Menu Close

Is The Multiplayer Boom Actually Hurting Game Sales?

Yes, I'm well aware that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 sold around 6 million copies in the month and a half after its release, but my question involves the psychology of online multiplayer fans.

You may not have noticed, but many who play MMORPGs like World of Warcraft simply don't play anything else. I really don't even consider them to be gamers, as they play one type of game for years on end. Now, I'm starting to see the same behavior from the rabid Modern Warfare fans: there are many who have played the original Modern Warfare online right up until the time the sequel released, and you can bet they'll repeat that procedure again. I'm not saying these online experiences are inherently addictive, but I am saying they seem to drain a lot of time from people and many have admitted to missing out on top-notch titles because they're stuck playing one particular title online. So in other words, of those 6 million who bought MW2, how many of them will buy Heavy Rain in February? I know they're two entirely different games but what about those who currently plan to buy Quantic Dream's ambitious project, then get hooked on MW2 and simply pass everything up, from Heavy Rain through even God of War III and Final Fantasy XIII in March?

These days, it seems as if the battle lines are being drawn: war is being waged between those who almost exclusively play online multiplayer and those who almost exclusively play single-player campaigns. I have noticed that those who get stuck on multiplayer have a lot of time on their hands, and they absolutely don't play as many games as the hardcore gamers who want to keep up with the industry. Missing out on the likes of Uncharted 2: Among Thieves , Assassin's Creed II , Batman: Arkham Asylum , inFamous and the amazing 2010 lineup due to constant online action seems downright reprehensible to me. Bear in mind I have nothing against the multiplayer boom, per se, but I wish some Western developers took the route the Japanese have taken with their big franchises: they gave us MGS4 to satisfy those who appreciate a wonderful story and an absorbing independent experience, but they also satisfied the other crowd with MGO. They give us FFXIII in March (it has no online multiplayer), which will soon be followed by FFXIV, which is only online.

In the future, I really want to see everyone do this. Multiplayer is big enough so entire games can be created with that object in mind; developers that attempt to produce both in the same package usually don't fully succeed in both respects. I think we all know the single-player campaign in MW2 isn't anything special while at the same time, despite the solidity and quality of the Uncharted 2 online experience, there's very little chance that anyone buys that game for multiplayer Deathmatch. So why bother? You could even make the strictly multiplayer games cheaper by making those entirely downloadable in the future (we're going in that direction, anyway). The bottom line is that many who play a lot online really don't care about any single-player experience, and the vice versa can be said about those who couldn't possibly care less about the multiplayer. And with the "time-sucking" aspect of these multiplayer games, and so many millions jumping in, how can sales of games like Heavy Rain not suffer?

Just a thought.

173 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
15 years ago

Best multiplayer game ever made? Contra. Gotta have two guys with the 30 Rest trick and then just go to town. 'Cept I don't like bein the red guy 🙂

LimitedVertigo
LimitedVertigo
15 years ago

No way, Smash Tv!

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
15 years ago

Smash TV was tasty, but I still loves me some Contra. It's really too bad they never got that game out of the dark ages properly.

LimitedVertigo
LimitedVertigo
15 years ago

Contra was my bi*** once I saved up for a turbo button controller. I agree on it being a great game that unfortunately never made a successful jump past the 16bit era.

LimitedVertigo
LimitedVertigo
15 years ago

Contra was my b-itch once I saved up for a turbo button controller. I agree on it being a great game that unfortunately never made a successful jump past the 16bit era.

Edit* Ya that's right, female dog is not allowed but cum is. sayyyyyy what?!


Last edited by LimitedVertigo on 1/4/2010 12:27:17 AM

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
15 years ago

I wasn't even a big fan of the 16bit attempts, I just loved the old 8 bit 🙂

fluffer nutter
fluffer nutter
15 years ago

I wore out my NES Max controller playing Contra. That game was the sh*t! That controller was awesome too. It had the disc for the d-pad and having rounded corners made the controller a much better alternative to the standard NES controller. Damn rectangle.

SvenMD
SvenMD
15 years ago

Contra is the jam. More co-op than multiplayer though. But you HAD to have the Konami code. But I always hated it when your friend started to die too much and then they stole your damn lives…

One of the highlights of my life – beating Contra with my wife in an hour….awesome.

BTW – I thought the NES Max controller blew. I hated that stupid disc thing that just moved all around EXCEPT for the one direction you wanted to go.

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
15 years ago

"One of the highlights of my life – beating Contra with my wife in an hour….awesome."

WIN.

Jed
Jed
15 years ago

@ SVEN

sounds like the D-pad on the 360 controller

NoSmokingBandit
NoSmokingBandit
15 years ago

The only game i ever spent time online with is KZ2. Most other online games just feel too repetitive, at least KZ2 mixed it up a little. I still got bored fast though.

Its sad that single-player games arent as popular as multi-player games. Ratchet and Clank is amazing, and adding an online aspect wouldnt make it any better, probably worse seeing as they would have to give up development time for it.

Even big online games like MW2 end up having a crappy campaign. The campaign in MW2 was just bad compared to MW1. 'Tis a shame. Nobody complained that Mario didnt have multiplayer.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
15 years ago

The only thing KZ2 online needed to be perfect was a coop mode like in Resistance 2. R2 online is one that I like and can have fun with from time to time.


Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 1/4/2010 12:25:11 AM

Jed
Jed
15 years ago

I loved the online co-op in R2. I think I'm going to start me a session soon.

Hezzron
Hezzron
15 years ago

Well I'm not sure about the idea that "battle lines are being drawn: war is being waged" between MP and SP gamers. LOL! If so, then I must be suffering some kind of internal conflict! I know that was probably used to stir up the comments here.

I play both SP and MP. I don't put that much thought into it, it's just a matter of what I'm in the mood for. I've played and finished most of the SP games listed in the article. I've also logged a good amount of time playing games online.

I think some older gamers (like me), who might be stuck in their ways, are actually AFRAID of MP. Maybe they feel like they're gonna be embarrassed in front of a "crowd" if they're no good. I used to feel a bit intimidated taking my gaming skills online, but now I actually get the craving for it.

There's a certain thrill that comes with knowing you're playing against live opponents. If you happen to stink it up online, its no biggie, no ones gonna reach out of the TV and slap you…..besides, it seems you can always change rooms and find some players worse than you.


Last edited by Hezzron on 1/4/2010 12:26:42 AM

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
15 years ago

I think there is something to the battle lines theory (as evinced by the probability that this article was sparked in part due to some lively debate in the forums between Ben and some Valve fanatics)

There really is a camp of people that will defend their online MP to the death and honestly don't give a rip about the game having a good SP. Then you have us guys around 30 who really could care less about MP and consider it a neat feature or addition that may extend the fun of the game. If you need evidence look at anyone who ever said a game was lacking because it didn't have MP. Or someone who scored it lower in a review because there was no MP.

Hezzron
Hezzron
15 years ago

Also, I do believe the lack of MP does hurt game sales now. It's not due so much to MW2's success, but rather due to the "Gamestop Effect".

Games that have SP only get traded in much faster. The same copy that sold "new" can be recycled many times over through these secondhand stores.

Developers are putting in MP now in hopes of getting people to hang onto the game and generate more "new" sales.

Alienange
Alienange
15 years ago

@ hezzron73 – What you have written here is brilliance. "Gamestop effect" LMAO! In fact, many a developer has admitted just that.

Anonymous
Anonymous
15 years ago

@Bikersaint.

What I describe to you is in AMERICA!! Most kids that play travel ball play Little league. Infact all those kids that win in the Little League world series? THEY PLAY TRAVEL BALL TOO! It is why they are so good.

End of Line.

LimitedVertigo
LimitedVertigo
15 years ago

Before you get banned do you have any last words? I'm assuming just "End of Line".

to_far_apart
to_far_apart
15 years ago

Maybe he'll announce his engagement to MW2?

Jawknee
Jawknee
15 years ago

Pftahaha, I can always count on you LimitedVertigo to give me my bedtime laughs.

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
15 years ago

Travel ball is simply hyper competitive little league. It's the kind of little league where the parents with money pay for private coaching etc, and the 'talented' kids play and the less talented kids play waterboy. You know all the ugly excess of the over-pushy sports parent with money? The kind that is trying to live their life through their children? That's what you'll find in travel ball.

The parents and organizers take it as seriously as the pro's do, unfortunately the kids get dragged in and are basically grist for the mill.


Last edited by TheHighlander on 1/4/2010 1:15:08 AM

fluffer nutter
fluffer nutter
15 years ago

Although, TheHighlander is very correct that you'll find those parents in those type of "leagues", you will also find those that know their kids really are that good and want to give them the chance to follow their dreams. I know plenty of people that got full rides; college paid for, and this allowed them to get started in a career that now has them enjoying life with little stress.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
15 years ago

Wait, fluffer, little league got them good careers?


Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 1/4/2010 1:35:33 AM

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
15 years ago

@worlds, that's what I was getting at, it's highly competitive little league, but however you look at it, it's all just baseball.

fluffer nutter
fluffer nutter
15 years ago

Yeah, World. Playing sports, like baseball, got them full rides into universities and they ended up with careers after that. Some are still active in sports, others are out in the office world or running their own companies and hanging out with their families.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
15 years ago

I never liked that whole thing where if you are good at sports you get a free ride through education.

Fane1024
Fane1024
15 years ago

One of my co-workers' kids just got scholarship offers (baseball team) thanks to "travel ball". I don't know if any are full rides, but any help paying for college is worth the weekend tournaments.

johnld
johnld
15 years ago

i love playing single player because when a story is good, it draws me in and keeps me entertained. multiplayer is good too once in a while especially when you're playing with people who knows what they're doing. unfortunately, the amount of decent matches on the ps3 is slowly decreasing especially in MW2. Im inclined to pick up a rapid fire controller at best buy just to piss them off. yeah, i was surprised to see it on the shelf. thought it was just a regular third party controller. i thought they didnt sell rapid fire controllers at retail stores anymore since the "online movement" began, at least this generation.

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
15 years ago

John,

Do those rapid fire controllers have an advantage these days? Don't most games limit the rate of fire?

BikerSaint
BikerSaint
15 years ago

OK, thanks to "ALL" who replied on Travel ball.

I'm 57 & around the area growing up, we never called anything by that name. Also, when my daughter was in a school softball league (catcher) quite a ways back, I can't remember anyone mentioning travel ball either.
Seems to me to be more of a now-a-days thing they're calling it now, I'm guessing???
Hell, back in the day, times were pretty tight for most of us back then & I don't remember anyone doing any traveling sports other than just a bounce or two between just 2-3 schools close-by.

@World
Although I'm trying….there's just thousands & thousands of games already out there according to a few of my databases, & I have neither the money or years left on this ole soul-train to get every title for my collections. But I am doing what I can to at least get close, with a few 5-20 game bundles at a time, LOL.
Heck, although I've got more than 1400 games spanning to the SNES/Genesis era, I didn't actually start collecting until about 1/2 way through the PS1's life cycle, & I was so impressed with it, that the collecting bug bit my butt big-time.

Right now, my biggest single console collection stands(so far) at about 1/4th completed, and that one being only 535 games out of almost 2000 for the PS1.
Here's what I've got so far…
SNES(packed away w/list, so I don't remember amount, but only about 1-15 games for it).
Atari Jaguar 9 Discs, 25 Cartriges
Panasonic 3DO 45
Genesis 145
N64 78
Saturn 75
Dreamcast 48
**Gamecube 34**
**GameBoy Advance(GC's console attachment) 5**
Xbox 190
**360 50**
**PSP 20 Games & 6 Movies**
PS1 538
PS2 233
**PS3 60**
(FYI: I have only owned the systems marked with ** for 6 months or less. The PS3, GC, & GBA are only about 5 or 6 months old, and I just bought the 360 & my PSP's less than 2 months ago).

@LV,
I have many mint RPG's in my collections, but I just haven't been able to get immersed into their gameplay, even though I keep going back & trying again on numerous occasions.
BTW, I've seen some copies going for a pretty penny in the past(FF7, FF Tactics, Tactics Ogre, Parasite Eve, Etc), but I seriously doubt I'd ever sell any of mine.
If you want to check out what I've got, I've put almost all of my console & game lists in our forum here(just look in the proper section for each system listed). I Do need to update a few of the newer system's games list though, since I've bought about 30 games since my last update.

(Damn, this post must be way too long, it just gave me Carpel Tunnel & finger cramps)LOL

Banky A
Banky A
15 years ago

Yes Ben, it just hurts so much.
Make the pain go away 🙁

*Crying*

archs13
archs13
15 years ago

i used to have a theory when i was playing killzone 2.. which is playing multiplayer a lot. i actually reached the second to the highest rank in killzone 2 without even touching the campaign story mode. but now, the trophies are a motivation to playing through story mode and single-player games.

i just want trophies dammit! but hey, if the multiplayer's really awesome then that's a great extra.

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
15 years ago

So you are thinking that if trophies are primarily associated with the Single player part of a game it will guide gamers to the single player campaign whether the multi-player is there or not?

I can see that working for a lot of 'trophy' hunters.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
15 years ago

LOL, okay so my BFF bought MW2 recently and while this whole thing is going on tonight he just texted me and I quote "What the hell? I think I beat it. Gay." He isn't allowed to have the internet by law so he is screwed.

That pretty much sums it up.

Snaaaake
Snaaaake
15 years ago

Not me that's for sure.

My main drive to play a game is the campaign or story mode.

Multiplayer comes later and it won't last me long.
I always rotate what I play.

I also don't get stuck on a single game for a very long time as I will definitely get bored of it months after purchase.

Dancemachine55
Dancemachine55
15 years ago

Played World of Warcraft for a year. Biggest waste of time and money to me. It was just hours of click this and go here.

After I cancelled my subscription, I haven't touched it in nearly 4 years. I pride myself with single player masterpieces like MGS4 and Uncharted 2. I have friends over and play Rock Band 2 or New Mario Bros. Wii (which is insanely fun with friends!!)

All in all, I think online only is a big hole on your wallet, it sucks a lot of time and money out of you and you get hardly anything from it in the end, even in terms of emotional highs or experiences.

I have no objections to developers adding online play to a kickass single player game. But I might not play an MMO again, unless I feel it offers an experience similar to a single player game and has no continuing fees.

Helps if my friends are playing it too, like EVE Online, but I can't afford it, and have bigger, better games to play like Bayonetta, Bioshock 2, God of War 3, Heavy Rain, Splinter Cell Conviction and Mass Effect 2.

Being a gamer is a double edged sword. Even my two jobs can hardly keep up with great game releases. DAMN YOU DEVELOPERS AND YOUR INCREDIBLE SKILLS!!!!! DAMN YOU TO HEEEEEEECK!!!!

frostface
frostface
15 years ago

When I'm gaming, most though not all times, I just want to get away from other people. I was/am (for 2more weeks) working in a very public orientated environment, so when I get home I tend to want to disconnect from that and single player games achieve that goal for me.
Also I'm not sure on this but, since the price drop on the ps3, or it's just kids buying MW2 (also questionable, where are the parents? They'll be the first to criticize the games when their kid does something bad, even though the kid shouldn't be playing an adult rated game) but the abuse and the idiocy that comes out on the in-game chat is getting worse.
I used to enjoy the online function and depending on the game I still do (I feel it's a different sort of person plays MW2 compared with BF:BC for example or Warhawk.)
Lately my hours have been absorbed with games like Dragons Age or Assassins Creed 2 and I every so often I'll venture back to Uncharted 2 and pick back up where I left off. The online multiplayer doesn't even factor into it.
I'm not very technically minded on these things but correct me if I'm wrong, if the games where built with just single player in mind, would the game play not last longer than the measly 5hr playthrough of a game split between online and single player? Also in vice versa, if the game was made with just multiplayer online, imagine how massive that game could be (I'm looking at you MAG).
So in short after all my rambling on, I agree with Ben, the games should and could be split. Gamers get better games imo and the companys who bring them out get to sell a single player and a multiplayer and maybe make more money for themselves, which I wouldn't begrudge if I got an immersive experience whether or not it was multiplayer or single player.

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
15 years ago

The locust swarm that buys MW2 is made up of a wide section of gamers, many of who have the maturity of shoe laces. Whatever their age, many of them will come across as kids.

JackC8
JackC8
15 years ago

I almost never play online. There are so many great games to play, I've barely got time to get through the single player campaign of most of them. If I were to spend more hours with the online, I'd have to skip half of them.

I don't get the appeal of online anyway. In a game, you've got characters, a story, exploration, boss battles, maybe some platforming – all kinds of stuff. With online, you've got a shooter. Nothing more. That would bore the living hell out of me.

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
15 years ago

I'm with you. Never got the appeal, either. Repetitive and boring as all HELL.

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
15 years ago

That's the thing to me that I don't get. I understand this whole idea that a real living opponent is more flexible than AI, but in reality in any game map there are a limited number of options and most players make the same mistakes time and again. So an experienced player can exploit that and generally speaking treat inexperienced players the same way they treat the AI – dispatch them within seconds.

It's the same thing time after time, it's a grind and that gets boring – or at least it should.

Single player games offer all the nuances that the creators of the game and the writers of the script/story could pack in. In some games like RPGs the complete-ists can have their way collecting everything, and in GT like games of course you want ever car and upgrade. To an extent this can become a grind as well, but with the Multi-player game it's a grind from start to finish and unless you have un-naturally quick reflexes once the game's regular players have leveled up you're toast.

Silent_J
Silent_J
15 years ago

i play alot on MW2 online but im not glued to it like others .I just finish Uncharted 2 ,beautiful unbelievable game and Im now playing batman AA .When Heavy Rain comes out im probably gonna wait for the reviews since it just barely spark an interest for me .God of War 3 is must buy , already preordered it.

D1g1tal5torm
D1g1tal5torm
15 years ago

to far apart summed this whole situ in his first para.

With net access being available to the majority of gamers, the online portion of a game is always going to garner at least if not more interest as it's where the longevity of a game resides.

It's akin to say reading a book or playing chess.

The book is always going to be the same, no matter what. A game of chess, if different pretty much each time due to different players, different scenarios.

So it's logical the sp's are going to be hit. People want value for money.

Therefore devs have to better stories, more immersive gameplay and an all round superior product to a combined sp/mp game.

Most sps dont. With uc2 now being the benchmark for sp's, (I know it has mp as well!) in terms of story, graphics etc. I only see Heavy rain as a sure fire purchase in my book.

NB: Dead space is another good example.


Last edited by D1g1tal5torm on 1/4/2010 9:46:20 AM

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
15 years ago

You are wrong, so very wrong, and here is the reason why. When you read a book, the entire thing takes place in your head. Your imagination creates the images, the settings, the voices the characters, how you feel about them, any emotional connection you feel to the story of characters and so on. A good single player game does some or all of this too. It is like reading a novel, your imagination makes your personal experience of the game different from another player's experience. Not only that but even if you go back and replay it, the replay isn't the same as the initial play through because you know things about the characters and setting now and it alters your perceptions of the game, setting, story and characters.

Chess is different to Multi-player because it is a one on one experience and there are a practically infinite number of possible move combinations for victory. Both players have the same tools, the same weapons and a level playing field. In most multi-player games there is one rocket launcher, one double barreled shotgun and one tank, so a given player can get the upper hand whether they have the skill or not. Chess is like multi-player games in some respects though because a player who is very good can generally dispatch lesser rivals quickly and with ease using a certain set of moves because most inexperienced players react in a predictable manner. So the experienced chess player plays certain moves to determine whether the player will react as expected and then goes in for the kill. There are books devoted to standard openings in chess. If you don't know the standard openings, the chances are that you will fall victim to someone who does.

With regard to games, you're talking about MP games as value for money. I don't buy into the repetitive game play of a Multi-Player game as value for money. If that was the case then what reason would anyone have for moving from MW1 to MW2? the campaign mode certainly isn't the reason, so what is? If people want value for money, why spend another $60 on MW2 for what is essentially the same game play as MW1?


Last edited by TheHighlander on 1/4/2010 11:37:51 AM

to_far_apart
to_far_apart
15 years ago

Totally agree with you Highlander.

These developers are so fixated on this online component in gaming, the develop solely for online gameplay (ie WoW) why bother making a lacluster campaign? Just market, advertise, and sell the game as an online experience.

Rather people cna be so ignorant that they're getting robbed by their very own developer whom the cherish if you coem to think about it. MW1 is the same thing as MW2, online has no differences, except minimal extras, why not keep MW running and add content to that then create MW2, when in essence they're not creating a game for an imaginative, unique solo experience, rather they're really just selling people an online game, and nothing that hasn't been been done either.

For those planning to buy the game, think about it. Is it really necessary to spend $60, when MW is really, in essence, the sam thing?

Plus, honestly, online to me is a waste of time. I know people love it, I'm not putting anyone down, because in the ends, it's what everyone likes, that's all. But really, most online games are shooters, and i'd die from boredom honestly. The thing with a campaign, it's just like a movie; scripting, scenery, story telling, interactiveness, gameplay, etc. It invites you in a world, and you soon begin to become part of that world.

@Highlander

Great analogy about the book. No better way to say it!


Last edited by to_far_apart on 1/4/2010 11:53:26 AM

D1g1tal5torm
D1g1tal5torm
15 years ago

HLdr – you miss my point, a book is generally speaking only read once; chess is played multiple times. Furthermore, it's not about many people you play against, it's that you have an opponent.

As for mp providing me with another challenge to a game, then yes, I feel it provides me with value for money.

Dunno where the mw2 ref came from but for £25? It's worth a punt compared to the a lot of tripe that retails for £40.

As for the movie element, you hit the nail on the head and that's why, to me, mp is enjoyable. It's not scripted. It's fluid, dynamic, evolving.

It's pitting you against another played rather than a scenario.

This is why I mention in my original post – HR is my only sure fire sp purchase.

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
15 years ago

I didn't miss your point at all. Many avid readers have favorite novels that they come back to time and again. People don't generally read a book once and then throw it away. I understood the point you were making, but I don't agree with your conclusion.

Open world multi-player games allow you to experience an 'adventure' and story of your own making – yes, but just like role playing games with dice and character sheets you are limited by the scenarios that have been created for you, or you are limited to a number of generic, pre-determined scenarios for shorter missions. Such predetermined scenarios soon become repetitive.

On consoles by far the most played multi-player games are shooters, and shooters are nothing like chess they area grind and offer no story value at all. There is no making up your own story when all you are doing is playing match after match of blowing up continually spawning bad guys or repeatedly respawning opponents.

Having an opponent is vastly over rated when many such opponents are dolts or foul mouthed, abusive little urchins who have no interest in playing cooperatively or doing anything except exploiting every cheesy attack and glitch in the game.

MaximusArcher
MaximusArcher
15 years ago

How many same novels do you read back to back, come on stop being pedantic.

MaximusArcher
MaximusArcher
15 years ago

And you're burying your head in the sand to mp.
It's valid, it's active and it's propelling the gaming industry at the moment.

You may not enjoy it and it may be to the detriment of sp but there's a reason games nearly always have an online portion…

…because it's popular. Why is it popular – because it's fun. The numbers don't lie.

I find this highbrow attitude against mp a bit trite.