Would You Buy BF4 If It Was Multi-player Only?

darrenw5094

Just curious to see how many people would still purchase BF it it was Multi-player only and no Single-player like MAG.

danniemcq

but what happens when the servers go down?

darrenw5094

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

danniemcq wrote: »

but what happens when the servers go down?

View it on Youtube......might even pick up some tips.:)

solarith

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

Yes, definitely. I honestly hope that some games go this way, and are discounted as a result of way less time spent in development. I haven't played a singleplayer mode in CoD since MW2, and never played more than half an hour of singleplayer in BF3, and about 4 minutes in BC2. I'm not really interested in their (crap, generic) stories.

The battlefield multiplayer games often feel more like a mission than anything I've experienced. There's certain patterns which emerge in the games which are unique to those games, really give it something that can't happen in a scripted game.

PogueMahone365

Have not decided yet.

solarith wrote: »

Yes, definitely. I honestly hope that some games go this way, and are discounted as a result of way less time spent in development.

They might go this way, but they definitely won't be discounted!

I like the Single Player stories, personally, I'd like to see them kept but improved, I think the reason they're generic and predictable is because they're focusing so much on the multiplayer aspect.

AnCapaillMor

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

BF3 was the first to have a single player campaign, the rest had a sort of skirmish mode, i've yet to play the single player, so have no problems whatsoever with it being mltiplayer only.

hypermuse

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

Single player games on FPS are somewhat redundant now when you consider how many hours people put into it compared to single player!

I'm not saying Single player is ****e (although I'm personally not that bothered with it) as some people love the story, but I'd say over 90% of the time spent on games like BF/COD is spent playing multiplayer for 90% of the people that bought it!

grizzly

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

100%. As hypermuse says better that the dev time is spent on multiplayer and drop single. I'll get my single player thrills from games like Far Cry.

BC2 had a fun single player game. BF3 SP looked great but was ultimately boring.

Iancar29

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

Bought BF4 on day one.... still havent completed the campaign ....

Just really cant be bothered with it anymore , the co-op i have though as its much better IMO playing with someone else .

chopperbyrne

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

The campaign disc has never left the box, so I'd have no problem with BF4 being MP only.

5uspect

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

The SP in BF3 was awful. Terrible story, buggy, scripted, and WTF were they thinking QTEs. Why waste time, money and effort on it when nobody wants it.
The SP in BC2 on the other hand, while nothing special from a gameplay perspective, was a hoot.

iColdFusion

Not sure really, I'd prefer it had a single player but would take a decent co-op campaign in its place.

Even though I have a crazy amount of hours racked up in BF3 online I'd still hesitate in handing over €50 for multiplayer only BF4 and I don't have enough faith in DICE to believe it would be perfect if they were allowed to focus on multiplayer only.

Logical Fallacy

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

iColdFusion wrote: »

Not sure really, I'd prefer it had a single player but would take a decent co-op campaign in its place.

This is what I really want from online multiplayer. I like capping fools, but I love co-op. It's why I bought Borderlands and why i'll buy the next one. I was gutted when Resistance 3 came out and there was no co-op modes, and then Insomniac basically abandoned the game.

darrenw5094

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

danniemcq wrote: »

but what happens when the servers go down?

Like right now?????:mad:

Lizard Spock

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

Yes, haven't finished the single player missions on BF3 despite racking up a ridicules amount of hours on multi player.

TheTacticsGuy

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

5uspect wrote: »

The SP in BF3 was awful. Terrible story, buggy, scripted, and WTF were they thinking QTEs. Why waste time, money and effort on it when nobody wants it.
The SP in BC2 on the other hand, while nothing special from a gameplay perspective, was a hoot.

Yeah I much preferred the SP's from the BC series

5uspect

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

TheTacticsGuy wrote: »

Yeah I much preferred the SP's from the BC series

It wasn't that they were particularly good. Mostly it's scripted generic gallery shooting. What BC did however was to take the piss out of the silly over wrought military shooter. Considering how silly MP can be with people C4ing the **** out of each other and talking ****e on TS, it was great to see discussion on strawberry sprinkles rather than the usual technobabble.

danniemcq

I played through most of the SP in BF3 when the servers were being updated a while back.

I willa admit there are some fantastic set pieces and stuff in there and its better than some SP only games i played.

probably will finish it next time there is an update.

Shiminay

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

Playing the Single Player is a waste of time when I could be playing Multi Player with friends instead...

I really wish they'd just say "you know what, no more SP in Battlefield and no more MP in Medal of Honor" and make them into two separate and definitive sorts of games. They've both got Frostbite 2 under the hood, they're both made by Dice, they're both modern day war-fighter games - why waste time on MoH MP when BF3s is superior anyway and all they're going to produce is some rubbishy 5 hours of set pieces. Give us a 20+hour SP campaign in MoH and concentrate on the best possible MP game from BF4.

SeantheMan

Every BF prior to BC was MP only

BF1942 / Vietnam / BF2

The recent SP have been an afterthought really, the focus is always the multiplayer with the BF series

Glico Man

No, i would only buy it if it had both Single and Multi player modes

Yes.

I bought BC2, Vietnam and BF3 for the multiplayer. Couldn't give a rats about single player/story mode. I do for certain games like Assassin's Creed and Mass Effect for example, where there is a credible single player story to become engrossed with, but imo, the single player/story mode just doesn't suit Battlefield.