Multiplayer-Only Games Over-Crowding The Gaming Industry?

Each year, there are tons and tons of game announcements and reveals. But there are not quite as many as when e3 rolls around, which is just getting started at the time of this wrtiting. For years now, it seems about half the reveals are multiplayer-only games, and most of them are first-person-shooters, and if not those, then third-person-shooters.

There are literally like 3-5 of these types of games to every one single-player game. I remember when e3 was something exciting, as it gave gamers something to look forward to. Not so much anymore. We might get like 2-5 interesting single-player games now. Though I suppose if you are into the countless multiplayer games, then things are more amazing in gaming than ever.

But let’s be honest. All these games are designed to play forever, until servers inevitably shut down, which depending on the success of the game, could take over a decade. So it baffles me that they could make so many of these games. If players are being loyal to one or two games, how can there ever be a fanbase large enough to sustain 90% of these endlessly released games, especially when so many of them constantly add on to their games to hold player interest?

And I imagine if a player wants to become really good, they are sticking to one game, so that they can eventually dominate most matches.

Online multiplayer has become such a priority, that games that are thoughtful enough to give us a single player are usually, and sometimes weak little game, but we still have to pay full price, mainly to help the company sustain it’s multiplayer software.

What’s even more baffling, is local multiplayer, aside from Nintendo games, has become practically non-existent in most games. Why can I play every game in the world online if I pay a subscription fee, but I can’t play with a friend in my own living room? Obviously, the games that are solely huge battle arenas and the like, local multiplayer is not possible or necessary, but smaller-scaled games that can allow 2-4 players to play don’t have a local multiplayer option.

And yes, I did answer my own question. It is probably due to the fact that they want you to pay for PlayStation Plus and XboxGold or whatever it’s called.

I just watched Ubisoft’s presentation, and it was pretty much four multiplayer games, 2 single player games, and a game that teaches you guitar, which I guess can be considered  single player.

Happy e3 to you online shooter fans. For a pre-event I also watch contained a large amount of games, more than half of them multiplayer shooters, so you’ve got your great selection of picks, even though you’re probably going to stick to what you’ve been playing the past five years anyway…

Us single players will be treated to maybe 10 AAA single player games and a thousand lame indie titles. Woohoo!

Metroid 5…Will It Ever Happen?

What is the deal with the Metroid series? Why does it never get any love?

I’ve read it’s really only popular in the west…or is it Japan? One of them it does really well, the other side of the world not so much.

But regardless, it still has to make Nintendo quite a bit of money, so what the heck?

Is the awesome gameplay, great atmosphere, fun exploration and item collecting just not worth anybody’s time? What makes this more frustrating is that there have been about 10,000 “metroidvania” games that have come out in the last 10 years, which is how long ago we got the last Metroid game…besides a remake.

But that is annoying too. I have Samus Returns, I haven’t played it yet, but I can’t wait to when I finally get around to it. But we are in a world where we get just as many remakes or remasters as we do new games.

When Metroid Prime 4 was announced last year, I was super excited, but when that 4 popped up on the “trailer” my first thought was that it was a remake of Metroid Fusion. That is when I realized that I am conditioned now to expect remakes over new games.

And did we really need Metroid Prime 4? That series closed out nicely. Why not go onto a different story line? I love the first person take and would love to see more games in that style, but I would also like to see more third person games like Other M, except done better this time around, and I absolutely would love some more sidescrollers.

The whole time we had the DS and 3DS, we got one game for each, Metroid Prime Hunters, one of the worst in the series, and Metroid II: Samus Returns. But isn’t anyone curious what happens to Samus after Fusion? That had such a cool story line; I couldn’t wait to see where they took it from there. Trouble is, we’ve been waiting almost 20 years to see what happens. And that is simply unacceptable.

I am giving myself false hope that they will release a Metroid 5 alongside Prime 4 like they did with Fusion and the first Prime game all those years ago.

But then again, who knows? Maybe Prime 4 takes place after Fusion and not between Prime 3 and Metroid II, like I assume?

But they need to give us a new sidescrolling adventure for sure. Zero Mission was the last I have played, and it was mind blowing…and again…that was a remake. Probably the best remake of all time…but still.

Just for kicks, look at how spread out the release dates are.

1986

1991

1994

2 in 2002

3 in 2004

2007

2010

2017.

Those are the years of the mainline games. The oughts were a great decade, the success of Metroid Prime and Fusion probably pushing them to make more. But it all stopped with the not so great Other M. Hopefully Prime 4 will push us into another great decade…the 20’s being full of Metroid games!