Crytek: 'The notion of single-player has to go away'
106 replies, posted
Coming from the guy that made Paid Tech Demo I, II and III.
[QUOTE=plunger435;39766770]Yes, EA is also responsible for smallpox, polio, and cancer.[/QUOTE]
the entirety of EA is actually composed of many, many hitlers
Can someone get an inter-dimensional portal or something and get rid of all these developers that care more about making money than making a good game that people like and is enjoyable to play?
Because these assholes really need to stop trying to fuck with the industry just because they have retarded business ideas.
Single-player = Art
Multi-player = Sport
The two are fundamentally different.
This won't happen, I mean unless that everyone in the world has a 1gbit broadband connection.
If it were for me I'll make every game with some sort of offline multiplayer (bots, etc) for the ones who are still stuck behind slow internets. Adds to the replayability, even if it gets kinda old after a while, but I guess that would happen online as well.
I understand the concept, really. But I'd rather buy a pure MP game that I know I can play it alone as well. Add all the DLCs you want (please don't), but singleplayer has to stay in one way or another.
Whats with the gaming news lately? First, EA's going to put microtransactions in their full retail games and now Crytek wants single player gone...
Its like they want the industry to get fucked.
[QUOTE=Kuro.;39765619]How much do you want to bet this is EA's doing? Sometimes this crap is imposed on them from higher up in the company and the only thing the public faces of the studio can do is try and tell their fans with a straight face that they're going to be screwed and to deal with it.[/QUOTE]
is everything a fucking conspiracy when those two vowels are involved?
As someone who absolutely adores single player stories for the atmosphere they're able to generate I would like to say fuck crytek and their shitty logic, if they want to get rid of single player stories then I'll give my money to someone who'll make them instead.
Like Remedy when they make Alan Wake 2.
[QUOTE=Bliblixe;39763967]Yeah well I sure can do without Crytek's singleplayer games.
So can I with their multiplayer titles.
Just keep shitting new amazing Cryengines and we'll be fine.[/QUOTE]
Which almost no one ever buys tho. So we can do without Crytek altogether. 3DMark's plots and gameplay are better then theirs.
damn and they'd been saying generally intelligent things these days
ya blew it crytek
cant even get multiplayer right and wants to abolish singleplayer
Keep dreaming crytek,your games are dumb anyway
Crysis 2 MP was somewhat fun except for the part majority of the final kill on the kill cam was a bullet hitting way behind the player.
Interesting story or mindless deathmatch?
I know which one I would choose
If devs made more multiplayer games like space station 13, sure, but the industry will never go no-singleplayer. It just won't work. Maybe crytek will do something stupid like this, but good luck convincing bethesda and the likes that.
[QUOTE=usaokay;39764534]wtf happened to you, crytek[/QUOTE]
... you used to be cool
Uhh, Mr Yerli, please kindly go eat a bag of dicks. I buy single player games specifically to avoid playing online. If I have a brain hemorrhage and decide I want to play a game online [i]I will play a multiplayer game.[/i]
Is that too hard to understand? Single player means offline, multiplayer means online? It isn't a difficult concept you greedy twit.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;39764917]I understand where he's coming from. I think he's suggesting that games shouldn't really have 100% closed off singleplayer, like The Elder Scrolls or Metro 2033, but instead should have a bit of online. Could be as simple as Sleeping Dogs' leaderboard system that lets you compare stats during gameplay, or as complex as having drop-in co-op while you're playing like the newer RE titles.
[editline]1st March 2013[/editline]
Also, don't worry you whiny babies, you'll be able to turn that crap off easily.[/QUOTE]
i thought of dark souls' singleplayer-except-for invasions and summons
Gabe Newell said the same thing in 2011
[QUOTE]“I think what we’re trying to talk about is the fact that, not that we’re not doing single player games. Portal 2 was a pretty good example of what we’ve learned over the years in terms of how to create those experiences. It’s more that we think we have to work harder in the future, that entertainment is inherently increased in value by having it be social, by letting you play with your friends, by recognizing that you’re connected with other people.“
…That’s the thing that we’re trying to say, is that, single player is great but we also have to recognize that you have friends, and we wanna have that connected as well. So, it’s not about giving up on single player at all, it’s like saying, we actually think that there’s a bunch of features and capabilities that we need to add into our single player games to recognize the socially connected gamer.”[/QUOTE]
Yeah but what about the games that inherently benefit from the complete opposite, like Amnesia, the first dead space for the most part and Alan Wake, those games greatly benefit from having an atmosphere of loneliness for most of or all of the game.
I have yet to see a horror game that works well co-op.
CO-OP takes all the horror away.
[QUOTE=Daniellynet;39785366]I have yet to see a horror game that works well co-op.
CO-OP takes all the horror away.[/QUOTE]
I've gotta say I think CO-OP killed the horror of Dead Space 3, not played it solo but if the same amount of enemies spawn then the game would definitely achieve a sense of dread really well.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39785240]Gabe Newell said the same thing in 2011[/QUOTE]
Yet portal 2 is a complete single-player experience, with an added co-op. It doesn't at all sound like that's what crytek is suggesting. I'm fine with some people wanting co-op, but don't force me to use co-op or social gaming stuff. I don't want it. Look at AC3 with their pivot shit, fun, hunting down a few orbs other players have dumped in the game. Not.
[QUOTE=Cureless;39766866]Can someone get an inter-dimensional portal or something and get rid of all these developers that care more about making money than making a good game that people like and is enjoyable to play?
Because these assholes really need to stop trying to fuck with the industry just because they have retarded business ideas.[/QUOTE]
I don't think this is business related.
I just think that a lot of developers are picking up on the enormous popularity of console platforms like PSN and XBL when it comes to gaming and socializing, combined with technical advancements like cheap and available broadband internet to create a more shared singleplayer experience than before. I could be wrong, but what all these developers are suggesting would be things like leaderboards or stat tracking or other relatively harmless connectivity perks.
Of course on FP people believe an EA executive dressed up in an SS uniform is going to come to their house and rip out your favorite singleplayer game and replace it with Battlefield 7
"Online Single Player"
Yeah, because that makes [i]so much sense[/i]
I really hate this shit. It's all about the money, popularity, controversy, etc. The games industry is slowly becoming the next music industry. It already has, for the most part. Whatever nets them money, whatever is easier for the "casuals" to understand. Who cares if it could be better, who cares if music/games/tablets/anything could be better, as long as they don't know that there is any better than this pile of shit we'll keep netting the $$$!
Dumbing it down, "social networking" for more microtransactions, ingame-bought dlc, and more popularity. Let's dumb games down and turn them into point n shoot with cinematics in-between just so it'll expand the audience, so they can go and point n shoot together in multiplayer! (only 9.99 for the new mappack and extra gun package!) And then lets never tell them there was ever anything better than this!
My point is, with more people uneducated on the status of the gaming industry consuming games, inevitably companies will try to make a profit off the fact that these people never knew any better.
I think those people are sincerely trying to innovate but they are too stupid or unfamiliar with videogames to make a good idea.
Everyone please read the whole fucking article before spouting shit like
[QUOTE=Muthenfrucheir;39763945]Of course this comes from the guys with the shit story & campaign :v:[/QUOTE]
for "EpiC SNIPE BRO!! XDD" creds
[QUOTE=*Freezorg*;39786026]Everyone please read the whole fucking article before spouting shit like
for "EpiC SNIPE BRO!! XDD" creds[/QUOTE]
everyone's read the article
[editline]3rd March 2013[/editline]
if you want to say you agree with it then go ahead, don't try and detract the validity of others' arguments with some imagined shortcoming on their part
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
