I think most are losing site of what makes video games what they are.

The whole point of video games used to be the single-player not the online multi-player.
It seems like most of the companies who make video games are slowly losing site of the single-player part of games and only focusing on the online multi-player parts of games, also it seems like alot of gamers are just going along with this. To me that stinks because most games used to have single-player parts that lasts for 10 times the length that games are now and they had no multi-player, and there are some newer games lately that have no single-player parts and have online multi-player parts only.
I am not saying that I do not play any online multi-player games as I do but only a few, as the only online multi-player games that I have ever played and play are Battlefield 2: Modern Combat for PC and Xbox360 and GRAW 1 & 2 on Xbox360 and COD 2 & 4 for Xbox360 but with those I like the single-player parts much better.
I am 33 and I have played every video game system that has been released in the USA since the Pong, and I still have most of my console systems. I also have played PC games since 1999 and have almost every year upgrade my PC that I build myself. So I know video games, and I am not saying that I am better then anyone else as I am just trying to make a point that video games have changed over the years. Which I think video games are changing for the worse not for the better.

Do you agree or disagree or don't care? Please explain why?

I agree, nowadays games are focus on multiplayer and online gameplay.

There's nothing more annoying then buying a game only to find out the campaiqn last like for 15 to 20 hours. Gone are the days of 4 people playing splitscreen on one TV and playing coop side by side, I am only hoping coop spiltscreen is still in style.

I agree, nowadays games are focus on multiplayer and online gameplay.

There's nothing more annoying then buying a game only to find out the campaiqn last like for 15 to 20 hours. Gone are the days of 4 people playing splitscreen on one TV and playing coop side by side, I am only hoping coop spiltscreen is still in style.

Hermitkermit

I hope that too.

The whole point of video games used to be the single-player not the online multi-player.
It seems like most of the companies who make video games are slowly losing site of the single-player part of games and only focusing on the online multi-player parts of games, also it seems like alot of gamers are just going along with this. To me that stinks because most games used to have single-player parts that lasts for 10 times the length that games are now and they had no multi-player, and there are some newer games lately that have no single-player parts and have online multi-player parts only.
I am not saying that I do not play any online multi-player games as I do but only a few, as the only online multi-player games that I have ever played and play are Battlefield 2: Modern Combat for PC and Xbox360 and GRAW 1 & 2 on Xbox360 and COD 2 & 4 for Xbox360 but with those I like the single-player parts much better.
I am 33 and I have played every video game system that has been released in the USA since the Pong, and I still have most of my console systems. I also have played PC games since 1999 and have almost every year upgrade my PC that I build myself. So I know video games, and I am not saying that I am better then anyone else as I am just trying to make a point that video games have changed over the years. Which I think video games are changing for the worse not for the better.

Do you agree or disagree or don't care? Please explain why?

ghstbstr

I think as times change (From the day of Pong, until now), the innovations in gaming also change. Multiplayer being one of the things that change over the years. Things get better.

What I do not like, is the people who buy great games like Call of Duty 4 and completely ignore the campaign mode and skip to online play only, and worst of all, say it's the best game ever made without even getting the full experience (As goes for any game). Then there's the people who completely reject a game like Bioshock or Mass Effect, simply because the games lack online multiplayer.

As long as there's people like this out there in the world, developers will keep going for better multiplayer experiences, with either dulled down or shorter single player experiences, because multiplayer has become a selling point in the gaming world, and where there's money, business will be there.
If Halo 3 contained no multiplayer, tons of people wouldn't have bought it.

01-18-2008

Completely aggreed.

Unfortunately the focus is changing. People want multiplayer - it addds replay value much greater than any single player campaign to a great deal of people. There are still some games focused on a single player experience. Bioshock, Mass Effect, Eternal Sonata, Oblivion, Half Life 2, Dead Rising, etc. But this gaming generation is really going to be pushing multiplayer/online games - it's the latest evolution.

Since the single player on most games is longer than older games SP I dont think you could get more wrong(super mario bros-short 2 hours or so,Sonic the Hedghog was an hour or so long,COD4 -at least 10,Halo 3 at least 5)ConflictMaster

Man you're way off about new games having longer SP than older games, i guess u never played a snes, genesis, N64, ps1, dreamcast, or even ps2.

But in either case, I agree and think they need to put more into the SP for games, but at the same time they don't need to necessarily take away from online MP.

Mass Effect & Bioshock were great SP games. I've pumped about 50 hours into mass effect now...