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.

Solid single player experiences are still out there.

Yes, we're under assault from a glut of FPS game as the impetus of development has shifted away from Japan and to the West (America, primarily) where tastes are different.

But is that any different from the assault of bland 2D action/adventure/platformers that we had 15+ years ago? Crappy FPS with multiplayer elements have just replaced that.

Traditional JRPGs do seem to be on the decline outside of Japan but then again I think Western gamers are having RPGs more suited to their tastes: Fallout, Mass Effect, Elder Scrolls, Baldur's Gate, to name a few select developers for example.

In part I think it's because developers are taking more risks and aren't necessarily locked in to trying tried a true formulas of the past.

And of course there are other genres on the decline as well but again thats just the reality of what sells and what doesn't. 3D environments are huge now, and I honestly believe that if developers had the awesome technology 15-20 years ago that we have no they'd have been pumping out games in 3D rather than 2D (though certainly not all, and I don't by any means mean to imply 3d is better than 2d - I just think it's the logical progression in terms of game design.)

RPGs at least, are breaking the mold, from the traditional JRPG design and have been doing so for some time now.

PS: FFVII is in no way, shape, or form "old school"

I miss JRPGs :(

Im not surprise people dont finish games.. because most games I've played are just do A, then do B, then do A again.. in a slightly different way. gaks boring (most of the time)..

Also some of us just aren't that good for example ninja gaiden.. I never finished that. IIRC they made you kill one worm, fine I did that.. then oh look two worms.. Die a dozen times.. Xbox goes off.

But I finished mass effect a bunch of times, cause despite being repetive it was fun.

Dow2 single player bites the big one IMO.. Do A then do A again.. yawn..

I used to like JRPG's when I was much younger, but over the years they ground on me until I couldn't stand them anymore. They've become very bland and grindy to me. It doesn't help that they all seem to follow the same formula. I finish nearly all of the games I play nowadays. the only one I didn't that I can remember is Fable 2. However, I only rented it and spent most of my time side-questing and exploring so I'll just have to pick it up later. I'm of the mindset that if you don't finish a game you've bought,you haven't made the most out of your investment and are obligated to at least try.

My theory game's are trying to be more casual so it will slowly become a multiplayer experience altogether.

I think the MAIN issue is that Multiplayer is so much more varied and amusing. Not to mention MMO's hold the attention MUCH more than any single player experience I've seen to date. Seriously, you don't think "oh man I need to beat that boss in bioshock" like you would think "I NEED to grind this rep with faction X in Wow!"

The need to play an MMO > any single player experience, and I think thats the problem. Companys don't think single player games can be profitible, tho I will disagree because games like Batman: AA reinvent single player as we know it and show us brilliance.

MMO's are designed to be addictive, though not necessarily good.

Railguns wrote:MMO's are designed to be addictive, though not necessarily good.

Thus why people think "multiplayer" is the way to go. People love playing with other people. Plus we have prime example of excellent games people play as addictively as MMO's that AREN'T MMOs, I.E. COD4, WaW, many RTS style games, etc.

I agree that MMO's aren't all quality, but seriously, the addictive aspect is why MMO's hurt single player. I can't tell you how many good single player games I didn't complete because I was so addicted to WoW. I eventually went back and finished many of them, but it took a lot more time than it should have lol!

Thats a big reason why I usually prefer good single player games. I have plenty to do otherwise, so I keep my gaming time down to small periods every few days and maybe if I get a break, I devote a few hours a weekend to completing something. It works for me. I do play multiplayer stuff sometimes, but the X-box live community tends to be comprised of the worst examples of human behaviour short of actual murder and assault.

Railguns wrote:Thats a big reason why I usually prefer good single player games. I have plenty to do otherwise, so I keep my gaming time down to small periods every few days and maybe if I get a break, I devote a few hours a weekend to completing something. It works for me. I do play multiplayer stuff sometimes, but the X-box live community tends to be comprised of the worst examples of human behaviour short of actual murder and assault.

oh I tend to agree, but having been a hardcore gamer since I was 4 (so 20 years) I've devoted endless hours to gaming. I spent ~10+ hours a DAY playing games during the PS1 era, especially when Xenogears and FFVII were brand spanking new. Its calmed down a lot in my later years of life (I only spent 3-4 hours a day for a week playing Batman: AA), but on occassion I go into a frenzy and will play for more than 8 hours lol. Especially when I do my every-other-year clear of Final Fantasy 6 (best RPG ever outside of Dragonforce!)

I cannot deny the staying power and memorable moments from single player games. All my fav games have almost no multi-player aspects in them, including the God of War series. But I also cannot deny the draw and power of playing with other people, the reason why the Wii is so successful. Hell, games like Goldeneye are classic for their single AND multiplayer prowess. We honestly need more games like that! or remakes of good games (I'd definitely buy a remake of the original Goldeneye or Perfect Dark)

Good god, calming down for you is 3-4 hours a day? Thats more than I play in a average week combined.

Railguns wrote:Good god, calming down for you is 3-4 hours a day? Thats more than I play in a average week combined.

Well i don't play EVERY day anymore like I once did lol, mostly cuz theres no really good games I haven't beat atm :( waiting for Brutal legend next month

mmo's are boring.. honestly. sigh.

If you're looking for a good, long single player-RPG, I recommend a game called "The Witcher". Good Story, very interesting, doesn't focus so much on gear, no monotonous grinding, takes at least 70 hrs to finish, just a good, solid game all around.

I hate MMOs, and almost all forms of multiplayer except for FPS's....which I rarely play anymore. Like Zid I've been known to play for ~10 hours a day, and finding anyone else able to play Hearts of Iron or Civilization III is damn near impossible...so once again multiplayer proves to be useless.

For me, mods are what turn an "okay" single-player experience into an awesome one, adding free new content so you can experience the game in a different way. This is what has kept me playing Oblivion, Rome: Total War, and Medieval II: Total War long after the stock gaming experience grew stale.

I've never actually been able to finish Oblivion. I have the console version, you see. My first game became hideously scratched by my x-box(no I didn't move it, it did that on it's own) and managed to somehow leave the game playable but missing half of the game world. Literally missing; you could be walking along towards leyawin or something and suddenly the whole world drops off. So later I bought the game of the year edition, messed around with the Shivering Isles for a while, and left it for a bit. When I put the game back in, it was also horribly scratched and refuses to play. So I'm 0-2 on Oblivion and yet to finish it. I liked the game, despite the rediculous leveling system that requires you to grind things you don't want to do to level up skills and make sure your level bonuses are decent. If you play by going about doing what you like too much, you will level up too fast and your level up bonuses to your stats are going to be awful. I didn't like Fallout's system too much more, but at least it allowed me to do what I wanted without gimping me.

Railguns wrote: I liked the game, despite the rediculous leveling system that requires you to grind things you don't want to do to level up skills and make sure your level bonuses are decent. If you play by going about doing what you like too much, you will level up too fast and your level up bonuses to your stats are going to be awful. I didn't like Fallout's system too much more, but at least it allowed me to do what I wanted without gimping me.

I'm using a mod now that kinda fixes that. There's no more level-up screen or ability bonuses. Now, there is just seamless advancement. You use your skills, your skills level up, and your ability scores increase based on the relevant skills that they affect. There's still the problem of carefully choosing your major skills to prevent leveling as a weak (combat-wise) character (never take Alchemy as a major skill, for example), but you don't have to worry about min-maxing your skill grinding to get the best ability bonuses.

That would have made Oblivion infinitely more enjoyable if it could take away the constant nagging worry that I have to make sure I've got such and such grinded up so that while I'm out questing I don't accidentally level up too soon. What a backwards system.