Ex-Midway producer says sometimes multiplayer’s forced by execs

Wednesday, 4th November 2009 15:01 GMT By Stephany Nunneley


According to ex-Midway producer John Vignocchi, sometimes it’s not the developers who want to toss in a bit of multiplayer in games, but the executives who run the joint demanding it be part of the finished product.

Speaking during a Giant Bombcast last month, Vignocchi used Stranglehold as an example and cited the team’s multiplayer regret.

“We were having this battle all the time, talking about, ‘OK, is a totally amazing single-player experience, the most important thing? Or should it be an 80% single-player experience and then a pretty cool multiplayer?’, he explained. “Stranglehold wnet through that exact same problem. I think if you ask every single person that worked on Stranglehold whether or not multiplayer was a necessity for that product, they would all say, ‘I wish we never did it.’

“It was the worst part of the game, and it was something that executive management had said, ‘This has to be in the game.’ And no one wanted it, and it turned out the way it turned out. That’s something every game developer goes through.”

That’s not a very surprising thing to hear, considering we’ve played a few games with multiplayer that felt tacked on or forced upon us at gunpoint.

You can find this bit at 1 hour, 22 minutes, and 51 seconds into the chat here.

Via Kotaku.



  1. Gekidami

    John Locke!

    #1 5 years ago
  2. Stephany Nunneley


    #2 5 years ago
  3. freedoms_stain

    Yeah, nobody should be surprised at this, although that doesn’t stop it from being any less bullshit.

    I wonder who decided Bioshock 2 needed a multiplayer.

    #3 5 years ago
  4. El_MUERkO

    while i understand their unwillingness to do multiplayer for a game like stranglehold a game better be an awesome single player experience or a lower RRP to even consider being released without multiplayer in this day and age

    #4 5 years ago
  5. blackdreamhunk

    pc gaming is now changing to the point that game devs no longer need publisher.

    #5 5 years ago
  6. Quiiick

    As I said multiple times before: I wish publishers would sell SP (single-player) and MP (multi-player) of the same game on SEPARATE discs and/or SEPARATE downloads.

    Or even better SP only on disc and MP only as DLC.

    SP for 39.99 €/$
    MP for 19.99 €/$
    instead of 59.99 €/$ for the full package

    This will unfortunately never happen, but it would definitely solve the problem of tacked-on MP modes. And it would also benefit all those gamers (like me) who rarely ever play MP and therefore need to “pay” for something they don’t use with the current sales-model.

    #6 5 years ago
  7. FeaturePreacher

    You are so right El_MUERkO. Whenever there’s a game where it looks like there can be online multiplayer, i.e. any time there’s manual aimed shooting, multiplayer is a must. If not, then that game better be released at $30. But there are games like Bayonetta, Dante’s Inferno, Dead To Rights 2, and Assasin’s Creed 2 that can get away with single player since no one’s figured out a way to incorporate multiplayer into those types of games.

    #7 5 years ago
  8. Bulk Slash

    This isn’t surprising at all, but to be fair to the execs, I’ve lost count of the number of reviews I’ve read where a single-player only game is criticised for the lack of multi-player, as if an MP mode is required in all games these days. FPS games in particular seem to be expected to always have a multi-player mode.

    Like Quiiick above, I rarely play multi-player so reading a review that criticises a game for lacking multi-player makes it hard to judge if a game’s single-player mode is bad or if it’s just been docked points because the reviewer thinks the lack of multi-player somehow ruins the game.

    #8 5 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.