Infogrames Phil Harrison Believes Single Player Only Games No Longer of Interest To Consumers
![Infogrames Phil Harrison Believes Single Player Only Games No Longer of Interest To Consumers [We Strongly Disagree, How About You?]](http://tftscdn3.nexus404.com/Blog/thumbnailimages/alt/bioshock-alone-in-the-dark-imageTFTSThumb220153.jpg)
According to Infogrames president and former Sony Computer Entertainment America’s front man, Phil Harrison, games developers will soon be looking to move away from developing purely single player games, such as Bioshock or the up and coming latest version of Alone in the Dark, on account of consumers no longer being interested solitary gaming experiences, perfering instead to opt for games offering network connectivity.
Specifically naming Alone in the Dark by way of an example, Phil Harrison states in an interview with Eurogamer, ‘Alone in the Dark is a beautifully crafted single-player adventure game. I don’t think the industry is going to make many more of those… I just don’t think consumers want to be playing games that don’t have some kind of network connectivity to them, or some kind of community embedded in them, or some kind of extension available through downloadable content.” He whent on to say ‘The industry is changing, and the role we play as creators and publishers has to reflect those changes. I don’t think I’m alone in having those views, either.’
So, games like Bioshock, Alone in the Dark, et al, are, apparently, not of interest to us gamers – though the fact that Bioshock alone sold over 400,000 copies in just its first week of release would seem to indicate otherwise.
What do you think? Is the age of the single player only game over? Do you simply refuse to purchase a gaming title if it lacks network play? Please let us know, we would love to hear your thoughts on the matter.
[via]
Industry Veteran Richard Browne Makes A Case Against Used Games, Encourages Microsoft & Sony To Restrict Used Games With Next-Gen Consoles
Kingdoms Of Amalur: Reckoning's Online Pass Locks Seven Single Player Quests
GameStop To Begin Warning California Customers Of Online Pass Fees For Used Games
Verizon Drops Plans to Charge $2 "Convenience Fee" for One-Time Online & Over-the-Phone Bill Payments, Citing Consumer Feedback
Treyarch Talks Black Ops 2 Zombie Mode, Single Player Campaign & Call Of Duty Elite Integration
Capcom Hoping That Resident Evil 6 Will Become Its Best-Selling Game Ever, But Is Enough Player Interest There?
3 Comments / Add Your Response?
Breaking News
The TFTS Team
With more and more ISPs explicitly or implicitly capping total downloads per subscriber at a handful of gigs a month, I’ve got this sinking feeling that net-hungry applications like social games are in for rough sledding.
First, there’s the software and content updates. For each game, they’re typically hundreds of megabytes in size, and are released monthly or more often. Not counting the pay-to-play extensions and new features.
Then there’s the in-game network load. First-person shooters with large teams can generate a lot of packets. Voice chat adds significantly.
Total these up, and a gamer can burn through several gigs of network usage very quickly. What’s a gamer to do when the monthly usage is nearing the cap and the choice is between an on-line NetFlix movie and another round of cops and robbers in GTA 4?
Perhaps network games will become more local as more households have in-home networks and multiple computers capable of supporting modern net-centric games. LAN parties will transform into kids in the neighborhood linking their house networks together, and will become part of the domestic landscape.
Hi JK – thanks for starting the ball rolling, you make some brilliant points here, much appreciated.
I think it’s a simplistic view of the gamer to assume that because we can play networked games, we won’t play solo games. It’s like a playing card manufacturer declaring that they’ll only release decks for Texas Hold’em, despite the clear and present interest in Solitaire.
I can see a game maker view of network games as a lower cost/better return in that the players invest time, effort and help build the game through playing online – imagine the coding required to make a single player WoW game with diverse guilds, scripted NPCs and AI. The features of the game environment that a human brings far outweighs the AI at the moment.
That said, there’s also the downside of humans in games – I’ve quit more than a few matches in TF2 because of the voicechat spam and I have Barrens chat autoblocked on every server I venture into in WoW.
There’s also the nature of game – playing for social company (WoW/CoH), sports style engagement (TF2), casual gaming (Audiosurf) or to relax (UT2K4) is different from playing for a storyline (Halflife) or skill development (Ninja Reflex). There are more than just single motives for movies, tv and reading, so why would there just be one way to video game?