Is The Multiplayer Boom Actually Hurting Game Sales?
Yes, I'm well aware that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 sold around 6 million copies in the month and a half after its release, but my question involves the psychology of online multiplayer fans.
You may not have noticed, but many who play MMORPGs like World of Warcraft simply don't play anything else. I really don't even consider them to be gamers, as they play one type of game for years on end. Now, I'm starting to see the same behavior from the rabid Modern Warfare fans: there are many who have played the original Modern Warfare online right up until the time the sequel released, and you can bet they'll repeat that procedure again. I'm not saying these online experiences are inherently addictive, but I am saying they seem to drain a lot of time from people and many have admitted to missing out on top-notch titles because they're stuck playing one particular title online. So in other words, of those 6 million who bought MW2, how many of them will buy Heavy Rain in February? I know they're two entirely different games but what about those who currently plan to buy Quantic Dream's ambitious project, then get hooked on MW2 and simply pass everything up, from Heavy Rain through even God of War III and Final Fantasy XIII in March?
These days, it seems as if the battle lines are being drawn: war is being waged between those who almost exclusively play online multiplayer and those who almost exclusively play single-player campaigns. I have noticed that those who get stuck on multiplayer have a lot of time on their hands, and they absolutely don't play as many games as the hardcore gamers who want to keep up with the industry. Missing out on the likes of Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, Assassin's Creed II, Batman: Arkham Asylum, inFamous and the amazing 2010 lineup due to constant online action seems downright reprehensible to me. Bear in mind I have nothing against the multiplayer boom, per se, but I wish some Western developers took the route the Japanese have taken with their big franchises: they gave us MGS4 to satisfy those who appreciate a wonderful story and an absorbing independent experience, but they also satisfied the other crowd with MGO. They give us FFXIII in March (it has no online multiplayer), which will soon be followed by FFXIV, which is only online.
In the future, I really want to see everyone do this. Multiplayer is big enough so entire games can be created with that object in mind; developers that attempt to produce both in the same package usually don't fully succeed in both respects. I think we all know the single-player campaign in MW2 isn't anything special while at the same time, despite the solidity and quality of the Uncharted 2 online experience, there's very little chance that anyone buys that game for multiplayer Deathmatch. So why bother? You could even make the strictly multiplayer games cheaper by making those entirely downloadable in the future (we're going in that direction, anyway). The bottom line is that many who play a lot online really don't care about any single-player experience, and the vice versa can be said about those who couldn't possibly care less about the multiplayer. And with the "time-sucking" aspect of these multiplayer games, and so many millions jumping in, how can sales of games like Heavy Rain not suffer?
Just a thought.
1/3/2010 10:04:14 PM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (173 posts)
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:31:57 PM
to_far_apart
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:14:19 AM
In terms of overall game quality and experience, the multiplayer component in games have left the campaign itself to be completely overshadowed. Now, not all games suffer the same problems, there are those developers who have created a significantly great campaign in addition to fun multiplayer side as well. The issue with this boom towards online gaming, is the fact that a lot of developers now feel that their main focal point has to be to the mass majority and include a functional and equally as fun online experience, it's not their fault for this movement towards online gameplay, but do to the overwhelming demand for this function, they feel that they could create a lackluster campaign and still sell well according to how addictive their online gameplay can be. This is not the case for all developers, however, because there are developers who have created games with both components of the game exceeding expectations and other developers should take some notes regarding this.
As for online gaming affecting game sales, i agree with that statement. I think that this boom into an era of online gaming has affected the industry to a degree. We see some games being overshadowed by games with a seemingly fun and addictive multiplayer. We also see people solely fixated on striving for a top rank or to be a top player online, therefore playing for countless hours, morning, day, and night. With this kind of obsession (luckily there are people who do know how to balance their time) most people generally forget about other titles, which have made their debut release and unfortunately are cast aside like stones because of this constant obsession for online. That's just my take.
If anything, one could even argue how devastating the addition on online capabilities in games have disrupted society in a way. Younger kids today spends countless hours and days, wasting away their youthfulness, spending hours in front of a television. Now, i don't know about some of you, but when i was young i played my handful video games, but i still went out, played some sports, rode my bike, and then when i had my fun, came home and spent a few hours on my games. The problem with society today is the lack or parenting and lack of discipline these parents have over their children. I'm pretty sure most of you received some pretty good spanking from your parents, or a nice juicy belt, and i'm pretty sure most of you learned your lessons quick. I know i did lol. But when a young punk can flick off and adult, disrespect anyone whom they chose, walk over their parents, then i don't know, i guess this world is rotting from within. For all we know, society has already been destined to doom.
Im sorry for barging on, i tend to do that. I hope i also didn't offend anyone, because that wasn't my intention. And for anyone who doesn't understand that this is just MY opinion ill be sure to capitalize it: THIS IS JUST MY OPINION.
Thanks for the time guys, i appreciate it hahah
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:28:41 PM
Reply
I personally think the whole MP boom has been hurting games in general. No longer can someone just churn out a great game, they have to add some form of online function or their game is considered lacking.
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:32:52 PM
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:36:26 PM
WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:49:42 PM
hellish_devil
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:00:59 PM
Really, times have changed. and I hope companies will still do games with single-player campaigns 3 years from now
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:06:37 PM
___________
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 6:13:38 AM
how can assassins creed 2 have multilayer?
who would you play as?
you cant have 30 ezios running arround trying to kill each other, and having one ezio and the others as guards would be unfair because of all the gadgets he has at his disposal.
thats what i said to my cuz the other day, the thing i hate most about games these days.
the fans are making the games, not the developers.
prime example would be uncharted did not have MP, fans bitched so uncharted 2 got MP.
another example, assassins creed and the assassination videos once you kill a target, fans complained there too long.
so they removed it in assassins creed 2 :(
THAT WAS THE BEST PART!
your enemies explaining why they did what they did, and adding, explaining the storyline.
now in AC2 its so short and basically tells you nothing.
DEVELOPERS SHOULD BE MAKING GAMES, NOT THE FANS!
SvenMD
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 7:56:23 AM
SnipeySnake
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:32:51 PM
Reply
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:38:39 PM
Way off topic maybe but I've been wanting a new Sim City for a long ass time.
SnipeySnake
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:40:40 PM
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:56:00 PM
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:23:07 AM
LimitedVertigo
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:33:17 AM
fluffer nutter
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:07:43 AM
Jed
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:48:13 PM
Reply
The thing that really tics me off is how everybody is trying to replicate the online experience from those games. With all their focus on making a good multiplayer they botch the single player campaign, and often the multiplayer also suffers.
I honestly thought the multiplayer for Uncharted would be crap, and that the rest of the game would suffer. (Thank God it didn't). But that is one of the rare instances when both the single and multiplayer were really good. I have not played Modern Warfare 2, but I've heard that the campaign was lacking.
You are right about the people that only play online spend much more time on one or two games. A good friend of mine only plays Halo 3 and WoW
WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:51:09 PM
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:55:31 PM
SnipeySnake
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:19:35 PM
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:22:03 PM
WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:48:38 PM
Reply
I rarely play online because I'm too wrapped up in awesome single player campaigns. Always looking for another story, I find MP rather vacuous.
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:54:08 PM
godsman
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:56:28 PM
One thing I don't like about multiplayer games is that they tend to lose value over time, cause less people from Uncharted 2 will be online 2 years from now. If i buy Uncharted 1, 5 years after it's release, it still has it's 100% value because it only has single players experience.
godsman
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:49:51 PM
Reply
When your friend buys it, you will buy it too just to versus him. As opposed to single player games, people buy it, then lend it to their friends. Right off the bat, a multiplayer game has the advantage in doubling, tripling, even quadrupling the sales of single player games. This gives developers incentives to make even more multiplayer games and which in return builds even greater publicity and interest in these genres.
hellish_devil
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:02:36 PM
Reply
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:08:18 PM
MyWorstNightmar
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:20:56 PM
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:23:24 PM
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:14:48 AM
jaybiv
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:11:43 PM
Reply
I guess you can call me a tweener. I love playing the single player campaigns, but I also love playing against a group of people. With that, I have to spend more time on MP just to keep up and keep it enjoyable for me.
Last edited by jaybiv on 1/3/2010 11:12:28 PM
mackid1993
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:14:56 PM
Reply
www
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 6:13:42 AM
Beamboom
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 10:31:18 AM
Deleted User
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:23:08 PM
Reply
Numbers dont lie, and the millions who bought MW2 prove it.
Want to know why some people bought Uncharted 2? Because Naughty Dog put Multiplayer in Uncharted 2. IF it wasnt for Multiplayer the game wouldnt have sold as much as it did ........ which pales in comparison to MW2.
Look, alot of people are VERY FRUGLE with their money. They have CHILDREN AND MATES to care for. This might mean travel ball on weekends for little Timmy and basketball for Mary. It means buying groceries and paying the house bills and saving for the future or going out on dates. There are a whole host of REAL LIFE AREAS that requires time and money and doesnt permit them to pay 65 bucks a month for a SOLO GAME they dont have time to play. But they WILL pay 55 for a SUPER MULTIPLAYER EVERYONE LOVES TO PLAY and can play it with friends anytime they chose and not have to travel over thier houses to play with. In other words, THEY GET THIER MONEYS WORTH.
IMO the solo game will never die. They will always have a place here.
Is this another whine on why MW2 destroyed UC 2? MUAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
I think Naughty Dog needs to learn quickly, 3rd person shooters suck. FPS all the way!
Buy MW2 TODAY!!
LMAO!!!
End of Line.
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:24:42 PM
johnld
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:51:10 PM
just a suggestion for you, try to get your head out of your ass and you'll realize that there are other games that are much better than MW2, killzone 2 is head and shoulder over MW2. I beat MW2 100% for spec ops, single player, and multiplayer. I got bored playing multiplayer on MW2 because of all the idiots playing that dont know what they're doing. If you're after kills, just stay in team deathmatch and dont even bother objective type game modes.
Hezzron
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:55:12 PM
I agree with most of what you said except for "3rd person shooters suck" and U2 selling more due to MP. There's only about 5000 people playing it online at any given time that I've seen, so that's obviously not the draw.
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:56:38 PM
to_far_apart
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:20:04 AM
LimitedVertigo
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:31:20 AM
godsman
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:51:44 AM
fluffer nutter
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:13:15 AM
Dancemachine55
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 5:21:55 AM
___________
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 6:18:38 AM
Jed
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 8:53:48 PM
Jed
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 8:57:10 PM
Lex Luthor
Monday, January 11, 2010 @ 7:09:07 PM
Buckeyestar
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:37:23 PM
Reply
I am drawn to characters and stories, which is why I detest FPS games. I need to see my character to connect with them, and then have them actually HAVE a personality along with the story. THEN I will truly enjoy a game. Finishing the year with UC2, AC2, Batman:AA, and GoW collection filled my gaming hours. And the likes of Bayonetta, Darksiders, Dante's Inferno, Heavy Rain, God of War 3 and Final Fantasy 13 will eat up even more of my time in 2010.
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:41:50 PM
johnld
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:52:19 PM
Jawknee
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:11:07 AM
Robochic
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:38:43 PM
Reply
I can't wait for Heavy rain but when I talk to people about it they're like whats that, its so sad to see some of these great games coming out being second fiddle to MMO's. I have nothing against MMOs just wish I had friends to talk to about other than that.
LimitedVertigo
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:44:25 PM
I've played the developers previous games and they know how to make a game seem like reality.
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:19:18 AM
LimitedVertigo
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:24:03 AM
to_far_apart
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:26:15 AM
Gotta love online huh?
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:31:14 AM
I bet you could model the behavior of the audience of MW2 or Halo on the behavior of insects that swarm.
I know that it means that sales of PS3 games may disappoint in comparison, but I don't think it's fair or healthy to make that comparison.
Perhaps I should have said hive instead of swarm, it's like there is a hive mind in control of the group of gamers stuck on MW2 and games like it....
:D
Last edited by Highlander on 1/4/2010 12:34:14 AM
LimitedVertigo
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:37:44 AM
The PS3 user base needs to be more vocal and productive if we're going to continue to see the trends established on the PS3 thus far. I'm buying Heavy Rain day one and I expect the rest of you to do so as well.
godsman
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:57:19 AM
That swarm metaphor is exactly what I believe the gamers with shooters are like. Developers make "New" IP's with new game mechanics or RPG element to it and everyone "swarm" over like its the next best thing.
PS3 may not sell 10 million of one genre of games, but they sell 2-3 million for a large diversity of games each. Gamers have a choice of what to play instead of shooters, shooters, and more shooters.
Jed
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 9:04:24 PM
SirLoin of Beef
Thursday, January 07, 2010 @ 11:27:00 AM
"I bet you could model the behavior of the audience of MW2 or Halo on the behavior of insects that swarm."
Just for clarification's sake, not everyone who likes playing the Halo games falls into this mindset. I've played all of the FPS Halo games, both SP and MP, and like playing them, and also love a good single-player experience. UC2 is, quite frankly, one of the best games I've ever played because I found its story riveting and the game play well-executed. Heck, even on the 360 I have the most fun with the single player games such as Dead Space, Oblivion, BioShock, Fable II, etc. Multiplayer games are only fun, to me, when I can set up something with friends.
I say this because there's a tendency on this board that if you happen to like MS's games, especially those of the Halo series, you're looked at as some kind of immature, mindless moron and the like. Yes, the 360 does have a fair share of morons that play (and sadly, most of them play online); we're all not like that, though.
BikerSaint
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:46:18 PM
Reply
___________
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:47:22 PM
Reply
no of course not!
hurting games that have MP?
well, quite obviously.
but than thats arguable because assassins creed 2 does not have MP and thats flying off the shelf.
batman AA does not have MP and thats not struggling to sell well either.
sales are a peculiar thing, something ill never understand, and never be able to explain.
you would think the best games would sell better than the crappy games, but you would think wrong.
funny how people are always bitching how theres so much piracy on the 360, but than the 360 version of games always sell better than the ps3 version.
well,99.99% of the time.
Cholo Gamer
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:48:07 PM
Reply
Deleted User
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:49:40 PM
Reply
Travel ball is a term used for USSSA BASEBALL that is played on WEEKENDS ONLY or any other form of WEEKEND baseball. Well it is also used for basketball and girls softball as well. These kind of events are for kids that are looking to expand thier horizons in these particular sports, or other sports for that matter.
End of Line.
BikerSaint
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:00:08 AM
fluffer nutter
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:19:46 AM
BikerSaint
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:54:03 PM
Reply
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:20:43 AM
LimitedVertigo
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:22:18 AM
to_far_apart
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:48:22 AM
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:05:05 AM
Skynet isn't fiction, it's the product of a fertile mind and a future echo caused by a temporal paradox in the near future!
</tinfoil hat mode>
LimitedVertigo
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:08:15 AM
to_far_apart
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:10:02 AM
to_far_apart
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:19:19 AM
dragonx_HD
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 11:59:02 PM
Reply
Last edited by dragonx_HD on 1/4/2010 12:02:27 AM
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:22:53 AM
BikerSaint
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 8:56:34 PM
Thanks for keeping me updated, I appreciate it.
As for when the I-Robots(or any other pieces of hell's little technical glitcher demons) begin starting their march to take over the world, then all I can say is....
I sure hope the rest of you are all stored up on frequency and computer disruptor's, have tons of stockpiled food goods & plenty of 55 gallon barrels of safe drinking water, kept your ammo dry, all weapons & big-boomers on ready mode. Then start blasting away at any frigging thing that comes within a 500 yard range of your blast-proof concrete bunker out in the wilderness.....I know I'm ready!!!!
"LOCK & LOAD, MOTHERFLOCKERS"
Jed
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 9:13:37 PM
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:03:49 AM
Reply
The craze for FPS games was soon followed by the craze for multi-player online. Massive games like MW2 drain gaming hours from potential customers for other games. It's no wonder Microsoft is so keep to charge $50 a year for XBL, that way they can monetize this trend. Sony on the other hand is not doing that since we play for free. As was considered in a recent article here, Sony and PS3 is really a better fit for single player games, and it really does show
I'm not dead set against multi-player, but as someone at the beginning of this discussion pointed out There are people who play multi-player games exclusively. They're like chain smokers going through cigarettes, starting the next from the remaining embers of the last. I like a limited multi-player environment, but let's face it, are you playing Uncharted 2 for the multi-player? Or a chance to watch chloe running? Or even a chance to play through an engaging story with complex characters?
There have been games (Soul Calibur for instance) where the single player story mode was all but omitted and the time/resource was allocated to multi-player online. Remember that Soul Calibur is a real time fighting game, who in their right mind thinks that a game that demands essentially real time control input will work well over a laggy Internet?
Devs should leave the multi-player to afterthough...
LimitedVertigo
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:11:55 AM
I think the problem is SP heavy developers are compromising their work assuming MP is needed to sell the product. I say it a lot but the co-op in RE5 really killed it for me. I didn't like the storyline (ya I know it's RE so what) and the setting was bla but the entire time I felt like the developer was trying to shove me into going online with the damn game.
I didn't forget you gave me a thumb down :)
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:24:54 AM
LimitedVertigo
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:28:58 AM
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:13:17 AM
Reply
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:23:45 AM
LimitedVertigo
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:25:58 AM
LimitedVertigo
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:27:05 AM
Edit* Ya that's right, female dog is not allowed but cum is. sayyyyyy what?!
Last edited by LimitedVertigo on 1/4/2010 12:27:17 AM
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:30:19 AM
fluffer nutter
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:24:20 AM
SvenMD
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 8:12:35 AM
One of the highlights of my life - beating Contra with my wife in an hour....awesome.
BTW - I thought the NES Max controller blew. I hated that stupid disc thing that just moved all around EXCEPT for the one direction you wanted to go.
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 10:30:53 AM
Jed
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 9:18:41 PM
NoSmokingBandit
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:14:37 AM
Reply
Its sad that single-player games arent as popular as multi-player games. Ratchet and Clank is amazing, and adding an online aspect wouldnt make it any better, probably worse seeing as they would have to give up development time for it.
Even big online games like MW2 end up having a crappy campaign. The campaign in MW2 was just bad compared to MW1. 'Tis a shame. Nobody complained that Mario didnt have multiplayer.
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:25:04 AM
Jed
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 9:20:16 PM
Hezzron
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:24:56 AM
Reply
I play both SP and MP. I don't put that much thought into it, it's just a matter of what I'm in the mood for. I've played and finished most of the SP games listed in the article. I've also logged a good amount of time playing games online.
I think some older gamers (like me), who might be stuck in their ways, are actually AFRAID of MP. Maybe they feel like they're gonna be embarrassed in front of a "crowd" if they're no good. I used to feel a bit intimidated taking my gaming skills online, but now I actually get the craving for it.
There's a certain thrill that comes with knowing you're playing against live opponents. If you happen to stink it up online, its no biggie, no ones gonna reach out of the TV and slap you.....besides, it seems you can always change rooms and find some players worse than you.
Last edited by Hezzron on 1/4/2010 12:26:42 AM
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:29:21 AM
There really is a camp of people that will defend their online MP to the death and honestly don't give a rip about the game having a good SP. Then you have us guys around 30 who really could care less about MP and consider it a neat feature or addition that may extend the fun of the game. If you need evidence look at anyone who ever said a game was lacking because it didn't have MP. Or someone who scored it lower in a review because there was no MP.
Hezzron
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:09:40 AM
Games that have SP only get traded in much faster. The same copy that sold "new" can be recycled many times over through these secondhand stores.
Developers are putting in MP now in hopes of getting people to hang onto the game and generate more "new" sales.
Alienange
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 9:43:48 PM
Deleted User
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:33:25 AM
Reply
LimitedVertigo
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:38:36 AM
to_far_apart
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:41:01 AM
Jawknee
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:12:21 AM
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:14:08 AM
The parents and organizers take it as seriously as the pro's do, unfortunately the kids get dragged in and are basically grist for the mill.
Last edited by Highlander on 1/4/2010 1:15:08 AM
fluffer nutter
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:27:38 AM
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:33:06 AM
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:35:49 AM
fluffer nutter
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 1:47:24 AM
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 2:20:26 AM
Fane1024
Saturday, January 09, 2010 @ 4:47:02 PM
johnld
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 12:55:27 AM
Reply
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 10:45:49 AM
BikerSaint
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 8:08:26 PM
I'm 57 & around the area growing up, we never called anything by that name. Also, when my daughter was in a school softball league (catcher) quite a ways back, I can't remember anyone mentioning travel ball either.
Seems to me to be more of a now-a-days thing they're calling it now, I'm guessing???
Hell, back in the day, times were pretty tight for most of us back then & I don't remember anyone doing any traveling sports other than just a bounce or two between just 2-3 schools close-by.
@World
Although I'm trying....there's just thousands & thousands of games already out there according to a few of my databases, & I have neither the money or years left on this ole soul-train to get every title for my collections. But I am doing what I can to at least get close, with a few 5-20 game bundles at a time, LOL.
Heck, although I've got more than 1400 games spanning to the SNES/Genesis era, I didn't actually start collecting until about 1/2 way through the PS1's life cycle, & I was so impressed with it, that the collecting bug bit my butt big-time.
Right now, my biggest single console collection stands(so far) at about 1/4th completed, and that one being only 535 games out of almost 2000 for the PS1.
Here's what I've got so far...
SNES(packed away w/list, so I don't remember amount, but only about 1-15 games for it).
Atari Jaguar 9 Discs, 25 Cartriges
Panasonic 3DO 45
Genesis 145
N64 78
Saturn 75
Dreamcast 48
**Gamecube 34**
**GameBoy Advance(GC's console attachment) 5**
Xbox 190
**360 50**
**PSP 20 Games & 6 Movies**
PS1 538
PS2 233
**PS3 60**
(FYI: I have only owned the systems marked with ** for 6 months or less. The PS3, GC, & GBA are only about 5 or 6 months old, and I just bought the 360 & my PSP's less than 2 months ago).
@LV,
I have many mint RPG's in my collections, but I just haven't been able to get immersed into their gameplay, even though I keep going back & trying again on numerous occasions.
BTW, I've seen some copies going for a pretty penny in the past(FF7, FF Tactics, Tactics Ogre, Parasite Eve, Etc), but I seriously doubt I'd ever sell any of mine.
If you want to check out what I've got, I've put almost all of my console & game lists in our forum here(just look in the proper section for each system listed). I Do need to update a few of the newer system's games list though, since I've bought about 30 games since my last update.
(Damn, this post must be way too long, it just gave me Carpel Tunnel & finger cramps)LOL
archs13
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 2:13:28 AM
Reply
i just want trophies dammit! but hey, if the multiplayer's really awesome then that's a great extra.
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 10:47:14 AM
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 2:32:48 AM
Reply
Dancemachine55
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 5:19:14 AM
Reply
After I cancelled my subscription, I haven't touched it in nearly 4 years. I pride myself with single player masterpieces like MGS4 and Uncharted 2. I have friends over and play Rock Band 2 or New Mario Bros. Wii (which is insanely fun with friends!!)
All in all, I think online only is a big hole on your wallet, it sucks a lot of time and money out of you and you get hardly anything from it in the end, even in terms of emotional highs or experiences.
I have no objections to developers adding online play to a kickass single player game. But I might not play an MMO again, unless I feel it offers an experience similar to a single player game and has no continuing fees.
Helps if my friends are playing it too, like EVE Online, but I can't afford it, and have bigger, better games to play like Bayonetta, Bioshock 2, God of War 3, Heavy Rain, Splinter Cell Conviction and Mass Effect 2.
Being a gamer is a double edged sword. Even my two jobs can hardly keep up with great game releases. DAMN YOU DEVELOPERS AND YOUR INCREDIBLE SKILLS!!!!! DAMN YOU TO HEEEEEEECK!!!!
frostface
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 7:22:13 AM
Reply
Also I'm not sure on this but, since the price drop on the ps3, or it's just kids buying MW2 (also questionable, where are the parents? They'll be the first to criticize the games when their kid does something bad, even though the kid shouldn't be playing an adult rated game) but the abuse and the idiocy that comes out on the in-game chat is getting worse.
I used to enjoy the online function and depending on the game I still do (I feel it's a different sort of person plays MW2 compared with BF:BC for example or Warhawk.)
Lately my hours have been absorbed with games like Dragons Age or Assassins Creed 2 and I every so often I'll venture back to Uncharted 2 and pick back up where I left off. The online multiplayer doesn't even factor into it.
I'm not very technically minded on these things but correct me if I'm wrong, if the games where built with just single player in mind, would the game play not last longer than the measly 5hr playthrough of a game split between online and single player? Also in vice versa, if the game was made with just multiplayer online, imagine how massive that game could be (I'm looking at you MAG).
So in short after all my rambling on, I agree with Ben, the games should and could be split. Gamers get better games imo and the companys who bring them out get to sell a single player and a multiplayer and maybe make more money for themselves, which I wouldn't begrudge if I got an immersive experience whether or not it was multiplayer or single player.
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 11:03:24 AM
JackC8
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 7:25:31 AM
Reply
I don't get the appeal of online anyway. In a game, you've got characters, a story, exploration, boss battles, maybe some platforming - all kinds of stuff. With online, you've got a shooter. Nothing more. That would bore the living hell out of me.
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 10:28:34 AM
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 11:07:30 AM
It's the same thing time after time, it's a grind and that gets boring - or at least it should.
Single player games offer all the nuances that the creators of the game and the writers of the script/story could pack in. In some games like RPGs the complete-ists can have their way collecting everything, and in GT like games of course you want ever car and upgrade. To an extent this can become a grind as well, but with the Multi-player game it's a grind from start to finish and unless you have un-naturally quick reflexes once the game's regular players have leveled up you're toast.
Silent_J
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 8:51:09 AM
Reply
D1g1tal5torm
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 9:44:55 AM
Reply
With net access being available to the majority of gamers, the online portion of a game is always going to garner at least if not more interest as it's where the longevity of a game resides.
It's akin to say reading a book or playing chess.
The book is always going to be the same, no matter what. A game of chess, if different pretty much each time due to different players, different scenarios.
So it's logical the sp's are going to be hit. People want value for money.
Therefore devs have to better stories, more immersive gameplay and an all round superior product to a combined sp/mp game.
Most sps dont. With uc2 now being the benchmark for sp's, (I know it has mp as well!) in terms of story, graphics etc. I only see Heavy rain as a sure fire purchase in my book.
NB: Dead space is another good example.
Last edited by D1g1tal5torm on 1/4/2010 9:46:20 AM
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 11:20:00 AM
Chess is different to Multi-player because it is a one on one experience and there are a practically infinite number of possible move combinations for victory. Both players have the same tools, the same weapons and a level playing field. In most multi-player games there is one rocket launcher, one double barreled shotgun and one tank, so a given player can get the upper hand whether they have the skill or not. Chess is like multi-player games in some respects though because a player who is very good can generally dispatch lesser rivals quickly and with ease using a certain set of moves because most inexperienced players react in a predictable manner. So the experienced chess player plays certain moves to determine whether the player will react as expected and then goes in for the kill. There are books devoted to standard openings in chess. If you don't know the standard openings, the chances are that you will fall victim to someone who does.
With regard to games, you're talking about MP games as value for money. I don't buy into the repetitive game play of a Multi-Player game as value for money. If that was the case then what reason would anyone have for moving from MW1 to MW2? the campaign mode certainly isn't the reason, so what is? If people want value for money, why spend another $60 on MW2 for what is essentially the same game play as MW1?
Last edited by Highlander on 1/4/2010 11:37:51 AM
to_far_apart
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 11:53:06 AM
These developers are so fixated on this online component in gaming, the develop solely for online gameplay (ie WoW) why bother making a lacluster campaign? Just market, advertise, and sell the game as an online experience.
Rather people cna be so ignorant that they're getting robbed by their very own developer whom the cherish if you coem to think about it. MW1 is the same thing as MW2, online has no differences, except minimal extras, why not keep MW running and add content to that then create MW2, when in essence they're not creating a game for an imaginative, unique solo experience, rather they're really just selling people an online game, and nothing that hasn't been been done either.
For those planning to buy the game, think about it. Is it really necessary to spend $60, when MW is really, in essence, the sam thing?
Plus, honestly, online to me is a waste of time. I know people love it, I'm not putting anyone down, because in the ends, it's what everyone likes, that's all. But really, most online games are shooters, and i'd die from boredom honestly. The thing with a campaign, it's just like a movie; scripting, scenery, story telling, interactiveness, gameplay, etc. It invites you in a world, and you soon begin to become part of that world.
@Highlander
Great analogy about the book. No better way to say it!
Last edited by to_far_apart on 1/4/2010 11:53:26 AM
D1g1tal5torm
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 2:35:08 PM
As for mp providing me with another challenge to a game, then yes, I feel it provides me with value for money.
Dunno where the mw2 ref came from but for £25? It's worth a punt compared to the a lot of tripe that retails for £40.
As for the movie element, you hit the nail on the head and that's why, to me, mp is enjoyable. It's not scripted. It's fluid, dynamic, evolving.
It's pitting you against another played rather than a scenario.
This is why I mention in my original post - HR is my only sure fire sp purchase.
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 5:24:20 PM
Open world multi-player games allow you to experience an 'adventure' and story of your own making - yes, but just like role playing games with dice and character sheets you are limited by the scenarios that have been created for you, or you are limited to a number of generic, pre-determined scenarios for shorter missions. Such predetermined scenarios soon become repetitive.
On consoles by far the most played multi-player games are shooters, and shooters are nothing like chess they area grind and offer no story value at all. There is no making up your own story when all you are doing is playing match after match of blowing up continually spawning bad guys or repeatedly respawning opponents.
Having an opponent is vastly over rated when many such opponents are dolts or foul mouthed, abusive little urchins who have no interest in playing cooperatively or doing anything except exploiting every cheesy attack and glitch in the game.
MaximusArcher
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 7:47:07 PM
MaximusArcher
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 7:56:36 PM
It's valid, it's active and it's propelling the gaming industry at the moment.
You may not enjoy it and it may be to the detriment of sp but there's a reason games nearly always have an online portion...
...because it's popular. Why is it popular - because it's fun. The numbers don't lie.
I find this highbrow attitude against mp a bit trite.
Highlander
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 11:34:11 PM
With one question you destroyed all respect I would have given you.
"How many same novels do you read back to back, come on stop being pedantic. "
As for burying my head in the sand on MP games, I'll thank you not to make snap judgments about my gaming habits or what games I play/don't play or have played/not played. I stand by my comments both with regard to multi-player games and with regard to the re-reading of novels being analogous to replaying of games with an engrossing single player story/campaign.
As for trite, both of your comments meet that criteria in abundance. In what way are multi-player games propelling the industry forwards? In terms of unit sales of a single game? They sure as hell aren't propelling it in terms of game quality, artistry, story or character.
There are millions of gamers suckling daily at the teat of MW2 and many of them will continue to do so for the next 6 months, just to get their next fix of kill/death ratio. Doing that instead of finding new experiences and games to find pleasure in. If you can't see how that is damaging to the gaming industry rather than leading it, then I think you are being deliberately blind or simply deluded.
MaximusArcher
Tuesday, January 05, 2010 @ 2:24:46 AM
Now that's an urban myth.
Whatever you say you're only trying to justify it to yourself, mp is here, and it's here to stay. It's every bit as valid as sp.
Just because you don't get any enjoyment out of it, and feel the need to put down those who do, is a bit short-sighted, lacking respect and naive to the industry.
Last edited by MaximusArcher on 1/5/2010 2:29:15 AM
Highlander
Tuesday, January 05, 2010 @ 10:11:28 AM
Next time, bring some argument to the discussion.
I gain plenty of enjoyment from multi-player games. However, I can also see how the over emphasis on multi-player components in otherwise single player games can be detrimental. Noting that problem is not putting down anyone. Being short sighted or naive might be applicable if I were ignoring the issue. If single player games were somehow encroaching on multi-player games to their detriment I would be just as quick to note that effect.
However, at this point the only effect I can see a lengthy single player campaign having on a traditionally multi-player title is beneficial. A lengthy single player campaign helps establish the environment, the game universe and backstory in the mind of the player who then goes on to play the multi-player aspect. In my opinion, the richer game universe/back story and characterization will enhance the player's enjoyment of the multi-player aspects rather than damaging it.
The reverse situation where the inclusion of multi-player content decreases the emphasis on story, character or setting in a traditionally single player title is sadly decreasing the enjoyment of that single player aspect of the game. That is damaging both to the gamer who wants to play the single player game as well as to the industry.
Over emphasizing multi-player elements to the detriment of single player elements in games does, in my opinion, damage the game, the player and the industry by decreasing the depth of the experience.
It's like the current infatuation that TV has with 'reality TV' where the public is the star. It's cheaper to make, easier to make and requires far less effort since there is little to no writing, the 'real' people involved are making it up as they go along. As long as the show has a good template, you can populate it with real people season after season and get different, compelling TV year after year.
Compared to the difficulty and cost writing good fictional TV drama or comedy, reality TV is a no brainer. It's also repetitive crap that get's old, but it's popular. Oh yes, masses of people watch it, so therefore it's good for the industry, right? Except of course that all the writers, actors and everyone else associated with more traditional TV drama and comedy are hurt by the redirection of resources to reality TV.
What I see happening now is that the traditional TV drama and comedy shows are trying to compete with the reality TV by becoming ever more sensational, and parodying reality, outdoing the reality TV, and yet imitating it. I for one do not see this as beneficial to the quality or artistry of TV drama or comedy. Long term I don't think it helps the industry develop or improve, and I believe that it hurts the viewer by continually dropping the standards in favor of sensationalism.
I see multi-player games in a similar light to Reality TV because they depend on the gamers themselves to make their own story.
Last edited by Highlander on 1/5/2010 10:12:12 AM
MaximusArcher
Tuesday, January 05, 2010 @ 11:11:29 AM
Good to hear you like mp games.
Let’s go with two classic examples, MW and UC2? How are the mp aspects of these games detrimental to the sp?
MW is effectively a good mp, with a tacked on sp.
UC2 is effectively a good sp with a tacked on mp.
Let’s ask the makers of warhawk or mag their views on having to expend time/money/people on creating a sp just to add a little “backstory”.
As for damaging players by emphasizing mp, I laughed at this comment.
Btw, in my book, mp is nothing like reality tv, because I don’t watch reality tv, but hey, whatever floats your boat.
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Tuesday, January 05, 2010 @ 6:45:44 PM
D1g1tal5torm
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 2:36:15 PM
ebterp
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 2:46:06 PM
Reply
EB
Beamboom
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 3:14:39 PM
As for Ben's question, "is the multiplayer boom hurting game sales" I believe the direct answer to that is "yes, definately", however not enough for one to kill the other: There is room for both.
geovanwitdakick
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 9:00:21 PM
Reply
Jed
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 9:40:38 PM
Reply
Now and then I will go online for a while, but since I don't play it all the time I get my ass beat, which makes me want to play even less.
Beamboom
Monday, January 04, 2010 @ 11:54:09 PM
OptimusPryme
Wednesday, January 06, 2010 @ 11:20:42 AM
Reply
Last edited by OptimusPryme on 1/6/2010 11:23:39 AM
Dfreek31
Thursday, January 07, 2010 @ 12:11:04 PM
SirLoin of Beef
Thursday, January 07, 2010 @ 11:49:51 AM
Reply
I was saddened when I heard BioShock 2 would have multiplayer in it. To me, the game is the story of a single entity tackling the horrors of Rapture. All of sudden there are more and the horror effect of the game is lessened. It diminishes the story. I've not played the multiplayer part of UC2. While I've heard it's not too bad, was it really necessary other than a way to try to get it into the hands of those players who play mostly multiplayer games?
A good example is the Halo series (yeah, boo! hiss! MS sucks and all that). The original Halo had a pretty engaging and long single-player mode for an FPS. I liked the story and thought how it was unfolded during the game was cool. In fact, it was the story the game was telling that prompted me to get Halos 2-3. What's sad though is that with each new Halo game, the single-player story was shorter than the previous one. ODST's story campaign clocks in around 5-6 hours. Granted, ODST's firefight multiplayer is different than the usual PvP style found in the other games but it's still the same result- more work done for the multiplayer part means less work done for the singe player part. This trend seems to be happening for a good number of games nowadays.
Dfreek31
Thursday, January 07, 2010 @ 12:08:02 PM
Reply
don't get me wrong I like multiplayer and I like the idea of being able to play people miles away from you. But, I love playing with someone in the room with me.
Sky_Genesis
Thursday, January 07, 2010 @ 9:05:38 PM
Reply
D1g1tal5torm
Friday, January 08, 2010 @ 3:55:59 AM
Reply
Gaming is, currently, the best selling media type.
Taking everthing back to grass roots, how can a media type that rises to the top actually be being hurt by a particular gametype.
The argument just doesnt stand up to scrutiny.
What's more relevant is the generational shift. Older gamers, who make up a fair portion of the community tend to hanker back to a more substantial sp effort, and lack the desire to playin in the cauldron of the mp environment (Hope you understand what I mean by this comment). But the younger generation, seem to be a lot more focused on mp.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare









Buckeyestar
Reply
Sunday, January 03, 2010 @ 10:23:08 PM