A number of people have mentioned it in this thread and I'm wondering whys multiplayer fall under the "feature" term/category anyways? Not every game has it but its far from being rarely seen as it was in the past! Optional installs, making of/trailers, screenshot function, video recording, heck even going back to the PS/DC era where putting the disc into a pc would give ya wallpapers & let ya listen to the games music! That kind of stuff is what I'd call features. But multiplayer? Not even close!
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Rocksteady: Arkham City is single player only
- Thread starter Suzzopher
- Start date
Buckethead
Banned
FUCK YES
the_prime_mover
Member
Uncharted 2 didn't compromise SP for the addition of MP and I am sure that the team at Rocksteady could have come up with great ideas for MP modes, but B:AA was a fantastic single player experience and if Rocksteady wants to focus on doing that again then they have my support.
This thread made me look into finally getting B:AA on PC and serendipitously it is only $7.50 today (on Steam)!
This thread made me look into finally getting B:AA on PC and serendipitously it is only $7.50 today (on Steam)!
StickyFingers
Member
Thank God.
This makes me happy. I think too many companies waste resources on a multi player experience when it may not be needed at all.
While this may be true about Uncharted, I don't believe there are is a big legion of people who are still playing Uncharted 2 multi on a daily basis. UC2 is a beast for its great single player campaign. Multi is optional.
Look at Ass Creed Bro. Game tacked on a multi player component and it is still selling in line with the other two Ass Creed games. Multi player didn't give the series a boost at all.
While this may be true about Uncharted, I don't believe there are is a big legion of people who are still playing Uncharted 2 multi on a daily basis. UC2 is a beast for its great single player campaign. Multi is optional.
Look at Ass Creed Bro. Game tacked on a multi player component and it is still selling in line with the other two Ass Creed games. Multi player didn't give the series a boost at all.
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
Excellent.
Rocksteady knows what's up.
Rocksteady knows what's up.
CadetMahoney
Member
hey that would've been cool u kno.TenshiOni said:
Discotheque
Banned
MP doesn't really affect the single player experience, unless it's some bullshit RE5 forced coop.
I remember people were crying about Uncharted 2 for no reason at all. It did nothing to the single player campaign.
I remember people were crying about Uncharted 2 for no reason at all. It did nothing to the single player campaign.
BloodySinner
Banned
Mr. Freeze should be on that list. He DID escape Arkham Asylum
JumpJeff84
Member
Good.
Oh well, I would have enjoyed co-op since playing with friends always seems to be fun but I'm not too bothered about it.
I do think the argument that multiplayer reduces the quality of the single player is dumb though, especially after playing through the great single player modes in Uncharted 2, RDR and Assassin's Creed Brotherhood.
I do think the argument that multiplayer reduces the quality of the single player is dumb though, especially after playing through the great single player modes in Uncharted 2, RDR and Assassin's Creed Brotherhood.
I AM JOHN!
Banned
Tentpole releases with gigantic budgets that are expected to sell in the multi-millions to turn a profit can get away with hiring a ton of people to make the various components of a game. Film at 11.hamchan said:
For every example of a game that delivered on both, there's many more in which multiplayer was unnecessary, tacked on shit and the game would've been better served with those resources going towards single player or never being tapped at all.
Eaten By A Grue
Member
I am glad multi-player is out, but co-op through the single player game with someone as Robin may have been awesome.mrgone said:
The Nature Roy
Member
I never felt co-op play would particularly suit for Arkham's gameplay style, but I did expect they would include a co-op option in the challenge modes. Bummed to hear that won't be included.
mysticwhip
Banned
I am Disappoint.
Didn't they say there was gonna be MP in the GI article?
Didn't they say there was gonna be MP in the GI article?
Eaten By A Grue
Member
The Nature Roy said:
I would imagine co-op would be similar to RE5, but with fist fighting instead of shooting. Eh no loss though.
mysticwhip
Banned
UC2 averages 40K daily. Plenty of people play it.Mrbob said:
I AM JOHN! said:
and you believe Arkham City isn't a big budget game that can cover every component?
I AM JOHN! said:
I don't want to start a list war but give me some examples. I've read Condemned 2 and Resident Evil 5 but I want more because in my head, I can think of more games that still had great single player campaigns even with tacked on multiplayer, than games with single player that were bad because of multiplayer.
I understand that more resources could have gone to the single player if multiplayer didn't exist. I also know that I don't really care to ruminate about how much better a single player could be without the multiplayer as we have no guarantee at all really that it would be.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
From what I've heard, ND was just testing the waters and seeing if it's even remotely fun to have multiplayer in Uncharted universe, and after playing around a bit it was indeed playable and enjoyable.the_prime_mover said:
That said, Rocksteady are pretty smart at what they do and I'm sure they'll add multiplayer if it playable, balanced and enjoyable.
dragonflys545
Member
It better be longer than the first one. Anyway GOTY!!!
Thunderbear
Mawio Gawaxy iz da Wheeson hee pways games
Good. Not every game needs MP tacked on.
I AM JOHN!
Banned
Yes you're right, Arkham City is obviously a big budget game, if not probably the biggest thing Warner Bros. has got going for them all year (moreso, I'd say, than FEAR and Mortal Kombat). My point was more that arguing that multiplayer could add a bunch to a game without hampering the single-player and then proceeding to list a bunch of games where the studios were able to afford to hire people and get a budget to make a multiplayer mode without taking away resources from the single-player is kind of disingenuous, as it ignores the fact that there's a ton of games made on ridiculous budget or time constraints that are still expected to be "fully featured games" (SSX: Deadly Descents being a recent example of this) and these resources have to come from somewhere. At best, you get a multiplayer mode that sucks and should never have been made because no one cares (see: most games that have multiplayer nowadays); at worst, you get the example listed below.hamchan said:
The Darkness is the perfect example of this for me - a single player that was two steps away from brilliant and a useless, shitty multiplayer mode that they even said in interviews was forced upon them by 2K and required them taking away team members from the single player towards the end of the project. Even if there wasn't much they could've or even would've improved in that single player had they not made that mode, but again, why spend the resources on something that's going to be terrible and serves no better purpose than a bullet point? Tron Evolution and Stranglehold are two other good recent examples.hamchan said:
We also have no guarantee that making a multiplayer mode just because they can results in anything halfway decent or worth the asking price unless you're a whiny bitch who sees that bullet point as a selling point despite the fact that you'll probably end up playing it for less than a week and never again. Yes, I am bringing my biases in here of thinking that most games should either focus on one or the other because you rarely ever get both right when you do (what's up, useless, unfun multiplayer modes in fantastic games like Half-Life, Deus Ex, and even Uncharted 2 to an extent?) and having an apathy for games forcing mandatory co-op experiences into the single-player because Gears of War made it an in-thing, but I feel pretty safe in saying that most times companies shouldn't bother trying to do both unless they're fully willing to hire two full teams to make both things. Out of all the single-player-oriented games we've gotten this generation with multiplayer modes, how many of them have been remotely decent, let alone strong enough to foster sizable communities that have kept them going? The ones you listed (not so coincidentally some of the more expensive games being made) are pretty much it.hamchan said:
But again, we have the all important point that the reason there's no multiplayer is because the team at Rocksteady said it wouldn't work. For some reason, I think I'm going to trust the people being paid to not fuck up the sequel to a game that won a bunch of Game of the Year awards over a bunch of forumgoers - many of whom don't know dick about game design (and that includes me) - who want to play as Robin.
Similar threads
- Poll