Do All Games Require Multiplayer For Big Sales Numbers?
While I maintain that certain video games will never need multiplayer, it seems like most developers are treating the option as...well, not an option.
There are rumors that God of War III will feature multiplayer. Now, my first question was- How?! But after convincing myself that Sony Santa Monica would be able to deliver an interesting multiplayer experience, the next question arose and it's much more important- Why?
Maybe it has to do with sales. Maybe it's the fact that the biggest title in the world - Call of Duty - is only #1 because of multiplayer. Or maybe it's because the competition - EA's Battlefield series - also relies heavily on the multiplayer "option," as many shooters tend to do. If that's the case, maybe this is only a genre thing; it's why God of War would never actually need multiplayer. But would it sell better?
And another question- are Xbox 360 owners more into multiplayer gaming than PS3 owners, as one platform's exclusives (with the exception of Alan Wake) definitely seem to push more in the multiplatform direction? Think about it: Heavy Rain, God of War III, inFamous and inFamous 2, and even the Uncharted franchise is all about the single-player campaign. Naughty Dog can crow about the multiplayer all they want; we know the truth of the matter. Most gamers will be focused on the solo adventure.
Above all else, the question remains- "If a product doesn't contain a multiplayer feature, does that hurt its sales potential?" Obviously, there are always other determining factors (including whether or not the multiplayer is any good), but eventually, we may be hard-pressed to find a great game that remains great entirely on the strength of its single-player effort.
Tags: multiplayer, video games, gaming culture
9/27/2011 9:15:09 PM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (67 posts)
ZettaiSeigi
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 9:43:43 PM
Jawknee
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 9:54:05 PM
tayizfire
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 12:16:28 AM
CrusaderForever
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 10:57:51 AM
PasteNuggs
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 9:46:08 PM
Reply
TheAgingHipster
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 9:58:20 PM
Reply
Jawknee
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:04:08 PM
TrophyHunter
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 8:18:47 AM
ZettaiSeigi
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:04:46 PM
Reply
But I really think it shouldn't be shoehorned into a game just so it would sell. It pains me to see fantastic single player games struggle in sales just because they do not have a multiplayer component.
LimitedVertigo
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:08:29 PM
Reply
Having said that I can't wait for BF3!!!! ;)
Jawknee
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:10:32 PM
LimitedVertigo
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:20:30 PM
Jawknee
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:44:34 PM
Jawknee
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:56:32 PM
It's okay but it's not the mind-blowing experience EA is hyping it up to be. Not on the PS3 at least. The graphics look only slightly better than BFBC2 and the game play seems to be the same with the exception of being able to go prone now. I wanted to get it but I think I'll wait until I can afford a PC rig. There is a lot of screen tearing too.
Last edited by Jawknee on 9/27/2011 10:57:45 PM
TrophyHunter
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 8:21:07 AM
CrusaderForever
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 11:03:34 AM
Jawknee
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 3:30:05 PM
Jakintosh
Thursday, September 29, 2011 @ 10:49:52 AM
fatelementality
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:10:22 PM
Reply
Jawknee
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:11:11 PM
WorldEndsWithMe
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:10:55 PM
Reply
I'm glad there are games that are really good at this for the fans of it but must it really be forced onto every other game that doesn't need it? How about some creativity that creates replayability in the SP instead? The best kinds of online are the subtle ones like Demon's Souls and Catherine.
LimitedVertigo
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:22:51 PM
Deleted User
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:14:36 PM
Reply
WorldEndsWithMe
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 11:08:01 PM
tayizfire
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 12:23:28 AM
TrophyHunter
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 8:26:58 AM
Highlander
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:41:31 PM
Reply
tayizfire
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 12:24:50 AM
ZettaiSeigi
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 1:04:41 AM
PSTan
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 10:45:44 PM
Reply
Good examples: Uncharted 2 has a good multiplayer mode, and ND is still supporting it to this day with hotkey fixes, xp weekends, etc. I still play it (excited for the third game).
But perhaps the best example of adding a multiplayer to a game that didn't need one is AC Brotherhood. Not only was it one of the freshest online games in years, it also managed to tell a story (an epic win in my book). And with the additions made in Revelations, I would expect Ubisoft to have another hit, online or off. And what's even more amazing is how much they manage to innovate and expand within a year of development from title to title, unlike other popular franchises. I guess it basically depends on the resources available to developers.
And this article seems to focus more on competitive multiplayer; however, I would like to see more co-op modes in certain games. I mean, who wouldn't want a co-op mode in infamous 2, where you and a friend run around as conduits?
Bottom line, a game's sales shouldn't be determined on what modes of play it has, rather by the quality of the game. There are exceptions, of course, but the reason amazing single player games like Mass Effect or Elder Scrolls sell well is the amount of MEANINGFUL content these respective games have. Also, no one tells you how you want to play a game; whether alone or with friends and strangers, it's nice to know that games can give us these choices.
WorldEndsWithMe
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 11:09:42 PM
sha4dowknight05
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 11:10:36 PM
Reply
TrophyHunter
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 8:30:33 AM
JackDillinger89
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 11:42:24 PM
Reply
PharaohJR
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 12:13:02 AM
Reply
today for the youth & olders folks that are adapting or following gaming its about multiplayer with credibility & top ranking stats that show for them to brag. they under the belief that mulutiplayer is primarily & the campaign is the luxury.
i wont say campaigns will fade away but in due time or probably is now... multiplayer will be the prime reason folks choose a game.
PharaohJR
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 12:16:32 AM
LimitedVertigo
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 1:27:56 AM
bluedarrk
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 12:47:40 AM
Reply
LimitedVertigo
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 1:29:55 AM
Underdog15
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 9:42:49 AM
Just not every game should have it, and if it's a SP game that is amazing, it shouldn't be hurt because there is no multiplayer.
Multiplayer isn't bad... sometimes it's exceptionally good! But a necessity for all games? That isn't really fair, I don't think.
Beamboom
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 1:20:40 AM
Reply
Another factor is that it doesn't really matter *when* single player games are bought. It's only going to be me playing anyways, noone is waiting for me to get it too. The game is the same and the hardware is the same so the experience will be identical if a wait a month or two. Ergo: Price drop. Games are way too expensive today, that's why those insane price drops can take place.
Lastly, I've noticed several mediocre games gets a lot better played in coop. It simply raises the level of fun tremendously. So from that perspective one could say it's needed to give a bad game a better reputation!
Last edited by Beamboom on 9/28/2011 7:34:07 AM
___________
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 3:56:19 AM
Reply
if your talking 8M+ then yes no MP games going to get to that without MP!
but if your definition of good sales is say half that then no it does not.
more importantly you have to ask does the genre suit MP.
GOW as you said how would you bring MP to that?
some games lend themselves perfectly to MP, where others do quite the opposite.
racing games, shooters, arcade styled games are perfect for MP because there competitive and its easy to rank people.
action games, or even platformers for example its much harder.
how would you bring multiplayer into infamous or mario?
LimitedVertigo
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 4:56:48 AM
Underdog15
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 9:45:25 AM
slugga_status
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 9:12:49 AM
Reply
If you do a open world MP such as GTA it needs to be top notch. The GTA MP was ok but the set up was bad. Plus the lag didn't help the cause.
DemonNeno
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 10:21:04 AM
Reply
What happened to adventure & action games with co-op story based gameplay like Contra or Metal Slug? I don't care about gaming with some friendless kid who can absolutely destroy me at any given game. The human connection isn't there for me, so I might as well just play offline.
I'm disturbed by how viral our communication and entertainment is. People need more media to socialize, on a local level. Maybe all these adults will come out of their closets. Everyone is so aware of your every move through all this viral networking of text. That includes games. Sure I can use a microphone, but that just makes it creepier to me.
I miss having a room full of buddies, taking shots and rummaging maps and tipping each other off with tricks and secrets. Now, I stare at a computer screen to subsitute it. It's like our artificial sweetener.
Tell me you wouldn't enjoy doing God of War 3 with another buddy, offline?? That would be sweet!
firesoul453
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 10:34:00 AM
Reply
jimmyhandsome
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 10:44:10 AM
Reply
wiley_kyotee
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 12:40:19 PM
I know one teenager who has had his PS3 for over a year now and has for the most part only played COD MW2 online. No way I could play one game for over a year! There are too many games I want to experience. As it is, I do not have the time and money to play all the games that I want.
Underdog15
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 1:39:54 PM
jimmyhandsome
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 4:29:30 PM
Underdog15
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 12:23:07 PM
Reply
Teddie9
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 4:23:14 PM
big6
Wednesday, September 28, 2011 @ 4:08:39 PM
Reply
But, in the some cases, like for some FPSes, then "yes".
Case in point. I purchased Homefront solely for the multiplayer. I haven't even touched the single player on it yet. I've been on the multiplayer for the past 3 weeks straight.
Something about the multiplayer in that game is very cool and addictive. It's almost as good as MAG! (those of you who frowned when I said that probably didn't even give MAG a chance)

See Full Image









Jawknee
Reply
Tuesday, September 27, 2011 @ 9:40:25 PM
Last edited by Jawknee on 9/27/2011 9:43:19 PM