Infogrames: Offline Single-Player Games Not Viable

by Aaron Linde, May 27, 2008 12:26pm PDT

Adding to comments made late last week, Infogrames president and former Sony executive Phil Harrison suggested that linear single-player gaming experiences may be on the way out in favor of online-enabled, downloadable content-fueled titles.

"I think the single-player, disconnected console game is probably in its dotage," Harrison told Videogaming247. "Now, that doesn't mean that those games aren't relevant going forwards, but they will be enhanced by community features being embedded in them, or downloadable content becoming an inherent part of the experience, or some kind of user-generated content will be part of the experience."

"All of the things we see in other games, the things that we can point to in compelling games," he added. "A relatively linear single-player game without online connectivity is going to be a challenge to green-light going forward."

Harrison said last week that Atari, which is wholly owned by Infogrames, would likely be turning away from high-budget single-player titles in the future. It was recently revealed that the Atari-published horror reboot Alone in the Dark will feature an unconventional DVD-style chapter menu, allowing players to rewind or fast-forward through the game at will.


25 Threads | 60 Comments

  • From a business perspective, perhaps having a single-player ONLY game green-lit MIGHT be problematic (though i fail to see how), but that's why most games come out with both SP & MP components.

    Personally, i hate MP (the only games I ever played online were Quake 3 and UT and that was a while ago and for a very shot time).

    I love high-budgeted SP games (MGS 4, Assassins Creed, Uncharted, etc etc ad infinitum), so if all companies would decide to pursue an online-only model or use it as an excuse to compromise the SP component of a game which has both, I'd simply sell my X360 & PS3.

    Sorry Sony, sorry Microsoft, I didn't buy your consoles to play online.

  • if you read between the lines, what they're really saying is that its easier to make/sell a shitty multiplayer game than put for the effort into a quality singleplayer game.

    with multiplayer games, they don't have to put forth the effort into a quality story and/or fleshing anything out, since it'll be up to the players to fill in the blanks, between the 1 minute long frag sessions, for those that can think enough to do so at least.

    with a singleplayer story they have to actually think/present something other than eye candy.

    personally i don't waste time with multiplayer games once i finish the singleplayer story. if i want multiplayer i'll fire up an mmorpg.

    i guess i'm 'old school'.