Multiplayer - A waste of money

**Fon** · 08-30-2012

http://www.joystiq.com/2012/08/29/sp...-waste-of-mon/

Originally Posted by Joystiq

Spec Ops: The Line lead designer Cory Davis slammed his game's multiplayer in a recent interview, describing it as a "low-quality Call of Duty clone in third-person" and a "waste of money." Davis told The Verge the outsourced mode was just a financially motivated "checkbox" for publisher 2K Games, and that the low number of multiplayer users, coupled with the mode's distinct tone and feel, casts "cancerous" aspersions on the whole game.

Davis revealed 2K insisted on the shooter having multiplayer, but the mode was far from a priority for developer Yager, and went against Davis' vision for the game. Nonetheless, the mode was greenlighted and then outsourced to Darkside Studios. Darkside is a small developer most notable for designing Borderlands' fourth add-on, "Claptrap's New Robot Revolution." Davis is clearly furious with the results.

"It sheds a negative light on all of the meaningful things we did in the single-player experience," Davis said. "The multiplayer game's tone is entirely different, the game mechanics were raped to make it happen, and it was a waste of money. No one is playing it, and I don't even feel like it's part of the overall package. It's another game rammed onto the disk like a cancerous growth, threatening to destroy the best things about the experience that the team at Yager put their heart and souls into creating."

Per the title, I want to make this into a general discussion regarding multiplayer. In response to the article itself, I haven't had the chance to play Spec-Ops: The Line but I have heard a handful of negative comments, mainly from the multiplayer experience so hearing those start to bum people out and end up disregarding the game completely(Not all of course).

Personally I feel like not every game needs a multiplayer - Adding something that is completely irrelevant to your ideas should never be implemented and will only bring disastrous results. It's wasted resources and money. Above all it could potentially degrade the game's overall quality.

What are your thoughts on the article and/or multiplayer in every game?.

**the_jim** · 08-30-2012

Wow! He's pretty vocal about own game! Kudos for his honesty though. I definately agree that not all games need multiplayer and when I heard uncharted was going to have it I feared the worst but thankfully ND didnt let it affect the single player experience whatsoever. I didn't play the MP other than to get some of the trophies... I bought the game for the single player.

MGS4 didn't need MP but they still went ahead. It should never be done if it's tacked on. It has to be built and intergrated from the start for it to work in most games.

I don't know how you guys feel but now I'm older I feel like I have to dedicate my MP experience to certain games just because I don't have enough time! Online gaming sucks up so much more time than the SP counterpart. I have close to 10 days on BLOPS Multiplayer... Can't imagine anyone putting that much time into its single player!

**DarkVincent07** · 08-30-2012

I think this is a really interesting thing for the devs to bring up. Like you've both said, so many games have unnecessary multiplayer modes. Dead Space 2, Bioshock 2, Mass Effect 3. List goes on.

I think for a game like this, which critics have said is quite a great game with a very gripping story - it shouldn't even need MP to help sell it and that money could have easily been used to enhance the SP experience. I really want this game as friends I trust said its awesome and I do plan to pick it up. But I never have had the intention or interest to even bother touching the multiplayer. This game is cheapest on 360 and I don't even have Gold :P

the_jim, yeah I agree, as I'm getting older and starting to have more and more commitments I only play MP with my buddies which is certain titles that we play at night like CS:GO, TF2 and LoL. In fact since getting a new PC I only play MP on PC

**Shibby** · 08-30-2012

Very few games can pull off a good story AND a good multiplayer experience.

CoD4 did it. Uncharted did it. Halo did it. ... and I'm drawing a blank past that.

There needs to be intent. If a game is being designed mainly for multiplayer and they put a campaign in there as a tack on, then it's better off being mp-only as the story will likely be shit anyway. Same goes for a game designed for story.

Even though they pulled it off, putting MP into Uncharted was a bad idea IMO.

Side note: "low quality Call of Duty clone" may be the most redundant statement I've ever heard.

**F34R** · 08-30-2012

Call of Duty
Halo
Gears
Killzone
GT
Forza
MLB
Madden
FIFA
NHL
NBA
Warhawk
LBP
...

The list can go on of great series' that have great MP.

**DarkVincent07** · 08-30-2012

^ all true F34R, but I think you missed the point. Which was that not every game needs it or should have it for that matter. Much of the time its outsourced and tacked on

**F34R** · 08-30-2012

Well, of course not every game NEEDS it. All those games NEED it though lol.

**keefy** · 08-30-2012

indeed having FIFA or Gran Turismo without multiplayer would be ludicrous.

I would say Uncharted is a game that doesn't need multiplayer, its such a polished and well scripted and well made single player.

**Georges** · 08-30-2012

Some games do need multiplayer, some don't. I don't use it either way because of my sub-par connection.

**LfCpS3** · 08-30-2012

Thing is, some games deserve MP much more than others.

Imagine games like just cause 2 with a 20 player free roam...

That would be epic.

**three3-times** · 08-30-2012

Fuck MP, i hate when games which are soley SP games get MP tacked on.

**mooninites** · 08-30-2012

Some games of course need it. Other games that are purely a sp experience that just crams a mp mode that makes no sense should save their time and money.

Some games need to throw in local multiplayer too. It's disappointing how devs are stepping away from local multiplayer and just have a game with online only multiplayer.

When i got BF3 i had a couple friends come over and they wanted to play it. When i found it was online only i almost threw the controller at the TV. No reason why racers and shooters shouldn't have local mp

Sent from my HTC VLE_U using Tapatalk 2

**Kuro** · 08-30-2012

I don't think all games need multiplayer but co-op would be a nice addition.

**-Kwesnoth-** · 08-30-2012

Originally Posted by DarkVincent07

^ all true F34R, but I think you missed the point. Which was that not every game needs it or should have it for that matter. Much of the time its outsourced and tacked on

The problem is that no one would know if the multiplayer fits in the game or not until they have sold it, and at that point its too late.

Game companies are coming to the realization that games with multiplayer will sell better then games without because it provides 10x the amount of time a person would put into the game.

**TOM2x** · 08-30-2012

I love multiplayer if it's done right and I would love it more if I had more free time! But, I'll admit a game like Dead space 2 didn't thrill me too much. I played the MP twice and then I went right back to the SP campaign. Now if it was Co-op, like the next installment is supposed to be then maybe it'll be a lot more fun to me. Like Resident Evil Co-op which can be a blast with the right friend.

**Soldier 95B** · 08-30-2012

MAG needs multiplayer.

**UberZman** · 08-30-2012

The only games that I play are multiplayer ones...

**BoyBettaKnow** · 08-30-2012

Originally Posted by LfCpS3

Thing is, some games deserve MP much more than others.

Imagine games like just cause 2 with a 20 player free roam...

That would be epic.

20 player free roam? Thats cute, watch this 600 player JC2 multiplayer gameplay. Servers support upto 1000 players

It's true though, not all games need multiplayer but as long as it doesn't take quality away from the main singleplayer portion, i don't have a problem with it. I never once touched the multiplayer of ME3 and i don't intend on touching it either.

**Fon** · 08-30-2012

Like, DarkVincent07 said, my point here is that not all games need Multiplayer. If a studio is focused on single player then they should invest their efforts on that then a multiplayer that could potentially ruin the overall value of their game. Uncharted got off lucky but I get the feeling that Uncharted 3 could have been a much greater experience without the multiplayer.

Metal Gear Solid 4, Bioshock, Dead Space 2, Assassin's Creed, Crysis 2 and Medal of Honor(To name a few), could have done well or better without multiplayer and instead increase the SP experience. Games can sell even better if they take their investments in something that will leave a lasting impression instead of gambling it on a multiplayer that people will most likely not touch after a while or use it as the basis to the game's image.

**F34R** · 08-30-2012

Originally Posted by FonFahbre

Like, DarkVincent07 said, my point here is that not all games need Multiplayer. If a studio is focused on single player then they should invest their efforts on that then a multiplayer that could potentially ruin the overall value of their game. Uncharted got off lucky but I get the feeling that Uncharted 3 could have been a much greater experience without the multiplayer.

Metal Gear Solid 4, Bioshock, Dead Space 2, Assassin's Creed, Crysis 2 and Medal of Honor(To name a few), could have done well or better without multiplayer and instead increase the SP experience. Games can sell even better if they take their investments in something that will leave a lasting impression instead of gambling it on a multiplayer that people will most likely not touch after a while or use it as the basis to the game's image.

That's a great point.

**Beast of Bourbon** · 08-30-2012

Wolfenstein comes to mind when i read this.
Imo if you have to outsource the MP mode you should scratch it completely.

Even Dead Space 2 had MP... i didn't try it once.

Next big fail on the horizon -> God of War

Tapatalkin'

**DeviousOne** · 08-30-2012

Originally Posted by zzKurozz

I don't think all games need multiplayer but co-op would be a nice addition.

I think some games could def benefit from multiplayer co op that was my favorite feature in the first resistance for Ps3.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

**LfCpS3** · 08-30-2012

Originally Posted by BoyBettaKnow

20 player free roam? Thats cute, watch this 600 player JC2 multiplayer gameplay. Servers support upto 1000 players

It's true though, not all games need multiplayer but as long as it doesn't take quality away from the main singleplayer portion, i don't have a problem with it. I never once touched the multiplayer of ME3 and i don't intend on touching it either.

Well my 20 player free-roam mention was more about making it available on the console

I signed up for this but forget to participate, looks amazing and is the reason why i think JC2 could be so much better with MP.

**BoyBettaKnow** · 08-30-2012

Games like MAG had best part of 256 people didn't it? Hopefully next gen the PS4/XB3 will support more players.

**Anubis79** · 08-30-2012

I'm sorry, but the MP part of MGS4 did NOT take anything away from the single player game. They took a product that had already been out in MGO, and rebuilt it for the PS3. I highly doubt they were even the same dev teams. MGO was a separate entity that just happened to be accessed through the MGS4 disc.