Arena - Defined Single Player, according to Square Enix may be.

Welcome back and dear readers of POV, today we have a topic that has been discussed very much lately, the alleged "death" of the single player in favor of the multiplayer. At least this is what has been said by Square Enix:

The days when single player games were of primary importance and secondary multiplayer games were over. Lately multiplayer games have taken over and it has become normal to design games for a long time.

We went for example, from a Half Life conceived for the single player but with the addition of Multi (all in all, still applauded), at games like Battlefield 1 where a campaign runs out in a few hours as a "practical"Introductory tutorial to the true heart of the game,on-line. That's good Lyed walker what I think is not all that good. Let's mean, well come a multiplayer game just like a great one Unreal Tournament, an Quake or an Overwatch for example, but to live together single e Multi seems to have become very difficult nowadays. Probably all depends on the huge amount of work that is now being demanded for video games that are comparable to colossal holliwoodiani, with developers seeking to sell their product as long as possible to maximize their earnings by investing less time in production. It is not, in fact, rare to see games come on the shelves in one early access masked by version gold.

By Actor I'm inclined to think of video games like gods hams, I prefer to look at the weight per kilo before buying it. And maybe wait Offers. But let's see the very personal views of our dear editors about the harsh words spoken by Square Enix.

Good Katsuragi he shared with us this thought:

Strong with fruitful experience with FINAL FANTASY XIV, recently promoted on Netflix with the drama "Dad of Light", SQUARE ENIX is more than ever determined to continue on the path of online massive multiplayer, and so far nothing wrong. The next step, in addition to the further expansion of the world of Eorzea, however, is to extend the world of FINAL FANTASY XV to network experience, with the D with a payment that responds to the COMRADES name: end the single player's affair Noctis and partners, we will be called to create our alter ego and venture into a "dead spot" of Tabata's story events, thus transforming Action RPG into a sort of real MMORPG.

The chocobo house therefore decides to invest the best of its strength in creating games that can entertain the public as long as possible and ensure constant earnings to the company; who loves classic Japanese role-playing games will certainly not remain dry: Tokyo RPG Factory, inside SQUARE ENIX, is about to release his second opera after the success of I am Setsuna: we talk about LOST SPHEAR , coming on Nintendo Switch, PlayStation 4 and PC and ready to meet the needs of those who prefer classic gameplay and single player experience.

On the other hand, the studio is certainly not the first supported by SQUARE ENIX to bring back to life shifts, stories of the past and protagonists designed in a super deformed style: years ago Silicon Studio showed us how much Nintendo 3DS was the most suitable console for this kind of titles with the wonderful Bravely Default and its sequel bravelySecond. While everyone is waiting to know the vicissitudes of the neighbor FINAL FANTASY or the third release date KINGDOMHEARTS (that, I am willing to bet, will also have a multiplayer component), I'm waiting for an announcement about the saga of bravely. Meanwhile, consider the days that separate us on arrival Project OCTOPATH TRAVELER, developed by Acquire under the same SQUARE ENIX label.

Let's immediately see the other nippofilo editorial what do you think, ledisengentlmen plis uelcom Joseph "Siral" De Luca:

I speak of great lover of the MMORPG (so multiplayer games par excellence): what a fool! It is true that many people now appreciate it too online multiplayer (especially at a competitive level, just think of League of Legends or Overwatch, just to name a few, but also the various Fifa or Pes), but giving credit to this type of player could be a big mistake by Software House (especially for one of the caliber of SquareEnix who owes his fortune largely to single player titles).
So well come the multiplayer, but they have to be titles studied for this mode with precise intent and not a fashion to chase at all costs in every type and genre.

And believe me that if you say a patient of World of Warcraft there will be trust, after all the single player is sacrosanct, do not you think? Let's see what the excellent thinks about it Damiano "Xenom" Pauciullo:

No, please do not. So I summarize my thoughts about putting the single player in the background; Of course I'm talking about thinking of how I play my favorite titles, but the single player experience should always remain the focal point of a video game. I see too many titles that have a multiplayer component obviously cast in the middle right because this idea of ​​"play at all costs" in the company is born, but this must not be: there are titles rightly meant to express themselves in the best way multiplayer, see the various Call of Duty, FIFA I'll pick you up, but I'd never like to see adventures at The Legend of Zelda, Uncharted o final Fantasy (main) made to be multiplayer and almost "unplayable" in single player. I am not one who is opposed to novelties, but these must be well thought out and blended into gameplay; distorting a game just to make it playable in company I find it is the worst thing you can do.

A brief thought also about the rise of DLCs and the support of long-time games: perhaps going against current I'm happy about this thing, but of course you always have to see how it is exploited. Cuttings specifically cut for lucre send me to the beast, but on the contrary, see enduring support over time, with new periodic updates and paid DLCs that actually continually revive the desire to play a title that has already been over for a while, I think they are right for to make life long-term projects that required years and years of development.

And I find myself in full harmony with the thought of the editorial Xenom, after all, let's be clear, how disgust was the multi of The Last of Us? Last but not least, we know we have bored you, we leave you with the reflection of the excellent Vincenzo "Yoshisaur" Marino:

Definitely no. I'm always for the single player or, for the most part, a multiplayer that gives me a real sense of progression inside something. For example, I like MMOs, playing at WoW, but if I propose a multiplayer "fine to myself" as it may be a CoD, a Splatoon but also an Overwatch where the sense of progression is only given by the progress of a a cleaver that indicates my level of sincerity I get tired at once, as fun and exciting as they can be.

In addition, the fear of being faced with a title with the classic free-to-play formula, personally despised and considered almost a mockery to the user, is always around the corner.

And manners the Peppina, who does not have the horror of the fantasy Free To Play even in triple titles paid at full price? Bah.

Let us know what you think, thank you for your attention and to have arrived here, you also propose new topics and a greeting from the editorial staff We're talking about Video Games!

Declarations

answers