To much focus on multiplayer?

It seems that today everybody and their moms want the next big game to feature some robust multiplayer component that they can spend hundreds of hours pwning noobs online. Is it just me or are we focusing to much on competitive online, or co-op gameplay this generation?

I understand why we are. Online multiplayer, both co-op and competitive, is the ultimate way of extending the life of a video game. When you pay $60 for a game, you better get your $60 worth of gameplay. That I completely agree with. There is a large part of me that wants a good online component. After playing games like Halo 2 and Forza last generation, a strong online mode seems like a no-brainer when it comes to longevity of the video game.

There is still a part of me that could care less about a robust online mode. Instead that part of me wants to see the production values on the single player story to make the game extremely fun to play. This generation I don't think we have been treated to many story driven games that are extremely fun to play for the 10-15 hours they last. Games this gen feel like a 8-10 hour romp through gameplay that is suited for multiplayer, just so we can say we finished the game and moved onto the online part of it.

I am talking about both Call of Duty 4 and the Gears of War games. All three are extremely high rated, but the focus is off of the story and onto the online. Now I know what you are probably thinking, that the single player aspect of Call of Duty 4 and the Gears of War games was incredible, as it was. I just feel that the single player in all three titles were a bit rushed. They put you in some amazing scenarios in all three games, but they were over a bit to soon and left me a bit disappointed. Maybe I am just crazy (which there is a possibility), but I actually wanted to hear more of the history of Sera in Gears of War, or see some more of the Americans in Call of Duty 4 instead of just being some special ops team with the same ol "save the world" story line we have seen since the dawn of movies...

Another game that was in this boat even last gen was the Halo games. They seemed to put the focus on the competitive online mode rather than develop the story. Its a bit more obvious with Halo as there are now books and other games set in the world to set up and inform about the story (which I think is complete BS if you needed a book to really understand what happened in Halo 3 /rant). They tried to make up for this by putting in some 4 player co-op with some excellent designed levels. Still, even after the amazing gameplay I still felt a bit underwhelmed of what could have still been. The cut-scenes were top notch, but the story moved so fast that it could hardy be appreciated.

There have been a few games this gen who have taken the different rout. GTA4 for example may have skimmed down the content of the last game in the franchise, but they made up for that with by far the most immerse world and best story telling they have come up with yet (that is a matter of opinion of course, as this whole argument seemingly is but just role with it). Sure it had an online component, but that was nothing compared to the depth of the story and all of the characters. Another game this gen that was stand out for a single player experience was Ace Combat 6. That had a long overdue online component, but the single player was the best in the series (even if the story was a bit blah).

Another game on the horizon that people criticize left and right is Killzone 2. People have been bashing it for the lack of co-op online play, but maybe the developers don't want to build the focus on two people playing through the story, instead they wanted to completely immerse just one play and all of their design choices revolved around that. From what I can tell, the single player story is a bit short but it doesn't seem to disappoint at all. It does have a multiplaye component, but until the game comes out I will not beable to tell if they skipped the single player for the online or not, previews aren't good enough for that.

What I am saying this whole time is that I think this gen has to much of a focus on mulitplayer. If a game doesn't feature some sort of co-op or heavy online component, it kind of goes under the radar (The Darkness, Brothers in Arms HH, Grid, Ace Combat). Note I exclude PS3 games because all of their story driven single player games were there exclusives and everybody knows about them.

Luickly there are a few games on the horizon for myself that look amazing for singleplayer. Homeworld 3 will be annouced shortly, Empire Total War, Cryostasis, Dawn of War 2, F.E.A.R. 2 Project Origin. It probably helps that I am a PC gamer as well as a 360 gamer, which then makes my game selection even bigger.

*Gasp* Our leader has made a spelling error...in a TOPIC TITLE! A coup de t'at is the only thing to do now! :shock:

In seriousness, yes, there is a stronger emphasis on multiplayer lately than I'd like, and I agree with all your points. Except for games like the Battlefield series and the like, I buy games almost solely for the singeplayer experience. Multiplayer is just a bonus for me.

I agree completely. It's also a shame that some of the great games this gen, most likely, were badmouthed by GS because it was "too short". I can agree that Mirror's Edge was too short, but it delivered an amazing experience. and when you think about it, we spend $20 dollars on good movies. good movies that are normally 2 hours long, and we spend $60 on videogames. if you think math, every $20 you spend is spent on 2 of Mirror's edge's 7-8 hours.

My overall feelings are that gamers have been spoiled by games with long replay value, that we forget to respect that one short(but VERY sweet) game. I think other games that were underated this gen were Prince of Persia and Uncharted. My greatest fear is for Resident Evil 5. It seems they are making it INCREDIBLY short from what I've heard(half as many levels as RE4). They seem to be focusin on the co-op part :(

There isn't enough story/ 1 player stuff. And theres a huge lack of split screen (offline multiplayer).

All developers seem to care about is Online Multiplayer. Which is very annoying.

Agreed, there's way too muchmultiplayer, so much so that single player games are suffering now. Developers need to realise that not eery game needs to be online focued. That's a huge reason I'm finding this gen so disappointing.BuryMe

[QUOTE="BuryMe"]Agreed, there's way too muchmultiplayer, so much so that single player games are suffering now. Developers need to realise that not eery game needs to be online focued. That's a huge reason I'm finding this gen so disappointing.Lance_Kalzas

I agree on the bit that says that devs and companies have spent too much time and effort focusing on the multiplayer experience, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. In my opinion most of the games you mentioned focusing too much on multiplayer, well, are extremely fun to play IN multiplayer.

Sure, Gears of War 2 had many awesome scenarios, but I don't think we were rushed through them, the game itself gives you that feeling of running-to-cover-while-killing-everyone "madness",and while I love to complete a game and then find out about the hundreds of hours available in multiplayer, I'll ALWAYS prefer memorable single player campaigns, such as MGS, or Okami, Zelda, etc.

I think this year was actually much better single player wise for games than last year. MGS4, GTA4, GeOW2 (single player was much improved over last year IMO), Farcry 2 (not the best game but still a primarily single player focused game, Fable 2 (coop obviously rushed), and Fallout 3 all come into mind.

I think this year was actually much better single player wise for games than last year. MGS4, GTA4, GeOW2 (single player was much improved over last year IMO), Farcry 2 (not the best game but still a primarily single player focused game, Fable 2 (coop obviously rushed), and Fallout 3 all come into mind.

JMR09

I think this year was actually much better single player wise for games than last year. MGS4, GTA4, GeOW2 (single player was much improved over last year IMO), Farcry 2 (not the best game but still a primarily single player focused game, Fable 2 (coop obviously rushed), and Fallout 3 all come into mind.

JMR09

Going to have to agree. But on the flip side, GeoW 2 was kind of still more mulitplayer, Resistance 2's single player was kind of a bust in favor of the online, the big thing about fable was still the co-op, even though it was quite rushed.

I think Fallout 3 and Farcry 2 both broke the mold. Lets hope more follow as well as good multiplayer ones.

[QUOTE="Lance_Kalzas"][QUOTE="BuryMe"]Agreed, there's way too muchmultiplayer, so much so that single player games are suffering now. Developers need to realise that not eery game needs to be online focued. That's a huge reason I'm finding this gen so disappointing.lolwotrickroll

You're right, there are specific instances where the single player experience could have been better but I'm not entirely convinced that it's because of focusing too much on the multi-player. The single player campaign was awesome for me as well as Gears 1 & 2, COD2, COD4, and quite a few other examples as well. There are specific and minor annoyances with Halo 3's campaign but overall it's very polished if you take into consideration the lack of glitches, bugs, and how many events are occuring on the screen all at once during the big action sequences. If you're expecting awesome character development out of a shooter....Well....I don't think that has ever happened so criticizing this generation of that doesn't make sense. I think lumping co-operative campaign modes into this discussion is not a good idea either because, in my opinion, I would much rather play through a campaign mode co-operatively than not. COD4 is an excellent example of this.

Also the guy who posted above me has more good points over why this thread is in and of itself pointless. If you haven't tried all of the awesome and excellent single player games that are out there, that is your bad, not the developers for not bringing it to your attention. It's your job as a consumer to research this kind of stuff so you can make an informed purchasing decision.

I don't really care about single palyer...

The last single player experience I really enjoyed was COD4. I just hate playing against AI, it seems a waste of time. You know you're going to win, so what's the point. At least in multiplayer there's a challenge, and you really do what you can to win.