Sony does make service-based games; MLB The Show 17 and Gran Turismo Sport are examples of that business model in action. However, the platform holder’s also one of the few publishers doubling down on single player titles right now, and speaking at PSX 2017 overnight, PlayStation boss Shawn Layden has noted the company’s commitment to these kind of experiences moving forwards.
In addition to admitting that story-telling and solo adventures are all things that the organisation does well, he also joked that he doesn’t go to any of Sony’s first-party teams and tell them, “I read in a magazine that there is something called Games as a Service, make me one of those.” This is a backhanded jab at what we’re seeing in titles like Need for Speed: Payback, where the whole microtransaction model has clearly been squeezed in somewhere it really doesn’t belong.
In fact, Sony actually believes that single player games are very much alive and well, with Guerrilla Games’ managing director Hermen Hulst explaining that Horizon: Zero Dawn is by far the Dutch developer's best-selling game, and it’s also its first in a long time not to feature multiplayer. Of course, it helps that it’s a Game of the Year candidate, but he’s clearly got a point.
[source dualshockers.com]
Comments 33
As long as Sony and Nintendo stay committed to single player, we're good. Now, if only companies like EA could go back to not being horrible and greedy.
Single player done well is the most fulfilling game experience you can have.
Much as I love PlayStation- and I do- it seems that Sony are very good at watching other companies fail, and then pointing out how they aren't doing something similar.
I'm actually a big fan of single player games that have that online crossover element to them. I love like in Dark Souls when you can see other players, or in Steep where you're just exploring and there are other people hanging out.
I do enjoy that, because they're still single player games, but... I like that multiplayer element to them.
Shame old MS is so focused on games as a service. I'm sure it's this blinkered vision that has now starved them of all their exclusives, barring their tent pole titles that are now being run into the ground through stagnation and microtransactions.
@Johnnycide I don't really have a problem like that in this case. Trying to leech money from people with micro-transactions is something that should be pointed out and condemned. It's just not an ethical business practice to include micro-transactions that aren't cosmetic IMO.
PlayStation is the best.multiplayer online game sucks.single player campaign with legendary story reign supreme.word up son
Its seems that Sony are more inclined to let their Devs create the games they want rather than dictate to studios that they have to make a certain type of game - in this case, games as a service. Maybe if the Devs though wanted to make one of these type of games, Sony may well allow them to do so but I get the impression that Shawn wouldn't stipulate to devs that they 'must' make a certain type of game.
Single-player experiences are always my favorite games.
Keep doing great SP games, Sony, that's why you are leading the gaming market.
The fact that Sony allow their developers so much freedom is a huge part of what makes them the best. Hopefully they stick to that.
As MS and EA have found out recently, being control freaks who only care about the latest money making trends - that has a tendency to backfire.
I thought the panel with Greg Miller was quite insightful, especially when he asked about lack of release dates.
Long live single player games.
Wish I could like this article more than once.
Can't wait for this Games as a Service model to come crashing down. There only so many games that can thrive on this model.
Single player games will always be king and local multiplayer will always beat online. If I was to ever try to work out what the best say 50 games I've ever played are, I suspect all are single player and maybe some with local mp as an extra. Thankfully Sony and Nintendo seem to be fully committed to this genre and it only ever seems to be devs that make poor single player games that say they don't work anymore (and seemed to be based in the US).
Son no games as a service please and if we have multiplayer can we start having local mp back regularly? I have great memories from the N64 in particular with 3 mates playing Goldeneye and Mario Kart, yet can't recall one match on Battlefront against random people online
Single player is fantastic. I'm not very keen on the Games as a Service model, too often that means "pay full price for this game, then keen spending more and more money on it".
@KirbyTheVampire oh don't get me wrong, I'm in complete agreement. I was just pointing out that Sony has a habit of this.
Games as a service are perfectly fine for the mobile phone, where their popularity apparently was born. That’s a great place to develop those pay-to-win practices for and all the casual gamers to fund. But I believe the console community has spoken and we’d rather not have those on our consoles, please sir.
@KirbyTheVampire man, i remember the times of command and conquer tiberian sun and tiberium wars.. or black and white ( God games ) .. they had so many franchises i loved
@KirbyTheVampire man, i remember the times of command and conquer tiberian sun and tiberium wars.. or black and white ( God games ) .. they had so many franchises i loved
@Johnnycide Oh okay, gotcha.
@get2sammyb I don't think 'games as a service' is necessarily something bad. I think we've seen some of this generation's best innovations in these services. And that's coming from someone who hardly ever buys a game at launch, and therefore often misses events and the like. There is something magical about that feeling of experiencing something with others.
However, it's exactly like the DLC discussions from ten years ago, when developpers suddenly started selling the ending to their game as DLC. You can't just lock content that should have been in the main game behind a paywall. But this is what we've been seeing with a lot of games this last few years. I still have good hopes about he future, though. Just as DLC turned out right in the end.
@Th3solution Is that so? Overwatch, Watch Dogs 2, Rainbow Six Siege, Hitman, Drive Club, Rocket League. All games that have flourished this generation on consoles by embracing the Service model.
@get2sammyb . I have to agree. Multiplayer in Demon Souls and Dark Souls really added to the experience. I also enjoy multiplayer in ‘monster hunter’ type games and had a lot of fun doing co-op in Soul Sacrifice (delta) on the Vita. Also the asymmetric multiplayer in games like Dragons Dogma and Xenoblade Chronicles X works well for me.
@Kidfried Well, that was said with a hefty dose of tongue-in-cheek. (the “please, sir” placed at the end to emphasize my poorly veiled sarcasm). But you’re right, for every Need for Speed Payback and Star Wars Battlefront fiasco, there seems to be games of service that the community embraces. Why the gaming community went ape over SWBF2 but yet embraced Overwatch and Rocket League, I’m not sure, but there’s definitely been a major anti-microT outcry the past year. Pay-to-win is the basic issue I think. I didn’t play any of those you listed so I’m not sure if the service aspect was P2W in those, but in my mind the games Shawn Layden should be jabbing at here are P2W and the ones, like Sammy said, where the MP and service / microtransaction stuff is shoehorned in later and not implemented properly.
The other distinguishing factor of those service games that do well versus those that cause the all out war, upheaval, and petitions on the internet is whether the game in question is a large well know franchise that adds this in, or a new IP that starts off as a service game. If everyone knows what they are getting into from the start then there is not likely to be complaints. I’m just guessing here, since I don’t participate in this genre of game typically.
*On subject ... hip-hip-hurray for single player games (and single player games with clever and fun MP aspects that don’t detract but enhance the experience)! Go Sony!
@Th3solution "Why the gaming community went ape over SWBF2 but yet embraced Overwatch and Rocket League, I’m not sure".
To me it is pretty clear, I am not sure how somebody can be not sure about it:
Overwatch = Microtransactions add a nice side thing in terms of cosmetics, logos, voices etc.
Battlefront 2 = Microtransactions are not a nice-to-have, they are too prominent, too "in your face" and were at least for a short time too much P2W.
EA simply doesn't know how to do Microtransactions in a non-greedy way. I personally have no issues with Microtransactions, but in Battlefront it felt too much like a god damn chore.
I am far more motivated trying to get cosmetics (and even paid some money for it) on Overwatch, but I am totally held back on Battlefront.
When a game is really great, do feel like spending more money on "individualizing" your character. But Battlefront it is more of a "must" to spend money (in-game or real currency). I am more than happy to support developers by spending more money on the game, but what EA is doing, I just won't support.
@tatsumi Thanks for clarification. That does support my theory, as stated above, that P2W is what I think is the basic issue. My being one of the last 5 people on earth who has never played Overwatch, and not having any particular interest in games as a service, I could only guess. My inexperience with the genre, coupled with my just lack of intelligence in general, makes me just have to be unsure about these things. 😉
People who play them I suppose know why they flock to some and not to others. Your explanation sounds like what I was guessing.
So for me ... single player all the way! I’m glad Sony is committing (at least verbally through the media) to focus on single player games.
With Sony and Nintendo holding the line, I'll not worry about end of single player.
@get2sammyb i agree i love the ways souls handles multiplayer.
@Th3solution Sorry I didn't pick up on that. I'm kinda slow!
I like both single player or multiplayer (co-op) games. As long as the games are good I don't have an issue with them.
This is why the games I play are mostly PS and Nintendo first party. Haven't bought an EA game in years...
@Kidfried No worries, dude. I’m definitely always open for a little clarification.
You remind me, that MGSV is another game that implemented an adjunctive MP component that was well done and not a distraction from the single player experience with the whole base infiltration thing. Also NieR Automata has the online body recovery mechanic, Persona 5 has the online network to help you with the game, ... the list goes on and on, so MP implementation certainly can be done right. -As long as they don’t nickel and dime me to death to get the full experience, then I’m happy if developers use interesting ways to connect to other players.
@Dodoo Mirrors Edge
Tap here to load 33 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...