What multiplayer games would you like to play in singleplayer?

[Neurotic Void Melody]

I would like to play The Crew 1 and 2 single-player please. And most definitely certainly offline, which should go without saying, you fucks.

I would also pretty please like to play destiny 2 single-player and offline if you would be so kind, bungievision, even though the story resembles a Saturday morning cartoon and ultimately felt like nothing meant anything, but in a way that kind of resembles my existence, so shouldn't complain too much.

I would also like every other multiplayer game that requires an online connection to be able to work at all, to have an offline single-player please. Rendering the above two examples rather useless, but whatevs, I'm not going to pretend I'm not wasting everybody's time here.

 

[Dalisclock]

I'd love a single-player OverWatch(and apparently it started out as a much large project which may have been single-player at one time). Every so often I see it, think maybe....oh wait, Multiplayer Only. Oh Well.

World of Tanks looks interesting but I've heard a lot of griping about the premium ammo/buy your way to victory issue and it just kills me interest. I'd love to find a similar single player centered game from anytime in the last few years.

I remember thinking that the Secret World would be fun if it weren't MMO, though I suspect it would basically be an MMO without the multi-player.

 

[Hawki]

I'd love a single-player OverWatch(and apparently it started out as a much large project which may have been single-player at one time). Every so often I see it, think maybe....oh wait, Multiplayer Only. Oh Well.

https://overwatch.gamepedia.com/Overwatch#Development

Overwatch takes assets from Titan, which itself was an MMO. So, guess you could technically play it singleplayer like any other MMO.

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

There is not a single multiplayer game I can think of that wouldn't be improved by the inclusion of a singleplayer campaign (Titanfall 2 and Battlefront 2 being prime examples), but for the purposes of this thread I'll pick a few of the ones I'd like to see first:

Overwatch.
Elder Scrolls Online (I know most of the game is scaled towards PvE solo play but just the presence of Internet monkeys hooning about ruins my immersion); I'm gonna go ahead and apply the same reasoning to the upcoming Fallout 76 as well.
Hawken.
World of Tanks.
Star Trek Online.

 

[sXeth]

I'd love a single-player OverWatch(and apparently it started out as a much large project which may have been single-player at one time). Every so often I see it, think maybe....oh wait, Multiplayer Only. Oh Well.

From what Iv'e read it was basically Blizzard's take on Destiny, that they just couldn't realize for whatever reason (or maybe they pulled the plug since they (Activision-Blizzard) were publishing Destiny itself). So they just kind of sliced off and/or created the PvP mode with some basic loadouts.


Speaking of Destiny, that'd certainly be a pick of mine for the main thread topic. Destiny only just barely (and mostly only recently) kind of scrapes the actual concepts of co-op play to begin with outside of raids, so there's not really much holding it back other then the worst bits of its design and in more recent years, microtransaction fodder.


Warframe kind of. Not so much that I'd want it in singlepyaer form, because unlike Destiny, it does have co-op gameplay (even if its oft unrequired by the challenges presented). Most free-to-play games though I often wish there'd just be the pay 60-100 dollars to just have everything and be done with it offering (that several like Smite and Brawlhalla do have).


I actually enjoy MOBA's too, but a single-player mode would go over well with bots that aren't insane cheats. Understandably the gameplays a little challenging to make AI's for. The bleeding edge meta-crowd in the actual online play for most of them is decidingly unfun to face off with (or team up with) as someone who just doesn't have the time to achieve and maintain that level of play, and the few that have bots are just horribly broken and unfair generally (or absolute cakewalks on the other end).

 

[Squilookle]

...the heck made you go back to this thread? I mean, not complaining, but, huh?

It was kind of one of those perfect storms of

a) browsing some of the old threads
b) reading something I missed the first time round, and
c) forgetting it wasn't a 1st page thread like the other tabs.

Felt a bit sheepish when I realised, but then again there's not much new kicking about in gaming discussion, so in the end I just rolled with it.

Wait... what!? Duke Nukem 64 had multiplayer bots you could play solo against?

Damn... I might have to go check it out now

Iirc, all versions of Duke3D from the Atomic Edition (which I think Duke 64 is based on) onwards have bots. I remember playing some botmatches back in the day, although I also remember it being kind of a pain to set up, by the standards of young inexperienced me, at least.

And I think you can't do a mixed match of human players and bots. It's either you vs bots only, or you vs other people. Although it's possible the newer releases made that possible. Been ages since I played any version.

I've checked out some footage and there are some really interesting aspects to it- shrinking and stomping on the bots in multiplayer, the jetpack pickup, and watching the security cams from the wall console for example. Looks fun, if not amazing.

 

[CaitSeith]

All of them. I'm not a fan of multiplayer-only games.

 

[Asita]

Oh, how about Star Trek Online and Star Wars: The Old Republic? I think both of those could be made into pretty solid single-player RPGs as well.

Very much this. SWTOR never really felt right as an MMO. I mean yes, that's how they justify having 8 different concurrent storylines, but at the end of the day it would lose very little from becoming a single player game, and the narrative largely supports that.

The class storylines assume that you're alone, the Knights of the Fallen Empire/Eternal Throne expansion is built around your specific character and his/her NPC companions. Even the flashpoints don't have any particular assumptions about additional players. And with a dwindling playerbase and balance patches veering towards making it easier to play with just one NPC as support... (and to say nothing of the fact that I still maintain that the game has one of the single worst MMO business models I've come across) suffice to say that I see significant benefit from turning it into a single-player game.

 

[wings012]

I'd love a single-player OverWatch(and apparently it started out as a much large project which may have been single-player at one time). Every so often I see it, think maybe....oh wait, Multiplayer Only. Oh Well.

From what Iv'e read it was basically Blizzard's take on Destiny, that they just couldn't realize for whatever reason (or maybe they pulled the plug since they (Activision-Blizzard) were publishing Destiny itself). So they just kind of sliced off and/or created the PvP mode with some basic loadouts.

Overwatch was originally, or contains elements of a project just known as Titan. It was Blizzard's attempt at making a new MMO. Development on it started in 2007, way before Destiny was even a thing and I seriously doubt Destiny had anything to do with its cancellation. While there was a merger - that's kinda higher up the ladder, Activision and Blizzard still remain separate entities and still operate independently with their own publishing arms even if they have the same owner. And it was never going to be a single-player affair.

Sounds like it was an idea they couldn't make work and they just canned it. Blizzard isn't shy about canning titles, like Starcraft Ghost. But they aren't one to let ideas go to waste. Warcraft Adventures was basically about Thrall, who is the protagonist of the orc campaign in Warcraft 3. Titan was reborn was Overwatch. Starcraft Ghost went on to spawn a bunch of novels featuring Nova, and the covert ops campaign in Starcraft 2.

But I am getting a bit off track.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

Literally since the answer contains the fact that "Once the developer and Publisher feels like they had enough, they can shut down the servers and you can never enjoy it again"... all of them are the answer.

 

[Xprimentyl]

Literally since the answer contains the fact that "Once the developer and Publisher feels like they had enough, they can shut down the servers and you can never enjoy it again"... all of them are the answer.

This; they?re basically rentals you pay full price for. Easily remedied with bots, but it seems, for whatever reason, bots are fairly rare these days. Good thing everyone agrees the only way to enjoy any game is with everybody else, amiright??

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

The answer, as always, Secret World. A game about secret societies protecting the unsuspecting world from the supernatural, conspiracies, werewolves, blood magic and immortals...why it isn't already a series of SP RPGs is beyond me. It has globetrotting, different weapons, melee and ranged, elemental magic...there's a character creation system already there. It has investigation missions, combat, puzzles, mysteries, great cast of characters, cool setting.

I would pay serious cash money for that.

 

[Hawki]

Overwatch was originally, or contains elements of a project just known as Titan. It was Blizzard's attempt at making a new MMO. Development on it started in 2007, way before Destiny was even a thing and I seriously doubt Destiny had anything to do with its cancellation. While there was a merger - that's kinda higher up the ladder, Activision and Blizzard still remain separate entities and still operate independently with their own publishing arms even if they have the same owner. And it was never going to be a single-player affair.

It's technically possible that Destiny could have played a role - work on Titan had begun by 2007, and the project was cancelled by 2014. Bungie began work on Destiny by 2010, and the game was released in 2014. That's a lot of overlap. Plus, we do know that Blizzard had to pitch Overwatch to Activision, so it appears that Activision does have some level of influence over Blizzard, though how high a level that is will depend on who you talk to.

On the other hand, most of the issues with Titan appear to be issues with, well, Titan, so while I'm open to the idea of Destiny playing a role (I doubt Activision would be unaware of its studios developing similar games), it would probably be a minimal one.

 

[sXeth]

I'd love a single-player OverWatch(and apparently it started out as a much large project which may have been single-player at one time). Every so often I see it, think maybe....oh wait, Multiplayer Only. Oh Well.

From what Iv'e read it was basically Blizzard's take on Destiny, that they just couldn't realize for whatever reason (or maybe they pulled the plug since they (Activision-Blizzard) were publishing Destiny itself). So they just kind of sliced off and/or created the PvP mode with some basic loadouts.

Overwatch was originally, or contains elements of a project just known as Titan. It was Blizzard's attempt at making a new MMO. Development on it started in 2007, way before Destiny was even a thing and I seriously doubt Destiny had anything to do with its cancellation. While there was a merger - that's kinda higher up the ladder, Activision and Blizzard still remain separate entities and still operate independently with their own publishing arms even if they have the same owner. And it was never going to be a single-player affair.

Oh I was just kind of throwing out Destiny as shorthand there, not so much a direct reference so much as a description of the sort of action-MMO-esque concept stuff (in with Warframe(which was first but is less mainstreamly identified), Division, Anthem, etc).

As to Blizzard's independence, I'd be highly skeptical of that. They were pretty readily drafted on to help with Destiny 2's PC version, despite having their own major projects on hand to handle. And Overwatch has the copy-pasted Activision lootbox model embedded in it. Maybe they get some leeway as long as they keep their cash cows reporting back in, but if that dries up particularly much they'll be Biowared right up.

 

[Hawki]

As to Blizzard's independence, I'd be highly skeptical of that. They were pretty readily drafted on to help with Destiny 2's PC version, despite having their own major projects on hand to handle.

Bit skeptical of that.

Destiny 2 officially has three developers - Bungie, Vicarious Visions, and High Moon. Far as I'm aware, the scope of Blizzard's involvement was getting Destiny 2 on the Blizzard App (god I hate that name). Also, I can kind of see them welcoming that - I mean, for instance, how many people play CoD? How many people play CoD on PC? If all those players are coming to the Blizzard App, and see Blizzard's titles, chances are at least some of them will give those titles are try when they might have otherwise ignored them.

Now, it is true that some of Team 3 provided consultation for The Taken King (per their work on D3), but that's about it as far as I'm aware.

And Overwatch has the copy-pasted Activision lootbox model embedded in it.

Maybe. But lootboxes aren't Activision exclusive, and from what I can tell, Overwatch is pretty fair in that all its lootboxes are cosmetic, where all new characters, maps, and modes are installed for free. That's pretty far removed from the worst excesses of lootboxes.

Anyway, point is, Activision definitely has some level of leeway over Blizzard (again, they needed Activision's blessing to release Overwatch), but I think it's less than what a lot of people think.

 

[Dalisclock]

Oh, I have another one that just popped up on my news feed. Dreadnaught. Made by Yager, who made Spec Ops: The Line, about Capital Ship Space Warfare.

And it's multiplayer only.....Because of course it is.

I was hoping to see a modernized successor to Homeworld and, welp, I guess that's not gonna happen right now.

 

[Gergar12_v1legacy]

Ace Combat Infinity. Sooooo many planes.