104 réponses à ce sujet

[Tooneyman]

This article states that EA isn't going to be making single player games anymore. Everyone needs to read this article and discuss it. EA needs to understand the gamers have a right to say whats on their minds. The president should be listening to the gamers and not himself, because this move could destroy this company.

The articles link:
http://xbox360.ign.c.../1138974p1.html



EA: Single-player Only Games Are Finished
EA's Frank Gibeau sees connected future for games.
UK, December 8, 2010

The single-player-only model of games could have had its day, according EA Games' label president Frank Gibeau, who believes that "online is where the innovation, and the action, is at."

His comments to Develop come in light of the addition of multiplayer to Dead Space 2, following the original's well-received mix of solo sci-fi and survival horror. "It's not only about multiplayer, it's about being connected," he said, "I firmly believe that the way the products we have are going they, need to be connected online. Multiplayer is one form of that."

"I volunteer you to speak to EA's studio heads; they'll tell you the same thing," Gibeau continued, "They're very comfortable moving the discussion towards how we make connected gameplay – be it co-operative or multiplayer or online services – as opposed to fire-and-forget, packaged goods only, single-player, 25-hours-and you're out. I think that model is finished."

Dead Space 2's inclusion of multiplayer came in for some criticism when first announced, though developer Visceral Games was quick to defend it.

"I'm very proud for what the multiplayer team has done; I think it's true to our franchise; it's unique and extremely Dead Space," Dead Space 2's executive producer Steve Papoustis told IGN, "I think once people get a chance to experience the single-player game and see we didn't water down anything there to give them multiplayer, I think they're going to be happy."

Dead Space 2 promises to be one of 2011's first big blockbusters – and we recently had a taste of its all-new multiplayer features.

Modifié par Tooneyman, 08 décembre 2010 - 02:32 .

[B3taMaxxx]

EA still has the sour taste of the Call of Duty effect in their mouths. It dominates holiday sales and all online community numbers. They've continually stated they'll trump the series year after year to no avail. So thier plan? Make every game produced include multiplayer in hopes they'll find their own golden goose.



Bioshock multiplayer failed, as will Dead Space 2. Non-MMO co-op games can never reach the numbers of competitive multiplayer. On one side I can see the 'why' he's stating this, although I would discourage this strategy and opt for something more innovative than the try, try again strategy.



Regardless, I don't see any way to stop this direction of games, when shareholders are considered.

[ErichHartmann]

One man's opinion doesn't concern me at this point.

[Tooneyman]

B3taMaxxx wrote...

EA still has the sour taste of the Call of Duty effect in their mouths. It dominates holiday sales and all online community numbers. They've continually stated they'll trump the series year after year to no avail. So thier plan? Make every game produced include multiplayer in hopes they'll find their own golden goose.

Bioshock multiplayer failed, as will Dead Space 2. Non-MMO co-op games can never reach the numbers of competitive multiplayer. On one side I can see the 'why' he's stating this, although I would discourage this strategy and opt for something more innovative than the try, try again strategy.

Regardless, I don't see any way to stop this direction of games, when shareholders are considered.

Actually. I do see it. ****** off the gamers enough so they stop buying your games and see what happens.. Its called we don't buy your games no more. Who wants to buy a game we multiplayer all the time. Its a move which will have two out comes. One destroy EA's image or Two make them even more popular. I just hope he listens to the gamers, because a move like that has more consequences than normal.

[Loerwyn]

As long as we get Mirror's Edge 2, I don't really care.

Edit: And no, Tooneyman, this has no effect at all. Most people who buy games don't follow gaming news too much, so many won't hear about this. Why do you think Orson Scott Card is so popular despite being an extreme homophobe? Why do you think Activision still sell millions of titles despite Kotick bleeding Activision dry?

It's because most people don't give a damn what someone thinks. Is it good? No, not really, but it's the way things go.

Modifié par OnlyShallow89, 08 décembre 2010 - 02:38 .

[B3taMaxxx]

Shareholders. That word says it all, and the fact that most publishing firms aren't exactly chock-full of gamers, but business men. Statistics is their game.

Modifié par B3taMaxxx, 08 décembre 2010 - 02:42 .

[Tooneyman]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

As long as we get Mirror's Edge 2, I don't really care.

Edit: And no, Tooneyman, this has no effect at all. Most people who buy games don't follow gaming news too much, so many won't hear about this. Why do you think Orson Scott Card is so popular despite being an extreme homophobe? Why do you think Activision still sell millions of titles despite Kotick bleeding Activision dry?

It's because most people don't give a damn what someone thinks. Is it good? No, not really, but it's the way things go.

It will have an effect on your game. Especially if it takes away the resources for the main campaign and a lot of gamers will definitely say that. I'm mostly a single player gamer. I like playing call of doody, but I mostly play single player games. Games like Elder scrolls and fallout are games I cherish. If everyone of them has a multiplayer. I might get discourage to buy it.

[Klimy]

I never understood what with all that multi-player hype. Been playing singleplayer all my life, few month ago decided to try multiplayer so bough black ops and bad company 2, this experiment didn't go so well. Still don't know what people like in it.

I think main part of the games is a singleplayer, because you can't make a good story in multiplayer. Well, at least not until all 7 year old trolls with mics die, shich is never.

[Tooneyman]

Klimy wrote...

I never understood what with all that multi-player hype. Been playing singleplayer all my life, few month ago decided to try multiplayer so bough black ops and bad company 2, this experiment didn't go so well. Still don't know what people like in it.
I think main part of the games is a singleplayer, because you can't make a good story in multiplayer. Well, at least not until all 7 year old trolls with mics die, shich is never.

Exactly. Why do I want some kid who I've never met in real life playing my Dragon age game with me. IT just sounds foolish. Most of the time all they will do is cry about how I'm not keeping up with them and how they are much better than you. Eck the list goes on.  

Modifié par Tooneyman, 08 décembre 2010 - 02:46 .

[Loerwyn]

Tooneyman wrote...
It will have an effect on your game. Especially if it takes away the resources for the main campaign and a lot of gamers will definitely say that. I'm mostly a single player gamer. I like playing call of doody, but I mostly play single player games. Games like Elder scrolls and fallout are games I cherish. If everyone of them has a multiplayer. I might get discourage to buy it.

I think you need to read the article again, now that I think about it.

He's talking about an online component to all games, whether it's DLC or going as far as a multiplayer mode. The point that he was making was that games where you install, play and then finish are gone.

Modifié par OnlyShallow89, 08 décembre 2010 - 02:48 .

[B3taMaxxx]

Klimy wrote...

I never understood what with all that multi-player hype.

 $360 million in its first 24 hours on sale. Numbers look good, and the bigger the better.

Modifié par B3taMaxxx, 08 décembre 2010 - 02:49 .

[Tooneyman]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

Tooneyman wrote...
It will have an effect on your game. Especially if it takes away the resources for the main campaign and a lot of gamers will definitely say that. I'm mostly a single player gamer. I like playing call of doody, but I mostly play single player games. Games like Elder scrolls and fallout are games I cherish. If everyone of them has a multiplayer. I might get discourage to buy it.

I think you need to read the article again, now that I think about it.

He's talking about an online component to all games, whether it's DLC or going as far as a multiplayer mode. The point that he was making was that games where you install, play and then finish are gone.

No. It seems more like hes talking about competitve gaming in all of the single player games. That is what I'm scared of. I don't want to play a game like Dragon age or mass effect were I have to compet with someone else. I want to play my game by myself and enjoy stuff. Now as for the DLC. I have no problem with that. I think the DLC worked awesome for Mass effect and DA. But for having death matches and team battles just seems stupid for these types of games. IT would be like fable 2 and 3 where I feel forced when I'm walking around with other players.  

[Fiery Phoenix]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

As long as we get Mirror's Edge 2, I don't really care.

This.

I actually recall reading an article where it was said multiplayer was a very likely addition for Mirror's Edge 2. Either way, I think ME is one of those games that are great with or without multiplayer, so it's all good.

[SarEnyaDor]

I really wouldn't worry, Tooney.



People say reactionary things all the time, but the truth is if they killed off their single-player games they would lose money.



More likely, if there as is any actual real change at all, they will try to incorporate MP aspects like with achievements for doing certain things online, etc. instead of ceasing all single-player game development.

[Tooneyman]

SarEnyaDor wrote...

I really wouldn't worry, Tooney.

People say reactionary things all the time, but the truth is if they killed off their single-player games they would lose money.

More likely, if there as is any actual real change at all, they will try to incorporate MP aspects like with achievements for doing certain things online, etc. instead of ceasing all single-player game development.

I would hope so, but in the article he did say completely dead. I'm going to keep my eye on him. I'm just going to cross my figures and hope EA's boardmembers listen to the fans and the gamers. Because if this really does happen then they really are going to loose a lot of money.

[B3taMaxxx]

Tooneyman wrote...
Because if this really does happen then they really are going to loose a lot of money.

 Well, if they did reach the holy grail of cloning Call of Duty, trumping it's sales numbers, and pulling a large portion of the online community, they could easily cancel 15 other core games without loosing any sleep.

[Loerwyn]

Tooneyman wrote...

No. It seems more like hes talking about competitve gaming in all of the single player games. That is what I'm scared of. I don't want to play a game like Dragon age or mass effect were I have to compet with someone else. I want to play my game by myself and enjoy stuff. Now as for the DLC. I have no problem with that. I think the DLC worked awesome for Mass effect and DA. But for having death matches and team battles just seems stupid for these types of games.

They're not going to force you to compete.

Mirror's Edge () had leaderboards you could voluntarily contribute to. Dragon Age: Origins has the character profiles and achievement displays (Which you could argue can be used to compete with other players). I'm guessing Mass Effect 2 might have been meant to have such features, especially from the data BioWare like to throw about in regards to how people play ME2. Just because they're adding features like that, or perhaps other similar online components like file sharing (DA:O's screenies, for example), it doesn't mean they're taking away from other features.

I think we have to wait and see what exactly it is that EA do. Dead Space 2's most requested feature was multiplayer, hence why it's being added. I don't think it would be ranked too highly for, say, Mirror's Edge and I honestly believe EA have the intelligence to make multiplayer for ME a separate product.

[Swordfishtrombone]

A company that cuts out single player options, or severely handicaps them in favor of putting all the resources to developing multiplayer, simply loses me as a potential customer. There are so many of us that enjoy playing a game in our own privacy without dunking our heads in some multiplayer environment, that I think any company that would cut out a single player option would be shooting itself in the foot, cutting out a large potential audience of customers.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Bull****

[Daewan]

Don't you have another equally hysterical thread on the same topic?



I really urge people to read the actual interview http://www.develop-o...s-leap-of-faith because it really isn't as bad as the OP wants it to be. We've already seen how EA encourages connected gameplay - it isn't all about multiplayer.

By the way, the complete, exact quote from Mr. Gibeau is:



I volunteer you to speak to EA’s studio heads; they’ll tell you the same thing. They’re very comfortable moving the discussion towards how we make connected gameplay – be it co-operative or multiplayer or online services – as opposed to fire-and-forget, packaged goods only, single-player, 25-hours-and you’re out. I think that model is finished.



DLC is an online service, by the way.



Mr. Gibeau's discussions on studio autonomy are also eye-opening, for all those people who are terrified that EA is going to force everyone to act the same way.

[Ulous]

Multiplayer 3D Virtual Reality Power Gloves are the future of gaming.

[danielkx]

This makes me laugh at many of the BioWare devs statements when they defend EA saying that they are not simply only about the money but that they actually care about the quality of the games.

Cannot blame the devs themselves, they really do not have a choice but to defend EA and it is absolutely possible that they never see the money hungry side of EA since there is a good chance that most of the devs do not speak with the higher ups at EA.

But if any company were to make these comments it had to be EA....Activision being the only other company that would be this idiotic.

It will be interesting to see what is done with ME3 and future DA games; but then again, this guy could just be talking out of his **** and his comments could mean nothing. Time will tell.

Modifié par danielkx, 08 décembre 2010 - 06:33 .

[JRCHOharry]

[spam post removed]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 08 décembre 2010 - 11:15 .

[B3taMaxxx]

danielkx wrote...
It will be interesting to see what is done with ME3 and future DA games; but then again, this guy could just be talking out of his **** and his comments could mean nothing. Time will tell.

 Well, being his job description doesn't include Janitor, his comments definately hold weight. Then again he is a publisher; should we expect an undying-love for video games, or perhaps profit margins?

[danielkx]

B3taMaxxx wrote...

danielkx wrote...
It will be interesting to see what is done with ME3 and future DA games; but then again, this guy could just be talking out of his **** and his comments could mean nothing. Time will tell.

 Well, being his job description doesn't include Janitor, his comments definately hold weight. Then again he is a publisher; should we expect an undying-love for video games, or perhaps profit margins?

Yes but he could just be stating his personal desire for gaming and not what EA as a whole is trying to do. How many times have executives said something pretty dumb about what they want to do with a specific game or gaming in general and it never becomes a reality? Maybe EA wants to force a subscription fee on all their games and you pay a relatively small fee but you get access to certain services and products (DLC, in game chatting...). 

We do not know what this guys' statements will result in, but either way, lets hope this never happens.