SammiYin said:
Surely the primary focus of a game is the 'game' aspect?
That's kind of like saying surely the primary focus of a movie is the visuals. If by game you mean a board game or a card game, then yeah the
game is the point. But video games are an
interactive medium. Thinking of them simply as games is a disservice to what they are and can do. I think of Call of Duty online as
just a game but I think of Amnesia: the Dark Descent as an [/i]experience[/i].
And aren't most games just more fun when played with other people?
For me, rarely. Plus I know very few games, and of them, not many are either not playing the same games as me (that have MP) or simply none of us can get online at the same time to play.
If you want story you read a book, if you want a good time you play, if you want a really good time you play with friends.
I think reading a book is a good time lol. But honestly as much as I read, it's not the same as experience a good game with a good narrative. I just finished the latest Game of Thrones book Dance With Dragons and it was extremely good, but I punctuated much of it with being on my PC playing some games or doing other stuff. 950 pages takes a loooong time to read and can be tiring so often it's fun to relax and play a game instead. I would be sad if I couldn't ever play a game that goes beyond pew pew! Explosionzz! I say that because I just started Crysis 2 and it's not that fun lol.
Anyway I don't mean to pick all of what you said apart like that, but mostly I'm just trying to get this point across: different strokes for different folks. I definitely think the gaming market is big enough to have some games with fantastic co op and some with fantastic SP and some with fantastic MP, but games should consider what route their taking from the start. I have, at one time or another, thoroughly enjoyed co op and MP (mostly when I was a lot younger playing N64) but my tastes and preference is now for good SP.