Slashdot Mirror


The Growing Illusion of Single Player Gaming

An anonymous reader writes: Multiplayer modes used to be an extra part of most games — an optional addition that the developers could build (or not) as they saw fit. These days, it's different: many games are marketed under the illusion of being single-player, when their focus has shifted to an almost mandatory multiplayer mode. (Think always-online DRM, and games as services.) It's not that this is necessarily bad for gameplay — it's that design patterns are shifting, and if you don't like multiplayer, you're going to have a harder time finding games you do like.

The article's author uses a couple recent major titles as backdrop for the discussion: "With both Diablo III and Destiny, I'm not sure where and how to attribute my enjoyment. Yes, the mechanics of both are sound, but given the resounding emptiness felt when played solo, perhaps the co-op element is compensating. I'd go so far as to argue games can be less mechanically compelling, so long as the multiplayer element is engaging. The thrill of barking orders at friends can, in a way, cover design flaws. I hem and haw on the quality of each game's mechanics because the co-op aspect literally distracted me from engaging with them to some degree."

15 of 292 comments (clear)

  1. Never been a fan of multiplayer. by aussersterne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe I'm dating myself here, but multiplayer games are still newfangled and weird to me, and I don't know if that will ever change.

    When I used to play games, I played to get away from social interaction and enjoy myself in isolation. It was a kind of recuperation. A world of gaming in which you have to face social interaction once again as part of gameplay was unattractive enough to me that I stopped playing games altogether. These days I mainly do crossword puzzles and read e-books for the respite that I used to get from gaming.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
    1. Re:Never been a fan of multiplayer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Dating yourself is definitely single-player.

    2. Re:Never been a fan of multiplayer. by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've always enjoyed single player games as a sort of kinetic puzzle. Even if the action involves racing away from the cops or jumping across platforms, a single player game rewards the ability to learn patterns and find weaknesses in the enemies and rules of a closed system. It's both relaxing and rewarding to master the mechanics of the game.

      Multiplayer, on the other hand, is a spastic experience which seems to be dominated by obsessive players with endless time to practice. The reward for the average player is not mastery, but rather learning to die a little less often.

    3. Re:Never been a fan of multiplayer. by preaction · · Score: 5, Interesting

      My first online multiplayer game was Diablo. I have avoided every online multiplayer RPG since, and generally avoid multiplayer "experiences".

      Multiplayer video games are a cesspool of the worst elements of society. You have to be relatively well-off to afford everything you need to play. In fact, the more well-off you are, the more time you have to spend in the game, the more likely you're going to be an asshole.

      You're anonymous. You're being competitive. You are (mostly) rewarded for being a complete asshole (loot, loot, precious loot! loot the newb corpse!)

      At least before voice chat you could close the text box or put it out of your mind. Now, if I decided to partake, I'd have to deal with 8-year-olds telling me how they fucked my mother in the ass and how she moaned (when they don't have to tell me, I could hear it just fine).

      Fuck multiplayer. Other people are too shitty to play with.

    4. Re:Never been a fan of multiplayer. by Spy+Handler · · Score: 5, Informative

      Multiplayer can be and often is what you describe. But it depends on the community.

      Some of the best online gaming experiences can be found on private servers (for those games that have them). Since anyone with moderate knowledge and resources can run a private server, there are many of them. A server's community tends to reflect the values of the owner, so just browse GTOP100 or other similar sites and look for well-policed friendly ones.

      Most private servers have a very high GM to player ratio compared to official servers. On a friendly private server, the 8-year-old you describe that tells people he fucked their mother in the ass will get banned before his first day is over. It will have clear Terms of Use that outlines what is acceptable behavior and what's not, and how to report abuse to GM. The good ones actually care about your gaming experience and will take griefing seriously.

      Also look for one with an active forum. Since the PS community tends to be small, you'll get to know most of the active players after a while. Browsing the forum will give you the flavor of the community.

    5. Re:Never been a fan of multiplayer. by Lotana · · Score: 5, Funny

      One enjoys EVE Online if and only if he/she also enjoys spreadsheets.

      Really, it is Excel with double-clicking to move around!

  2. Got Burned by Titanfall by Scott+Tracy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hard-core gamers will laugh, but I bought Titanfall for Xbox One thinking 'Hey, cool, what a great looking first-person game." I get home with the disc and find out (a) there is no way to play alone, and (b) I needed an Xbox Gold account to even go online and play with others. Apparently I'm the only one on earth who doesn't like multi-player and has zero interest in playing a game with a bunch of random strangers on the Internet, so for me the game is effectively useless. And what really bugged me was that it was not at all clear on the game packaging that it was mutli-player ONLY and absolutely required Xbox Gold to play. Even reviews I read online didn't make that explicitly clear - I assumed Titanfall would be like Halo or Call of Duty: sure there's mutli-player, but you also get a game to play yourself. Now I see something like Destiny and I fear the same thing happening (and from reading the linked article it sounds like single player is there, but not well thought out). Is the first-person shooter market really so heavily focused on multi-player that those of us with no interest in that feature will eventually be shut out of playing the latest games?

    1. Re:Got Burned by Titanfall by gohmifune · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why do you have to go to external sources to find information on a games requirements? It should be clearly stated on the box.

  3. Escapism by Bifurcati · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When I game, it's usually as a form of escapism and distraction - I don't want to play with my friends all the time. Rather, I'm after fun game with a great story. That's why games like Arkham Asylum, Skrim and Deus Ex are brilliant: become immersed in a world, enjoy a story comparable to a movie, and not deal with people for a little while.

  4. Re:cool by afidel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I too have a massive library of oldies from GOG.com, a huge Steam library, and a large Steam wishlist just waiting for the right sale to pickup, I can outwait this trend since I literally have more content available than I can possibly consume pre-retirement.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  5. Cheaters, griefers, trolls, and children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    are bad enough, then being at the mercy of everyone's internet connection is not fun or entertaining in my opinion. Then there is over loaded servers, unexpected maintenance, server crashes all weekend long, and the ultimate end of the servers being shut down. Or at least that was it was like a couple of years ago, when I switched over to casual games to get my fix.

  6. Fallout 3+ by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 5, Informative

    I agree. It is why I enjoy the Fallout universe. Even if parts of the story are frankly lame, the fact I can wander around and find better 'mini stories' and interesting characters makes it worth while. I have finished the game a number of times trying different approaches: piling on individual attributes/skills at the beginning (get to max at agile or intelligence etc, and at small arms or sneak or melee weapons as fast as possible etc), being good, being bad, being neutral, etc. I'm looking forward to the next release.

    If they ever do go online, I would prefer being able to be the lone wanderer if I still wish. And as far as the PC/console game, I'd rather not have to always be online. That one thing has been the major reason I don't game very much any more.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  7. No trouble finding single player games.... by Berkyjay · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wasteland 2, Pillars of Eternity, Civilization, Banner Saga, FTL, GTA V, Skyrim, Fallout (all of them), ALL my iPad games, Stick of Truth, Torchlight, Banish......ETC. Basically, if you pull your gaze away from the "AAA" titles, you'll find a plethora of compelling and fun single player games.

  8. I HATE multiplayer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I detest multi-player -- precisely because I hate it when "friends" give me orders when playing a game. Worse, some strangers try to do it. I just never took to that and I really resent it when somone tells me: "do this. Cover that. Kill that." It reduces my enjoyment by 75% at least. There are actually some people who are great "yellers" when they're just on TeamSpeak or one of those but they couldn't do that face-to-face.

    I'm not saying it isn't fun for everyone nor that anyone should never try it. Just that **I** don't like doing it and I never buy a game for the multi-player experience. Solo is the way to go for me.

  9. Re:Crouching Microtransactions, Hidden DRM by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Overall the video game industry is dying

    The industry isn't dying; it's just facing many of the same problems that the movie industry faced in the late '60s through the early '80s.

    During the so-called "New Hollywood" period, there was a shift as many commonly-loved genres (westerns, musicals, big epics) started to fall out of favor, with a resultant loss of profitability. The big studios started floundering, especially as the increasingly lost control of the theaters. The independent auteurs took up the slack, and now-famous names like Coppola, Scorsese, Spielberg and Lucas made their debuts. Giant epics fell from grace and smaller (and cheaper) movies became more popular. New technologies - often created by the independents, who didn't have the cash to do things the old - and expensive - way, brought new options to moviemakers. Old genres were reinvented and new ones created, reinvigorating the industry, leading to the era of summer blockbusters. Meanwhile, the old studios had to open themselves up to buy-outs from outside investors, and take on new lessons about proper corporate governance.

    It is easy to see parallels with the game industry of today. Customers no longer find the popular genres of yesterday quite as fulfilling as they did a few years back and the big developers seem to be having trouble offering new options. Fortunately, the "indie" game developer is reinvigorating the market, and these days there seems to be more excitement about the indie games than big-name titles like Destiny or Call of Duty XXIV. The publishers are also struggling as their traditional means of distribution is changing from retail sales to digital. The indies are also proving it is no longer necessary to spend $100 million on a game, utilizing new technologies like procedural generation to create worlds as grand as those made expensively by hand.

    The game industry is not dying, it is just in transition. And like the Hollywood Renaissance of the '80s, I hope the game industry will rebound to bring us bigger and better experiences in the next decade.