View Single Post
Old 01-19-2013, 03:20 PM   #5
ImmortalArbiter
 
ImmortalArbiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 516

ImmortalArbiter's Gamercard

Awards Showcase Submit - Bronze
Total Awards: 1 (more» ...)
My thoughts? It's incredibly stupid.

The fat cat execs look at the success of Call of Duty, and ask why it's so popular. They get the answer: Multiplayer. So then, they want to add it to their game, not realizing that the multiplayer has to be the focus and not a cheap addition to really sell the game.

People can say "Well, if you don't like the multiplayer, don't play it!" To that I say: Each game has a budget and a deadline. Just think that that time and money could be spent enhancing the single player experience (which is what sells certain games, just like the multiplayer sells Call of Duty).

Did anyone ask for multiplayer in Tomb Raider? Highly doubtful. Then, to add insult to injury, they add multiplayer achievements - ones that usually take forever and/or require a ridiculous amount of boosting just so they can say "Well look! These people played our game for a long time! They must love it!"

Don't get me wrong - I do love multiplayer games. I've played a ton of Call of Duty, Gears of War, Halo, Team Fortress 2, etc. but games like BioShock, Assassin's Creed, Dead Space, Mass Effect, Rage, The Darkness, etc. DO NOT NEED IT! No one wants it! If they absolutely HAVE to add it in, why not just leave off the MP Achievements?

Tacked on multiplayer is one of the worst trends this generation (Disc Locked Content being my personal most hated) and sadly it doesn't seem like it's going away.
__________________

ImmortalArbiter is offline   Reply With Quote