In this day and age most games have some form of multiplayer, a lot of gamers like multiplayer as it gives them something to do with the game after they finish the story however does multiplayer equal Re-playablility?
Yes. MW2 had a 6 hour campaign yet i had an online time of 10 days, more than i have put into other games with a longer campaign.
I disagree. I think it's more about the single player experience. Multiplayer adds to a game's replayability, but it isn't the basis.
Tell that to Battlefield, Call of Duty, Warhawk, Killzone, Halo, Gears of War, etc. Multiplayer is most definitely the basis of those games.
@vickers500 yes but they are mostly FPS, for example, i know a lot of people who played MotorStorm singleplayer a lot (including me) because some maps have alot of routes, made for different vehicles, i wanted to check out all the alternatives and that kept me playing the same map for long time. Things like this are nice additions for a game, i just hope more games find a way to do this.
Tetris everyone? Also, you can spend hundred of hours on any good RPG games like FF series or Mass effect.
Bad example. MW2 is an online game with a tacked-on SP campaign. Of course online multiplayer "extends" the game -- that's what it was built for. Personally, there are lots of SP games that at least for me have all sorts of replayability without needing multiplayer. I think I played RE4 at least 20 times, for instance. This gen, I've gotten 6+ playthroughs out of Dead Space, Uncharted, Uncharted 2, and MGS4. (The last two have multiplayer, but I never seriously touched either). A well-designed SP game really doesn't multiplayer to have replay value.
Meh, it varies from game to game but good multiplayers are rarer than good single player games so far, imho, and far too many games which would have been better spending all the dev budget on the SP have a MP because they THINK they have to have one for their Metacritic(marks knocked off at review for no MP etc) and because they can't think of an easier way to say their game has replay value. I think DS2 might fall into this trap and having played a little AC:B MP I think that already has-the game's aren't really suited and though I think BOTH the ideas come up with are worth playing I just don't think there's going to be a heavy Brotherhood community playing in six months-people are quite vanilla about the online games they keep playing and big budget console releases should consider other routes if theirs isn't a game with classically accepted MP. Even a lot of FPS games could do without as nobody seems to want to leave their mainstays(the four or five big games on each platform that we always play)so wouldn't the money be better used elsewhere than wasted on MP? Seriously, SC:C is another that has a player base now that doesn't really make you think the outlay on the online was worth it. I think a lot more research into how long people play a lot of the online modes of the non mainstream online games(Singularity, for instance, barely had anyone playing the MP AT RELEASE)as I reckon it's often a case of quickly diminishing returns. Vanquish did the classic speedrun allure and high score approach and many other games should look to that clever backward looking approach or even the genius online incorporation of Demon's Solul's. Whatever, neither is the single answer to this question and we all know at least that much.
depends on the game. I've prolly dumped more time in to Oblivion then most multiplayer games.
I would argue no. I have played through Dead Space 4 times on PS3 and got the platinum. Afterwards I sold it, regretted it, and am working on 100% on the 360 version, with 18 hours already played. Value is subjective. Some games really appeal to your taste as a gamer. Just because a game lacks multiplayer doesn't mean it doesn't have any re playability. Also, lets not forget games like Oblivion and Fallout. I easily put 150 hours + into that game. Or how about Super Meat Boy? You could sink dozens and dozens of hours into a game thats only $10/15 dollars. Some gamers appreciate a more social and/or muliplayer component and cannot fathom the value of a single player only game. You can debate the topic forever and there is no right or wrong answer :-)
Not necessarily true! Fallout 3. Oblivion. Super Meat Boy (Don't know about you guys but I go on every day just to beat a couple dark world levels.) Plenty of other games it all depends on what you like to play!
I didn't read your comment until after I posted. I listed the same games, except one, that offer great value as single player games :-p You should give Dead Space a try.
Haha yes I just read you comment! Dead Space I would love to play... One day. I just have nightmares after playing horror games. Some people say it isn't too scary but I thought some of Half Life 2 was scary :p I would shit my pants playing Dead Space.
:-) The first couple of times I played the game were especially scary experiences. Its worth the soiled pants though, lol. I feel sort of desensitized to the horror now as I know what to expect, haha. Its a great action/survival game and quite difficult on impossible. I guess thats why I come back to it. Also, the atmosphere of the game is convincing and the science fiction/story pretty good. I promise I don't work for EA :-p
Looks at GT5. I've been playing it constantly since release and I haven't even touched the online races yet.
nah replayability can be based on thigs like infinite level up systems like in demons souls are scoreboards that reward you with earning a lot of points i mean look at classic games like pac man and tetris games that we are still playing 20 years since they were made that is replay value right there
No way. In fact, I find the online section is more boring due to the lack of set pieces.
this is weird lol. i made a comment about this not an hour ago! did it inspire this article? and, yes, it is largely true. it's one of the biggest cons of this industry at the moment. those that like single player are getting cut down versions of games because the industry (reviewers and those with invested interests) are promoting it heavily. i don't want to shoot, be shot, respawn, rinse and repeat, i want to be absorbed in a world that takes me away from the this world. look at Castlevania... 20 hours!!! of pure escapism. more please. games that have longer and more involved singlepayer have a longer shelf life because servers die or get closed down and if you are only left with a 3 hour game, you are not going to sell it in a years time (not without garnering resentment)
i think it was you, lol thanks for the insperation
not necessarily but its almost become the standard now as we are seeing fewer and fewer single player incentives and unlockables in favor of multiplayer. i dont really play any multiplayer games to be honest. im usually just stictly a single player kinda gamer and most of the single player re-playability is given to us in the form of dlc. this doesnt apply to all single player games but its a common occurrence.
Not for me - Online has never been a consideration. I've played DEAD SPACE more than just about any other title recently and it has no online, at all. I played through the COD: MW campaign and never touched the online component, and I've been driving my way through GT5 every single day since launch and haven't been online (to play, that is), once. But I guess there'll be someone saying the exact opposite, which proves there's no such thing as 'standard' in gaming...
Many online games are basically doing the same thing over and over , ad nauseum with very little variations . I dont believe a single second that a cod offer more variety online than the sheer array of possibilities of a Hitman ... only more hours of the same (wich i personally wont call replayability) . A few genre offer variety online due to their inherent nature ,like fighting games (a roster of completely different from each other characters , and its chess strategy nature , plus the skills of the player and opponent as an actual factor make for a few unique experience each match) but imo they arent that numerous .
for certain players it is trophies & achievements...
I don't really care about trophies, but certain games like Demon's Souls and FF13 make it feel like a quest to me and make enough variety in it that it just feels like a part of the game! This is better replayability than any multiplayer and a game enemy tends to be less of a d!ck than human enemies... or teammates for that matter!
Online play is pretty much repetitive so that is not really replay value imo. Games like Fallout, Oblivion, Infamous, Mass Effect etc... are what I call replayable you can go through the entire game again, and different things happen. I am sure most gamers count that as replayability when it has online play, but for me it has never factored into if a game is replayable or not.
Some(most) people have a competitive nature about them and online gaming caters to this kind of personality! It just brings them joy to get the better of somebody! I had some friends who live life this way; everything's a competition and they become impossible to be around. They are also generally more prone to jealousy than normal. No matter how much more they have than you, they will hate you for the little you have!
I'd like to think replayability is subjective first of all, and it certainly does not solely rest on multiplayer, even though many new age gamers will say otherwise. A good game is a good game, a bad one is bad. Online play isn't going to make me like a bad game any more than what I already do.
Replayability doesn't hinge on a game having multiplayer in my view. I think all a game needs is to capture your attention and delight your pallet with what it brings to the table. Then there's other methods like harder difficulties, game collectibles, challenge rooms, alternative choices, continuing to play with your stats maxed out and much more. I just think that now a days it's easier to say "if I don't like the single player that much maybe I can get some enjoyment out of killing other people who also brought this otherwise mediocre title".
It didnt use to be, but now with teams putting major focus on Online, of course, I would like to see more co op myself as I find that better than online. HALO 4 Life for Online, off - line, Uncharted 2 any day for replay.
Single Player games suck, online is the where its at. You play an "Epic" single player, you beat it and your bored with it, you replay it and you know exactly whats gonna happen. "Oh no drake might off off the train, wait no he wont i beat the game already".
meh , you are describing is actually what fits many multiplayer games , especially current fps . I dont need a cristal ball or to launch the game to know that there will be a camper on the highest point of a map , among other things . Given how most people reproduce even worse pattern than AI in some mp games , i'll disagree . Show me a single cod game with more possibilities and path than say , again any Hitman . You can pick games that are completely linear like you did with Uncharted sure (even though all of those still provide extra challenges) ... but you can at least pick open solo based games , or rpgs among other things . There arent a lot of multiplayer games that propose much variety
You find less replayability in those tiny maps than in a whole single player level? Running through the same house 28,000 times, spawning in one of three areas and running through the same little area 10,000 times!
It should be based on both single player and multiplayer.
No. I still play the HL2 games all the time. Probably the most replayed games in my collection. Crysis was really fun to replay too cus you get a lot of different options each time..
For me it's a definite YES! because I'm a huge online gamer... Though, I always finish a campaign if a game has that...
Super Smash Bros Brawl.
I have replayed Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy Tactics and Civilization II more than any other games in my life. All of them single-player. (Yes, I do own COD4, Killzone 2, etc.)
No. This is the dumbest title I've read in 2011 (so far) The path of least resistant, that's what it seems like to me. In other words, "Hmmm, how can we make our game last longer? OOH LETS GIVE IT MULTIPLAYER!" Dumb resolution, to a non-problem. Make your game re-playable in other ways. Not every game needs multiplayer. Anyway, I'll "LOL" this thread and move on.
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.