There was a big ruckus earlier this week when it was revealed that EA had shut down Visceral Games -- the developer behind the once fantastic Dead Space series. The studio was working on a single player Star Wars title -- that one that's been in development for what seems like an eternity -- and EA said in a statement that it had decided the experience isn't one "that players will want to come back to and enjoy for a long time to come". The statement doesn't explicitly say that the project will become a service-based release like Destiny 2, but, let's be honest, it's heavily implied.
Unsurprisingly, this statement sent shock waves through the gaming community, and once again unearthed the all-important question: are traditional, single player games dying out in favour of always online, service-based experiences?
It's no secret that with the right formula, titles like Overwatch, Destiny 2, and a whole load of other online-based games stand to generate a huge amount of money. Microtransactions, as always, factor into the conversation, but at this point, that's almost an entirely different can of worms that we won't be opening here.
Anyway, we want to know what you think. Are single player games in danger? Are you a fan of service-based titles? Vote in our polls, and then feed us your opinions in the comments section below.
Are single player games in danger of dying out? (320 votes)
- Yes, there's a real danger as publishers pursue service-based games
- Yeah, I think there is some danger
- I'm honestly not sure
- Nah, but service-based games could become the norm
- No, single player games will always be the core of the industry
Please login to vote in this poll.
Do you play more single player games, or more service-based games? (317 votes)
- I only play single player games
- Mostly single player games
- I play both equally, more or less
- Mostly service-based games
- I only play service-based games
Please login to vote in this poll.
Comments 82
@Cpt_Price it is isnt it, lots of your progress doesn't count offline other than arcade crap, or so I've heard
There will always be single-player games, although I could see that becoming more of a Japanese and indie thing as the major Western AAA companies all transition to service-based games. Which, honestly, wouldn't bother me, because I play very few Western AAA games to begin with.
Due to the lack of single player content and focus on online, I passed on GT Sport. I generally play single player content only, I only play multiplayer with friends which is extremely rare due to working hours and life.
Got about 400 hours in Overwatch since launch. So yeah my time has shifted this past year, but im no idiot and wont ever go into games like Destiny2. Overwatch is a completely different game and micros are for looks that i earn and never buy
The problem with discussions like this in enthusiast circles is that, unfortunately, we don't reflect the trends of the industry at large. I mean, go back and look at the poll we made about handheld games recently — you'd think that the PlayStation Vita was a huge success if you merely transposed the data from our small sample to the market at large. But that's just not true.
I think single player games will continue to exist, but it's clearly becoming incredibly difficult for publishers to justify funding them. Games like Uncharted, God of War, The Witcher, Horizon, et al are not cheap AT ALL to make. And while we've certainly seen some lower budget single player games have success this year (NieR, Nioh, etc) I do think we're going to get less and less of them moving forwards.
I don't have the information to hand, but I found it fascinating how Ubisoft's talking about Assassin's Creed Origins. It's practically the only "non-service" game in its portfolio — and it's not expecting it to make a massive amount of money as a result.
This is why I never get rid of a console or it's games. At some point it'll all be digital, which sucks. I prefer hard copies.
@Cpt_Price Of course there will be more Uncharted, Horizon, and Witcher — I'm just saying single player games on that sort of scale are going to become even less common in my opinion.
Here's that story about Assassin's Creed Origins that I was referring to by the way. Ubisoft management isn't exactly predicting a big hit considering the scale of the product and the evident expense that's been invested into it: https://www.dualshockers.com/assassins-creed-origins-sales-better-syndicate-worse-unity-black-flag/
Yeah honestly they are. Basically if you don't like Western RPGS, Uncharted type "games", or the Arkham games, you really don't have many choices left besides Indies. Those are only fun for so long.
No. When we have multiple new or revived IPs that started off MP only but their sequels added single-player campaigns (Titanfall, Battlefront), you realize that single-player is getting more attention, rather than less.
I sincerely hope not like.
I don't think they're dying out, but I can see a future where they're not the norm either. Sony and Nintendo stuck to single player games mostly, and I'm glad for that. EA, Activision, Ubisoft and most other publishers found other ways in terms of always online DRM, MMOs or just straight up multiplayer integration into everything.
The fortunate thing is that there's a finite about of gamers and they have a finite amount of time. There are only so many online games you can focus on at once. And most people play them for a long time, so there's a lot of competition in that genre. Look at For Honor for example, or Steep.
People forget the massive popularity of RPGs. Especially now in this generation. Many financially successful games last year were all RPGs. As long as there is interest in this genre single player games will never die out. I could see them going toward a ffxv route with constant updates, though.
I only play single player games after I got burnt out on fps's last gen. So this may be a trend for this gen, but it will never kill singleplayer games. Besides you never know how popular upcoming games (Spiderman, God of War) may shift developers towards single player games.
@get2sammyb Yeah, but Assassin's Creed is suffering from franchise fatigue. They've literally released like, twelve games in the past like, ten years? It would be the equivalent of having fifteen Dark Souls games in ten years.
That's a lot of souls for a person to take. Or need.
Hmm, yes I think that as an industry whole, big AAA single player experiences will be relegated to publisher funded efforts or a rare single player experience from some studios. They will exist and they'll do ok but I think we will see more tacked on 'campaigns' rather than not. Other than Nintendo who will still continue to do what they do.
It isn't doom and gloom but what tends to happen is that big business see certain trends and interpret the way they want. E.g. games like Prey, Assasins Creed, DIshonoured 2 or Watchdogs 2 launch but don't sell to target or sell as much as predecessors, hence generating less revenue. At the same time, service based games generate revenue well over a longer period of time. Hence, from an investment point of view, every game should be service based. It ignores modest success stories like Horizon or UC etc. or that a well made, modestly budgeted single player game can give a solid return on investment.
I get it but it is a shame and probably the wrong lesson to take. I also get Sammy's point that we are dedicated enthusiasts who love us some single player games but the average joe might just like playing footie or shooting randoms on a FPS.
Whilst I think the evidence points to AAA single-player games dwindling among the big third party publishers, I don't think single-player games will disappear altogether. AAA game development is very expensive, almost to the point of economic self-harm, but what about Indies and Japanese developers? They're not going to stop making them because EA decided to. In fact, it provides even more of a niche to fill. While games like Nioh, Nier and Persona 5 were modest sellers by Western AAA standards, all three actually over performed and I think suggest that there is indeed continued demand for single-player content. Sony and Nintendo seem committed to producing quality single-player content and I doubt either will abandon it.
Yep, third party publishers are going to make it the norm. Ubisoft, Activision, EA, Square, they're all head in it. But there's a resistance on first party, specially Nintendo
Single player games dying out is a silly idea. There'll always be a market for them. Perhaps this market will shrink as more people play online games, but single player games won't go away.
My main problem with single player games is that they just take soooo much time to finish these days and are usually padded to death with busywork...as a working adult with a family, I don't really have time for that. I prefer a 6-9 hour game that's tightly woven and memorable.
I don't think they'll die out completely, but they're definitely becoming a lot more common, and that's a big shame IMO. While I like some online games a lot, single player games have always been my favorite.
We are all one step closer to the always online Oasis in “Ready, Player One” where there is only the one huge overarching virtual reality existence that we all play. 😕
But I agree with Sammy. In many ways the casual gamer market appears to have grown in the last several years; a side effect of the roaring success of the PS4 being in so many homes is that people who have just a fleeting interest in gaming now own a console and watch Hulu and Netflix on it and only buy a couple games a year. It’s the double edged sword of success that the masses out there are not as dedicated to the hobby as we and don’t play dozens of single player games annually like most of us do. Mobile phone games also add to this destructive ruin imo. To be honest, I liked it better when video gaming was more niche and the hardcore fans drove the market. I think that is shifting toward hardcore gamers being the minority as the number of casual gamers vastly outnumber the hardcore and so their combined dollars are outvoting us, no matter how many games we buy.
So a shrinking market for single player experiences is inevitable, and I don’t mind as long as the quality stays high. Whether that be from Japan, indies, or whomever.
Yeah we're going to start getting less and less single player games. I'm worried, but at the same time there will always be games catering to the market. My biggest worry is that these games will receive limited funding due their perceived investment return.
As long as Sony is around though, I'll get enough to keep me happy. GT Sport was always meant to be their 'service' game. There's plenty of single player games coming out.
First party game coming out for PS4 AND Vita!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYRE_avtdps
I’m yet to find an online game I actually enjoy! 😕
No, I think there will always be a healthy appetite for single-player experiences, but I'm prepared to buy ten thousand copies of Bloodborne 2 to make sure.
@BLP_Software And Sony as well
I'm not sure why Nintendo is being touted as a bastion of single player games. I know stuff like Zelda, (3D) Mario, and Metroid typically has a single player focus, but beyond that I feel like a large portion of their portfolio leans on local multiplayer, social experiences.
I'm sure this comment will get cherry-picked with other examples, like Pokemon and Xenoblade, but y'all know what I mean.
@get2sammyb Yeah I don't get it either, only Zelda was there recent big game that focused on SP. Mario Kart, Splatoon and ARMS were more about multiplayer. For every Nintendo SP game Sony can double yet Nintendo is "the savior of the industry" apparently.
I think it's important to talk about why the trend is this way. Namely, SP games have a definitive end and therefore less avenues for players to spend money.
MP? Map packs, new characters, skins, and it's all cheaper than a single player DLC too since you won't need expensive VA work or mocapping.
This, sadly, seems to be related to the fact that once again games are costing too much to make. But big publishers are constantly throwing huge amounts of money at game dev for titles that don't need it, causing a swelling effect.
Add to that diminishing returns (Growth to playerbase has a limit when just throwing money at it, and marketing sometimes being the same cost as development) and tons o' games fighting over wallets and it's easy to see why the big pubs want to go this route.
Ironically, we saw this a while ago too, around 2012, when every game needed an MP section. Seems devs are just getting rid of SP now, rather than tacking on MP.
Without SP the industry will crash again, then SP will be back. Don't need to worry.
Just remember 10 years ago, when everybody said "mmo is the future SP is dead"....yeah...nope.
Single player I am likely to play once then either gets deleted or stays on the shelf collecting dust. I much prefer some element of interaction with other gamers.
I love single player games and would be more than willing to pay extra for a single player experience without any multiplayer involved. The Witcher, Uncharted and Horizon are great examples of single player games that are worth $100. I will pay more if it means single player stays around for the foreseeable future.
@get2sammyb @adf86 @BLP_Software Nintendo new ip last gen is splatoon, a multiplayer focused shooter, nintendo new ip this gen is arms, a multiplayer focused fighter (with no single player story mode), I don't think nintendo is savior of single player game.
Compared to sony that has new single player ip like uncharted and tlou last gen, and horizon this gen. I think sony is the savior of single player story games
And nintendo has micro transaction in all of their games, it's called amiibo
I played the GT Sport Demo and saved sum bunce.
The thing kept going to utube everytime i wanted to see a demo of a lesson , I like single player and dabble in multiplayer ,but if I wanted an online only game then it would make sense to get it on P.C.......less restrictions.
Yes, sadly. The gaming industry is obsessed with multiplayer games only, microtransactions, GaaS and e-sports stuff. Smartphones and PC gaming are responsible for this as well, why bother to release a new game if you can make hats for mobas, your dumb fanbase will still praise you.
We still have great single-player games coming soon: Spider-Man, God of War, Super Mario Odyssey, Days Gone, Beyond Good & Evil 2...But I'm not sure if this will happen after some time.
no it's not.we got more single player game.than online multiplayer.
Single player games are the core of gaming. They offer the magic moments. Tell me what kind of memorable moment you had in overwatch. But all will remember the classic story of bioshock.
Unfortunately not all developers are ready or are up to a single player story.
It's like music. It's a modern concept create the environment and let them play. No thinkling around.
@get2sammyb "I think single player games will continue to exist, but it's clearly becoming incredibly difficult for publishers to justify funding them. Games like Uncharted, God of War, The Witcher, Horizon, et al are not cheap AT ALL to make. And while we've certainly seen some lower budget single player games have success this year (NieR, Nioh, etc) I do think we're going to get less and less of them moving forwards."
Is not a significant part of the reason these games are so expensive to develop these days is because so much time and energy is funnelled into the aesthetics? I'd say the majority of the time this is used to cover up unoriginal gameplay and narratives. Don't get me wrong, I like pretty things as much as the next guy, but it doesn't matter how good the paint is if the box has caught rot. They're only that expensive because they've made them that expensive (if that makes sense). It reminds me of something you said recently in relation to Battlefront 2's shortcomings, that we're kind of to blame for it, too. I think that's the case here as well. We've spent so many years banging on about graphics and photorealism that we're partly responsible for the industry adopting it as a major priority. We've shot ourselves in the foot here and can't really complain (although I will, of course, because I bloody love complaining!)
@lixei32 To play devil's advocate, I bet there are loads of people who have many amazing moments they remember in mulitplayer games like Overwatch.
I certainly remember @Simon_Fitzgerald spamming Hanzo.
I really don't see single player games going away ; but how they are delivered will change. The big publishers have been pushing flashy graphics, and larger open worlds for years now, and in many cases have lost sight of what they are doing. Service based games are the next trend for them, moving away from single player titles with limited opportunities for ongoing income to service based titles with a constant revenue stream. This reminds me of the evolution from 2d to 3d games. But players want choice and so there will always be someone willing to fill the gap. This used to be AA developers, and has now seen indie devs fill the gaps. so I see a similar scenario where we see the rebirth of AA devs; or Indy developers fill the space left by 'big' publishers.
I’m a single player person. I have played 4 AAA SP games that came out this year: Horizon, Persona 5, Nier: Automata (still playing) and The Lost Legacy. They’re all great games, enjoyed them. I still believe AAA SP games will continue to exist, but they’ll be less than before (I hope not). I think EA are making it clear that SP story driven experiences won’t be their focus, and it sucks. I also think Bioware has ANTHEM as their last shot, given that especially it’s a new IP, or they’ll suffer the consequences. On the bright side, indie studios exist. They still give us rich, story driven experiences, sometimes even better than the EAs and Ubisofts. Let’s hope that more publishers prioritise SP over GaaS.
Imo theres nothing better than a well crafted self contained game.
If that becomes a thing of the past its because these big game corporations have let greed blind them.
Lets hope it never comes to that and that there will hopefully be a reemergence of new people in thw bizwho are in it for the love of gaming and not money.
If they actually do go away I’m moving to Japan for Nier Yakuza 0 and P5!
@get2sammyb
Well maybe but I don't think so. Reading a magazine has its moment. But reading a good book is another thing. You know what I mean.
Nah!
The thing is with multiplayer games you can milk money from your playerbase (not saying it's bad, I spend like 100 euros or more per year in LoL and 40 or so in OW)...but singleplayer games are like 60 euros and then it's all they have! So I understand the sudden shift for multiplayer games but overall there's not 1 multiplayer game that I would choose over a well crafted singleplayer game
While it's possible service multiplayer games could be more prominent, I doubt singleplayer will suffer. There are many good points arguing that (The games getting more expensive to make, casuals preferring multiplayer, etc.), but I think they'll be fine. The good ones still sell well, and it's likely we'll see more announced in the future, and there's plenty not even released yet.
Even if they do somehow die out, having nothing but service multiplayer titles would probably do more harm than good. I'm probably thinking too simply about this, but if that was all there was, people could only really commit to a couple games at a time. People only have so much money, and they can't throw it at every game out there, know what I mean?
@keihtg i was just thinking that if these games cost so much to make the answer is to get rid of all that filler that people just complain about anyways and really focus on making games more compact. Im sure most people would sooner praise a game that is maybe a bit on the short side and lacks hrs of boring fetch quests and instead has an amazing 5-10 hrs of precise awesomeness.
Companies need to stop concerning themselves with what the masses are yapping on about and instead craft "their" game, possibly on a slightly smaller scale/budget. Just do the best they can without worrying about current trends.
Its the whole "build it and they will come" thing.
@PaperyWhiteBoy and @Gmork__ I think have a point here. We have complained and given feedback suggesting we want bigger and better looking games and developers are likely trying to respond and the cost to make them is just going up and up.
If everyone who is saying they want high quality SP games that don’t necessarily have to last 100 hours would go buy and enjoy the ones we do have, then it might go along way to “telling” developers there is a market for them. For example, among games I played within this year are - The Order 1886, Rachet & Clank, and Uncharted Lost Legacy. All very good SP experiences that lasted less than 15 hours each. I wish there were more of these. But no, we all complain about how such-and-such game was too short, so they just don’t make those 8-12 hour games anymore. (Granted, the price point should be reflective and be less, like that $40 mark)
Games don’t all have to be huge 300 hour RPGs or service games that people sink 300+ hours in.
No, imho service will become prevalent with multiplayer games but just an added extra for single player games.
@lixei32 I have had plenty of memorible moments in Overwatch and CoD MP with friends in fact some of them where just as good or even better then single player games.
The day the industry goes games as a service I will be leaving the hobby or at least go to a company that wouldn't likely go that route which is probably Nintendo.
I'm not a massive fan of open world or online games if Im being honest. I dont have the time to put 80 hours into a game, nor am I interested in spending 20 minutes heading from point A to point B on the map. Take Metal Gear Solid 5 for example, it ticked all the boxes, good graphics, solid gameplay, a decent story (although strange). But I was put off early in the game because there was far too much of a barren map to traverse not to mention the oil rig BS. Give me a 12-15 hour single player Uncharted 4 any day of the week. Not enough of them these days in my opinion.
@BLP_Software What a surprise that you throw out the fanboy argument. You say that Sony let Jak and Daxter and Sly die, that's because Sony actually invest in new IP and give their developers something new to do. For all the relevance Nintendo have they have to rely on Mario and Zelda all the time just to have some semblance of a market share.
Breath of the Wild carried the Switch to sold-out status for months after launch even though there was virtually nothing else to play on Switch.
Journalists who are allowed to play Super Mario Odyssey at conventions are all raving about it. That will almost certainly be another huge hit.
Horizon: Zero Dawn would have been a serious GOTY contender if Breath of the Wild hadn't sucked all the oxygen out of the room a week later.
These are all single-player-only titles.
So no, there is no risk of single-player games dying out.
@BLP_Software And Splatoon was the only one that people seemed to care about which is ironic considering it's a MP game. Maybe Nintendo's audience isn't as interested in SP titles these days outside of Mario and Zelda.
What are service based games even? Online games? Not my thing, I play Smash Bros 4 online with my buddy every now and then but that's pretty much the extenct of it.
For me, a consideration that isn't factored into the equation is that the community can only support so many online games. It's no accident that typically there are only a handful of online games that make megabucks at a time. These games tend to cannibalize each other's audience a lot.
Just look at the last 12 months, PUBG and Overwatch and maybe COD have completely dominated and as such, have made incredible amounts of profit. Then there is a second tier with your Battlefields and such but almost every other online game has struggled to gain a foothold.
It's all well and good for these companies to want to enjoy the profits that PUBG, Destiny and Overwatch make but they will have to knock out something truly incredible to compete and the reality is, only a few games will hit the mark.
Personally, I don't see anything changing that much. I think the current balance of Online, single player and indie games will continue for the foreseeable future.
Are companies really going to ignore the profits that the likes of Horizon, MGS5, The Witcher 3, Mario, Crash Bandicoot and all the other games make?
In my opinion I think the older generation gamers will always have a base for single player games. I still believe now there are few people that play single player but in the future we will see more multiplayer games as new generation grows the more popularity multiplayer games are. Is like social media kids now a day want to play online with there friends and others
in my opinion multiplayer games were much better last-gen, nothing on PS4 comes close really. i played way more multiplayer/online last-gen. for me, i would always have had a fallback game after being done with a single player game.. but these days i can go weeks and months where i use my ps4 only for iPlayer, All4 or amazon video.
every publisher wants its grand theft auto v.. though i think the console market can only sustain so many of those service-based games, and much like the FPS market, it'll be hard to break the dominance of the few, and it's not that easy to get it right either, as destiny found out when it couldn't generate anywhere near enough regular new content to cope with the player demand. destiny 2 has many of the same shortcomings and in some ways added new ones, since people seem to have dropped off the endgame grind way more quickly this time around. ubisoft had the division, which was a great environment lumbered with an average game. after i got the platinum trophy, there was literally no reason/desire to play it any longer. it's also tried steep (which bombed), and for honor (is there really much of a player base for this?).
it's not just the cost of AAA games, it's also the length of the development cycle as well.. even SP-focused games can be 3-4 years in development, so the bi-annual cycle that existed last-gen is no more, so revenue generated from one game is having to sustain some teams for much longer. even if development costs are not an easy conundrum to solve, in some respects the industry has only itself to blame for that predicament. i've heard stories of environmental artists spending weeks on the most trivial things because of the push for 4K photorealistic graphical fidelity. i get that big budget single player only games are a risk - it seems like we've got to a point where if a game doesn't sell at least 2m+ it's going to lose money - and games which seem to have all the right elements and pedigree for big success fall flat, or sequels of previously commercially successful properties under perform - and the general gaming public can be a pretty fickle lot, and i include myself in that. i bought destiny, but not desiny 2, i bought watch dogs but not WD2, battlefront but won't be buying BF2, wolfenstein new order but won't be buying the new one.. i haven't bought assassin's creed since revelations, etc.
i bought only 4 games this year (horizon:zero dawn, mass effect andromeda (only played it a couple of hours), the lost legacy, everybody's golf). dlc for HZD aside there's nothing else i'm looking forward to until next year, and seems the games i've got on the radar are all single player focused - god of war, days gone, detroit, the last of us 2, shadow of the colossus remake..
I don't think single player games are in danger of dying out. At the moment there is still very high demand and a profit can easily be made, so if there's a risk at all we're far away. I think at worst it will become a niche market. That being said I think the trend towards online is pretty ubiquitous.
@RedMageLanakyn Same here. I like single player games on physical copies, because when I buy them I feel comfortable knowing I'll still be able to play them years down the line.
@ThroughTheIris56 @RedMageLanakyn - same, i don't own a single AAA game digitally. in fact, i don't think i own much digital other than some telltale and housemarque games.
when single player games disappear, I go back to buying old consoles, as much as I've enjoyed Destiny 2 once I finished the story I've stopped playing
@BLP_Software you make it sound like it's bad they've "only" just got into DLC
@leucocyte For the most part the only digital games I own are indie games. Other than that it's shorter AAA games, and even then I rarely get something digitally if its not on sale.
I honestly only buy the games Sony publishes. There all great single player games. I can't remember the last time I bought a 3rd party published game.
I can't remember the last time I played an online multiplayer game. I exclusively play single player these days. I do expect the number of single player experiences to continue to dwindle. Production costs are just too high. You either end up with Tomb Raider 2013 that sold millions of copies and was still a failure in the publishers eyes, or teams getting dissolved altogether. I expect we will get more games like Shadow of War from third parties. Special Editions and season passes will be offered and in game purchases will be available to offset the higher production costs.
I feel like we will always have some single player games around as someone will always plug the gap... And with these service games some are actually good if you really like the gameplay your sorted for ages. Reminds me what they do with mmo's but obviously just don't pay for the microtransactions that's a big NO. I'm not going to support that unless they're done in the right way on a free to play GAME. I just like a bit of both just don't like the way they're making games worse even single play now!! By trying to force people to buy microtransactions it just completely ruins the game for people who don't and your abit daft imo if you pay for them just to save time you really should just play the game and earn it and enjoy earning that not just buy it.
Also even if we had a spell where it is mainly service and multilayer games we can always go back and play the great ones. I'm just playing through God of War 1 for the first time on PS Now and I absolutely love it. It's ace they just don't make games like that anymore.
I think what could happen is that more games like FFXIV, Destiny 2 and Diablo will surface. Games that are online multiplayer, but with a campaign that can be played through as solo or through simple matchmaking / groups. I do actually like having a game where I can experience the story together with some other players. You feel less "alone" experiencing that world. Also it is giving you more motivation to continue playing with fellow players in that world.
I am always looking forward to the next FFXIV patch, where I can continue the story, team up for raids with matchmaking and have also social interactions throughout the story.
Single player will never die but the selections may be less than before and with less AAA games. Gta 6 online only with no single player story mode off line? I hope not.
One thing is certain and that is that companies will try to make profits on their investments. Following the trend and copying what other companies have been successful with is then expected.
Funnily all of the games on my PS4 is 1P Games
Switch: I have 2 Multiplayer games but the rest is Single Player
3DS: Only a small handful are multiplayer but mostly 1P
I’m more on the 1P side
Same w Vita as 3DS some games are multiplayer some are single
I think now that all console manufacturers charge for online they’ll want you to pay up so they’ll encourage Multiplayer games.
EA and other companies that kill off single player games only care about money, not gamers.
It's obvious the traditional single player games are in danger. Phased out completely? Maybe not. Indie studios exist and there will always be some who try to be different from what is the current norm. But there's no question traditional single player games from 'AAA' studios are nearly done (will most likely be totally done by the time next-gen starts). And it doesn't help when prominent mainstream websites like IGN and GameSpot and good console-specific sites like this one basically push for the end of traditional single player games in favor of service based nonsense like Street Fighter V and Gran Turismo Sport.
While multiplayer games are undoubtedly popular, could it be the industry that wants more of them over single player games?
Think about it. Single player games can be played and then sold on which the industry doesn't like.
With multiplayer games you keep the game longer and resale is limited because by the time most will have finished with a game there won't be many others to go online with.
Just saying
@waluigifan1 what do you mean by “games”?
@adf86 Nah, it's just that Splatoon was the only proper attempt at a new IP. They tried with ARMS, but that game suffers from the same problems SFV did at launch, too little content, and updates are too far and few between. The rest received little to no marketing, or just aren't interesting games, or even noteworthy (I mean, I already forgot BoxBoy was a thing).
This isn't the first article here pondering whether single-player games are "dying", and yet I still don't understand where the question even is coming from.
This year has seen an utter barrage of new releases and yet only a handful of those are high-profile multiplayer-only games. Nintendo is putting a lot of chips on the multiplayer side with releases like Splatoon, Arms and a port of Mario Kart 8, whilst third-party publishers so far haven't actually put out any multiplayer game without at least a storyline that can be played through solo. Even the likes of For Honour and Destiny 2 have a story campaign.
I'm just not seeing why you guys are suddenly so concerned about single-player dying out. Are multiplayer-focused games with microtransactions and lootboxes the most lucrative right now? Sure. But it's not a binary situation, fortunately. Overwatch's success does not mean a game like Horizon: Zero Dawn, Resident Evil 7 or Persona 5 cannot also come out to commercial success.
It reminds me of publishers arbitrarily deciding that horror games were dead, last gen. They eventually learned that that wasn't the case, and they'll do the same with this. Eventually.
@Cpt_Price but they have pumped out loads of Single Player games Sony! so I'm not going to scold them for GT.
Smart companys follow the money and unfortunately it's leading away from single player games. Take for example, Kingdoms of Amular Reckoning , It was a fun single player game, but the company went bankrupt. They were planning an MMO based off of the that game. Maybe if they did the MMO first or at least had cosmetic loot crates the company would still exist.
Nothing you can do other then buy and support the games you like. I am not worried, single player games going anyplace it has a large market also.
@get2sammyb you only remember it so well cause I put you in your place XD
@BLP_Software IDK
smash bros was pretty microtransactiony
some people give a strange "cinematic" attribute to sp games. Nothing forces a sp-oriented game from having less scripted data and more gameplay/replayable/creative content.
Mp/mmo are not "longer", especially mmorpg. it's simply more grind for same or less actual content.
but a game like a cities skyline, a minecraft or a skyrim are HUGE. also witcher 3. or...a dwarf fortress. quality and longevity can be also less than millionaire develop costs and triple a.
@BLP_Software holy lol i laughed at that original comment
@lixei32 If I had the time and energy I could give you tons of amazing Overwatch memories, like tons
Tap here to load 82 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...