So we're in the early part of the "next gen" but i'm already seeing a trend developing; the online MP only game. Titanfall, evolve, plants vs. zombies are all launching this year and all MP only. On the flip side, we've seen a few new IPs announced with no MP modes when i think many expected them to have MP. Most notably, to me at least, is the order 1886.
This is a very different trend compared to more recent games where a lot of games got a tacked-on, terrible MP mode: tomb raider. dead space. ryse. god of war. i'm sure adding these MP modes wasn't cheap and the reality is "no one" really played them anyways. why would we, they sucked. on the flip side games like CoD with a strong MP following seem to have a shorter and less compelling single player campain with every release.
So I ask,... are titanfall and the order 1886 "incomplete" games that we as gamers should be angry about and boycott or is it to everyone's benefit that we keep things seperated. gamers get well-crafted, fun SP and MP experiences and game publshers get to make games with less bloat in their development costs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
personally, i kinda like the idea of keeping them seperate. i've got no data to back this up but i just get the general impression that most gamers have a pretty passionate preference for either SP or MP games. i rarely see anyone say they love both experiences equally. so why try and bundle 2 games under 1 release?!
as far as i care just sell the MP and SP portions seperately cause at least 9 times out of 10 i'll never touch the online mode anyways. and by seperating them the developer can give a full budget to the game they are making. no more 4 hour (or less) single player campains. no more shittily-balanced, laggy MP modes with no one else playing.
