BY WIL HARRINGTON: From GoldenEye to Fortnite, from Zork to Horizon Zero Dawn, gamers have long had a vast selection of great single player and multiplayer options. Is one mode genuinely better than the other or is a balanced experience between both best? Let us dive in, shall we?
Single player or co-op, I usually have like one competitive MP game on the side I'll play for a couple years, BF used to be my go to but 2042 sucks and I haven't really found a good replacement
Single Player
Having developers create rich, lore filled worlds and giving us great single play driven stories always appeal more to me. When developers do multiplayer games it always feels the effort just hasn't been put into it, like they are expecting replay value and overall fun to come from gamers gaming with each other, especially with close friends.
Rather having a well crafted level that will capture you and draw you in they'd rather create a short generic like level which you need to grind over and over with your party. It's like they are hoping you are so distracted playing with your friends, talking amongst yourselves that you won't realise and when you finally do click on and start to get bored they'll flash a shiny new update or expansion in your face which really is just the rest of the game you WOULD have gotten it if was purely single player.
The reason for that is by playing by yourself you don't have any distractions and you are concentrating more on the world on screen. You then start to notice if the gameplay is short, repetitive, not fun, buggy, generic etc which is why developers have to try harder when doing single player games. I always feel that's why developers want GaaS titles because it doesn't mean more money for them but less work as you drip feed the game content.
Single player.
Both.
I like tits growing games like jrpg and rage inducing games like Rocket League.
Singleplayer. But it is fun to play pvp/e MP at times.