@lumpy: I mentioned FF XV just because it's not on PC. I could easily have mentioned Until Dawn, Infamous: Second Son or Bloodborne. Uncharted 4 might have a multiplayer mode tacked on but it's not the draw card for me. As long as a multiplayer mode doesn't detract from the single player experience, I don't care if it exists. I put over 200 hours into Dragon Age: Inquisition without touching the multiplayer once.
I tried Guild Wars 2 but it wasn't for me. Because it's designed from the ground up to be an MMO, it sacrifices too many things to be a good RPG. Same with ESO, I gave it a try but it's no Skyrim.
Some people are drawn to games for the competitive aspect. I'm not. If you want the feeling of teamwork from taking down a huge raid boss that's fine. If you love ruining other people's day with your headshots, great. That's not what I play games for. I like story, interesting characters, tight combat & the feeling of progression among other things. If publishers try to wedge multiplayer into singleplayer games or mess with the pacing to fit an episodic model, that's when things fall apart.
"...you wouldn't have to deliver the whole game in one month; you could develop and deliver the game as it goes."
Is he talking about an episodic model? Does he not even understand what Netflix is about? In the past we were slaves to the TV schedule, watching the next ep when it released - now we binge if we feel like it or wait to catch up if that's what fits our schedule. Some games can fit the episodic model but most games just shouldn't. Imagine The Witcher 3 or Zelda: BoTW as episodic games - it would be horrible!
If MS is choosing not to develop single player games because they can't keep getting infinite subscription money, they have no understanding of why people buy consoles. I'm a PC gamer but games like Uncharted 4, Horizon: Zero Dawn or Final Fantasy XV would make me consider buying the PS4 to play them.
I give approximately zero f*cks for multiplayer games. I Like to play a lot of single player games. In the past I rented console games, now I buy games on deep sales on Steam or other platforms. A subscription service would work for me but not if they're going to mess with the quality of a game to make it fit Microsoft's business model.
@pixelpopper: I can't speak from any personal experience but I thought Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket was a great film. It showed the harsh training & put emphasis on the relationships formed before moving on to actual deployment & showing some more gritty realities.
Doing that in a game would be a tough ask... maybe not 4 years but even a good number of hours in training before getting your boots dirty would put off a lot of people & limit the audience. I think it would be really bold & interesting though. Imagine a Mass Effect style relationship building mechanic - almost like a visual novel. Go through training exercises & talking to people for 20 hours or so before getting into the real meat of the game. Include some tough decisions & real risk of your squadmates dying - ironman mode only so there's no going back to save them.
Hopefully the game wouldn't give anyone PTSD but it might help people relate to those who have it.
@crashchaos: Yeah, great game. I hated the part where you shell those civilians with white phosphorous though - I saw that they were obviously civilians so I tried to leave the mortar & not do it but the only way to progress in the game was to shell them.
@ministersin420: Games don't have to be "fun". They have to be compelling.
Take a look at This War of Mine or Papers, Please & tell me if you think they are designed to be fun. They show war in it's cold, harsh reality - sure, not completely real, that's a tough ask for any piece of media, but they don't glorify war, death or sacrifice in any way. However there are still elements that compel a player to keep going.
Limiting games to only being fun holds back what the medium can do. Open your mind to the possibility that they can do more & you'll see that they already have been.
The board game, Risk, was made in 1957. Not quite the 1940s but kids have been playing war games a long time before video games were a thing. I'm sure plenty of children ran around with sticks, using them as guns. Treating war, even ones currently being fought, like a game is nothing new.
@videogameninja: Is that a cat on the fence or a ninja in disguise?!
Yeah, I'm not really sold on walking simulators either. They make a whole game out of the mechanic that we try to let slide in other games that have more going on.
Bioshock is great - lots of shooting, interesting enemies, well designed levels to explore... We kind of give it a free pass on the conceit of it's storytelling. Of course it's ridiculous that somebody would have left all these audio diaries lying around in the perfect order that we should discover them but we suspend our disbelief because it adds something compelling to an already great game.
Mass Effect Andromeda has left me wondering just how cheap ipads are in the future because there seem to be dozens of the things left lying around with a single memo typed on them. Again, it's a bit silly but you try to let it slide because the rest of the game is still fun.
A whole game based around that silly storytelling device that we try to suspend our disbelief for is kind of a weird premise. It has to be done very well just so that you're not distracted by how convenient all these clues are & how absurd it would be for people to just leave pages of their diary lying around.
@merwanor: Some people care about single player, others would never touch it even it was great. As long as that information is there, who cares what the score is?
bbq_R0ADK1LL's comments