Single player.....

[squid5580]

Let me put it this way... two of the best games I played last year were Red Dead Redemption (that has extensive multiplayer) and Alan Wake (that has NO multiplayer).

And yet, if it didn't have any multiplayer, it wouldn't matter at all. I probably played it for all of about twenty minutes, and then went back to single player.

I think there's a problem with too many devs trying to shoehorn multiplayer into games that don't fit the style at all. Of course you could interesting experiences you wouldn't expect (splinter cell, Assassin's creed brotherhood), but equally you can get plenty of games where it goes against the spirit completely (GTA 4, Bioshock 2.)

It would just be nice if more developers acknowledged that not every game needs a multiplayer.

Do you not remember the biggest complaints from game reviewers about Bioshock? The one missing factor almost every reviewer docked points for? If you said because it lacked multiplayer you are correct. Once the voice of the average gamer acknowledges not every game needs MP we might not see it shoehorned into every freakin game.

 

[Justanothergamer300]

Less competitive multi player more coop multi player. MAybe story with coop but a different type of story

 

[Skoldpadda]

I'm not the multiplayer-type. Every once in a while I'll do some splitscreen Halo when friends come over for a beer, but that's it. I never go online to game.

When I game, it's to avoid shitty people, not to meet them.
Multiplayer's just not my thing.

So if singleplayer ever disappears (which it won't), then I'll just have to resort to Patience and Chessmaster. And old games, of course, provided they still work.

Wow, that's a thought. Imagine the IE games will finally stop working on newer OS altogether.
I'll have no choice but to burn my PC, throw the pieces in the river, and make do with an abacus and stone tablets for the rest of my life.

And I understand the occasional need for a Captcha, but does it have to be so damn hard to read? It's really annoying. Either make it hard to read and use real words, or if you're gonna use words like "igallyn" and "rsuet", allow us to make out the letters. Don't be a dick about it.

 

[Drexlor]

I don't care too much about multiplayer, although it can be very fun and addictive if done right. I much prefer a great singleplayer campaign. AND WHY DON'T MORE GAMES HAVE SPLITSCREEN!!!!!

 

[Vault101]

I don't care too much about multiplayer, although it can be very fun and addictive if done right. I much prefer a great singleplayer campaign. AND WHY DON'T MORE GAMES HAVE SPLITSCREEN!!!!!

actually thats a good point since tvs are getting bigger (I remember the n64 days, on an average TV and 4 players youd be playing on somthing no bigger than a mousepad...hey rember those?)

anyway the answer is obvious, if you wanna play with freinds they have to won a copy of the game too = more money

 

[Vault101]

Let me put it this way... two of the best games I played last year were Red Dead Redemption (that has extensive multiplayer) and Alan Wake (that has NO multiplayer).

And yet, if it didn't have any multiplayer, it wouldn't matter at all. I probably played it for all of about twenty minutes, and then went back to single player.

I think there's a problem with too many devs trying to shoehorn multiplayer into games that don't fit the style at all. Of course you could interesting experiences you wouldn't expect (splinter cell, Assassin's creed brotherhood), but equally you can get plenty of games where it goes against the spirit completely (GTA 4, Bioshock 2.)

It would just be nice if more developers acknowledged that not every game needs a multiplayer.

Do you not remember the biggest complaints from game reviewers about Bioshock? The one missing factor almost every reviewer docked points for? If you said because it lacked multiplayer you are correct. Once the voice of the average gamer acknowledges not every game needs MP we might not see it shoehorned into every freakin game.

I remember that they said the mulitplayer was bad but that was because it was tacked on, mabye there wouldnt have been any complaints if they didnt bother with it at all, no one complained that the original bioshock didn't have multiplayer (and if they did they are idioits)

 

[Vault101]

Some companies do sacrifice single player for multiplayer. But there are a lot of good companies that still values single player, both as in game that are only single player and games where the multiplayer are to when you are tired of the single player. Look at Starcraft 2 the game was clearly made for the multiplayer but still has an AI that will perfectly satisfy most players and a good descent length entertain campaign. As far as most of the game I play the multiplayer are something extra not the main part of the game, and it's lack of these kind that I don't buy a lot of games.

well this trend seems to affect FPS most of all, but there are still LOT's of games with good single player and many coming out this year

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Multiplayer does seem to be getting shoe-horned into a lot of games. Bioshock 2 is a prime example of a game NOT needing multiplayer, but getting it anyway. I think Dead Space 2 is another one, though I have yet to play it. Now, if more games had co-op, I would be happy and find little to complain about there.

 

[Solo-Wing]

Multiplayer does seem to be getting shoe-horned into a lot of games. Bioshock 2 is a prime example of a game NOT needing multiplayer, but getting it anyway. I think Dead Space 2 is another one, though I have yet to play it. Now, if more games had co-op, I would be happy and find little to complain about there.

I mean there are games that go hand in hand with the multiplayer like Borderlands and games that the multiplayer is done well enough that is the only reason the series is popular like CoD.
But a lot of games do not need it.
Like the FEAR series. I don't wanna play that game CO-OP. A game cannot be scary as a CO-OP game.

 

[Vault101]

Multiplayer does seem to be getting shoe-horned into a lot of games. Bioshock 2 is a prime example of a game NOT needing multiplayer, but getting it anyway. I think Dead Space 2 is another one, though I have yet to play it. Now, if more games had co-op, I would be happy and find little to complain about there.

I mean there are games that go hand in hand with the multiplayer like Borderlands and games that the multiplayer is done well enough that is the only reason the series is popular like CoD.
But a lot of games do not need it.
Like the FEAR series. I don't wanna play that game CO-OP. A game cannot be scary as a CO-OP game.

I also felt like F.E.A.R. 2 single player was very short or is that just me? I don't know if I should play the 3rd one, I couldnt get my hands on the first do I was pretty much lost on the story

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Multiplayer does seem to be getting shoe-horned into a lot of games. Bioshock 2 is a prime example of a game NOT needing multiplayer, but getting it anyway. I think Dead Space 2 is another one, though I have yet to play it. Now, if more games had co-op, I would be happy and find little to complain about there.

I mean there are games that go hand in hand with the multiplayer like Borderlands and games that the multiplayer is done well enough that is the only reason the series is popular like CoD.
But a lot of games do not need it.
Like the FEAR series. I don't wanna play that game CO-OP. A game cannot be scary as a CO-OP game.

I also felt like F.E.A.R. 2 single player was very short or is that just me? I don't know if I should play the 3rd one, I couldnt get my hands on the first do I was pretty much lost on the story

True, but be honest: Are you REALLY expecting F.E.A.R 3 to scare you, or just gross you out? Now F.E.A.R would not have been good for co-op, as that game's atmosphere would be ruined by having a partner chatting during some of those moments, but F.E.A.R 2? Not so much.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Multiplayer does seem to be getting shoe-horned into a lot of games. Bioshock 2 is a prime example of a game NOT needing multiplayer, but getting it anyway. I think Dead Space 2 is another one, though I have yet to play it. Now, if more games had co-op, I would be happy and find little to complain about there.

I mean there are games that go hand in hand with the multiplayer like Borderlands and games that the multiplayer is done well enough that is the only reason the series is popular like CoD.
But a lot of games do not need it.
Like the FEAR series. I don't wanna play that game CO-OP. A game cannot be scary as a CO-OP game.

I also felt like F.E.A.R. 2 single player was very short or is that just me? I don't know if I should play the 3rd one, I couldnt get my hands on the first do I was pretty much lost on the story

Oh, I can give you a summary when I get back from work and have time to write it, if you want.

 

[minispike47]

I guess that we are starting to see nearly all games having some kind of multiplayer element. However, I believe that it doesn't always improve the game. My favourite games, Oblivion and Dragon Age: Origins had no multiplayer element, but were still fantastic games.