Should Multiplayer be sold separately?

Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3 are both games with single player campaigns with multiplayer gameplay. While the multiplayer will including the standard deathmatches, team deathmatches, and capture the flag, the solo storyline is only 6-8 hrs long. Should the solo and multiplayer have an optional sold separately?

Sold separately as in Battlefield 3 multiplayer side could be bought for $50, the solo play $40, or $60 for all of it.

I do not like multiplayer and if I would get Modern Warfare 3 I would only get it for the campaign. Paying $60 for 8 hours is a little steep. However, if the game was sold at $40 for campaign I might actually consider on getting it.

Nope, no matter the game, I don't want that to happen. if you're not prepared to pay the price for CoD games, considering they go down in price extremely slow, then you just have to be careful for some good sales (they do go on sale from time to time, mostly retail tho, but even digital these days - since BO -)

That would be something COD would do.

No would be another way to charge an arm and a leg for games...

Delete this thread before EA or Activision see it!!

Delete this thread before EA or Activision see it!!

QQabitmoar

HAHAHAHA oh god thanks for that joke.

I wouldn't say sold separately, but the OP is on to something.

It's very rare to have a game with good single player and good multiplayer. One element is often lacking. I'm hoping that in the future there are games that are more narrowly focused into that they want to focus more of their reinforces into one or the other rather than tacking on part on.

Games should come with everything in one single package including multiplayer, single player and ALL the content (none of this limited or preorder bonuses) or day one DLC.

Absolutely, and they shud charge 60$ for each with lotsa DLC on day 1

As long as the sum of the parts costs the same as the whole why not? How many people play cod online exclusively (or vice versa). Seems like a much better way to compete with resold copies then online passes.

Also for games released in chapters look at Sam and Max or the Half Life. episodes

No.

I agree with this 100%. I'm unable to play modern multiplayer games, because my internet connection is way too slow. In my country, very few can afford a fast net connection. Its totally out of question for the common man. I cannot play any multiplayer game beyond Counter Strike 1.6. So it makes sense to release single player and multi player parts separately, at least in countries where fast net connections are unaffordable for the common man.

Absolutely, and they shud charge 60$ for each with lotsa DLC on day 1

JigglyWiggly_

worst idea i've read in a long time

No I don't think this is a good idea. Especially at the price points you brought up. If there is going to be a game with a short Campaign like BF3 but with no multi?? What's the point there's no replay value and is definitely not worth $40. Hell, even at $15 I'd question a game that short.

Sold separately as in Battlefield 3 multiplayer side could be bought for $50, the solo play $40, or $60 for all of it.Jd1680a

Yes, great idea ONLY IF they are price properly.

While in theory I guess this doesn't sound terrible, I simply don't trust publishers like EA and Activision to not find a way to spin this around so that they can nickle and dime us even more than they already are.

40$ for the BF3-campaign? Yeah, no.

Has everyone forgotten about convenience? Say if you bought retail - and there are still some people who still do - who wants to go to the shop twice? I think people could be put off too by the idea of 'paying twice" as well. Just the action of forking out twice could be troublesome and they might resort to just downloading the SP. Also, what if the campaign is crappola like in the case of BF3? You buy a single package and yeah you don't get a great SP but you get 100 hrs out of the MP. Paying separately for a bad campaign and broken co-op wouldn't go down well. biggest_loser

[QUOTE="biggest_loser"]Has everyone forgotten about convenience? Say if you bought retail - and there are still some people who still do - who wants to go to the shop twice? I think people could be put off too by the idea of 'paying twice" as well. Just the action of forking out twice could be troublesome and they might resort to just downloading the SP. Also, what if the campaign is crappola like in the case of BF3? You buy a single package and yeah you don't get a great SP but you get 100 hrs out of the MP. Paying separately for a bad campaign and broken co-op wouldn't go down well. FelipeInside

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="biggest_loser"]Has everyone forgotten about convenience? Say if you bought retail - and there are still some people who still do - who wants to go to the shop twice? I think people could be put off too by the idea of 'paying twice" as well. Just the action of forking out twice could be troublesome and they might resort to just downloading the SP. Also, what if the campaign is crappola like in the case of BF3? You buy a single package and yeah you don't get a great SP but you get 100 hrs out of the MP. Paying separately for a bad campaign and broken co-op wouldn't go down well. destinyDemon

Looks like something Activision might come up with. :P Seriously though, developers should focus on making both the singleplayer and multiplayer a great experience, instead of all the 6 hours campaigns we`ve been seeing recently.harry_james_pot

thats a terrible idea tc...so IF someone happenes to buy the solo and then later on down the road decide to buy the MP they will have then payed 90 bucks for the game!? no...slvrraven9

I like the idea but companies like Acitvision and EA would abuse it and chanrge $50 for each part. Maybe if every company was like Valve it would work and I think this idea works better digitally. I wouldn't mind paying $40 on steam for the SP only for COD or for the SP of Starvraft 2 on battle.net

If it was 30/30.. then yeah. It seems sony is actually in the process of trying this with KZ3.

[QUOTE="slvrraven9"]thats a terrible idea tc...so IF someone happenes to buy the solo and then later on down the road decide to buy the MP they will have then payed 90 bucks for the game!? no...FelipeInside

[QUOTE="slvrraven9"]thats a terrible idea tc...so IF someone happenes to buy the solo and then later on down the road decide to buy the MP they will have then payed 90 bucks for the game!? no...FelipeInside

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="slvrraven9"]thats a terrible idea tc...so IF someone happenes to buy the solo and then later on down the road decide to buy the MP they will have then payed 90 bucks for the game!? no...slvrraven9

LOL< perhaps we didn't understand each other. Basically, what I said was: the only way this would work if each part was sold cheaper or half the price of the full game.