Tacked-on multiplayer is causing developers to crank out gimped single-player games

in gaming •  7 years ago 

singleplayer.jpg

Since the launch of Xbox live, online multiplayer gaming has become massively popular. Some games are basically only playable online with other gamers and have no 'real' single-player experience. Other games have added online multiplayer as an additional gameplay option to keep you busy once you’ve completed the main campaign.

However, it seems that more and more games are putting more focus on the multiplayer than on the single-player campaign. Others are games that shoehorn multiplayer aspects into the game so they can have that bullet point on the back of the box.

While I don’t really take issue with games that are designed as multiplayer experiences first, far too many games suffer because the online multiplayer aspect is forced into the game and draws resources away that should have been directed at making the single-player game better.

Case in point, Bioshock



Image Source: GameMiles

The original Bioshock is a masterpiece of single-player FPS gaming goodness. The game uses brilliant art design, clever level structure and great writing to create one of the most compelling gaming experiences of all time.

A couple of years later the inevitable sequel hits consoles. While Bioshock 2 was a decent followup that managed to find a new and interesting reason to bring you back to Rapture, it was received as a disappointment across the board. The game naturally featured an online multiplayer mode, to feed the need to have every FPS game sporting online play.

Would the core game have turned out better if the team who was working on the multiplayer mode was reassigned to making the single-player game better? While its not a sure thing, I have to think that Bioshock 2 would have been a much more successful followup if they didn’t have to split their resources to introduce online multiplayer.

Games that are single-player first and feature tacked-on online multiplayer suffer across the board. Not only is the single-player game held back by the lack of resources, the online multiplayer components rarely can compete with popular games like Call of Duty which make online the primary focus of the game. Both modes suffer and few people actually hang around and play the multiplayer modes of games that should be single-player only.

An impaired legacy



Image Source: GameSpot

These afterthought online modes are often played around with briefly by those interested by it, but they’re often played for curiosity rather than quality. Hence, the online component of these games is usually pretty bare 6-12 months after release. Players mess around with multiplayer, but don’t typically get their online multiplayer fix from games like Bioshock 2. What you’ll find a few months after release are online lobbies where you can watch tumbleweeds blow through as you wait for some other desperate gamers to wander in.

Popping in that game today gives you the single-player campaign and the option to play a multiplayer mode that has been barren for years. As these games age, it will become more apparent that they should have stuck to the single-player modes and put all of their focus on crafting the best single-player game they could.

Moving forward



Image Source: GameSpot

I don’t really see this changing anytime soon. Online multiplayer seems like a must-have feature for many consumers, but it seems that games that aren’t crafted around being multiplayer-first will be stuck with online modes that are filled with tire-kickers who play these modes for a few hours and go back to playing dedicated games like Fortnight and Splatoon.

If you’re going to build an online game, focus on that. If you’re making a single-player experience, put all your resources into that and make the best single-player game you can. Tacked on multiplayer modes are essentially disposable, while a finely-crafted single-player classic will be as enjoyable 5/10/20 years after its release as it was on launch day.

What do you think? Am I wrong? Is tacked-on multiplayer an unneeded feature that should be left behind so the single-player experience can be improved or can these modes peacefully coexist? Let’s discuss!


Decorative-Line-Black-PNG-Image.png

Thanks for reading. As always, upvotes, resteems and comments are appreciated!

Cover Image Source: Blur Studio

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I have totally noticed this!

Nail on head! The rise in popularity of online multiplayer is trying its hardest to kill of both quality singleplayer campaigns and split screen multi player. Its a depressing trend as more popular doesn't necessarily mean better!

I don't really enjoy online multiplayer, with a few exceptions like Splatoon or Mario Kart 8, so its always frustrating when you play a game where the single-player campaign feels like an extended tutorial for the online multiplayer mode.

If the multiplayer modes don't noticeably hurt the single-player campaign, I have no problem with it. But if they're giving me a 6-hour single player game for $60, I have a big issue with that.

The biggest problem will be revisiting these games ten years from now. They're going to feel like incomplete games once the multiplayer servers for them go offline.

Maybe 2K learned this lesson by removing the multiplayer mode in BioShock 2 remastered (BioShock: The Collection). And I agree, better focus on one thing than trying to be something more that might result in half the envisioned quality.