Support NeoGAF

[Men_in_Boxes]

The Last of Us II. I thought it was alright. Definitely overrated, but not bad.

The one thing I can't stop thinking about is how expensive the game looked. There's a scene early on where you're walking through Jackson and a dog comes up to you so you press X to watch a stupid little petting animation. It's fucking dumb. Around you is this cool looking, peaceful encampment, where a bunch of NPCs are living a somewhat normal existence. It looks really slick.

Then you pet the dog, and run forward NEVER TO RETURN TO THAT SPOT EVER AGAIN.

I don't know how many man hours were spent on that scene alone but it's treated like disposable garbage to the player. In fact, the whole game is essentially like that. Super high production values everywhere and every location is made to progress through only to be immediately discarded right after.

Too many single player games are designed this way.

I must have dropped Grotto over 1,000 times last season in Fortnite. I fucking absorbed that place. I learned every little quirk, every little detail in the entire PoI. I got something new out of that place every time me and my partner played.

As we enter the next generation (and watch budgets balloon again), single player game developers need to figure out how to create more "sustainable" assets. Levels, AI, and mechanics that stand up to repeated use by the player.

In other words, we need fewer water slides and more gardens. Less Uncharted and more AAA Stardew Valley style games. That **** is just not sustainable.

 

[bitbydeath]

MP games suck though so what can you do.

 

[V4skunk]

I think we need less cancer like Fortnite.

 

[REE Machine]

Give me quality single player games than games as a service mp every damn day of the week!

EDIT: HOLY FUCK KNUCKLES I think we did it boys! Thanks for all the amazing reactions and reaching to 100.

To the best gaming community around, to neogaf!

 

[Victoria3D]

No thanks. I'm not paying $60 for some bland repetitive experience designed to run on potatoes. There's a reason why all the kiddies play bland repetitive garbage like Fortnite. It's all they can afford.

Single player gamers can afford to fund the development of quality experiences.

 

[Danny Dudekisser]

Alternative: More replayable single player games.

 

[Sub_Level]

As we enter the next generation (and watch budgets balloon again), single player game developers need to figure out how to create more "sustainable" assets. Levels, AI, and mechanics that stand up to repeated use by the player.

I imagine the models, animations, and mechanics will be used for the multiplayer coming next year.

 

[TheMay30thMan]

I almost got mad until you said you've played over 1000 games of fortnight...lol

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Alternative: More replayable single player games.

Yes. This was actually the point of my thread, though it looks like some single player gamers got triggered above. I think we need more repeatable experiences in single player games.

I got an ant farm when I was a kid. I loved that thing. Watching the ants slowly dig out tunnels, and then when they'd finish I'd fuck with them a bit. I'd add more sand so they had to dig out. I'd drop spiders in and watch them fight. I'd experiment by putting food and water in different spots.

Maybe it's significantly more difficult for developers but providing the player with a playground shouldn't just be for multiplayer games.

 

[Aion002]

We need more games not less. Uncharted can and exist side by side with any other games.


This is one of the weirdest threads I've ever seen... You are asking for less games...


You are trolling, right?

 

[Clintizzle]

I have to disagree. SP games are the only thing in gaming that can evolve and wow us.

The new consoles should allow for a lot of the "fluff" we see these days due to asset loading etc to be removed and create some cool shit. Its probably only going to be Sony 1st party but hey I'm still excited.

 

[iconmaster]

Alternative: More replayable single player games.

Right. I submit the OP is putting forward a false dichotomy.

The choice is not between a single player game you only play once or a multiplayer game you play forever. There's a spectrum of replayability.

Consider a single-player game with New Game Plus (Souls), or procedural variation (No Man's Sky, FTL, various other roguelikes), or skill-based performance grades (Devil May Cry, Streets of Rage 4). Also consider a multiplayer game that you try once, decide you hate and never revisit. (Or, better: one that fails to achieve critical mass and gets quickly shut down.)

You don't have to agree with all my examples to recognize that it's not so simple.

 

[bitbydeath]

Honestly I don't mind the odd bit of Fortnite when I'm unlocking battle pass content as it gives a reason to play.

But without content to unlock you really do experience just how boring and mind numbing MP games truely are with depth the size of a mud puddle.

 

[yurqqa]

Don't throw the polygons away - recycle them !!!

Save the virtual space !!!

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

We need more games not less. Uncharted can and exist side by side with any other games.


This is one weirdest threads I've ever seen... You are asking for less games...

I suppose in reality I'm asking for more systems based single player games where the player can experiment.

I think the single player industry is littered with too many one and done story based games. I'd like to see more games that reward experimentation from the player. For example, a AAA Stardew Valley where instead of working a farm, the player is preparing an encampment for war. Choice based design rather than cutscene based design.

But yes, this probably isn't my best thread.

 

[graywolf323]

I prefer to play games for the escapism so I'd strongly disagree

single player games are much better ways to escape reality, there aren't any 11-year olds being jackasses

 

[Aion002]

I suppose in reality I'm asking for more systems based single player games where the player can experiment.

I think the single player industry is littered with too many one and done story based games. I'd like to see more games that reward experimentation from the player. For example, a AAA Stardew Valley where instead of working a farm, the player is preparing an encampment for war. Choice based design rather than cutscene based design.

But yes, this probably isn't my best thread.

Games like Conan Exiles, Ark, No Mans Sky, The Forest or like The Elder Scrolls, Dragon Age, Way of the Samurai, Rune Factory and Kingdom Come?

There are quite a few of games like that. Still... You don't need to kill something to get more of the other, both can coexist.

 

[McHuj]

I kind of agree. When I think about the great level design of Dark Souls, I know that world inside and out. It's memorable.

 

[Sir Vilhelm]

OP, have you played Man Eater? That will change your tune. Not even joking

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

Go play Respawn's Jedi Fallen Order and tell me they didn't have super intelligent and creative use/reuse of nearly every area in the game. Sublime and creative development pipeline to impressive and exciting gameplay throughout without the exhaustive repetition of backtracking exactly the same methods or areas. New areas open with new abilities, shortcuts are found after first exploration for backtracking, story exposition married to the masterful repurposing and level design. Honestly it's the type of solo game that got me dropping multiplayer games like Apex Legends and party buddies to actually see a solo game through to completion.

Control was another title crafted in the same vein but a little more linear than Fallen Order.

Moving forward PvE games like Destiny almost force developers to set out their games this way. It would be nice if there was more procedural or openness to tackling the same objectives. I hope with new systems and cloud integration things like AI start to learn around player/squad tactics e.g. you split your party so does the AI, you swarm on path then so does the AI defense etc. More power should equate to more being put into games, not just prettier graphics and higher resolution.

 

[JTCx]

Nothing to see here folks, just another Fortnite player.

LOL

 

[Explosive Zombie]

 

[wipeout364]

I am getting so sick of people talking about sustainability and price. These are not charity services, these are businesses with directors, shareholders and accountants. These games and services exist because someone did some number crunching and figured out this is what we do to make cash. Sometimes they are wrong and that's why THQ, Atari, Sega Consoles etc. are no longer with us. It's like the false argument games are too cheap, no actually they are not, otherwise everybody would be bankrupt and the games industry would no longer exist.

the last of us 2 exists as it does because Sony marketing and accounting felt they could give Naughty Dog enough slack to make the game and based on their track record would turn a profit. And guess what, they probably did turn a profit.

 

[namekuseijin]

> Fortnite

I quit at this point

 

[Abear21]

I was also disappointed we never got to explore Jackson more, but trust me OP, there isn't anything outside of what you see on screen to explore! We got a ton of other large areas that were great so hard to complain.


I'd argue multiplayer is a dish best enjoyed hot at release while lobbies are full whereas you can buy a great single player experience on the cheap years later and you're not jumping in behind where it's less enjoyable. Also usually less micro transactions in a single player game.

This is solely my take and this post is in no way meant to offend, fuel a console war, or influence you or anyone else that reads this that they should agree with me.

 

[haxan7]

It's about what people will pay for. If game companies can justify spending X amount of development time for Y amount of return on their investment, you'll keep seeing games do what you described in TLOU 2.

There is no "should" or "should not" in this system. It's about what makes money and what doesn't.

 

[LordOfChaos]

It's just a moment, but you noticed it, didn't you? TLOU 1 sold 17 million copies. That's 17 million people who may appreciate these details.

 

[Yumi]

Not all single player games are like that though. There are plenty of single player games with more focused and utilized level designs.

Hyper detail is Naughty Dogs specialty since Uncharted. I think for them environments prioritize story telling and realism rather than gameplay.

Maybe the new Resident Evil Remakes would be more up your alley? They're greatly detailed and you spend a good amount of time in one spot before you move on.

 

[bender]

Can you pet dogs in Fortnite?

 

[O-N-E]

The only thing that matters is if you enjoyed the experience as it is.

Stop crying about the amount of work it took. That's somebody else's business.

 

[Wonko_C]

This is why I like short, replayable stuff like Streets of Rage 4 or Ninja Warriors Once Again. I've spent nearly a hundred hours on each, and a single playthrough lasts around one hour. I have burned those tilesets or hand drawn backgrounds into my brain now.

But then again those games are impossibly far from what one would call modern AAA single player games.

 

[kretos]

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I was also disappointed we never got to explore Jackson more, but trust me OP, there isn't anything outside of what you see on screen to explore! We got a ton of other large areas that were great so hard to complain.


I'd argue multiplayer is a dish best enjoyed hot at release while lobbies are full whereas you can buy a great single player experience on the cheap years later and you're not jumping in behind where it's less enjoyable. Also usually less micro transactions in a single player game.

This is solely my take and this post is in no way meant to offend, fuel a console war, or influence you or anyone else that reads this that they should agree with me.

This really wasn't meant to be a single player vs multiplayer games thread.

I genuinely just find it odd how disposable most of our AAA single player games are. Why has the public settled on playing a game for 10-15 hours and that's "enough"?

I probably played Civilization VI over 100 hours and can still enjoy a new game. Sneaking past the 1,265th clicker and killing my 742nd Infected was getting mind numbing for me by the end of the game. I don't want to pick on TLoU2 because there's a lot of mainstream games that suffer from the same thing, but it's the freshest example for me.

Hopefully Ken Levine's new game gets here soon enough. I've seen him in a few interviews echoing my sentiments here as the basis for his new project.

 

[Yoboman]

What about all of those games where they have dogs running around and you can't even pat them? Instantly made BOTW and Witcher 3 trash tier

 

[HoodWinked]

there is an equilibrium.

if every game was multiplayer, the sole single player game is king. if all games are single player vice versa. the markets find the equilibrium where the maximum sum total of both games coexist.

 

[april6e]

A blockbuster movie can cost over 100 million + millions in advertising, events and such. Do you feel cinema is a waste as well despite movie goers consuming a movie that took years and a massive amount of money to make in 2 hours? This argument is weak.

 

[Hawking Radiation]

_ Fortnite,

 

[Ten_Fold]

Sony's single player offerings outside of bloodborne isn't worth a second play through imo. Now games like Botw is amazing an can be played soo many different ways. I feel we need more FUN games, because a lot of AAA games are extremely dull to play.

 

[Guilty_AI]

I do agree with OP here, sort of.

The problem isn't in the game having a lot of 'wasted' resources but rather the possible human cost that took to develop those. Huge scenarios like that aren't easy to make, and spending huge amount of hours developing something thats basically inconsequential for the experience, instead of cuddling your child or going shopping with your mother, feels rather wrong knowing crunch in game development is a thing. And thats not even going into how games could be cheaper and be delivered faster if developers took more efficient approaches.

There are plenty of titles that don't show the sort of ostentation games like RDR2 and TLoU2 display, often costing less money and time to make, that still managed to deliver powerful experiences.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

A blockbuster movie can cost over 100 million + millions in advertising, events and such. Do you feel cinema is a waste as well despite movie goers consuming a movie that took years and a massive amount of money to make in 2 hours? This argument is weak.

I think movies are waaaaaay better at telling stories than games are. I can sit through 110 minutes of Whiplash or Rocky and they don't overstay their welcome or suffer from the multitude of drawbacks that games do.

But are blockbuster movies a waste? Yes, most of them are vapid time fillers with zero nutritional content.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

But big multiplayer games require marketing budgets that double, triple or even more than development budgets.

Naughty Dog are masters of their craft. I definitely want them to keep making what they are good at.

 

[SupremeHoodie]

Multiplayer games are simply more competitive. Playing against other humans head to head is way more fun than a single player game. With that being said we need both types of games for that balance.

 

[SupremeHoodie]

Fortnite is very hard game, outside of its meme status the game genuinely takes skill to be good at. It's beyond simply being a good shot, you need to be able to build too. Most of you laughing at the game sucked at it to begin with.

 

[Neolombax]

No, I disagree. The whole deal with single player games is that it creates an experience, better production values give better immersion. I could always replay the game and get value of that too. It really isn't a waste in my opinion. There is a place for BR games (which I personally hate), for MP games and for SP games. There needs to be more variety in each genre though, not streamline everything into a single type of game.

 

[Abear21]

This really wasn't meant to be a single player vs multiplayer games thread.

I genuinely just find it odd how disposable most of our AAA single player games are. Why has the public settled on playing a game for 10-15 hours and that's "enough"?

I probably played Civilization VI over 100 hours and can still enjoy a new game. Sneaking past the 1,265th clicker and killing my 742nd Infected was getting mind numbing for me by the end of the game. I don't want to pick on TLoU2 because there's a lot of mainstream games that suffer from the same thing, but it's the freshest example for me.

Hopefully Ken Levine's new game gets here soon enough. I've seen him in a few interviews echoing my sentiments here as the basis for his new project.

Ok and I get what you're saying clearer now. Game design has changed some for the better the last few years too though. I do enjoy that multiplayer and sports titles update with "seasons" now and have longer legs. Games like Destiny and Fortnite that provide ongoing rotating challenges gives players a reason to jump back in that single player linear games just can't match without DLC.

Single player experiences are like a great book to me. The fact that it's a self contained story that doesn't change allows the writer to take you on a journey that isn't possible in open world design or playing co-op. If that journey is worth taking is another story.

 

[Danjin44]

Not for me, I LOVE Single Player games and there are SP games that will give great challenge like Sekiro and Catherine.

 

[Codes 208]

linear single player games have very little replay value imo. Action adventure games that focus more on the rpg elements feel a bit more fluid and fun. Like I really loved bloodborne, GoW4, MHW and BotW. But for the life of my I just can't force myself to slog through another playthrough of games like TLoU, The Order or Ryse.

It's just a moment, but you noticed it, didn't you? TLOU 1 sold 17 million copies. That's 17 million people who may appreciate these details.

And fortnite has 5x that install base, but that doesn't automatically make it good.

 

[Qudrat Rabbi]

Multiplayer games are like fast food. Single-player games are gourmet meals at a fancy restaurant. As I get older, I'm starting to appreciate single-player games a lot more.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

SP games are the best though. Been playing thru some old VNs/strategy games lately and I'm most likely gonna start on the sequel soon. Meanwhile all my MP games are only used when people come over lol.

 

[Klayzer]

It's like a race to see who can post the worst take of the day. You cant like to game and have an opinion like that.