Muliplayer or Single player

[Gnizmo]

rocketpig said:
It depends on the game. Halo and CoD are MP franchises with solid single-player campaigns. Some of the best combinations of the two around. BioShock simply wouldn't work, make sense, or be as great with a multi-player component. It just doesn't fit the environment, story, or anything. While the Splinter Cell series has multi-player, I view it as a BioShock. It doesn't make sense to add multi-player components to stealth/man on the run games while the competitive nature of a military/war FPS naturally lends itself to a great (and long-lasting) multiplayer experience.

The same applies to platformers. I am a strong opponent of multi-player in platformers. If we start seeing multi components in games like SMG, Banjo, R&C, etc., I fear the game length and single-player components will go the way of the TPS/FPS genre. If I start seeing 10 hour or less platformers, I think my head will explode. I put up with it in FPS because most modern FPS games that are worth a damn have both a co-op and a multi-player component that doesn't get old... I don't see that happening in the platformer genre. There will never be a super-competitive platformer that has the multiplayer legs of a CoD or Halo.

In short, I love 'em both. But there is a time and a place for each experience. Some genres lend themselves well to MP, others lend themselves better to SP. Very few have a decent mix of both.

 Well said. I get tired of people trying to tack on multiplayer to every game that comes out because of some absurd notion that it will make the game better. Some genres are just meant to be played alone, and certain genres meant to be played together.