Another one of those business trends that has bugged me considerably over the past several years. The concept of a tacked on multiplayer is one that I'm really not a fan of and with the new Tomb Raider game appearing to be the latest victim with said feature not looking nearly as good as the single-player, I figured I'd go ahead and pour my thoughts out (I'll try to keep it short).
I understand why they do it, money, but I don't understand why they keep doing it when it has proven to not be a real sales booster for many games. If you're going to add multiplayer to a game that has traditionally been single-player, then at least do it right, make the effort otherwise it feels completely inconsistent with the rest of the game. Now I know "You know, you don't have to play it if you don't want it." I know I don't, but it's that even though bad multiplayer doesn't necessarily ruin the single-player aspect, the money and time put into an unnecessary feature is money and time that could have been used to further improve the development and quality of the single-player. Which is the case with some games that feature two teams (like TR) where the budget is sometimes divided. Publishers only give out so much money, best it be used wisely.
When you have a tacked on feature with little imagination or a game it doesn't mesh well with, how can you expect it to be a big success? Not many will find too much enjoyment, less people are online, and now you have a poorly active addition where money and time was wasted.
What are your thoughts on the whole subject of the trend, are you for or against? Really interested in your opinions.
I understand why they do it, money, but I don't understand why they keep doing it when it has proven to not be a real sales booster for many games. If you're going to add multiplayer to a game that has traditionally been single-player, then at least do it right, make the effort otherwise it feels completely inconsistent with the rest of the game. Now I know "You know, you don't have to play it if you don't want it." I know I don't, but it's that even though bad multiplayer doesn't necessarily ruin the single-player aspect, the money and time put into an unnecessary feature is money and time that could have been used to further improve the development and quality of the single-player. Which is the case with some games that feature two teams (like TR) where the budget is sometimes divided. Publishers only give out so much money, best it be used wisely.
When you have a tacked on feature with little imagination or a game it doesn't mesh well with, how can you expect it to be a big success? Not many will find too much enjoyment, less people are online, and now you have a poorly active addition where money and time was wasted.
What are your thoughts on the whole subject of the trend, are you for or against? Really interested in your opinions.
