Online Only Games and Consoles

[Kathandira]

I agree with the OP.

I don't agree with his comparisons, But I do dislike that Titanfall has no single player campaign.

After a few years if I wish to play this game again, I will likely be unable to do so as there will be so few people playing it, or anyone at all.

Titanfall, while being a neat game that I do enjoy, will lose it's luster when better FPS's come out.

I stand by my opinion that Titanfall should not have been a $60 game as it will not offer the longevity that I can get from other games which have private party's or single player modes.

[Captain N]

And today is Redemption Day for Sim City per Kotaku - No More Internet Connection Required

http://kotaku.com/simcity-redemption...van-1550244057

[darkwarrior42]

I am universally opposed to games being online only unless there is a reason that necessitates said online presence that actively benefits the game from the player's perspective.

For example: Diablo 3. There is no reason for that game to be online only from a player perspective. Prevent cheating? Doesn't affect me if I don't do it and don't play with others, and single player is an option. Prevent theft? Not an issue for me as a player. Auction House? Actively detrimental to the game imo, and whether or not you agree it's now gone. Allowing an offline play mode would not change the nature of that game at all.

Example 2: WoW. WoW is a game that is built around the idea of player interaction. While not everything you do is done with other players, it is always done in a world that all players share. That is the point of the game genre, and to allow offline play would be to completely change the nature of the game.

Edit: To phrase it in another way, if WoW were able to be played offline, the game would require radical overhauls to make it acceptable in offline mode. The game as-is simply does not work as a local single player only game if you wish to do all the content. Other players are mandatory in at least some form, and to create the feel of a living world that world has to always be present. Those are qualities that cannot be accurately captured by a game that permits players to play offline, even if the game itself were amenable to such a mode of play.

Diablo 3 could easily be played offline. The only change that would be required would be a simple interface preventing offline characters from going online, and vice versa (similar to ladder characters from D2). There is no persistent world, so nothing is lost.

To cite a third example: I am opposed to Titanfall being online only. It's an FPS, and while they do use the servers to take some of the strain off the xbox, that is not necessity and feels more like a way to justify the game being online only. Even as a game designed primarily for multiplayer, that's not an excuse; Unreal Tournament was pretty much built around multi-player, and it wasn't online only. (I imagine it would be were it to be re-made today, but the fact that it worked just fine at the time is evidence of the fact that the concept doesn't require a permanent online connection.)

For the other games you mentioned, for the sake of thoroughness:
Sim City 5: No good reason for online only, firmly opposed. See arguments regarding Diablo 3.
Xbox 1: There is no good reason for a console to be online only, and in fact half the reason I still have consoles is for times I don't feel like getting online; not only is it unnecessary, it is self-defeating in my opinion (and that they considered it means I won't buy the XBox 1, regardless of whether that requirement is or will be present).
Hearthstone: Borderline. The game itself doesn't require an online connection, but the system of expanding your collection does. An offline mode would either require a separate single-player mode with your own collection built entirely with gold, or would have to prevent you from earning any kind of gold or purchasing cards... and since there is no campaign, the offline mode would be limited to playing against friends you know or against bots. Still, there's not much reason they couldn't do that, so in general I'd be opposed to be being online only... but given what you would lose, I'm not sure there'd be much point to the offline mode, so there I'm only opposed in principle and don't really care either way.

[Halicia]

There was backlash against D3 because it was an old franshise many people wanted for the singleplayer experience.

well... while I wasn't part of the 'major backlash' two parts of D3 that didn't ring true to me was that, while I enjoyed the singleplayer experience in D2, what was AWESOME about it wasn't the online multiplayer, it was the LAN parties.

The second aspect, was that d3 lacked the same multiplayer feel as d2 due to the painful cap on players.