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

[Detection]

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

But it's supposed to continue where C2 left off, I completed it already but apart from a few key points of the game, I couldn't tell you what it was about, just nice graphics and kill things

[redfish]

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?

I don't know if you're supporting the argument people are making or just mentioning it, but ...

But non-social isn't anti-social. You cite a concern with loners playing violent shooters, but playing single-player Civilization or SimCity is like doing gardening in your backyard or enjoying model building. And playing a single-player story-driven role-playing game like Skyrim is like reading a novel in your spare time. Some people look at gaming as a hobby, pastime, or personal enjoyment, not as a sport. Even with these single-player games, the gamers are often social, going on forums and entering discussions, just like model hobbyists and book readers discuss their hobbies and books with others.

But this really has nothing to do with people actually being anti-social or being violently anti-social. There is a long standing bias in our culture against people being non-social, the suggestion is that killers are always loners. This isn't true. Charles Manson wasn't a loner. The Columbine killers were two friends, so a social relationship. Lanza's personal life seemed to involve his mother smothering him, not him intentionally being asocial.

If violent shooters are the problem in these killings, which is another argument entirely (which I'm not going to argue for or against here), I don't think it matters if they're social games or not. Stormfront is a very popular social site for a limited group of people, White Nationalists. DailyKos is full of hateful comments every day. Socializing doesn't stop people from being anti-social. They just act anti-social in groups. Anonymous is a group that's anti-social.

[Solid Knight]

Demon's Souls was truly revolutionary. Looks like Crytek is onboard.

[Detection]

There is no difference between killing AI and killing characters played by real people, the player is still sitting in-front of a screen shooting charaters, MP is not social, just as forums are not, facebook is not, they call it social but in reality, you are still sitting on your own in-front of a screen regardless of it being other people or AI talking back to you

Sociable = Gathering with real people in a real place

[sava700]

I'd love to play Crysis 3 in a COOP mode - as in have 2-4 friends join a server and go thru the missions with them vs against them.

[PGHammer]

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

I don't buy into the theory, either; however, Crytek (in fact, ANY developer that works on shooters) had better pay attention to it, because that theory - rightly or wrongly - IS driving the argument.

Crytek is a particularly juicy target for several reasons - they write MOSTLY violent shooters, they have a particularly successful one on their plate right now (Crysis 3), and they just opened a new studio (albeit by acquisition) in the United States (Crytek Austin) - any, let alone all, puts a great big bulls-eye on their back. Belief in the argument is one thing - however, you dare not dismiss it.

I don't buy the crux of the argument the gun-control advocates are using one whit - and I've said so several times - however, I don't dismiss the argument, either.

[McKay]

But it's supposed to continue where C2 left off, I completed it already but apart from a few key points of the game, I couldn't tell you what it was about, just nice graphics and kill things

Thats because Crysis has never been a "great" game, it's always been Graphics and shiny things first, playability second. In the end it's just a generic shooter. I for one personally love playing Story Modes with other people on Co-Op. I always have more fun.

[Detection]

Thats because Crysis has never been a "great" game, it's always been Graphics and shiny things first, playability second. In the end it's just a generic shooter. I for one personally love playing Story Modes with other people on Co-Op. I always have more fun.

Occasionally I enjoy co-op, more so if its LAN in the same room, not that I've done that for a while, mainly I enjoy games for SP, be it storyline or graphics to wow at, I like to be able to stop somewhere and have a look around, mess about a bit, not so easy with MP

[Orange]

Sorry but without single player you really wouldn't have online gaming. It's all about Single player and a story that goes with a game. Getting tired of seeing games go all out online and leave us with unfinished single player campaign.

[Azusa]

How could you have multi player only on a game very few machines can run as is the case with many of their games?

[Athernar]

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.

The games industry doesn't give two defecations about what the pea-brained American political right is currently "up in arms" (More like up in armchairs) about, they're nothing more than ephemeral fads in the news industry business model. There is no increasing demand for single player, merely the business-first side of the industry targeting what sells more and costs less - yearly instalments of multiplayer titles like Call of Duty.

Any push to "eliminate" single player is actually just always-online DRM attempt 2.0 plus a sprinkling of prevention of resale, this time with a excuse in the form of "You need to be online so this core feature works!!!".

You might like to dream up various politically themed theories, but truth of the situation is the same as it's always been, business is business. MP sells more. And heck, even if you're too stubborn to accept the non-political answer, what effects the game industry will also effect the movie industry - and Hollywood's $$$ speaks far louder than the right wing.

[PGHammer]

The games industry doesn't give two defecations about what the pea-brained American political right is currently "up in arms" (More like up in armchairs) about, they're nothing more than ephemeral fads in the news industry business model. There is no increasing demand for single player, merely the business-first side of the industry targeting what sells more and costs less - yearly instalments of multiplayer titles like Call of Duty.

Any push to "eliminate" single player is actually just always-online DRM attempt 2.0 plus a sprinkling of prevention of resale, this time with a excuse in the form of "You need to be online so this core feature works!!!".

You might like to dream up various politically themed theories, but truth of the situation is the same as it's always been, business is business. MP sells more. And heck, even if you're too stubborn to accept the non-political answer, what effects the game industry will also effect the movie industry - and Hollywood's $$$ speaks far louder than the right wing.

It's not just the US political system, as much as you might want to think - have you NOT been following the recent issues with gaming in Germany and even Australia?

And you seem to have MISSED the fact that I stated - categorically - that I don't believe the excuses the pols (of ANY country) are giving for the codswallop they are trying to make us swallow.

Crytek (and everyone else) is talking like this to avoid being made examples of - it's called survival.

And though I don't believe it, and certainly don't buy it, I had certainly better pay attention to it.

And there are the same sort of stupids on the OTHER end of the political spectrum - or have you not been listening the the left-listing screeds, in OR out of the United States?

[George P Global Moderator]

I can't compare sitting in front of my screen playing a well written single player campaign to just running around a map vs real people seeing who can kill who the most for points. How people can still find that fun for hours on in is beyond me. I got into games for a good story and not just mindless fragging on a batch of maps over and over.

[+Red King Subscriber²]

DRM, smaller USD 60 games with NET USD ~200 of DLCs (ranging from hats to the final boss), Achievements, and instant ability to post to facebook.

I am very excited.

[Athernar]

It's not just the US political system, as much as you might want to think - have you NOT been following the recent issues with gaming in Germany and even Australia?

And you seem to have MISSED the fact that I stated - categorically - that I don't believe the excuses the pols (of ANY country) are giving for the codswallop they are trying to make us swallow.

Crytek (and everyone else) is talking like this to avoid being made examples of - it's called survival.

And though I don't believe it, and certainly don't buy it, I had certainly better pay attention to it.

And there are the same sort of stupids on the OTHER end of the political spectrum - or have you not been listening the the left-listing screeds, in OR out of the United States?

I didn't miss anything, your political references are a load of utter tripe. As I said, the reasons behind all of this are purely business just as it always has been.

What do you think makes more sense, big Triple-A publishers trying to maximise profit and minimise cost by pandering to the bigger markets. (Yearly MP re-release titles, zombie games) Or an entire industry being in fear of some ignorant, loud-mouthed right-wing blowhards on TV that actually only have an infinitesimal fraction of the power that they think they do?

Yeah, pretty damn sure it's the former. Just like it was when Cevat ran off crying to the consoles because some people pirated his interactive benchmark.

[HawkMan]

It's not just the US political system, as much as you might want to think - have you NOT been following the recent issues with gaming in Germany and even Australia?

The fact that Germany is loosening up on its tight regulations, ever so slowly. No Australia no longer bans all "adult" games, and instead added an adult only rating to allow violent and sexual games...

Yup. Have you been?

[compl3x]

It's not just the US political system, as much as you might want to think - have you NOT been following the recent issues with gaming in Germany and even Australia?

I live in Aus and pay pretty close attention to the media and its views/attitudes towards gaming and, frankly, besides the occasional 2 minutes slots on morning variety type shows, gaming isn't a huge issue here and it certainly isn't being blamed for any societal ills. You know, like gun violence.

The only "recent issues" with gaming in Australia are people commenting on the views in America that violent video games should be hold more accountable for gun violence than guns themselves. Something we, and I imagine a large chunk of the rest of the developed world, find highly amusing.

[+Random Stranger Subscriber¹]

I was very dissapinted with the Crysis 2, but because i lived crysis 1 + expantion.. I was so eagerly waiting for Crysis 3 !!!!

Now i know why they are saying single player must die! The Crysis 3 single player is horrible. So far from the amazing Fry Cry 1... the only great single player game ever developed by crytek

[compl3x]

Perhaps Crytek should stop making SP games. I don't love/hate Crysis or Crytek but how about they decide what they want to do with their games, not tell the consumer what they want.

[Sandor]

single player...a very 1980's/90's console concept.

never even bother with the crappy scripted single players. half life 1 and 2...played the single player for about 10 minutes. have all the modern warfare games and didn't play single player. same with battlefield.

i DID play the medal of honour allied assault and it was decent fun.

[compl3x]

single player...a very 1980's/90's console concept.

never even bother with the crappy scripted single players. half life 1 and 2...played the single player for about 10 minutes. have all the modern warfare games and didn't play single player. same with battlefield.

i DID play the medal of honour allied assault and it was decent fun.

Those are all FPSs. FPSs deserve decent MP. But some games gain nothing from MP. Or it is incompetently implemented.

[Sandor]

Those are all FPSs. FPSs deserve decent MP. But some games gain nothing from MP. Or it is incompetently implemented.

Implying anything besides FPS on the PC is worth the time of day (besides transport tycoon) :D

[compl3x]

Implying anything besides FPS on the PC is worth the time of day (besides transport tycoon) :D

FPS gets the least amount of attention of my PC :D