How relevant are single player games today?

You could say stamp collecting is popular too then, that's not how it works, it's not because there is a market for it that it is popular. Ubisoft can say that it is a record breaking sales for them, the results are not that impressive if you compare it with multiplayer games.

How much did origins sell ? 8 million on all platforms. The last black ops sold 27 million, bf1 16 million, pugb 50 million, fifa 18 16 million.

and then we're not even talking about in game revenue, and I know you and many others disagree with this business, many people completely agree with ths business because they make up for it in terms of content.

For instance, I spend money on world of tanks but that game is packed with content, they add maps regularly, add more music, update the graphics, more tanks, more game modes, and you don't even have to spend money to play it. I don't hear people complaining they can spend money on this game.

I'm sure there are games that push it too far, but people always vote with their wallet, no one forces you to play a certain game or buy certain content.

I only really play single player games, I might dabble occasionally in to an online match but I simply do not have the time required to invest in becoming competitive in online games as by the time I would get to that level the game would be out of fashion and I would have to start all over again.

With SP games I can generally finish it in a week by grabbing a few hours as and when I can.

I prefer SP games than Mp games but I can some Mp games like MHW and God eater but those so callled good mp lacking of character development and same or lacking movement(such as shooters)mp games ,so boring

Very relevant going by the sales of GOW and Spiderman.

Super relevant. It seems only a few multiplayer games become out and out breakout hits. And when they do, people tend not to sway from them. Single player games with stories and their own set of gaming mechanics will always be welcome. This is what makes video gaming unique in of itself, is the fact they can be played alone and provide a challenge.

"It's not because there is a market for it that it is popular." Er, that's literally what it means. 8 million is a very good sales number. You act as if single-player games are doing it like the indies, struggling to push high six-figures or something. What's 8 times 60? 480. $480 million. Let's assume sales and discounts and simplify by disregarding Collector's Editions, DLCs and microtransactions and, say, slice that in half. $240 million is, empirically speaking, a shit-ton of money. Screw COD, screw Battlefield, screw battle royale, screw FIFA, screw all of that crap, and look at the raw numbers. There is a market there, and it's a big one, with plenty of money to be made. That is, by definition, popular. That is, by definition, relevant. Again, please stop thinking like the AAA publishers; single-player games make a lot of money, it's just that they don't make enough money to roll them into joints to smoke while bathing in a tub full of dollar bills.

I know how free-to-play games work. Did I mentioned I'm a Warframe player? Oh yes, I did mention I'm a Warframe player. I even spent a total of $50 on three 75% off coupons just because I enjoyed the game and thought the devs deserve my money. I'm now sitting on a pile of 6,800 Plats I don't really know what to do with, since I instinctively hate spending them. Still, I have no regrets. I have no problem with that business model in free-to-play games. It's the $60 (hah!) + Collector's Edition + Season Pass AAA games that do this shit that I have a problem with. You said it yourself: Battlefield 1 sold 16 million copies. Do the same super-duper-rough calculation again, and you get $480 million. That is a metric shit-ton of money. And yet they still expect you ALSO pay for premium currency and buy microtransactions until your face go blue. It's greed, plain and simple. Greed and their dumb Scrooge McDuck fantasies.

And don't give me that "no one forces you to buy it" excuse. Rule of thumb: if it makes them money, they want you to use it, and will "incentivise" you to do so. Just look at Middle Earth: Shadow of War; Warner Brothers - by their own admission, by the way - completely busted the Nemesis System in order to accommodate the microtransactions and incentivise people to use it. They broke it so hard that when it came time to remove it, they had to write a massive patch to rebalance everything so it wouldn't be a colossal chore to play. That's how badly these AAA publishers want your money. "Player choice" really just means you can choose to pay now, or when you're on the verge of throwing your controller at the wall.

I would hope so, the day single player dies is the day I am done with games! Don’t get me wrong I do spend some time with a assortment of mp games but sp is my bread and butter:)

They are very relevant on PC. It's the console kiddies who play Fortnite/COD/FIFA all day

I play the occasional cooperative online game, but 99% of my playtime is spent in single player games. I don't like competitive multiplayer partly because the environment is typically very toxic, and partly because I don't have the time to become good enough at them where I can be competitive.

When I play a game, I want to be immersed in the virtual world of said game.

I don't want to break my immersion by having to deal with toxic 13 year old kids that is what plagues multiplayer games these days...

Not really. MP games usually have more players overall and make much more money.

Still very relevant.

I only play single player.

Whenever I try play online stuff, it makes me feel like grade school teacher again. I'm surrounded by noisy, rude kids who run about the place in chaotic manner. You might like such crowds, I dont.