"...it seems that the idea of solo-oriented experiences is now dead to EA. As is variety, it seems. The inexorable march towards videogames becoming one indistinguishable mass of grey sludge continues."

Ridiculous. The upcoming SimCity (release almost 10 years after SC 4) looks great and if I'll ever play it, it will be in endless single-player sessions.

Well, that would really suck for a lot of gamers. My best experiences in gaming are almost entirely from single player gaming.

Isn't that the one that forces you to be online so your city can be affected by other players?

The only multiplayer I play is co-op. Not a fan of single player franchises with shoehorned multiplayer elements. I would be in favour of a cheaper standalone single player game with an optional $10-$15 "online pass" multiplayer.
Roll on Borderlands 2

Yep.

Yes to the 1st part (always online, don't care about it), the 2nd part (affected by other players) is news to me.

As long as I don't have to pay extra, I don't care.

Some games are meant for solo experiences and I only play that. The last couple Assassin's Creed games had multi-player, I did not play it at all. Just beat the game and moved on.

If anything I'd prefer local multi-player in the same style as Goldeneye, but for some reason they focus on online matches and no local. bleh.

These great works cannot be built if you’re trying to play a single-player game?
Our single-player is still considered multiplayer, because everything you do, you’re still part of that SimCity world. You could play by yourself in a region, but play multiple cities. So it’s really about the number of cities that it takes to achieve something like that. And, of course, playing with other players, there’s going to be some social reward mechanics there the more players you have. And it’s going to be quicker to get things done. 

So it is technically possible to play single-player if you don’t want any outside interaction?
Yeah. We’re definitely catering to different playstyles. We know that there are quite a few SimCity players who do want to play alone. When you create your region, you could just set it to private and play any one of those cities by yourself. You’re jumping around between the cities and playing that way. And later on, if you want to invite a friend, you can invite a friend to your game if you’d like.  We’re going to have a matchmaking system, so you can just hit play and we’ll put you in a region with other players, and you can play that way as well. 

SimCity requires an always-on online connection. How does that work if players just want to play solo?
We are building a multiplayer experience. That is our goal. We want players to play together. We’re making the missions, adding leaderboards, things like that. This is a collaborative online experience. We’re going to be delivering content like challenges as the game is live. That’s the experience we’re after. If you want to play solo, we’re going to give you those opportunities, but you’re still part of that SimCity world. We want players to feel like that they are part of that, and that their actions at the city level ripple up and that world is being broadcast back down into your city and your experience. 

Looks like you can play on your own but you have to keep switching cities and pretending it's multiplayer to make it work.

Final bold should read: fuck you SP people.

Personally, I find this a bit of an odd choice ...

While many "hardcore" gamers thrive on online competitive multiplayer, the blind focus on online multiplayer ignores a large market of gamers who prefer single player and local multiplayer experiences.

I could be wrong but one of the main reasons I thought the Wii was so successful was because it was the only system that actually had decent local multiplayer.

As far as I understand, you'll be always online and the neighbouring cities will be controlled by other players. So the commercial relations and everything depends on those players...