Do all games need a multi player component?

[LampyLX]

I don't know how others feel regarding the recent development with Bioshock 2 being delayed because they added a multiplayer component to the game. I for one feel that not every game needs a multiplayer aspect or even an online aspect to make it a good game.

Going back to the Bioshock example, what would be the point of an online death match or capture the flag?

Thoughts?

 

[pigeon_of_doom]

I think you would be very hard pushed to find a single gamer who seriously believes that all games need multiplayer.

 

[Spaghetti]

To be honest, I'm sick of games that are either entirley multiplayer or have a dodgy single player with a focus on multiplayer. I can't get my Xbox 360 online and my internet connection is funky at the best of times, so I don't get to play that much multiplayer. More single player games like Half Life or STALKER please

 

[olee12343]

I think you would be very hard pushed to find a single gamer who seriously believes that all games need multiplayer.

Agreed. Most gamers of the current generation grew up playing games before online console play became so popular or easy to access. That being said, games have long survived without multiplayer, so there's really no "necessity" for multiplayer components.

 

[JRCB]

It all depends on what sort of game it is. If it's very focused on single player mode, and it does it very well, then it probably does not need multiplayer.

 

[Jadak]

*Continues playing Mass Effect*

No, no they don't.

 

[SenorTico]

Not every game lends itself to multiplayer because of several reasons. You brought up Bioshock. I know I am not going to play multiplayer for the sequel because for me it seems like it was an idea that was tacked on by the designers. The atmosphere and ambience would be lost with a bunch of splicer's trying to capture a flag. I couldn't imagine Fallout 3 having multiplayer or Batman: Arkham Asylum. Some games should just stay entirely focused on single player. With Modern Warfare 2 it's a bit different because we know the same attention to detail is being spent with both single and multiplayer.

 

[DrDeath3191]

Sometimes yes. It gives the gamer a reason to put the game back in the console. It's kept me playing the Conduit and Super Smash Bros for a very long time. Most FPSs and fighters especially need this mode since those are mainly based on player-vs.-player action.

Other times, it isn't necessary. I don't need Mass Effect to be multiplayer. However, sometimes it is nice to see efforts made into expanding the experience, like in Bioshock 2's multiplayer.

To summarize, it depends.

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

If it makes sense, it would be nice to have. If it's a single player experience with replayability, then I'll just go play other games for MultiPlayer.

 

[Kiutu]

The Elder Scrolls.

 

[Joshimodo]

No, no no, no, no.

Bioshock is a prime example. It doesn't NEED a multiplayer. All a multiplayer does to a game such as Bioshock, or The Darkness etc., is suck much needed money and time away from the developers. It'll end up a listless, boring multiplayer, and the campaign will suffer for it.


If a game starts out with a multiplayer, and the developers always intended to have one, fine. Co-op, too. When a developer feels the need to just tack on a multiplayer mode to grab a few extra bucks from the people who will buy it FOR the multiplayer, no.

 

[esperandote]

not if it is a good game ZING!

 

[Merteg]

It adds re-playability to a game.

But, no, it isn't a requirement to a good game.

 

[Kpt._Rob]

I don't think the Bioshock multiplayer is going to be tacked on, I heard about it months ago, it's not a recent development or anything, and if they're going to have multiplayer, then I'd rather they do take the extra time to make sure it works well. That said, I do hate when a multiplayer element is tacked on last second, and is really shitty. I'm looking at you Quake 4.

 

[hopeneverdies]

I feel that it seems that quite a few games these days are just multiplayer games with a single player campaign tacked on at the end. I generally do not like that at all.
I prefer a game that has a good single player with a weaker multiplayer or none at all, to one where it seems like single player was an afterthought to the multiplayer which is excellent.

 

[Clashero]

I always felt The Longest Journey would have been so much better if it had CTF.

 

[justhereforthemoney]

Sometimes yes. It gives the gamer a reason to put the game back in the console. It's kept me playing the Conduit and Super Smash Bros for a very long time. Most FPSs and fighters especially need this mode since those are mainly based on player-vs.-player action.

Other times, it isn't necessary. I don't need Mass Effect to be multiplayer. However, sometimes it is nice to see efforts made into expanding the experience, like in Bioshock 2's multiplayer.

To summarize, it depends.

If its a good enough game you wouldn't need multiplayer to put it back in the console.