Call of Duty: Black Ops 2

Publishers don’t want you to sell your games, and they’ll do almost anything to stop you. For primarily single player focused releases like God of War: Ascension and Tomb Raider, that means implementing online multiplayer in the hope of extending the title’s lifespan beyond its comparatively slender single player campaign. But with the competitive scene dominated by a select few franchises – Call of Duty, Battlefield, and FIFA to name three juggernauts – is it all just a waste of time, money, and effort?

Warner Bros. announced that Batman: Arkham Origins will include a competitive component earlier today. The series – which has been a strictly solo affair under creator Rocksteady’s cautious eye – will mark its first foray into the online arena with an adapted version of the Invisible Predator trials from the previous games. Two groups of three goons will duke it out with guns, while two additional players will work together as Batman and Robin to intimidate them into submission.

Assassin's Creed

It sounds fascinating on paper, but it’s debatable whether it should even exist. The asymmetrical extra is being constructed by British outfit Splash Damage, who previously worked on Brink. This has allowed main developer Warner Bros. Games Montreal to focus its attention on the single player campaign, which is a reassuring move for fans. But as the industry buckles under the weight of increasing development costs, we can’t help but wonder what this means for the publisher’s bottom line.

It’s certainly not our job to worry about the financial state of a colossal company, but you only need turn your attention to Tomb Raider for a case study of where excessive expenditure can go awry. Crystal Dynamics’ brilliant reboot was a critical smash, but it still struggled to meet expectations and claw back its budget. Furthermore, its superfluous multiplayer mode added nothing to its success, which was produced out-of-house by Eidos Montreal.

Batman: Arkham Origins

In fact, boot up your copy of Lara Croft’s return mission and you won’t be greeted by lobbies bursting with players, but more an overlooked online mode that no one asked for. Devoid of any personality and utterly at odds with the message of the main campaign, the competitive component seemed unnecessary from the outset. It's unsurprising, then, that according to PSN Profiles just 25 per cent of the title’s PlayStation 3 playerbase have reached level ten in the mode.

Boot up Tomb Raider and you'll find an overlooked online mode that no one asked for

And to us, that just seems like a waste in virtually every regard. It’s a misuse of the publisher’s resources, of the unfortunate developer’s talent, and of the consumer’s time bothering to boot it up in the first place. And it’s a fate that can be attributed to dozens upon dozens of other narrative-driven games, including – but certainly not limited to – BioShock 2, Dead Space 2, Spec Ops: The Line, and many more.

Fortunately, there are examples that buck the trend. Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood was heavily criticised by its decision to expand into the online space, but its unique brand of competitive action ultimately provided some welcome respite from the gun-focused mechanics that tend to dominate the multiplayer scene. As such, the clever mode – which sees you mimicking the behaviour of non-playable characters in order to stay in stealth – has become a recurring piece of the historical franchise.

Mass Effect 3

And there are other success stories. Mass Effect 3’s excellent co-operative component didn’t really do anything radically different, but served up a compelling slice of online action fuelled by its clever progression system and strong core gameplay. The same is true of The Last of Us – a title that has generated all of its plaudits from its single player, but actually boasts a surprisingly compelling competitive experience that maintains the sense of survival found in its solo campaign.

But the failures far outweigh the triumphs. For all of its good intentions – and pretty admirable support – God of War: Ascension has struggled to cultivate a committed audience. The sequel’s online mode stays true to its single player roots, too, but despite the many thoughtful ideas of the design team, it’s always been apparent that the franchise’s fervent audience just wasn’t interested in taking the series’ brand of brutality online.

Tomb Raider

It’s a challenging topic, because we actually appreciate it when developers try. Kratos’ first (and probably final) foray into the online space may not have scored a flawless victory, but it had some interesting ideas of its own that suited the context of the game. The same appears to be true of Batman: Arkham Origins, so there may yet be hope for Splash Damage’s sure-to-be-divisive brutes-versus-Bats affair.

At the end of the day, it’s hard to argue in favour of a game featuring less content – just ask Wii U owners how they feel about Warner Bros. right now – but we can understand the arguments against. When said additions are rote, unnecessary, and completely at odds with the core campaign – hello again, Tomb Raider – it just seems like an utter misuse of resources. And yet, if Ubisoft hadn't taken a chance, we wouldn’t have Assassin’s Creed online – and that would be an even bigger crime.

What’s your opinion on single player focused games adopting multiplayer? Are you happy to let developers experiment, or do you worry that it will detract from the single player experience? Let us know in the comments section below.

Do single player focused games really need multiplayer? (47 votes)

  1. As long as it doesn’t affect the solo mode, it can result in some interesting ideas57%
  2. I’m not really fussed what a developer decides to do15%
  3. I don’t have the time, energy, or desire to play all of these extra online modes28%

Please login to vote in this poll.