When single-player game franchises go multiplayer

[aozgolo]

Fable turned from a do-anything Sandbox Action RPG into a 4v1 MOBA
Dragon's Dogma is going from a Sandbox Action RPG to a F2P MMORPG
The Elder Scrolls added it's own MMORPG into the mix

This isn't new...

Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic went Turn-based Narrative Driven RPG to MMORPG
Warcraft went from Real-Time Strategy to MMORPG

Sometimes (as in Warcraft's case) this works well, and is probably the kind of success other devs hope to do by jumping ships, often though I see this kind of change met with serious gnashing of teeth and complete utter alienation from the franchise's established fanbase.

What are your opinions? Do you think there's any merit or positive aspect to game franchises going this route? Or is this simply another in a long list of poor game design choices that needs to die?

 

[ninja666]

I find this pretty forced, to be honest. It's like they really want to keep their franchise afloat but can't think of any ideas on how to do it, so they make it an MMO/multiplayer game because it requires little effort in terms of creativity.

 

[aozgolo]

I find this pretty forced, to be honest. It's like they really want to keep their franchise afloat but can't think of any ideas on how to do it, so they make it an MMO/multiplayer game because it requires little effort in terms of creativity.

While it would be easy to assume this given the general route many MMOs take, from a game design perspective it actually takes way more talented people to pull off, more money, more development time, more art, sound, music, and story assets. More programming time.

Though with stretching all these assets around a game where content may be quickly glossed over (yeah yeah shut up and give me my quest XP) or not experienced at all, not to mention the sheer amount of content available, it's easy to see why the content may be less potent than a single player experience.

 

[Aerith]

It's like Naughty Dog and Kart Racers. It's nice to do something different with the game, but it shouldn't be the only focus of the franchise. Like, one MMO game is a nice change of pace. Same with that Halo RTS.

 

[Recusant]

An important note is that most of these were (or began as) spinoffs, not sequels, and so don't count (or at least don't really count) as "going multiplayer". If World of Warcraft had bombed, Blizzard likely wouldn't stopped making Warcraft games; if it had sold only moderately well, we'd have dozens of threads talking about the upcoming Warcraft seven. Most spinoff titles either do reasonably well or crash and burn; rarely do they last very long, and VERY rarely do they even end up eclipsing the main series; let alone end it. Red Alert was a huge hit; we still got more Command and Conquer. Alpha Centauri was one of the best games ever made; we still got more Civilization. WOW killed Warcraft and Tribes killed Earthsiege, but these are the exception, not the rule.

 

[BaronVH]

I just wrote a thread on how jilted I felt by the new Fable. I used to play WoW. I got to the point that it was so repetitive I ceased to have fun. The day I quit I started a new game of Baldur's Gate and was amazed at how much fun I had. The only reason that I see people developing multiplayer only is for money. Developers want the business model that WoW has. I thought KOTOR would be a license to print money. While I found it more entertaining than WoW, it still was just the same old thing. I got Titanfall and enjoyed it at first, but it quickly grew tiresome. I will likely never play it again. On the other hand, I will probably play through Alien Isolation once every two years from here on out. I am fine with multiplayer only games. I just won't be purchasing them. The extremely manipulative style of free games like Class of Clans and Plants v. Zombies 2 where you pay as you go is destroying gaming. Dungeon Keeper for iOs is the prime example of this. I have gotten to the point now of being exclusively single player. If I hear of a game that has tons of day one DLC, even if it is just skins, I will not purchase it.

 

[Evonisia]

I've nothing against a singleplayer series that has a more multiplayer focused instalment, so long as the singleplayer option is still there.

Going full multiplayer pushes me the wrong way, simply because it's the singleplayer that will keep me playing when my friends aren't playing the game anymore (or take a break). WoW is an exception as I hadn't played any of the previous games before it, and I made friends on the game over the years.

 

[Gengisgame]

I find this pretty forced, to be honest. It's like they really want to keep their franchise afloat but can't think of any ideas on how to do it, so they make it an MMO/multiplayer game because it requires little effort in terms of creativity.

While it would be easy to assume this given the general route many MMOs take, from a game design perspective it actually takes way more talented people to pull off, more money, more development time, more art, sound, music, and story assets. More programming time.

Though with stretching all these assets around a game where content may be quickly glossed over (yeah yeah shut up and give me my quest XP) or not experienced at all, not to mention the sheer amount of content available, it's easy to see why the content may be less potent than a single player experience.

Actually the original poster was right, it terms of overall ability it is easier and cheaper to make outside of overall content.

It's the difference between mass production and hand sculpted.

DAI used the mmmo quest formula to fill the void in their expanded world as they didn't have the budget or time (possibly staff) to make the well thought out quests of previous Bioware games and Elder Scrolls online was not made by the same team as the Elder Scrolls game, it was a new team.

 

[sageoftruth]

I've got no interest in multiplayer, unless I'm couch gaming with friends, but I'd still hate to remove that option. If a game gets released and it somehow seems to have excellent potential as a multiplayer game, I don't want to stand in the way of it happening. I'd certainly support anything that made companies smarter about doing it though. If you want to make a multiplayer game out of a single player franchise, do it because the game seems to have untapped multiplayer potential. Don't force it.

If anything, I'd love to divide more games into exclusively singleplayer/coop and exclusively multiplayer. Trying to do both at once just makes both options less impressive than they could have been.

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

How do I feel? The same way as when a game series goes from one genre to another for no reason (looking at you Sacred). It's just another game with the previous game(s)'s name slapped on it to make it sell, as if they knew a new IP wouldn't.

 

[Javetts Eall Raksha]

I'm probably going to get the fable one (which is funny since i don't like the fable franchise). however when single player games go multiplayer, i usually stop buying. all the big games are multiplayer, there are only a few AAA single playergames left. if fallout was announced tomorrow, but it was multiplayer... i'd ask everyone to not talk or call me for a week. i'd need the time to recover emotionally.

 

[Diablo2000]

My opinion is that if a series has been strictly single player, then tacking on a multiplayer mode is both annoying and a waste of time.

Look at DA:I for example,that multiplayer got chucked in for the sake of it and I have'nt heard anyone talk about playing it.

Tacked on and forced multiplayer never works in games that don't need it.

Played once. Thought "That is pretty unnecessary" and never touched ever again.

As someone who loved Kotor 2, I still resent The Old Republic. Fuck EA, Fuck Bioware, Fuck George Lucas. Fuck everything...

 

[kasperbbs]

From what i can tell it only worked out for WoW, others probably made a profit, but they werent all that great and were soon forgotten by everyone, i see people talking about Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind, but noone seems to even mention Elder scrolls online. I'm still pissed that C&C franchise basically died with that attempt to make a multiplayer only game with shitloads of micro transactions and i would love to play more games like that, well at least theres an upcoming Starcraft 2 game and Grey Goo.

 

[erbkaiser]

The Jump the Shark moment, when a series usually begins to turn bad. The worst example so far is probably Mass Effect. I am very much convinced that the unnecessary addition of multi-player was a prime cause of the third game not getting actual endings since the MP had to take up so much development time.

 

[Zen Bard]

I play games to get AWAY from people. If want human interaction, I'll go out and socialize.

That being said, I know how popular multiplayer games are to you social and collaborative Millennials. So it makes sense to turn a popular single player franchise (Elder Scrolls, Fable, Assassin's Creed, etc...) into a multiplayer experience.

And honestly, I would try a multi-player game that wasn't a complete grind or had a sufficient differentiator. Evolve and Destiny are on the right track. But Triple A gaming greed and microtransitions are getting in the way (or so I've read. By admission, I haven't played either.)

But yeah, I think taking a single player game title and making it multiplayer is just a big cash grab.

 

[bat32391]

The only example of single player game that added multiplayer in and did it good was Mass Effect 3. It also helped that the whole horde mode fit in the reaper invasion that was going on and they allowed us to play as the other races.

 

[Maxtro]

Anybody remember Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning?

It was a very fun action RPG with some of the best combat I've ever seen in a game.

The franchise ended because of huge lawsuit about unpaid loans that were used to develop a MMO.

Yeah.

 

[Lightspeaker]

Don't like it. I seriously resent the fact that the WoW spinoff killed mainstream Warcraft RTS games. And also resent the fact that FFXI and FFXIV are both numbered-title Final Fantasies that are MMOs and thus don't really fit the "main numbered game" thing.