playing single player unless it's Metro of HL3! $30 multiplayer is ok.
that's my thing most FPS have such a generic story most don't even waste time but when a game does something new or fresh or actually put some effort into single player than i am all for it military shooters just have hollywood style big moments to advertise and sell the game, every COD advertisement has generic explosions that they make look like the best game ever borderlands 2 dishonored metro last light bioshock some of the FPS i am interested in that actually put some efoort into its main single player stories
I'm all over the single player games, especially with first person shooters. You'll almost never see me online playing against kids 20 years younger than me. If you could match yourself up with players at least by decade I think I'd probably play more. The immaturity that's rampant online just sucks the fun out of them for me. If they do spin off the single player modes, as long as there's some decent length and some replayability, I welcome it. Cheaper price wouldn't hurt either.
I'd love to see that happen!
This would be great! Hate paying for extra content I'm never going to use.
Who will pay $40 for a FPS SP? It only lasts 7-10 hours and it usually has the most generic story ever.
People who are uninterested in playing online because it is either populated by 12-year-old douches, or adults who act like 12-year-old-douches. I played a lot online...until I came to my senses and realized that the "interaction" isn't worth the social torture. If it means that I have to pay for just single player and you have to pay for just online, then I am happy. I mean, I don't understand why people would be upset by this. Most gamers that I know play either one or the other. It is a rare individual who plays both. If you really want to play both, you just pay more.
I understand that, but 40$ is too much for 7-10 hours of gameplay. and why do I have to pay $40 extra just because I want MP? It should be included with the SP.
So if you end up not buying the single player because it isn't up to your quality standards, and a lot of other people do the same, companies learn from consumer feedback that they expect the single player game to get better. Now, that could backfire, and they could end up just ceasing to produce single player games. But, I don't think that would happen because there will always be demand for single player games in rural areas where internet access doesn't make multiplayer games as feasible. Personally, I prefer a game with great single player that may have some added multiplayer functionality. That's part of the reason why I play games on portables.
If I have a FPS game, I generally play the first 1/2 missions to get the feel for it, then I hop onto online. I can see why people wouldn't mind a SP and a MP separate game, depending on their preference, but for me, if I get bored of MP, I hope onto SP for a bit. In truth, it all depends on the game, if it was a CoD game, this would work very well indeed
I would rather pay $40 for the multiplayer, over the single player. While the single player isn't necessarily bad, I don't think it's worth $40. Not for a Cal of Duty game, anyway. Others that would be a fantastic price.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.