I hope Gears 2 and CoD5 have longer campaigns.

[Bodhesatva]

boycop said:
Well, they should have financial inititives for making single player campaigns. Though, most people are interested in multiplayer, there are many, like starcraft and me, who are more interested in single player campaigns. And I'm not afraid to admit that it's due to the fact that multiplayer games are not funny, unless you are good at them, which means you have to have a lot of spare time, which is not usually the case for professionals.
I won't buy games with very short single player modes anymore.

 

Everyone is welcome to their own tastes, but these companies definitely should not have financial incentive to focus more on the single player experience.

When speaking about financial incentive, "should" means "has significant financial motive." Single player campaigns are no longer a predominant selling point for these types of games. It doesn't mean that you don't like them; I'm just saying you're the significant minority, and that from a financial perspective, these companies should follow the significant majority's desires.

Single player lovers are not the primary driving force behind Halo 3, or CoD4, or Gears of War, or Wii Sports, or Wii Play, or Smash Brothers, or Mario Kart, or Mario Party. The only single-player focused franchises to strike it big thus far this generation are GTA, which has added multiplayer components now, and Wii Fit, which I think is still "social gaming" even if it isn't technically multiplayer.

Again, I'm not saying your preferences are bad, or wrong, I'm just saying they're no longer very popular. Emphasis on single player has been decreasing for decades, and within 5-10 years I expect the entire concept of single player to be fairly niche.