As a person who wants to makes games for a living and loves to play games it is always distressing how mediocre some games are and yet they have million dollar budgets. One game always comes to mind is Call of Duty, a game that for all intents and purposes is considered one of the best franchises for FPS (first-person shooters) Black Ops as decent as it was has more than a few issues but truly hasn't changed since Infinity Ward's amazing Call of Duty 4.
Some can argue that if it ain't broke don't fix it, well what about innovation or just trying something new? What about making a Call of Duty game just for multi player and one for single player? This is the separation I am talking about. I know more than a few people who do not enjoy multi player games (me included)I would rather have something co op or highly story based.
Call of Duty single player campaigns are fun but if I purchase the game for the story I am screwed because I just paid $60 for a 5 hour story. I get no enjoyment from the multi player so the only reason I keep the game around is because of the co op (combat training). Black Ops is the only one out of the series that I own because of this. Yeah I know MW2 had spec ops but it was limited to 2 players at a time so it is not the same.
The most recent game that suffers from this is Homefront a game with so much promise because the story was so fascinating but never really got it going during the actual game itself. If the multi player was the point of making this game then why even create a single player portion at all? The development time could have been used to make the multi player better and you can use the story for a game that can benefit from it. I finished this game in about 5.5 hours and I was looking forward to it for months and I was extremely disappointed. The brilliance of this story was over shadowed by the fact that they are making a Call of Duty clone. I was hoping for a better thought out game with actual elements of great story telling and that took chances. Instead I got a great intro, newspaper clippings that attempt to drive the story, a voiceless main character and a cookie cutter design. But wait it has MULTI PLAYER!!! The multi player is set before the game is so not even that is cohesive. I long for the day where a company will say you know we have a brilliant story and let's focus on delivering that. Oh wait we have that they are called Irrational Games the makers of Bioshock.
Bioshock is the example of what I am saying they made an FPS with a story, nurtured that story and did not focus on multi player at all because they know the power of story telling. Is there room for multi player in story driven games? Sure there is as long as it doesn't interfere with the story then I am all for it.
A lot of people said Sony was crazy for putting out games like MAG and SOCOM Confrontation, in my opinion they got it right. They didn't try to force it, they said we want something multi player and that's what they focused on. End of story.
Let's just think about something, are people willing to pay $60 for a multi player game? Yes I think they are. I mean Call of Duty can just be multi player and it will still sell like crazy. For fuck's sake it has a menu option that says load multi player by default.
Homefront you are a disappointment not because you were a bad game but because you are a follower. KAOS and THQ grow some balls, experiment and innovate or you will always be the company whose games people play while they are waiting for the new Call of Duty. And please if you are going to make a voiceless hero at least let me play co op with a voiceless partner.
Is Mass Effect 3 out yet?
No comments:
Post a Comment