Source: http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/113/1138974p1.html

I think it's funny that the game they use as an example is the exact same game I'd use to counter their point. Dead Space 1 was (is) an amazing game. Wonderful replay value, and an excellent single-player experience. Dead Space 2 absolutely does not need single player. I'm not saying it is going to be worse because of it, but multi-player in Dead Space 2 is 100% not a necessity. In fact, there are several example of games out there that had multi-player shoe-horned into it and was a general waste of time. Off the top of my head I can think of at least Uncharted 2 and Bioshock 2. No one played those games for the multi-player experience and they were both fantastic games.

Not only that, stating that "single-player games are finished" pretty much denies entire genres from existing anymore including JRPGs. I believe this is a very ignorant statement and neglecting single player experiences in games will only hurt the gaming industry if this line of thinking catches on. Multi-player has it's place no doubt, but so does single-player. I hope they don't forget that.

EA is filled with a bunch of retards as we already know.

I do think that "online" is the future of gaming... But in that sense multiplayer and solo both have their respective areas. But I foresee solo still being heavily featured online through achievements, tracking, communities, etc.

But yeah, there are always going to be people that don't like interacting with others. And then there are always going to be people that just want some me time. And then there are people that just want a wonderful story to be told...and you can't always do that in a multiplayer format.

Do I see multiplayer being tacked on to a lot of solo based games just for the extra added content? Hell yes, and I'm fine with that. Might never take advantage of most of it, but I like the option being there.

Do I ever see solo games, especially rpgs, going the way of the dinosaur? Not a chance. Rpgs are gamings version of literature, and there are always going to be that want their lit available in a gaming media, and some story tellers are always going to want it delivered in a gaming media.

(EA sales are based in sports games...come on.)

quite.

I'm pretty convinced that EA's sales are based in annual re-releases of the same games with different numerals tacked onto the titles.

NEXT - SINGLE DRIVER CARS: DEAD?

Seriously, I believe that pretty much the only multiplayer that is good in any game is co-op. Outside of that, I prefer single player.

Single-player better NOT die. I don't have anybody to play with.

Elder Scrolls V comes out in November. And when it sells like hotcakes and will probably get Game of the Year, I'm sure EA will be content with putting fingers in their ears and go 'lalalala I'm not listening!"

Your imaginary friends.

The day single player games die out is the day I spend significantly less money on video games.

I just thought of this a moment ago, but if what EA says is true... then the Wii would have failed horribly as it has no online multiplayer aside from very few titles.

And I got to tell you, as I play Golden Sun: Dark Dawn, I just loathe the fact that I can play it online with someone...

As you play WHAT?

Golden Sun: Dark Dawn which is a direct sequel to the first two games. It happens 30 years after the second game and you play as the sun of Issac along with Garet's son and Felix's (main character the second) daughter. So far, it's been everything I expected of a Golden Sun title. It's freaking awesome and is a single player game. I hope EA likes those apples.

I know what the game is. I just wasn't aware it was out, already.

Oh, btw EA isn't done being a douchebag. There are two more things I'd like to stack onto the pile. Every single time you boot up Dead Space 2, it asks you to agree to their terms of use... and you have to make sure to uncheck the "Inform me of EA news" box... AND disagree to make an EA account before it'll even take you to the game's title (This also happens if you are mid-game and want to quit to the title to re-load for whatever reason).

And what's more? To play online, you have to input a code that comes with the game. This activates your copy to play online. Without this code you can not get online to play. Luckily for Dead Space, it's not a big deal as Dead Space is very much a single player experience and multiplayer is virtually useless. BUT if other games down the line use this that ARE very multiplayer heavy (Borderlands, Halo, Left 4 Dead, etc) then users who buy games used are screwed as the original owner will have used said code already.

That said, I will not be using my code for Dead Space 2. If any of you guys end up buying it used and want to try out the multiplayer, send me a PM and I'll give you my code.

I bet if you don't have a code (preowned) EA would kindly offer a code for a minimal fee of $5. God bless America!

That is such GARBAGE! There was an Army of Two demo that I had downloaded to play with my cousin. He already had an EA account but I didn't. If I remember correctly it wanted me to create an account and agree to the Terms just to play the demo. So I told my cousin, "sorry but HAELLL NO!" So no sale for them there. Plus I am hesitant to buy The Saboteur even though it is only single player I think because I fear it will want me to create an account or agree to terms.

You know the thing is for those terms to have any meaning you have to read them. I don't agree to any terms anywhere unless I read them first. I'm never going to read the terms each time just to get to a title screen (assuming they could change if online). So what is the point of making me agree. Do they really think I will read them each time or are they ABUSING the situation by putting them in a place where you are effectively forced to click "agree" even without reading them. We all know the answer. They are garbage.

As for the code thing it would be interesting to see how it is handled at EB/Gamestop. Do they advertise this? Will they refund your money if you can't play online?

Btw, I just checked last night... you do get SOME online features without the code. Just one actually. You can pull up the Dead Space 2 marketplace to buy their new online code if you bought it used. And it's 800 ... $10. Not only that, but there are also micro-payment options for extra suits for your character 400:mspoints, extra health kits, 400 , or extra ammo for all your guns 400 .

You know, I don't mind someone thinking of new ways to bring us content that costs money. Capcom did it the right way with Dead Rising: Case Zero. Instead of a demo, they released a full (albeit incredibly short) game. And whatever you get in that game (items, levels, money) is transferred over to your character in Dead Rising 2. And they sold it for only 400 . And then you have companies that go out of their way to try and save you money. Valve has always fought to make XBLA DLC free for their products (and actually IS on PC seeing as Steam doesn't try to tack on extra fees). They even make a four-book-long comic with the newest DLC for Left 4 Dead as a prequel to the actual DLC. They didn't charge for that either.

What I'm getting at is that EA is taking two steps back while everyone else is taking a step forward. Out of all the gaming companies out there, I have the least respect for EA than anything else out there. Even more so than Nintendo, which is saying something because Dead Space 1 and 2 are better than just about any Wii title out there (Give or take a Mario or Zelda).



Also, I noticed something. The title in my list of games is Dead Space™ and Dead Space™ 2. It's the only two games in my list that have trademark symbols on them. I find this silly. From this point on, I shall refer to the series as "Dead Space Tee Em."

Looks like you gave them too much credit.

@Lantis
This is just BEYOND ridiculous...until everyone else does it. The question (as always) is whether or not gamers are willing to put up with this crap. Most will (addicted sheep punks!). I will not. That is one main reason I didn't buy Halo Reach...because of the way Bungie treated us online who didn't have all the maps for Halo 3 that they tried to make us buy (by giving us only 4 playable match types out of a total of 20 for those who bought all the maps).

This SHOWS that single player games rule!

That having been said the single player game "The Saboteur" is now officially off my list.

I am sure that once you agree to the tos, you won't have to again unless it changes/updates. I would do it just to get rid of that screen.

Actually, I did agree to it twice... and it will continue to ask you until you make an EA account. I found that if you just hit the cancel button and then confirm, it'll take you to the main menu. I'm sure that if you make an account and then agree to the terms, they'll leave you the f*ck alone and let you play the game. But I don't want an EA account.