I agree. But only in the way it seems also every game coming out is a FPS game and by default they have always been about short single player mixed with online deathmatch and capture the flag. My guess is the reason why so many people love Bioshock first FPS out that has a story and is longer then three typical FPS's.

I think if we had more RPG's and more varied generes it would be ok but considering for every one non FPS game there is 20 FPS's it is no wonder why online seems to be the biggest thing. There has yet to really be any games that are not, "use gun on guy"

You're right about "use gun on guy" games. There are plenty of them out there. I don't mind that so much though. What I do mind is when that kind of game is so short. I just finished Lost Planet, and I think it took me right around 10 hours to complete. While not the shortest game I have ever played, I feel that there was a lot more potential and room in that shooter. I would love to see more games like the Brothers in Arms games. They had a healthy single player campaign that offered plenty of reasons to play through it again, which extends the length of the already good single player game.

Admittedly my view is skewed on this because I've never had XBL, but I agree with you 100%. I've said so before. I think online play is fine, it's a good thing, it brings people together but it's not the end all to beat all. Like you said, games focus should be on the single player game, make it longer and give it more depth.

I don't get online because I don't usually don't have the time to play for long periods of time at a sitting. I play for a short time then I'm off to something else. I like games with a a good challenge and some length. Bothers in Arms is a great example of a fun FPS with length and replay-ability. (It even adds a little actual military history). This is one reason I can't wait for BiA: Highway to Hell.

There are some signs this may be changing, but we're still getting mixed signals. Some new games in development are said to focus on the single player aspect. But on the other hand there are also some online only games out there too. I just home there is at least some balance with both - skewed toward single player of course!

Totally agreed. Single player is why games exist in the first place. You just can't have an immersive story when someone keeps jumping around you like crazy going "roflmao!!11!1112".

Right. I see how online gaming could be fun, for awhile. But after that, I just don't see how it's fun for long periods of time to run around the same map(s) doing the same jump, shoot, grenade maneuver.

I think that most of what makes multiplayer fun is who you're playing with. I'd rather play splitscreen with three other friends than online with 16 to 32 other strangers. So, in my opinion, splitscreen is as important as online, if not more.

I agree that playing split screen multiplayer is more fun than playing online with people you don't know. It's still more of the same multiplayer though. Run around, shoot, get killed, respawn, rinse and repeat.

I have now read 2 different reviews of COD4 and both said that the game was entirely too short in the single player campaign. That's my point in this blog. We've been hearing about this game for months now, and getting excited about how awesome it is going to be. I WON'T BE GETTING IT THOUGH, because why would I pay that much money for a game that people are saying can be finished in 5 HOURS! I don't play multiplayer. COD4 is just another game with great single player potential that never blossomed.

Yes, but it does have splitscreen, which is why i'm getting it.

While I agree that many games focus quite a bit on the online multiplayer aspect, I disagree that it is so bad. For one it allows you to play with people you might not ever have the chance to play with, like friends who live across the country. Also it has been mentioned that online multiplayer play is boring or repetitive, but I don't see how it is any different in a single player game where you run, shoot, and grenade computer players, then if you die you restart and do it again. Also, human players offer a much more challenging enemy. Single player games are restricted by their AI. Enemies move in predictable patterns that can be beaten easily once you learn them. Human players are spontaneous and move in unpredictable ways coming up with maneuvers that you may never have seen before. In that respect, multiplayer is always changing, making you adapt to more than one style of play. I'm not saying that everything posted here about the lackluster single player games is wrong, because I agree that they should be better, but that multiplayer is not all bad.

Right. I'm not saying online MP is bad. I do think it is a challenge and the tactics could change. My point though has been illustrated by the recent CoD4. The single player is reportedly 5 hours give or take depending on skill. With a campaign that short, I sort of wonder why they made a campaign at all. If a company wants to make a multiplayer game, fine. Make a multiplayer game, but if a company is going to try and include a single player campaign, they should at least try to make it a decent length.

beutlich99, I just posted basically the same thing in my blog about COD4: Modern Warfare 5 hours of gameplay for $60.00? I'll pass.

but COD4 is co op? thats cool but still i wont pay that much for 5 hours and im glad i just got on b/c i was about to leave togo buy this game!!! HELLO ASSASIN'S CREED!!!!

I think CoD4 is worth just renting.

I got assasin's creed now! I hope it is good!

Yeah. Assasin's Creed is a great example of how the developer concetrated on singleplayer, not multiplayer.

I can't wait to play it!

ok i almost beat it. but i havent been playin as much im really busy! but it is amazing!

I might have to pick up Assasin's Creed, sounds like the single player is pretty good and offers some interesting new technology with regard to character movement.

I'm waiting to see if I get it for Christmas.

If you don't have it by Christmas, you should get it by Jan 24. So I can play it

I've have a new blog post briefly talking about Asassin's Creed. I also found official pics of Two-Face in The Dark Knight. I made a review of A.C. too. It really is a good game. If it had a traditional multiplayer, it wouldn't be as good.

I thonk if it had a slayer type game in assasin's Creed it would be awesome. but single player rocks!!!!

I agree with you but you can't fight the trend. Games are a big business today so the focus is on multiplayer and internet play. I'm afraid games with a good storyline are a thing of the past. They just don't make that much money.

I disagree. Look at games like Bioschock, Assassins Creed, that Mario game, and Half-Life. Plus I know Halo multiplayer is big, but everybody loved the campaign so much that that was a reason to buy the final installment.

good point

I know this is a older post, but I thought I'd comment anyway. I won't go into to much depth about my opinion of online gaming as most of it's already been said. I get it, I know why people love it, but it's definitely not for me (and this is what I'll elaborate on).

I can count on one hand how many games I've played online. I'm not big on it at all. With a few exceptions part of this is that I tend to get my butt handed to me. Like you said B99, I'm not the worst gamer out there, but I know I am far from the best. I'm okay with that. I have too much going on to be able to sit down for a long period of time and play games hours and hours on end. This past week I've been lucky, as many of my obligations have been temporarily suspended, but for the most part I only get to play a couple hours a week. And that's not enough time to practice to be able to compete. I'm more than happy to sit through a single player campaign and have some fun, then hop online with others that are out to prove something. I know not everyone is like that online, but there is a fair share.

I don't mind multi-player when the person is in the room with you though. It's just more enjoyable for me that way.

Hear, hear Ebb. Single player is plenty for me and skills I have. And like you said, mp is much more fun when the person is sitting with you in the room . . . especially if it is co-op.