The dreaded "5 hour campaign"

[Vault101]

So I think Ive made threads about this before, anyway this is a really annoying trend that is affecting nearly all FPS's today

Im not sure why this seems to be mainly exclusive to FPS's is it because online works so well with this genre? is it because people have just accepted this as the norm?

do you supose this trend will begin to affect other genres? Im not sure sure it would as competitive online dosnt exactally work for all types of gameplay, then again I supose mabye any game with shooting be it first person or otherwise

 

[Kpt._Rob]

It probably has a lot to do with Multiplayer. I know I've bought games for no reason other than to play the multiplayer. I bought Halo for the multiplayer, and I still haven't finished the campaign. Hell, I only finished a couple missions of the Modern Warfare campaign, and I never even started the campaign for Modern Warfare 2. And I own all of those games by the way, I could finish them any time I want, but I honestly didn't buy them for the campaign.

And tomorrow I'm gonna go buy Crysis 2, and while I may give the campaign a shot at some point, it probably won't be for a while. It's not the campaign that interests me, again, it's the multiplayer.

So yeah, if the multiplayer is good enough I'll happily forget about the campaign. And is that really so bad? Hell, I remember playing Counterstrike back in the day, that didn't have a campaign at all (or at least not that I know of) and it was still one of the most fun games I've ever played. If FPS makers want to focus on the multiplayer and forget the campaign, okay... well I probably would still be somewhat upset, but still, I don't mind at all a game with a light campaign and deep multiplayer.

 

[Valkaris]

Think about it, what do you do in an FPS? You shoot things. Now shooting things gets pretty old after a while, so you need constant variation and new elements to make the game interesting. Think of games like Halo, Modern Warfare, Uncharted (not an fps but you get the point). They all rely of huge, impressive set pieces to work. if it were all taking place in one big field the game would be no fun. This makes it much harder and more expensive to make a good FPS campaign, thus making the time developers feel they can put into it less.

Now take, if you will, Dragon Age: Origins. Combat consists of more complex things, like many different spells and abilities, varying companion characters, and enemies with changing abilities. In a game like this, the combat can sustain itself without the interference of big, short lived, expensive set pieces. Same is true with RTS games such as Starcraft 2, you don't need to put as much work into the unique stuff because it more or less sustains itself without to much differing in the gameplay.

 

[Vault101]

It probably has a lot to do with Multiplayer. I know I've bought games for no reason other than to play the multiplayer. I bought Halo for the multiplayer, and I still haven't finished the campaign. Hell, I only finished a couple missions of the Modern Warfare campaign, and I never even started the campaign for Modern Warfare 2. And I own all of those games by the way, I could finish them any time I want, but I honestly didn't buy them for the campaign.

And tomorrow I'm gonna go buy Crysis 2, and while I may give the campaign a shot at some point, it probably won't be for a while. It's not the campaign that interests me, again, it's the multiplayer.

So yeah, if the multiplayer is good enough I'll happily forget about the campaign. And is that really so bad? Hell, I remember playing Counterstrike back in the day, that didn't have a campaign at all (or at least not that I know of) and it was still one of the most fun games I've ever played. If FPS makers want to focus on the multiplayer and forget the campaign, okay... well I probably would still be somewhat upset, but still, I don't mind at all a game with a light campaign and deep multiplayer.

I think its fair enough that some FPS focus on multiplayer

however its a huge trend right now (mabye it will go away) its just annoying for some people when we know FPS can also tell great storys like Bioshock or Half life 2

 

[Kortney]

It probably has a lot to do with Multiplayer.

This.

Multiplayer is where shooters really make their money. Naturally, it is the main focus of developers so they pump out a polished 6 hour campaign in the single player and put most of their effort into the multiplayer.

 

[Savber]

I miss big long FPS games like Half Life 2...

Do anything similar even exist in the industry anymore?

 

[Korten12]

I miss big long FPS games like Half Life 2...

Do anything similar even exist in the industry anymore?

What a 9 hour SP? Not that much longer.

 

[WelshDanny]

I hope this trend doesn't continue into other genres. I had really hoped for something substantial with Homefront, specially with all the promises of a clever narrative: http://tinyurl.com/5shgxuc

Glad I didn't pay for it...I got a review copy.

I was disappointed not only was the story overhyped but it only lasted 5 hours. I really hope when Half Life 3 comes out (Yes I said when!) it was a substantial single player campaign. I don't imagine Valve would spend loads - if any - dev time on a multiplayer specific to Half Life 3. Why bother when games like Counter Strike and Team Fortress 2 are still popular?