Anyone else fed up of games forcing multi-player down our throats?

As I have stated before. Not every single game needs a "competitive" MP. I recall reading in GI about a year ago. And the CEO of a huge AAA Publisher said that he would not "Green Light" at any IP unless it had some kind of a MP. After reading that I
was irate. Because some times adding a MP takes away from the SP experience.

I am tired of certain games. (This is just my opinion) Games like Mass Effects co op was a brilliant idea, except for the simple fact that the Galactic Readiness slowly dwindles away (which does make sense). So what happens when you want to replay the
game 9 months down the road? You will have to get it back up. You do not HAVE to, but for me... I want it up to 100% before I finish the game. Drives me nuts.

Assassin's Creed (again in my opinion) has no business putting out a competitive MP. The game is renowned for it's single player. And they use achievements to try to bait you into its mediocrity. The games sells millions, yet across all consoles you have
up to 8,000 users on the middiling MP.

Tomb Raider was awesome, the competitive MP was not that bad. But they added MP Achievements to bait you in. Again, why even try?

There are certain circumstances in which I enjoyed a bit of MP experiences melded with the SP. Watch Dog's intrusion for example. It added a sense of a real "Blume Agent" fixer trying to stop you. But the MP? C'mon now. Ubisoft, stick with your Rainbow
Six, and Ghost Recon games for your Multi-Player. Assassin's Creed, and Watch Dogs, do not need
competitive MULTIPLAYER. And leave the Achievements to your renowned Single Player games.

 

I do agree that certain games shouldn't have multiplayer - many of which you guys have already mentioned: Mass Effect, Assassin's Creed, Tomb Raider, etc. By adding multiplayer, they're taking away resources that could otherwise be added to what is essentially
a great campaign and in affect lose out on making it even greater, IMO.

 

I agree GG. Games like Halo, Call of Duty, Gears of War, and Battlefield have a great way of doing both (although, CoD has just flat out grown stagnant to me). With that being said, not every single game needs a Competitive Multi-Player.

And I agree, I do believe (my beliefs do not require everyone else to agree with me), that adding a competitive MP takes resources away from the making the campaign even better.

 

Galactic geek are you saying certain games shouldn't have Multiplayer, Cooperative Multiplayer, Competitive Multiplayer, Team-Based Competitive Mutliplayer, Local Multiplayer, Online Multiplayer, Split-Screen multiplayer, Same-Screen Multiplayer, Turn-Based
multiplayer, or LAN Party multiplayer. Please clarify.

 

Haha, Dukes - very funny. First of all, those are all multiplayer - there's no such thing as "just multiplayer." It's an umbrella term that has many different types, of which you and I have evidently described. To answer your question though, I think it
depends on the game and/or genre. Most games that I don't think should have multiplayer are the action, story-driven style of games, such as has already been mentioned (another good example, by the way, would be the Batman Arkham series). For the most part,
I'm referring to the competitive and online multiplayer. I suppose local co-op would probably be fine, but it would have to be handled very carefully (for example, the secondary character should actually have meaning and purpose and shouldn't be a throw-away
character or a copy of the 1st character). In some cases, turn-based multiplayer might be good as well - for example, you can have 1 player play Batman on the stealth side-missions and have a a 2nd player play Robin/Nightwing to best his time and score. Then
again, at that point, I suppose it becomes competitive multiplayer, so in a nutshell, I think it's all relative and should be handled on a case by case basis. Now, regarding this post, it is most definitely my opinion, as I, nor anybody else here, has any
say in how a game should be made. For better or for worse, that decision is up to the developers.

 

You're making it too difficult. (I understand that you are trying to use the literal definition.)

There is single player, there is co op and there is multiplayer. If someone needs to break it down into a subset for a specific reason that is fine. But when we are going to have a casual gaming conversation there is no need. Borderlands is co op. Assassins
creed unity will be coop. Call of duty and battlefield are multiplayer. Halo offers both multiplayer and co op. They all offer single player. You can clarify very easily, "I'm loving Halo's single player", "Me and my buddies are are having a ton of fun
in co op", "The multiplayer is unbalanced". No one will question which you are referring to. Also, no one is going to take the time to say "I'm loving the competitive team based multiplayer". I'm pretty sure it would make my eyeballs bleed if they did.

With that being said, I would like to see campaign based games focus on the campaign, get rid of 'competitive multiplayer' and add in full campaign co op mode. I would be fine with games like battlefield and call of duty dropping single player and adding
in more maps and focusing on the bugs and glitches in MP.

 

I agree with Dukes on making it more difficult than is necessary. Not to mention that I believe Halo: Reach could, if we got over-technical about it, have been labeled several of those terms in just campaign alone.

There was a setting in the campaign (co op) for scoring. You could set it to off, which would be simply MP co op. You could change this setting if you wanted to add all players' scores together (forget the name of that setting) for... well I'm not even sure
what it should be called TBH... but the principle was simply to go for a higher score than before. That would still be MP co op. Then there was a setting to track individual campaign scores, which in the most technical sense would be competitive co op MP.
I think I'd rather just go with the 'evolved language' idea. It's not that hard, usually, to understand the inference. Otherwise, we'd spend a lot more time just clarifying each post.

 

I don’t think anyone is ramming multiplayer down your throat. That being said, I do agree to some extent with the overall theme of your post. Some games are designed around multiplayer. Ever Quest is one example that comes to mind for me, but also something
like Battlefield or Left 4 Dead. These games were all interesting multiplayer experiences where the multiplayer nature was critical to the experience/design. They were not single player games with tacked on multiplayer. So while I would agree with you that
a good single player experience, doesn’t need tacked on multiplayer, I would also say a well-designed multiplayer game doesn’t really need a tacked on single player campaign either. I think everyone is served best when the experience drives the player interaction
and not the checkboxes from marketing.

 

I am not a HC gamer but do GAME, mostly cod and every sport title heavily. But I do sympathise with the sp offline gamers. I understand how it feels to get cheated on the sp and how completing games is so easy. Developers go to the money immediately, negating
true gamers the single player experience.

Don't let this get you out of your gaming zone OP but look at it as a challenge. You might miss out on a few great no games that are being packaged for release such as the amazing Halo Master Chief collection.

 

I finally got around to trying out Dishonored on the Xbox 360 today - that's a good example of how a great single-player game doesn't necessarily need multiplayer because the story that the campaign revolves around is just that good. In fact, the ONLY thing
I've seen wrong with it thus far is a few blurry textures. Otherwise, the game is as fantastic as everyone has been saying it is.

 

I am not a HC gamer but do GAME, mostly cod and every sport title heavily. But I do sympathise with the sp offline gamers. I understand how it feels to get cheated on the sp and how completing games is so easy. Developers go to the money immediately, negating
true gamers the single player experience.

Don't let this get you out of your gaming zone OP but look at it as a challenge. You might miss out on a few great mp games that are being packaged for release such as the amazing Halo Master Chief collection