Death of the single player experience…or is it?

Lens of Truth writes - "More and more we are seeing the focus shifting from single player games to multiplayer. We see it more and more, and while online gaming is great, does it not come at a great cost to our offline experience?"

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
iamnsuperman2716d ago

I personally think single player games are not dying. Multiplayer is becoming more important but it is only overtaking some games and genres. There are still fantastic well rated single player games out there that do sell. AC is an interesting example single player going multi but the recent beta shows little improvement over ACB. At heart AC is a single player game. Uncharted is the same. They have revamped the multiplayer but they are just showing story after story scenes. That game sells because of its story telling and single player mode. FPS is that genre where single player is taking a back set because pitching your abilities against each other seems far more enjoyable. Single player will never die.

darthv722716d ago

i prefer a good single player story to get sucked in to. There are a few multiplayer games that are fun like the lego titles. Yeah they are cute and all but still fun to play with someone.

As for the fps games, that seems to be where all the multiplayer is centered around. Taking games that are more single centric and tacking multi on just doesnt seem right.

kreate2716d ago (Edited 2716d ago )

single player is dying becuz the major companies dont support it like they use to.
its all about multiplayer due to the online element.

MS knows firsthand why this is. they get to sell u gold memberships every year. they make money by advertising to u. being online gamers take the bait and buy DLCs. buy more games. try betas or demos and get excited for future releases creating hype.

ends up buying unneccessary things like gamer pics or extra clothing for ur stupid looking avatar.

renting/buying movies u already saw on tv/pc.

If u are online, MS has more control over u. easy to obtain customer information. trends of what gamers are doing. seeing how easy it is to convince the general public, extracting extra revenue of cashflow has never been easier in the eyes of the mighty Bill Gates and his ever-growing empire.

u cant sell gold membership to single player games. hence MS do not advertise these games as much.. thats why xbox died in japan. MS try to shove MP games like halo and gears down the throats of the japanese and they resisted.

in america however, we let MS shove halo/gears down our throats so they can position themself better.

equally, games like killzone and mag doesnt do so well in japan either. but sony provides other games japanese love. and thats why ps3 is still alive in japan.

Venjense2716d ago (Edited 2716d ago )

Single player is dying because GAMERS don't support it. Look as Dues Ex, the game has one of the best SP I've played in a while but the sales are mediocre.

ME2 had an amazing SP experience - the sales were mediocre.

Most people I know now buy 2-4 MP centric games a year (shooters and sports) and log 100s of hrs into them and ignore everything else.

I worry that deep SP experiences are on the way out and pay-to-play MP is on the way in.

Devs will have to charge for MP because people stick to a tiny number of games and play MP until the sequel comes out, never even considering new experiences.

kreate2716d ago (Edited 2716d ago )

Again, thats what the corporations want u to do.
Stay online and play MP and spend more money while ur there.
They dont want gamers to play single player games.

MS pour tons of money to convince ppl that MP is the way to go.
So ur friends play MP becuz their other friends play MP.

Its not like MP is anything new. Its been around since the 90s.

They cant make money off u if ur offline playing single player games.

My statement is in general.

WhiteLightning2716d ago (Edited 2716d ago )

What developers need to realise is to stop tacking multiplayer and co-op onto great single player games.

Look at Borderlands, L4D, TF2, Counter Strike, COD 4 onwards all good examples of games built up around multiplayer. Some don't even tack on a single player because it would be pointless like CS/TF2 for example. If someone was to say "Oh Valve should add a better single player mode onto L4D" someone would come out and say "Well it's a multiplayer games it wasn't meant for single player" yet that same person could moan on for a game like Elder Scrolls to have co-op in one of their titles............why, co-op or online in a game like Elder Scrolls, or even Fallout, wouldn't work. It wasn't built up around co-op so theirs no point tacking it on.

Yet some developers do....Dead Space 2, Bioshock 2, Resident Evils 5 forced co-op, Banjo Kazooie Nuts N Bolts etc when they could of spent their time and resources on making the single player longer and better.

Some games can do it right like Uncharted and Assassins Creed etc but theirs no point in tacking it onto great single player may aswell make a brand new games built up around the feature you want to include. Even tacking it onto a game which would ruin the genre of the game like Horror....can anyone please tell me that having Co-op in a RE title was a good idea, if you look at what it was going to be like WITHOUT co-op it looked amazing. Chris, Jill, Barry, Zombies, no Uroborus crap, solo missions, no chapter select, horror, tyrants, better plot, Chirs and Jill get to kill Wesker, a RE4 styled merchent, more open areas, effects like dehydrating and seeing mirages.

Proof that forced, tacked on co-op ruined RE

Iceballs2716d ago

I couldn't agree more. Dead Space 2 and BioShock 2 multiplayer was a complete waste of development time and disc space. Not every game needs MP but for some reason devs still add it like people will actually play it.

"Hey lets get on Dead Space 2 MP tonight" just no.

WhiteLightning2716d ago (Edited 2716d ago )

What's more sad is seeing these online/multiplayer obsessed people maon on for a game like Skyrim for example to have co-op where they could finaly get given their wish, go on it for like a month, get bored of it, then end up going back on a built up multiplayer game like COD with their friends....leaving single player gamers with a ruined Elder Scrolls game.

Obviously this probably happens to all games which get online tacked on. I'm sick of it because anyone who thinks great single player games need an online are not gamers in my books...because I don't see how a gamer can not appreciate great single player games like Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Mirrors Edge, Half life, God of War, Heavy Rain for example. I like to think of them as etheir COD fanatics since most obsessed online people come from the COD crowd or people who just HAVE a console (mostly an xbox because their cheaper) to pass the time........that's what most of them are in my opinion

GTRrocker2716d ago (Edited 2716d ago )

I actually liked the Dead Space 2 multiplayer. It isn't something I jump on every night like you said, but it was nice to at least have it for when I want to mess around online. The single player didn't suffer at all from having an online. The single player is great in that game. My favorite franchise this generation btw.

B1663r2716d ago

Or they could get creative with their online mode... For example, they could do forge game play elements instead of DM...

I am really bored to tears with DM game play.

vickers5002716d ago

I agree with you for the most part about tacked on mp/sp experiences, but I had an absolute blast with Resident Evil 5 on co-op, but then again, it was only my second RE game to ever play, so I wouldn't exactly call myself a long time fan of the franchise. Still, if you don't look at it from the perspective of an RE fan and just look at it as a standalone game, it's a really great game.

Also about Skyrim and co-op: Skyrim doesn't 'need' co-op, but it would make the game better, more enjoyable and more replayable (even though replayability really isn't an issue on Skyrim). Tackling side missions with a friend with more enemies, increased difficulty, a trading system and whatnot would be pretty fun, more fun in my opinion than going it alone. Still, I don't need co-op to enjoy Skyrim, but it would make it a hell of a lot more enjoyable for me.

WhiteLightning2716d ago

"but it would make the game better, more enjoyable and more replayable"

It wouldn't through it would ruin it....Bethesda have even said this themselfs.

People don't realise this you've said " it would make it a hell of a lot more enjoyable for me." but you don't think about howm much it would effect the game you love. What happens if it's not the same game when they add co-op because they have to sacrafice a lot of stuff.

Trust me it wouldn't make the game more enjoyable or better, it would make it worst. It's nice to know Bethesda acknowledges this

vickers5002716d ago (Edited 2716d ago )

"Bethesda have even said this themselfs."

I'll be the judge of that. Ninja Theory trashed Heavenly Sword a little while back basically saying it wasn't very good, as have a few other devs about other games. I'm not going to take a devs word on whether or not I'll enjoy something, that's my call.

"but you don't think about howm much it would effect the game you love. What happens if it's not the same game when they add co-op because they have to sacrafice a lot of stuff."

If a dev is talented enough, then it would have minimal to no effect at all, and they wouldn't have to sacrifice much. But even so, if they had to sacrifice say, 20 side missions to implement co-op, then they should do it. There's going to so much content in the game that like 90% of the people who play it won't ever fully complete each side mission anyways, so it would be better for them to create some variety in the gameplay through co-op, which would be better than a 20 reskinned fetch/skill quests.

"Trust me it wouldn't make the game more enjoyable or better, it would make it worst."

So I should just take some random strangers word for it? Some random stranger who in all probability is very cynical about anything multiplayer at all and therefore has no creativity or imagination in something being able to be great and still have both co-op and single player? No thank you. I tend to be a bit more optimistic, because I've seen it been done successfully before, and in the hands of a dev such as Bethesda, I fully believe they could pull it off.

And they didn't admit that it would ruin the game, don't twist their words around. They said they would have to make sacrifices and cut certain things, but they never said it would "ruin it". I'm betting some of those things weren't all that important anyways.

Shogun Master2716d ago

Single player games better not die or I will be though with gaming for good. Assassin's Creed adding MP was stupid and even Uncharted to a certain extent, gamers would have bought both and enjoyed both without mp modes IMO.

GTRrocker2716d ago

I think this is only kind of true for FPSs.

But on the other end of the spectrum, the campaigns for Killzone 2 and 3, and Resistance 2 and 3 were great to me. Some people on the forums argue that they weren't, but I had a blast with them. I don't really think that having online really takes away from a single player campaign all that much if the substance isn't there to begin with.

Venjense2716d ago (Edited 2716d ago )

I really liked the MP in those games but the SP could have been so much richer - none of those games are offering experiences like Half-Life 2 or Bioshock. They're typical FPS campaigns common to the COD generation of SP style - short and action packed but ultimately, very shallow and forgettable.

The SP in most games is more Steven Seagal than Martin Scorsese.

GamersRulz2716d ago

For me SP > MP any day.

I really love games with deep story that get you involved to the very end, that's why SOTC/MGS series are ranked up high on my all time favorite.

Show all comments (34)
The story is too old to be commented.