Yet another complaint.
I loved Bioshock. Critics loved Bioshock. It seemed as though everyone loved Bioshock, just as they should! It is a magnificent shooter, but it is so much more than just a shooter. It has elements of an RPG, with choices, and consequences to your choices. A lengthy single-player game set in the brilliant and beautiful world of Rapture, Bioshock had just about everything. Add in an exceptional backstory and plot and you have yourself a true Game of the Year candidate. Unfortunately, that just isn’t enough for some people.
All is not well, though. Just like I do everyday for hours on end, I was browsing my favorite internet forums (i.e. Something Awful, Neogaf, etc.) when I found some people bitching about Bioshock. This piqued my interest, if only to see how anybody could really complain about it. What I found disgusted me more than goatse.c. The one thing most people who had complaints about Bioshock most was its apparent lack of Multiplayer.
What!? What the hell, guys? Is a damn-near perfect single player experience not enough for you morons? This seriously fucking pisses me off. Although about two weeks ago I said I would stop being pissed off, I’m sorry, but when I see idiocy on this level I kinda can’t help it.
The reasoning behind these peoples (flawed) thinking is this: They get “complete” shooters like Halo and feel that is the norm, that every game – EVERY GAME – must include a multiplayer portion to be an even viable purchase. They feel that it is incomplete, somehow, without both portions.
This just really pisses me off. Do these backwoods retards not realize that the multiplayer in most games outright sucks ass? Outside of the exceptions like Halo, Battlefield, CSS, and Unreal Tournament, most games that include multiplayer are just tacked on pieces of crap, not worthy of playtime in any way. Not surprisingly, most games multiplayer goes unplayed by just about everyone who bought the game. Remember The Darkness? Prey? Great singeplayer games with decent multiplayer. Yeah, nobody plays those anymore.
What this means, essentially, is that it was a complete waste of the developers time. Most likely, they only added it in because Publisher goons browse message boards and see these fucking morons complaining about lack of multiplayer, so they force the poor developers to tack on some form of online experience to a game that most likely would have been just fine without it. Time taken away from developers equals less time put into singleplayer, the only portion that really matters to most of the userbase.
You can see, then, why I am so happy that Irrational (I refuse to call them 2K Boston) completely ignored the internet numbnuts and went ahead to make the game they wanted to make. When that kind of dedication is put in to make the singleplayer something truly special, this is what happens. Is it magic? No, just common sense.
Not that I’m against multiplayer gaming, mind you! Don’t get the wrong idea, please. I adore Counter-Strike Source, Team Fortress 2, and even Halo 3 sometimes. Its just that most of the best and most played multiplayer games on the internet were developed solely as multiplayer experiences. Personally, if a game only had multiplayer modes and is as brilliant as Team Fortress 2, I don’t mind in the slightest paying $50 for it. Just like how if the singleplayer experience is great and it doesn’t have any multiplayer component, I wouldn’t hesitate in the slightest to throw $50 down for it.
Message to Developers: Listen to forum goers complaints, but always take them with a grain of salt. If they’re posting on message boards on the internet, they’re probably a more hardcore gamer than most. Some of their complaints may be valid, but quite a few of them aren’t.
Oh, and I’m going to kick the next guy who bitches the game was too easy with vita-chambers right in the balls.
