So here's an interesting one for gamers. Should developers stop bothering with Singleplayer? Should they use all their resources for Multiplayer? If so, why? Now, here's my opinion. I think that developers should focus on Multiplayer! The reason being that most people do not play Singleplayer more then twice! If the developers were to focus all resources on Multiplayer, there would be many more maps, more balanced gameplay and maybe more original maps! And now, to show an example. Unreal Tournament 3. When you play Singleplayer, it is very obvious that it is more of a tutorial, an indepth one at that too! The gameplay in it is absolutly amazing as no two weapons or vehicles are similiar! The game even has 55 maps (360 version, PS3 and PC version have 50 stock maps but they have modding.) Out of all those 55 maps, each one has unique gameplay that is different to every other one such as the ability to start an avalanche if you blow up a barracde! So, opinions?
I honestly think developers should focus on both. I always play multiplayer. Usually customs and a lot of the time with matchmaking. Now I also play single player. Which I think is fun for a change to just play alone. But I do think developers usually focus on the single player because there you can get the plot for the game. Like Halo for example, the single player builds up the plot for the game. Master Chief has to fight for the planet and then that is basically what the game is about. That is my opinion.
yeah they definitely shouldnt just drop single player all together. think about, would halo be what it is today without the story of master chief as the last hope for human kind?
I respond to this by saying that most of the time, they put way too much resources ino the story! Some examples include Command and Conquer 3, Red Alert. In this case, they spend at least a million more then they really should on famous actors! All of this because everyone wants an experiance that will only last one playthrough! We don't even need to go into EA made games! Look at Halo 3 itself! I've only played the Campaign three times and I can no longer finish a level as I get bored before it ends. If they used the money from Single Player and put it into Multiplayer, they could have put the money to make better map design, better balance of weapons and maybe find ways to stop people from getting to those impossible to reach hiding spots. Obviously they shouldn't drop Single Player off the face of the Earth but make Single Player just bot matches or into better features that can allow you to design your own Campaign and Multiplayer maps. And yes, Halo would still be what it i today if Single Player was gone as a huge amount of stories I've heard from people are all centered around Multiplayer as opposed to Single Player. I myself only have one story from Single Player as opposed to the dozen I have from Multiplayer.
If Halo didn't have a story mode, I wouldn't have even bought it in the first place. I enjoy playing by myself from time to time. When my so-called friends are camping around in the bottom area of the Great Fox in SSBB, I like to just say, "**** you, I don't need to play with you," and enter the great realm of story mode. The story is interesting and fun. Although I sort of see how mindlessly shooting each other and running to the enemy base back and forth to get a flag of no real importance might possibly be fun in your regards, it's not nearly as enjoyable for me.
I don't see why developers should focus on one part of a game when if you're staff is determined, and large enough to populate Switzerland, they can make both great. I have real big hopes for Halo 3 Recon to have a more enjoyable Campaign than Halo 3 but Halo 3's Campaign is in no way bad. It's average, some times better to play Campaign alone than Forge like when you have a creators block. Multiplayer allows endless possibilities with no motivation but Singleplayer gives you a story that you can truly enjoy. Most shooters other than Halo I always play more Campaign than Multiplayer, for example, I LOVE Call of Duty 4 but I prefer its Campaign over its multiplayer because it has many memerable moments and story and gameplay flowed well together. So, in summary, I think a well rounded game is a better than a game leaning to one game mode and not so much the other.
Multiplayer and Singleplayer are both vital aspects to a game. Singleplayer is a place where the player can really be immersed in the game. They get to feel as if they are part of a universe, as if they are their character, as if they are really doing what is happening in the game. Multiplayer is where competition comes into it. With multiplayer, you know that whoever you're going against is, in all particality, the same as you: Someone sitting on the couch trying to shoot someone in a virtual world. This appeals to alot of people, because they can fight people they know, or atleast can imagine. More times than not, the main antagonist in a videogame's storyline is a larger than life character who is seemingly unstoppable. The player feels good and stronger when they can defeat someone who seems great or powerful, someone who they couldn't even imagine. I think it's a great Idea when game can allow people to progress though a story with their friends. It's been said many times throughout the years that videogames are genuinely movies that allow someone to take the story into his/her own hands, and influence the story based on their decisions.
Shame on you for saying they should drop single-player altogether >=O Are we all forgetting that not all of us can afford internet? I myself only started playing online last year. Before that, I just played all of the single players repeatedly. And I have to agree with Nemihara, if Halo didn't have Campaign, I wouldn't have bought it in the first place. And honestly, for Gears of War, I enjoy the story mode a WHOLE lot more than it's glitchy online play. I can say the same for many other games with lackluster multiplayer and amazing single-player modes. (The Darkness, anyone?) And, come on, let's all just remember the old days, people still payed good money for games, which were ALL single-player, by the way. They did pretty well. And you still see people shovelling out cash these days for games like The Legend of Zelda, new Super Mario games, and role-players like Final Fantasy. Lastly if designers just dropped single-player games, we wouldn't have fantastic games like Fable or TES4: Oblivion. However, I do agree, multiplayer is indeed more important part of games nowadays than single-player, but single-player is still important enough that you can't just get rid of it completely. So, yeah, that's my bit on the importance of single-player and multiplayer (I doubt any one's gonna read all of that, though =/).
I agree with Okage: Single Player was how it started, and how it still is for some of us. I think that both still have a place in modern games. Single-player draws you in, and Online Multiplayer keeps you coming back. I've never played Only the multi-player aspect, but I have played many games only as single player (Bioshock is more fun per unit time than Halo 3s multiplayer, IMHO.)