Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Why do developers insist on adding multiplayer to games that dont need it.
Ex:Bioshock 2
Even worse it seemt that they spend more time on multiplayer then the single player. that it screws with the game.
Please tell me why that just plain old killing is taking over a good linear(or non lineor) story?

I'm of the exact opposite opinion. I believe every game ought to have multiplayer. I've played enough overly cinematic (I have DVDs for this), purposely drawn out ("our game has 2323923029 of gameplay, but only 3 hours of it are relevant!") one player scenarios with "revolutionary AI" (that still manages to glitch or run straight towards me even though it's holding a gun) that I stopped caring a long time ago. With multiplayer you can practice, develop skill and have fun with real people. That will last longer than any flavor of the month story mode ever could.

WRONG.

+1

Another quality garret thread.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:I'm of the exact opposite opinion. I believe every game ought to have multiplayer. I've played enough overly cinematic (I have DVDs for this), purposely drawn out ("our game has 2323923029 of gameplay, but only 3 hours of it are relevant!") one player scenarios with "revolutionary AI" (that still manages to glitch or run straight towards me even though it's holding a gun) that I stopped caring a long time ago. With multiplayer you can practice, develop skill and have fun with real people. That will last longer than any flavor of the month story mode ever could.

I fully agree. I do enjoy a good story, but it better have some good Multiplayer

OK but in all seriousness why do they have to stick multilayer in games that dont need it. the original bioshock didnt need a multiplayer to be great.
Bioshock 2 would be out this fall if they didnt want to add multiplyaer to it. Know we have to wait all the way till next churstmas if i remember right i may need to cheack the facts. But what about eople who cant play with others all the time cause of different reasons(like me) dont they deserve a good game with good single player?

Actually they already HAD multiplayer in BS2, but they wanted to overhaul it. 2K games likes to add fun and variety, so I doubt we'll be seeing lame crap like capture the flag and deathmatch in Bioshock 2 (least one would hope!)

Also, why are you complaining? The single players gonna be excellent, who cares if they're tacking on MP? Sides, with Brutal Legend this coming month, Dragon Age AND Assassins Creed in Nov... I'm glad they moved it back, gives me something to play late winter.

I'm more of a fan of the single player campaigns/stories/etc., but I highly doubt that adding multiplayer to any game really detracts anything at all. If anything it adds more return play value as multiplayer always seems to be a new adventure each time you play.

I don't need multiplayer games either.

FYI, the multiplayer part of BS2 is being done by a completely different company so it will have little to no effect on the single player gameplay.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:our game has 2323923029 of gameplay, but only 3 hours of it are relevant!

I see you are familiar with Square-Enix, and Star Ocean in particular.

If you don't like multiplayer then simply don't play it.

To suggest that just becuase you don't wan't to play multiplayer in BS:2, therefore nobody else must want to either, is arrogant in the extreme.

I also think games should have a co-op mode too. I mean, why the hell not?

@Ahtman: Nail on the head.

We need more coop, it's what makes and breaks friendships, relations and marriages.

But umtli-player is always there. I fething hate MP, so I avoid it. With a passion. I'd only buy Gold for the 360 to play in coop with friends abroad.

Co-op is genuinely what is lacking. To few games do it, or if they do it is a scaled down version. Or, if they do have it it is online only. People still do sit next to each other in real life occasionally.

garret wrote:OK but in all seriousness why do they have to stick multilayer in games that dont need it. the original bioshock didnt need a multiplayer to be great.

Some people have friend

Seriously, decent multiplayer gameplay should not be in the way of a good single player experience.

Gears of War has a mediocre story that's really lame, but the coop value is great. Cliffy B might be a douche, but he knows how to make a game fun.

I'd be more worried about the games that have MP as their primary selling point, like Bioshock 2. That's what I hear the most about right now, MP! MP! MP! Oh yeah you are a Big Daddy, but it has MP! MP! MP! Then again, most dedicated MP games don't last that long, horrible exceptions withstanding.

Nothing wrong with single-player games, nothing wrong with multi-player either. It's when the publisher insists on spooging the two together that the trouble starts.

This thread.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/254513.page

Especially this very insightful post from an industry insider.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/254513.page#946776

BrookM wrote:Gears of War has a mediocre story that's really lame, but the coop value is great. Cliffy B might be a douche, but he knows how to make a game fun.

I'd be more worried about the games that have MP as their primary selling point, like Bioshock 2. That's what I hear the most about right now, MP! MP! MP! Oh yeah you are a Big Daddy, but it has MP! MP! MP! Then again, most dedicated MP games don't last that long, horrible exceptions withstanding.

Y'know, I always thought Cliffy B was a douche too, till I met him at my community college campus. They're apparently recruiting alot of folks right there to bring in for internships, etc.

But back on topic:

Coop needs to be done more often like Gears of War, just with more folks if needed. Warzone and ODST's Firefight are amazing ways to spend a gaming session.

Coop in Gears is excellent because the item placement etc. is done in a competitive manner, there aren't two of everything everywhere. You both want that torque bow? Let's see who gets there first then shall we?

Saints Row 2, my surprise of the year also has stellar coop, sure there is the odd thing here and there, but stuff like the mini-games are seemingly made with coop in mind. Now that's awesome.

Gimme the Multiplayer... gimme the co-op... gimme the singleplayer... just one big orgy of playing.

Game discs can't hold enough for good multi player and single player games.

they should go multi disc.