Hi, I am a purely SP player and never play MP, it's mainly a time thing for me I can't commit to specific amounts of time. And given that there always seems to be so much discussion re SP v MP and the differing development requirements maybe it's time to just sell them separately for a lower price each?
Is this even possible, would you just buy one or the other?
No. Even if the game were just a single player only game, it would still be sold at the same price. MP is added in for the same price that you would pay anyways, so why even complain? It's like a freebie with added extra fun. MP might not be your cup of tea but at least it's optional and you don't have to play it.
I'd still like to see an optional Co-op main campaign.
Very curious to see how the guys working on Sword Coast Legends handle it.
No. Even if the game were just a single player only game, it would still be sold at the same price. MP is added in for the same price that you would pay anyways, so why even complain? It's like a freebie with added extra fun. MP might not be your cup of tea but at least it's optional and you don't have to play it.
Not complaining just throwing the idea out there 
Not complaining just throwing the idea out there
Sorry, I didn't mean you specifically. Just in general for people who do complain
My post is more about whether it would be easier for the dev's and companies to build them separately (but cooperatively) and would it be a viable split in terms of a selling point in the market I guess?
If they got sold separately only one of the two would sell at all.
Conceptually, I think that's a great idea. It's the same basic premise for how dlc should function to give games a modular design. Not everyone is going to want to every feature in a game and this would give them the ability to pay for what they want.
The cost would go up for physical copies.
I don't really think it's workable in practice. MP needs a fairly large player base to get to viability. Good-- or rather, adequate -- SP gives a prospective MP player some assurance that he'll have that. Also, branding's an issue. There aren't too many MP games that don't piggyback on some kind of SP to get launched. Having said that, it should be theoretically possible since some games have managed the trick.My post is more about whether it would be easier for the dev's and companies to build them separately (but cooperatively) and would it be a viable split in terms of a selling point in the market I guess?
The cost would go up for physical copies.
I don't hink so. I think they would have to mind their financial "ceiling" a bit more.
You cannot make VG's even more expensive than they already are. The majority of customers does not have the money to pay 100$ for a single title - nore would they ever wnat to do that! The games are so bloody expensive these days anyway.
Conceptually, I think that's a great idea. It's the same basic premise for how dlc should function to give games a modular design. Not everyone is going to want to every feature in a game and this would give them the ability to pay for what they want.
I would be very pleased if they sold this separately. I would love it even more when these two games (SP & MP) would be developed by wholly different developers! Many companies outsource the developement of the MP, these days. I think this would be the way to go anyway ... to be really able to focus on your most important goals, when developing the single player campaign/game.
You cannot make VG's even more expensive than they already are.
You can the question is whenever it will return a desirable profit. And customers might not be willing to give a big chunk of money at once, but there are plenty who will pay in parts for whatever reasons
I was however speaking about the packaging and nothing else.
The purchase price of the game is not the problem for me. I don't like to see a purely singleplayer franchise like Dragon Age add multiplayer at all. I could list plenty of examples of sequels that added multiplayer, and the singleplayer quality went down. DAI, Mass Effect 3, Bioshock 2, Dead Space 3 ... I don't want to spend too much time listing them all but it can't be a coincidence.
For the record I would also have a problem with the opposite - a purely multiplayer franchise adding singleplayer in a sequel - although you don't ever really see that. But for example, if Killing Floor 2 adds a singleplayer campaign, I would be annoyed.
I think the very best games pick one thing and then focus all their resources into making that game mode the best it can be.
If Dragon Age Inquisition was split between a single player and multiplayer game?
As it stands, the single player already is having some difficulties standing in the eyes of some, and the multiplayer...?
Well, I would have suggested a few months delay if it was made separately...give some time for more content. As it is, the multiplayer mode could not stand on its own, especially at the price of a 'full' game.
As Bioware is known more for its Singleplayer experiences, and is venturing into the world of multiplayer more and more, I'd say the mix we have now is fairly good.
Because i assume many do not want the MP aspect of Dragon Age.
I just see it as wasted assets, if i wanted to MP i would not buy Dragon Age franchise or Mass Effect for that matter..
I'd still like to see an optional Co-op main campaign.
Very curious to see how the guys working on Sword Coast Legends handle it.
All of the older titles had this. whenever a friend or relative buys the game that's the first question they ask. I think it's ridiculous that in this day and age with all of the technology we have developers dont even attempt this at all anymore. Games have gone backwards imo.
It is harder to monetise. A lot of talk is heard about "wanting to give the players something fun to do after the SP campaign" but I think the reality of the situation is, if they couldn't include microtransactions, they wouldn't have done it. At all. And that's fine, but the rhetoric about it being "all about the fun" gets a little old.
*snip*
Maybe we SP players should be cheering on those poor chumps buying the MP chests.
I would agree, but that can end up being a double-edged sword. Companies would look at those people and say, "they bought the game AND they're buying chests! EVERYONE likes chests! Let's put chests EVERYWHERE!" All said in very excited corporate speak, of course. The more that these modes successfully bring in revenue that outstrips their dedicated development costs, the more likely developers and publishers are to start - not so gently - herding everyone towards them....because it's fun....
Since I have absolutely ZERO interest in playing MP. it would be my biased opinion that the 2 should be kept entirely separate.
And the MP aspect of this game is to a large extent responsible for the nerfed SP, so selling them as separate games would be good.
Retour en haut
