Multiplayer or no multiplayer?

There are a lot of video games out there, covering any number of ranges. You have shooters, racing games, sports games, Role Playing Games, platformer games, and tons more. Just about anything you can be into there is a game for it, which makes the world of video games very appealing. Unlike films and TV shows you control the action in video games. In some instances what you do in one game will affect the story in unique ways as you get the sequel games, which is really cool. Most gamers are able to find what it is that they like and stick with it. That’s simple since there is such a huge range of great games available. But there are some points that gamers can’t agree on. And I’m not just talking about fanboys who will only play one particular console and hates on others who play something different. There is a heated dispute that comes down to one aspect of gaming, which affects any type of game: that is online multiplayer.

Typically you’ll see things play out something like this: a new game in a series is announced. The company shows off some gameplay footage at that time or a bit later, and gamers love what they see. They proclaim that this will be the best in the series or at least as good as what came before. They will say that after seeing a gameplay video all of their concerns about the particular game have vanished. Then the developer will talk about how there is a multiplayer mode in the game. No matter how good or refined it is, that’s when people start to get angry. To some Multiplayer VS Singleplayerextent I definitely understand that. Some people don’t have the internet, so they can’t play multiplayer, which is worse when a trophy or achievement can only be gained if you play online. You’d be telling somebody who can’t even do it that they need to play online to complete it 100%, at least when it comes to trophies and achievements. I can get why those guys would be mad. I can also understand it if the main single player story suffers because of having multiplayer. If you’re playing a game that’s a primary single player game, like Mass Effect for example, you shouldn’t see the main game suffer because of the multiplayer aspect. So that is something I agree with as well, seeing why people would be upset about it.

 

I’m not one of them however. I think multiplayer options are great and give you more to pursue aka great replay value. Look at Batman Arkham Origins for example. After you beat the game in the story mode completely, including all bonus items, there is still a multiplayer mode that you can play. You always have more to do in the game as long as the multiplayer option is available. Sure, you’re only playing as Batman/Robin or one of the Joker’s or Bane’s men doing a normal capture type mission. It’s not dramatically different between any one time or the other. But a lot of the missions in the Arkham world are just like that: you either stop the bad guys from doing whatever it is they are doing, or you get to play as the bad guys trying to accomplish said task. It’s cool and it keeps the game fresh. Don’t like it? Don’t play. It’s that simple. But that’s just me. Sometimes things like the aforementioned problems do occur, and I can understand not wanting multiplayer then. But overall it’s not that big of a deal and you can simply skip it if you don’t want it. Don’t purchase the game if you know it ended up hurting the main game. I think multiplayer should be there if it doesn’t derail the main game. What do you think?

Frontier Theme