Support NeoGAF

ThoughtsOfSpeaking · May 25, 2016

Vulcano's assistant said:
bout 0.7 a year in average if we are lucky, lets be optimists here

Even in the most optimistic scenario, they are going to be few and far between. Single player games are going the way of the dodo. Either start accepting that or prepare yourself for a lot of disappointment.

The good thing is there are probably enough great single player titles out there that you have never played to last you your natural lifetime.

grandwizard · May 25, 2016

Spirit of Jazz said:
They clearly never had a PC or Xbox growing up. Let the poor kid pretend like Timesplitters was actually a good game.

Finally someone said it.

sflufan · May 25, 2016

Furthermore, how would a single-player campaign mode work for relatively weak support character such as Mercy or a defense-oriented character like Bastion? What does an engaging single-player campaign experience shaped around those characters look like?

You essentially have to:

(a) limit the single-player mode to certain characters like Soldier 76 which will well and truly suck in its own right, or

(b) find yourself in a situation kinda like Battleborn where you can theoretically "win" the campaign with any character but will have a FAR harder time with some characters relative to others and the overall solo experience will be tedious and unentertaining.

Dreams-Visions · May 25, 2016

Vulcano's assistant said:

yasss.

Spirit of Jazz said:
They clearly never had a PC or Xbox growing up. Let the poor kid pretend like Timesplitters was actually a good game.

but...Timesplitters was fucking awesome. Especially coop.

Jito · May 25, 2016

Yeh I wish *insert clearly multiplayer focused and designed game* had a forced single player campaign as well. I really just wish all games were designed for me an my interests only.

khaaan · May 25, 2016

sflufan said:
Furthermore, how would a single-player campaign mode work for relatively weak support character such as Mercy or a defense-oriented character like Bastion? What does an engaging single-player campaign experience shaped around those characters look like?

You essentially have to:

(a) limit the single-player mode to certain characters like Soldier 76 which will well and truly suck in its own right, or

(b) find yourself in a situation kinda like Battleborn where you can theoretically "win" the campaign with any character but will have a FAR harder time with some characters relative to others and the overall solo experience will be tedious and unentertaining.

khaaan said:
Surely you guys don't think the designers at Blizzard would come to the conclusion that a single player implementation of the game would be to create a corridor shooter, right?

Has anyone bothered to look what the gameplay options in Overwatch are? You can control maps, hero/role selection, and gameplay stats. There's even a gameplay mode that rotates through various custom settings like that and it's completely optional. Hell, if you read the data-mined Weekly Brawl modes then there's already at least one that facilitates some of the story that they've already laid down. Would it be so bad if there was a cutscene or MGS comic book style scene at the end of a match that added more to the story?

Or what if instead of custom multiplayer matches, you could systemically unlock cutscenes/comics/story for the character you were playing? It could be done through bots or through multiplayer with the point being to expand the characters in some way.

If it's something Blizzard wants, they have designers much smarter than anyone here to make it happen.

Sylverstone14 · May 25, 2016

Would've been nice, but I also like how they're doing things with establishing the lore by other means. The game is already super addictive without one.

Gemüsepizza · May 25, 2016

I will never get how some people don't understand it when MP-only games are criticized for having little content, because devs (edit: I'm talking about management) invested only few man-hours into the game. Yes you can spend a lot of time playing them. But you can also spend a lot of time playing with wooden toy blocks. Doesn't mean that I want to spend 65 on them. Especially when the game is made by a multi-billion dollar company like Activision-Blizzard or Electronic Arts, which I know can do a lot better than that - if they want. And even more so when there is basically 0 risk involved (like with Star Wars: Battlefront).

Old Gimlet Eyes · May 25, 2016

Ah the old compare a multiplayer only game to Lincoln logs, wait what the fuck?

sflufan · May 25, 2016

Gemüsepizza;204653307 said:
I will never get how some people don't understand it when MP-only games are criticized for having little content, because devs invested only few man-hours into the game.

Do you really believe that "only a few man-hours" are invested by the developers into creating a well-designed multiplayer game? Seriously?

Gravy Boat · May 25, 2016

ZombiePlatypus said:
Other multiplayer focused games don't have a cast like Overwatch though.

You've never played a Moba, have you?

Deadstar · May 25, 2016

sflufan said:
Have you experienced any of Blizzard's "storytelling" capabilities recently?

Trust me, we're better off without it.

Agreed. Diablo 3 was a mess. How hard can it be to create a demonic storyline?

doctorblurg · May 25, 2016

Gemüsepizza;204653307 said:
I will never get how some people don't understand it when MP-only games are criticized for having little content, because devs invested only few man-hours into the game. Yes you can spend a lot of time playing them. But you can also spend a lot of time playing with wooden toy blocks. Doesn't mean that I want to spend 65€ on them. Especially when the game is made by a multi-billion dollar company like Activision-Blizzard or Electronic Arts, which I know can do a lot better than that - if they want. And even more so when there is basically 0 risk involved (like with Star Wars: Battlefront).

Are you saying that just because they didn't make a little 6-8 hour campaign they invested very little man hours into developing the entire game? Do you understand how long it takes to balance a multiplayer game, much less a team and objective based one with a huge variety of characters?

Ferrio · May 25, 2016

Gemüsepizza;204653307 said:
I will never get how some people don't understand it when MP-only games are criticized for having little content, because devs invested only few man-hours into the game.

You're underselling the amount of hours they've put in this game by a lot.

sflufan · May 25, 2016

Deadstar said:
Agreed. Diablo 3 was a mess. How hard can it be to create a demonic storyline?

Even DOOM 2K16 did a better job with its demonic storyline!

LiQuid! · May 25, 2016

sflufan said:
You mean the campaign mode that can only really be completed solo effectively with certain characters which means that it essentially forces you into a co-op situation and where you have just about as much narrative context as is present in Overwatch's multiplayer? That campaign mode?

Yep. This is the reason I don't own Battleborn. The thought of trudging thru its tacked-on, co-op campaign in order to grind/unlock characters when all I care about is the multiplayer shooter/MOBA hybrid is a dealbreaker for me. If Battleborn was a solely multiplayer game with full player parity with every hero unlocked from the start without all the grinding and unlocking I'd have bought it day 1.

Plywood · May 25, 2016

Disagree. If they want to make a single player campaign down the line with the proper resources BY ALL MEANS. Otherwise I'll take a focused experience over an unnecessary addition.

DrArchon · May 25, 2016

Gemüsepizza;204653307 said:
I will never get how some people don't understand it when MP-only games are criticized for having little content, because devs invested only few man-hours into the game.

What are you talking about? Only investing a few man-hours into MP only games? That's insane. Well made MP only games still take a great deal of time and effort to make. You have to balance the game around every possible variable and situation. You have to make sure that every map is balanced for both teams, that every character is fun to use, that the servers don't go up in flames on day 1, that the matchmaking properly works, that progression isn't busted or unfair.

Jito · May 25, 2016

Gemüsepizza;204653307 said:
I will never get how some people don't understand it when MP-only games are criticized for having little content, because devs invested only few man-hours into the game. Yes you can spend a lot of time playing them. But you can also spend a lot of time playing with wooden toy blocks. Doesn't mean that I want to spend 65 on them. Especially when the game is made by a multi-billion dollar company like Activision-Blizzard or Electronic Arts, which I know can do a lot better than that - if they want. And even more so when there is basically 0 risk involved (like with Star Wars: Battlefront).

Hahaha what the hell is this shit? This can't be a serious opinion, that because it's a multiplayer game they put less effort into it? Idiotic gibberish!

Valkyr1983 · May 25, 2016

I'm fine with multi-player only style games, but I feel they should all have vs AI/bot modes for those of us who value lifetime purchases, don't like playing humans, or don't like relying on internet

All the infrastructure is there, youbdont have to create more content, just program a somewhat decent AI to replicate the experience

I weep for all the games that in 20-30 years might not work. What a waste

KazenY2J · May 25, 2016

Garrett Hawke said:
Asking for MP focused titles to have single player campaigns is as bad as asking single player titles to have MP modes, and thank goodness we're out of that neck of the woods.

This

patapuf · May 25, 2016

Valkyr1983 said:
I'm fine with multi-player only style games, but I feel they should all have vs AI/bot modes for those of us who value lifetime purchases, don't like playing humans, or don't like relying on internet

All the infrastructure is there, youbdont have to create more content, just program a somewhat decent AI to replicate the experience

I weep for all the games that in 20-30 years might not work. What a waste

I haven't played against it beyond the tutorial, but there is a coop VS AI mode.

BlackBanditSho · May 25, 2016

Garrett Hawke said:
Asking for MP focused titles to have single player campaigns is as bad as asking single player titles to have MP modes, and thank goodness we're out of that neck of the woods.

Angelus Errare said:
This.

Dunno if i agree with this. In this specific case, it is clear that Blizzard created all of these assets bursting with rich lore and personality that really doesn't have a place to shine in this game as delivered.

I've had several friends call me up and we've all been scratching our heads trying to figure out the hubbub about this game. We've each of us been jazzed about the character designs and the commercials and the polish, but to the man, once we started playing we were like, "is that all?" It's just a bunch moshpit gunning without much narrative connective tissue.

I'm not even asking for a deep story mode, but when you present these awesome CG shorts implying about this world of super heroes and villains, I want to play in that world and experience those stories. Even a mode where I can select a team against boss battles with a lil' bit of story would've been bad ass.

As is, at least to me, the profiles/shorts/art seem totally disconnected from the experience of playing a vanilla team based shooter online. I don't get it, honestly. Story would've gone a long way.

LiQuid! · May 25, 2016

Valkyr1983 said:
I'm fine with multi-player only style games, but I feel they should all have vs AI/bot modes for those of us who value lifetime purchases, don't like playing humans, or don't like relying on internet

All the infrastructure is there, youbdont have to create more content, just program a somewhat decent AI to replicate the experience

I weep for all the games that in 20-30 years might not work. What a waste

You're in luck. Have you heard of a game called Overwatch?

khaaan · May 25, 2016

patapuf said:
I haven't played against it beyond the tutorial, but there is a coop VS AI mode.

I'm not sure about co-op, but there definitely is a bot mode. You have to be online even if you want to play against bots by yourself though.

LiK · May 25, 2016

I would've liked a CGI movie included with the game.

sflufan · May 25, 2016

BlackBanditSho said:
I want to play in that world and experience those stories.

Not ones written by Blizzard, you don't!

Trust me, things are better this way.

Imperfected · May 25, 2016

I'm of two minds.

On the one hand, more single-player content would be fun.

On the other hand, any sort of story means they would probably have to let Chris Metzen get involved, which means all those charming characters and quirky lore are pretty sure to become a lot less charming and quirky...

I think, on balance, I'm fine with arena-only.

CosmicQueso · May 25, 2016

Gemüsepizza;204653307 said:
I will never get how some people don't understand it when MP-only games are criticized for having little content, because devs invested only few man-hours into the game.

Just when I thought I've read the craziest shit ever on GAF, GAF still surprises me.

Fracas · May 25, 2016

I'm glad there's no SP, modern shooter campaigns suck. Gimme more of that polished MP pls

ethomaz · May 25, 2016

The game is fine MP only... it is a blast of fun.

I prefer more focus on MP for Overwatch.

A-V-B · May 25, 2016

Fracas said:
I'm glad there's no SP, modern shooter campaigns suck. Gimme more of that polished MP pls

Have you played Doom, good sir Dog?

sflufan · May 25, 2016

A-V-B said:
Have you played Doom, good sir Dog?

I think a cogent argument can be made that DOOM 2K16 is NOT a modern shooter (and Praise Odin for that!)

Azriell · May 25, 2016

I really don't care that Overwatch (or Titanfall) doesn't have SP. If it meant a better game, I'd gladly take SP CoD and BF as well. I buy these games for MP, and what they offer in SP story telling is generally not as good as the usual SP games I play.

I kind of like the idea of MK/MK Mythologies spin offs, for $20~30 each. Ultimately, however, I like the characters and designs, but it's really inconsequential to me what sort of story they might have attached to them. That's just not what I'm here for.

Gemüsepizza · May 25, 2016

Ferrio said:
You're underselling the amount of hours they've put in this game by a lot.

They only put so many hours in this particular game because it was supposed to be a completely different game. The game we got now could have been made with much less man-hours.

doctorblurg said:
Are you saying that just because they didn't make a little 6-8 hour campaign they invested very little man hours into developing the entire game? Do you understand how long it takes to balance a multiplayer game, much less a team and objective based one with a huge variety of characters?

How about a 15 hour-campaign? What I do understand is that many multiplayer-only games have much lower budgets than other games with both SP and MP. There is a reason why games like Counterstrike or Team Fortress 2 aren't 65€. And while balancing certainly isn't that easy, you really don't need many people for doing that.

DrArchon said:
What are you talking about? Only investing a few man-hours into MP only games? That's insane. Well made MP only games still take a great deal of time and effort to make. You have to balance the game around every possible variable and situation. You have to make sure that every map is balanced for both teams, that every character is fun to use, that the servers don't go up in flames on day 1, that the matchmaking properly works, that progression isn't busted or unfair.

That's not insane, that's how it is. Overwatch was supposed to be a completely different game. That they were able to salvage it that quickly and create this game out of their failed project in such a short time shows exactly what I meant. And Star Wars Battlefront is another example which perfectly illustrates that.

Jito said:
Hahaha what the hell is this shit? This can't be a serious opinion, that because it's a multiplayer game they put less effort into it? Idiotic gibberish!

MP-only games like this usually require only small teams and less time, that's the simple truth. But thanks for insulting me.

CosmicQueso said:
Just when I thought I've read the craziest shit ever on GAF, GAF still surprises me.

Ok, thanks for your input.

Levito · May 25, 2016

sflufan said:
My God, the way some of you are going on, you'd think these characters were drawn from a Nabokov novel or something.

You guys did see the animated shorts/read the comics, right? These characters are delightfully paper-thin which is EXACTLY how they should be. Any further exploration of them other than what we've gotten and you'd see just how ineptly Blizzard will "develop" them.

This is why Valve never bothered to "develop" the TF2 characters (who I personally find more engaging than the Overwatch ones anyway) beyond what we got in their animated shorts/comics - Valve just knew that there really wasn't anything to develop.

Dude you are so on point as always. Half the people that love the Overwatch cast are failing to realise it works cause it's in small doses.

StarCraft + Brood War is one of my favorite games of all time, I love the campaigns. However I could barely get through Wings Of Liberty and only got about half way through Heart Of The Swarm cause the dialog and story were so awful and cringe inducing. Diablo 3 was maybe even worse.

Like, there's a part in Diablo 3 where the "Angel Of Hope" is captured by the "Demon Of Despair" and it's played completely straight.

F0rneus · May 25, 2016

I am part of a very, very small minority of players who enjoy FPS shooters with bots...and without any interaction with any human players. I just don't like online play. I play Souls games offline, just to avoid people.

But I spent a TON of money as a teenager on games like Unreal Tournament and Quake III, UT2k3, 2k4, Team Arena, you name it. Because I just like playing with bots. I absolutely love team based FPSes, but...I just like playing alone with bots. Not because it's easy. I make sure the bots are hard as hell.

It's sad to see bots, and that kind of play being marginalized, if not outright ignored. Back then you could enjoy every mode, map and weapon of UT and Q3A without connecting online. I'm not asking for a campaign. I'm asking to be able to play these games by myself.

I could play TF2 alone. Unlock achievements. Enjoy the gameplay without the stress of competition. I sure as fuck wish I could do that with Overwatch. But I can't.

doctorblurg · May 25, 2016

Gemüsepizza;204655326 said:
They only put so many hours in this particular game because it was supposed to be a completely different game. The game we got now could have been made with much less man-hours.

How about a 15 hour-campaign? What I understand is that many multiplayer-only games do have much lower budgets than other games with both SP and MP. There is a reason why games like Counterstrike or Team Fortress 2 aren't 65. And while balancing certainly isn't that easy, you really don't need many people for doing that.

That's not insane, that's how it is. Overwatch was supposed to be a completely different game. That they were able to salvage it that quickly and create this game out of their failed project in such a short time shows exactly what I meant. And Star Wars Battlefront is another example which perfectly illustrates that.

MP-only games like this usually require only small teams and less time, that's the simple truth. But thanks for insulting me.

Ok, thanks for your input.

You really devalue the amount of time, effort, money, and resources it takes to make a functional multiplayer game.

Arkeband · May 25, 2016

It'd be interesting if those animated shorts were able to be played from within the game client, and if there were short story-driven single player missions for each hero that teaches players how to play each one and give them some more characterization.

One long single player campaign doesn't really make sense with a game centered around having potentially dozens of playable characters - when a new hero is released, they wouldn't be featured in the campaign, devaluing it.

kamineko · May 25, 2016

I feel like every release, even the ones I have no interest in playing, should include every imaginable gameplay mode.

I look back at a game like Planescape: Torment, and I think that a tremendous opportunity was lost by not including a PvP collectible card battler.

It also should have included a Well-Written Dialog (TM) simulator. 2-4 players could attempt to have Well-Written Dialog (TM) with each-other in Real Time! Because there's a little Avellone in each of us.

It's no wonder Black Isle went under, charging full price for incomplete games.

Fracas · May 25, 2016

A-V-B said:
Have you played Doom, good sir Dog?

I have not, but I've heard good things.

ExVicis · May 25, 2016

Wasn't a lot of the Overwatch lore an after-the-fact kinda deal? I remember reading somewhere that the whole Omnic Crisis was thought up way late into development. Without much in the way of lore I don't see how they could have made a single-player campaign.

Alpha Phoenix · May 25, 2016

Fracas said:
I have not, but I've heard good things.

Doom, Metro Redux, Wolfenstein, Far Cry: Primal.. the list goes on. Those are highly praised single-player shooters just this generation (although Metro is technically a last-gen remaster).

Herbspiceguy · May 25, 2016

I don't think Overwatch would've been such an excellent multiplayer experience if they had to focus on a singleplayer campagin as well.

GhostWriter24 · May 25, 2016

Wouldn't have played it. This game is all about the social aspect.

Iadien · May 25, 2016

Not for those of us that think SP is a waste of time. I'll spend hundreds/thousands of hours playing this. I want all dev time going into improving and adding more content to MP.

GeordieMark · May 25, 2016

No, Overwatch shouldn't have a single player campaign if it has been designed to be a multiplayer game. It is what it is. I don't like seeing multiplayer modes shoe-horned into single-player games, and I feel the same way about it when its the other way around.

Valkyr1983 · May 25, 2016

patapuf said:
I haven't played against it beyond the tutorial, but there is a coop VS AI mode.

That requires an online connection at all times unfortunately. Same reason I ignored garden warfare too, which looked so fun

Valkyr1983 · May 25, 2016

LiQuid! said:
You're in luck. Have you heard of a game called Overwatch?

I did! Requires online connection even for solo vs bots though so I'm skipping!

PKMNTrainer · May 25, 2016

Not really going to defend a lack of single player campaign, as I do think there's a lot of reasons to be excited about what could have been when it comes to this cast of characters, but there seems to be plenty of people willing to shell out $60 to play match after match of online multiplayer. And to Blizzard, I think that's the most important thing right now.

Support NeoGAF

Overwatch not having a single player campaign is such a missed & wasted opportunity.

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

I proudly and openly admit to wishing death upon the mothers of people I don't like

NeoGAF's smiling token!

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Member

I proudly and openly admit to wishing death upon the mothers of people I don't like

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

#fuckonami

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Tears in the rain

Banned

Banned

Does his best thinking in the flying car

#fuckonami

Member

Member

Member

Member

Guarantee I'm going to screw up this post? Yeah.

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Similar threads