Valve: Not Every Product Needs To Offer Multiplayer
We are often concerned about the multiplayer explosion, and the negative impact it seems to be having on single-player experiences.
But Valve Software, a company known for both excellent single-player experiences and being a pioneer in the multiplayer element of the industry, says we shouldn't worry...even if the single-player fans feel a little stifled. In speaking to Gamasutra, Valve project manager Erik Johnson said that single-player adventures will always be a part of interactive entertainment.
"Half-Life 1 was a really offline product. I think customers want to find ways to talk about the thing that they are a big fan of with other people, and ideally experience it the same way.
That doesn't mean every game needs to be multiplayer. ...I still think the analysis that every product needs to be a competitor in multiplayer, or an MMO, is incorrect; there are a lot of people who want an experience without the stress, so I don't see that changing."
That's an interesting allusion to stress, isn't it? These days, I and many people I know utilize gaming almost strictly as a form of relaxation, and few have much of an interest in multiplayer. It really is stressful, to a point. Kicking back and going through a game on your own, taking on AI-controlled enemies and what-have-you, is a solitary experience; that much is true. But it's also a relaxing, entertaining one.
And although not everyone sees it this way, and multiplayer seems to be dominating just about everything these days, the single-player adventures really can't die. They stop...I stop.
Tags: valve, single-player, games industry, game length
11/9/2010 8:56:27 PM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (24 posts)
sunspider13
Tuesday, November 09, 2010 @ 9:56:39 PM
Reply
Being able to go through that experience relaxes me. Watching the 'oh $#!+' moments, figuring out a hard puzzle, or finding that one 'thing' to make you stronger or progress further in the game is a treat.
Long live single-player!
sunspider13
Tuesday, November 09, 2010 @ 10:00:18 PM
Highlander
Tuesday, November 09, 2010 @ 10:05:21 PM
CONTRABAND
Tuesday, November 09, 2010 @ 10:01:53 PM
Reply
Oxvial
Tuesday, November 09, 2010 @ 10:22:00 PM
Reply
So I am disappoint with the Blazblue dlc characters...almost 8 bucks and not arcade or story mode...=( .
Last edited by Oxvial on 11/9/2010 10:24:44 PM
BikerSaint
Tuesday, November 09, 2010 @ 10:38:05 PM
Reply
Oxvial
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 @ 10:27:27 AM
Jawknee
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 @ 5:15:40 PM
___________
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 @ 12:25:24 AM
Reply
games should not have to add MP, but sadly allot of people refuse to buy games if they dont have MP, no matter how long the game is.
why do you think some of gamings biggest series, GTA, dead space,resident evil, assassins creed, which use to be SP only have changed?
Scarecrow
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 @ 12:29:52 AM
Reply
It gives you the kind of freedom many of us have lost.
When we turn on our consoles we're automatically signed in and see other players signed in. We kinda feel obliged to join them or play some kind of multiplayer game.
Not being signed in to the network is great. It gives you the option to go for something else offline. Less pressure/influence.
And for once I agree with Valve, multiplayer is good and all but not all games need or should have multiplayer.
Highlander
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 @ 3:12:40 PM
It's as bad as facebook. My wife was telling me one of her friends got all hurt 'n stuff because she hadn't replied to her facebook status. My wife's point of view was "And...?". But I hate that about the always on world. People think that you can be contacted any time and that you *have* to respond or else you hate them. I tell all my friends that I don't check my email or voicemail regularly so if they don't get a response within 5 minutes they should not spam my message box or get all annoyed, they just have to show some patience.
Last edited by Highlander on 11/10/2010 3:16:11 PM
Lawless SXE
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 @ 12:52:52 AM
Reply
The two markets can co-exist.
Peace.
Akuma07
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 @ 3:37:44 AM
Reply
In the past year you have restored a little lost faith in you, and the fat controller AKA Gabe Newell.
It is cool that you are so focused on single player experiences, because thats what us hardcore gamers want.
But for the love of god, can you PLEASE hurry up and give me Half-Life2 Ep 3, either that, or just release a direct sequel. Please.... Its been years since I have taken my crowbar to the skull of the Combine.
Kind regards,
An old fan.
Highlander
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 @ 3:17:37 PM
A2K78
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 @ 9:21:02 AM
Reply
"I've just never understood the appeal of beating other people online.'
the appeal of trying to beat others online is just another attempt at mimmicking the arcade scene and it social atomosphere. Truth is online WILL NEVER duplicate or ever come close to ever replicating that atomsphere. Its for this reason why all of these online fighting games end up failing when it come to the experience..they cannot replicate the notion of being there(as in the social nature of fighting games).
Highlander
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 @ 3:19:00 PM
QFT - Quoted For Truth.
556pineapple
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 @ 9:53:39 AM
Reply
animalmother
Friday, November 12, 2010 @ 9:10:11 AM
Reply

Portal 2









Highlander
Reply
Tuesday, November 09, 2010 @ 9:55:07 PM
I play off-line games for relaxation. Playing online generally leads to frustration, shouting and swearing at the top of my voice at the screen. When that happens my wife frowns and I feel stupid. I don't need that stress, or the stress that the weasels online generate.
So, yeah, single player off-line gaming can never die. If it does, I may have to find another hobby. Perhaps my wife won't mind if I join her collecting dolls? The 2ft tall japanese anime dolls of course...LOL!
So, yeah, single player gaming can never, ever, die.