Poll: Strong Singleplayer Or Multiplayer?

[[Gavo]]

I've played my fair share of games, and I've realized something: Some games have a great singleplayer, but no multiplayer, and some games have shitty single player but great multiplayer. Which do you Prefer?

For me, I prefer strong singleplayer, such as, say, Resident Evil 4, where it has a very good campaign but no multiplayer.

 

[Caliostro]

I think it all depends on the actual game and what you expect of it really. Undoubtedly the best, and what developers should aim for, is to have both.

If you can't have both, depends on the game doesn't it? I mean, if I pick up an Unreal Tournament game I usually go for the multiplayer, while something like, say, Ghost Recon, is generally more sought after for the single player.

However I do think the choice is somewhat unfair, not to mention an easy way to "forgive" developer errors and flaws... Nothing states a game can't have BOTH.

CoD4, for instances, did this by having both very strong online and offline modes, SWAT 4 did it too, Jedi Knight II and III, while not without their many flaws, manage to have both a strong and entertaining online and offline components. Very good single and multiplayer should never be mutually exclusive, in fact they often go hand to hand as they're the fruit of a genuinely good developer.

 

[Corven]

I like a good single player, but I'll try multi-player once I get the chance (in the near future, maybe)

 

[LivemeLifefree]

I prefer a strong local multiplayer as I love to invite my friends over and play.

 

[D_987]

Definatly single-player

 

[Spartan Bannana]

it all depends, if it's a game like Fable or fallout 3, yeah, you want strong singleplayer, but if it's a game like Call of Duty: World at War, you would want strong multiplayer.

 

[Rankao]

Well my first games in back in the day didn't have any multiplayer like Quest for Glory series and Doom. Single-player has always had been my focus.

 

[ElephantGuts]

Yeah that's a hard decision to make. It depends on what kind of game it is and what they developers mean to do with it.

 

[CCountZero]

I think it all depends on the actual game and what you expect of it really. Undoubtedly the best, and what developers should aim for, is to have both.

If you can't have both, depends on the game doesn't it? I mean, if I pick up an Unreal Tournament game I usually go for the multiplayer, while something like, say, Ghost Recon, is generally more sought after for the single player.

However I do think the choice is somewhat unfair, not to mention an easy way to "forgive" developer errors and flaws... Nothing states a game can't have BOTH.

CoD4, for instances, did this by having both very strong online and offline modes, SWAT 4 did it too, Jedi Knight II and III, while not without their many flaws, manage to have both a strong and entertaining online and offline components. Very good single and multiplayer should never be mutually exclusive, in fact they often go hand to hand as they're the fruit of a genuinely good developer.

QTF


I never understood why the playerbase on Ghost Recon prefers the single player though.
It's a perfect platform for online play, one for the people that does not like the realism failure that is Counter-Strike?

 

[Nitro 288]

I prefer strong multiplayer over singleplayer, since after a while, playing single player in a video game becomes repetitive and boring, and in-game AIs aren't as fun to interact with as real people.

However, that is no excuse to make a crappy singleplayer. Examples I'll use is Star Wars: Republic Commando and Halo 2.

Republic Commandos had a very entertaining single player mode, but the multiplayer itself wasn't well made at all.

In Halo 2, the campaign wasn't very good, but the multiplayer was incredible.

Despite the flaws that both these games had (in both singleplayer and multiplayer), I spent more time playing Halo 2 than Republic Commando.

 

[OverlordSteve]

Singleplayer, because my internet connection sucks and I have no friends. :C

 

[Anarchemitis]

Singleplayer, because my internet connection sucks and I have no friends. :C

This is the reason why multiplayer should only obligatorily be good on games dedicated to Multiplayer.

 

[Jumplion]

I will always care about the single player before multiplayer, but that does not mean it can't have a suckage single player and an awesome multiplayer. It just means that the latter won't be played as often.

Usually, I like to go through the story multiple times to get all the extras and secrets, and multiplayer usually doesn't have that.

 

[huntedannoyed]

I am glad to see that more people are liking the single player. Multiplayer is a constant draw that adds unlimited replay value to games. But since I don't play PC games and was deprived of it, I grew up with NES, good Multiplayer cannot replace good singleplayer.

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

"Either" - though I prefer single player - but you should only focus on one (at a time), otherwise either one will be significantly better than the other and will feel like an "add-on", or they will both suck.

 

[haveyouseen_mywallet]

i enjoy the strong single player stories, it allows the person to get attached to the story and then after you realize you've been playing for 12 hours and haven't eaten, then you can invite some friends over for some decent multiplayer.

 

[OverlordSteve]

Singleplayer, because my internet connection sucks and I have no friends. :C

This is the reason why multiplayer should only obligatorily be good on games dedicated to Multiplayer.

Hooray, I'm an example.

 

[mipegg]

Strong multiplayer, a single player campaign gets boring after a while, you start knowing were enemies are all the time etc whereas in mutliplayer if you find a decent community you can never get bored tbh.