Single Player Vs Multiplayer
SmoodCroozn
Join Date: 2003-11-04 Member: 22310Members
Join Date: 2003-11-04 Member: 22310Members
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">Which is more important?</div> In the end of the 2004, we had a good mix of single and multiplayer games. Games such as Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, Doom 3, and Far Cry proved that the single player games could survive without little to no multiplayer. Recently, Resident Evil 4 has received successful reviews as a single playe game. However, games that were much more oriented toward multiplayer: Battlefield Vietnam, Halo 2, Joint Operations made big in the gaming industry as well.
As a gamer, how do you feel about the trend of game that focus mainly on multiplayer aspects usually with a decent or shallow single player?
As a gamer, how do you feel about the trend of game that focus mainly on multiplayer aspects usually with a decent or shallow single player?
Comments
I've enjoyed Dawn of War because of its good multiplayer. If I had bought it for its single player, I would have been very disappointed.
I sincerely hope that is sarcasm, since Half Life had the best single player out there until
Half Life 2 came out this past year.
I'd say that the most successful games are usually those that offer a solid mixture of 'both single player and multiplayer. I like having both available to me, and the lack of a good multiplayer on Half Life 2's release date was an annoyance, although it didn't really matter until a few days later, when I was finished with the game.
So do I.
The mood determines whether I want to play single- or multiplayer. I love games with stories, and these are best when playing alone.
Personally, and I know that this is a strange thing for a MP mod's producer to say, I'm very strongly leaning towards narrative, and thus mostly SP games. MP has this big, big disadvantage of involving people I would edge away from if I met them on a park bench.
The other side of the coin is that you get to "kill" said people.
As soon as someone can come up with a changeable world that can be experienced by multiple people at the same time, I think we'll have reached the next evolution of interactive entertainment.
...
Wh...
...
<b>WHAT?</b>
As for the topic: Games like Hitman 1 & 2, with their missions having many different ways of being completed, offer a lot of replay value simply from the "I wonder what happens if I do it this way?" component. Plus if you completed a level flawlessly (Silent assassin) you were awarded a shiny new weapon. If a game has this level of replay value, MP isn't really required, it would merely be a favourable addon.
Games like the millions of crappy WW2 games that have come out recently which offer canned, highly-scripted, linear, directed gameplay <b>require</b> a multiplayer aspect to have any sort of replay value whatsoever. Unfortunately none of their multiplayer attempts come close to matching the amazing popularity of MP_Beach in RTCW.
On the other end of the spectrum, there's BF1942, which is basically a MP game with bots. While there's nothing exactly wrong with it, there's no real SP value to speak of. Merely an amazing online experience to be had.
--Scythe--
Nothing is as relaxed as playing a SP game, not screwing a game for someone else, doing whatever you want to do.