"Single-player gaming is our focus."

[intothedreaming]

The end of the new interview with Tim Cain put a smile on my face. After reading about so many game companies not even considering single-player focus in games anymore, I've been worried about what that might mean for those of us who love those types of games. I am very happy to see that there are publishers out there who understand and respond to the need to keep such games alive.

[C2B]

What about the cake?

Edited September 18, 2012 by C2B

[intothedreaming]

What about the cake?

 

Cake would be good, too.

[Sarog]

The differences between Bioware and Obsidian continue to multiply.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Sarog

[Hornet85]

I was very happy to hear that. Glad there are people who still focus on single player games at times when companies like EA are swearing off single player games.

 

Not every game needs to be multiplayer. Some are just meant to be single player.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Hornet85

[Kilroy_Was_Here]

Maybe they can put multiplayer as a $10 million stretch goal?

 

@Sarog So true; Bioware gives us crap (DA2 and the ME3 ending) and Obsidian gives us cake!

[Crosmando]

IWD, BG and Arcanum had multiplayer, and I don't ever remember it ever being popular even back "in the day", though then again we all had 56k modems and my internet was so bad I couldn't have played properly anyway

 

Different audience, seriously there's a million MMO's out there for that crowd, focus on a good offline single-playing storytelling experience.

[Hornet85]

IWD, BG and Arcanum had multiplayer, and I don't ever remember it ever being popular even back "in the day", though then again we all had 56k modems and my internet was so bad I couldn't have played properly anyway

 

Different audience, seriously there's a million MMO's out there for that crowd, focus on a good offline single-playing storytelling experience.

 

Exactly. I play games like Guild Wars 2 for my multiplayer RPG fix.

 

For RPG games like Fallout, the story and the single player experience is very important. We need to feel like we are part of the story and we can influence it, and of course there must be a great story going on. Not just running around slaying monsters with our friends.

[Ashram]

I like single player as much as the next person, but I also enjoy multiplayer rp experience. Even if other party members take part more in a supportive role over LAN or whatnot. NWN multiplayer was fun. Doesn't have to be a focus but definitely a nice stretch goal.

[Indiphilo]

IWD, BG and Arcanum had multiplayer, and I don't ever remember it ever being popular even back "in the day", though then again we all had 56k modems and my internet was so bad I couldn't have played properly anyway

 

Different audience, seriously there's a million MMO's out there for that crowd, focus on a good offline single-playing storytelling experience.

 

I strongly agree. I really hope that every single cent goes into making the single player-campaign as great as it gets.

 

 

But... if it's likely that announcing MP as a stretchgoal gets a lot of extra funding from MP fanatics, then maybe it's not such a bad idea? As long as it pays itself.

 

Buuuut... On the other hand, announcing MP could possibly make other people drop their pledges... So ehm... I don't know. gah.

[kalimeeri]

Not a fan of MMO at all, but LAN would be nice if they're thinking of going the multiplayer route. I remember playing IWD, Diablo 2, and Dungeon Seige with my family, and had a great time. There's no server costs, and no policing required ... and you sell multiple copies of the game.

[BMacklin]

I'm all about that single player.

[kinemitor]

The end of the new interview with Tim Cain put a smile on my face. After reading about so many game companies not even considering single-player focus in games anymore, I've been worried about what that might mean for those of us who love those types of games. I am very happy to see that there are publishers out there who understand and respond to the need to keep such games alive.

 

if you haven't noticed Obsidian is not a publisher, is a developer

most if not all punlisher are interested only on shooters and coop,multi..

but developers are interested only on making a good game, here is were they dont get along

[Yst]

It hardly seems necessary to belabour the point further. But likewise, I will say, as someone who enjoys playing multiplayer RPGs, and currently plays two MMORPGs (Guild Wars 2 and WoW), I would hate to see Project Eternity waste time on multiplayer functionality.

 

The bastardisation of the multiplayer RPG experience in the pursuit of a single player style (The Old Republic, Diablo 3), and the bastardisation of the single-player RPG experience in the pursuit of multiplayer options (Mass Effect 3, Diablo 3) serve neither one very well.

 

Project Eternity, as so far outlined, benefits from a wonderful focus on a straightforward goal which its fans are in love with, for all its simplicity: it aspires to realise the things we most love about the isometric RPG adventures of days past. It's a realisable goal. If there's anything remarkable about it, it's simply that achieving 1997 RPG design objectives is regarded as a dizzying aspiration, in 2012.

 

The last thing this glorious clarity and simplicity of vision needs is vague gesturing in the direction of an uncertain multiplayer approach, which might serve to obscure such an elegant yet achievable design.

[IcyDeadPeople]

I haven't found any role playing games yet that did multiplayer well, but the co-op in Divinity: Original Sin looks really promising. Also interested to see how the co-op will work in Shadowrun Returns.

 

In the few MMOs I've tried, the PvP can be fun, but the multiplayer aspect of the game always seems to result in a rather lifeless game world compared to single player RPGs, and enemies with crappy A.I. that just stand around waiting for players to approach. The Secret World was somewhat interesting because there were a lot of puzzles that were challenging to solve, even when teaming up with friends.

Edited September 19, 2012 by IcyDeadPeople

[Volourn]

Yet, they're thinking of adding MP possibly at a later date. And, Cain should be careful as wasn't he working on a MMO prior to obsidian?

 

 

"Bioware gives us crap (DA2 and the ME3 ending) and Obsidian gives us cake!"

 

DA2 + ME3 > SP + DS3 + AP

 

It's true, it's true, it's damn true!

 

 

P.S. BIO has made SP focused games. Both the DA and ME series are SP focused. So whya re people making things up about BIO? Oh, KOTOR MMO? That was made by FAKE BIO TEXAS *not* REAL BIO EDMONTON.

[Bobby Null]

To make a good multi-player RPG, design concessions must be made on the single player side of the game. This is especially true for titles with a lot of interactive dialogue and/or narrative delivered via text. George Ziets and I have had this conversation many times over the last few years, and it always boils down to one simple truth. Reading is not a team sport.

 

If you don't make those concessions, you end up with sub-par multiplayer. As much as I love the Baldur's Gate series, the multi-player aspect took a lot of patience (putting it mildly), as the design focus of those titles was the single player experience.

 

I do believe you can create an awesome multi-player experience with dialogue and choice and consequence, in my mind it would require a very large budget. I'll let you guys decide what that may or may not mean.

[Leferd]

Hmmm....

 

Novel concept: game design is a balance of resources with opportunity cost for every decision made.

[Umberlin]

I couldn't be happier that they said that.

 

To make a good multi-player RPG, design concessions must be made on the single player side of the game. This is especially true for titles with a lot of interactive dialogue and/or narrative delivered via text. George Ziets and I have had this conversation many times over the last few years, and it always boils down to one simple truth. Reading is not a team sport.

 

If you don't make those concessions, you end up with sub-par multiplayer. As much as I love the Baldur's Gate series, the multi-player aspect took a lot of patience (putting it mildly), as the design focus of those titles was the single player experience.

 

I do believe you can create an awesome multi-player experience with dialogue and choice and consequence, in my mind it would require a very large budget. I'll let you guys decide what that may or may not mean.

 

Thank you so much for saying every single word of this.

[BSoda]

Phew...so no mp/coop for PE ? That's a real relief. I was worried when I read the "SP is our focus" quote. Bioware said similar things with ME3.

[okiraan]

I wouldn't mind a multiplayer game. My wife and I played through BG1 & 2 and Icewind Dale 1 & 2 together. I'll also be happy with a single player game, especially if it turns out near PS: Torment caliber.

[DarthAdamRG]

While im happy the game is primarily a single player and have no problem with that, I would like the choice to log in with a mate and have some fun together, nothing more then that, I dont hope for this to turn into and MMO at all.

[Gurkog]

Phew...so no mp/coop for PE ? That's a real relief. I was worried when I read the "SP is our focus" quote. Bioware said similar things with ME3.

 

Bioware is now EA's battered stepchild. Too bad we can't report them to the police!

[GhostofAnakin]

It'll be nice to see single player being the focus of a game. It seems that nowadays, even if the game is primarily a single player game, there's resources dedicated to a tacked-on multiplayer component.

[Knacki99]

Way to go!