Poll: Would you buy a game ONLY for multiplayer?
- Thread starter LightspeedJack
- Start date
Recommended Videos
TF2, and I will never regret it.
Hell, I'd rather games who want to be the next multiplayer hit NOT include a single player campaign. Because they tend to be way too short and shallow.
That way they can spend the time they would on a crappy single player campaign creating a unique multiplayer experience that is fun, instead of just making the same game over and over again.
Hell, I'd rather games who want to be the next multiplayer hit NOT include a single player campaign. Because they tend to be way too short and shallow.
That way they can spend the time they would on a crappy single player campaign creating a unique multiplayer experience that is fun, instead of just making the same game over and over again.
It seems to me that a lot of fps games rely heavily on multiplayer. It's like they don't really try to make a decent single player campaign. Citing examples such as MW2 and Bad Company 2, I have to draw the conclusion that the only reason single player campaigns exist anymore is to help transition the players to multiplayer. The only reason I played any of Bad Company's campaign was to learn how to fly the helicopters.
I purchased Bad Company 2 just for the mulitplayer, but waiting on EA to get the servers fixed the couple of days following the release of the game I played through the Single Player and like most people in this thread TF2 and the L4D games
I've already done this, heard of Street Fighter IV?
Also, omitting MMORPGs is a co-out. It's like saying, have you ever bought a game only for multiplayer but not games that only have multiplayer, cause that makes a difference to the magical elves of inane rules.
Also, omitting MMORPGs is a co-out. It's like saying, have you ever bought a game only for multiplayer but not games that only have multiplayer, cause that makes a difference to the magical elves of inane rules.
wow, I'm surprised that Battlefield 1943 hasn't been mentioned. superb multiplayer, never gets old, and there really isn't need for a story. Pacific Theater, 1943, WW2. We all know the story.
Another game is Blur. Never before in my life have I felt such a refreshing blend of the best aspects of Mario Kart and Need For Speed combined into one great game.
Shawn White's Snowboarding, just because of the "hang out" factor of multiplayer. just chillin throwing snowballs at each other
And finally GTA IV because I'd heard of free mode from my friends and that it was really fun and 3 years later I still play it.
Another game is Blur. Never before in my life have I felt such a refreshing blend of the best aspects of Mario Kart and Need For Speed combined into one great game.
Shawn White's Snowboarding, just because of the "hang out" factor of multiplayer. just chillin throwing snowballs at each other
And finally GTA IV because I'd heard of free mode from my friends and that it was really fun and 3 years later I still play it.
A game that can't stand alone on it's single player campeign is completely worthless.
MMORPGers are a special category. A good MMORPGer like WoW can be played as a single player game and enjoyed throughout. If you are a clever bastard you can play solo thru an MMORPG like FFXI with certain classes to end game, but that game is all about the grind with story needing groups (and often level capped because square is full of bastards).
It really comes down to story. Most online multiplayer comes down to playing against others using the single player interfaces and characters. There are no story objectives, just kill the other players. Now if more games had multiplayer campeign mode that would be awesome, because co-op mode is king and more games need it.
MMORPGers are a special category. A good MMORPGer like WoW can be played as a single player game and enjoyed throughout. If you are a clever bastard you can play solo thru an MMORPG like FFXI with certain classes to end game, but that game is all about the grind with story needing groups (and often level capped because square is full of bastards).
It really comes down to story. Most online multiplayer comes down to playing against others using the single player interfaces and characters. There are no story objectives, just kill the other players. Now if more games had multiplayer campeign mode that would be awesome, because co-op mode is king and more games need it.
No, a game is like a sandwich where the story is the meat, the sense of ability to affect a change is the lettuce, the art design is the butter, and the gameplay is the toasted bread. With multiplayer only games, you only get buttered toast. Sure toast is good, it's filling, it gets the job done if you're late for work, but I would rather have the whole sandwich.
I haven't bought single player only games.. since.. ever, really.
I've never agreed with Yahtzee's "multiplayer only games aren't proper games" argument. It just.. no. It's just like any team sport. It's like saying football/rugby/hockey/baseball is a crap sport because you can't play them alone.
I've never agreed with Yahtzee's "multiplayer only games aren't proper games" argument. It just.. no. It's just like any team sport. It's like saying football/rugby/hockey/baseball is a crap sport because you can't play them alone.
Absolutely not. I don't have XBox Live and even if I did, I'd probably only use it to get the DLC for Fallout 3. Most of the games I have (Arkham Asylum, Dead Space, Mass Effect) don't use multiplayer that much. I did buy the Orange Box and one of my dad's friends bought L4D for us (local co-op)
