So going through the System Wars forums the past few weeks have led me to believe we have actual babies on this site. Simply because they can't comprehend the word "optional" and their way of looking at it is the only way. Allow me to explain.
Bioware (or EA. Whichever.) has recently announced that there will be multiplayer in Mass Effect 3. Me, being optimistic, immediately thought that it would be pretty fun to have co-op levels with everyone's personal Shepard's and what not. And I thought a lot people would agree with me. Sadly, this wasn't so.
A lot of people have this idea that multiplayer ruins singleplayer games. Where they got this reasoning, I haven't the foggiest but they had it in their head. Upon further explantion on the new multiplayer, it was revealed the multiplayer was completely optional and was separate from the single player experience. Yet people were still complaining saying that "EA is the devil for adding such blasphemous features in the Mass Effect franchise." Some people have even cancelled their preorders because of this.
My response:
Seriously? It's just multiplayer. And it's not even competitive. It's co-op. You don't even have to play it. To the people who cancelled the preorders, you were going to shell out $60 for the game when you knew it was just a single player game. Why cancel it when they are ADDING something for the same price? Some people are worried that the time taken to work the multiplayer has taken away from the time to work on the single player. Which would make the single player mediocre. Which would be true if it wasn't false.
Two examples that prove against this. Uncharted 2. Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. When Uncharted 2 said they would have multiplayer, I admit, I was a little frustrated because I thought it didn't need it. However when the game came out, the multiplayer was decent and the singleplayer was better than the first game.
When Ubisoft announced multiplayer for AC:B, I was even more upset. Mostly because I didn't even know how their were going to do it! It seemed just like a bad idea. However when the game came out, the multiplayer was actually well executed and, although the story lacked, the amount of s*** you could do in the Brotherhood single player was ridiculously large.
Adding multiplayer to a game is not always a bad thing. And it's a smart business decision. We're are in an age of multiplayer. And in an age where the economy isn't so great. People are looking for bang for their buck. Multiplayer lengthens the life a game. So people are willing to buy a game at a higher price if they think it will last them a long time. Think about it. Would you buy a laptop for $800 if you knew it was only going to last a month?
To the babies on this site who just can't have it their way, please grow up and get off the bottle you're sucking on.