Comments on: Atari’s Not the Only One Moving Away from Single-Player Games, Says Harrison

By: Resnic

Resnic — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 21:06:55 +0000

I’d have to disagree with Multiplayer games being needed or even wanted. Though they’re lots of fun with your friends or you’re just a lonely guy who’s played halo way too many times on your own, ok. But for most of the people i know, single player games are loved because it’s a more personal experience. instead of going online and getting slaughtered by crazy halo players (who are yelling moronic things over their headset).

The market shows that there is a still steady, breathing flow between consumers and SP games. Don’t turn gaming into the equivalent of modern reality daytime television.

By: Binky

Binky — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 21:02:29 +0000

Really, have they forgotten about Half-Life(And 2) already? I mean, they had a (small)multiplayer component, but the main thing you got was the epic single-player experience. If there aren’t ever any games like that again, what will happen?

By: Fenris

Fenris — Fri, 30 May 2008 12:41:55 +0000

1- Consoles are not killing gaming, they have created the 11 billion dollar a year industry. You may not like the console games (but my guess is you secretly do), but more players and more mainstream acceptance are not the issue

2- Xbox live gives me plenty of community while I am playing Mass Effect, Oblivion, etc. I can chat with my friends the entire time Im playing, get help, keep track of what they are doing, etc. Saying all games must have some kind of online component hammered in just to have it does not make sense.

3- Bioshock was a fun game and I liked it, but its not the best story ever, or if it is then System Shock 2 is the best story ever (since Bioshock is practically a clone of that game).

4- While I agree that there are games (like Bioshock) that I play once or twice and then not again, what is wrong with that? One night stands are great! Seriously though, story based games have this issue (though in RPGs less so) and you either accept it or not. Adding lets say a bunch of sandbox type multipayer modes to Bioshock would not keep me playing it for much longer. You can be a car or a horse but not both.

By: LoBo

LoBo — Fri, 30 May 2008 11:13:03 +0000

P.S. MMorpg`s are a big con and nothing else… are you fat and you moma hates you, play world of warcraft and be a poverful beoutifull elf and SHOW THEM WHOZ BOSS,(15$ a month + 200$ for gold from a con company of gold diggers)

” Atari would be moving away from “huge-budget, single-player games in the future”
Great why make something of walue when you can get a team of 10 and make another shitty mmorpg and make loads of money… if atari realises a mmorpg paid monthly its the las theyll se of my money (i was a fan since `atari 800xt` the wee gray komputer till my 50pound witcher limited edition)

By: LoBo

LoBo — Fri, 30 May 2008 11:01:39 +0000

Truth being multiply and especially Pay2play MMorpg is a sauce pan the gold mine the new eldorado… but just for developers. Just look at the amount of crappy MMorpg`s that korea spitts out… all unreal2 engine all look the same but becouse the reccurency of payments they make soo much mone its feasible and now the companies we love for our single-play (i dont mind coo-op its great but non existent) waant a part of the cake… preatty rubbish if you ask me, I bloody hate those mindless hours of griding and no story line what so ever… armors that have a thousand spikes on them, weapons the size of buildings and all that chinease shit(no offence to the inteligent nation but im sick and tired of their infuence on gaming) girls with ears and tails wearing something that came uot of bukake childrape japanise porn waching 24/7 office workers dream. I WANT A STORY LINE AN ENDING AND FUN THAT WONT COST ME 15 pound a month (serwers cost couple of pennies a month to run per player head every expansion costss on top and its all just an addictive(payed, now you HAVE to play) bullshit… like drugs but legal)

By: Bounce

Bounce — Fri, 30 May 2008 07:41:09 +0000

Singleplayer games are much better. If you make crappy games all you need to do to lure those console kiddies is to add multiplayer. Fucking console kiddies are killing the entire gaming industry.

By: Notme

Notme — Fri, 30 May 2008 07:14:51 +0000

Alone in the Dark
Screw all you anti-single player gamers. It was single players that brought the Gamining industry the success it has now. Millions of us still like single player gaming. Maybe we don’t want to do battle with a bunch of gaming tech-heads that know how to cheat in online games.

By: Evismang

Evismang — Fri, 30 May 2008 06:11:09 +0000

I think Bioshock could have used a little bit of sprucing up. I mean, it was an awesome game with amazing visuals and one of the best stories in a video game ever, as far as I’m concerned, but I beat it once, and now I really don’t want to go through it again. I already know what happens. Nothing will really change. If I was able to play co-op or something, well then ya, I’d go through it again. I usually play online with friends from RL, so we have something to talk about, and that helps to spruce up a lot of situations. Like in Halo 3, we were going to get a skull. We go the skull, turned around to get out of the passage, and didn’t know how to get out. We were exploring, finding a way out, following one another. The first person ran off into a bottomless pit and died, and said “Don’t go there!” right as I ran off. I then said “STOP!” and the 3rd person said “Why?” and then ran right off the same spot.

By: Mustikos

Mustikos — Fri, 30 May 2008 03:41:45 +0000

Thats the thing though, I want the big Holy crap moments like the stuff in bioshock and kotor. I wouldn’t mind if they made games small co-op which I prefer but it always seems if they do mulitiplayer then its random death matches (which I do like). I wouldn’t mind playing the Witcher through maybe co-op style, one person can be Gearalt and the other person can maybe be Dandelion (sp) and that person can get you in trouble all the time like he does in the the books. The problem though still is I read somewhere that in a matter of few years people might start seeing “internet brown-outs” which will suck.

Spore probably has the best approach to some of this. Still a great single player game yet you still are basically with other people with out having to put up with their crap. But just like a movie, some times you want to watch them alone. Not here peoples idiotic comments through the movie etc.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 30 May 2008 00:12:53 +0000

As I said, it doesn’t have to be a multiplayer necessarily. But some way to connect with others — leaderboards, a way to share things, etc. Being confined completely to yourself just doesn’t make sense though, except in certain cases, like BioShock.

By: Mustikos

Mustikos — Thu, 29 May 2008 23:36:18 +0000

I don’t agree that every game needs some kind of multiplayer . The whole reason that I enjoy single player games in the first place is to get away from all the morons that seem to be on the internet. I don’t play games to socialize with people, I don’t want to hear about how crappy their lives are while I am trying to kill some mob or trying to read what a NPC is saying. Plus seems lazier on the developers part.