The lights are on
With the growth of online multiplayer as a major force on consoles this generation, we've seen a new issue pop up in the industry: Are developers required to put a multiplayer mode in their games?
Obviously developers don't need to do anything, but more and more often it seems like superfluous multiplayer is being added into a game where single-player is the clear focus. We saw this earlier in this generation with games like Condemned 2, and this year we've seen it in such titles as BioShock 2 and Singularity. You could even point to titles such as Grand Theft Auto IV and Red Dead Redemption. Rockstar was perfectly happy keeping its open-world games as solo experiences last generation, but this time around the developer feels the need to put in extensive online support as well.
I'm not saying these unexpected multiplayer additions always suck, but sometimes they seem like an afterthought. And other times, they surprise us and genuinely extend the life of shorter single-player games.
So what's your take? Are you more inclined to buy a game if it has a multiplayer mode of some sort, even if single-player is still the main course? Do you think that adding multiplayer ends up making publishers more money? Or could the resources spent on those modes be better put toward adding content to a single-player experience? Let us know in the comments.
Email the author Phil Kollar, or follow on Twitter, Google+, Facebook, and Game Informer.
absolutely not. far too many resources are wasted in this industry making multiplayer modes that aren't compelling and barely used by the people that buy the games.
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There are games out there rich enough to do well without MP look at Batman Arkham Asylum!!!!!
every game seems to think multiplayer is necessary in order to sell copies.. but i dislike that every game is puttin multiplayer in their games.. and most of the time i never even touch the multiplayer.. unless it is a game like cod halo or gow... i believe you would see the quality of games improve if multiplayer was left alone... some games are meant to be played by 1 person alone..
if dead space makes a multiplayer.. the world may end
It really depends on the game. Games like Half-life, Portal, and Mass effect really don't need a multiplayer mode but it does help out a game that isn't as good
Single player should be the focus of any and all games before mutliplayer is even an issue. Single > Multi every time
Too many people think multiplayer makes the game. They condemn anything without it instantly.
I can't tell you how many times I've had people come in where I work and say Batman: Arkham Asylum was one of the worst games they played, simply because it lacked a multiplayer mode.
Anybody who played it can say otherwise. It was one of the few titles that stood out last year.
I hate playing multiplayer, because if you don't adhear to the agenda of who you play with, your screwed. They don't care if you are good or bad, you are out of the party.
The only multiplayer I liked was BioShock 2's, until I kept getting booted for games, simply because I was winning.
Contrary to other people, I buy big name shooters, like Gears of War & Call of Duty ONLY for the single player campaign.
I can't stand some people online, and I don't know why they can't be fair & give people chances, rather then be selfish and immature.
Bottom line, give me a single player game any day, and I'm happy. No matter the game, I hardly ever play on multiplayer, so to me its not worth it.
The developers should focus on a gripping and compelling story, rather than appealing to the multiplayer junkies looking for the next best thing. That's my opinion. Take it or leave it.
An always,you always need it. Splitscreen is also epic, especially since some people have no connection to the internet.
The sad truth: Most publishers demand multiplayer and DLC.
I don't think multiplayer is a requirement for new games, but it does add a lot to the experience. I only buy games if it looks good and...well if it isn't bad. I like multiplayer but I don't buy a game basing it off of the multiplayer component.
No No Its Not if Fallout go's mutliplayer i wont buy it ill ignore it and say its not canon.
No. Most games shine in their singleplayer. Look at Halo and CoD, both started as single player experiences.
no games like team fortress 2 and left 4 dead are mainly multiplayer but other games like bioshock and mass effect they should focus on being single.
This generation of consoles has really harmed the gaming industry in many ways. Sure, it's making more money and raking more people in. But that's the problem, it's raking in more people because the games are being dumbed down, and everything is so mainstream. Multiplayer is one of those mainstream aspects that developers see and think "hey maybe people will be attracted to our game if it has this". Thank God companies like Valve and Blizzard still exist (sure WoW is dumbed down, but it is also very advanced at the same time which is what makes it so great), otherwise I would have lost faith in games by now.
No, not all video games require mutliplayer. Bioshock 2's multiplayer is pretty fun but it seemed to take away space and attention that could've made the game longer. I love having a game that I can just play by myself and not worry about friggin' online achievements as well as leaving a LIVE Party for game chat. I usually take my headset out anyway. When I do play multiplayer it's usually co-op and even then someone's annoying little brother and has to join and ruin things with intentional friendly fire because there's a stupid Vidmaster that has stupid requirements. Other than co-op I only really play Team Fortress 2 and Halo 3. There are a lot of people out there that get a game just for the multiplayer and they spend all of their time trying to get better at it by skipping the campaign and ending up on your team and basically lose the game for everyone. I'm sorry, but this tends to happen a lot to me. ALSO, there are a lot of cheaters out there- boosters, hackers, etc. Haha, that's my venting for the day.
I believe devs should only put resources into what they think they should. If they put their money into multiplayer when the game is generally single-player (such as Bioshock), only because they think it will make more people buy it, then it is not going to be that good (such as Bioshock). If however, they excel at making multiplayer games, but not single-player games (such as Bungie), then they should pour most of their money into multiplayer.
Multiplayer should only be there if the dev wants it, not the publisher. Though I know that even then, the publisher will force them to.