PS3 News: Will FPS Devs Just Admit They Only Care About Multiplayer? - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Will FPS Devs Just Admit They Only Care About Multiplayer?

I do love a good shooter. I'm gonna play Battlefield 3 and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, and I'm a big fan of the last two Killzone titles.

And while Guerrilla's games have fantastic single-player campaigns and I'm hoping that won't change for the fourth entry, I wish developers would just come out and admit that the multiplayer boom is all they care about.

I don't blame them a bit; it's all they care about because it's all the majority of gamers care about. When it comes to shooters, if it doesn't excel in the multiplayer category, it may as well not exist. If it doesn't deliver on the single-player front, who cares? Even if it's the greatest campaign ever, it'll only come in at 7 hours max, and the multiplayer is endless.

And now the big news from DICE is this from Battlefield 3 multiplayer designer Lars Gustavsson-

"In multiplayer, we do an additional pass for animation. In singleplayer, you don’t mind if a guard up on a balcony does a Hollywood death – stumbling around a bit before falling over. In multiplayer it needs to be a one-to-one correlation between action and result."

Okay, so the animations in multiplayer will be better? Or at the very least, more realistic? And then we hear about how MW3 will somehow have a "multiplayer feel" to the campaign, although we don't have exact details just yet. Look, nobody buys these games for the campaign anymore; a few might actually play that campaign, but they'll quickly move past it for the multiplayer action. We all know it, and the developers know it.

One of these days, I keep hoping they'll release multiplayer-only shooters and separate titles with no multiplayer. You know, games that feature 20-hour bad-ass campaigns that great studios could produce if they could dedicate all their resources to single-player. And the multiplayer fans would benefit as well, with 100% of all resources going towards that one endeavor. But that probably won't happen. And in the meantime, I'd just like one game maker to admit what we already know.

Related Game(s): Battlefield 3

Tags: battlefield 3, dice, fps, shooters

7/10/2011 9:04:19 PM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (84 posts)

schillah
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 9:52:14 PM
Reply

lol yea

especially MW3 coming out...they're showing story mode vids now but....everyone is waiting for the killstreaks and perks info.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Xombito
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 9:54:12 PM
Reply

Well there kind of doing that already aren't the? MAG is multiplater only and I don't think I heard of anything regarding multiplayer for Bioshock Infinite. Then there the new Deus Ex.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 10:02:51 PM

While both of those are from a first-person viewpoint, they don't really qualify as "shooters."

Agree with this comment 4 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 10:21:45 PM

So far MAG is an anomaly in the market.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

mindmurderer69
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 11:24:23 PM

for an "anomaly" i thought it was a pretty good start. Sure it didnt have the perks of C.O.D but that and the SGT PL and OIC leaders aspect gave it the most original/RL feel of any FPS out there right now. im sure if they polished up the graphics it wouldve done better on the market as a whole. they also could expand to cross between MAG and something like battlefield or warhawk to where you could operate equipment found on a normal battle (tanks planes ships) and actual rank and files like in mag do away with perks (takes away from a real life perspective) it would be the ultimate true to life experience make it on-line only and a different title for offline there would be people that would definitely pick it up

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Xombito
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 11:32:45 PM

Oh yeah, I forgot about Warhawk.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

maxpontiac
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 8:54:56 AM

I would still be playing MAG today if they would have had more maps for Sabotage.

That game was to good.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

big6
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 9:30:05 AM

MAG is and was an amazing game! I played it religiously until I hit the barrier at level 70.

To this day, when I play other shooters, I compare it to MAG.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 11:43:44 AM

MAG was brilliant. I love that game. I'd be home playing it right now if I knew someone who was playing. I get lost in all those players by myself. It's nice to have a comrade with you when diving into the mass of hundreds of players.

Last edited by bigrailer19 on 7/11/2011 11:44:34 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Neo_Aeon666
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 5:24:12 PM

I am sorry Ben but I disagree. They qualify as shooters. You have a gun, you point, you shoot. That is the core of the game. Now around that you have some nice RPG elements but that only makes it a good original shooter that is unlike the others. To me even Mass Effect 2 is a 3rd person shooter with a good story and nice customization. In the end it is still about your skill to crouch shoot and get headshots.

Going by what you are saying, only boring, repetitive war games come in the *Shooter* category.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 8:14:45 PM

You can believe what you want. Putting Bioshock in the "shooter" category is absurd.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Neo_Aeon666
Tuesday, July 12, 2011 @ 9:07:03 AM

Well I am not saying it is ONLY a shooter. But at the core it is one no? When people ask me about good shooters I talk about Bioshock as one of them. Then I tell them it also has some RPG elements and a much deeper story line. But heck, you see in first person and most of your weapons are guns. And if your aim is crap you won't get far. To me a shooter is a game where you use mostly guns and need accuracy to hit a target. You seem to only have extremes in your categorization O_O I would like to know just what is a shooter by your standards and why a game can't be a shooter at the same time as being somewhat of an RPG.

At the moment if I go by your say and someone asks me about a good shooter I couldn't mention Bioshock. And when someone asks about a good RPG I couldn't either since it is by no means close to turn by turn and the strategizing (not sure that word is legit lol) is minimal compared to fully fledged RPGs. So I'd have to have a *Bastard* section where I keep those games that incorporate many elements XD

Last edited by Neo_Aeon666 on 7/12/2011 9:18:10 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

NoSmokingBandit
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 9:56:37 PM
Reply

Modern FPS make me miss games like Red Faction. I still have my copy somewhere around here, i'll have to dig it out. I spent more time in Red Faction than i did in some RPGs.
Modern shooters are short, unoriginal, and boring in comparison. I feel like there are very few things that are better now than they were 10 years ago.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

jimmyhandsome
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 9:57:10 PM
Reply

I don't think they'd ever admit that in fear of alienating some of their fans who actually like the campaigns. Although I think you're right about FPS that have bad multiplayer compared to single player. Killzone 3 had a good single player but it was sooooo short. I kept going back for multiplayer. And like wise Socom 4's campaign was crap, but I've poured in tons of hours online.

I don't mind developers making both a robust single player and multiplayer modes. I mean, look at Uncharted 3. The campaign will be great based off of the past two iterations, and the beta is already a beast. If its done right I want most developers to put time in both modes.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Alienange
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 10:01:40 PM
Reply

You want a gamemaker to admit to... who, exactly? The press? Something tells me they've admitted it to themselves, and their fans certainly aren't so dense as to think mp is less important than a long-winded campaign. Not sure why they'd have to come out and officially "say something" to anyone.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 10:04:02 PM

They need to admit they're focusing more on multiplayer and that way, maybe people who like campaigns won't always rave about how disappointed they are at the length of a shooter story.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 11:17:48 PM

I think we just can't get past this "The campaign will not suffer in any way" nonsense untilt hey admit, "yeah this game is aimed at multiplayer fun"

Agree with this comment 3 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 11:47:18 PM

Exactly.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Nas Is Like
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 10:23:06 PM
Reply

It's all about the multiplayer today. That's where the real fun is in FPS games, especially since there are some tough competitors out there and playing the campaign tends to get repetitive/boring quickly, as it's the same thing over and over again. At least you can keep it fresh with multiplayer.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Fabi
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 11:05:16 PM

I don't agree at all.

But don't have the time right now to type every reason why.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

FM23
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 11:50:44 PM

Yeah even though FPS's aren't my thing...I like the online features sometimes because most campaigns aren't really that satisfying. Bioshock and Half life are the exception as well as KZ "2". But everything after this is just rinse and repeat military mumbo jumbo...even KZ3's sci-fi setting couldn't save it. But the MP was fresh, if not irritating but more satisfying than the campaign in my opinion. Keep MP because it's a very good diversion from stereotypical campaigns...I still need to try Crysis 2...might add a new great FPS to my lot if it turns out good.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 3:54:45 AM

I understand what you mean Nas, regarding the repetitiveness. I agree. Once it's played it more or less is played.

Just to cross reference this to the story last week about Ubisoft welcoming the next gen cause of design limits in the AI designs: This is exactly why. Once the designers *can* create advanced AIs as opposed to having to heavily rely on scripts to do the major moves (that's what makes it so repetitive) campaigns can technically become able to have much higher *replay value*, cause that's the core of what we discuss here. It's the replay value of mp vs sp that is the problem. it simply is much more fun to play the same map over and over and over against human players. It's *not* in sp.

So, from this perspective I am actually an optimist for the future single player experiences. It just have to wait for the *next* generation.

(And each time I do these arguments I sense that I get one step closer to wanting a new gen after all. It may not be such a bloody bad idea when I think about it!)

@FM23: I really look forward to hear what you think of Crysis2 when you've played it. I actually considered starting a new playthrough last week - and I've not felt like that for anything but RPGs in many, many years!

Last edited by Beamboom on 7/11/2011 3:57:19 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Neo_Aeon666
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 5:38:49 PM

I get your point of having fun in the multiplayer but a game with good SP is not repetitive and boring and HAS good replay value.

Just like it was said a little earlier plus some more. (we didn't specify first person or third person) Look at Bioshock, DeusX, HalfLife, FEAR, Gears of War, Mass Effect 2, Fallout, Vanquish, Red Faction, Uncharted and so many more.

They are all shooters with their own personal twist that make them original. They have a great campaign with awesome replay value and it took me a while before being totally done with them.

Also about the real life AI crap. If I want to play Real Life enemies I will go online. There is a fun part in finding the weakness of every enemy type or the flaw in their position that you have to use to get past a certain point. These things are thought off by the DEVS and it is the way you have to go to pass the stage. Then there is harder difficulties to change the situation and make it even harder so you do have replay value. Like there is always a trick to defeat a boss. If it were like you are saying then the Boss would learn from his mistakes and guess what he has like 100 times your HP and knows what buttons you are pushing on your remote the moment you touch it XD This type of AI will only be good in boring war games where the story is always the same... Kill that terrorist or diffuse a bomb. Guess now it would be a bit more fun to have some AI saving the utter boringness of the story. But in all the games I mentioned above, real life AI wouldn't be a plus.

Last edited by Neo_Aeon666 on 7/11/2011 5:41:41 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 10:25:35 PM
Reply

What scares me is that so many of the people who buy these games never even play the campaigns. It's a sad state for gaming.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 5 down Disagree with this comment

FM23
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 11:53:14 PM

Not a sad state for gaming, just the individuals who love single player campaigns more than anything. The gaming community is expanding because of MP action, good or bad. I love single player gaming, but there are alot of gamers who like MP action...shouldn't they get catered too as well, but then again...sometimes it's at the expense of single player oriented gamers...hhhmmmmm!?!

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 12:22:46 AM

I think it's a sad state for gaming because it send the message that gamers don't care about a quality narrative, which isn't true.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

chedison
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 12:27:06 AM

Not every game solely focuses on multiplayer. And I don't buy every game to tell me a story. Sometimes I just want to get online and play with some friends. Thats why I enjoy games like Battlefield. Not every game has to cater to every audience.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 4:01:11 AM

Maybe it's a sad state of the single player campaigns? That many of them simply are not good enough for gamers to really care?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 4:26:33 AM

My point exactly Ched, so why do they bother trying to cater to single player fans at all? Just separate MP into its own game.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

aaronisbla
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 10:26:37 PM
Reply

Ben, i think they mean that the animations won't be over the top in multiplayer, meaning when you kill someone, its shows them dying in multiple ways but nothing over top like how they may be in single player

Example would be during the tank gameplay they showed, one of ur teammates tanks were destroyed and it shows ur actual teammates jumping out of the tank, set on fire, slowly collapsing from the pain before dying. i dont think this will make it in multiplayer

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Havoc
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 10:34:06 PM
Reply

It is what it is. Sucks to be in the minority of public opinion I guess. Time to adapt or live in disappointment.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 11:48:39 PM

What an ingenious solution.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 2:01:36 AM

But I want to have my cake and eat it too...

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 4:21:47 AM

Don't listen to the stormtroopers. Fight the power!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

StevieRV
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 10:43:15 PM
Reply

i dont buy cod for the campaigns, every modern warfare i buy is purely for muliplayer, modern warfare always comes out alongside uncharted so ive played uncharted single player and modern warfare multiplayer, both in 07, 09 and now 11 ill do it all again, cant wait for 2013 either

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SnipeySnake
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 11:34:13 PM
Reply

I actually liked the single player in battlefield....but if it comes to any cod game, i just try it out for a couple minutes and just put it away, cant stand how boring they are.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

sha4dowknight05
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 12:05:46 AM
Reply

well, I guess depends on which FPS developer you mean. But, developers like bethesda don't have multiplayer. to bad they don't care about making a better ps3 versions of their games. I think maybe maybe fallout 3 wasn't ported maybe all 3 were developed side by side together.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

kevinater321
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 12:45:30 AM
Reply

Is it too much to ask for both? Guess we will see when Uncharted 3 comes out.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 1:03:07 AM

U3 isn't a FPS.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

kevinater321
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 5:03:58 PM

Doesn't mean it can't have a great single player and multiplayer. I think that this article should include all genres because it doesn't necessarily have to be a fps that has a heavy focus on multiplayer and a...not so focused single player experience.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 1:02:50 AM
Reply

I'd say this is true for most developers but certainly not Valve. Their SP experience rivals anyone IMO.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 9:50:19 AM

The L4D games have sh**-ass single-player campaigns, my friend. ;)

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

coverton341
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 1:46:22 PM

Ben, while I agree with you on your L4D point, I agree with LV here. Valve might have two games in their catalogue that have sub-par single player, but the rest of their games are top-notch in the single player realm.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 3:01:25 PM

They also haven't really made games that strive to do both at a supremely high level. Portal, for instance, is single-player-based.

If they make a Half-Life 3, it'll be interesting to see what happens...don't think they don't know how important multiplayer is right now.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Kiryu
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 1:32:42 AM
Reply

Have any of u guys played Singularity?
That was some Epic Single Player for an FPS.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 5:06:39 AM

Don't say that around here... Don't you know it's an Activision game :P

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

chedison
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 5:21:07 AM

That's the first game I thought of when I read this article :). Also Metro 2033 came to mind.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 9:51:33 AM

Singularity was great (read my review) but I'm afraid it's a dying breed. You may notice it didn't exactly burn up the sales charts, and I can absolutely guarantee you that Activision's take on the matter is this-

"If it had had fantastic multiplayer, it would've sold better."

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Seasnake
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 2:08:15 AM
Reply

That is the problem with FSPs today, it is all about multi-player on-line. That sucks because most of us have crap ping rates and get annihilated by the boys with super fast connections. I prefer something I can play on my own or how about games where you can co-operate with a number of freinds with similar speed connections to achieve a common goal? Not that I will give a monkey's shortly when my broadband goes from sub 2 meg to 25 plus ;0D

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 2:09:24 AM
Reply

I got really worried when I read a headline on, I think it was CVG, saying that DICE said that they wouldn't be sacrificing MP for SP...
Then reading the article, it was more implied that they would be trying to balance it so that everyone could enjoy it with robust MP, SP and co-op modes. Anyway, I don't necessarily agree with this headline, but I do agree with the sentiment that a game focussed exclusively on each portion of the gameplay would be better for the games in general.

Also, that quote in the article... I think that that applies to making the campaign more Hollywood-style, which isn't really a good thing, but I'm taking an innocent until proven guilty outlook on this one. Here's hoping that the campaign will be worthwhile. :/

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 4:03:40 AM

Maybe even the campaign will be *better* with hollywood style dyings, that too realistic "drop deads" would make the single player experience look more boring? One never know...!

I preordered Battlefield yesterday cause of sheer group pressure so I *want* that game to be as good as it can get. :D


Last edited by Beamboom on 7/11/2011 4:19:45 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 3:21:10 AM
Reply

and that proves that they only care about MP how?
battlefield 3 is a ridiculous example, you do realize BF3 is the first in the series to have a campaign right?
not that you would know that constantly bashing the PC, but to say that developers only care about MP is just ridiculous!
yes its getting allot more emphasis put onto it then it did say 10 years ago, but there are still plenty of developers out there that care about delivering a eventful satisfying story as much as they do delivering online.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 4:13:57 AM

Like who... I can think only of Bungie, 4A and maybe Guerilla, though there are a few others that can do a decent story... but hardly spectacular.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 8:44:19 AM

bioware, eidos, ninja theory, A2M, R*, team bondi, crytek, sony SM, PD, PG, id, CD Projekt RED, pretty much all of nintendos developers, team ninja, $E, visceral games, ND, insomniac, monolith, epic, vergil games.
plenty developers out there that still appreciate the experience a well designed campaign can bring!
just because allot of games that use to be SP only have gone MP does not mean devs dont care about campaigns anymore.
its just a attempt to garner more sales.
adding a MP mode will increase there fan base, and it will also help prevent people from trading it in.
thus hopefully garnering a higher profit.


Last edited by ___________ on 7/11/2011 8:51:49 AM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 11:59:00 AM

Your talking about developers as a whole through many genres. Ben is singling out the FPS genre. Refine your list of developers, developing FPS games with great stories and campaigns then come back. I know you can do it. They are out there.

I know there are FPS out there with great stories and campaigns but Ben is right, it's obvious MP is the fore front of development for most FPS games now. With that said, I know and believe there are some devs out there that do appreciate and can develop a good FPS campaign, and will continue to do so.

Last edited by bigrailer19 on 7/11/2011 12:01:11 PM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 1:32:07 PM

And that is why I asked. id and Crytek are the only FPS developers out of your list. Yeah, other developers can create great stories, but most aren't FPS developers.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

coverton341
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 1:53:24 PM

The words you are looking for are "a lot".

The word allot means to give a portion of something.

You also should learn to use correct capitalisation and punctuation. It really isn't too much to ask for when trying to convey a message to someone or a group of people in a meaningful way. You might think it wasted time or energy, but it will make more people be able to take you more seriously. That is if you care about being taken seriously. If not continue to ramble on you wayward little soul, you.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Qubex
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 4:12:23 AM
Reply

I buy shooters primarily for the multi-player fun and longevity of the game.

I do like a strong single player campaign though, like in Crysis2...

Q!

"play.experience.enjoy"

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 4:23:59 AM

Every time I read someone mention Crysis2 like that I get this warm cosy feeling inside. That game is very underrated in the ps3 community imho.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Excelsior1
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 5:32:43 AM

it is underrated in the ps3 community. crytek didn't help themselves by letting that poorly built demo out the door. the reaction to it was so bad ea yanked it from psn. people just assumed it was yet another inferior ps3 multiplat when in fact it it's probably one of better muliplat titles out there. the ps3 version still is technicly inferior to the other versions becuase it's at a lower resolution which makes it look blurry, but it's by no means bad. still looks pretty good. i enjoyed it, and thought it had a lot of value with its lengthy sp campign.

as for the subject of developers admitting they only care about the multiplayer...that's already happening to an extent when you get all these fps games shipped with token 5 hr sp campigns. i remember getting kz3 on a friday afternoon and by the next day i was watching the end credits.

Last edited by Excelsior1 on 7/11/2011 5:34:07 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

big6
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 9:36:14 AM

Yeah, I'm still playing through Crysis 2 right now. It's a pretty cool game so far (I'm about half way through).

Anyone else think it has an "MGS feel to it"? haha

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 11:54:06 AM

Crysis 2 does have a MGS feel to it, absolutely. It is also an awesome shooter with a great campaign. I feel like Crytek developed that title around the SP.

I don't agree that it's underrated in the PS3 community. I again think because it was a game about the SP it's just not getting that same recognition is all.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 1:27:47 PM

I don't know the sales numbers Bigrailer, I just noticed it dropped off the Play sales chart almost immediately after launch, while it stayed on the top 3 for *weeks* on the xbox chart. I have no idea what that means in actual sales though, but still.
It deserved to be well within the top 5 for at least as long on the ps3 chart, it deserved that!

Last edited by Beamboom on 7/11/2011 1:43:46 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 4:53:51 PM

Absolutely, I in fact love the mp. So does a few friends of mine. I don't know the sales numbers either, but I just have this feeling if it were more MP centric it would be played a lot more or payed more attention too.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Gabriel013
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 7:33:54 AM
Reply

I must be an oddity who bought the last Battlefield game for the single player. Don't think I ever played multiplayer.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

maxpontiac
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 8:57:58 AM
Reply

I have no issues if FPS want to focus on multi-player. Most people who buy those types of games know what they are getting into, and those that are bothered by it either need to adapt or move on.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

jimmyhandsome
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 10:43:13 AM

Agreed!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 11:47:25 AM

Agreed.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Deleted User
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 10:13:03 AM
Reply

Multiplayer FPS are going to continue to be the rage with younger gamers for sometime. However, at some point they will tire of the genre just like they did with fighting games in the early to mid-90's.

I don't really have a problem with developers making so many of these games since they sell so well. I wish they would do something about the cheaters who do so in order to thinly conceal the fact that they suck at the game.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mamills
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 10:15:55 AM
Reply

Well, I must ask but, who cares about military shooter campaigns?
They are all the same to me.
(some military superpower wants to wipeout some other military super power but they need some highly classified weapon. Blah blah blah story goes on.
If I want to play a military shooter I play mw or battlefield for multiplayer and multiplayer only.
If I want a good story then I look to uncharted or enslaved or bioshock etc etc.
I mean these titles have a lot more imagination and a much more interesting stories anyway.
most of these military shooters overlap so many times in their campaign, I swear they are all starting to blur together for me.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

slugga_status
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 10:18:14 AM
Reply

I don't think the developers need to admit anything at all. I think they do care about the SP aspect just some devs aren't as good as others. They know there are a lot of us who enjoy a good SP over MP. With FPS' once you've beaten the SP and/or got all the trophies, there's not much left for you to do but MP.

I'd hate to see the day where we get a FPS that's SP only with a simultaneous release of the MP version. I know it'll happen eventually but that would put those who like both in a tough situation..

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

jimmyhandsome
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 10:44:48 AM

Yup, I also do not want to see the day that we will have to buy a SP campaign and MP game seperately.

MP in FPS is just a way to add a ton of replayability to the game. Why seperate the two?

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

slugga_status
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 11:27:18 AM

Exactly..When I buy a FPS I want some type of replay value. With DLC some SP's have replay value which I think is the way to go for those who love a good SP. At the same time I can see complaints regarding that too as some might feel they chopped parts out of a game.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

jimmyhandsome
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 11:36:33 AM

lol that is the biggest most badass avatar I've seen on this site.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 3:04:29 PM

You separate the two because the massive costs of game development is out of control, and studios have to continually split resources down the middle in order to develop ample single-player and multiplayer elements.

And because multiplayer is vastly preferred in the shooter genre, the single-player inevitably has to suffer. Furthermore, those who want the multiplayer won't even bother with a single-player-oriented title, so it's not like they'd have to pay for two games. And those who only want the long single-player campaign and don't care about multiplayer - like me - wouldn't have to buy two games, either.

As far as I can tell, there is a dwindling number of people who like this genre who absolutely must have both. They're quickly being divided into two separate camps, even though one camp is much bigger than the other.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

slugga_status
Tuesday, July 12, 2011 @ 7:17:11 AM

@Ben

I agree that the cost of development isn't decreasing. But if you dedicate resources 100% for two different titles that seems like more money spent compared to what is being spent now. Yet, I have to disagree with the dwindling number of people who want both. There are a lot of people such as myself who enjoy both. As I mentioned, I don't think multiplayer is vastly preferred. It's just the fact that once you've ran through the campaign there's not much left to do. A lot of these games lack different game modes other than multiplayer.

I think this is more of a CoD syndrome than anything. And I'm sure one day we'll see two different versions of a game. Wouldn't that hurt profit however? You'll have a vast quantity of either product left b/c you divided your game into SP version and MP version.

Iono, maybe I'm in the minority..I'd hate have my $65 in my hand and stare at the game cases like "hmmm which one do I want the SP or the MP?" When I know that I'd like both.



Last edited by slugga_status on 7/12/2011 7:19:17 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

jimmyhandsome
Tuesday, July 12, 2011 @ 8:58:28 AM

I also disagree with the huge number of people that don't want both. Maybe it seems that way because people are going to spend much more time online in general. That doesn't mean they don't play and enjoy the single player campaign, though. Even if they are short.

Honestly, of all the games I have played online this generation, the *only* game I could think of where I didnt enjoy the SP campaign and could have done without was Socom 4.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

tridon
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 10:21:23 AM
Reply

I still hardly play MP and I love both Battlefield and the Modern Warfare series (even though the second game was disappointing compared to this first). It's all about the campaign for me and to be honest, I'm fine with 6/7/8 hour campaigns. I don't have the time these days that I once use to and it's hard for me to play through a long campaign. Case in point, I've been playing Castlevania: Lords of Shadow for five months now and I'm not even a 1/4 complete yet. Not sure how I feel about MW3 and its MP-feeling campaign, though. I'll probably skip that installment altogether if that's the case.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Simcoe
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 11:45:45 AM
Reply

I'm actually looking forward to playing the MW3 SP. I own MW and MW2, I never played MW in MP, but I did with MW2. But I liked both the stories in those SP campaigns so I'm waiting to see how it continues in MW3.

Only BF experience was with BC2, I found their SP story to be dull but it's one of my top 10 favourite games because of the MP.

Though, I never really got into Resistance and Killzone MP, I loved their SP campaigns!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

amonte
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 1:00:13 PM
Reply

I have to disagree with your last statement. Devs should make quality lenghty single player campaigns as well as a good multiplayer. Any game that has that automatically gets bought by me. And I believe the reason why people say they don't play the campaign on shooters because they're boring, short, etc. is because the campaign of the majority of shooters this gen have been crap, short, with a crap story so they say, if the campaign is going to be crap and short why would I play it? I'm enjoying Killzone 3´s campaign right now, the gameplay is good and the story is alright which is more than I can say about most of the shooters that came out this year. One reason why I love Uncharted and will buy each game (as long as it doesn't have Onlince Pass) because it has an unbelievable single player in every aspect as well as multiplayer.

If you want good SP, let the devs/pubs know and don't buy any of their games with crap SPs, not buying and letting them know the reason why you havn't bought is the only way that will change.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

BikerSaint
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 2:27:01 PM
Reply

amonte,

"Amen" to that!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Masa42
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 3:07:11 PM
Reply

I have a question about Killzone does anyone know if the series is taking a break because of the new IP they are working on ?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Havoc
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 4:02:17 PM
Reply

Its all in the sales of previous titles that determine what gets made and published. I guess if 17 million people buy the latest call of duty and only 4 million buy bioshock (insert other titles if you want) then thats just the trend that those 17million have created for everyone.

I think sometimes people want atleast a little SP campain to get some practice in before they go online and get killed.

But its nearly unheard of to have the best of both worlds in one package. Even when they form seperate teams to work on everything one is almost always lacking compared to the other.

So 9 times out of 10 its not the publisher thats looking for a great stand alone single player FPS experience to get made. Its a very passionate design team that either has clout with a publisher or a killer app that pulls together the resources for what is in todays market sure to be a big financial risk.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jian2069
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 8:23:38 PM
Reply

Wow. Did I actually read that for BF3?
*facepalm*

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

Got the Wii U?
Yep, had mine since day one.
Yeah; I just recently picked it up.
No, but I might get one soon...
No, and I don't ever want one.

Previous Poll Results