Support NeoGAF

[Elandyll]

Don't make it $60 then.

Big ambitious singleplayer games are likely actually far more expensive to produce than most MP games, specially "arena" based ones with a limited number of maps.
Internal alpha/ betas for mp are the big ticket items, but nowadays players are more than happy to do it for companies, even chomping at the bits to pay to access buggy early test phases.

Story writing, script, voice over (in multiple languages), motion capture, HQ asset creation forn stages that are non repetitve, etc.
It's compounded by the fact that you can't have a community (open) beta test your SP game, because then your storyline is out.

I just really hope that MP/ GaaS types won't eventually kill SP games (Witcher 3 and others have shown there's still plentybof money to be made), because as seen with ActiBlizzard and even moreso Valve, the appeal certainly is there.

 

[SmokedMeat]

So there's actually been an interesting trend here with more $40 singleplayer games.

The top 20 NPD games from last month:

1. Madden NFL 18
2. Grand Theft Auto V
3. Uncharted: The Lost Legacy - SP, $40 (Though it does give you access to UC4's MP.)
4. Splatoon 2*
5. The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild* - SP, $60, 97 MC
6. Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six: Siege
7. Mario Kart 8*
8. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Remastered
9. Crash Bandicoot: N. Sane Trilogy - SP, $40
10. Overwatch**
11. Injustice 2
12. Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon: Wildlands
13. Minecraft
14. For Honor
15. Call of Duty: Black Ops III
16. Agents Of Mayhem - SP, $60, 63 MC
17. Forza Horizon 3
18. Battlefield 1
19. NBA 2K17
20. UFC 2

We actually do see $40 singleplayer games doing well.

Of course, the issue is that retailer margins and licensing fees are way less favorable/profitable at $40 than $60.

We see well known brands doing well in the single player market. Seems like new single player titles have it rough.

 

[Koozek]

Lol, not that I have followed it at all, but I thought Agents of Mayhem was another one of those Overwatch/Battleborn-kinda games.

 

[Yearsoflurking]

Maybe it needs to be if they're losing revenue.

Also I wouldn't say the single player experience of Uncharted Lost Legacy is drastically different from previous Uncharted games.

Lost legacy is a shorter uncharted game with an already finished engine. You wouldn't see a full fledge multiple year production uncharted or last of us sequel as an 60 dollar game.

 

[Randolph Freelander]

That's unfortunate, as I'm clearly an outlier.

If it's a "service based game," I'm probably not touching it. I refuse to pay extra to access such services, such as the redundant charges to use PSN or XBL.

I'm not paying the price of 2 games just so I can play 1.

 

[Welfare]

Plenty of SP games sell just fine. Agents of Mayhem was a SP Hero Shooter with nothing going for it.

But hey, let's push that GaaS is the way to go for devs, because why control your budget and focus on making a compelling product when you can just milk customers through microtransactions?

Budgets are out of control and gamers are getting less for their $60 than ever before.

GaaS is successful, so why shouldn't devs implement these features to generate more money?

I mean, if you really want the truth of it, budgets growing like they have games probably shouldn't be $60. Good thing Activision didn't push for $70 games at the start of the gen as a base. Now publishers are pushing for you to buy the higher edition SKU while still providing the $60 SKU, but a few days later.

 

[LastGamer84]

You're emphasizing the point I was making in the statement. For a SP non service based game to reach the top of the charts, execution on both the title as well as the marketing and promotion has to be near perfect. The games you mention as successes? They did everything just about perfectly.



Push? Stats are stats. The sales data is exceptionally clear.



Read the statement again. Because it agrees (somewhat) with your point.

I'm not disputing the statement, I'm just lamenting what the industry has become.

GaaS is successful, so why shouldn't devs implement these features to generate more money?

Besides the fact that it encourages budget bloat and relies on gamers with poor impulse control?

 

[Everlya_Apocryha]

save us from Gaas, sony worldwide studios and nintendo EAD!!!

 

[fredrancour]

Lol, not that I have followed it at all, but I thought Agents of Mayhem was another one of those Overwatch/Battleborn-kinda games.

I also thought it was a multi-player only game. How the hell did I get this impression? My response to this thread went "didn't know that had a campaign" - "oh wait what the hell"

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Plenty of SP games sell just fine. Agents of Mayhem was a SP Hero Shooter with nothing going for it.

But hey, let's push that GaaS is the way to go for devs, because why control your budget and focus on making a compelling product when you can just milk customers through microtransactions?

Budgets are out of control and gamers are getting less for their $60 than ever before.

Publishers are pushing the GaaS model because consumers are responding positively to it.

 

[MatPiscatella]

I'm not disputing the statement, I'm just lamenting what the industry has become.

Oh. Fair enough.

 

[Staf]

As someone who don't like multiplayer games, this is a depressing read. Oh well, back to Pillars of eternity on PS4!

 

[Tigress]

As some some one who hates what microtransactions do to a game (or rather encourage how a developer makes the game) and much much prefers SP games this really saddens me. Though this doesn't surprise me at all. MTs are very profitable just like gambling because in general the games are designed more for a gambling mindset which will keep putting money in for chance of reward rather than designed for fun. And in general it's easier to get away with MTs in MP games because gamers haven't accepted the idea for SP games. Which is why you have Bethesda trying their own way of monetizing. And as some one who sees where things are going, I'm hoping Bethesda finds a good way that doesn't involve going MP cause they are one of the few left still wanting to make single player games and I'm not going to hope they aren't going to see the other money developers are making and not want to find some way of getting that themselves. They are a business and in the end they want to make profit.

There's only one MP game I even play, GTA online, which is actually a perfect example of how developers will purposely do bad design in a game to encourage MT purchases.

 

[Brotherhood93]

This has been pretty clear for some time now but I think it'll swing back eventually. Multiplayer/Games as service is heading for over-saturation, if not at that point already. In fact it might be just that, as many people have joked recently, that there's too many games in general where not having near-perfect execution is dangerous for any game regardless of it's type (see Lawbreakers as a recent MP example).

 

[ethomaz]

He's saying you have to nail a good SP game in every aspect to make it successful in today's market. So you are agreeing with the OP comment for the most part.

That is true for each game... not related to being SP, MP or service.

Quality defines sales.

I know MC is not always accurate but even a with good quality with a low MC because some launch issues will sell well after launch due good WOM.

Quality sells games.

 

[Memento]

That is why Sony is my favorite publisher.

They are the only big publisher greenlighting left and right AAA singleplayer games nowadays.

I think they will venture in the "games as a service" camp sooner or later but I am sure they will keep funding games like Spider Man and Death Stranding.

 

[Nirolak]

This has been pretty clear for some time now but I think it'll swing back eventually. Multiplayer/Games as service is heading for over-saturation, if not at that point already. In fact it might be just that, as many people have joked recently, that there's too many games in general where not having near-perfect execution is dangerous for any game regardless of it's type (see Lawbreakers as a recent MP example).

Historically speaking, developers move toward new horizons when they run into an oversatured field, instead of old horizons. Those generally don't work out unless you're scaling down and trying a new business model.

For example, adventure games aren't full priced products anymore, nor are classic style WRPGs.

 

[blakep267]

This has been pretty clear for some time now but I think it'll swing back eventually. Multiplayer/Games as service is heading for over-saturation, if not at that point already. In fact it might be just that, as many people have joked recently, that there's too many games in general where not having near-perfect execution is dangerous for any game regardless of it's type (see Lawbreakers as a recent MP example).

Lawbreakers was just unfortunate to be launching at a time where Overwatch is still going strong and then having PUBG take over the whole first part of the year. They even marketed the game fairly well

 

[Welfare]

Besides the fact that it encourages budget bloat and relies on gamers with poor impulse control?

Budgets have been growing long before this model. The switch to HD graphics blew AAA budgets sky high, and relying solely on one $60 purchase does not cut it anymore. That's why we saw the massive DLC push last gen, online passes, season passes, and now loot boxes.

 

[Stone Ocean]

The problem is there's only so much room in the market for service games.

 

[FoneBone]

On a related note, I cannot see this trend boding well for Wolfenstein or The Evil Within next month. I admire that Bethesda is still trying to push big single-player games that aren't open-world, but I don't think Doom, Dishonored 2, or Prey exactly burned up the charts, and I foresee changes in their publishing strategy after next month.

 

[IKizzLE]

Plenty of SP games sell just fine. Agents of Mayhem was a SP Hero Shooter with nothing going for it.

But hey, let's push that GaaS is the way to go for devs, because why control your budget and focus on making a compelling product when you can just milk customers through microtransactions?

Budgets are out of control and gamers are getting less for their $60 than ever before.

I like GaaS. You like making general sweeping accusations. I felt quite satisfied with the likes of Destiny 2 and Overwatch recently.

 

[blakep267]

That is true for each game... not related to being SP, MP or service.

Not particularly(Cough Destiny 1). I like a lot of Ubisoft games but I'd hardly say their execution is perfect. But they have multiplayer hooks and GAAS elements that keep people playing. If For Honor had strictly been a single player fighting game it wouldn't be nearly as popular as it was with the PVP/E elements. Same could be said if Ghost recon had no co-op

 

[Z3M0G]

$60 = Service
$40 = Non-Service

Id be ok with this if Service games didnt also come with endless microtransactions on top of the $60.

Oddly, the gap between a $60 game and a F2P game is shrinking...

 

[DeathbyCheerios]

On a related note, I cannot see this trend boding well for Wolfenstein or The Evil Within next month. I admire that they're still trying to push big single-player games that aren't open-world, but I don't think Doom, Dishonored 2, or Prey exactly burned up the charts, and I foresee changes in their publishing strategy after next month.

Which is odd because from what I have heard those 3 games are excellent.

I do think we are in a weird place where most players just want to play games with their friends so single player games don't sell as much. I think if they had took multiplayer out of doom they could of sold reasonably well at $40 or $50.

 

[phant0m]

Or, just be good? Witcher 3 was non service based, had no MP and sold hotcakes. BotW outsold systems available to play it on. Divinity OS, the sequel and PoE selling well with comparatively little marketing. As others pointed out, there’s also a very nice group of high-quality at the $40 mark that sell very well: R&C, the FF XII remaster, Hellblade and Lost Legacy.


AoM was a bad game and had bad marketing.
Andromeda was a bad game and had good marketing.

I don’t think the RPG genre is really in any danger, as they generally offer 40+ hour experience anyway. I think this years Ass Creed and Far Cry will be the watermarks of whether the single player AAA 12-20 hour FPS/TPS is still viable in the market at $60. It wasn’t for Prey (and I thought that was a very good game).

 

[M3d10n]

Notice how many of the single-player success stories being brought up like Zelda, GTA, The Witcher, Skyrim, etc. veer into the "hundreds of even unlimited hours of content" side.

 

[AstroNut325]

Yup. I've been noticing this trend too. Good to have data.

GaaS is the future.

Edit :
People are missing the forest from the trees. Mat is saying that, yes, super high quality SP games with great marketing succeed. That's not practical for every game.

 

[Interfectum]

That is true for each game... not related to being SP, MP or service.

Quality defines sales.

I know MC is not always accurate but even a with good quality with a low MC because some launch issues will sell well after launch due good WOM.

Quality sells games.

I think the argument is it's easier for a questionable quality GaaS to be a success than a b-tier SP game in today's market.

For a single player game to be a huge success, one that rivals a GaaS title, it has to have perfect execution across the board. Game quality, game marketing and a really good hook. Most of them are bloated to open worlds so they can attempt to rival the unlimited hours a GaaS provides.

 

[Mato]

First time I hear about this game. Doesn't seem bad but incoherent. Name does it no favors, sounds derivative.

 

[ethomaz]

Not particularly(Cough Destiny 1). I like a lot of Ubisoft games but I'd hardly say their execution is perfect. But they have multiplayer hooks and GAAS elements that keep people playing. If For Honor had strictly been a single player fighting game it wouldn't be nearly as popular as it was with the PVP/E elements. Same could be said if Ghost recon had no co-op

Because these games focused in MP or Coop... of course you will sell it will do bad being SP only.

Created a SP focused game with good quality and profit.

It doesn’t need MP, service, Coop, etc.

 

[Obliterator]

Budgets have been growing long before this model. The switch to HD graphics blew AAA budgets sky high, and relying solely on one $60 purchase does not cut it anymore. That's why we saw the massive DLC push last gen, online passes, season passes, and now loot boxes.

A lot of people don't realize a ton AAA games would essentially cease to exist at scale without DLC / microtransactions at this point. Its keeping the industry alive in a lot of ways.

Look at any financial report of the major publishers and look at how much of their revenue comes from Digital purchases now. That tells you all you need to know.

 

[Ashtar]

Yup this is getting more and more the case, look at Prey and Dishonored 2, hell look at WD2 which tried to have a GAAS component but it didn't work out too well.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule like your Zelda, Horizon, Mario and probably AC:O and Shadow of War but for the most part gamers have moved on.

It kind of sucks because I like playing through a game, finishing it and being done with it, maybe return in a while if it was really excellent but this playing the same game endlessly is not my ideal way to play.

 

[Deadly Joker]

Yup. I've been noticing this trend too. Good to have data.

GaaS is the future.

Not my future. I will quit playing video games if this happens. I do not enjoy MP games.

 

[zelas]

Lost legacy is a shorter uncharted game with an already finished engine. You wouldn't see a full fledge multiple year production uncharted or last of us sequel as an 60 dollar game.

I know what Lost Legacy is. Its existence is my point. Maybe publishers shouldn't be so focused on sticking only to full price sequels and start looking towards offering lower priced alternatives in between to decrease the risk when launching the next full on entry.

 

[MatPiscatella]

A lot of people don't realize a ton AAA games would essentially cease to exist at scale without DLC / microtransactions at this point. Its keeping the industry alive in a lot of ways.

Look at any financial report of the major publishers and look at how much of their revenue comes from Digital purchases now. That tells you all you need to know.

All. Of. This.

Notice how many of the single-player success stories being brought up like Zelda, GTA, The Witcher, Skyrim, etc. veer into the "hundreds of even unlimited hours of content" side.

Yup.

super high quality SP games with great marketing succeed. That's not practical for every game.

Yup again.

 

[Forward]

I only buy games with strong single player primary focus.

I see myself going full retro in the very near future. If it weren't for Steam and the 3DS, I probably would have already done so. The PS3 DID have an amazing body of single player games though - or at least games that could be enjoyed both single and multi, in equal proportions.

 

[Some Nobody]

If you're a single-player fan, it comes down to what you're willing to deal with in your games. If Ubisoft needs to keep an optional multi-player in Watch Dogs for me to have WD3? So be it.

If a game has co-op or multi-player but it doesn't affect the game's SP? That's fine.

If every game becomes Destiny? Content-starved that just has really solid gameplay that you play over and over again? I'll opt out, thanks.

Similarly, something like Overwatch where there is no story? Just pure MP? I'm not willing to spend money there either.

I'm not close-minded to GaaS or DLC, though. If someone made a Witcher 3-type world that continously expanded with DLC? You could get hundreds out of me. WarnerBros is leaving money on the table for instance, because I'd totally pay for a DC game that continously added new cities and heroes but was otherwise single-player and had a unique enough combat system.

So yeah. There are plenty of gamers who prefer SP games, or do MP but only have room for one and otherwise only do SP. They'll figure out how to cater to us too, because who passes on money?

 

[mentallyinept]

it's probably OK for SP games to have lower overall lifetime sales. You just won't reach the highest of highs that MP games do.

-- SP games have much lower lifetime costs can MP, GaaS oriented games.
-- No servers to maintain, no continuing large scale development, etc. It's out the door and done with.
-- Any DLC is just more icing on top of the cake you already sold to people.

 

[blakep267]

Because these games focused in MP or Coop... of course you will sell it will do bad being SP only.

Created a SP focused game with good quality and profit.

It doesn’t need MP, service, Coop, etc.

Your not understanding what he's saying. He's saying SP games have to be exceptional, have great marketing or an established fan base or brand. Where as a service based game doesn't need all of that just hooks that players find favorable. A 75 MC service based game with great multiplayer hooks can do great where as a new IP low 80's SP only game has a harder time(Sunset overdrive, Wuantum break etc)

 

[HeroR]

Or, just be good? Witcher 3 was non service based, had no MP and sold hotcakes. BotW outsold systems available to play it on. Divinity OS, the sequel and PoE selling well with comparatively little marketing. As others pointed out, there’s also a very nice group of high-quality at the $40 mark that sell very well: R&C, the FF XII remaster, Hellblade and Lost Legacy.


AoM was a bad game and had bad marketing.
Andromeda was a bad game and had good marketing.

I don’t think the RPG genre is really in any danger, as they generally offer 40+ hour experience anyway. I think this years Ass Creed and Far Cry will be the watermarks of whether the single player AAA 12-20 hour game is still viable in the market. It wasn’t for Prey (and I thought that was a very good game).

Witcher 3 and Breath of the Wild have DLC, which is a type of GAAS.

 

[Grettir_the_Swole]

I wonder how it will impact the F2P and GAS models as my generation begins to enter the workforce. Millenials are a stingy bunch towards "traditional" marketing and sales models. Will we gradually abandon games as we focus on raising families and other occupations or will there be a shift back to rich single player experiences?

 

[MatPiscatella]

Quality sells games.

Quality only has a coefficient of determination of 30% or less, in most cases, to sales.

Meaning differences in quality can explain only about 30% of the variability in sales.

That's why I say that it has to be a great game, with great marketing and promotion, to get to the charts.

I really wish you'd take a moment to read and think through the things I post before you reflexively go to the reply button to tell me I'm wrong about arguments I'm not even making. You do this all the time. It doesn't have to be this way.

Witcher 3 and Breath of the Wild have DLC, which is a type of GAAS.

CORRECT.

Service =/= multiplayer. Non-service =/= single player.

 

[M3d10n]

Yup this is getting more and more the case, look at Prey and Dishonored 2, hell look at WD2 which tried to have a GAAS component but it didn't work out too well.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule like your Zelda, Horizon, Mario and probably AC:O and Shadow of War but for the most part gamers have moved on.

It kind of sucks because I like playing through a game, finishing it and being done with it, maybe return in a while if it was really excellent but this playing the same game endlessly is not my ideal way to play.

With exception of Mario, all other games are open-world-ish, allowing players to extract several more hours of gameplay compared to completely linear story-based games. Two of those games (AC:O and Shadow of War) also heavily feature micro-transactions and post-launch content. Zelda has DLC too, even if not as much.

BTW, mainline Mario games are arguably content-heavy games as well and the upcoming one is exploration-oriented. It's likely to receive DLC as well.

The takeaway is simple: consumers are increasingly more likely to gravitate towards games they know they can get dozens/hundreds/thousands of hours of entertainment out and less likely to go for one-and-done full price experiences that can be beaten in a single weekend.

 

[Brotherhood93]

Historically speaking, developers move toward new horizons when they run into an oversatured field, instead of old horizons. Those generally don't work out unless you're scaling down and trying a new business model.

For example, adventure games aren't full priced products anymore, nor are classic style WRPGs.

You're right but I don't think traditional single-player games are going away anytime soon. You're talking about a very specific genre of game but there is always going to be significant demand for SP games, in my opinion. The current trend is for big, open-world games and it's very well possible the fashionable genre of SP games will change, perhaps to smaller $40 titles similar to The Lost Legacy, but I just don't see a future where all games are following the same business model.

The fear some have that there will be no major single-player games in 10 years time seems irrational to me and I don't foresee GaaS being a sustainable business model if all the devs/pubs try to chase it but I could be totally wrong about that. I guess we'll see.

Lawbreakers was just unfortunate to be launching at a time where Overwatch is still going strong and then having PUBG take over the whole first part of the year. They even marketed the game fairly well

Isn't that kind of the point though? There's only so much room for these types of games that it makes it increasingly hard for new games to break the hold of the ones that already exist.

 

[Pachael]

service games is what's going on now and in the future, which makes the earlier half SP JRPG successes like Nier:A and P5 all the more commendable in this environment. Both I recall debut at $60 (the latter I pre-ordered at that price)

 

[phant0m]

Witcher 3 and Breath of the Wild have DLC, which is a type of GAAS.

I get your point, but I disagree. I realize it’s a thin line, but when I think of GAAS, I think of Division, Wildlands, Destiny, R6S, etc. Their updates continuously change the game world and it’s mechanics and often have “community” events. Witcher 3 / BotW just have static expansion content.

 

[Some Nobody]

CORRECT.

Service =/= multiplayer. Non-service =/= single player.

I figured this was what you meant. People are going to have to understand going forward that "service game" doesn't mean only something like OverWatch or Rocket League where the focus is entirely on multiplayer. A service game can totally be The Witcher 3, which has zero multiplayer but did release a $30 DLC pack featuring two expansions. It still counts, but I'd bet in the minds of most gamers they wouldn't think it did.

 

[Ridley327]

service games is what's going on now and in the future, which makes the earlier half SP JRPG successes like Nier:A and P5 all the more commendable in this environment. Both I recall debut at $60 (the latter I pre-ordered at that price)

Incidentally, those games likely don't fall under the definition of a traditional single player game as they have a fair bit of DLC available for them (P5 especially), and both do have passive multiplayer elements to them (the poll for what to do on a specific day in P5, the YoRHa elements in Nier Automata that wind up playing a major role in the game's plot).

 

[george_us]

Damn, the future of single player games worry me. Luckily the mid and indie tier will always be there er, but it was always nice to have the occasional mainstream production

Mainstream SP AAA games have been shackled for years by their bloated budgets so this doesn't concern me one bit.