Single Player Games?

Avatar image for mayloj20
Posted by mayloj20 (15 posts) -

I love single player games. Being pulled into a great story or location, and getting lost in it for a while is amazing. Unfortunately, things are slowly changing, and that's a problem. Games like Wolfenstein 2, The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt, and Dishonored, are some of my favorite examples of great single player games, and need to promoted and supported more. However, they are often overshadowed by bigger, often multiplayer, games.

Money: Many single player games are great, and can be some of the most critically acclaimed works, however, how long does that last? Many multiplayer games, whether they are good or bad, are talked about for months and months after their release. This constant publicity encourages people to pick them up more often than other single player games that are just as good, if not better, and increases the revenue that big companies and developers can bring in. That, in turn, encourages more and more developers to create multiplayer centric games, or use the "games as a service" model. Now don't get me wrong, I love games like Destiny or CoD, but that doesn't mean that every single video game needs to be established the same way. This also brings us to the issue of loot boxes, which has clearly been talked about to death (especially with Battlefront 2's recent controversy) however, it is a very serious problem. For example, just take a look at Shadow of War, which is a mostly single player focused game which ENCOURAGED THE PLAYER TO BUY LOOTBOXES. That was completely unnecessary, and for some reason WB thought it would be a good idea, and were probably honestly only in it for the money which came along with these boxes. This brings us to the big root of the problem. The money that multiplayer games make is usually far superior to that of a single player game, and are much, much more appealing to developers and publishers alike. A big question that is then raised is "How long can these single player companies continue their business model?" Developers like CD PROEJEKT RED claim that their future games like Cyber Punk 2077 are going to be mostly single player experiences, however what happens when they can't support their business because they aren't raking in the cash that they need? It's a problem, and it needs to be fixed.

I would love to hear other opinions and discuss, and if there are any great single player games that you love, I'd love to hear about them.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
#1 Edited by mrbojangles25 (40039 posts) -

I think that whole "multiplayer makes more money" argument is bogus.

The simple truth is that alleged-AAA games have huge, bloated, arguably-unnecessary budgets. They hire Hollywood voice actors, they spend huge sums of money developing game engines, and they advertise the living hell out of their games.

But do we want/need Hollywood voice actors? To me it ruins the immersion of it; I'm playing this game and then I hear a real-world voice that is familiar to me, but should not be there; the only thing that would be more jarring to the experience is if my mom voiced a character....And game engines, while important from a tech standpoint, don't need to be constantly pushed to the extreme. 4K is a luxury (hell, not's still in its infancy) that few have from a gaming standpoint, and our game worlds don't need to be larger, they need to be more detailed. We are running away from warm and creative artistry, and being told to accept cold, hard technical prowess. Don't get me started on advertisements. Between Superbowl ads costing hundreds of millions of dollars for a few seconds, and giant banners that cover the entire side of a 15 story building, I just can't help but think my/our money would be better spent elsewhere.

Conversely, a lot of independent and small-studio games have small budgets, cost 50% or less as much to purchase as big-studio games, and provide dozens/hundreds of hours of fun instead of a mere handful.

I mean, don't get me wrong: I game for fun, and there is something fun about a big, blockbuster game with fancy effects and stuff like that; but at the end of the day, I'm going to come back to my staples, the games I've invested time in and want to see develop more.

Avatar image for mayloj20
#2 Posted by mayloj20 (15 posts) -

@mrbojangles25: I completely agree!! Single player games are just the ones that I often sink most of my time into (the good ones at least) and I feel that they do need to be focused on more.

Avatar image for turtlethetaffer
#3 Posted by turtlethetaffer (18667 posts) -

Honestly, I agree that inflated budgets lead to less interesting single player games. Some of the best SP games I've ever played have been low to medium budget.

As far as why I love them, to me the best ones combine gameplay with storytelling in a way no other medium can. Like Majora's Mask. You learn more about the story and world through the natural progression of the gameplay.

Avatar image for mayloj20
#4 Posted by mayloj20 (15 posts) -

@turtlethetaffer: Right, they're entertaining and fun!

Avatar image for turtlethetaffer
#5 Posted by turtlethetaffer (18667 posts) -

@mayloj20: I mean, yeah, at the end of the day that's what a game should be lol.

Another reason I love SP games is more technical/ social. I don't need an internet connection to play most SP games and I don't need to socialize with others while playing. I understand that everyone loves competition and proving they're the best at something, but I personally don't see why multiplayer has exploded so much these past few generations. Not that multiplayer is anything new obviously, but there's such a huge focus on it now and it's crammed into games it has no reason being in.

Take, for instance, Spec Ops the Line. It's a brilliant game that is one huge critique of the modern shooter. Its message is "hey, murdering your fellow man shouldn't make you feel powerful, it should make you feel like garbage" and the kicker is that it actually works pretty decently as a challenging TPS. But then... there's multiplayer. It lacks the subversive quality the campaign had and is about as generic as it gets. In fact, the very idea of that game having multiplayer seems to miss the point of the game entirely!

Avatar image for mayloj20
#6 Posted by mayloj20 (15 posts) -

@turtlethetaffer: I've never had the opportunity to play spec ops, but it's definitely at the top of my list. I've heard about how different and influential it can be, especially in the single player department. It is weird though that they added multiplayer into that game, and I kinda feel like that's a good example of the point I'm trying to get across.

Avatar image for joe_b1_kenobi
#7 Posted by joe_b1_kenobi (820 posts) -

It’s very rare I play a multiplayer game at all. Only ones I’ve purchased this year being Mario kart and splatoon 2. I think developers need to focus on their games catering to both sides and many do with cod, uncharted, titanfall 2 and gears being good examples. Some bad examples would be rainbow 6 siege (awful single player) or games like tomb raider with tacked on pointless multiplayer.

I think it’s safe to single player games aren’t going anywhere for a few years at least. Just look at Sony’s upcoming releases, god of war, days gone, tlou2, Detroit, soc, Spider-Man. All single player focused games.

My only worry is devs getting purchased by big developers who seemingly love to ruin franchises. I pray for respawn now they’re ea owned. I can see titanfall 3 starting with two titans and having to purchase the rest or “win” them in loot crates.

Avatar image for jensonm
#9 Posted by jensonm (1 posts) -

I like singe player games too :) A lot of interesting games ( for singer player and not only ) you can find for example on :) Now they have very good prices. You can also sell them your old games ( I made some extra bucks there some time ago so its good option ;p )

Avatar image for sukraj
#11 Posted by sukraj (27437 posts) -

I'm all for SP games they're are tons of them if you go and look for them.

Avatar image for mevvay
#12 Posted by Mevvay (1 posts) -

I would say gothic series is one of the most epic world i've ever encountered. Quite simmilar to witcher conceptions, friendship or any other kind of relations with most characters are passing through all 3 episodes, which brings many characters to be very colourful. The world u're entering is really dynamic, there's no feeling like u're the only person here who's about to do something (unlike TES series). The only disadvantage is 1st and 2nd parts of the game are quite old, so if u're an insane graphic fan that could stop u. Tho if u can abstract from bad graphic there would be no regrets playing it. And there's also 4th part of game, but the storyline is totally differs from previous games, basicly, the only simmilarity they have is the title and i would not really suggest last one to play.

Avatar image for cboy95
#13 Posted by Cboy95 (80 posts) -

Why can't we get something like this?

Tom Clancy's The Division of Overwatch

It's single player only. Would you play it?

Avatar image for xabi1998
#15 Edited by Xabi1998 (34 posts) -

I completely agree !! Single player games are just the ones that I often sink my time.

It's very rare I play a multiplayer game at all. I really love the single games, especially the Run3 game it really is a single game that I love. I usually play it on

Avatar image for portaplay
#16 Edited by Portaplay (5 posts) -

I think single player games also suffer from more critique than multiplayer and that people need more to be satisfied with single player.

Multiplayer games usually don't get critiqued for having one or two bad maps, but the single player game will be critiqued if they have one weak point in a story and such.

Avatar image for valgaav_219
#17 Posted by Valgaav_219 (1346 posts) -

I think SP games should be fine. They usually have small but dedicated fanbases. If they were to go away that'd probably be the day I stop gaming, though lol

Avatar image for narlymech
#18 Posted by narlymech (1447 posts) -

I barely have the attention span for singleplayer games lately. They drag on so long sometimes, where multiplayer is over in 30 minutes or less.

Avatar image for Sam3231
#20 Posted by Sam3231 (1965 posts) -

Kind of a false narrative imo

Avatar image for Wolfgang133
#22 Posted by Wolfgang133 (63 posts) -

I am more into single player games than multiplayer ones. I never play multiplayer mode.

Even when I play MMO games like Neverwinter I usually solo through most of my missions and I stay out of PVP matches.

I get a better sense of accomplishment achieving a mission alone rather than with a group of others.

Avatar image for anon15
#23 Edited by anon15 (2 posts) -

they are just fun ones me too like dat

Avatar image for gongbaojiding
#28 Posted by gongbaojiding (21 posts) -

Maybe you should give a try to ECHO.

Avatar image for oldcharlie55
#30 Posted by oldcharlie55 (10 posts) -

I got into video games in the first place 40 years ago because it meant I didn't need to find someone to play with. Over the years I played some local multiplayer at a friend's home but I never played online multiplayer till 2017 and only did it a few times. Some of my friend's are gamers but we don't necessarily play the same games anyway and playing online with strangers can be a bit awkward at best.

Avatar image for cboy95
#32 Posted by Cboy95 (80 posts) -

You don't hear anybody complaining Overwatch or Rainbow Six Siege being online multiplayer only.

Avatar image for karolowsky
#33 Posted by Karolowsky (5 posts) -

The Witcher 1,2,3

Avatar image for nesmo0871
#36 Posted by nesmo0871 (5 posts) -

Dragon age series are great

Avatar image for bln1
#37 Posted by BLN1 (128 posts) -

I play both, but I easily play singleplayer games a lot more often. I'm a story guy, it's who I am.