-
Dragon05555
- Gamer
Yea, if you havent already figured it out. I'm bored.
Well, it would surely suck if modern gaming had really devolved this much, but the question stands....
If you could only choose between your games being multiplayer only, or singleplayer with no multiplayer component at all? And i mean ALL games that you own.
There are several downsides to both.....
Singleplayer only would be good because the game is never going to change. People in the game arent going to randomly stop playing, they are computers. Also, depth in singleplayer campaigns usually make multiplayer look like a joke.
The bad part of only singleplayer games is, obviously, you cant play with your friends.
Good part of multiplayer only is you can stay connected and have fun with your friends, as well as have leaderboards and visible signs of dominating the leaderboards.
Bad thing is, eventually, that game's servers are going to be a barren wasteland, or the whole experiance will devolve into people all using the same loadout because of it's cheap advantages, etc. Also, there's the possibility of not being able to play all the time (longer loading times,) along with bad connection possibilities and moron players in the game that ruin it...
I would have to say singleplayer only
GOGOGOGOGO!!!
