Developers and players alike seem to care more about multiplayer than singleplayer these days. With Xbox Live and such, there is less and less incentive to make an exceptional single player experience. As time goes on, there will be a surge of online multiplayer games having absolutely no singleplayer. Huxley and Warhawk are just the beginning of this shifting trend for consoles. And for games that will have singleplayer they will also have multiplayer. The singleplayer experience will get shorter and shorter and may eventually fade away entirely. I fear for the future of console videogames.
thats not true....online gaming is huge on the PC....far bigger then on the Consoles...yet their are still plenty of good Single player games (STALKER)
Solely singleplayer games will become sparse? Hmm, interesting theory but some games are all about the singleplayer, especially heavily story-driven games such as Metal Gear Solid. Sure MGS3:S had multiplayer but many games will still have singleplayer as the core of the gameplay so as long as stories exist, so will singleplayer games.
Multiplayer is a huge part of a game. It extends the singleplayer experience and greatly enhances the replayablility of a game. Some games can survive without a singleplayer (Shadowrun).
Multiplayer is a huge part of a game. It extends the singleplayer experience and greatly enhances the replayablility of a game. Some games can survive without a singleplayer (Shadowrun).StreetRacer91
I doubt the end of the single player game is anywhwere in the near future, not with things like achievements and trophies to give gamers a greater incentive to revisit each level.
In my opinion,there is too much of an emphasis in multiplayer these days.People these days act like a game must have multiplayer to be good.Metroid Prime 3 will be great.Why?Because its single player will be fantastic (assuming there will be no mutliplayer.We still know nothing about if it will have multiplayer/online or not).Same with Bioshock.I'd take a quality single player of multiplayer any day.
Developers and players alike seem to care more about multiplayer than singleplayer these days. With Xbox Live and such, there is less and less incentive to make an exceptional single player experience. As time goes on, there will be a surge of online multiplayer games having absolutely no singleplayer. Huxley and Warhawk are just the beginning of this shifting trend for consoles. And for games that will have singleplayer they will also have multiplayer. The singleplayer experience will get shorter and shorter and may eventually fade away entirely. I fear for the future of console videogames. AvIdGaMeR444
Multiplayer only games = no real games = the end of gaming, hope it never happens, after all a market only with multiplayer games could only turn back to single player ones
But at the same time, as multiplayer games become more successful, they also become less accessible. I know that I'm not the only one who walked into the Halo 3 beta only to be owned until boredom; I also know that I'm not the only one who found the lack of narrative guidance diminishing to experience. Like many out there, increasing numbers simply aren't the sort of incentive we're looking for after completing identical match, after identical match - some of us prefer a narrative experience with a memorable story as a reward for our efforts. I choose games over sports for one reason: games have the freedom to break free from the shackles of repetition. Number after number, or a plot on-par with award-winning novels... which do you choose? Or more importantly: which does the industry choose?
But at the same time, as multiplayer games become more successful, they also become less accessible. I know that I'm not the only one who walked into the Halo 3 beta only to be owned until boredom; I also know that I'm not the only one who found the lack of narrative guidance diminishing to experience. Like many out there, increasing numbers simply aren't the sort of incentive we're looking for after completing identical match, after identical match - some of us prefer a narrative experience with a memorable story as a reward for our efforts. I choose games over sports for one reason: games have the freedom to break free from the shackles of repetition. Number after number, or a plot on-par with award-winning novels... which do you choose? Or more importantly: which does the industry choose?project343
But dont forget that there will ALWAYS be a market for single player games. Why I dont get with many posters in SW is that they are quick to assume false things. Many ppl say that if Wii wins the console war, everyone is going to forget about state-of-the-art grpahics and do ugly graphics. That is simply not the case. Wii is selling becasue there is a market.
If there is a market overload of multiplayer games, some ppl will look for alternative styles of gaming, such as singleplayer. Dont worry if mulltiplayer is being favoured more nowadays. Some developer out there will realize that if there is too many mp games, there is an open market for sp games and is good for business.
But at the same time, as multiplayer games become more successful, they also become less accessible. I know that I'm not the only one who walked into the Halo 3 beta only to be owned until boredom; I also know that I'm not the only one who found the lack of narrative guidance diminishing to experience. Like many out there, increasing numbers simply aren't the sort of incentive we're looking for after completing identical match, after identical match - some of us prefer a narrative experience with a memorable story as a reward for our efforts. I choose games over sports for one reason: games have the freedom to break free from the shackles of repetition. Number after number, or a plot on-par with award-winning novels... which do you choose? Or more importantly: which does the industry choose?project343
Warhawk was such a disapointment. If you want to give me 1 good play mode, make it single player.
but i think you're right. When companies talk about games, all they say is what they can give us in multiplayer options. This really bugs me because i don't like multiplayer all that much. i might play with a few friends from time to time, bu i very much prefer gaming alone, so i can have some sort of story to advance through.
But dont forget that there will ALWAYS be a market for single player games. Why I dont get with many posters in SW is that they are quick to assume false things. Many ppl say that if Wii wins the console war, everyone is going to forget about state-of-the-art grpahics and do ugly graphics. That is simply not the case. Wii is selling becasue there is a market.
If there is a market overload of multiplayer games, some ppl will look for alternative styles of gaming, such as singleplayer. Dont worry if mulltiplayer is being favoured more nowadays. Some developer out there will realize that if there is too many mp games, there is an open market for sp games and is good for business.
Get it?
Fkid
Obviously extremes won't be hit, but you're missing the grey area. With the general market focused on multiplayer experiences, there will be less, and less developers creating quality singleplayer experiences (as rare as they already are). The same thing goes for the Wii, as developers care less, and less about quality production values, there will be less, and less quality-games available. Ubisoft, and EA have already jumped the bandwagon, in that they're focusing a heavy fraction of their teams on mediocre, quick-cash titles. With these developers preoccupied with money, there are less quality games being made. The industry as a whole will move closer to greed as uneducated consumers accept that filth.
Single player goes...I GO...With the fading "splitscreen coop" im getting less and less interested in gaming these days...Gaming is for friends and family to share together ...NOT online alone..
I thought I was clear enough. It's an advantage games have over sports. Multiplayer games are very similar to sports, so I figure that it was a valid comparison.
Gaming is for friends and family to share together ...NOT online alone..MOHaashkilla
Who says who can't play with friends, and family online? I do. Heck, I hardly play online games unless my friends are on, and they're on almost every night. And yes, I'm talking about friends I see every day... in person.
I thought I was clear enough. It's an advantage games have over sports. Multiplayer games are very similar to sports, so I figure that it was a valid comparison. I disagree greatly.
But this is not the proper thread to run into arguements about games vs sports.
pfft...okay whatever. SP is more important than MP. MP is fun and I love it a lot, but nowadays devs are just addin MP just because it's what other devs are doing and because of that sometimes the SP is worked on as hard as it could be. Of course there are games that are just MP which is cool and I'm sure they'll be hella fun, but without SP games will become generic if everyone starts to take that aspect out I mean.
Log in to comment