Single-player games "gone in 3 years"

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 16 August, 2011

Predicts veteran designer Mark Cerny.

The traditional single-player only game experience will not exist by the end of 2014.

That's the prediction of veteran video game consultant Mark Cerny, who has worked with Sony on games such as Crash Bandicoot, Jak and Daxter, Spyro and Ratchet & Clank.

"I believe the traditional single-player game experience will be gone in three years," Cerny told an audience at a behind-closed door, Sony-organised panel discussion on the future of video games, attended by Eurogamer, this evening.

"Right now you sit in your living room and you're playing a game by yourself – we call it the sp mission or the single-player campaign. In a world with Facebook I just don't think that's going to last."

Cerny pointed to 2009 action RPG Demon's Souls as an example of the single-player campaign of the future.

"We're already seeing the wall starting to crumble a bit," he said. "Demon's Souls, even though on one level it's a single-player game, as you're walking through the world you're seeing the ghosts of everybody who died in that world via the internet. You can leave messages for them. They can leave messages for you. There's actually a boss you fight in that game which is controlled by another player.

"We're talking five, 10 years out. I believe three years from now, if you aren't doing that, you are being criticised in your reviews for your lack of innovation."

This shift from single-player only experiences to connected single-player experiences presents a unique problem to game developers, Cerny said.

"The funny thing here is, we don't even know what to call this. Is it single-player or is it multiplayer? We don't even have the words. It's kind of Orwellian. If you don't have any word for freedom you can't have a revolution. How can you be talking about design when we don't have the words to describe it? Yet, that will be the standard, I believe, in 2014."

Sitting alongside Cerny on the panel was Sony president of Worldwide Studio, Shuhei Yoshida, who said that in the future, all games will have social elements because hardware will be connected.

"I believe almost every electronics device will be connected," he said. "It's going to be very natural to have the social connectivity behind your game. So, whether or not it's a real-time, synchronous, head-to-head game or traditional single-player game, you could be connected to the world."

"A game without the presence of other players in it – you go out three or five years, I believe that is unthinkable given how connected we're becoming," Cerny concluded.

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (133) Latest comment 6 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Dunk_13 #1 6 months ago

    Who cares?

  • TheNonk #2 6 months ago

    "More dumbass comments in three years" predicts single player only gamer

  • MistaGav #3 6 months ago

    It will be a sad day for gaming if it does happen...

  • chasejamie #4 6 months ago

    I'm actually playing less and less online now and playing more single player games. But I'm not an analyst or expert. Merely a gamer, who plays the damn things everyday.

  • Dunk_13 #5 6 months ago

    Is it not called "Single Player with social aspects"?

  • dirtysteve #6 6 months ago

    In the future games consoles will be so powerful, only the five richest kings of Europe will own one.

    sigh, also , another ConsUltaNT. He worked with Sony on some games, but what qualifies him to make such an odd prediction.
    Edited by 1 at 16/08/11 @ 23:44

  • jaegermc #7 6 months ago

    When someone refers to Facebook as important to gaming, it's time to stop reading and move on to one of Eurogamer's more important headlines - "Dance Central 2 tracklist expands" or "Sony announces Move Fitness - pinpoint accuracy" here I come.

  • moh82sy #8 6 months ago

    BS

  • dsmx #9 6 months ago

    Well if single player games die in 3 years time at least I know when I'll stop gaming, 2014 will at the very least be a year I'll start saving a lot of money.

  • uiruki #10 6 months ago

    Your English comprehension skills are appalling. He said that games would likely be criticised for not including any connected elements at all in three years, not that they would be dead.

    Also, have some fucking respect people. Mark Cerny isn't just "some guy". He didn't just "work with Sony on some games," and suggesting that is all he did betrays a complete ignorance of videogame history.

    edit: heh, degree of self-ownage there. Never mind! My second point still stands, of course.
    Edited by 1 at 17/08/11 @ 00:31

  • McFly55 #11 6 months ago

    So now ill get to have my single player games ruined by complete shits online

  • liquid-s #12 6 months ago

    I really hope not I dont want multiplayer in every game I play. Don't get me wrong I dont hate multiplayer game's in fact its quite the opposite I really enjoy them from time to time but for me the real heart in gaming has always been in the single player games with story telling and character development. Something for me that just doesnt translate across in to multiplayer games.

  • Kami #13 6 months ago

    "We're talking five, 10 years out. I believe three years from now, if you aren't doing that, you are being criticised in your reviews for your lack of innovation."

    Unlike now where we criticise games for shoehorning in social aspects where they don't belong?

    I sort of get the need for social gaming. I respect it. I even admire it. However, I don't think reviewers or gamers will completely reject single-player-only experiences. Because what happens when you want some... well... quality alone time? Much like someone may sit down and read a good book, sometimes one would just like to sit in front of a screen and play a game and enjoy it.

    Books aren't going down the pan - if anything, the sales of books is increasing, despite electronic devices doing the opposite. Single player games won't be muscled out by forcing in social aspects unless all developers collectively do it at once, and it's quite likely a lot of gamers will collectively scream bloody murder if they even so much as attempted such a thing.

    Developers also need to demonstrate how this will work in a real-time concept. For all we know, they could be talking about something like the Uplay connecting your games on all consoles to one central account (we know Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo won't join forces after all) rather than all games will have some griefer running around killing all your quest NPCs because he's a 15-year old asswipe loser who needs a punch in the face (or three), no tea and sent straight to bed. What?!

    Telling us what we want, or what we can expect, doesn't work. It hasn't for Sony, it didn't for Microsoft and even Nintendo of late have found you can't tell people what they want. Which renders all of this totally moot really, it's a load of pontificating with very little in the way of logic, reason or common sense. It's so unbelievably VAGUE.

    When they have a working concept to show us, by all means, come back and show us all. Until that time, sometimes those little thoughts in your head - those little tiny flights of fancy - should be left in your head.

    After all, that's what got Peter Molyneux into the mess he is in today...

  • bad09 #14 6 months ago

    "In a world with Facebook I just don't think that's going to last"

    I don't understand? What does facebook have to do with single player videogames?

    I don't really want a "connected" single player anyway. Sod off I'm relaxing playing games at my own pace in my own little world, muliplayer is too much like work and I don't want my single player experience messed up with "connected" single player getting in the way.

    Less unconnected Single player mean more retro so less money spent on new so I hope this guy is talking the absoute rubbish I certainly think he is.

  • The-Bodybuilder #15 6 months ago

    "I believe the traditional gamers of which our industry has been built upon will be gone in three years,"

    And so will I.

  • intpleeus #16 6 months ago

    Perhaps introverts will stop existing in three years ... but, then, perhaps not.

    We could, of course, apply Cerny's exact argument to books: "Right now you sit in your living room and you're reading a book by yourself. In a world with Facebook I just don't think that's going to last."

    Almost half of the world's population are introverts, and probably more than half of gamers are introverts. These people like to be alone for extended periods, and one of the things they like to do alone is play videogames.
    Edited by 1 at 17/08/11 @ 00:11

  • BaggyAnt #17 6 months ago

    When you have got games such as Fallout selling 5 million copies then supply will continue to meet demand. It's pure economics

  • Vyggo #18 6 months ago

    "There's actually a boss you fight in that game which is controlled by another player." (about Demon's Souls)

    Is this true, how does that work? Or does he mean the black phantom thing I've heard about.

  • Peew971 #19 6 months ago

    He's right you know, I hear that Skyrim thingy can only fail being a single player game.

  • Unofficial #20 6 months ago

    It shouldn't happen, and hopefully it won't. It is primarily publishers pushing this kind of connectivity (multiplayer, "sticky" social features, persistent online featuress etc) and for the most part they want it to boost sales. They want people to make the investment in the product and stick with it, and all these features help. They keep the game fresh in player's minds, the disk in the tray, and get people talking. Plus to be fair there are some good examples in games already.

    Having said all that from a players perspective i just dont want it in every game. It makes each game more similar, even with innovation. Sometimes competition is nice (even indirectly like Autolog on NFS), but sometimes I just want to experience something alone. I don't want player tags, pseudonims, competitive stats in all my games. Sometimes I want to experience atmosphere, story, and my own personal journey alone.

    EDIT - I would also point out that this guy being a consultant and working with publishers such as Sony is clearly going to parrot what the publishers are currently asking for. I have no doubt that someone looking to pitch to a publisher in 3 years time may well be critcised for lack of innovation if they don't include these features, as they are there to make the publisher money and they are a fashionable label to add. However, that doesnt make it right for every game, and it doesnt mean every game developer is going to have to bend over and just accept it.
    Edited by 1 at 17/08/11 @ 00:29

  • WinterSnowblind #21 6 months ago

    If single player games become rarer (which to be fair is likely) that's only going to increase the demand for them from a certain audience and make the few there are a lot more profitable. Are games like Skyrim really just going to become so unpopular they aren't worth making?

    They are not going to disappear, certainly not within the next 3 years. I can't believe somebody so high up in the industry could make such a stupid prediction.

  • BonzoBanana #22 6 months ago

    I like scripted stories in games like Fallout 3. I like exploring and the horror/tension of being alone not knowing what is going to be around the corner. A lot of atmosphere is created by single player games. Can't see Resident Evil working if there is 50 online players wandering about in the same house and amongst the snarls and howling you can hear people saying 'whatever' etc. Also single player games have always been the sanctuary for rubbish gamers who enjoy games but aren't actually that good at them.

  • gjgjg #23 6 months ago

    doubtful. if most games are socially networked in the future, then the cool innovative indies will be making those 'dissconnected' games you speak of.

  • Scirm #24 6 months ago

    Yes yes, and PC gaming is dying, too. We heard that few times.

  • Lemming81 #25 6 months ago

    This couldn't be further from the truth to me.

    Over the last couple of months, I put down the WoW and other online games and have been playing some pretty old single player games: Dungeon Keeper, UFO, Terror From the Deep, Baldur's Gate. Why? Because I'm just burning out on stuff that is, to be frank, second rate zoos to these games.

    I look forward to games like Bioshock, Deus Ex etc. Games focused on story and a single player experience.

    What world these jokers are living in I have no idea.
    Edited by 1 at 17/08/11 @ 00:55

  • peppergomez #26 6 months ago

    Mark Cerny's relevance "gone in 3 years" predicts veteran gamer peppergomez.

  • HyperTails #27 6 months ago

    Single player gone in 3 years? One word proves that this prediction is a load of crap:

    Nintendo

  • StooMonster #28 6 months ago

    "We're talking five, 10 years out."

    Facebook will be dead and gone by then.

  • TheGuvernor #29 6 months ago


    Total Bollox.

  • miseryguts #30 6 months ago

    The only reason certain factions within the gaming fraternity would like to see the end of single player only gaming, is because it's a lot harder to wring more & more money out of the consumer after they have bought it (with the exception of perhaps periodic self contained dlc) as opposed to the games that are online multiplayer focused, which can be monetized over and over and over again, with people seemingly queueing up with a great big smile on their face to hand over their cash.
    I have been gaming for longer than i care to remember & all of my favourite games without exception have been single player only (or i didn't notice or touch the multiplayer aspect)
    Mr Cerny may want to pay a little less attention to focus groups & XB360 online forums.

  • SummonerPascal #31 6 months ago

    And not a single **** was given that day.

  • Bleemo #32 6 months ago

    Someone needs to tell him that Super Mario Galaxy, RDR, Elder Scrolls series, Mass Effect Series, Assassins Creed series, Resident Evil series, GTA series, Fallout 3 and so on are best selling games in their multi millions, where single player is the focus and primary reason for purchase. Where as Demon souls only sold a small quantity and was purely niche. It's obvious to anyone with a brain some people play purely single player, some multi and many a bit of both depending on mood.

  • MMMMMM7 #33 6 months ago

    So CD PROJECT creators of Witcher 2 will have time to bearly release
    Witcher 3 ? And then what about The ELder Scrolls which have a cycle
    of 5 years. Skyrim will be the last RPG from Bethesda ? The same goes
    for Fallout and Half Life, Metro 2033, Stalker, Batman, Syberia, Dreamfall:
    The Longest Journey and many many other great games.

    My point is that the best quality games in terms of story, characters,
    cinematique presentation and graphics are the single palyer ones.
    Multiplayer games have social features but have also seriouse drawbacks
    like trivial missions especially in the MMO games, weak story, poorer
    graphics and in general offer quantity rather than quality.

    My predicition is that the two game categories will co-exist because a
    vast majority of gamers appreciate the qualities the single player gaming
    experience can only offer.

    Edited by 2 at 17/08/11 @ 02:19

  • Snake_2011 #34 6 months ago

    no SP I'm out of gaming.

  • Lord_Gremlin #35 6 months ago

    How stupid. SP only games will not go away, never. Because there is a market for them. Now, in 3 years most of games will, sadly, include MP - in that I can believe.

  • apoc_reg #36 6 months ago

    What a load of crap. Single player immersion rpg trumps bro shooter everytime

  • king26 #37 6 months ago

    I've noticed perfectly good SP franchises have began adding MP such as the sequels of Uncharted, Deep Space and Assassins Creed. Though I do think in some cases the MP is added to stop the game being traded in a week later.

  • Vixremento #38 6 months ago

    I dont care if they make it optional (the social bits) but the moment it's forced then it becomes nothing more than DRM in my eyes. Surely there is plenty of room and demand for pure single player gaming (or do we really want little 8 year old Sally playing Barbie with random online ppl controlling Ken?)

  • Mentat_Idaho #39 6 months ago

    @Vyggo

    That is correct. You can invade other single player world's (providing they are in a 'living' rather than 'dead' state). If you are lucky you will appear as one of the end of level bosses. It really is cool.
    Edited by 1 at 17/08/11 @ 03:47

  • gamecubeisbest #40 6 months ago

    I can't believe we will still be playing online shooters in three years.

  • sfp_noodle #41 6 months ago

    Good thing Sony and Nintendo ignore everything this clown has to say then. I don't care how much going online has improved our gaming lives, NOTHING has come close to the experiences I've had with Sony and Nintendo franchises over the past 15 years. 99% of those experiences have been single player only and the other 1% only came into play during the current generation of consoles. If the utterly retarded does happen and single player games are forgotten about in however many years then that will be the year I retire from gaming and start building a collection of retro consoles.

  • Zander #42 6 months ago

    Like a want some c*nt ruining my gaming experience all the time (leave that to own c*ntish self). Yes something like Demon Souls is great but I think there is room for traditional "unplugged" experiences for many years to come.

    Also is anyone else sick of having social network push onto them? Yeah so I have a facebook account but I only use it to send mates stupid things. I do not want to know every little detail of anyone i ever met, or have my personal details passed about.

    Ah... the good old days...

  • unacomn #43 6 months ago

    Ya, when games are going to have singleplayer experiences at least as profound as they were 20 years ago, and have them for 10 straight years, until we get our fill of magnificent singleplayer games, maybe. Until then, the only people abandoning singleplayer are the ones who don't know how to do it right.

  • lostlain #44 6 months ago

    Why do they have to give everything a name. What he's talking about is still a single player game. What a nob.

  • kenichi-san #45 6 months ago

    I'm in agreement with my fellow gamers here.

  • hana_fubuki #46 6 months ago

    And can Cerny explain to me how online functionalities would in any way improve the single player of, say, The Witcher 2? Make it more immersive? While I'm fighting for the fate of the Pontar Valley or trying to piece together the complex political landscape I'm wading through, do I want to be constantly reminded of the "real world"? Suddenly Henselt's camp will turn into Second Life? Sheeeee-it...

  • KongRudi #47 6 months ago

    I guess he's probably somewhat right.
    We'll see much less of single-player only games in the future, but they'll not dissepear.
    We see it allready with good single-player games getting more multiplayer-focus, i.e. Assasins Creed, Uncharted got multiplayer.. I expect mass Effect, and most other franchises will get it aswell.

    I also had the same problem trying to explain Demon Souls, to a friend, I ended up saying it's a multiplayer singleplayer-game. :p

  • dfooster #48 6 months ago

    what an absolute load of shit. What works with demon souls isnt going to work with games like formula 1 is it??

    the truth is things will evolve and things will also remain exactly as they are. its no good having innovation if you cant also have choice.

    When the day comes when i have to rely on the cheating general public to play through a campaign is the day i stop gaming. it isnt going to happen so im not worried.

  • EugenesLair #49 6 months ago

    There's no faster way to destroy a single player game's atmosphere than adding social aspects.

  • super_monty #50 6 months ago

    I am playing less on line recently because online has become old and boring.
    All shooters, racers or mmo go here kill 50 baddies collect item rinse repeat.

    Single player = better immersion.

  • jstar #51 6 months ago

    oh shut up, it is still by far my favorite type of gaming.

  • DanB24 #52 6 months ago

    [link url=http://www.spacevidcast.com/wp-content/uploads /2009/02/24w7ed0.jpg
    ]http://ww w.spacevidcast.com/wp-content/u...[/link]
    Nuff said I say. ;)

  • Segnit #53 6 months ago

    This guy is a nutcase for sure.

    But assuming he's right and I am the nutcase for not seeing the 'obvious' then the industry is hell bent on shrinking its market.

    Facebook-o-holics are a bane in society today. Facebook is for a bunch of egotistical twats who don't value personal privacy and promote corporate greed.
    Edited by 1 at 17/08/11 @ 07:15

  • dagas #54 6 months ago

    I hope not. I like playing some games in multi player, but it is never as immersive since you are constantly reminded you are only playing a game. In single player you can get really immersed into the story and characters and forget about the real world for a moment. It's enough with the constant "your friend has logged in" and "you unlocked an achievement" pop-ups to break immersion in today's gaming.

  • Inmediasress #55 6 months ago

    Honestly I'm sick of being forced to be online all the time with my games,sick of the social aspect of gaming and personally couldnt care less for it.
    The problem seems to be that every dev and his mother wants in on the online action and paid subscriptions.
    That is until the bubble bursts as it seems it is very likely that it will happen sometime in the near future and it comes down crashing.
    I said it a long time ago that gaming is really heading down stream really fast but no one seems to care, too many stupid people who buy into anything.
    Unfortunately only those people could change this trend by voting with their wallets and that is really sad.

    Another aspect that the companies seem to ignore is cyber terrorism the more exposed we are to the always online register everywhere kind of datafarming the bigger the risk that something similar happens like with Sony.

    Sorry but first and foremost I'm an SP gamer and I will certainly vote with my wallet against these practices.
    Honestly online gaming is boring after a while it took up some 7-8 years ago and now it's the primary form of gaming just because people got bored of Sp games and now it's the opposite few SP games and people are bored of MP games.

  • svenjl #56 6 months ago

    As long as being online is not required to play a single player game then I don't care. Forcing gamers down a pathway to gaming is never going to work though. I hate the idea of always being "connected" when gaming. I enjoy solitude as well as split-screen offline co-op and so do plenty of others. I don't want people that I can't see possibly f**king up my experience! And FFS - games are criticized for a lack of innovation in many different elements already including crappy online/multiplayer features so what's new?

  • SonicUk #57 6 months ago

    So I have three years of fun gaming left before I hang up my joypad for good then. Demons Souls is an awesome game - when played offline that is so people can't wait around for you to get killed so they can nick all your stuff you've just spent the last two hours collecting. I have zero interest in Multiplayer and have always thought a good game is Single Player first and foremost and Multiplayer if included at all is a bonus to those interested, not an absolute.

  • andymale #58 6 months ago

    Bullshit

  • neems #59 6 months ago

    *Fires up steam game*
    *Forgot to sign out of friends*
    *BING!*

    I look forward to inescapable social interaction, really I do. Note to self : delete entire autolog friends list.

  • ajaxpliskin #60 6 months ago

    This is the most blinkered, ignorant opinion I've heard from the gaming industry as of late, and I've heard a lot.

  • Pehmu #61 6 months ago

    Not every game needs a multiplayer. I find it amazing people get disappointed when hearing Heavy Rain doesn't have a multiplayer. Oh no. What were you expecting, QTE deathmatch?

  • technotica #62 6 months ago

    Right and all indie-games will be multiplayer? I don't think so.

  • Subdominator #63 6 months ago

    What happened to all those analysts from five years ago that predicted there would be no singleplayer games anymore by now because MMOs will crush everything?

    The thing is: We are already there. Every game on PS3 and 360 is online aware, meaning you can chat with your buddies and show what achievements you have collected. And that is about as much as it gets. For every person joining Facebook there is one person who is not willing to join Facebook. The numbers already show a decline in Facebook users in the US. That is more people deleting their accounts than people signing up. To base any expectations on the future on Facebook is just stupid. MySpace went from undisputed world leader to bankrupt in three years. And it was just as dependant on the US as is Facebook.

    Right now many publishers are trying to push multiplayer because it's an easy way to include their "project ten dollar", "online pass", whatever they call it. But the truth is only a minority are interested in multiplayer. The majority of multiplayer gamers are playing Call of Duty, Halo, Counter-Strike, Team Fortress 2, Battlefield. Nobody cares about multiplayer in games like Mass Effect 3 or Prey 2. The only reason people play that for a while is achievements. In the end you only hurt yourself. You spend one year on a multiplayer mode to sell an online pass and it leads to shorter singleplayer games and in the end to lower overall sales.

    Coop on the other hand is a different story. I can see that three years from now almost every singleplayer game offers a coop mode. But that's not the end of singleplayer, it's just an evolution. Why did Battlefield never become as big as CoD? Because it had no singleplayer. That's what drives the industry and gamers, not how connected the experience is.

  • whoyouknow #64 6 months ago

    Ugh, shut up.

  • TheEarlOfZinger #65 6 months ago

    lol

    Let's just sit back and see how many copies Skyrim sells...

  • Shinetop #66 6 months ago

    Ha, I remember somebody making the same prediction when X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter came out a jillion years ago. "Now that we have the internet, single player games will be gone in three years!"

  • Corinthian7 #67 6 months ago

    NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

  • crazyfaze #68 6 months ago

    What a load of rubbish. I predominantly play single player games because I love the feeling that the story is being told directly to me and all the development has gone into making that experience as rich and rewarding as it can be. Online games are great for a quick blast, but can often be frustrating depending on the people that you play with. I used to play a lot of Everquest and then WoW, but have given MMORPG's up in recent years because they are so repetitive. I want a good story and solid entertainment whenever I can spare the time to play.

  • Gumersindo #69 6 months ago

    Yeah, right...

    That day, videogames will die.

  • dr_shambles #70 6 months ago

    Mandatory multiplayer. Bra-vo. :-(

  • DrizztP #71 6 months ago

    Yes because everyone want's their games intriguing story and escapist world to be littered by pointless tips or racial slurs from little Timmy no life.
    It's like every game has to have a MP aspect... WHY? How many of you are still playing Singularity online? How about Dark Sector? We have our Call of Duties, our World of Warcrafts. Why must these people always wish for the demise of single player experiences.

  • dingo75 #72 6 months ago

    I will stop buying video games in 2014 then.
    However given the amount of bullshit coming from the industry I doubt they will make it to that year.

  • Quint2020 #73 6 months ago

    God I bloody hope not.

  • syra #74 6 months ago

    I LIKE ALL OTHER SP MISANTHROPES AM DISGUSTED BY THE IDEA OF INTERNET SCUM ENCROACHING UPON MY GAMING EXPERIENCES. MAKE SP GAMES AND MP GAMES SEPARATE GENRES.

  • retr0gamer #75 6 months ago

    If single player games stop coming out it will be the day I stop gaming.

  • mingster #76 6 months ago

    Heis right though about Demons Souls. It had the best single player/multiplayer interaction of any console game so far.

  • Stoatboy #77 6 months ago

    @Vyggo: It's not just the black phantom thing. One of the bosses can actually be controlled by another player:

    [link url=http://de monssouls.wikidot.com/walk3-3-boss
    ]http://de monssouls.wikidot.com/walk3-3-b...[/link]

    I turned off my network connection for that fight simply because I'd read that you had a bloody good chance of getting a griefing twat as an opponent, and I don't need that in my life. Nice idea in principle, but give it to the average gamer, and there's a large chance it all turns pear-shaped.

    I loved Demon's Souls. Killed myself every time I got resurrected though to prevent other people coming into my single player game. Fuck that. I had a couple of random battles, and quite enjoyed them, but that wasn't what the game was for me, and so I decided I'd rather go through the game with 75% health than have to deal with random incursions. I liked the messages and ghosts that the online component brought, but the other people can fuck right off.

    There will always be single player games simply because there will always be people who don't want to feel obliged to play games by other people. Maybe the mainstream industry will move further away from single player, but it won't abandon it because there's plenty of money there. Publishers quite like money.

  • FireMonkey #78 6 months ago

    (Mainly) Single player gamer says 'F**k off!"

  • skunkfish #79 6 months ago

    "I believe three years from now, if you aren't doing that, you are being criticised in your reviews for your lack of innovation."

    Hold on, if you aren't doing what everyone else is doing you'll be criticised for lack of innovation?!? Is this man dribbling this stuff out of his backside? Somebody please pass him the Andrex...



  • DiamondIce #80 6 months ago

    I enjoy beating or at least attempting to beat online 'friends' on leaderboards like Trials or NFS: Hot Pursuit. That is as social as I get with gaming on a regular basis.

    The day single player dies is the day I quit gaming.

    I just want to sit down and play games in my own time without constant social interruptions. I am forever hiding my online status so I don't get invited to games.

  • MadCaddy13 #81 6 months ago

    Yeh well your fucking dead wrong there bitch

  • fiery_jackass #82 6 months ago

    The thing about DS is that it's an optional extra, not something that the experience is predicated upon. Good job too as I believe they're turning off the servers soon enough and, as the game ages, incursions are rarer and rarer and excursions harder to organise. If your game is largely dependent upon that sort of interaction it becomes defunct as the game ages, built-in obsolescence innit.

    Anyway, the Demon's/Demons' Souls "experience" is a mixed bag. The ghostly notes are a nice touch and invasions can be exciting. It is, however, a royal pain in the arse to come back from a well-deserved piss to find some hoodlum hacking away at you and endangering your lucky charms.

  • superdelphinus #83 6 months ago

    There's nothing like shattering the illusion of reality by an idiot 14 year old twatting about trying to break the game in front of you. Really multiplayer games rely on players who want to play the game properly. If I want to get involved in a game I like to do it in my head, and that relies on what I am seeing on the screen being mainly believable.

    Imagine trying to get through an f1 game season and every other race there's a kid driving the wrong way around the track and confusing it for stock car racing.

  • MightyMetalMonkey #84 6 months ago

    Is this a good time to point out that I still like Turn based games ? That not everything has to be real-bloody time !

  • FireMonkey #85 6 months ago

    "We're talking five, 10 years out. I believe three years from now, if you aren't doing that, you are being criticised in your reviews for your lack of innovation."

    How can you criticise games for lack of innovation when they don't do what you expect every game will be doing? If every game is going to be doing it it is NOT innovative.

    Edit: Damn Skunkfish got there first!
    Edited by 1 at 17/08/11 @ 09:33

  • kangarootoo #86 6 months ago

    Nonsense. Not going to put more effort into my response than that. Don't care how veteran he is. His statement is nonsense.

  • KrazyFace #87 6 months ago

    "I believe three years from now, if you aren't doing that (shoe-horning MP), you are being criticised in your reviews for your lack of innovation."

    That's the scariest thing I've read this week! Seriously, this is gonna be the problem games will face; there's nothing wrong with single player games at all, but the suits and the breifcase swingers will MAKE the develepors put some kinda connected shit into games because it's keeping up with the joneses. Take TDU2, a perpetually connected single player game that at a moment's notice can go from SP to MP. Some might say that's a good thing, but I'll tell you this; the most annoying thing in the world for me is driving along in my single player mood only to have some shrill-voiced teen start smack-talkin' me coz I ain't in a Veron, and then smashing into the side of my newly decorated car. Because of this I have to go into my PS3 XMB and disconect the WHOLE MACHINE from the net, just so I can enjoy MY game at MY pace without being insulted.

    PLEASE don't let this idea happen to games, or I'll have to find a new favorite past time.

  • Shinetop #88 6 months ago

    If every game is going to be doing it it is NOT innovative.

    It can be. Innovative does not mean unique.

  • Whitster #89 6 months ago

    Two points, firstly PS3 users of facebook integration already annoy me, Joe Blogs unlocked the "Cocksucker" trophy in Cock Sucking, John Smith brought a PSone game you already played to death ten years ago and don't need advertising to you. Give us a social feed on the consoles home screen, don't invade existing social networks to do so!

    Secondly this article intrigued me to Demon Souls and upon checking Wikipedia I discovered the online support is being dropped this October barely a year after the games release locking off a chunk of the game, do we really want every one of our games to be in the same boat where half the functionality is cut off when the publisher can no longer financially support it or has a sequel to flog?

  • Rens11 #90 6 months ago

    I don't want social aspects ruining games ala Dirt 3 hey amigo that was a sick race why not upload it to YouTube bro virtually after every single race!

  • OnlyMe #91 6 months ago

    Brilliant, that will be a perfect time for me to catch up on my back catalogue.

  • Dave_McCoy #92 6 months ago

    So Solitaire will cease to exist?

  • superdelphinus #93 6 months ago

    One thing I would say though is that multiplayer gaming has given me some of my favourite experiences, and can make a poor game great. If the emergence of sort of gaming clubs or some advanced type of matchmaking process that was able to tell how you played games came about then co op sort of games could be the future.

    E.g opflash dragon rising was quite a broken single player game but played co op with three other humans who wanted to play it properly transformed it into a fantastic experience.

    Trouble is finding people like that. Last night I played a few games of f1 2010 online for the first time. 1st one was with the eurogamer group and it was great fun, everyone playing hard but fair and loads of evidence of sportsmanship. After that I played a few more with ransoms. First one at Monaco I stopped after two laps because I've never seen anything so insane in my life. Second one was going ok until some weirdo decided to hang around on the final chicane in turkey and basically ram everyone who came past. Last one the guy who won quali was 2.5 seconds faster than anyone else. Came to the race and he was utter shit and had piled his car into a wall and taken three of us out in the aftermath after 3 corners, so I have to suspect there was something a bit weird about his quali time......

    If strategies to enable like minded gamers to play together then this can work, but I think it's quite a long way into the future

  • geeza2020 #94 6 months ago

    I dont really use facebook. I have an account but havent logged into it in over six months because its fucking shit being spammed with crap that you dont care about every goddamn day. I DONT CARE IF YOU JUST FOUND A CRISP THAT LOOKS LIKE GARETH GATES. I DONT CARE IF YOU JUST HAD AN EPIPHANY ABOUT BIG BROTHER ON YOUR WAY HOME FROM WORK. FUCK OFF.

    If this creeps into singleplayer games, then the industry can stick it up its arse and fuck off while its doing it as far as I'm concerned.

  • BritishBlue1 #95 6 months ago

    Well, that's strange because many, no wait, all of my most memorable gaming moments this gen were single player experiences.
    Certainly I've had excellent multiplayer moments but they were all a different kind of memorable.

  • HL706 #96 6 months ago

    ...and in 2015 it will be monetised to hell!

  • andromeda #97 6 months ago

    I predict Mark Cerny will be unemployed in 3 yrs if he keeps making such ridiculous comments.

  • cen4pgb #98 6 months ago

    I love how a group on here has gone off on one about facebook when that actually has very little to do with this, he's just using it as an example of always connected way many live these days.

    To a basic degree this is already here in most new games, certainly just about all PS3 and 360 game has achievements/trophies (and a large protion of steam games) and they fall under this sort of things.

    If handele well you really shouldnt notice this. Things like radio reports in a game like GTA or Saints row are perfect for this. Done prorely then yes it will hurt.

    THe biggest issue with what this analyst says, as others have mentioned, is that it isnt the death of SP games at all, it's just that theres some conecitvity being added. The big worry here is that it is a always connected DRM through the back door entry method.

    SP games are safe (hell LOTRO nominally a MMO is becoming more and more a SP game with conectivity and the odd safe lock away for those MP weirdos than a full on MMO).

  • Spong #99 6 months ago

    Mark Cerny is clearly some kind of cunt.

  • ninjasinthesnow #100 6 months ago

    Maybe instead of gone he should have said 'significantly and profoundly less a solitary experience'. This has to be about choice. As long as we still have the option to enjoy a game on our own then the option to include others is okay for me.

  • Madder-Max #101 6 months ago

    ConsUltaNT lol

    I think it will be the oppostire. Pure MP gaming is stale. capture the post, deathmatch, team deathmatch etc....yawn. I think these will be gone in 3 year and we will have a more co-oppy type of format, either direct Coop or indirect such as Demons Souls

  • Darren #102 6 months ago

    I think it'll be a lot longer than three years before single player games disappear for good so I don't think anyone needs to worry myself.

    I only play single player games anyway as I prefer story-driven games with a beginning, middle and end and find multiplayer games, especially shooters, tedious and repetitive. As long as single player games exist then I'll continue to play games. If they should disappear for good though then I'd stop playing games, simple as that, but there's lots of others things I enjoy doing anyway so it wouldn't really bother me as much now as, say, 15 years ago.

  • LittleRiver #103 6 months ago

    Are these people tricked (or drugged) into saying dumb s**t. Where do they get such idiotic predictions from.

    There will always be a place for immersion in a story all by yourself.

    Co-op and MP are great; but it usually involves messing around and having a laugh. If games are to move forward as a form of interactive media they need to be more emotive not less.

  • DJ_2011 #104 6 months ago

    The day that single player games cease to exist, is the day that I'll stop gaming for good. Fuck your multiplayer.
    Edited by 2 at 17/08/11 @ 11:05

  • Darren #105 6 months ago

    Another thing to consider is the rise in popularity of the indie games scene since the arrival of PSN and XBLA. These people work on limited budgets so do not have the time or resouces to commit to costly online modes which take a lot of post-release maintenance too. So I suspect if anything major publishers like EA and Sony may shift over to multiplayer-only games but the indies will continue churning out plenty of single player titles such as Limbo and Bastion, etc.

  • Gearskin #106 6 months ago

    Never understand why people are so defensive when it comes to online enabled games. You can still have a solo experience in an open world inhabited with other players. How's that even a bad thing?

  • geeza2020 #107 6 months ago

    Gearskin - How can you have a solo experience when there are other players in the game? Surely thats the very definition of multiplayer.

  • logicub #108 6 months ago

    "I believe three years from now, if you aren't doing that [[i]multiplayer[/i]], you are being criticised in your reviews for your lack of innovation."

    So what he's saying is, if you aren't copying everybody else by including multiplayer, then, you aren't innovating... Have I understood that? :-/
    What tripe, we need a campaign to save true single player!

  • Skorms-Boss #109 6 months ago

    don't play online
    don't use facebook

    so where does that leave me Cerny?

  • Tuco #110 6 months ago

    Nothing new here. Clueless "experts" and "analysts" who don't play games, don't understand games, and yet pretend to know something about them.

  • Madder-Max #111 6 months ago

    "Gearskin - How can you have a solo experience when there are other players in the game? Surely thats the very definition of multiplayer. "

    fable 2

  • evarofzentral #112 6 months ago

    This shouldn't, couldn't, sh'couldn't happen. I very mch doubt single player games will disappear any time soon. To be honest I prefer them as with multiplayer games you tend to lose a lot of the depth to games and they start to become more one-dimensional.

  • ForozM #113 6 months ago

    Adult life has led me to believe that SP is the future.

  • P1GEONPOO #114 6 months ago

    Which boss fight was conrtolled by a player in demon's souls? I only played it offline coz the psn was down when I started it. But I loved the game anyway.

  • misinformed #115 6 months ago

    Rubbish. Facebook may be gone in 3 years, but single player only games wont be.

  • Ryze #116 6 months ago

    The Demon's Souls example sounds fantastic, and reminds me that I NEED to get hold of a copy of Demon's Souls!

  • whatfruit #117 6 months ago

    In 10 years AAA games will be dead.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #118 6 months ago

    ""The funny thing here is, we don't even know what to call this. Is it single-player or is it multiplayer? We don't even have the words."

    Single Player

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #119 6 months ago

    You only have to read the comments from some of the people involved in this industry to see why the whole thing is going to shit. :(

  • intpleeus #120 6 months ago

    I have, belatedly, been playing Fable 2 recently. While I have no objection, in principle, to its online functionality, I have been playing it offline. If some people prefer to have others intrude on their experience, then they can have that. So long as the online functionality that Cerny speaks of is optional, then there is no problem. But then the core experience will always be a single-player one with some optional multi-player bonuses. Calling this anything but "single-player" is just misleading. There are many multi-player games that have some basic single-player mode that nobody plays, and we don't get all angsty about what to call them -- they're just called multi-player games.

  • CFacto #121 6 months ago

    'Video game consultant' sounds like the easiest job in the world judging from this 'veteran'. Talk nonsense that sounds strategic but in reality is just riding on the tired social media / online bandwagon that shareholders love so very much.

    Anyone that plays games and frequents a couple of forums could come up with more insight.

  • cyber_nicco #122 6 months ago

    In the year 2014... In the year 2014...

    Do you guys get Conan (O'Brien) out there?

    No? Then never mind.

  • Kaminari #123 6 months ago

    And Paco Rabanne predicted Paris would be destroyed by the toilet seat of Mir station.

  • Red_Devilfish #124 6 months ago

    I fucking hope not. I don't want some screaming yank kids calling me gay and a douche when I'm trying to play what used to single player. Won't happen any way, fucking douche.

  • Caimbeul #125 6 months ago

    Peat! If that ever came to fruition that would be a sad day...the day I gave up gaming.

    On the plus side, I don't see it where all rpg games are multi-player or strategy etc or sim, the list goes on.

  • nanogasm #126 6 months ago

    It's like this article is one huge attempt at trolling. You gotta be kidding me.

    I haven't played an MP game in ages. Between the griefers and the veterans who boot the casuals, plus myself having young kids and needing to hit a pause key - MP has zero room in my entertainment bubble.

  • MARKIV #127 6 months ago

    This article is complete BS. For a start Halo 6 on the Xbox 720 won't be out for another 4 years I doubt and there's no way that will be soley mulitplayer, although it will have co-op if that's what this guy really means..?

  • panathatube #128 6 months ago

    Yet another BS prediction...

  • CamberGreber #129 6 months ago

    2014
    I stop playing video games.

  • brod #130 6 months ago

    Facebook can fuck off. Do not want.

  • scuffpuppies #131 6 months ago

    Although I'm a "Single Player" gamer first and foremost. I do play online, but predominantly co-op with a friend or friends. I'm not adverse to competitive multiplayer games, only the deliberate shoe-horning of half-assed concepts because the Marketing Dept insists the studios latest SP game needs one available.

    I also believe multiplayer has been progressively and aggressively pushed onto the consumer by the publishers in an attempt to combat the secondhand market. Understandably they want gamers to stop trading so as to limit the availability of secondhand copies of their game, forcing the next customer to buy it new. The most successful business model to combat this so far has been 'multiplayer'. Keeping the gamers playing online for the first 3 - 6 months, slows them from secondhand trading during the highest sales period for that title.

    Just because publishers often force MP onto the market, doesn't mean every gamer is asking for it. Did 'Dead Space 2' sell more units because of its sudden inclusion of multiplayer? Or was it due to a great single player campaign? Did 'Batman: Arkham Asylum' shift less units due to a lack of MP? I doubt it very much. I seem to recall gamers being relieved that Rocksteady had continued to forgo MP in the forthcoming 'Arkham City'.

    Personally I believe the majority of gamers continue to purchase a title for the single player campaign first, with MP being an added (if not occasionally unwanted) bonus. CoD, Battlefield etc often being the exception to the rule. But that's just me.

  • napalm68 #132 6 months ago

    What an ahole. If single player games are go9ne in three years, I will not be buying any more games in three years. What an utter retard statement. How can you compare a story with the chaos of online gaming?

  • Loghorn #133 6 months ago

    I agree with many people here. You take away single player games, & gamers everywhere will be boycotting future games or will just go back to retro gaming. Single player has been around since gaming was first introduced, & it's going to always be around. Like it or not.