He is wrong... just that.
Seriously OP, you could have put the whole Moore quote in the title or something, or at least highlight it in the text (or people could read the OP, lol).
"very few people actually play the single-player on these kinds of games” going on with “that’s what the data points too.”
Is something I pretty much agree with, I mean Battlefield singleplayer campaigns in 3 & 4 are nothing more than tutorials for the multiplayer anyway, to my knowldege. People really shouldn't act as if they desperately needed a singleplayer campaign in this game.
| Veknoid_Outcast said: Usually I'll take any opportunity to blast EA or the lack of single-player options, but in this case I think Moore is right. This kind of game is designed for a competitive or cooperative multiplayer experience. And Battlefront will have offline splitscreen co-op missions, correct? I think that makes up for the lack of a single-player campaign. |
Those co-op missions don't make up for a lack of single-player, they even said they are short.
He's probably right. Most people don't even finish the single player story/campaign.
NNID: FrequentFlyer54
That's utter bull crap, especially when it comes to Star Wars.
Fans of the franchise LOVE it for its characters and STORY, and for fans to enjoy the story there needs to be a CAMPAIGN....I just can't understand the minds of some of these idiots when everything is already laid out in front of them.
90,718 
Ka-pi96 said:
Well yeah, that's what he just said Doesn't mean they couldn't have designed it for both singleplayer and multiplayer if they had wanted to though. Look at COD, most of the people that buy that are getting it for the multiplayer but Activision still invest in some proper singleplayer modes as well and some people do buy it solely for that. And maybe others still buy COD games rather than other multiplayer focused games because there is the campaign mode in it for them as well. |
Hey, you're preaching to the choir 
I am a single-player first, co-op second, multiplayer third kind of guy. But not every game needs a substantial single-player campaign. A game like Battlefront, oriented around large multi-party battles, should be focused on multiplayer.
And, again, it's not like there's no offline or co-op options. From what I understand, there will be short missions that can be played solo or cooperatively, online or offline.
Titanfall says hi :). I really like Titanfall but the lack of a fleshed out SP removes so much longevity and value from the game. Battlefront sounds worse each day sadly.
| Veknoid_Outcast said: Usually I'll take any opportunity to blast EA or the lack of single-player options, but in this case I think Moore is right. This kind of game is designed for a competitive or cooperative multiplayer experience. And Battlefront will have offline splitscreen co-op missions, correct? I think that makes up for the lack of a single-player campaign. |
This kind of games are designed for the multiplayer, sure. But the problem is that we'll be paying 60€ or whatever it costs for half the content we got in Battlefront 1 or 2. This is not a small game mode that could be patched later if demand is loud enough, it's litteraly half the game. And the offline splitscreen was in the previous titles, keeping one feature does not make up for the fact another has been cut.
| MoHasanie said: He's probably right. Most people don't even finish the single player story/campaign. |
Looking at my trophies only 37% of people actually beat Shadow of Mordor, guess that game should have launched without single player then.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
Currently Online 
