Crytek: 'The notion of single-player has to go away'

[compl3x]

For years, numerous pundits have called for the death of single-player games, and while some of us gnash our teeth at the thought of losing solo experiences, the creep of multiplayer has been undeniable. This is good news for Crytek, a studio that apparently can't wait to be rid of single-player.

"I think the notion of a single-player experience has to go away," CEO Cevat Yerli told IGN. "However, I'm not saying that there will be no single-player experiences ... it could be it's called Connected Single-Player or Online Single-Player instead.

"Online and social can reignite single-player in a new type of context and provide benefits that will make you want to be a part of a connected story-mode rather than a disconnected story-mode. Sure, if the technology forces you to play a traditional single-player game online, that doesn't make sense but if it's offering actual benefits to be online then you want to be part of it."

Sigh.

If there's one thing that really irritates me about this industry, it's the sudden and callous desire to see things killed off. The games market seems incredibly quick to discard things at the slightest provocation, or claim something's "dead" at the drop of a hat. This is coupled with a seeming need to see everything homogenize and become the same thing.

Yerli's connected single-player idea? Not a bad idea. In fact, it's been done with Demon's Souls and Dark Soulstremendously. Great idea ... but why does it now need to be every ****ing game? This is the same attitude that saw multiplayer crammed into Overlord -- about three people played that ****, and nobody's playing it now.

It was a useless waste of time and money, but it had to be done because everybody's doing it. I hate seeing one good idea duplicated to obnoxious excess -- we have Hollywood for that already.

You know what notion needs to go away? The notion that something needs to go away entirely just because you've latched onto one idea that works for a set few games.

Crytek Reveals the Many Faces of Free-to-Play [iGN]

Read more at http://www.destructo...f4FEe6Jm8FcY.99

[Nagisan]

As long as it has a good solid single-player story (and gameplay, ofc) I don't care what they want to call it.

[compl3x]

The top comment on Destructoid was "**** off, Crytek".

I agree with that sentiment.

[Blackhearted]

How bout crytek just 'goes away' instead?

[Raa]

Please, no.

[Athernar]

Yet more proof that Cevat Yerli is a complete and utter idiot.

Do you know what really needs to be killed off? Crytek.

[AngelGraves13]

What they're describing is co-op mode. Yes, we want it as much as they do and nobody seems to do it right except for Valve. Even then it's not an ideal method.

I'd like a single player game like ALIENS where you're with a team of 12 people, each customized down to the last detail, and you use your mics to communicate through a singular gaming experience. Instead, we got Aliens: Colonial Marines...

[Lighthalzen]

I like the way Dead Space 3 worked out. Me and my buddy had a blast! (Assuming that's what they are talking about, lol.)

[Osiris]

Singleplaya 4 life crytekbitches.

Only reason imo they want "online single player" is because it makes piracy all the more difficult, ala diablo 3 et al.

[spaceelf]

I believe he's talking about cloud assisted stuff. SimCity does it, Dragon's Dogma did it, I assume the stuff mentioned in the article did it.

Enjoying Crysis 3 far more than I did 2 and it's still single player so seems like an odd time to say it.

[StrikedOut]

Sounds like one of the dumbest ideas for gaming for a very long time. I very rarely buy a game for the multiplayer action, prefer a good story line and to be honest these are few and far between these days.

[compl3x]

I think there are games which in which adding multiplayer is a no-brainer and others in which it is so pointless and unworkable to even try is mental.

[HawkMan]

What they're describing is co-op mode. Yes, we want it as much as they do and nobody seems to do it right except for Valve. Even then it's not an ideal method.

I'd like a single player game like ALIENS where you're with a team of 12 people, each customized down to the last detail, and you use your mics to communicate through a singular gaming experience. Instead, we got Aliens: Colonial Marines...

Really ?

Halo, Gears of War, heck even Diablo3. Drop in single player CoOp.

Even so, while those are great and drop in coop is cool. I want games designed for me to play alone, by myself. But if it's done as well and seamless as Halo and GoW where I can be in a single player one man mission when I want and IF I should decided to want to play with someone else I can have a drop in friend, then it's ok.

[sanctified Veteran]

Im not surprised that this statement comes from a company that only can make Michael Bay-like single player experiences.

[AngelGraves13]

Really ?

Halo, Gears of War, heck even Diablo3. Drop in single player CoOp.

Even so, while those are great and drop in coop is cool. I want games designed for me to play alone, by myself. But if it's done as well and seamless as Halo and GoW where I can be in a single player one man mission when I want and IF I should decided to want to play with someone else I can have a drop in friend, then it's ok.

Haven't really played those 3 games myself, but yeah they have co-op. L4D2 is probably the one I've played the most. Always fun.

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

This is coupled with a seeming need to see everything homogenize and become the same thing.

The in-game achievement points have become omnipresent now; it's like some precious commodity. And, of course, you need to be online even in single-player games to earn them.

[neo1911]

I know what they want. They want in-app purchases in place of single player campaign.

[HawkMan]

Haven't really played those 3 games myself, but yeah they have co-op. L4D2 is probably the one I've played the most. Always fun.

The difference is that L4D , while a cool game in itself, is a horrible example for this. It is exactly what we DON'T want. yeah it has fun multiplayer "coop" but it's not really a single player story experience, that game is built around just being multiplayer. They can have those kind of modes and certain games like L4D who is purely MP games sure can only have modes like that. but what we want if they're going this route is PROPER single player storylines, with drop in MP like Halo and GoW.

[compl3x]

The in-game achievement points have become omnipresent now; it's like some precious commodity. And, of course, you need to be online even in single-player games to earn them.

Do you? I am pretty sure I have achieved... achievements and trophies offline. If you want to sync them with the server you have to be online to do that.

[George P Global Moderator]

Adding co-op to the single player campaign is one thing but forcing a online only co-op or MP type game on us is a big no. I never played any of the l4d games exactly because they're forced online co-op. I want a single player story driven offline campaign and if they start to get rid of that in games then my gaming is done.

I've been doing some halo 4 MP these past few weeks but really it's just to kill a few hours when I have nothing better to do. Once I get a new game in I'll never go back to MP again, it's really just a bonus to hold me over till I can start the next game and nothing more.

[PGHammer]

And thus we are actually HELPING make Crytek's point for them. What has been getting the video-game industry in hot water (and especially shooters - the most violent video games) is single-player-by design - basically isolated gameplay by design. Why is social play (in or out of computer or console gaming) something to be reviled and rejected? Whether we realize it or not, the increased DEMAND for isolated gameplay as a design, and the increased rise in antisocial behavior in general (and especially antisocial criminal behavior - such as mass shootings) is having everyone+dog looking for ways to avoid contributing to it. (Yes - that includes the same developers currently in the societal crosshairs, such as Crytek.) Oh no - we want what we want and everyone else can go YKW up a rope.

Crytek is making such comments because they want to remain relevant as a company - and especially a company that wants to EXPAND. (In case we haven't noticed, they are not alone in calling for more connected gaming - practically EVERY developer is doing so.) Crysis 3 may well be the last PERMITTED single-player shooter - and as much as I wish I were kidding, look at the societal outrage over shooters. Crytek is making these comments basically to save itself from being lynched.

Are we THAT disconnecvted from today's headlines that we aren't aware of that?

[Anibal P]

And thus we are actually HELPING make Crytek's point for them. What has been getting the video-game industry in hot water (and especially shooters - the most violent video games) is single-player-by design - basically isolated gameplay by design. Why is social play (in or out of computer or console gaming) something to be reviled and rejected? Whether we realize it or not, the increased DEMAND for isolated gameplay as a design, and the increased rise in antisocial behavior in general (and especially antisocial criminal behavior - such as mass shootings) is having everyone+dog looking for ways to avoid contributing to it. (Yes - that includes the same developers currently in the societal crosshairs, such as Crytek.) Oh no - we want what we want and everyone else can go YKW up a rope.

Crytek is making such comments because they want to remain relevant as a company - and especially a company that wants to EXPAND. (In case we haven't noticed, they are not alone in calling for more connected gaming - practically EVERY developer is doing so.) Crysis 3 may well be the last PERMITTED single-player shooter - and as much as I wish I were kidding, look at the societal outrage over shooters. Crytek is making these comments basically to save itself from being lynched.

Are we THAT disconnected from today's headlines that we aren't aware of that?

I don't buy into that horrible theory at all, yes games might have a bigger influence than real guns, but antisocial behavior and antisocial actions are the result of bad parenting, games might facilitate that disconnect, but are not the cause of it, it still falls to horrible parenting coupled with helicopter parenting that are breeding a generation of recluses that have no clue how to act in public

[Detection]

Just because they find it difficult to create an understandable and interesting storyline doesn't mean SP should be killed off, they just need to hire better devs for it, ones with the same talent as their graphics devs

[TPreston]

More bloatware and annoying online services to get in the way of the story and gameplay, And as usual the pirates will have a better experience than the paid users.

[spaceelf]

Just because they find it difficult to create an understandable and interesting storyline doesn't mean SP should be killed off, they just need to hire better devs for it, ones with the same talent as their graphics devs

Truth is, they did. Crysis 3 is far more engaging than 2 ever was...and I'm not even that far in.