rob_simple said:
It's a valid complaint, the single player experience has taken a massive backseat in recent years, especially in the FPS genre, because publishers think it's an easier buck to go after the multiplayer crowd, no matter how out of place that may be (who here really thought what the Tomb Raider series was missing was multiplayer? Who thought the best way to follow up the fantastic Resident Evil 4 would be to saddle you with a co-op partner or a completely useless AI? Lost Planet 2, for god sake.)
It's a valid complaint if it actually applies to anything to do with the singleplayer. In Bioshock 2's case, it had an entirely separate developer (Digital Extremes -- Warframe, darkSector, Homefront multiplayer), and the reason it didn't do as well was because of a forced rewrite a year into development. And somehow Dead Space 2 never suffered from it's multiplayer -- in fact, from what I learned from talking to a beta tester, they actually cut things from the multiplayer so they could make sure the singleplayer was good, and also Visceral's repeatedly beaten in the fact that they wanted co-op from the start. Although that's not convenient for people to rail against multiplayer so it's taken as them trying to protect EA's ass. Multiplayer is what saved Homefront, from where I'm sitting. That was the only part of the game that was really praised as the singleplayer was a sloppy, badly put together linear affair while the multiplayer was, arguably, the closest we could get to a CoD killer that just didn't sell well enough or have enough momentum. Lost Planet already played like a co-op shooter, in my experience, so while I'm not going to argue that no one really asked for it, it's not like it was a deep divergence from the main idea like adding co-op was to Resident Evil 5.
Crystal Dynamics, not Square or Eidos, wanted to make a multiplayer mode for Tomb Raider, they just didn't have the time so they came up with some ideas that they clearly didn't flesh out and handed it off to Eidos because they wanted to make it a done deal. They never had to make, they wanted to. In fact their entire original idea for the reboot would have -never- even allowed for it if they hadn't gone back to the drawing board and made "Uncharted but with bits of Dead Space and Resident Evil 4/6 tossed in". It was their rather stupid choice. I'm not going to argue the thing with Resident Evil 5 because I haven't played it but you know what, I actually LIKED playing the demo for RE6 and plan on getting it for PC if I have the cash for it and/or its on sale.
rob_simple said:
We're fine for multiplayer games
First, really? We have no need to explore new multiplayer options? That's why DayZ did so horribly that no will know what I'm talking about? That Gotham City Imposters with its impressively polished platforming isn't still consistently played by its fanbase? That year after year there are new multiplayer mods for Half-Life 2 that change the way things work? Yeah, clearly no one wants anything besides CoD.
You really aren't aware that people are intentionally banding together on Steam to play Max Payne 3's MP together so they can play despite the lackluster match making? That teams of max-rank players go toe to toe in Dead Space 2's competitive multiplayer? That even this far after launch, I can still find someone to do co-op with with my PC copy of Dead Space 3? Even more crazy is that there are still active clans and non-clan players playing Homefront? That I could find multiple full matches for Bioshock 2 on PS3?
rob_simple said:
, but a satisfying, meaty single player is a rare occurrence, nowadays, and by the sounds of things, if this dev keeps to his word, that may well be what Wolfenstein actually delivers.
Yeah, there are no singleplayer enabled experiences that anyone might like, like Minecraft, Spelunky, Tiny & Big: Grandpa's Leftovers, Bit Trip, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Dead Space, Resident Evil 6, Resident Evil: Revelations, Injustice: Gods Among Us, Just Cause 2, Max Payne 3, Mark of the Ninja, Alan Wake, Alan Wake: American Nightmare, Silent Hill: Shattered Memories, Silent Hill: Downpour, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, The Walking Dead, Spec Ops: The Line, Sanctum, Sanctum 2, Orcs Must Die, Orcs Must Die 2, Batman: Arkham Asylum, Batman: Arkham City, FF12, FF13, FF13-2, Portal 2, Bioshock Infinite, Bioshock, Bioshock 2, Dead Space 2, Dead Space 3, Transformers: Fall of Cybertron, The Witcher, The Witcher 2, Civilization V, XCOM: Enemy Unknown, Borderlands, Borderlands 2, Scarygirl, Super Meat Boy, Gunpoint, Hard Reset, Sleeping Dogs, Ys Origin, Sniper Elite V2, Black Mesa (mod), Warhammer 40k: Space Marine, WH40k: Dawn of War. WH40k: Dawn of War 2, Metro 2033: Metro: Last Light, DmC, God of War Collection, Uncharted, Uncharted 2, Uncharted 3, Don't Starve, Shank, Shank 2, Total War: Napoleon, Total War: Shogun II, Crusader Kings, Crusader Kings II, Persona 4 Golden, Persona 3 FES, Persona 2, Trin, Trine 2, Remember Me, Dust: An Elysian Tail, Anomaly, Anomaly 2, FEZ, TES: Morrowind, TES: Skyrim, TES: Oblivion, Of Orcs & Men, Mars: War Logs, inFamous, inFamous 2, inFamous: Festival of Blood, Resistance, Resistance 3... shall I go on? Because I could just start listing the things available on Steam, PSN, XBL, hell lets go to the Android and iOS markets. The excuse that there aren't enough good singleplayer games is utter crap, you just have to get off your arse and look. And I'll guarantee you -- a number of those games that are great for singleplayer *gasp* they've got multiplayer! And somehow they haven't utterly failed as a result. You can't pretend to know if a multiplayer is good or not unless you've actually played it and confirmed with others that yes, it didn't play well. Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Wolfenstein, and Doom all had multiplayer and they certainly didn't need it but are they still not held up as classics? What about XCOM: Enemy Unknown? It's missing half its content in order to shorten the dev time but not because of the multiplayer.
I get it, it's your easy way out, it's your easy excuse by pure deduction. But forgive me if, in my experience, the deduction of my fellow gamers hasn't exactly blown me away. There are people who still think developers lose cash from the sale of used games when it's actually the publishers, and they'll swear by it. Multiplayer always has existed, it always will. The only thing you can do about it is encourage the new, divergent ones instead of the same old thing. Instead of buying that COD map pack, get FEAR 3 on sale, two copies, try out the multiplayer with a friend, enjoy F**KING RUN and the co-op, and actually experience something new.
rob_simple said:
P.S. You mentioned Assassin's Creed's multiplayer...funny how the single player element of that series started nose-diving in quality around about the time they started pushing the multiplayer aspect.
So what you're saying is the actually interesting multiplayer made the bland singleplayer seem less interesting? I for one am SHOCKED.
I'll be quite honest with you, if your intention is to "win" or "prove me wrong", you're not gonna have an easy battle. I've been watching people give arguments like this across multiple sites and in the end I have never seen a valid reason for why multiplayer is viewed as the spawn of Satan for any other reason than who is publishing the game. If it was Valve instead of EA that had published Dead Space and they made the exact same product, you're damn well sure there'd be people playing its multiplayer happily because "they're supporting Valve". It's not that the concept or the innovation of multiplayer is bad, it's because the grubby publishers know that they can make money with it. Okay... that's kind of their JOB! I am not going to defend EA/Origin or Capcom with their sequel fest but you know what? Yeah, they're in this to make MONEY! I don't like it, I'm not a fan of it, I don't even like using that as an excuse when we see things like Dishonored and Skyrim, but you know what, they're stupid as fuck so if I can at least get an experimental multiplayer out of the bargain, I'm gonna take it. Because I'd rather get the most I can from a raging torrent of stupid that I can put to use and benefit than just whine about it like a ten year old when its very clear that they'll keep doing it unless it literally is a MASSIVE failure. We're talking not even a single person online at launch day -- Rogue Warrior comes to mind (Game Informer's review reported they couldn't even get a single match at the time of review).
If, however, you're actually looking to discuss this in a calm and sensible manner, then all the laser beams will turn off, but dude... I already wrote my original post because of how frustrated I am with this issue so, if the hill of text isn't any indication, I'm a bit opinionated on this issue. I'm to this like Jim Sterling is to the Xbox One. Maybe moreso, and that's bloody saying something.
