One more thing that seems to have crept into gaming recently is neglecting story modes and single player for online multiplayer.
I side with Yahtzee saying a game should be worth it’s money for single player alone, unless of coarse it’s a game like TF2 where all you have is online.
Aren’t those like us who prefer/really enjoy single-player sorely in the minority? Like, there’s 4 or 5 of us in the known universe?
Yeah, there’s about 7.
Yeah, I almost never enjoy online multiplayer. I’ll play a split screen game, but that’s fun because there’s a person next to you. There are only a few good online multiplayer games, a few would be tf2 and l4d2.
I much rather enjoy a good single player game.
I actually prefer singleplayer games more than most multiplayer games.
Dude, there’s like 12 of us!
WE CAN HAVE A LAN PARTY AND NOT ENJOY IT AS MUCH AS EACH PLAYING ON OUR OWN!! :V
Single-player all the way!
Borderlands:
Great Single player
Splitscreen
Benefits to online
Still fun as hell
Yeah boarderlands was awesome single player but it also kind of changed itself for multiplayer which impressed me quite a bit.
it was worth £7
I wouldn’t say Borderlands had awesome single-player. The story wasn’t very fleshed out, the characters weren’t given any depth, and the ending was nothing short of disappointing.
The gameplay was still fun, it just doesn’t stand out as an awesome single-player game to me.
Well, it’s not the greatest game but as a pew pew mindless kill game it has good gameplay.
but yeah the ending sucked so i’m not even going to try defending that.
I dunno, maybe it’s not so prevalent recently, but I have noticed a number of games in the past where the opposite was true: SP was well done but the MP felt unnecessary and just tacked-on as an afterthought, without much effort put into it. Either way, I am of the opinion that if you’re not going to put equal amounts of effort into both SP and MP so that they are both good, you might as well scrap the weaker and use the effort saved to make the good part better.
QFT
I just hate games that “force” you to work on multiplayer to get the most out of it though, especially with trophies/achievements, seriously, not everyone CAN do online multiplayer, so why force them to do so?
MW2: I don’t want to pay 30 additional bucks to be able to play with 90% of the people on there
And yeah, Borderlands ending? It puzzled me, I mean it seemed anti-climatic at first, but then I actually thought about WHY that’s how it turned out, and I came up with a good bit of fridge logic there.
Read the caption, hot shot.
my guess is he wanted to fool us and have a good laughter at our stupidity. :freeman: not today :freeman:
All I’m absolutely sure that I know is that Valve actually takes care of it’s fans. For example, when Valve Anti-Cheat messed up on MW2 and banned people, Valve gave each person that was banned for no reason Left4Dead2 free. That just shows that they aren’t only to make a profit (Valve didn’t HAVE to give L4D2 free and if they’re giving it away free then they’re not making a profit). Obviously they still want money but they take many years (as we all know) to make their games and polish the hell out of them until they’re insanely good.
Also in this particular case they get a bunch of people who would not have normal gotten l4d2 to try it and potentially become brand loyal.
I don’t have anything against the way valve does things but they do it for a reason. Just like anyone else they are out for the money. They’re just clever.
Or making money through their actions is a side-effect of their good will… Or is that too far-fetched?