An FPS can survive without a good campaign but it can't survive with a bad multi-player. Unless, of course, it's a single-player only game like Bioshock or HL2.
To me, single player and story are the most important thing in an FPS. One might argue that multiplayer tends to get mindless, not to mention that it's plagued with cheaters, hackers, and immature people who cuss incessantly. I think multiplayer is emphasized way too much in advertising and gaming. We have Homefront coming up on March 15 here, and I'll bet there are people who won't even touch the campaign in favor of the multiplayer, including mindlessly blowing up strangers online and incessantly cussing in lobbies.
I buy the shooters with good multiplayer but I usually play the singleplayer first and I have to agree that developers are paying less attention to detail to the single player than they should.
An FPS can survive without a good campaign but it can't survive with a bad multi-player. Unless, of course, it's a single-player only game like Bioshock or HL2.
Hickamie14
So basically you are saying that a MP FPS doesnt need a SP campaign and a SP FPS doesn't need MP? SHOCKING! As Yatzee sais a game should be able to stand on its own. And I would take spit screen over online anyday. What people dont have enough friends to come over for some spit screen co-op anymore?
its irrelevant to the masses of CoD fans who buy it year in year out for the multi and prestige to 10 or w/e number is set upon.I see it in my friends list a few of my firends only have trophies related to zombies and maybe 1 or 2 missions.
But apart from that theres a lot of people who like decent story driven FPS's like myself.Bulletstorm was primarily a single player romp and damn it was good old fashioned fun.
people will praise an FPS game for its multiplayer and completely ignore how weak the campaign is (like in the case of black ops or ODST)
people will bash, pan, and nitpck an FPS game for its multiplayer (or lack thereof) and comepletely ignore the amazing singleplayer campaign (like bulletstorm, killzone 2, resistance 2, MW2). crysis 2 and KZ3 seem to be the latest victims of attacks based on this mentality.
so does the campaign just not matter anymore? is multiplayer the only reason why FPS games exist?
arbitor365
IMO, a solid single-player campaign and story are still welcome things to have in an FPS. Also, its a great way for noobs to learn the ropes before entering multiplayer.
I just remeber old fasion fps that could have a great and long campaign and great multiplayer. Now it seem like developers focus too much on the multiplayer aspect of a game than the single. Its a little frustating when you buy a game with a short single player and are forced to play multiplayer to get your moneys worth.
Bulletstorm has been the first fps to focus on a great single player experience in a while. At least in my opinion
people will praise an FPS game for its multiplayer and completely ignore how weak the campaign is (like in the case of black ops or ODST)
people will bash, pan, and nitpck an FPS game for its multiplayer (or lack thereof) and comepletely ignore the amazing singleplayer campaign (like bulletstorm, killzone 2, resistance 2, MW2). crysis 2 and KZ3 seem to be the latest victims of attacks based on this mentality.
so does the campaign just not matter anymore? is multiplayer the only reason why FPS games exist?
arbitor365
ODST had one of the best Halo campaigns. It was just too short.
Log in to comment