Now that God of War has fallen into the MultiPlayer darkside, What other good singleplayer games are left?

[Heavenly_King]

Ajescent said:

Heavenly_King said:

Ajescent said:

Heavenly_King said:

Ajescent said:

God of War now has Multiplayer because that's so necessary. In my opinion, games that were originally SP  but later go on to include MP often end up losing the quality of the SP.

Example
Uncharted 3

Admittedly that's the only game that comes to mind right now because I always try to avoid Multiplayer games if I can help it.

Now that GoW is gone, I'm now worried that games built exclusively for the lone-player will be a thing of the past and all your future games will force you to play with some random on the other side of the world or whatever.

Should I be worried or is this not a sign of things to come?

mmm...Not sure if serious.

UC3 according to you may not be as good as UC2, but for a lot of people is way better. Just because you think something, it does not make it true/right/norm.

Also, I remember the time when most people said that about Uncharted 2, .....and if I remember correctly was 100X better than the previous installment according to 90% of the reviewers and most PS3 gamers.

So your comment is invalid.

PS: A game that I think could fit your thread more accurately is ME3.

There is something called "a personal opinion", I'm not sure if you've heard of it.

When most people like something and a minority does not (including you) it means by consensus that the "something" is good.   By having your opinion you express your uncertainty about what you are saying and yet in your post (even though the word opinion is in it) you are already implying those ideas as "true ideas" (And I have already proved you are wrong) making your conclusion that GOW is gone and that it will be a piece of crap that will never be great again.  Obviously those are not your words, but you get the idea.

Just because it is a "personal opinion" it does not mean that it could not be wrong. An opinion is based on judgement, and the latter is based on facts; and the facts you used to make your judgement are wrong, making your judgement and your opinion not correct according to the events you are referring; making your comment invalid.

Extreme example: Racism was considered true and just a few hundred years ago, does that mean it was right? No There might have been a minority then who where against it and their opinions were disregarded simply because they were in the minority.

In this scenario: I maintain that in my opinion, the single player was lacking when compared to previous installments. I reserve and execute the right to say it sucks. Now the populous will disagree and they have the right to do so, does not mean I have to conform to them. It means I have the right to stand my ground as much as they do theirs.

The problem here is that you are not talking about opinions, you are talking about actions. If you do something like that over and over again, it means you are 100% sure about it; invalidating the concept of opinion. I mentioned before that if most like something, that makes it "good" according to a certain purpose by consensus; but that does not means they are right (according to them they will obviously be right lol).   I said you were wrong because you are already saying that the game will be bad based on your experience with somes games that most people like, (making them good by consensus).   The concepts of good/bad; and right/wrong are independent.  

You can say that something according to you sucks? yeah.  Could you say that something will universally be crap based on your experience? nope, (you did it with "Now that GoW is gone").   You have concluded on a "universal truth", based on facts that are not right, making you wrong.

Your facts: Those are bad games in contrast to the previous ones.      True facts: By consensus they are great games, better than the previous one.

You have the right to stand your ground, but that does not means you are right.   Your ideas in the answers are mostly right; but when you try to defend your first post which ends with an "absolute conclusion" based on wrong facts, it is......"weird".    You are defending that you can have opinions, but that post stopped being an opinion when you implied that GOW: ASCENSION will be a piece of crap.

Maybe you did not meant it that way, but that is how it is understood.  Maybe it would have been better to write it in a different way.

PS: By writing this, I see myself like this: (lol)