Are you surprised by games which don't have online features but gain AAA status?

I only care about single player experiences, I'd take issue if a game got down rated simply because it didn't have multiplayer.

AnnoyedDragon

Games used to be good before online gaming, you know.charizard1605

Clearly online is a big part of this gen and games that don't come with such features usually have a hard time getting noticed compared to games with online features. It has almost become mandatory for games to have some form of online integration to stand out, singleplayer experiences just doesn't do it for most anymore. I also believe gamers, or system warriors (lol) feel more safe hyping a game for AAA status if it has online play. What do you guys reckon? Does Online play further helps the game to gain AAA status?Swift_Boss_A

I ma not surprised. Online is not required for a game to be great. I actually prefer to have no online than one that feels tacked on.

A singleplayer game does not need online play, and people who critize a game for not having online should just shut up and stick with the multiplayer focused games like CoD and Halo.

A game like Bioshock, Batman or Devil May Cry does not need online and should never be critized for not having it.

After all would you prefer the dev waste time tacking on a crap online mode, or focus on making the singleplayer experince even better?

Snagal123

sadly, Bioshock 2 has multi...

No, I'm more surprised when half hearted campaign titles get AA/AAA simply b/c a MP component was tacked on.

Online only enhances the experience, if the core gameplay itself is not good already it would just fail miserably online anyways. You don't slap online on just to make it good, GOW is the perfect example.

Online multiplayer is a nice perk, but it is by no means necessary. A lack of online support really shouldn't count against a game's score either. If anything the focus on multiplayer this gen has hurt what games are all about. Single player stories/campaigns are by far more important and shouldn't be sacrificed in any way because or multiplayer or even co-op.

Yea, if the story has lots of replay value sure. But something like CoD without MP would be catasrophic phailtastic fail :D

To me eaven Bioshock was a big kick in the you know what when it scored 9s... I mean it wasnt free roaming, nothing realy revolutionary etc. I mean story was fantastic but it was still classic 10-15 hour story only...

You don't need online to have a lot of fun and to get a lot of value out of a purchase.

What does surprise me are games that suck but gain some form of critical acclaim.

Not every game needs multiplayer. I would greatly prefer a quality singleplayer to quality multiplayer in most of the games I play.

not at all. most of my favorite games this gen are single player.

I prefer games without online features...some of the best story-driven pc games are ones without an online option. A game should gain AAA status because it's an exceptional game...not because it has online features. I'm not surprised at all.

Are you surprised by games which don't have good offline features but gain AAA status? like 3 hour SP modes

You don't need online to have a lot of fun and to get a lot of value out of a purchase.

What does surprise me are games that suck but gain some form of critical acclaim.

t3hTwinky

Are you surprised by games which don't have good offline features but gain AAA status? like 3 hour SP modes

darth-pyschosis

I'm more surprised at games with 5 hour single player campaigns getting AAA status.

[QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

You don't need online to have a lot of fun and to get a lot of value out of a purchase.

What does surprise me are games that suck but gain some form of critical acclaim.

dakan45

Well congratulations, you loved a crappy game.

Honestly, if RE5 hadn't been so focused on co-op I think it could've been a much better game.

Replayability is a factor when scoring a game. If a game lacks replayability, it should receive a lower score, period.

That said, if a game doesn't have multiplayer, or has a really bad multiplayer, then it should be really hard for that game to score highly. Games being as expensive as they are, shouldn't be just a few hours long. If a game is 10 hrs, and is only worth playing once or twice, it should be scored lower than a game with a multiplayer that's worth playing for hundreds of hours, regardless of how great that 10 hrs is.

Basically, if one game scores a 9 and another game scores an 8, then that should mean that I'm getting a better experience for my money than the game rated as an 8.

A game shouldn't necessarily be scored lower for not having multiplayer, but it should be HAMMERED if it doesn't have replayability.

metal gear solid 3 is the greatest game of all time. nuff said. /THREAD

[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

You don't need online to have a lot of fun and to get a lot of value out of a purchase.

What does surprise me are games that suck but gain some form of critical acclaim.

t3hTwinky

Well congratulations, you loved a crappy game.

i don't care of online multiplayer on consoles lol. Compared to pc console's on line multi-player is lame (imo) I purchased my console for single player only I don't give a s**t about online. I have my online multiplayer strictly on my pc and that's where it belongs

I'm surprised that a game that didn't have multiplayer didn't get AAA. I thought Uncharted was the best gaming experience I had this gen, but whatever Uncharted 2 looks like it will hit that AAA status from GS that it deserved lol

No. Because online in every case (aside from racing games) is just icing on the cake, an unnecessary, but welcome addition to a singleplayer experience.

Those are normally the best games for the year.

[QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

[QUOTE="dakan45"] I loved that game... dakan45

Well congratulations, you loved a crappy game.

No, 8.5 is a number, Farcry 2 is crap. It's crap because it has lousy gunplay, wimpy driving, and a faux sandbox enviornment made up of enclosed linear tracks linking small areas together each with perpetually respawning enemies. And yes, through deductive reasoning one can conclude that Assassin's Creed is also crap.

Honestly, if RE5 hadn't been so focused on co-op I think it could've been a much better game.

krunkfu2