Pages

Wednesday 5 November 2014

Why Online Multiplayer Needs Single Player



Over the last decade online multiplayer shooters have become increasingly popular on consoles. What once was a fun and exciting new mode to accompany the single player campaign has now taken center stage. In fact the online section of these games are so popular that a large portion of their player bases choose to only play the multiplayer and never bother touching the single player campaigns. This has sparked many discussions about whether or not most multiplayer shooters need a single player option to accompany them and if they could not only survive, but thrive as a multiplayer only experience.


A recent up and coming competitor in the online shooter genre was willing to put these questions to the test and release an online shooter without a single player mode for full price. This competitor was Titanfall and it was set to be the next big thing in the realm of online shooters. Titanfall was a success critically and commercially, although I think that it fell a little short of expectation on both of those fronts.

          This piece isn’t about that though. This is about my personal feelings towards Titanfall. I know I wrote a review to cover that, but there was something about Titanfall that I felt warranted further exploration and that is the following question that it left me with: would Titanfall have been a better multiplayer game if their had been a single player campaign?



Now, it would be easy to say that Titanfall would be a better game if it had a strong single player campaign, as it would be an additional enjoyable mode to experience. I mean, at the very least how could that make it any worse? This is not what I am trying to figure out. You see in my experience with Titanfall, one of my biggest problems was that the whole thing felt hollow. I didn’t care about anything outside of the game’s mechanics. I didn’t care about the universe Titanfall takes place in, nor did I care about the environments I was fighting in, I also didn’t care about the technology behind the Titans, or the Pilots I was playing as or the soldiers fighting with me or the voices from the game talking to me or even the weapons I was using (beyond the level of “which am I appearing to do better with”). Nothing in Titanfall grabbed me and made me care.



A contrasting experience for me is the one I’ve had with the Halo franchise. Halo is my favorite multiplayer series and I believe that the single player had a lot to do with that. By designing Halo’s single player first the game was given a wide variety of cool and interesting weapons that felt distinct from one another and were meant to give the player a sense of variety and allow them to tackle different situations, or to tackle the same situation in a variety of ways. This not only lead to their being a number of interesting guns and a level of strategy around which to use them in the multiplayer, it also made the players who had gone through the single player know all of that from the get go. Players knew what guns they were comfortable using, what ones they wanted to find and pick up and what ones they wanted to make sure their enemies never got. Would the energy sword be iconic if Halo was a multiplayer only shooter? Sure, I believe so. Would it be as iconic or as beloved by fans if it wasn’t a weapon only our enemies in the campaign could wield in Halo 1 and then in Halo 2 when you defeated one of them players had this magical moment where they find out they can now use it too? Probably not. Would being able to play as an Elite in Halo 2 multiplayer have mattered without knowing Halo’s story? No, because it would just be a second character model. But you know what? When we first got to play as Elites it was awesome because we could finally play as our fiercest enemies. And despite how cool it was to play as an Elite players like myself preferred to remain as Spartans because they looked just like our beloved hero Master Chief from the campaign. There is no connection like that to your weapons or Pilots in Titanfall, not even close.


          It is important for players to connect with a game. It is important for them to understand and appreciate the world around them, the enemies in front of them, the character they are inhabiting and even the weapons in their hands. I believe that a single player campaign has the power to do this for the player when it is handled correctly and that it is something competitive multiplayer cannot handle on its own. This is why I believe that a multiplayer focused game still needs a single player campaign. A good single player isn’t just something that is nice to have as an additional mode; it shares a symbiotic experience with the multiplayer that makes it more enjoyable for the player. 

          So even though online shooters could remove their single player campaigns and still sell millions of units at full price, just like Titanfall did, I don’t think it would be the right move for most franchises. I feel that not having a single player accompany online shooters would be detrimental to the player experience, especially for any series just starting out, as players wouldn’t have had a chance to connect to the game’s world yet. And for anyone reading this who hasn’t given the single player a try in the multiplayer shooters that they play, I recommend you give it a go and see if it helps build a connection to that game’s world and if that leads to a more enjoyable experience for you as it has for me.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Batman: Arkham Knight Critique - Joker Story

The most compelling aspect of the story in “Batman: Arkham Knight” for me was Batman’s ongoing hallucinations of The Joker. I had heard...