UltimateUnknown on 02 April 2013
| cusman said: I think your question is too generic.. I think games whose main aim is to be a mass market competitive shooter should focus on that. So Call of Duty and Battlefield who generally have crap single player but very good competitive online modes... maybe just for those types of shooters your question can be valid. For most other shooters that I might play... I could care less about competitive multiplayer. For those I am interested in Co-Op multiplayer or just the single player campaign modes. ... In other words... Left4Dead series did it right... came out with just the one primary game mode it is designed for which was Co-Op multiplayer Bioshock did it right... came out just with the one primary game mode it is designed for which was Single Player Tomb Raider did it wrong... made an excellent single player that it was designed for... and then wasted development resources on competitive multiplayer mode that core audience doesn't need. Halo and Gears of War are kind of tough to put a judgement on because they tend to have multiple modes that will alone satisfy both gamers looking for meaningful campaign, co-op, and competitive multiplayer modes. |
You are right. I think I generalised the question a bit too much and people got the wrong idea. I was talking about all these modern military shooters who clearly have their targets set to being mass market through their multiplayer components and keeping people playing everyday like COD and BF.
I was by no means referring to games like Halo who also have a great lore in their SP components or SP only shooters like Bioshock. I just meant those shooters who clearly thrive on their MP and honestly have very sloopy SP.
