The whole notion of online MP games and always connected being the "future" of gaming. . .

I will always prefer offline games to online games.

If you can't sit down and just enjoy some games on your own, and have to rely on the Internet connection and other people to enjoy a game, it isn't as fun.

I enjoy MMOs and games with online play as much as the next guy, but I much prefer a good single-player adventure or mode-heavy game.

With the way many games are set up now i find single player games to be far more manageable. I dont mind MP games, but if you expect to compete you're going to need to spend hours a day playing, and i and anyone with a job, family and friends, cant do this. We dont have the time to memorize every inch of every map of call of duty 6,000. But i have no problems dedicating 3 or 4 hours in a weeks time to continuing say, Bioshock infinite or Last of Us. And at the end of the day, ive played a great game, ive seen a great story, and ive fed the gamer in me.

But ive known plenty of people (including myself when i was younger) who have done the 5-8 hour gaming sessions three to seven times a week and everyone seems to have the same problem. Vitamin E deficiency, depression, social issues, etc. Hell, i remember playing ultima online for hours upon hours at a time (it was actually mostly because i moved to a new city) but when i started a new job and met people, i noticed i felt much better physically and mentally and it didnt take much to figure that one out.

Your fail is the vast majority not paying for online doesn't subtract much because they still make money off each game sale.

Then id one in ten pays continuously that is still profit. If it weren't, these companies wouldn't do it.

Ya'll can adress the quoted posts without these lame deflections?

That's a shit excuse if i've ever seen one.

If only there were other people like you who had a job, family and friends...

Oh wait, there are. And they have no problems playing online videogames. And being good at them.

Well shit.

This entire thread is addressing those assertions. The *vast* majority of the console gaming business revolves around offline gamers. Obviously, PC is a different bag altogether. A better case could be made that the avid online gamer gravitates toward that platform as a necessity or some natural market force. None of #TeamThisIsTheFuture are making those arguments. So, here I am, making them for you while you guys continue to stick your heads in the sand whilst frantically pointing fingers.

*KermitSippingTea*

@Shewgenja: Why don't you update your op to include some data. Isn't it something like 26.4 million ps+ subscribers to 70 million mau. But if you are using this data the problem is what constitutes a mau. I mean there can be several mau for one console. If I go online and register an account on psn do I count as a mau? Isn't every mau technically online at some point during the month? I mean do you have some additional figures that say x amount of people with ps4 are never online! Even if they are not subbed to ps+, they would still have to be online to get updates.

Because the MAU is so close to the actual number of units sold-in, what kind of dramatic difference are you looking for?

So, in other news. Grass is green. Water is wet.

The problem with topics like this is that people project their own likes and preferences on them rather than reality.

@Shewgenja: Wow that correlation. What about ps3 + ps4 sales. It's not close to that yet an mau could be a sole ps3 owner, could be a sole ps4 owner, could be both or could be neither!

Yes, see your statement above. We know for a fact that MS has not broken down paid vs. non paid subs. I haven't seen from Sony how many of there 70 million are paid vs. free either.

@NathanDrakeSwag: Agreeing with your assessments of social interactions.

Which is why it's rather amusing to see MP-only franchises buckle to the need of having a single-player campaign when coming from PC to console. Battlefield was around forever without one, but when it came to console, Boom.

Titanfall's sales fell flat because it was an online-centric MP game marketed on the back of a console launch, so they go back to the drawing board with its sequel and flesh a (actually darn good) campaign out. It's almost as if it found its way onto yet another console the second time around or something.

Call of Duty would be dead and gone if it were a PC-only title because its multiplayer only has so much depth. Yet, it is the behemoth that it is because of high production values and a cinematic campaign that makes it sell units by the truckload on console.

Hell, Destiny is heading for the hills to PC gamers because it's entire core structure revolves around it's online MP gameplay. Obviously, that is a natural ingredient for success on the platform that welcomes that type of experience with open arms. Bungie didn't exactly dig their heels into the ground over Destiny being a console franchise.

So many times, the industry shows us that this "Always Online future" exists on one platform, but doesn't hold up on console. In fact, the PSP Go falling dead on its face surprise exactly no one and the XBox One's online-centricity was met with open hostility. Perhaps, it's not so much that it will never happen, and more a matter of it being so far off that it's silly to even talk about it. When the industry that does have all the numbers makes such clear and obvious moves as it does, it's just daft to assert that the next generation or even the generation after that of consoles are just going to be a box with a hard drive in it. That, mark my words, will be what happens.

lolwut?

Battlefield's campaigns barely get played, Call of Duty is the behemoth it is, not because of its stupid campaigns sunshine, it's because it's a super casual friendly multiplayer game that sells a buttload for its progression based multiplayer, something consolites eat up. Titanfall 2's good campaign, did nothing for that game, and even among the more rabid Titanfall fanbase was criticized for ways in which the multiplayer went backwards. If anything it's died harder on PC, both times. It's not just on the PC, the most played games on the console also happen to be for their multiplayer.

The two biggest selling titles on the PS4 this year are Ghost Recon and For Honor, multiplayer titles.

Bungie, who has predominantly been a console dev since 2001 at this point, made a mp game, that was heavily criticized, and they still were outselling critical darling single player games.

Added bonus, that game Rockstar sold 80 million copies.

That game came out in 2013, came out on PC in 2015. It made a buttload of money though from it's multiplayer component, and has been making more money years after it released, which is something most games simply do not do.

Naughty Dog, who can pump out a turd, and still win a shit load of GOTYs, doesn't release a game without multiplayer. Whether it's a franchise that started solo only, or even when they are doing a new ip where the core mechanics revolve around sneaking and survivor horror principles. With microtransactions no less, pay to wins, while they are at it.

Last year's big new money maker on both consoles n PC? Oh yeah it was Overwatch. A mp only game.

Oh and the big cult classic internet darling turn mainstream hit Souls franchise, yeah, that franchise's biggest innovation, was the stuff it was doing with its online multiplayer. To the tune of that game's "easy" mode is strictly you needing to play with another person.

You guys do realize you're making my argument for me, right? Yes, online games are a massive revenue stream. No one even argued that. However, those streams do not exist without a majority of offline console gamers propping that industry up. It's not the other way around. It hasn't been the other way around. It won't tip over its head any time soon.

Frankly, you guys are also cherry picking the shit out of the whole of gaming to prop up the argument for always-connected consoles, too. Plenty of online-centric MP titles get the axe within their first year and the expense of creating them was completely wasted. Developers go under chasing that particular rainbow and it's not exactly a utopic future. Little wonder why there is a veritable renaissance happening on PC right now where old Japanese titles are putting money in publishers pockets.

The circle is complete. But if this console generation starting out with a pitchfork and torch party won't get through to you, probably nothing will. I am sensing hostility, so I am supposing where there's smoke there is a fire.

@Shewgenja: titanfall 2 is already dead on pc and will soon be on console. it seems like its done worse than the first game because they wasted resources on a single player campaign and had to strip features the first game already had, like Frontier Defense.

Except you're making a round-a-bout point that

A: Nothing you say actually backs or is factual
B: No one is even denying

Because majority of the triple A money is going to multiplayer games. It's not even a contest in that regard. Majority of games made are probably single player, you can even argue that there are more single player gamers, but they also aren't consistently big hits. Where as EA's biggest money makers are multiplayer centric, Activision's biggest money maker is multiplayer centric, Ubisoft's big titles have multiplayer in some capacity. Hell Nintendo who actually, consistently, makes fucking games. Their best selling titles nowadays are Mario Kart (multiplayer), Smash Bros (multiplayer), and Pokemon (which is also a multiplayer game, fucking trading is a big part of its roots). Even in Sony's case their best selling franchise, Gran Turismo has a huge multiplayer component to its gameplay by virtue of being a racing game.

You keep saying "look at all these people that don't play mp", and no one is denying they exist, what's being argued is exactly how much money they will spend, how often, and on what. It's also not a shocker that the majority of big triple A single player games are open world games this gen, because stuff like Skyrim, GTAV, Fallout, n Witcher have shown, that those big, long games, at least make money.

Resident Evil might be able to get away with a game its length, but not too many other ips can. Wolfenstein sort of did fine, but nothing to write home about as a single player game. Bioshock Infinite tanked a whole studio.

So your notion that the big mp games aren't the ones propping the industry up, is false. It's where majority of this industry is making their money in terms of games released. The largest pool of revenue is coming from a game with some type of multiplayer component. That's literally propping the industry up, if the mp bubble was actually capable of collapsing, it would take the entire industry with it.

These MP franchises buckle to the vocal minority mainly to avoid the negative PR backlash and/or get a few extra sales and it makes their games worse for doing it. They waste money and game resources on throwaway campaigns that could be used to make the MP better.

Titanfall 1 sold pretty well I think it sold 7 million on Xbox alone. Titanfall 2 is actually an inferior game because they dumbed down the game itself to make it a multiplat and the campaign was kind of forgettable.

Your CoD and Destiny comments are just kinda lol.

Not to mention the biggest games this gen are MP. Overwatch is an MP only game. GTAV is popular because of GTA Online.

Seriously, do you even play MP games? It really seems like you dont. Most of my hardcore MP friends never play the campaigns at all.

Also, imho opinion a big part of the Xbox One's launch failure (besides price and less power) was them actually buckling to these whiners and changing their policy which basically gutted the model of what the console was made to do. They were basically trying to make a Steambox type device that allowed game sharing and license trading. Originally you could share your purchased games with 10 friends/family and it also was designed to supposedly eventually let you trade your used games digitally.

At the time, Windows 10 wasnt even out yet and they did a horrible job of explaining the virtues of the box and how it would fit into the Windows system. Instead they just told people 'deal with it' which was stupid. If they had spelled it out for the dummies people might have actually seen the virtues of the concept.

Im saying... FOR ME, the degree of difficulty i see in many MMOs and MP games is a degree i am not willing to devote time to developing by removing time spent with family and friends. And generally people who do have a full time + job, plus a kid or two, dont have this time either. Most of the people i personally know who play MP/MMOs are single or dating or divorced and dont have their kids full time. There is generally a big gap in their schedule they can fill with games. Which is fine, im not saying its not. But if youre working 40-60 hours a week and have a family you have to cook for, clean up with or after, laundry to do, friends to meet up with, etc. youre now sacrificing what few hours of sleep you can get to play games and most people ive met dont want to do that after spending 10-12 hours a day at work plus dealing with the house and family.

I think we're at an impasse. I'm putting words in your mouth and you are putting words in mine. I don't think any bubble will pop, and I don't think the rules have really changed much since World of Warcraft launched. For every FFXI or Aion, there has been an obscure Korean F2P that has gone completely belly up. It's not so much that World of Warcraft propped up the MMORPG so much as it honed what previous games were doing to a fine art and added some established lore to it from a beloved franchise. In the same token, the carbon copy clones came hot and heavy in its wake and those games did not enjoy anywhere near the same amount of success.

Very few multiplayer games actually make a fad so much as follow one and hope to scoop in some percentage of the profit that the big AAAA megapublisher-fed server farm-o-rama game in its particular genre do. Heck, Halo was once that trendmaker but later borrowed from the Call of Duty formula when the writing was on the wall in terms of the multiplayer gameplay. Again, welcome to the clonism that is online gaming. All well and good for fun, but let's not pretend that the 1%er megahits like GTAV are somehow a barometer of the industry. With the advent of DLC and micropurchasing, many of these games have soaked revenue out of gaming. A L-O-T of the verbiage used in System Wars is almost word for word the kind of banter you hear at shareholder meetings for publishers when it comes to future plans for software releases and what they ask from platform holders (aka console makers) to support from their online infrastructure.

The majority of the industry is making their money selling games. The larger publishers, on the other hand, are raising their profits very much off of microtransaction. PC gamers have already run this gauntlet with the industry and it already led to the rise of indy development. Also, Japanese publishers are in on the act now and bringing their classic titles to a type of gamer that is post-clonism. Making an entire platform revolve around online games and being an online-only or service-centric machine would be suicide.

Based on the fact that people refuse to pay for air?

Vast majority of 3DS users play with one analog stick. Well shieeet, guess since people don't want to pay 20 fucking bucks for a circle pad or buy a New 3DS, the future of Nintendo game systems belongs to a 1-analog-stick control scheme.

...Oh wait...

You can't see forest for the trees, mate.

I'm one of those "offline PS users". You know why? Because i own 3 games for my PS4 and play online games on my PC.

If that's where these console companies think the money's at (like you do), they're fucked.

Nah, that's clearly not what you said.

Then to most people you've met i'd suggest finding a different job.

Working 12 hours a day is not a good idea if you want to have a hobby outside of getting boozed up on fridays.

Have i stepped back in time? this sounds like old men out of the loop.

Tons of games are already online only... hell most mobile games are online only.

1. Dont quote me. I was very clear on stating that for myself and most people im around.

2. So, i just want to point out how far divorced from reality you are on this subject. Theres not exactly a large percentage of Americans with careers who work less than 10 hours a day. You also seem to be completely ignoring any kind of real world social interactions that normal people have on a daily basis. Again, children, wife, parents, brothers, etc.

Well we live in an "always connected" world. our phones have internet access, apps like facebook, twitter, instagram etc people are always connected to each other all the time. Why would gaming be any different?

the reality is MP is more popular then ever. sure 10-15 years ago there was more appeal in SP games, but not anymore. 50% of PS/XB users pay for online multiplayer. Games like overwatch a MP only title just won game of the year. More hours are spent playing MP games now the SP games. Lets not forget games like LOL, WoW and other MOBA/MMORPG games with huge playerbases. hell even WOT is insanely popular for some reason. back in the early 90s when gaming was pretty niche the business was a fraction of just what MP is today. Sure there will always be SP games, but games are going to lead more towards MP all the time now. There is much more money in MP as well. with paid online access (or in PC case subscription fees for games like WoW) Microtransactions etc. Games now cost 100-400 times the amount they used to to create (from 50k to about 25-100 million) , but the cost to us has only gone up about 50% (from 40 bucks to 60 bucks)

As far as AAA production values, lets face it, that was a very short period of time. xbox'PS2 games didn't have that the tech wasn't there. We started to see some in the 360/PS3 era but that was the same era that online play boomed. SP story games will never have the massive sales that online games do. minecraft, GTA V, WOW all sales monsters. Even mobile F2P games generator more revenue then big single player AAA games.

"Don't quote me?" Seriously?

Why are you in such denial on this, exactly?

No, when you say "ANYONE", it's not clear that you're talking about yourself and your friends, fool.

Because "anyone" usually means "anyone". A direct opposite of "a specific group of people".

Learn to communicate properly.

Sure fam, tell me more about how much time you spend on your parents every day.

That's some high quality straw clutching right there.

Listen here. I couldn't care less what percentage of Americans works 10+ hours a day. I couldn't care less about Americans altogether.

All i said is, if you're working big hours, it is a choice you've made. That's you neglecting yourself for the sake of making more money. So don't use it as an excuse for not having enough time for your hobbies.

I and all of my friends do, regardless of real life commitments. Imagine that.

There is only so much room in the industry for multiplayer games to be successful. If every dev started making only online games, the industry would crash and we'd be left with only a few surviving devs. That is why we will always have devs that go for offline games because they will be profitable.

Chances are he was born in the 90s, dude.

Reading this thread and its some side with SP some with gameplay over story, i know i have nothing to fear. I say it often, its entertainment to me, simple as that. I also dont limit myself with personally made up things and then call them "standards" so as to seem refined. I know I can find something to entertain myself in most gaming be in MP, SP, story driven or all gameplay.

LOL like pong was engrossing against the CPU? lol

So many good points but my favorite is how people are afraid to lose access to games when they get shut down. But then some of them say so what to BC program getting more titles because lol old games. Well if old games are lol, why cry about them getting shut down from access? Because they have mangina's

Huh? No.

The most successful game last year was Overwatch. The most successful game in last few years is LoL. Call of Duty and Battlefield series are huge and most people don't even play SP in those games.

Or maybe, they want to go back and play games way more than just one gen down the road, tough guy?

How does that change the narrative from "LOL Old games" to be acceptable? Reads more like "I want what I want when I want it" or King Baby syndrome.

Who you calling tough guy? I'm a sensitive man of the world. ;p

I'm a big believer in context, but also a believer in fine wines and scotch. There's "old" meaning "old news" and then there's old like a bottle of Macallan 25. Sure, a lot of people throwing that argument against BC out there really are the type that think FFVI is a terrible game because it doesn't have FMV or holds your hand through the tutorial. . . And to those people, yes, scum of the earth. I get it. However, there are also people out there that are saying you should be excited about a brand new $400 console because you can play 5 year old games on it. . . Also, pretty bottom-feederish.

Which happens in other genre as well, the clones get punished for not doing their own thing. Games that are more distinct enjoy more success. Rainbow Six overcame technical issues at launch/weaker reviews (because gaming critics are bad) because it's a distinct mp experience, Overwatch is dominating because contrary popular opinion it isn't just TF2 rehash, it's fundamentally unique. World of Warcraft is just the bench mark, but The Old Republic is still doing fine, so is Guild Wars 2, so is FF14, so are quite a few games.

Much like how the Moba LoL n Dota 2 own the top of the mountain, but Heroes of the Storm, Paragon, n Smite have each found their own market, because they have their own distinct.

Cloneism isn't some distinct to mp games, in fact often single player games have been bigger offenders of this. What with how many samey open world games we get, the new ips this gen look a hell of a lot like old ips. The big new ip this year Horizon is a glorified Ubisoft with a chick.

Because this applies to single player as well. What fad was MGSV starting other than Kojima wanting to make his own spin on a game like Far Cry. What fad has Naughty Dog started? All their games since the PS3 have been generic conceptually. Rockstar? Pls they make the same game, but it's in the west this time, they haven't innovated since 2001. Oh but we had the rebirth.....of Doom, a game that goes all the way back to the 90s? Wolfenstein? Well there is Bioshock Infini....which plays like any basic single player fps of the modern era, except it has some neat powers that are redundant and don't add depth to the mechanics.

Because I'd argue among triple A productions this generation, you've had fresher ideas in multiplayer than single player. Overwatch doesn't really play like any other class based shooter, Splatoon doesn't play like any other tps, Siege isn't just another tactical shooter, For Honor and Arms are unique spins on fighting games of all things, a genre that hasn't had a truly new spin since like Smash Bros n Powerstone.

Single player games may have a variety of aesthetics, but the gameplay has been interchangeable. A fucking third person shooter, with cover based mechanics, and psuedo-stealth mechanics built around basic line of sight challenges, with spaces that allow a bit of an A or B approach, but are better suited for a do stealth first, and then just shoot shit once you get caught.

First of all it absolutely is a barometer, GTAV is the biggest game release of the last 4 or 5 years, and yeah it has a great balance in that single player fans will always look at GTAV as a quality investment because of its production value, multiplayer gamers will get GTA Online, and stupid people like me who value things like gameplay depth will somehow still end up paying for and finishing a Rockstar game, knowing full well that Rockstar's games are secretly mediocre and unsatisfying.

But it is the bench mark for this medium, and it's largely making a shit ton of money, more money then it did on launch day (which is when most games make their largest sum of money) years (read YEARS, plural) after release. But even if we ignore GTAV, the largest sales are still going to mp games.

Majority of the industry is smaller independent titles, and yeah they are making their money sure. But in the triple A: expensive to produce space, it's not close between multiplayer n single player, and that's a reality some of you don't seem to want to accept. Big budget multiplayer games reach a broader market, big budget multiplayer games are the driving forces of this industries eco system, these aren't opinions mate, these are facts of life.

Like I said in my first post. It's not so much that we are immediately going with devices that will be mostly digital and always connected online, it's that it will eventually happen in our life time, because everything we're doing is more about digital and online, because it's simply faster n efficient. And from a pub/dev standpoint, 100% in their favor. Single player gamers will still have options, even in the triple A space, and we're not getting rid of physical media anytime soon, but if they don't see the writing on the wall that digital is the future of this medium, they are on crack. And saying the single player market is the broader audience, when all the facts say the broader appeal is in a MP game is being fucking delusional.

I get that people love stories, which whatever, but it astounds me how people think video games have more in common with films n books, when in reality they have way the **** more in common with Monopoly n Connect 4. Like no duh, this space has a huge multiplayer aspect of it. Competition, challenging another person, matching wits with other people, or just all around social gathering has been primal aspect of a game, since forever.

LOL So it has to fit in with one of two options there? If you're a believer in context why did you run with Spencers comment about SP the way most that didnt read the whole interview did?

A) I am not excited for a PS4 or X1 anymore. That excitement ended in 2014 after I got them.

B) I own more current gen games on my X1S then 360 games on it.

I'm a believer in humans are full of shit here and hate having their feces put on a plate in front of them. "Old games" are old games. Your definition holds no more weight than mine. I think FF6 sucks because it has the most boring gameplay on earth same as Persona 5.

I dont recall anyone saying anyone else should be excited about BC. If you could link to that, I'd be thankful. I know some people enjoy it, and post about it when a game they enjoy playing, revisiting is added. Looking at the sales bump of BLOPS2 and RDR when they went BC, obviously some people are enjoying them at this time.

But its obvious that others that are fans of a console that only has a streaming option for last gen games on it like to shit on what other gamers might enjoy about being able to pop a disc in to their current gen console and play said game after install. And they shit on it with the "LOL old games" mantra. But then some of them are against digital because, oh noes!! Dont take away access to my old games!!!! Well shit Cletus, wont you have new games when said access is dropped? Why so butthurt? Oh because reasons. Bottom feeder babyback bullshit, indeed.

I always understand where you come from 'champ. As I have said in the past, I enjoy some stories in my games. But I also enjoyed Penthouse forum stories LOL Its just entertainment for god's sake. When I want something with meaning I'll read or look to quality film or stage. My game stories need only be fun enough to make me pretend I need to get underground in Gears of War/to Mount Olympus in God of War.

Games are legitimately most often played with others. I never went outside, crossed the street and rang my friend's door bell so he would come out side, bring his GI Joe figures and then we would go into our own little single player stories. No, made massive wars and welcomed others into them. This comment by Spencer, that obviously still has some people smelling whats in their drawers is so taken from context. It reminds me of a few years back when Fox news ran with some non sense about a "War on Christmas" just because some people said Happy Holidays. Its like there is this mind set among some that there is now a war on single player.

@cainetao11: Eh, the only super girly boy vegan whole grain wet noodle arm crybaby bullshit I see are people who swear by a game machine with pay walls and restrictions with about a hamd full of games to call its own while wishing the super manly and infinitely backwards compatible PC out of any and all platform wars discussions.

My Threadripper and Vega build sees their excitement for 6 tflops and laughs. For my God is Crom, and he has the Enigma of Steel. The Lemmings are unworthy, and so they cry over their lack of current gen games while seeking moral high ground in last generation's console. There is no glory in crying, though.

lol all he said is the pricing model has to change, the business model has to change to fund single player games. And somehow the dude hates single player. Just some basic knowledge of the company will cover the fact that Microsoft would rather avoid what Sony did last gen, which was releasing high-risk exclusives to less than 50% of the market. Which bled money, sony this gen can get away with going exclusive happy like they did last gen, because this gen they own 50% of the market. The role is reversed, so in terms of making money Spencer thinks they need to find a new model.

And I sort of agree with that idea, in an era with all these different sales options between Steam, Amazon, cdkeys, or humble bundle, 60 bucks isn't gonna fly, especially when people are gonna compare 60 bucks to "This big ass open world game that is long as ****". Because I don't think every game should be long as **** and an open world game, so how are those games going to make their money? Because 2 million sales as a break even point, is a pretty high bar just to get to even. And no one wants to make pennies on the dollar, you want to make a serious profit. Enough to fund the next game, and still have money left over.

@cainetao11: I dont have a problem with people liking single player games (even though personally I prefer MP) and the facts are there will always be plenty of them, even if they aren't the 'headliners' as the industry progresses.It just seems to me the premise of the topic is kind of like a circular argument just to support the TC's personal tastes, instead of looking at the current trends which kind of dictate the contrary.

Again, link me to these statements please.

I dont doubt some people do that because I have seen charizard make threads comparing only consoles. So is charizard a super girly boy veganwhole grain wet noodle arm crybaby bullshit person when he makes a thread about PS4 being a better console than the WiiU and X1 because it was getting P5, as he did while playing Bloodborne in 2015? No PC was in the discussion and I remember him clearly saying its a current gen console comparison. Or let me guess, just like how "old games" is only LOL by your criteria, then the only posters that are comparing consoles and say PC isnt in this comparison are super girly boy......... are the lems, right? Your shit is weak here dude.

Fvckin A!! Have fun dude!! Laugh if thats what you need to feel superior to others that are excited for a product. I dont need to feel superior because I have accepted I'll never be anything more than human while alive. Nothing I own or like will be superior or inferior to others. Its ego bullshit.

But thumbs up on the REAL Conan the Barbarian pic!!!

I don't enjoy online only games are they are only playable for a sort time, filled with DLC so not for me but I guess it is ok to have them.

What I fear is to place of online component in games ... like in Mortal Kombat X/XL. A big part of the offline playing is tied to online stuff. Like the Living Tower which is a big part of my time with this game won't be accessible once they kill the sevvers ... same thing with the Faction part.

Nah, you're cool. I am just having fun with this lol. I like to dial up things for funsies.

I haven't played any game online since BF 3 first came out.