By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Singleplayer separate from Multiplayer (a possible new trend beginning)

crissindahouse on 24 February 2012
DarthVolod said:
crissindahouse said:
DarthVolod said:

Does anyone remember when you could pay 50-60 dollars for a game and actually get a full game without paying anything extra for a multiplayer mode, dlc maps, dlc single player lvls, extra skins, weapons, ect?

I kind of see what Sony is doing here, but it sounds more like another attempt to break up otherwise complete games and sell them back to the consumer at a much higher price. Call of Duty Black ops is my fav example of this ... 60 dollar game and then another 60 dollars for a bunch of maps that mostly should have been included in the first place.

Paying 15 dollars for just the multiplayer of Killzone 3 ... not quite sure if that is a bargain. Between sales and other deals you could probably get the full game for 20 dollars or less at some retailers. Even if you buy the multiplayer portion you will have to get the map packs as well (I think not sure).

Only Nintendo seems to sell complete games now, and that won't last with the transition to HD/online with the Wii U.

yes i remember that. that was the time everyone of us didn't earn as much as nowadays because of loan increases. the time the developer didn't have to pay as much as nowadays for their employees as well. instead of that they could sell the games for 80€ which wouldn't be more for me than paying 120DM 15 years ago but this doesn't seem to work because most people believe a game should never increase in price even when they earn 500% more n 50 years lol.

Just raise the price of games then. I'll gladly pay 70 dollars or even 80 if it means I will get a full game without having to worry about dlc, online passes, weapon packs and ect. My concern is not so much price, but the hassle of jumping through so many hoops just to play a game.

Fortunately, it seems like more and more developers are releasing the full version of their games with all the included dlc that should have been there in the first place ... Borderlands GOTY edition, Fallout GOTY, Oblivion GOTY, Fallout New Vegas Ultimate ... ect. ect. As far as I am concerned, these are the official releases of these games, and what came before was an extended demo. Oblivion might be an exception though as I felt the game was complete even without the expansion.

Imagine if movies were sold 20 minutes at a time and you had to buy add ons in order to see the endings. This does happen with a few examples (lord of the rings extended edition and ect.) but, for the most part, when I buy a movie I am getting a full movie and not just 2/3 of a movie which is often the case with the mostly incomplete video games that are released now.

My ultimate point here is that I am not so much concerned about price as I am about being sold parts of an overall experiences when what I want is a complete game.


i wouldnt have a problem with a higher price, i know what i had to pay 20 years ago but most complain even about the price we have to pay now which isn't more than that 20 years ago for me lol^^



Around the Network
Scoobes on 25 February 2012
Seece said:
butcherknife said:
Seece said:

So $60 for Single player, and $15 more for the full multiplayer? Or cheaper retail pricing?


Cheaper retail pricing...maybe $30 for singleplayer, $30 for multiplayer...or $45 for singleplayer, $15 for multiplayer...I dont know. 

Exactly what have Sony got to gain here? a $30 retail game wouldn't earn Sony much at all, $45 is a big drop down from $60 as well.

There's the possibility they'll bring in new customers who only play the single player or multiplayer component and therefore don't want to pay a full $60 for only a half the experience the full game offers. Normally, these players would wait until the game goes to platinum/bargain bin when they wouldn't get as much return anyway.

For instance, can you imagine if someone only wants to play single player Call of Duty? Paying $60 for only 4-5 hours of campaign is ridiculous.




Get your Portable ID!

TWRoO on 25 February 2012
Scoobes said:
Seece said:
butcherknife said:
Seece said:

So $60 for Single player, and $15 more for the full multiplayer? Or cheaper retail pricing?


Cheaper retail pricing...maybe $30 for singleplayer, $30 for multiplayer...or $45 for singleplayer, $15 for multiplayer...I dont know. 

Exactly what have Sony got to gain here? a $30 retail game wouldn't earn Sony much at all, $45 is a big drop down from $60 as well.

There's the possibility they'll bring in new customers who only play the single player or multiplayer component and therefore don't want to pay a full $60 for only a half the experience the full game offers. Normally, these players would wait until the game goes to platinum/bargain bin when they wouldn't get as much return anyway.

For instance, can you imagine if someone only wants to play single player Call of Duty? Paying $60 for only 4-5 hours of campaign is ridiculous.

The cost of creating the game can't be split right between whatever SP and MP experience is in the game though, most of the stuff created for a full game is shared, so splitting it into 2 games would not result in a significantly cheaper price for someone buying just SP or just MP.

Of course in the knowledge that they (the developers) are basically creating two seperate games, the single player version of something like CoD wouldn't be so short.



Scoobes on 25 February 2012
TWRoO said:
Scoobes said:
Seece said:
butcherknife said:
Seece said:

So $60 for Single player, and $15 more for the full multiplayer? Or cheaper retail pricing?


Cheaper retail pricing...maybe $30 for singleplayer, $30 for multiplayer...or $45 for singleplayer, $15 for multiplayer...I dont know. 

Exactly what have Sony got to gain here? a $30 retail game wouldn't earn Sony much at all, $45 is a big drop down from $60 as well.

There's the possibility they'll bring in new customers who only play the single player or multiplayer component and therefore don't want to pay a full $60 for only a half the experience the full game offers. Normally, these players would wait until the game goes to platinum/bargain bin when they wouldn't get as much return anyway.

For instance, can you imagine if someone only wants to play single player Call of Duty? Paying $60 for only 4-5 hours of campaign is ridiculous.

The cost of creating the game can't be split right between whatever SP and MP experience is in the game though, most of the stuff created for a full game is shared, so splitting it into 2 games would not result in a significantly cheaper price for someone buying just SP or just MP.

Of course in the knowledge that they (the developers) are basically creating two seperate games, the single player version of something like CoD wouldn't be so short.

Art assets and models are shared. Some basic level areas may also be shared. However, the time and other resources devoted to each section can be split. Costs concerned with AI development and voice acting can be largely attributed to Single Player for instance.

Not that it matters either way. The cost of only a single player or multi-player game compared to a full package is still going to be significantly less. Even if they're each (SP/MP component) $40-45, that's still a $15-20 saving to buying the whole game new. That's a customer that may not have normally bought the game full price. If that customer does later decide to buy the other component then the publisher gets more money overall. That's how I see publishers working a system like that anyway.




Get your Portable ID!

Marks on 25 February 2012
TWRoO said:
Marks said:
That's cool with me.

I would love the next Treyarch CoD game to separate its game into a $20 single player, $20 multiplayer and $20 zombies modes or something like that. I would then buy the multiplayer and zombies for $40 and forget about the single player.

Probably wouldn't work out like that though... if it did happen it would be more like $50 multiplayer only, or $50 single player only, or $70 for both (I am assuming RRP in the US is $60)


Yeah that's true. You're probably right. 



Around the Network
crissindahouse on 26 February 2012
Marks said:
TWRoO said:
Marks said:
That's cool with me.

I would love the next Treyarch CoD game to separate its game into a $20 single player, $20 multiplayer and $20 zombies modes or something like that. I would then buy the multiplayer and zombies for $40 and forget about the single player.

Probably wouldn't work out like that though... if it did happen it would be more like $50 multiplayer only, or $50 single player only, or $70 for both (I am assuming RRP in the US is $60)


Yeah that's true. You're probably right. 

that's why i said something like:

mp/sp $40 (this price is only an example) which would cost $80 to buy both but if you bought one part for $40 they could give you the other part for half the price.

this would mean that they wouldn't lose money (no retail and so on for people who buy it as download) and the customer wouldn't have to pay more if he only buys one part and the other one 2 weeks later.

AND i believe more people would buy the game then (at least one part). if i could only purchase the online parts of some games i would maybe do it. maybe i would have bought one of the last cod games then but i didn't because i don't want to pay for the single player.

and in retail they could still sell the whole version if you don't want to buy a download. noone would have a disadvantage then but a customer like me could buy what he wants and not the whole game just beeing interested in half of the game.

sure this system wouldn't work for every game but for some games like cod i believe it would work.



goldeneye0074eva2222 on 26 February 2012

no ! its either they give us a complete game for 50-60 , , or dont freaking release it period i hate these types of games look at ridge racer , they didnt even try with that one 3 tracks 5 cars am i the only one who has only played 1 other title thats in existance that offered 3 tracks and 4 cars-race drivin that was a super nintendo game

what is wrong with this industry and yet you wonder what makes me come back to nintendo for far so long , cause if this starts im blaming kz3 and sony , and the supporters behind them , ,

sick of half arse games -gt5 prologe any one , gt5 any one , --no damage til you advance in level? pft pass .

and ive yet to see that nice night drivin that was shown in the trailers



Degausser on 26 February 2012

Seems like a cool idea, I doubt it'll ever take off beyond selling the multiplayer or whatever a year or so after release but it's still a neat idea.

Would be great for me if I could buy MW3 spec ops without having to pay for the single player / multiplayer i don't care for.



JOKA_ on 26 February 2012
Seece said:

So $60 for Single player, and $15 more for the full multiplayer? Or cheaper retail pricing?


I think in this KZ3 example its more like $60 for the full single player AND full multiplayer.  Or the person can get just the mulitplayer for free (with a level cap) and remove the cap for $15.

 

Also, if CoD did this no one would be buying the $60 full game.



Platinums: Red Dead Redemption, Killzone 2, LittleBigPlanet, Terminator Salvation, Uncharted 1, inFamous Second Son, Rocket League

Light on 26 February 2012
Marks said:
That's cool with me.

I would love the next Treyarch CoD game to separate its game into a $20 single player, $20 multiplayer and $20 zombies modes or something like that. I would then buy the multiplayer and zombies for $40 and forget about the single player.

Agree :)