| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 42 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 01:50:03 |
| Calls: | 220 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 824 |
| Messages: | 121,543 |
| Posted today: | 6 |
So hopefully this study will encourage developers and publishers to
put more resources into strong, quality single-player experiences
without trying to insert unnecessary online activities into them.
There's an obvious and under-served market for that sort of game, and
too often it's titles like "Diablo 4", "Destiny" or "Call of Duty"
that get all the attention. Which, if you like those sort of games,
it's great that they exist. But maybe EA/Ubisoft/etc. can put some of
their billions toward creating new single-player IPs too?
A recent study reported that most gamers prefer single-player! Take
that, multiplayer nerds! ;-)
Of course, the reality is that, if you look into the study, the
single-player advantage is minimal; it's along the lines of 53% to 47%
in favor of single-player. And the breakdown is predictible; the old
fogies like the single-player, whilst the brats go for the online
stuff. Honestly, the study doesn't really tell us anything that we
didn't already know.
On Wed, 09 Oct 2024 13:13:20 -0400, Xocyll <Xocyll@gmx.com> wrote:
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs
say:
A recent study reported that most gamers prefer single-player! Take
that, multiplayer nerds! ;-)
Of course, the reality is that, if you look into the study, the
single-player advantage is minimal; it's along the lines of 53% to 47%
in favor of single-player. And the breakdown is predictible; the old
fogies like the single-player, whilst the brats go for the online
stuff. Honestly, the study doesn't really tell us anything that we
didn't already know.
I like a blend of full single player games and MMO's which I play as
single player games with more realistic (and rude) NPCs.
Plus the option to chat while doing my solo play.
I'm not adverse to teaming at times, but I hate playing with people with
a different playstyle so even in MMOs I solo play so I can play my game
my way and not be rushed by some speed running bozo who apparently hates
playing the game and wants to rush through everything lest story, lore,
or entertainment contaminate his purity.
Back in the days COH was on the live servers there was a CSIPGR coh
group I played in, (weekly play session, dedicated character I only
played with them,) but 99.9% of my play was solo.
Yeah, but we're all old fogies; _of course_ we trend towards
single-player. Who amongst us ancients has the time, patience or even
social network anymore to dedicate so much time to multiplayer?
I'd wager having more disposable income helps too. Sure, teens are
renowned for having a lot of excess cash and for years were the prime
target of many companies, but that income -though broad- wasn't deep.
For a lot of the kids, a $60USD game was a huge investment. So kids
tended to buy fewer games and stick with each game longer. Multiplayer
helped extend the lifespan of those games. Adults can afford to buy
more games, so shorter single-player experiences aren't as much of a downside.
Interestingly, Epic CEO Tim Sweeney recently made a claim about how
the future of games is social, and that games like Fortnite (to pick a completely random example) are the future of gaming. Which seems a bit short-sighted. Then it is Epic saying this. They also insisted PC
gaming was going to be dead in a few years back in the mid 2000s.
They've never been much to look past their current success. "Fortnite"
is social;
"Fortnite" is popular, therefore all games should be like "Fortnite".
Forget the fact that there's a huge population that doesn't _like_
Fortnite, and there have been a lot of very popular single-player
games. That's not what Epic is selling _now_, and changing gears is
hard. Therefore, "Fortnite" is the future, now and forever. ;-)
A recent study reported that most gamers prefer single-player! Take
that, multiplayer nerds! ;-)
Still, for years publishers parroted the line that multiplayer was the
only way to profitablity, and strictly single-player games (or even single-player modes) were often given short-shrift. There have been
numerous reports of attempts by developers to push forward
single-player games that have been shot down by publishers, who told
the devs that single-player games 'just don't sell'. And why not? Multiplayer games sold tremendously well, and you could attach all
sorts of live-service features onto the games to rake in even more
money
On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 23:16:59 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
A recent study reported that most gamers prefer single-player! Take
that, multiplayer nerds! ;-)
Ha!.. Just as the best way to understand how a black person feels is
to ask a white person, and the best way to understand how a gay person
feels is to ask a straight one, I like to get my updates on the
viability of multiplayer gaming from a hardened single player only
person!
Honestly no, seriously I do understand that writing about games is as important to you (or more so) than playing them but let's be honest
Spalls, you've never even been to kindergarten day one of
understanding the multiplayer gaming community, why people like
multiplayer games or anything even remotely related.
Personally I've always been both a single and multiplayer gamer, so I
have a slightly different selection (but please don't map that to any previously suggested analogy because I don't swing that way, thanks..
;)
The reality is tastes vary, and everything I ever liked about
multiplayer gaming has mostly gotten decimated over the last 10 years
or so, to the point I kind of don't give a fuck if gaming itself
dissipated into thin air tomorrow. The industry mostly destroyed the
concept of dedicated servers and multiplayer clans' abilities to
administer even peer to peer environments where they could play among
friends and have some control over douchebaggery, etc.
Oh wait.... can we even SAY the word "clan" these days without someone somehow tying it to the KKK and saying it's a racist word?
Ah well fuck it, I can't say I give a flying fuck about that. I'm
just happy that in the moments before I die I will know that I did a
few things useful with my life other than playing video games and
complaining about them incessantly on Usenet for an audience of a
couple of dozen.
Honestly the whole appeal of multiplayer games for me was only ever
about 2 things.... playing AGAINST humans for a level of "AI" that
never was and never will be available in SP games, and playing WITH
humans in a tactical teamwork capacity, which involves a great deal of microphone communication and is not an experience that could ever be
replaced with AI by the nature of what it is.
But yeah, mostly snowflakes and wokism led to the creation of
positions like "Monetization Director" within AAA game studios. That
is another way of saying "Chief Marketing Fucktard". His job is to
examine current demographics, and notice that snowflakes get disturbed
by historically accurate things, and preferred every character to be a
pink haired tranny farting rainbows while riding unicorns. And that
sent so much of the multiplayer community looking elsewhere, that it
doesn't surpise me at all if single player games sell better these
days.
Have fun with the rainbow farting Spalls! lol
On 11/10/2024 00:57, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 23:16:59 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
A recent study reported that most gamers prefer single-player! Take
that, multiplayer nerds! ;-)
Ha!.. Just as the best way to understand how a black person feels is
to ask a white person, and the best way to understand how a gay person
feels is to ask a straight one, I like to get my updates on the
viability of multiplayer gaming from a hardened single player only
person!
Honestly no, seriously I do understand that writing about games is as
important to you (or more so) than playing them but let's be honest
Spalls, you've never even been to kindergarten day one of
understanding the multiplayer gaming community, why people like
multiplayer games or anything even remotely related.
Personally I've always been both a single and multiplayer gamer, so I
have a slightly different selection (but please don't map that to any
previously suggested analogy because I don't swing that way, thanks..
;)
The reality is tastes vary, and everything I ever liked about
multiplayer gaming has mostly gotten decimated over the last 10 years
or so, to the point I kind of don't give a fuck if gaming itself
dissipated into thin air tomorrow. The industry mostly destroyed the
concept of dedicated servers and multiplayer clans' abilities to
administer even peer to peer environments where they could play among
friends and have some control over douchebaggery, etc.
Oh wait.... can we even SAY the word "clan" these days without someone
somehow tying it to the KKK and saying it's a racist word?
Ah well fuck it, I can't say I give a flying fuck about that. I'm
just happy that in the moments before I die I will know that I did a
few things useful with my life other than playing video games and
complaining about them incessantly on Usenet for an audience of a
couple of dozen.
Honestly the whole appeal of multiplayer games for me was only ever
about 2 things.... playing AGAINST humans for a level of "AI" that
never was and never will be available in SP games, and playing WITH
humans in a tactical teamwork capacity, which involves a great deal of
microphone communication and is not an experience that could ever be
replaced with AI by the nature of what it is.
But yeah, mostly snowflakes and wokism led to the creation of
positions like "Monetization Director" within AAA game studios. That
is another way of saying "Chief Marketing Fucktard". His job is to
examine current demographics, and notice that snowflakes get disturbed
by historically accurate things, and preferred every character to be a
pink haired tranny farting rainbows while riding unicorns. And that
sent so much of the multiplayer community looking elsewhere, that it
doesn't surpise me at all if single player games sell better these
days.
Have fun with the rainbow farting Spalls! lol
Did we read the same post?
On 10/11/2024 12:57 AM, JAB wrote:
On 11/10/2024 00:57, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 23:16:59 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
A recent study reported that most gamers prefer single-player! Take
that, multiplayer nerds! ;-)
Ha!..á Just as the best way to understand how a black person feels is
to ask a white person, and the best way to understand how a gay person
feels is to ask a straight one, I like to get my updates on the
viability of multiplayer gaming from a hardened single player only
person!
Honestly no, seriously I do understand that writing about games is as
important to you (or more so) than playing them but let's be honest
Spalls, you've never even been to kindergarten day one of
understanding the multiplayer gaming community, why people like
multiplayer games or anything even remotely related.
Personally I've always been both a single and multiplayer gamer, so I
have a slightly different selection (but please don't map that to any
previously suggested analogy because I don't swing that way, thanks..
;)
The reality is tastes vary, and everything I ever liked about
multiplayer gaming has mostly gotten decimated over the last 10 years
or so, to the point I kind of don't give a fuck if gaming itself
dissipated into thin air tomorrow.á The industry mostly destroyed the
concept of dedicated servers and multiplayer clans' abilities to
administer even peer to peer environments where they could play among
friends and have some control over douchebaggery, etc.
Oh wait.... can we even SAY the word "clan" these days without someone
somehow tying it to the KKK and saying it's a racist word?
Ah well fuck it, I can't say I give a flying fuck about that.á I'm
just happy that in the moments before I die I will know that I did a
few things useful with my life other than playing video games and
complaining about them incessantly on Usenet for an audience of a
couple of dozen.
Honestly the whole appeal of multiplayer games for me was only ever
about 2 things.... playing AGAINST humans for a level of "AI" that
never was and never will be available in SP games, and playing WITH
humans in a tactical teamwork capacity, which involves a great deal of
microphone communication and is not an experience that could ever be
replaced with AI by the nature of what it is.
But yeah, mostly snowflakes and wokism led to the creation of
positions like "Monetization Director" within AAA game studios.á That
is another way of saying "Chief Marketing Fucktard".á His job is to
examine current demographics, and notice that snowflakes get disturbed
by historically accurate things, and preferred every character to be a
pink haired tranny farting rainbows while riding unicorns.áá And that
sent so much of the multiplayer community looking elsewhere, that it
doesn't surpise me at all if single player games sell better these
days.
Have fun with the rainbow farting Spalls!á lol
Did we read the same post?
Probably not.
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 07:41:02 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 10/11/2024 12:57 AM, JAB wrote:
On 11/10/2024 00:57, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
Have fun with the rainbow farting Spalls! lol
Did we read the same post?
Probably not.
Like the part where he implies multiplayer gamers might be "...
younger, less sophisticated and less discriminating..."
Yeah if anyone missed that part they sure as all fuck were either not
reading or not paying attention, to be sure.
But to be fair this was just a fun poke at Spalls that has more to do
with context of all of his previous rants on this topic. It's just
fun to rattle his cage now and again, keeps him on his toes :)
On 10/11/2024 9:01 AM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 07:41:02 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 10/11/2024 12:57 AM, JAB wrote:
On 11/10/2024 00:57, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
Have fun with the rainbow farting Spalls!á lol
Did we read the same post?
Probably not.
Like the part where he implies multiplayer gamers might be "...
younger, less sophisticated and less discriminating..."
Yeah if anyone missed that part they sure as all fuck were either not
reading or not paying attention, to be sure.
But to be fair this was just a fun poke at Spalls that has more to do
with context of all of his previous rants on this topic. It's just
fun to rattle his cage now and again, keeps him on his toes :)
Wait, I'm only supposed to rattle his cage "now and again"? I thought
it was supposed to be all the time!
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 08:57:08 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
On 09/10/2024 04:16, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Still, for years publishers parroted the line that multiplayer was the
only way to profitablity, and strictly single-player games (or even
single-player modes) were often given short-shrift. There have been
numerous reports of attempts by developers to push forward
single-player games that have been shot down by publishers, who told
the devs that single-player games 'just don't sell'. And why not?
Multiplayer games sold tremendously well, and you could attach all
sorts of live-service features onto the games to rake in even more
money
I'm not sure it's that they don't sell but instead the really big bucks
are to be had in multiple-player games that are far more amenable to
having MTX shoved in them providing a healthy income stream possibly for
years to come.
Except the study showed that you _aren't_ necessarily promised massive revenue just because you make a multiplayer game. Or rather, it isn't
simply the fact that the game is multiplayer that guarantees that
money. It's that wildly unpredictible, "is it a good/popular game"
factor that brings in the big bugs.
On 10/11/2024 8:19 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 08:57:08 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
On 09/10/2024 04:16, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
Still, for years publishers parroted the line that multiplayer was the >>>> only way to profitablity, and strictly single-player games (or even
single-player modes) were often given short-shrift. There have been
numerous reports of attempts by developers to push forward
single-player games that have been shot down by publishers, who told
the devs that single-player games 'just don't sell'. And why not?
Multiplayer games sold tremendously well, and you could attach all
sorts of live-service features onto the games to rake in even more
money
I'm not sure it's that they don't sell but instead the really big bucks
are to be had in multiple-player games that are far more amenable to
having MTX shoved in them providing a healthy income stream possibly for >>> years to come.
Except the study showed that you _aren't_ necessarily promised massive
revenue just because you make a multiplayer game. Or rather, it isn't
simply the fact that the game is multiplayer that guarantees that
money. It's that wildly unpredictible, "is it a good/popular game"
factor that brings in the big bugs.
But we don't want bugs at all!!!
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
...
Except the study showed that you _aren't_ necessarily promised massive
revenue just because you make a multiplayer game. Or rather, it isn't
simply the fact that the game is multiplayer that guarantees that
money. It's that wildly unpredictible, "is it a good/popular game"
factor that brings in the big bugs.
But we don't want bugs at all!!!
I am a bug. :P
Except the study showed that you _aren't_ necessarily promised massive revenue just because you make a multiplayer game. Or rather, it isn't simply the fact that the game is multiplayer that guarantees that
money. It's that wildly unpredictible, "is it a good/popular game"
factor that brings in the big bugs.
But we don't want bugs at all!!!
Rin Stowleigh <rstowleigh@x-nospam-x.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 02:24:37 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
...
Except the study showed that you _aren't_ necessarily promised massive >> >> > revenue just because you make a multiplayer game. Or rather, it isn't >> >> > simply the fact that the game is multiplayer that guarantees that
money. It's that wildly unpredictible, "is it a good/popular game"
factor that brings in the big bugs.
But we don't want bugs at all!!!
I am a bug. :P
I always thought of you more as a feature than a bug, but thank you
for clarifying. :)
It's not a bug, it's a feature.
On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 02:24:37 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
...
Except the study showed that you _aren't_ necessarily promised massive >> > revenue just because you make a multiplayer game. Or rather, it isn't
simply the fact that the game is multiplayer that guarantees that
money. It's that wildly unpredictible, "is it a good/popular game"
factor that brings in the big bugs.
But we don't want bugs at all!!!
I am a bug. :P
I always thought of you more as a feature than a bug, but thank you
for clarifying. :)
candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote at 02:24 this Saturday (GMT):
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
...
Except the study showed that you _aren't_ necessarily promised massive >> >> > revenue just because you make a multiplayer game. Or rather, it isn't >> >> > simply the fact that the game is multiplayer that guarantees that
money. It's that wildly unpredictible, "is it a good/popular game"
factor that brings in the big bugs.
But we don't want bugs at all!!!
I am a bug. :P
and bugs are cute :D
Not all of them! ;P