Wednesday, 25 January 2012

Multiplayer vs. Singleplayer


It is becoming increasingly popular among games to add multiplayer into the mix. Whilst many shooters such as Call of Duty and Battlefield incorporate this with ease others do not and this tends to lead either to people wanting multiplayer to stay out of games or to co-op. One way or another however many developers are adding multiplayer into the mix effectively or are jeopardising the single player somewhat to focus on the multiplayer.

Take last autumn’s Battlefield 3 for instance, for me it was one of the best games of the year and yet its single player was one of the most tedious experiences of my life so far. Why then was it so good? The answer is simple, its multiplayer is second to none, indeed its multiplayer is so good I have lost all interest in other military based first shooters because, quite frankly, they can’t hope to compete.

Naughty Dog make great multiplayer and singleplayer. 

A series such as Battlefield is expected to have multiplayer as part of the package and if it means the single player mode is dull then it is excepted, other games however are not. Take Mass Effect 3 for example; each Mass Effect game has had some fans wishing for multiplayer and others enjoying the fact that it is a solitary experience. Now with Mass Effect 3 Bioware has decided to take the plunge and add multiplayer, to me this is a great move. If you can focus enough on the single player to keep its standard high but also add a quality multiplayer component then you can greatly increase the longevity of a game, this is something I’m sure that Bioware can achieve. If Bioware pull it off like I believe they will then it is certainly something I would like to see more games try (such as the Elder Scrolls and Fallout).

Ultimately £40 is simply too much to pay for most games if they don’t include multiplayer. I will happily pay for an RPG or an MGS game if it has no multiplayer but for any other game it is simply too much to pay for a single player only experience, playing by yourself is only fun for so long. I understand people’s worry that multiplayer jeopardises the single player, and in some cases I agree that it does, but it doesn’t have to and it really shouldn’t and if developers work towards creating a well-balanced single and multiplayer package then I think gaming as a whole will benefit greatly. 

7 comments:

  1. Hey Rob its Mazix from EnemyHQ.com , we were wondering if you would like to join our team as an author to write posts for our gaming blog, please contact us on our site if interested, thank you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree wholeheartedly. 60 bucks for 8 hours or so is not worth it. Uncharted 2 was a great example of a compelling storyline and a multiplayer experience that I played for months.

      I just can't buy a full priced single player game anymore unless its in my list of must-have like final fantasy or Zelda. quick question, did you like the campaign in Bad Company 2?

      Delete
  2. Yeah the campaign was great. The Bad Company campaigns were awesome because they didn't take themselves too seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nice one Rob, keep up the good work. Looking forward to Sunday.

    Manu Katche

    ReplyDelete
  4. Can't wait 'til Sunday.

    Eric C

    ReplyDelete
  5. Just a snip Battlefield 3 for me is awesome. Multiplayer just keeps things alive.
    Game Fan

    ReplyDelete