Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Single Player Games

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Hoserman117 View Post
    I'm okay with paying $60 for CoD because I spend a huge amount of time playing the multiplayer on it.

    I don't really care what I'm paying for as long as I'm enjoying it. I see it the same way as paying $60 for just a single player game.
    I agree for the most part.

    When a game's is just single player, more time and effort is put into it. IMO of course.

    That's why Mass Effect > Bioshock 2

    Mass Effect, all the time was focused on SP and it showed. Bioshock, all the time and effort went into multiplayer, which is why the game bombed.
    Last edited by Amari24; 12-30-2010, 11:33 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Amari24 View Post
      I agree for the most part.

      When a game's is just single player, more time and effort is put into it. IMO of course.

      That's why Mass Effect > Bioshock 2

      Mass Effect, all the time was focused on SP and it showed. Bioshock, all the time and effort went into multiplayer, which is why the game bombed.
      I actually liked Bioshock 2 Not as much as the first by any means, but I still thought it was a solid game. I never did touch the MP though.

      Comment


      • #18
        This is what I like most about the Marvel: Ultimate Alliance games. 4 players, 1 screen, and lots of fun.

        Gears, Left 4 dead, and Halo are the only games that come to mind that have one-console multiplayer (where you use multiple controllers). Tiger woods maybe, but you pass the controller anyway.

        Comment

        Working...
        X