GameBanshee Forums

It seems that very rarely does a game have both excellent single-player and multiplayer components. I'll list some examples:

1) Half-Life: great story, very immersive, but multiplayer is a totally different story, it's good, but unrelated to the plot.
2) BG2: Great story, great RP elements, but the multiplayer, to be frank, is very lacking.
3) PST: Possibly the best story in a RPG, no multiplayer at all.
4) Daggerfall: one of the best RPGs ever, again no multiplayer.
5) Unreal Tournament: single-player gets boring very soon, multiplayer, however, is one of the best on the market right now.
6) EQ/DAOC/all other MMORPGs: Good multiplayer, but no single-player at all.
7) Starcraft/Warcraft: okay single-player, but both really shines in multiplayer.

From the list above, I see a general pattern. While almost all the shooters, or non-RPG games are striving to achieve excellent multiplayer opportunities, they seem to neglect the single-player component for the most part. The opposite goes for RPGs, while most go for immersive, non-linear plots, and good RP, they seem to neglect the multiplayer component. With the rapid spreading of broadband, I wonder if companies will slowly move away from developing good single-player games and completely move to multiplayer since it is way easier to just let people interact with each other instead of creating believable and likeable computer characters and good AI. In multiplayer, the company doesn't have to develop the AI that much.

My question is, will single-player be completely forgotten? Although some games do provide excellent single-player components and good replay value, but will it be enough to match the almost infinite replay value of online games? I have never seen a game where the multiplayer actually allow many different people to immerse in the same world that the excellent single-player component created. Sure, MMORPGs have company-hosted quests, but what it really boils down to is usually fighting monsters and acquiring items. My vision of this would be a game with the story and the immersiveness of perhaps PST, or Daggerfall, and a multiplayer environment where people can simultaneously be drawn into this immersive world. Someone could play the quest-giver, someone else could be the person that another is trying to kill, while making this all form a coherent story.

As you see, this kind of game is really hard to create. So far I've never even seen such a game that even comes close. So will the developers actually put in the effort, or will they just give up? Will single-player eventually die out and give way to multiplayer?

Go the American Communist Party!

After all, everyone likes a party.

I don't know. I think there will always be some games that just wouldn't work as multiplayer. The Grand Theft Auto series and the Thief series, for example. On the other hand, I can definitely see the market for single player games diminishing.

Maybe all us RPG fans will go back to PnP for our multiplayer needs.

I wonder if NwN is the game that might fulfill those things you ask for. I certainly hope so.

There was a time when i was buying every fairly decent game that came out (i have a huge game collection ) and to be honest it is costing too much to keep doing this, for the same price i can get about 20 books which will last a lot longer I have resigned myself to waiting for great games, rather than just average. I have been dissapointed in some way with every game i have played since BG2 (although the ending was a little trite ) RtCW, Red Faction, Battle Realms. There are numerous examples of dissapointing games and frankly i am tired of it, unless the PC market stops flucuating in quality then i think it is on a spiral to self destruciton

There will always be games for both the single and multi player varieties. If you want a game with both excellent single and multiplayer variants, try ghost recon. I find both to be highly enjoyable and the multiplayer allows for a variety of cooperative or team games. I haven't found a better FPS'er although I think many will disagree that getting shot once and being dead is lame, albeit more realistic.

As long as consoles are around, there will be single player games, or are you only referring to PC's. The games you list seem to indicate so I'll stay away from the console side of gaming. I play both, and enjoy both.

There are many folks and gamers out there too shy or not good enough to compete in the online gaming whether its bandwidth, don't like, aren't very good. I, unfortunately, consider myself to be an extreme vidiot (and my girlfriend will be more than happy to agree), yet I find myself getting pasted when playing counterstrike, Age of Empires, Halo, Ghost Recon, etc... online. I'm amazed at how good some people are at these games that sometimes it shuns me. Instead of getting my ass kicked for a couple of hours, I'd just like to be able to enjoy playing the game. Enter LAN gaming with friends or just playing a single player game.

good topic humanflyz, curious to see what directions this heads in. Don't forget that spamming is a mulitplayer game when going back to read the thread later.

By multiplayer do you mean over the internet, or local networks, or both? I and my partner play together over a LAN and are a bit worried about the number of "multiplayer" games that are internet based. We've been living in a country where you pay by the minute for internet connections, which makes playing online games expensive, to say the least!

BG2 as a multiplayer game is great for us: 1 created character and 2 adopted characters each. DiabloII is also good fun. But I've noticed recently games seem to be either single player or online. I hope it's not a continuing trend...

@Humanflyz. I wouldn't describe MP in BG2 as lacking. It's just that SP in BG2 is phenomenal(sp?). The BG series has raised the expectations of every gamer out there. My partner and I play MP BG2 most of the time. It's the business.

I will agree with fezek, BG's MP is very good, i will not say anything for the SP since there is nothing to say . Except from the MMORPGs ,each game that offers both SB and MB gaming will do fine in both, if the gamers like it.

Anyway Fallout Tactics is another game that offers both very nice SP and MP.

I think that Single Player Games are going to suffer for a while. I think that the reason for the tremendous amount of MMORPG's being introduced is purely economic. Once a company sells a single-player game--they've made their money, that's it. If the game isn't a blockbuster, they lose money. With a multiplayer game, they not only make money at point of sale, but on an ongoing basis, since you have to pay a monthly fee to play it online. I hope that once the gaming companies have shored themselves up financially with these multiplayer games, they won't forget those of us who liked the single player BG experience and will introduce something for us.

@Humanflyz, I think your examples have provided their own answer. Those games that reply upon nothing but immediate mano-a-mano interaction are going to focus on multiplayer, since it's much easier to do: you don't have to worry about developing a reasonable opponent AI. By contrast, those games that lean heavily on storyline are going to continue to be aimed at the singleplayer market. And many companies, who pride themselves in their quality graphics and/or AI, are going to continue to emphasize singleplayer, because these advantages are basically lost in multiplayer gaming.

good points fable,

that's where ghost recon excels. It is an exciting multiplayer team game, multiplayer cooperative game, and single player game. The AI is incredible. I've never seen another FPS where the AI will have a few guys pin your position down with long range fire while a couple of others try to sneak up on you for a head shot, execution style.

I will never worry about the PC gaming industry because luminaries like Warren Spector will always exist. One person will always craft a genius game that revolutionises the entire genre and then other companies realise the advantage of this sort of game and then you see the game and are blown away by it...

I enjoy both experiences, I play SP games for storyline, I'm not bothered about gameplay normally but when I play games like Sacrifice, Silver, Giants: Citizen Kabuto and Commandos 2, I am filled with joy that some people still create this sort of game. (If you don't realise, I recommend these games thoroughly! )

Multi-player games are nearly aways used for quick, 'manly' games, as Fable's post suggests. I agree with this statement quickly, Sacrifice will never be as popular multiplayer (and it's a real shame it didn't as a game, it never got the credit it deserved
) because it isn't quick as a deathmatch game of Unreal Tournament...

Single player dying? No way!

There are a lot of great single player games out there, of course most of them do have multie player oprtions.


Try Medal of Honor, it's the best shooter since half-life. Great story and all. Haven't tried multi just yet.

Alians vs predator, nice game though the predator missions suck. This game has the worst multi player ever. But the rest is ok.

Max Payne, need I say more? Best game of 2001. No multi player option at all.

Hitman is also a VERY good game without any multi player.

I could go on... No one lives for ever 2....Icewind dale 2....Mafia etc etc tec

i think there are practical limitatons on what you can achieve in multiplayer games. good MMORPGs usually have a lot of controlling from the outside to even make them an rpg, not a fantasy beat-em-up. a plot demands linearity, so unless there are multiple angles to play from, an rpg is limited in multiplayer by the amount of different storylines. one way round is co-operative gaming. works with BG2, works with half-life, but really is awkward with more than 2 people.

multi player gaming has to be less organised, plotted and linear to cope with all those annoying people who insist on turning up to play them at all times of the day and night.

the UK government are making big pushes at the moment (pumping into big com businesses) to get everyone onto broadband. It's all happening all over the world, but nobody really sees it. The reason WinXP is so tight on security and anti-piracy is that Microsoft (and Warner etc) all want a slice of the online media commerce pie. And it will be a bloody huge tasty pie. They are trying to iron out all the crease, get the hardware in every home, have they telecom infrastructure laid out, and then in 2-5 years it'll all explode suddenly. Mark my words, there will be a sudden rush as everything falls into place, and that's when everyone will be DLing all their movies, games, music, software...and equally, that's when everyone will be getting into serious online subscribed gaming.

I have got a ninja broadband connection at the moment which is the only reason that I would even consider online gaming. My mum's PC is on a 56k modem, and it's just too much hastle to play online.

For me, Roleplayers have never been any good online, they're to disjointed, but I play AoE2 and HalfLife regularly still..

I've got some very insightful discussions from all of you.

The thing for me is that I don't have a fast reflex. I get slaughtered whenever I play intense online games such as Counter-Strike, Starcraft, Quake, basically games that is very competitive and require very fast reflex and instant-decision making to win. After a while, it just becomes a pointless competition to see who won the most number of games. The sense of accomplishment when you beat the single-player for the first time is lost. As many of you have said, the economic advantage of creating online-only games will probably not be ignored by game companies. In our current state where every kid just want to play the latest and most hyped online game, will the gaming industry lose interest in developing excellent single-player components?

I really appreciate your input. I guess games with both excellent single-player and multiplayer these days are really hard to come by these days.

I think it's always goign to be rare for the same game to be as good in MP as SP (or vice versa), because different qualities suit each type.

I rarely play SP FPS... I think the best way to play UT is MP, against people I know. I don't play online because with a 56k modem it's just too slow. But Frogus is right about broadband - prices in the UK are dropping as we speak (and my parents are even talking about getting ADSL, heh ) - and I'll probably play online once I have it. But I'll still play SP games.

@Sleepy I doubt if NWN's SP will be that great, since it has been developed more to cater for online RGPing. Still, I hope I'm wrong

@Nippy " 'manly' games"?

@Georgi:

I think Nippy meant that these games are games that outsiders usually perceive to be for male-only, of course, under the influence of a long-standing stereotype that games are for guys only.