"If a game can't stand on single player alone, it's a bad game." Really?

[Anti Nudist Cupcake]

-snip-

Come on, man, what part of "added value" don't you understand? If you buy a hot dog, and it comes with a free bag of chips, are you going to complain that the bag of chips is too small?

No, i would complain that the chips taste like crap.

First, one of the top complaints about single player campaigns in shooters nowadays is that they aren't long enough, thus it is an issue of size, not quality. Being able to beat the game in 8 hours is bitched about more often than how "good" (subjective) the story is.

Second, in this example let's say the the hot dog in question is honestly one of the best hot dogs around thus is getting a lot of attention by the public. Then you hear a few people talking about how they liked that you get a free bag of chips with the hot dog and they thought they were pretty good. They may or may not mention the hot dog because it goes without saying it was as delicious as everyone else out there is already saying.

Now, wouldn't it be silly for someone who doesn't like hot dogs to go buy a hot dog just for the free chips and criticize the chips thus the vendor? Why the hell not just go buy a bag of damn chips?

Ah, and this is where we will never reach an agreement in this argument, because to me, it is the single player that is the hot dog, and the multiplayer that is the chips.
From my point of view, games were always the hot dog, until people added chips and realized that people really liked the chips and eventually some dingbat decided to make his own little hot dog store amongst the other hundreds of hot dog stores that have some of the greatest hot dogs in the district, and decides that he will make the best chips you can buy, then he acts surprised when people say his hot dogs are really mediocre compared to the hot dogs from the other stands. Many people keep saying that since they're really only paying for the chips, he should never have sold hot dogs in the first place.

To you guys, the multiplayer is the core of the game.
To me and allot of other guys, it is the singleplayer that is the core of the game.

You cannot expect people with two such different opinions to come to an agreement, this argument has been going on for too long already.

Neither side is right or wrong.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

-snip-

Come on, man, what part of "added value" don't you understand? If you buy a hot dog, and it comes with a free bag of chips, are you going to complain that the bag of chips is too small?

No, i would complain that the chips taste like crap.

First, one of the top complaints about single player campaigns in shooters nowadays is that they aren't long enough, thus it is an issue of size, not quality. Being able to beat the game in 8 hours is bitched about more often than how "good" (subjective) the story is.

Second, in this example let's say the the hot dog in question is honestly one of the best hot dogs around thus is getting a lot of attention by the public. Then you hear a few people talking about how they liked that you get a free bag of chips with the hot dog and they thought they were pretty good. They may or may not mention the hot dog because it goes without saying it was as delicious as everyone else out there is already saying.

Now, wouldn't it be silly for someone who doesn't like hot dogs to go buy a hot dog just for the free chips and criticize the chips thus the vendor? Why the hell not just go buy a bag of damn chips?

Ah, and this is where we will never reach an agreement in this argument, because to me, it is the single player that is the hot dog, and the multiplayer that is the chips.
From my point of view, games were always the hot dog, until people added chips and realized that people really liked the chips and eventually some dingbat decided to make his own little hot dog store amongst the other hundreds of hot dog stores that have some of the greatest hot dogs in the district, and decides that he will make the best chips you can buy, then he acts surprised when people say his hot dogs are really mediocre compared to the hot dogs from the other stands. Many people keep saying that since they're really only paying for the chips, he should never have sold hot dogs in the first place.

To you guys, the multiplayer is the core of the game.
To me and allot of other guys, it is the singleplayer that is the core of the game.

You cannot expect people with two such different opinions to come to an agreement, this argument has been going on for too long already.

Neither side is right or wrong.

Actually, to most of us, the core of the game is whatever the developers intended that core to be: I bought Half Life the other day, almost exclusively for the singleplayer, but if I were to buy a modern Call of Duty game tomorrow, I'd be judging it on the multiplayer. For most people, it depends on the game and how the developers intended it. If one part of the game is always the core for you, regardless of what the developers intend to be the core, there's something really weird about that.

 

[Netrigan]

-snip-

Come on, man, what part of "added value" don't you understand? If you buy a hot dog, and it comes with a free bag of chips, are you going to complain that the bag of chips is too small?

No, i would complain that the chips taste like crap.

First, one of the top complaints about single player campaigns in shooters nowadays is that they aren't long enough, thus it is an issue of size, not quality. Being able to beat the game in 8 hours is bitched about more often than how "good" (subjective) the story is.

Second, in this example let's say the the hot dog in question is honestly one of the best hot dogs around thus is getting a lot of attention by the public. Then you hear a few people talking about how they liked that you get a free bag of chips with the hot dog and they thought they were pretty good. They may or may not mention the hot dog because it goes without saying it was as delicious as everyone else out there is already saying.

Now, wouldn't it be silly for someone who doesn't like hot dogs to go buy a hot dog just for the free chips and criticize the chips thus the vendor? Why the hell not just go buy a bag of damn chips?

Ah, and this is where we will never reach an agreement in this argument, because to me, it is the single player that is the hot dog, and the multiplayer that is the chips.
From my point of view, games were always the hot dog, until people added chips and realized that people really liked the chips and eventually some dingbat decided to make his own little hot dog store amongst the other hundreds of hot dog stores that have some of the greatest hot dogs in the district, and decides that he will make the best chips you can buy, then he acts surprised when people say his hot dogs are really mediocre compared to the hot dogs from the other stands. Many people keep saying that since they're really only paying for the chips, he should never have sold hot dogs in the first place.

To you guys, the multiplayer is the core of the game.
To me and allot of other guys, it is the singleplayer that is the core of the game.

You cannot expect people with two such different opinions to come to an agreement, this argument has been going on for too long already.

Neither side is right or wrong.

In regards to single player games with multi-player content... unless your franchise is already insanely popular, you had best have a good single player game, because otherwise no one is going to give a shit about your multiplayer content.

In another thread, someone is defending Kane & Lynch 2 because the multi-player is actually quite good and it features one of the more innovative MP modes of recent time. And it doesn't matter because the SP game simply isn't good enough to draw fans in who would want to check out what else the game offers.

I can't think of a single developer who has managed to launch a successful on-line multi-player game which didn't come on the heels of a popular single player game in the same franchise or genre. id is unique in that its multi-player game with a oft-criticized single player campaign was Quake (game play was quite good, but the premise & story were a complete mess), but they had already planted the MP flag with the insanely good SP game DOOM. Unreal Tournament built on Unreal. Halo & Call Of Duty both have their roots in an extremely popular single player campaign... even if more recent entries are getting criticized. Team Fortress & Counter-Strike are also a bit unique in that they sprung from the mod scene, but both received a heavy push when they were included with Half-Life.

In the First Person Shooter world, that's pretty much all the major players from the start of the genre (the also-rans also had highly regarded single player campaigns). Slipping gears into the MMO world, World Of Warcraft spun out of the popular Warcraft series.

Single player establishes the brand, while multi-player cements the long-term playability. Without the first, the second is pretty much doomed.