Sometimes tacked on multiplayer isn't so bad. It worked well with some games. Uncharted 2 for example.

There aren't too many games where it seems that multiplayer is forcefully tacked on though.

Hard to say, it's rare for a game to offer both an amazing SP and MP experience. When Halo and Gears of War came out, both sides of the fence were just plain amazing. I want to say choose one over the other, but by that same mark, people often complain if one out of the two is missing.

Woah, slow down there, Satan.

No way am I paying $120 for Halo 3, for example (if such a business model existed in 2007).

God of War: Ascension has an excellent multiplayer component, the single player felt tacked on.

I have no interest in MP only games, would be best to have an equally strong SP & MP component.

let's be honest here, yes you would..

I definitely feel like tacked on multiplayer has become an issue as of late. Most of it seems to come from third person shooters in the vein of Gears of War style multiplayer. It is generic and uncreative and it doesn't make me want to play the game online if it brings nothing to the table to separate it from the rest.

I personally think a lot of these prominent single player games would better benefit from taking the online scene in another direction. I understand the appeal of wanting to have multiplayer to push DLC sales and increase the longevity of the product. But a simple competitive multiplayer may not be the best answer for all. A cooperative online aspect might be better for some. Whether it be the main story or new missions like Splinter Cell, that will work for a few games. "Horde" mode or "waves" will also work for a lot of the more actiony games and it is also something that can help with DLC sales of new maps and characters. It is something Resident Evil does well with Mercenaries mode. Finally, twists on traditional competitive multiplayer are always welcomed. Twists like how Left 4 Dead allows a mix of competitive and cooperative play with some playing the survivors and some playing the infected. Or how Rockstar allows you to have the large open world of its games and the social aspect with friends.

I hope things like this is what developers look into more for the future of online gaming rather than putting in a "gears of war" style competitive play that is dull and uninspired.

pffft....I didn't even pay $60 for it. I got it used off Half.com for like $35. I get what you're trying to say, but now you're getting into paying for a game twice to get the whole experience.....and then paying again to be able to play it online since online MP is behind a paywall for Sony and MS now. No way, bro

If the games are 100% MP only, then I don't have a problem at al

I'm one who likes games to either be 100% single player or 100% multiplayer. With the exception of Monster Hunter Tri, I very rarely play multiplayer matches of single player games. Not even games like Mario Kart have really compelled me towards online, but I have spent countless hours on games like Dota 2 and TF 2 that are MP only.

Of course, I don't want all games to be MP, or only single player for that matter, there has to be a balanced between both.

Let's not pretend that pricing all games at $60 makes any sense. The cost of producing them is vastly different and jRPG should give you a much longer playtime than other games, but still cost the same

Personally, I mostly play single player games. If there is a top quality multiplayer mode, I'll give it a try, but I generally stick to single player

The upcoming trend is making the single player in a "shared universe." I'm on the fence with these sorts of games, I fear that they basically become co-op focused and the single player experience is left lacking, but we'll see

I love single player games more than multiplayer and also prefer co op multiplayer if I am playing online.