Bleszinski: Japanese Devs Need To Stop Ignoring Multiplayer

[josemlopes]

"No. Just NO!" That was the thought that screamed across my head when I read the title, even more so after reading the whole article.

I had enough of tacked on Multiplayer on every single franchise.
Its only necessary to add it, IF and ONLY IF its a title like... say, Dark Souls.
The closest Japanese title I can think of to implement similar mechanic would be Monster Hunter.

Do I want a Multiplayer Persona 5? NO!
Tacked-on multiplayer like on Mass Effect 3? NO!
Tacked-on Megaman multiplayer? Pssh.

Multiplayer like Dark Souls ? YES!

...I would tout Armored Core V multiplayer too, which is similar to Dark Souls, but then being a niche title it was not the best decision IMO. Its mixed at best. Then again I'm a FROMSoft fanboy.

What I believe is that Japanese games need to do a bit of soul searching, rejuvenate the magic Japanese games had that Western games Don't. They used to have it, but then all I can say is "Where was the magic?"

To be honest multiplayer can be added to a singleplayer game and not be tacked on (Mass Effect 3, Max Payne 3), the multiplayer is only tacked on if they dont care enough about it to make it good. The same thing with primarly mutiplayer games getting a singleplayer mode tacked on.

 

[Sixties Spidey]

If a game provides excellent single player content with an engaging story, interesting mechanics, and can be replayed and enjoyed multiple times, then multiplayer shouldn't be tacked on. I'd argue that multiplayer in Japanese games are just as tackily implemented as single player based franchises tacking on multiplayer, and a little more volatile as it usually takes away from the overall quality of the game. (See also: Ninja Gaiden 3)

 

[hazabaza1]

Had more fun with Vanquish than I did with any Gears game, Cliffy boy.

 

[Royas]

I'd have to say the exact opposite as Cliffy, I think the western developers need to concentrate a lot more on the single player game, and stop emphasizing the multiplayer. Mass Effect 3, for example, didn't frustrate me because the endings were so contrary to the narrative (they were, had no real connection), but rather that part of Shepard's success was tied into how much multiplayer I participated in. I hate multiplayer as a rule, and therefore could only be so successful in the single player game. That is seriously frakked up.

There are only so many games that can make it on muliplayer alone, and too many games are sacrificing single player quality for some excuse to shoot things online. I don't mind a multiplayer mode, some people like that sort of thing, but I do mind it affecting the single player experience in any way.

 

[dimensional]

Dont worry just humour him he might go away.

I would say Japanese devs add multiplayer when its appropriate but they dont try and cram it down our throat like so many western devs do i.e fighting games which are usually made in Japan multiplayer makes sense so its included Vanquish multiplayer does not make sense so it isnt and I hope it stays this way I dont want a crappy multiplayer part on every game.

 

[Amnestic]

To be honest multiplayer can be added to a singleplayer game and not be tacked on (Mass Effect 3, Max Payne 3), the multiplayer is only tacked on if they dont care enough about it to make it good. The same thing with primarly mutiplayer games getting a singleplayer mode tacked on.

It's not a matter of 'caring', it's a matter of time, money and resources of which are generally limited unless your name is Valve and you're working on HL2: Episode 3.

If you have limited resources, then something is going to be sacrificed to create a multiplayer mode. Something is generally the single-player. But wait, you can't sacrifice too much from the single-player. That's the core aspect of your game!

So what then?

 

[RustlessPotato]

Sure, let everyone focus on multiplayer so that we can all have mediocre singleplayers. The only strong singleplayer games are RPGs and Sandbox style games. Too bad, because I rather enjoy the shooter genre. For once I wished i could buy a shooter genre that is intuitive, fresh and more than 8 hours long.

 

[Gatx]

Sure most Western developed games tend to get multiplayer modes, but that's because most Western developed games are shooters in some form or another, whether it be first person or third. Multiplayer for shooters is formulaic at this point so there's no difficulty implementing it there. For every other genre that has multiplayer, Japanese games in that genre have had it - racing, fighting, RPG, etc.

Besides isn't one of the most popular franchises in Japan Monster Hunter? A game that exists ONLY to be played on multiplayer?

 

[WindKnight]

Ok, I love gears 3, but the only reason it has 'multilayer longevity' is the seriously 3.0 achievement, and the way epic basically use it as a stick to beat achievement obsessives into earning it.

I buy games for single-player first, multiplayer second. Every game does not need an 'obligatory' multiplayer mode with tacked on achievements to boost the playtime so the makers can show off how much their game was played.

 

[The Last Nomad]

Me: Western Devs Need to stop ignoring SinglePlayer

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Japanese video games do suck some major ass, but since when is Cliff Bleszinski relevant? Make anything even slightly creative and I'll consider caring for a moment what you have to say, Cliff.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Me: Western Devs Need to stop ignoring SinglePlayer

The top selling Steam games at the moment are all single player focused, many of them containing no multiplayer at all. If you consider the first person genre too focused on multiplayer, you mustn't know the genre too well, as lan party FPS games were kind of the reason the genre took off.

 

[Major_Tom]

Of all the things that's currently wrong with Japanese game industry... Multiplayer? Really? That's going to fix everything? Slap some multiplayer on Silent Hill and we're back to the glory days? Cliff, shut the fuck up.

 

[Starik20X6]

Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but you know what pisses me off so much about this generation? Online only multiplayer. I don't want to play against randoms over an internet connection. I don't want to play with my friends over an internet connection. I want to play with my friends while they're in the same room as me.

I mean sure, online is fantastic for those who can't get friends together to play/have nobody to play with in meatspace, but why did you remove the ability to play together in one room? I've heard the argument that the console can't handle it, with all the top-tier graphics and whatnot, but that has to be a load of crap- the N64 managed 4-way split-screen with 4MB of RAM on TV's half the size of the ones we have now.

In short, call me when playing multiplayer is something I can do at parties, not something I do when I'm alone. This is why even non-gamers love games like Smash Bros. and Mario Kart- they don't have to go through the hassle of buying a console and a game just to have fun. Trust me, most of my friends are like this.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Once awesome game series are being ruined by multiplayer. Especially when they add it for no real reason than because they are expected to. An this can be at the expense of the single player game.

Yes multiplayer can add to a game. But also not every single game needs it.

 

[Something Amyss]

Hey bleszinki, how about you make a series that isn't shit, THEN rag try ragging on other developers?

Are you kidding? All his games are good. They have MULTIPLAYER!

 

[uguito-93]

Lets just take a western example: Alan Wake. Absolutely no multiplayer needed or tacked on, and it sold very well. So saying that the Rising Sun's sunset starts without multiplayer hasn't got the most solid foundations. If CliffyB was serious, maybe he'd fix up UT3 for us.

Actually, Alan Wake sold terribly at launch, it didn't exactly bomb but i think the sales figures hung around 200,000 for the first year or so. It was the kind of game who's sales only picked up serious steam a year or so after launch. Then again the PC port sold pretty well right off the bat.

 

[Deviluk]

On the other hand, companies focusing on the multiplayer (Battlefield, CoD, Words with Friends) tend to neglect the single player, as if THAT is that tacked on bit. Believe me, I would come back and replay awesome levels of games, if I try the multiplayer for 2 days and get bored, I'm not touching it again, because by the time I come back everyone has found the cheats (I'm looking at you MW3).

I'd rather pick up a old single player campaign and do it on a harder difficulty, or lend it to a friend so we can talk about certain bits we liked. My brother plays BF3 and, even though he's been on it for weeks and weeks, all he can say is "I've got a new gun!" Thats the most exciting part of his game. New gun.

Hey Japan, don't let your target audience widen a slither. They don't deserve, or want you.

 

[Arkynomicon]

And I think western developers needs to stop shoehorning in multiplayer in games that does not need them.

 

[uguito-93]

Me: Western Devs Need to stop ignoring SinglePlayer

The top selling Steam games at the moment are all single player focused, many of them containing no multiplayer at all. If you consider the first person genre too focused on multiplayer, you mustn't know the genre too well, as lan party FPS games were kind of the reason the genre took off.

No offense man, but I cant take your comment about the guy being ignorant of the genre seriously when you said this.

Japanese video games do suck some major ass, but since when is Cliff Bleszinski relevant? Make anything even slightly creative and I'll consider caring for a moment what you have to say, Cliff.