Could Single Player Games Go Extinct in FPS?

VG247 Forum » The VG247 forum

Could Single Player Games Go Extinct in FPS?

(27 posts)

Started 2 years ago by frostquake
Latest reply from Ge0force

frostquake
Moderator

As we all know, Single Player games are starting to disappear, especially in First Person Shooters. The single player experience in FPS seem to be turning into nothing more than a bot trainer for MP.

The games that do have SP, have become extremely short, with some notable exceptions as of late, that being Bioshock, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect 2, and a few others.

I specifically want to talk about FPS games. I understand that scripted AI in a FPS can never compete against MP games in the "Surprise" factor, but how many times can you play CF, Team Death Match, and all the other same old, same old.

The few exceptions, were Resistance 2, L4D, and a few others. R2 had Co-op where all humans were on one team playing against a scripted AI enemy, but was objective based. They were going in the right direction, only to totally scrap it in the new Resistance 3.

I understand that you just don't make a SP experience 15 hours for the sake of making it 15 hours, but the new direction is becoming very apparent.

Make a FPS, give it a very SP experience, and then give MP just a few maps, and then make a TON of money off of seemingly very experience Map Packs.

There really is no money to be made in an in-depth quality FPS SP experience anymore, and with the cost of game "everything" being extremely expensive, studios are looking to make their "Deep" pocket money with Add-Ons and DLC.

I starve for a well in-depth SP FPS experience that doesn't end up being a 5 hour lazy gun, run, repeat cycle.

I will really miss an in-depth, well thought out, ever changing, creative SP FPS. I will say this, I really think I am in the minority. That the gamer of this generation, is very happy MP'ing the same old game play, as long as they get some new or redux map packs every few months, even if they are doing the same thing over and over and over again, they still keep shelling out the big dollars for this repeat maps.

R.I.P SP FPS!

Posted 2 years ago #
dirigiblebill
Member

Seems like an appropriate place to plug this...

http://videogamesdaily.com/features/201011/has-call-of-dutys-single-player-outlived-its-usefulness/

Posted 2 years ago #
Gadzooks!
Member

SP may not be the primary focus of a lot of FPS games these days, but there are still plenty of places to play campaign.

Metro, Singularity, Far Cry, Crysis, Halo, Fear, Killzone.. these are just a few of the many campaign-driven FPS games out there.

SP FPS games are not dying, and SP games in general are not dying. I spend a hell of a lot of my free time gaming, and at most only a few hours a week of that is online. I have a massive backlog of SP games to finish, and a rental list constantly between 10 and 15 upcoming games, all SP.

If you dont like what's on offer then fair enough, but I find SP campaign-driven gaming fairly easy to come by.

Posted 2 years ago #
frostquake
Moderator

@ GAD, True..SP Offerings are wide and varied...What I am sad about is the Thin offerings of SP FPS games, and how SP FPS games now feel like an after-thought and the true focus is on FPS MP.

Remember when SP FPS were the meat and potatoes of the game, and the MP component of the game was slim? Once developers and studios figured out where the real repeat money was (MP Map Packs), MP became the meat and potatoes and SP FPS became the tiny little after dinner mint.

:)

Posted 2 years ago #
freedoms_stain
Moderator

Well, I'm sure we've all seen the evolution of FPS picture recently (http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:cWtuqJ1ZpD8npM::gvgdesigns.ca/2009/10/halo-the-evolution-of-fps-over-the-past-8-years/&t=1&usg=AFrqEzfPvLadyiCOGs26eOQ-BeTExCX0gQ for those who haven't) and I think part of the reason for the decline in the single player experience is how tragically linear it has gotten.

Most single player FPS games play almost like rail shooters now. Can't blame people for finding more enjoyment in multiplayer where things aren't scripted down as much.

I hope we'll see more "big" SP games in the future, but hopefully with more co-op a la Borderlands, which was a sprawling free-roaming world let down only by it's dumb as shit AI and overly light story (imo).

I think as long as Valve are in the game we should see a few good single player games (per decade). I like what they did with l4d, I hope their work with the AI director will evolve into more standard FPS games, less scripting, more spontaneity.

Posted 2 years ago #
OlderGamer
Moderator

To be honest, at this point, I feel the FPS games are mostly a lost cause.

Most are generic beyond carying. The SP might be the only place these games can distingues themselfs from one another, but that gets thrown out the window in favor of selling you and I a vehicle in which they can distribute DLC.

With FPS on colsoles you get what you get: a MP experience dominated by teens. Rinse and repeat.

Posted 2 years ago #
Robo_1
Member

I thought the Black Ops SP was pretty decent actually. A no brainer roller coaster ride of set pieces, explosions and shooting. I haven't even tried the MP and will trade it this weekend. I may be in the minority, but if a games doesn't have a single player campaign, then it doesn't get my cash.

Posted 2 years ago #
Psychotext
Member

"I may be in the minority, but if a games doesn't have a single player campaign, then it doesn't get my cash. "

I'd vote for that. On the bright side, there's never been a MP only FPS that's done serious numbers... so I can't see them all rushing to do it.

Posted 2 years ago #
Da Man
Member

one thing I would like to say is that i'd rather have no SP than a yawnfest like the one in Reach, after the classy ODST it is unbearable. I'm having fun with the multiplayer though, Firefight is a blast.

also, I would expect fps games with strong multiplayer to drop the SP in the coming years. pretty sure Halo and CoD will follow in the footsteps of L4D.

Posted 2 years ago #
frostquake
Moderator

@ Older Gamer

I agree with you. MP one Consoles anyway, has become a scream-fest of what sounds like teens to me. I also gave up on L4D MP, was always being voted out so some teen could get his friends in. I can't remember if L4D allowed for private games, but holy cow, don't play a public match and then scream and shoot me trying to get me off some so 14 year old can take my place.

Could someone please tell me, why people keep shelling out HUGE MONEY for Redux, and Nothing new Map Packs? Are the major buyers just tweenies who have money to burn through? Do you think they will ever stop buying these Boring Map Packs?

Halo Reach was heading in the right direction with MP Space Fights, but they ditched it for the tried and true 4 wall grounded Map Packs.

Don't know if anyone remembers, but the later Wing Commander Series actually had you fly your Space Ship out of space, onto a planet and fight on planet, Reach could have done so much more with the Space Craft options..sigh.

Posted 2 years ago #
Suikoden Fan
Member

i'll say this now if fps loose singleplayer all together i wont play another fps ever again. Singleplayer is my prefered gaming option. I hate glitches, jumping jack rabbits, cheaters, weiners moaners etc. you dont get that bullshit with singlplayer.

The only thing i hate about singleplayer fps is a stable of the cod series the 'all eyes on me' AI.

simply, you could be having a pacifist picnic on the ground while your mate has a gun aimed at the enemies head and they'd still rather shoot you. fucking hate that bullshit AI

Posted 2 years ago #
freedoms_stain
Moderator

@ Suikoden Fan, "all eyes on me", great term for it. They're not the only offenders though, in a lot of modern games the hardest difficulty tends to amount to supernatural perception and accuracy, pop your nose out of cover and every enemy within a 2 mile radius instantly has your exact location and bullets that teleport directly into your body. Becomes a case of learning the script.

Poor excuse for a decent scalable AI.

Posted 2 years ago #
OlderGamer
Moderator

And you see there in it lays the problem with most SP experiences. One word sums it up.

Scripted.

I enjoy games that allow for some type of creative gameplaying. I don't want just one way to do something. Or even having to pick from two scripted options is no better.

I guess that is why I enjoy sandbox games so much. Or games like Civ where I can play a different way every time I play(on randomly generated maps no less). Or a game like Phantasy Star(Portable, universe, Online) that allows me to build the toon the way I want, do the missions I want, where, when, and how I want. Freedom. I think it is also one of the biggest draws to sport games. You have a lot of freedom to build your team, your players, franchise, and you can also be creative with your play calling and control the flow of the game the way you want.

Most FPS SP campaigns are so tightly scripted that they don't allow for much creativity. I think that element of unkown and unpredictability is what draws folks to MP matches.

Just a thought Warhawk, Fat Princess, Mag, Monday Night Combat, and soon Dungeon Defenders are all Online Based MP shooter(or shooterlike) experiences. And most have sold fairly well. I bet Dungeon Defenders does also(game looks amazing - look it up). Not to mention a whole host of PC games that feature absolutly no campaign and do very well. I am not sure where you would fit a MMORPG like Guild Wars, EQOA, FFO, or WoW(or the up and coming Firefall(FPSMMORPG), but samething. Big name games little or no SP.

Food for thought.

I bet someday most games will have SP worked into their MP Online expereiences. But I figure that is a ways off still.

Posted 2 years ago #
freedoms_stain
Moderator

@OlderGamer, has to be said though that some Multiplayer gamers are just as predictable as the scripted SP.

When I'm playing an FPS online if I get sniped more than once in the 1st few minutes of the game it's sniper hunting time. Those guys are sooooooooooooo predictable, once you've found their hole you're pretty much guaranteed a kill every time you go by there, because they'll go back time and time again.

edit: and FireFall looks awesome to me. I signed up as a beta hopeful. I'd really like the chance to see how that baby plays out.

Posted 2 years ago #
Ge0force
Member

I don't think singleplayer games are starting to disappear at all. Online based shooters have become very popular and their campain sometimes sucks, but there are still a lot of games with a nice singeplayer part: Uncharted, Infamous, Gears of War and in the near future there's Bulletstorm, Killzone 3 and Resistance 3.

Posted 2 years ago #
OlderGamer
Moderator

I think it is interesting Geo, that what you named are PS3 games mostly. Gears does have a campaign mode, but I would argue that it wasn't designed to play solo. It features extremly tweaked and well done co-op campaign. Either way your right a strong sp experience can be found there.

The only reason I draw out the PS3 here(well two reasons really) isn't that I am a rabid fanboy. I own a PS3 like most of the rest of us here. But that Sony has always been 'lest one step behind when it comes to integrating Online into its games. We saw that with PSone and PS2. Both the Sega Saturn and the Sega Dreamcast had online support. It wasn't untill MS launched Xboxone that Sony started to give online any thought at all, then the PS2 recieved a modem add on(I remember it well because I bought one to play EQoa on PS2), and later broadband support was built into the slim.

They have been playing catch up from the get go.

On the plus side many of the games(esp first party/sony published ones) have featured strong focus on SP. Either by default or design, I am not sure which.

And at this point I notice that die hard Sony fans do tend to enjoy the SP portions of games. Where as die hard xb360 fans tend to favor Online MP. Neither is wrong mind you, just that gamers that are looking for a dominate SP gaming style have gravitated to PS3.

I think this has happend because of each companies roots. MS was making games before there was a xbox. But they did it on PC, and PC has almost always featured strong Online MP. I remember playing the first 3D MMORPG(Meridian59 by 3DO, built on a Doom engine in the early/mid 90s). Sony on the other hand dominated the console scean with PSone, and they did it with strong Japanesse supported games. You will notice that even today the JP do not play online like the west does. Their idea of MP is linking two or three handhelds together.

Also being a JP based Company philisophicly speaking Sony found the move to Online shaky at best. Anyways you don't need a history leason(and I am sure someone on here will see it in a different light then me anyhow). And it doesn't matter what games you like or what games you play(or what ones I or anyone else plays/likes).

But.

But I do think that anyone who claims that SP games are still strong, alive and well with a bright future ... are being a bit nieve. Go look at the store shelfs. And also consider regions. Here in the states the XB360 gets the most game space at store shelfs. And for the most part its games greatly out sell PS3 ones. And again, for the most part, those hot sellers all almost always games that Focus(or 'lest offer) strong online componates. Too many games(imo) toss in shaddy SP as an after thought. Or rush the SP to focus dev time on the OMP.

Also understand that just because say infamous doesn't do CoD numbers, doesn't mean it is a bad game. And it doesn't mean you can't enjoy it. The only thing worrying to me, is that devs/pubs will stop making games like infamous because they are all chasing CoDlike numbers, and think making yet another FPS OMP game is the way to do it.

Posted 2 years ago #
freedoms_stain
Moderator

Single player games are slipping on the sellability front because they're too freakin easy and 90% of them are 1 playthrough wonders, maybe 2 at best (if they've locked away the super secret ULTRA HARD difficulty, which then turns out to be just challenging enough and what they should have given you from the start.

Personally I'm loath to spend £40 on ~10 hours of entertainment.

I think what we'll see in the future is that the biggest selling games will be good multiplayer titles, next up will be good RPG games, because they usually have a good degree of replayability. Next up should be good single player titles that are highly skill based and thus challenging and replayable on a difficulty/perfection level, but in reality these games will sell fuck all and shitty movie tie-ins and kids games will take slot number 3.

As if to prove my point the current of the current top-10 360 games on the Game website 7 have a multiplayer component, 6 of those being online, the other being Kinect Sports, 2 are large scale RPGs (New Vegas and Fable 3) and the lone representative of the purely single player experience (at 10 btw) is TFU II and by most accounts, that game is a turd.

Posted 2 years ago #
OlderGamer
Moderator

Freedoms_stain

I very much agree about the value of hours and the price of a game.

And I agree that most games today and into the foreseeable future are/will be Online MP games. Even the rpgs are MP. Look at how well MMOrpgs do. DiabloIII is going to be a huge game. Even Fable is MP. I don't think of RPGs as just JRPGs anymore.

The only part of what you said I disagree with is how hard a game should be. I don't think a game being easy is what is holding back in sales. Infact I say a game that is too hard would be held back in sales.

Gamers don't have the patients today that they used to. Hell my wife rented Donkey Kong Country Returns for the Wii. While we loved the concept, no one in this house enjoyed playing the game. We got frustrated and sent the game back to gamefly two days after recieving it. And really it was THAT hard, it was just that we have other choices that aren't as hard and won't make us spend an hour on one part over and over again because we can almost make that series of three jumps. It just got tyring.

I won't touch a lot of JP games anymore for the same type of reasons.

I call it too much "Game" in the game. Things like when your cruising along in a game and bang their is a puzzle out of no where. Why is it there? Why do I now suddenly have to find keys/switches(in the correct hidden secreat order)? Why is that iteam I now need hidden behind that wall/rock that I can't see because of the camera angle? Things like that. It just bugs me. Mostly because I know that the only reason things like that are there is falsely extend the time it takes to complete a game.

And I think some game makers understand this. And I bet this leads to the catch 22. The games are too short. And maybe too easy for you.

That is why, unless your loaded with cash ala Tea, you really need to rent games if you can. That way I am not stuck with a game that makes me frustrated and I can never see the end of like DKCR. And you get to beat as many games as you have time for.

And it is buyer beware. Know what your buying. I know a game like World of Warcraft will offer me thousands of hours of gaming for my 15usd/month. I know a Civ games has amazing replayability. I am comfortable buying XBLA/PSN/Steam games that are smaller in size and and aimed at pick up and play - they just don't have that investment and on XBLA they all have demos to try. You know what your getting.

And at the end of the day that thinking is why so many folks are spending time with CoD games. and other Online MP games to begin with. There is just so many hours of gameplay offer for the same 60usd as a SP one and done game.

Posted 2 years ago #
freedoms_stain
Moderator

I suppose there are different takes on difficulty.

Scalable difficulty would be nice.

Posted 2 years ago #
frostquake
Moderator

My entire Family, including In-Laws, Cousins, Nieces and Nephews, all call and get game advice from me, and the first thing they always ask, "How hard is the game?" If it doesn't have an option to play on easy they don't want it.

I only have one family member, a 2nd cousin, who plays always on the hardest difficulty always, and he is a professional gamer with the MLG (Major League Gaming) and makes his living doing that.

So Scalable Difficulty will always be a must, go either way..make them too easy or make them too hard and you will loose a whole demographic.

Posted 2 years ago #
OlderGamer
Moderator

Agreed scalability would be the best choice.

And your family sounds like mine Frosty, 'cept for the pro gamer guy(although my oldest teen would prolly consider himself a pro).

Good call btw on the Zen Pinball on PS3. We checked that out and will be picking it up on Xmass day.

Posted 2 years ago #
DSB
Member

I feel for you OG. I miss those games as well. Highly scripted games like Half-Life or RPG hybrids like Deus Ex are dearly missed.

I don't think it's about easy or hard. That's far too simple. There are many cliches about gamedesign, most of which are extremely true. Like the idea of starting out underpowered and unskilled, and ending up a superhero ("early game catchup, late game elite") and of course implementing the fundamental principles of trial and reward.

Super Meat Boy for example is a completely merciless platformer that's engineered to kill you over and over until you get a level just right - And that's where most of the fun comes from. It's no fun to run into the same awkwardly placed razorblade 50 times while you're doing it, but it is a hell of a lot of fun to see yourself getting killed in 50 different iterations on the after-action replay. That makes it all worth it to me.

You don't (re)sell a concept to the industry without a major succes. The new Deus Ex is the only contender I can imagine presently, and it certainly won't become easier to pitch a concept like that in a time where EA and Activision are competing to make the best bid on the same game. What you need is a new Ken Levine that can sell anything to executives, and then back up his concepts with actual product quality.

Again though, nostalgia is often rose-tinted. Plenty of the old FPSes might have posed the semblance of a story, but it was just as superficial and inconsequential to the actual gameplay as it is in most blockbusters today. The truly storydriven narrative FPS was always rare, it's simply been marginalized further than it already was.

Posted 2 years ago #
Ge0force
Member

@Oldergamer: interesting theory you have, but not one I agree with. I have been a pc-gamer since the early 90's and played hundreds of hours Unreal Tournament, Quake, SoF2, CoD2 and a bunch of other FPS- and RTS-games online. While the online features of the x360 may have been a revelation for console-only gamers, there was nothing new for pc-owners. Teamspeak, IRC and XFire already did what Xbox Live does.

Since pc-gaming is/was very popular in Europa (except UK), the good story driven ps3-exclusives may explain why PS3 is the clear winner in most european countries. Every multiplat game sells better on PS3 for example, but also singleplayer x360 games (Alan Wake etc.) get higher sales in Europe than elsewhere. We already had an 'online revolution' a few years ago on pc, and we like both online and offline for variety in our gaming experience.

Don't get me wrong: I still love online gaming, but I'm getting tired of 'classic' online shooters like Black Ops. Story driven singleplayer games still can suprise me tho, that's why I still like them. I actually bought a PS3 for that kinda games, since singleplayer games no appear on pc because of piracy.

Posted 2 years ago #
Christopher Jack
Member

What i would love to see is another Timesplitters, I have never played the 3rd one, but the second is honestly one of my favourite games of all time, the amount & variation in the challenges were awesome, from survival & infection to death matches & small missions. The amount of characters was awesome, playing matches with mates was fun, having bots is something that newer fps are unfortunately missing outside of the campaign, FORCING us to play online, even by todays standards it's still a great game.
Zombies, Monkeys, Aliens it had it all, bring us Number 4 now! with everything that made the second one of last gens best games.

Posted 2 years ago #
Da Man
Member

er, I would like to comment on the last post by Geoforce:
'While the online features of the x360 may have been a revelation for console-only gamers, there was nothing new for pc-owners. Teamspeak, IRC and XFire already did what Xbox Live does'

did you mean on the first xbox? because Live had the centralized friends list, voice chat functionality since 2002.. at the time when you've had to rely on those third party solutions for PC. Dreamcast also had the voice chat iirc.. PC didn't get the same up until Steam appeared.

Posted 2 years ago #
OlderGamer
Moderator

^^I bet most of the folks that post here thought the PS and PS2 may well have been the only gaming systems on the planet during those days.

I'd also like to add that I had my Sega Saturn Online as well. No where near as fleshed out as an Xboxone or Dreamcast, but it had a browser and a couple of games. Hell even the Genises was online(sort of), in that I mean they offered the Sega Channel. Where as you could use an adapter to connect to your cable TV and each month they rotated between around 50 games. The service was too late to really matter in the 16bit lifecycle, the 32X launched, the Saturn and PSone were one their way. But in the end it worked a lot like OnLive or Gametap works now. Just saying.

But as for voice and friendslist, personialy, been doing that on a console before a PC. Consoles made it easy. Now I play both that way.

Posted 2 years ago #
Ge0force
Member

@DaMan: free choice of 3rd party solutions is the reason why online gaming is still free on pc, so I don't think that's a bad thing ;)

Thankx to those apps, I've played UT99 while voice-chatting with my friends, while popular RTS-games like Emperor: Battle for Dune had built-in friendlists, matchmaking and even clan-support. Steam and Xbox Live made things easier, but didn't change my gaming experience that much.

Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.