Too Much Multiplayer In Today's Games?
hornedrat writes "Gamepro discusses the idea that modern games put too much emphasis on multiplayer, and that players aren't as concerned about it as developers think. 'The current environment encourages developers to unnecessarily toss multiplayer into their games without caring about it — or even considering whether anyone will bother playing it. It’s like they're checking an invisible quota box that demands multiplayer's inclusion.' Personally I agree that too much emphasis is placed on competitive multiplayer. I play online, but only with my brother in games that allow co-operative modes, like Rainbow Six: Vegas and ARMA 2. 'My point isn't that developers shouldn't try and conquer Halo or Call of Duty. We'd never have any progress in this industry if developers didn't compete. Game companies, however, should think carefully about what they want their games to be, and more important, gamers should consider what they want. If a developer wants to eclipse Halo, then by all means, pour that effort into a multiplayer mode that's different.' I would be interested to know how many gamers really care about the multiplayer components of the games they buy."
but I know a lot of families that would love a LOCAL 4 player Lego Star Wars or a LOCAL 4 player RPG.
I'll help you if you can help me solve this: Local multiplayer game development still appears to be a very closed environment where indies can't thrive. An indie local multiplayer game can work with four USB gamepads plugged into a hub, but it needs a PC within a cable's reach of an HDTV. But a lot of families still use a standard-definition TV, and even those that have an HDTV with HDMI and VGA inputs usually don't have a spare PC with non-Intel graphics to put next to the TV. One Slashdot user has recommended making the game for the PC not with the intention of selling copies for the PC but instead as a "pilot" to get picked up by a major publisher who will fund a console port. What publisher takes such games?