Valve: single player games have a future

By Fred Dutton Published 8 November, 2010

Not all gamers want "stress" of multiplayer.

There's still a huge market for single player-only games, developer Valve has insisted.

Answering an assertion from Gamasutra that single player games were doomed as they're harder for publishers to monetise and easier to pirate, Portal 2 project manager Erik Johnson said, "I still think the analysis that every product needs to be a competitor in multiplayer, or an MMO, is incorrect; there are a lot of people who want an experience without the stress, so I don't see that changing."

"You brought up piracy being a reason to not do single player, which I think is a pretty crazy analysis on an issue like that," he continued.

"That's making a decision for your customers about the types of products you are going to build without, by definition, including your customers in that at all.

"You're saying that because of these pirates, you get no single player experiences, which makes no sense to me. If there are as much players that want single player experiences, you should go build that. I think there are plenty of people that still want to have single player experiences."

Johnson added that, as a designer, he tries to keep financial concerns outside of what he and his team are trying to achieve.

"One thing to think about is, when we are building a game like Half-Life 2 or Portal, monetisation is a separate thing that, in the context of the game design, doesn't make a huge amount of sense, really.

Portal 2 is due for release on PC, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 next year.

Picture of Fred.

About Fred Dutton

Fred Dutton is Eurogamer's US news editor, based in Washington DC.

Read more articles from Fred by visiting the Fred Dutton archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (59) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • jack24 #1 2 years ago

    I wholeheartedly agree.

  • bad09 #2 2 years ago

    Amen!

  • YoshiMcTaggis #3 2 years ago

    yarp

  • JoeGBallad #4 2 years ago

    Is there also room for get-everyone-round-stop-looking-at-my-screen-splitscreen-multiplayer because I like that too and really don't want it to disappear.

  • Shikasama #5 2 years ago

    Pretty stupid question from a journalist really.

    Hire him immediately!

  • Lukus #6 2 years ago

    Good single player is what I look for primarily in any game I buy. I find online multiplayer far too competitive, even with friends, which saps the fun out of it, for me.

  • sfp_noodle #7 2 years ago

    The day there stops being single player games will be the day I retire as a gamer.
    Edited by sfp_noodle at 08/11/10 @ 19:41

  • weejok #8 2 years ago

    All the more reason to get Episode 3 done!!!

  • Emmit_Assassin #9 2 years ago

    Along with a barrage of other such words, 'monetisation' should be banned and if spoken, punishable by death. They get the £40 (ish) off us, why is that not enough? Why do they have to try and squeeze every last penny possible out of us?
    Stop worrying about how much money you can scew us out of and concentrate on making a great game and it will sell itself and make you shit loads.
    Can you imagine if MS let the rigns go with the whole 'charge them for anything and everything on XBL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!' and let the devs give us free stuff? How much more would you trust MS and the devs? How much more would you spend on their games if you weren't worried about how much they're going to charge you for the rest of the game (that they'll release after) after you've spent the £40 in the first place?
    As for SP over MP, there are certain games that should be only MP (CoD being only one), others that should be SP only (Dead Space, Batman:AA etc..) and others that can be both (Red Dead etc...).
    There is room for all, and to try and ignore SP is stupid. However, trying to shoe horn MP into a SP experience (will it really work in Dead Space 2?) is just as bad as tagging a shoddy SP game onto an MP game (CoD, I'm looking at you.)

  • Haloboy #10 2 years ago

    Black Ops. Play single player campaign first or dive right into multiplayer where I'll be instantly roasted alive before I say 'hai!'.

    Decisions, decisions.

  • sfp_noodle #11 2 years ago

    ^^

    I say sell it and play some Halo boy

  • Haloboy #12 2 years ago

    You don't quite seem to understand the bitter irony behind my name do you noodle.

    Anyway, if I want to immerse myself in a strong character lead seat of my pants game experience I'll fire up the single player.

    On the other hand if I want to be called a 'fahg' all night amidst a load of annoying as fuck french pre-teens I'll play the MP.
    Edited by Haloboy at 08/11/10 @ 19:50

  • jefranklin18 #13 2 years ago

    Publishers please take note.

  • martlev #14 2 years ago

    Thankfully single player games are still around. I just wish that more shooters would put time and effort into their single player campaigns. 6 hours for MW2 and roughly 4 for MoH was utterly disapointing.

  • SteveHolt #15 2 years ago

    I'm okay with what he calls "stress", it's just that most MP games are kinda shit.

  • Utopolitan #16 2 years ago

    I just love Valve.

    And I wish more developers would prioritize single player over multi.

  • Centrifugal #17 2 years ago

    Fallout: New Vegas has shipped five million. I know that's not sales, but it's still a pretty good representation of its popularity, as it's been high in the charts since its release.

    New Vegas is a single player game.

    More needn't be said.

  • The-Bodybuilder #18 2 years ago

    I almost forgot that this isn't facebook. I was rampantly searching for the "like" button.

  • Scimarad #19 2 years ago

    Yeah, most of my gaming (which admittedly isn't much at the moment) is either single player or split-screen. I've got nothing against online multiplayer aside from when it impacts the single player game.

  • dsmx #20 2 years ago

    New vegas is pretty much the only game to come out recently on next gen consoles that actually has a meaty single player experience.

  • StooMonster #21 2 years ago

    ...and we all know the single player Valve game that we're waiting for!

  • MiniAmin #22 2 years ago

    For me single player gaming is like reading a novel - it's an absorbng, solitary experience in which I suspend any disbelief and lose myself in the narrative afforded by being the main protagonist in an interactive virtual world.

    Multiplayer is an entirely different experience, fun, frantic, tactical, social and yes stressful. As much as I love multiplayer gaming and appreciate its capacity to increase the longevity of a game, for me, a good single player campaign will always remain a wonderful experience unmatched by hardly any other media offerings.

  • Emmit_Assassin #23 2 years ago

    @MiniAmin

    Well put, that man. +1

  • AaronTurner #24 2 years ago

    I rarely play online anymore, I prefer leaderboards etc

  • PixelPirate #25 2 years ago

    The gaming industry of "Stick a Donk on it" == "It has Multiplayer!"

    Single player games can offer amazing experiences and let you go at your own speed, multiplayer games have alot of drawbacks for people who dont have alot of time, or enjoy games but arent very good at them.

  • TheGuvernor #26 2 years ago

    There was a time not long ago when a solid, gripping single player fps expereince was the norm - with multi an add on:
    FEAR
    FAR CRY
    HL2
    COD2 (almost)
    More recently Bioshock, FarCry2 ( I loved it!) & Crysis.

    It's a mercenary move on the part of pubs/devs to put out a sub 6hr campaign.
    No way am I going to pay large cash for MOH or COD for such an attrocious cash grab. No bloody way.

    Single player is also really important from a tech perspective - it's a place to demo new tech improvements as most of us have to reduce settings when we venture on line.
    Singleplayer & consumers should both be given the respect & attention they deserve.
    Edited by TheGuvernor at 08/11/10 @ 21:12

  • ISeeEverything #27 2 years ago

    I think that story driven single player is movielike experience and deserves future , it's like a good book .

  • ubergine #28 2 years ago

    It's hard to believe this question even exists.

    I can't understand why more developers, publishers, and certainly sites like Gamasutra just haven't looked more to the game which kicked off this current gen of consoles: Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Putting aside the early, (experimental?) embarrassment of Horse Armour, the DLC model for Oblivion is surely why Zenimax is the new EA. The DLC came in a wide range of sizes and prices, much of which was compelling (especially to collectors and keen players) and provided a revenue stream for second hand game sales years before the best part of"Project Ten Dollar" slid out of some EA lizard's trousers.

    PC Oblivion had NO DRM. Zenimax BOUGHT ID. Is there a relationship between these two statements?

    Anyway, it's kind of ironic for Valve to be championing single player since they haven't made one in years.

  • Blazewamp #29 2 years ago

    AGREE! i my fave games are all single player

  • metallicorphan #30 2 years ago

    yeah someone on Kotaku said that they want the next Elder Scrolls game to have Co-Op..i nearly spat my Coffee over the Monitor

    Co-Op and MP have their places,but don't just stick them in/on single player games just for the sake of it

  • The_Asking #31 2 years ago

    It's not just a question of not wanting stress, I love games that test skill and reflexes - but the last time the multiplayer component of a game had any positive impact was with super smash bros brawl. Normally I'm all about the narrative in a game - Mass Effect, Fall out, Dragon age - all recent narrative heavy big sellers, that would not make much sense in a multiplayer context. I really don't see games like that dieing out soon.

    Irrational games had some strong arguments about this when they shipped Bioshock as single player only.

  • makeamazing #32 2 years ago

    Sorry i am a loner and want to play on my own, is that wrong :( Glad valve agree :D

  • chessboxer #33 2 years ago

    @metallicorphan

    I agree that MP and co-op shouldn't be added just for the sake of it.

    I remember there were people calling for co-op in God Of War 3? WTF?! Kratos doesn't need a side kick.

  • Shinetop #34 2 years ago

    Good job. Now get back to working on Episode 3!

  • Farzlepot #35 2 years ago

    Dear Valve,

    I agree with you wholeheartedly.

    NOW QUIT WASTING TIME OPINING AND GET ON WITH EPISODE 3!!

    Sincerely,

    Farzlepot
    Edited by Farzlepot at 08/11/10 @ 22:31

  • tenofspades #36 2 years ago

    I disagree!

    (I just want to be the only one on the thread to be neg-repped)

  • dingo75 #37 2 years ago

    Black Ops. Play single player campaign first or dive right into multiplayer where I'll be instantly roasted alive before I say 'hai!'.


    If you say "hai!" you should be shot on sight anyways.

    I prefer single player myself and as someone else already said: The day meaningful single player games died is the last day I bought a game (I won't retire being a gamer but concentrate on my backlog that should keep me busy some years or replay older games that are still kicking today's games' asses.).
    Edited by dingo75 at 08/11/10 @ 22:51

  • cw- #38 2 years ago

    @The Bodybuilder
    I almost forgot that this isn't facebook. I was rampantly searching for the "like" button.

    It's at the top of the article :p

  • Collymilad #39 2 years ago

    I see what he means about the stress.

    I wouldn't use as strong a word as stressful, but it's good to play a game in Single Player and know that you're playing against a somewhat predictable and difficulty-stable opponent.

    I like playing FPS and other games online but I do feel a need to win and do get annoyed if I go on a losing streak.

  • chaywa #40 2 years ago

    That being said its very easy for Valve to say that given that they are a well established studio, with their own Marketplace/DRM model to cut down on piracy and plenty of financial support and well known and respected products.

    New IPs from not that well known studios (see the article on Enslaved not selling so much earlier as proof of this), and rampant piracy in the PC indie market (see World of Goo and Braid) stifle that notion entirely. Its difficult to break through into the market without being visually unique (Minecraft) and lots of gamers will be offput by that, even at a cheaper price point.

    Single player is here to stay, but I fear the single player market being crowded out by fewer developers/publishers than say 6-7 years ago in the PS2 era.

  • Sevens #41 2 years ago

    Single player doomed -- what's wrong with you?


    P.S.:

    "Fallout: New Vegas has shipped five million. I know that's not sales, but it's still a pretty good representation of its popularity, as it's been high in the charts since its release.

    New Vegas is a single player game.

    More needn't be said."

    Well, people mostly bought that because you surely can't get more bugs for you buck.
    Edited by Sevens at 09/11/10 @ 00:15

  • StooMonster #42 2 years ago

    Can you finish Half-Life 2: Episode 3 before you move into Half-Life 3 please?

  • whoyouknow #43 2 years ago

    Never a truer word spoken, from the makers of the only multiplayer game I can stand for more than ten minutes.

  • CrispyLog #44 2 years ago

    I got a pirate copy of the original Half-Life when it first came out (piracy is wrong and I only got a couple back in the 90s). Since then I have bought that game twice legally as well as buying Half-Life 2 twice legally. People really do overestimate the destructive force of piracy. Great games having nothing to fear from piracy, only the shit games that aren't worth paying for.

    If every game was half as good as Half-Life 2 then they wouldn't need multiplayer stuck on.

  • beatwolf #45 2 years ago

    well said!!!!!!!!

  • Shakey_Jake33 #46 2 years ago

    If single player games didn't have a future, I'd have to politely bow out of gaming. The only time I tend to play multiplayer games is local co-op, or something like Smash Brothers when coming back from the pub with friends. Otherwise, I like to play a game at my own pace.

  • TRUTH #47 2 years ago

    I don't mind multiplayer but prefer singleplayer experience with games - Ico, Castlevania LOS, Uncharted 2, Half Life 2, Okami, Metro 2033, Fallout 3,Oblivion etc etc, will never be the same and for worse if singleplayer was multiplayer. Even games like Borderlands was more enjoyable on singleplayer rather then the intended co-op/multiplayer.

  • ShiroBen #48 2 years ago

    They better bloody have.

  • Headache #49 2 years ago

    Surely the more sensible route of developers is to focus on a great single player experience. With the likes of WoW, Halo, Starcraft 2 and Call of Duty wildly popular most of the people who passionately love multi player gaming will be doing so on one of those platforms. That's a tough market to break into (as most MMORPG makers are still discovering.)

    Whereas a great single player game will always have an audience ready to try it out because (for the most part) they don't have the same replay value of a great multi player game meaning that no matter how good the game was, once completed, its players are ready to move onto the next great game.

    Basically, Valve +1

  • gillri #50 2 years ago

    SP>MP always has, always will

  • Sausagechaos #51 2 years ago

    The trouble with multiplayer is that it reminds you how awful the general public are, a succession of screeching little fuckers repeating themselves and taking advantage of the weak. There are no basic good manners for new players , just a miserable darwinist exercise in preying on the weak.
    They don't need multiplayer, they need national service.

    Enough of this, I have letters to write to the Daily Mail

  • FortysixterUK #52 2 years ago

    That's great.

    now....Where the fuck is episode 3 ?

  • Subi #53 2 years ago

    If I wanted a multiplayer experience, I'd become a school teacher. That way I would still have 12-year-old kids screeching abuse at me and not be able to do anything about it, but I would be being paid for it. I wouldn't be getting paid very much, but I wouldn't be paying for it.

    Edit: And +1 for getting on with Ep3 as well.
    Edit 2: But don't break the previous games in the series like you did last time.
    Edited by Subi at 09/11/10 @ 11:05

  • arcam #54 2 years ago

    @Sausagechaos

  • Sausagechaos #55 2 years ago

    Yes?

  • Fur1ousApollo #56 2 years ago

    I want both types of game. Not necessarily in the same game. I love Fallout and I love Halo multiplayer.

    I switch between playing both types single and multiplayer dependent on my mood.

  • dfooster #57 2 years ago

    I fear for the single player experience when you consider the huge following a game like call of duty has. Never understood it really. Run around a bit get a couple of kills, die yourself, spawn screen rinse and repeat.

    I prefer a good narrative and ingenious level design to get me hooked. Call me old fashioned i dont care. Call of duty isn't fit to be mentioned in the same breath as games like half life 2 which have moments that I will remember probably for the rest of my life.

  • darth_paul #58 2 years ago

    i buy single player games

  • KonanTheLibrarian #59 2 years ago

    I'm all for MP and used to enjoy MW alot, until my 16 yr old nephew came over and I watched him play MW2. Runs round corner knifes someone, quickly pulls out shotgun another kill, jump across roof pulls out handgun, another kill. I now spend my eves reclined in my armchair avec slippers, paper and bottle of stout!

    Stress free and I get pissed!