Is Single Player Mode Dying in Modern Video Games?

[phillout]

@megamantaray Not being a native English speaker, I'm at a disadvantage here, still I can't help but feel like using the "P" word as a derogatory term sounds dismissive towards those people making products that you use every day and can't live without. 

 

I won't argue though, it was just my $0.02

[megamantaray]

8 minutes ago, phillout said:

@megamantaray Not being a native English speaker, I'm at a disadvantage here, still I can't help but feel like using the "P" word as a derogatory term sounds dismissive towards those people making products that you use every day and can't live without. 

 

I won't argue though, it was just my $0.02

Yeah it's a word meaning thing and that can vary greatly, I think we understand each other though.

It's just meant to describe games or movies made without any passion, just to have another thing out there for the sake of it or for money.

It's also a context thing, I'm not saying dairy products or food aren't essential, they are. In the context of media though, a soulless product is a different thing.

It's a whole lot of semantics at play and language barriers muddy that up real bad.

[27X]

6 hours ago, phillout said:

@megamantaray Not being a native English speaker, I'm at a disadvantage here, still I can't help but feel like using the "P" word as a derogatory term sounds dismissive towards those people making products that you use every day and can't live without. 

 

I won't argue though, it was just my $0.02

There's a huge contextual difference between making a product good and making art a product.

 

Just ask this man, he knows.

 

 

[phillout]

1 hour ago, 27X said:

There's a huge contextual difference between making a product good and making art a product.

 

 

Does this imply that a popular movie can't be good since it was made to be popular?

[27X]

41 minutes ago, phillout said:

 

Does this imply that a popular movie can't be good since it was made to be popular?

Since I specifically mentioned the brothers that made the most popular movie of all time as a positive for Disney, the most formulaic entertainment company in media history, pretty sure semantics or black and white views have little place in the conversation .

[lordgdavid]

19 hours ago, megamantaray said:

The only disagreement I have with you is that you said you shouldn't call them "products" that's not quite right.

It's kinda like the Disney formulaic movies and such. They're not "movies" they're "product" and you're meant to enjoy product and then be excited for next product.

It's the same with these companies, easily remade yearly releases aren't games, they're not experiences, they're product.

I love this clip it's from a parody podcast RedLetterMedia did to make fun of Disney shills:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

I meant that the properties of product are slipping away in most AAA games. They are becoming service centered, not ready on launch, etc. Also if you follow fallout 76 news companies like Beth are trying to weasel out of rules that apply to products and deny refunds and such. They are still products but we are dangerously close to see the death of products since every bigger player in the industry is thinking hard how to lock in gamers in their subscription based service where you "own" even less then now. Your only way of owning something truly is if you pirate it after purchase.

[phillout]

5 hours ago, 27X said:

Since I specifically mentioned the brothers that made the most popular movie of all time as a positive for Disney, the most formulaic entertainment company in media history, pretty sure semantics or black and white views have little place in the conversation .

What I'm saying has nothing to do with "black and white", I'm simply trying to make my point clear as it humanly possible. There is nothing wrong with the "product", there is nothing wrong with learning about the demographics of your potential buyers either, etc.

 

The problem IMO comes from a simple fact that even people studying the client requirements do a sloppy job. Because naturally all people who are expected to buy the game expect it to be good. And when it isn't - this logically means someone has failed at their task. Such abomination as Fallout 76 failed not because someone tried to study the market, but due to the opposite reason - someone with the head high in the clouds failed to set up the product requirements. Because before you go into the creative mode, you need to set goals and decide what exactly you're going to create. And then when the company fails to build something interesting and releases yet another soulless boring BS, they just start a marketing campaign, something what @lordgdavid described - "everything is better with friends", "this is the same as before, just better - because friends" etc. The thing is, this actually works for some time, just like Hollywood's political messaging tactics has worked for some time, before they started to fail like they did with the recent "Terminator" movie. 

 

IOW it's not the marketing and its researches and stuff that kills the game. The problem is people in wrong places not doing their jobs and hoping that a cheap sales pitch will get them a paycheck and benefits with a minimal effort.

[megamantaray]

1 hour ago, phillout said:

What I'm saying has nothing to do with "black and white", I'm simply trying to make my point clear as it humanly possible. There is nothing wrong with the "product", there is nothing wrong with learning about the demographics of your potential buyers either, etc.

 

The problem IMO comes from a simple fact that even people studying the client requirements do a sloppy job. Because naturally all people who are expected to buy the game expect it to be good. And when it isn't - this logically means someone has failed at their task. Such abomination as Fallout 76 failed not because someone tried to study the market, but due to the opposite reason - someone with the head high in the clouds failed to set up the product requirements. Because before you go into the creative mode, you need to set goals and decide what exactly you're going to create. And then when the company fails to build something interesting and releases yet another soulless boring BS, they just start a marketing campaign, something what @lordgdavid described - "everything is better with friends", "this is the same as before, just better - because friends" etc. The thing is, this actually works for some time, just like Hollywood's political messaging tactics has worked for some time, before they started to fail like they did with the recent "Terminator" movie. 

 

IOW it's not the marketing and its researches and stuff that kills the game. The problem is people in wrong places not doing their jobs and hoping that a cheap sales pitch will get them a paycheck and benefits with a minimal effort.

You're arguing with a fundamental misunderstanding of what we're talking about. We're not dismissing market researchers, producers or committees.

Yeah it's important to have market researchers but what we're talking about is how that's all that matters to some companies.
People like EA don't really shape their media to satisfy an audience, they make a bland expressionless "product" every year to satisfy a profit margin by playing it as safe as possible by pandering strictly to the lowest common denominator, the guaranteed sales that'll get them that money and nothing else, no innovation or nuance.

Where an indie game or good AAA games would offer a colourful wall that makes you think or enjoy an experience of some sort, like Horizon: Zero Dawn a game like Call of Duty is the same blank slate every year with maybe a new crack or spot of bird shit on it.

Either there is a fundamental misunderstanding here or you're purposely ignoring what we're trying to say.

[phillout]

50 minutes ago, megamantaray said:

they make a bland expressionless "product"

 

Yep. 

 

Sorry, me just being picky here for sure. Working for months on a project that's being basically sabotaged by some self-proclaimed "software artisans" that have zero discipline (because arts!) and more attitude than actual skills makes one grumpy over matters like this, I guess. Reading something like "it's just a product, no creativity" got me triggered for no actual reason. Sigh... Pals?

 

[megamantaray]

1 minute ago, phillout said:

Yep. 

 

Sorry, me just being picky here for sure. Working for months on a project that's being basically sabotaged by some self-proclaimed "software artisans" that have zero discipline (because arts!) and more attitude than actual skills makes one grumpy over matters like this, I guess. Reading something like "it's just a product, no creativity" got me triggered for no actual reason. Sigh... Pals?

Well I don't see why we would be hostile toward each other, we're just expressing differing views mostly because of a misunderstanding.

Language barriers do that, especially since you can't really read intent over text that well.

No hard feelings, didn't have any to begin with. I understand you take your work seriously but what the cat and I were referring to was people who don't and just do the bare minimum.

It could've probably been expressed better.

[GrimReaper]

23 hours ago, megamantaray said:

Well I dunno if I got my point across properly but what I was trying to say is that those movies and games aren't really made with a creative or innovative mindset, they're basically mass-produced for minimum risk and maximum profit. I.E. just generic "product" they can cheaply renovate each year with minimal loss, if any.

They're not crafting new experiences or taking you somewhere new, it's just more product you can buy and then wait for new product when that one goes out of date.

It makes sense in my head, I mess up explaining things a lot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_industry

 

That whatchu mean

[Yami X]

Short Answer:No

 

Long Answer:Fuck No.

 

[megamantaray]

1 hour ago, GrimReaper said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_industry

 

That whatchu mean

Yes actually, thank you.

I was having such a hard time putting this into words, I should've figured someone smarter than me had thought of a proper term for it.

[Wolfstorm321]

On 12/8/2019 at 4:45 PM, megamantaray said:

The only disagreement I have with you is that you said you shouldn't call them "products" that's not quite right.

It's kinda like the Disney formulaic movies and such. They're not "movies" they're "product" and you're meant to enjoy product and then be excited for next product.

It's the same with these companies, easily remade yearly releases aren't games, they're not experiences, they're product.

I love this clip it's from a parody podcast RedLetterMedia did to make fun of Disney shills:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

Do the "product" meme comes from this video?

[megamantaray]

7 hours ago, Wolfstorm321 said:

Do the "product" meme comes from this video?

It might. RLM has started quite a few memes.

[27X]

9 hours ago, Wolfstorm321 said:

 

Do the "product" meme comes from this video?

The term "product" for story entertainment has been a thing since the 80s. and it's not a meme, it's a fact.

[submissive miss tris]

it's really depressing but the only way this shift towards multiplayer games only is something that can only be reversed if suddenly singleplayer experiences become more profitable, which i just don't see happening ;-;

[FauxFurry]

4 hours ago, submissive miss tris said:

it's really depressing but the only way this shift towards multiplayer games only is something that can only be reversed if suddenly singleplayer experiences become more profitable, which i just don't see happening ;-;

What, don't you think that the likes of the Resident Evil remakes, The Witcher series, Ghost of Tsushima and Horizon Zero Dawn (and pretty much tent pole Nintendo properties)are profitable? Do you think that Cyber Punk 2077 or Assassin's Creed Valhalla will be massive flops? 

If the answers are Yes and No then it ought to be clear that Single Player games are not going away anytime soon, no sooner than they would when this thread was started/last active.

[landess]

12 hours ago, submissive miss tris said:

shift towards multiplayer games only

How many games have been focused on multiplayer, and only a few months after launch, the servers are 'dead'. Add to this servers being closed... Multiplayer in general isn't the 'end all' you might believe it is. It's like fashion - what was stylish today is old news tomorrow with many players looking for that next hot game.

 

Some have staying power, which isn't bad, but then again, with rampant cheating and lack of content support many players don't stick around. Some developers shoot themselves in the foot by changing and meddling with what worked and players abandon the game.

 

Streamers are always trying to be ahead of the curve as 'influencers' with an annoying trend lately of streaming early access titles just to be doing something no one else is.

 

Not everyone wants to deal with the baggage multiplayer games bring every time someone wants to just play a game. Most multiplayer games are hard or 'illegal' to mod. Players can be toxic.

 

As an old MMO player, the things that attracted me to that experience isn't present in these match play, lobby dependent multiplayer experiences most games offer. Playing the Devil's advocate I believe most games have a form of spyware if they require you to log-in to use their product - LOG IN DAILY FOR FREE STUFF - umm, yeah...... <<< Why ARE Multiplayer options soooo popular?

 

I understand there are people afraid to be alone with their own minds for any period of time, as well as social whores needing validation and acceptance from others. Multiplayer is an option for these types. I'm not anti-social, but I don't die IF I can't check my phone every 5 minutes.... 

 

Multiplayer can be a great experience, but it's not what a game is about, just an option some may be interested in.

[submissive miss tris]

9 hours ago, FauxFurry said:

What, don't you think that the likes of the Resident Evil remakes, The Witcher series, Ghost of Tsushima and Horizon Zero Dawn (and pretty much tent pole Nintendo properties)are profitable? Do you think that Cyber Punk 2077 or Assassin's Creed Valhalla will be massive flops? 

If the answers are Yes and No then it ought to be clear that Single Player games are not going away anytime soon, no sooner than they would when this thread was started/last active.

 

1 hour ago, landess said:

How many games have been focused on multiplayer, and only a few months after launch, the servers are 'dead'. Add to this servers being closed... Multiplayer in general isn't the 'end all' you might believe it is. It's like fashion - what was stylish today is old news tomorrow with many players looking for that next hot game.

 

Some have staying power, which isn't bad, but then again, with rampant cheating and lack of content support many players don't stick around. Some developers shoot themselves in the foot by changing and meddling with what worked and players abandon the game.

 

Streamers are always trying to be ahead of the curve as 'influencers' with an annoying trend lately of streaming early access titles just to be doing something no one else is.

 

Not everyone wants to deal with the baggage multiplayer games bring every time someone wants to just play a game. Most multiplayer games are hard or 'illegal' to mod. Players can be toxic.

 

As an old MMO player, the things that attracted me to that experience isn't present in these match play, lobby dependent multiplayer experiences most games offer. Playing the Devil's advocate I believe most games have a form of spyware if they require you to log-in to use their product - LOG IN DAILY FOR FREE STUFF - umm, yeah...... <<< Why ARE Multiplayer options soooo popular?

 

I understand there are people afraid to be alone with their own minds for any period of time, as well as social whores needing validation and acceptance from others. Multiplayer is an option for these types. I'm not anti-social, but I don't die IF I can't check my phone every 5 minutes.... 

 

Multiplayer can be a great experience, but it's not what a game is about, just an option some may be interested in.

yeah you're both right actually, maybe more accurate is that there's a push towards games that aren't 'offline,' it's becoming more common for games on startup to connect to the internet and you're right, that's so they can gather data. spyware or not, they get a lot of data just knowing what you play and how much and basic information like that. they want it for marketing and all that i'd bet.

singleplayer experiences still do well but they're certainly not the focus of the market, they make good money good singleplayer experiences aren't as common anymore (because of the over saturation of online, free to play, and in-game-purchase heavy games)

[Umbra Nensei]

No.

[Dynchia]

On 10/11/2019 at 6:48 PM, Hiderius said:

single player games are not dying they are in high demand even today I want to say and EA is completely wrong on the whole single player games are dead. I could name single player games that came out last year, will come out this year or next year that proves them wrong on that

Of course EA is wrong. This is the same company which stated not long before TS4 came out that they was NOT going to do it in 64bit because no ones develops for it or uses it and this just right after they released about 10 games of which only 3 was 32bit only and the rest was both 32 AND 64 save for I think 2 which was 64bit only.

 

 

[KoolHndLuke]

Single player is still alive and well and it does look like indies are picking up whatever slack AAA devs might have. Think when I started this I was looking at some mmos that I liked and wished they had single player options (some do). Doing some digging (and some extra cash) this summer has kept me very entertained with the single player one handed experience.

 

Perhaps if I ignore the world losing it's goddamn mind around me enough this fall and winter, I can focus on getting all achievements or something in some of my games.

[FauxFurry]

Oddly enough, Monster Hunter World has a strictly single-player collaboration with The Witcher franchise (complete with dialogue choices and dynamic single player camera)where one plays Geralt fighting a Leshen who he tracks down across worlds after doing a quick investigation in the world of Monster Hunter, making it single player elements encroaching on a multiplayer online game.

I'm left wondering if other multiplayer focused games will follow suit someday soon.

[Swanky]

I think the tone of Singleplayer games has shifted in the past 20 years or so. Back then bigger companies would often hold the novelties and smaller indie studios had more arcade-y stuff, if at all.

Nowadays big companies mostly play it safe safe for CPPR and Valve, and most of the more interesting stuff gets done by smaller, often independent studios, or if done by big companies, smaller inhouse studios. Of course you can't formularize this, but it's a trend.

 

As a whole, singleplayer games will never die. It's a misconception planted by big companies to rope you into their service product that's usually a flawed, quickly done, highly monetized cashgrab. Also, you would never be able to experience a story like Alan Wake or Life is Strange in a multiplayer environment, and there will always be studios that just want to tell this kind of story.