Does multiplayer have a place in single-player RPGs?

Discussion in 'General Gaming and Hardware Forum' started by Mutant Screg, Nov 24, 2019.

  1. Mutant Screg

    Mutant Screg Totally not a mutant

    126
    Jun 27, 2015
    CD Projekt Red's announcement of a multiplayer mode for Cyberpunk 2077 would have worried me much more had it not been confirmed to be a post-launch goal. Being post-launch, it shouldn't be a detriment at all to (initial) the development of the core game. But I can't help but wonder how much (if anything) it could potentially add to the experience and whether or not it will be a bad decision down the road. Cyberpunk's allure comes from CDPR's promise of delivering a truly immersive and content-rich world filled with a variety of meaningful quests, characters, choices, etc., and the promise of a multiplayer is honestly a bit of a surprise. But I suppose that is where the gaming industry is moving these days -- games as a service.

    What is very concerning is the fact that while CDPR initially stated that "it's a bad idea to do microtransactions after you release a game," they have since completely backtracked and now promise good "value" for whatever microtransactions will be added. Suddenly, we're "far too early" in the game's development to see any real details about their plans. Now, of course you can always just ignore the multiplayer aspect if you're interested in enjoying the base game, but I can't help but wonder just what is in store for those of us to play an RPG for a single-player experience. One example is Rockstar downgrading Red Dead Redemption 2's graphics (allegedly) in order to help the online mode run smoother; however, we know absolutely nothing about how multiplayer is going to work in the game and on what scale, so it's impossible to predict whether or not the devs will have to worry about performance impacts.

    The point: We are moving into an age where tacked-on multiplayer money-pigs are becoming the norm, and devs are becoming increasingly okay with delivering a worse single-player experience in order to push microtransaction schemes. In your opinion, is there any circumstance where we can trust a AAA dev team to separate multiplayer from single-player and deliver two excellent experiences without detracting from the core experience?
     
  2. Mr Fish

    Mr Fish ...The pain of being dead...

    Sep 11, 2010
    Hey, remember that time when games shoehorned in multiplayer because it was what sold? Now we're at a point where games shoehorn in multiplayer because it sells. Funny how history repeats itself. Only different is that before it was base sales and now it is desperate microtransactions. Either way, a game should either be designed for singleplayer or multiplayer, Focusing on multiplayer can still mean you can have a campaign and all but it is clear where the focus of the game lies and that's fine. But games that are clearly designed from the ground up to be singleplayer games often get tacked on mutliplayer modes that doesn't fit and no one wanted since it dies off after just a few months if not a few weeks.

    Could just, yknow, not buy the game if you object to their development and sales practices. I don't see why CP2077 would be any exception to that rule.
     
  3. Risewild

    Risewild Venerable Relic of the Wastes
    Modder Orderite

    Jun 14, 2014
    There were games in the past that were singleplayer games with a multiplayer option, while still being good games.
    One of these examples would be Baldur's Gate 2. The game is considered one of the best cRPGs ever and it had a multiplayer option, where you could play the campaign with more people.
    Another example is Fallout Tactics, where the multiplayer was actually popular for a while and people would play maps against each other and in teams.
    Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2 also had multiplayer options that actually enriched the game and gave it longevity (even a few years ago I found people still play multiplayer Neverwinter Nights 2 in persistent worlds created by fans).

    There are probably other games but I just woke up so my memory is worse than usual...


    The point I'm trying to make is that singleplayer games with multiplayer can still be good as singleplayer. It's all up to the devs how to implement it though...

    About microtransactions... I hate anything microtransaction, I don't care if it's optional and just cosmetic... Microtransactions are predatory and shouldn't exist in games where you have to buy it to play it. In free to play games I don't have as much of a problem, but they should still be regulated and have some kind of way to prevent kids or people with addiction problems from spending too much.
     
  4. Eshanas

    Eshanas Mildly Dipped

    522
    Jul 6, 2016
    It's meh. Even in MMOs, I play solo for all of it, it's relatively fine until mid-late grinding rears its head, but by then I'm off to a new game anyway (Runescape, Tibia, Eternal Lands, Star Trek Online, Neverwinter, Albion Online, the like). As long as I can do coherent and logical plot stuff for a while solo, it's whatever.
     
  5. TheGM

    TheGM The voice of reason

    Aug 19, 2008

    Hey look everybody it is Mount Everest.

    I'm indifferent. if the MP is just gta online where children scream and fly jet bikes into crap, I'm gonna pass. if it lets a group of friends get together and run jobs for shadow clients on the matrix and is routinely updated with new work. that's fine. if they want to sell crap to people who play MP, whatever.
     
  6. Mutant Screg

    Mutant Screg Totally not a mutant

    126
    Jun 27, 2015
    What is your point here, exactly? I am simply making observations based on previous actions from these companies. I'm not saying singleplayer gaming is doomed like some extremists here. Be indifferent if that is your stance, but I am only trying to stir conversation.

    Anyway, I don't believe being complacent is motivating developers to make good design choices. Not that I care if someone doesn't care, though. It's just a fact that vocal fans are what push devs to do better.
     
  7. TheGM

    TheGM The voice of reason

    Aug 19, 2008
    you serious? pretty self evident.

    Literally stated why I'm indifferent, what I wouldn't and would want like to see. guess you missed that part because of the complexity of a image of a mound of dirt.
    That is an outright lie. Vocal fans are usually morons and listening to them makes things worse more often than not.
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2019
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  8. Gizmojunk

    Gizmojunk So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs

    Nov 26, 2007
    So did the original. ;)
    ___

    The only multiplayer games I have had any interest in, have been RTSs.

    Years back (but after its hey-day) a friend and I went to the trouble to setup NwN1 for a game, and after about twelve minutes we were bored beyond saving it, and just quit; and never played it again.
     
  9. Squadcar

    Squadcar I'm spinning

    Jun 1, 2018
    Doing both doesn't mean that either has to suffer. It's just that more time and care is spent on one side rather than the other. Sure, CoD campaigns aren't anything to write home about because they all are selling you a multiplayer game. Both can be well done, it's a matter of doing it well. I've played a good bit of games that had singleplayer and multiplayer that were fun.

    Issues I have with multiplayer games are the strong monetization schemes, the epsorts push, and aping CoD's custom loadouts too much. Not every multiplayer game needs to be an esport either. Why can't some just be fun without trying to introduce such a competitive leaning.
     
  10. Mutant Screg

    Mutant Screg Totally not a mutant

    126
    Jun 27, 2015
    Allow me to state this clearly for you: I understood your point, I just disagree with it. I'm not attempting to start a riot over muh video games. I am only using developer actions from the PAST in order to predict how the tactics they currently use to shoehorn multiplayer may evolve. It isn't like I'm saying the entire industry is doomed. I get the feeling that you just get off on hostility and find comfort in the fact that it probably isn't anything personal. Just the way you are.

    And developers look for fan input all of the time. I don't know what is pushing you to deny this. The results obviously don't always result in a better game, but suggestions are often taken and applied in hopes to do better by the fans. Intent and execution are different.
     
  11. BigGuyCIA

    BigGuyCIA Water Chip? Been There, Done That

    956
    Oct 26, 2016
    As a post-launch feature perhaps. There's no guarantees, of course. Without seeing actual "time-spent" metrics we can't really determine how "post-launch" something is. To use CP2077 as an example, they could be developing multiplayer pre-launch at the cost of single-player features. It's pretty nebulous.
     
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  12. TheGM

    TheGM The voice of reason

    Aug 19, 2008
    ......then why'd you ask?
    My carefree attitude and facetious remarks apparently have to ability to offend people on the spectrum. Some call it a super power, others a curse.
    I never said the devs will or won't listen to fans. I alluded to the fact that the most vocal of fans are idiots who don't know what they want.

    I like how I made a joke about making mountains out of mole hills and you turned my post into Olympus Mons because I said if Cyberpunk had MP I wouldn't like if it was just GTA online. people can't make this crap up.
     
  13. Mutant Screg

    Mutant Screg Totally not a mutant

    126
    Jun 27, 2015
    There is being facetious and there is being a self-righteous jerk. I'm sorry if you're still confused about the difference. Later dude, and good luck to those around you. I'm sure they know what I mean.
     
  14. Mutant Screg

    Mutant Screg Totally not a mutant

    126
    Jun 27, 2015