Scoobes said:
They have that creativity in SP modes as well though. You have a lot more to think about when designing and creating a single-player experience because as well as trying to be creative in terms of gameplay mechanics, you also have to think about the story, level design, more complicated AI routines. Take Half-Life 2 for example, which was made as a predominantly SP game where they introduced the gravity gun (innovation), yet they had to program detailed animations to convey character emotions (Mainly Alyx- not really needed in as much detail in MP, after all, you're just gonna shoot them), AI for the soldiers, AI for the allies, the squad control system and puzzles. If they concentrated on only multiplayer they wouldn't have to think about that stuff. In MP you have the opportunity to innovate without having to think about the above, or if you do, in less detail. As mentioned before, the main issue is with balance in MP only. |
MP is not just simply about balance. The gameplay mechanics have to be perfect, fun enough to last hours, days worth of playtime. In SP modes this isn't the case (after all, you're distracted by characters' emotions).
But seriously, MP design is an art on its own. The best multiplayer games, from companies like Blizzard or Nintendo, are untouchable because nobody has the talent to dethrone them. Warcraft / Starcraft dominates the RTS genre with its multiplayer. World of Warcraft dominates the MMO scene for the same reason (it does have its lore, but it isn't the reason people are hooked). The same can be said for games like Mario Kart, Smash Bros, and Wii Sports/Resort.
Perhaps SP does have more "stuff" to think about than MP. If it's assumed that means MP is easier or requires less creativity, you may as well argue that games are harder to make than movies. Movie makers need only worry about what's on the screen, while game designers need to add player interaction on top of that.
... You know what, if you're not convinced, I'm not going to push this further. I just don't understand how anyone can possibly agree with the statement below which I took issue with:
This is someone valuing the cinematic aspects of games above all else. Once upon a time, games did not have voice actors, stories, deep characters, or (if you go far back enough) even music. There were still great games in this era. I refuse to believe that these games were "soulless and can be done by almost everyone." Shigeru Miyamoto and Will Wright are probably the most revered developers in the industry, and it has nothing to do with the elements given above.
Games do not need to imitate movies to be considered an art.