Are triple-A single-player only games on the way out?

It seems that way, but let me remind you about The Last Of Us

I certainly hope not - I would buy less games if that were the case. Some of my favorite games of all time (Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Half Life 2) are AAA singleplayer games.

In fact, I'd say my best gaming experiences have come from AAA single-player titles - to lose them would dishearten me a great deal. Multiplayer is fun, but it's different.

Single-player only? Devoting AAA resources to compensate for single player shortcomings (eg, smart AI) just isn't as cost-effective as developing similar multiplayer components. For the purest singleplayer experiences that can't be currently replicated in multiplayer -- like Skyrim -- there will always be some market.

That said, IPs that also may include multiplayer elements, like Assassin's Creed, Halo, Crysis, and Medal of Honor, will still be popular. Just as popular as they are now. It's a natural progression where games incorporate features that appeal to a wide audience.

The big publishers are definitely going away from them, but actually disappear totally? No. Look at Skyrim. Darksiders 2 just set the US chart on fire and a lot of noise is being made about Dishonoured. Maybe more like Mass Effect 3 where you get a multiplayer component attached to keep people playing. But you just have to hope they're more like ME3 or Assassin's Creed then the multiplayer crap Dead Space 2 tried.

I think what scares publishers right now about single-player games is that, for an AAA title, the single-player content is more or less linear experience (or, at best, a "choose your own adventure" like the Mass Effect series). That means, for such a game, the number of gameplay hours scales linearly with the cost invested in writing, voice acting, and asset creation. If I want 50 hours of single-player AAA content, I need to spend 50 * X dollars and man-hours. Then, if I want to add 10 hours in a DLC pack, I need to spend another 10 * X dollars and man-hours. Yes, you can reuse assets, but most game studios really just don't think ahead enough to do so (and get called out when it's noticed).

Multiplayer is more emergent in that the other players provide most of the engagement and content. The core idea of "emergence" is that complex systems spring forth from simple building blocks. MOBAs are a fantastic example. Put ten characters, each with only four or five abilities, on one map in two teams, and you get literal years of gameplay. As soon as you introduce a new character, you get the millions of new team compositions and match-ups producing hours upon hours of new gameplay from just a few simple mechanics. Why? Because people are providing most of that content. They're searching the space of possibilities and finding unique combinations of elements to make the game interesting for themselves and each other.

Long story short, I think the triple-A story-driven single-player experience is on its way out for now, and possibly for a few years to a decade. Game companies can't afford to "brute force" these sorts of things the way they have in the past by throwing content at what comes out to be a 50-hour movie. It'll just become too expensive for a $60 game (which really is a bargain considering the cost to produce the product). However, the single-player story will get smarter. Emergent stories are on the horizon in the research community, and will allow game developers to build narratives and experiences out of simple building-blocks, rather than having to painstakingly script from start to finish. We're reaching the limits of the old-school "just throw content at it" mantra of game development, and we're entering an era where games are going to work smarter and cheaper. We're seeing this in the indie revolution (Minecraft is as emergent a single-player game as one could ask for, but isn't a triple-A story-driven experience), and we'll see it in the mainstream once it trickles through the entrenched, slower-moving major studios.

I like to think of it as a hiatus. The triple-A game story isn't dying, but it's taking a break to go to school and get a degree.

I pretty much side with Yahtzee on multiplayer, so the day we stop seeing AAA single player games is the day I never buy another AAA game.

Also, as others have pointed out, the massive commercial success of Skyrim indicates that single player is here to stay.

One thing you have to bear in mind : we're currently in the middle of a gigantic worldwide economic crises, and have been since 2008. I'm pretty sure people started talking about the decline of single player in games since around 2010, 2 years (i.e. one development cycle) after 2008. In the middle of a time where its tough for big businesses to stay afloat, it makes sense that publishers would give developers less artistic freedom by encouraging them to make more games that they know will earn them money, and to take less risks for fear that the risks won't pay off in sales and possibly cause the company to lose a lot of money. Not to mention that entertainment industries are the most badly hit industries in a recession because they aren't essential items that everyone needs to buy, especially expensive video games and consoles. So I think that's all that we're seeing; AAA games developers taking less risks by making multi player games rather than single player games (it seems to me like its probably easier to make a multi player game which isn't rubbish than a single player game which isn't rubbish) because taking risks is far more dangerous for a company during times of economic hardship. This would also explain why we've been seeing excessive amounts of sequels rather than new franchises being created since ever since 2010, a trend which is only starting to be broken about now, just as the economic problems of the world seem to be easing off a bit.

I don't think that AAA single-player games are going out, just look at the new games coming out soon: The Last of Us, Remember Me, Watch Dogs, Dishonored, all of them have this nice big campaign.

I think, what we will see are games with single-player campaign alongside a MP in the same disc like the Uncharted series, AC series, ME3, and RDR. However, let's just hope that the developers or the publishers don't make the MP part affect the SP part of the game, kinda like what's going on with ME3.

End of the console generation not far off? What you talkin' about, Willis?

I think AAA games won't be as popular as social games soon

I think it will depend on the sales of GTA V.

[deleted]

I hope not, those are my favorite

Yeah, I'm getting sick of everything being put into the multiplayer, and skimping on the single-player experience. Incorporate multiplayer, but don't sacrifice the one-player modes for it. The most recent slap in the face was Twisted Metal. Soooo fucking pissed about that one. The stories and characters have always been the major draw. So to make it a multiplayer-focused game cuts a lot of the fun out of single-player. Seems like Jaffe and co. weren't terribly worried about keeping in the spirit of past games. There was something so much more involving about the driver of a given vehicle. I didn't just like cars because of the cars. I also liked the characters. Giving you three relatively uninteresting characters to drive every car takes a lot of the draw out. The story mode was half-assed because of the outpouring of fans who demanded a special multiplayer experience. I don't see why there can't be an equal focus.

I don't think so, but I suspect that if triple-A games have gameplay suitable for multiplayer, they will likely include it. We'll probably see fewer and fewer FPS or TPS games that are single-player only.

Multiplayer, collaborative, competitive, community-based, etc. stuff is just what's trending right now. Remember in the PS1 era when everybody though 2D was dead? Fucking Sony of America even refused to license certain Japanese games for the US market on the grounds that they were 2D and would hurt their image.

I will stick with Civ IV, thank you.

The only big budget games Ubisoft has that can justify AAA is Assassins Creed. Just Dance is huge, but it cost them nothing in development compared to Assassins Creed.

Prince of Persia isn't that hot.

I see Kickstarter for hope. Kickstarter allows for game makers to make single player exclusive games without heeding publishers. Look at Wasteland 2. But Kickstarter is still unproved, so time will tell.

Single player games are not going to disappear what is going on now in the industry is the game industry has a TOOLS CRISIS, costs are extremely high and tools are really bad. F2P and MMO's are basically scam artistry that took hold as expenses shot up a cliff as hardware power advanced but most gamers are stupid and not money smart.

Consider that many "failed games" on both PC and console sold a million or a little more then that. In the 90's getting over a few hundred thousand was extremely good. That means the costs of modern development are way out of hand and are going to take decades to reign in with better procedural generation tools and techniques to make high def content on an industrial scale for cheap.

F2P games can never really replace single player games, MMO's have shittier designs then single player games. Too many compromises have to be made for F2P. The F2P craze won't last, F2P will be only one amongst many varieties of games. You're going to see huge flame outs soon. Too many F2P games will make sure of it.

The F2P crowd is small and do not have a bottomless well of money.